Animals used in space missions are deemed surplus afterwards, with little legal obligation for their continued care. For example, France’s Félicette, a cat sent into orbit in 1963, was euthanised post-mission for brain study, despite surviving re-entry. Unlike military working animals, which undergo transition programmes for civilian life, space animals lack formal exit protocols. Records of their fates are scarce, and their legal status remains ambiguous. The lack of formal protections and transparency continues to raise questions about the ethical and moral cost of scientific progress.
ANNA MARIE BRENNAN: Animals have played a pivotal role in space exploration since the 1950s. The former Soviet Union’s launch of the stray dog Laika aboard Sputnik 2 in 1957 marked the first living creature in orbit. Laika’s cramped, stressful conditions and eventual death from oxygen deprivation highlighted the harsh realities of early space missions…
The US followed suit in 1961 with Ham, a chimpanzee sent on a suborbital flight to test task performance in space. Ham endured invasive monitoring, electric shocks for incorrect responses and severe dehydration. Although he recovered physically, he showed signs of psychological trauma following the mission.
As space exploration expands, the absence of legal protections for animals becomes increasingly problematic. International regulations are long overdue to formally recognise the sentience of animals in outer-space law and to safeguard their welfare before, during and after missions… This week, Russia is expected to launch its Bion-M No.2 biosatellite from the Baikonur Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan, carrying 75 mice and 1,500 fruit flies…
Despite technological advances, animal casualties persist. In 2019, Israel’s Beresheet spacecraft crash-landed on the Moon with thousands of tardigrades aboard. The fate of these eight-legged microscopic animals, also known as water bears or moss piglets, remains unknown.
Often, animals used in missions are deemed surplus afterwards, with little legal obligation for their continued care. For example, France’s Félicette, a cat sent into orbit in 1963, was euthanised post-mission for brain study, despite surviving re-entry… In 2022, KEKA Aerospace in the Democratic Republic of Congo pledged to stop using animals after a rat named Kavira died aboard its Troposphere 5 rocket…
NASA briefly considered resuming primate experiments in 2010, but PETA’s lobbying led to the cancellation of proposed research at Brookhaven National Laboratory. Nonetheless, NASA continues to use mice in space studies. In 2024, a group of mice was sent to the International Space Station to examine the effects of space on bodily systems…
Unlike military working animals, which undergo transition programmes for civilian life, space animals lack formal exit protocols. Records of their fates are scarce, and their legal status remains ambiguous. This gap stems partly from the absence of animal considerations in outer-space law…
Despite growing awareness, the legal and ethical frameworks surrounding animals in space remain underdeveloped. The lack of formal protections and transparency continues to raise questions about the ethical and moral cost of scientific progress.
There are five core outer space treaties, covering issues such as the peaceful use of outer space, the rescue of astronauts, the registration of space objects and liability for damage. But despite the long history of animals participating in space missions, none offers formal protections, focusing solely on human and state interests.
A common argument is that prioritising animal welfare could hinder scientific progress. While violence against humans is prohibited, harm to animals for food, research, medicine and other purposes remains widely accepted on Earth. Some question whether it would be inconsistent to restrict harm to animals in space, where human casualties are more likely…
The types of harm animals face in space – stress, injury and death – are not fundamentally different from those permitted on Earth in service of human needs. In both contexts, animals are used to advance human survival or ambition. Thus, the perceived inconsistency in protecting animals in space may be less significant than it appears.
We need a more balanced framework – one that acknowledges animals as sentient participants and ensures their welfare is considered alongside human interests. SOURCE…
RELATED VIDEO: