Australia Animal Research: Over One Million Mice Used Annually 2026

More than a million mice are used in Australian scientific research every year, according to the first nationwide count of its kind, with 1,193,619 mice and 46,961 rats recorded in 2024 alone. The figures come from a pilot study compiled by veterinarian Dr Malcolm France for the Australian and New Zealand Council for the Care of Animals in Research and Teaching.

France described the count, released today, as an "overdue first step" toward publishing national statistics covering all animals used in research, including fish, rabbits, birds and monkeys. Until now, Australia has lacked the kind of overall data that comparable countries routinely publish.

Why the Australia Animal Research Count Matters

National statistics on animals used in research are important for building public trust and informing policy, France said. He pointed out that publishing such figures has long been the norm in the United States, Canada, the European Union, the United Kingdom and New Zealand.

In those countries, year-on-year comparisons help shape animal welfare priorities and guide where resources are allocated. They also contribute to greater transparency, which France argues is essential for public confidence in science.

The pilot study focused on mice and rats first because they are widely used laboratory animals with clearly defined reporting categories. That makes them a practical starting point for a national counting framework.

What the Numbers Do and Do Not Include

The total of 1,193,619 mice and 46,961 rats covers animals used in scientific research, teaching and testing during 2024, the most recent comparable year. However, the count does not include animals that were bred for research purposes but never actually used.

That distinction matters. Breeding programmes can produce far more animals than are ultimately involved in experiments, so the true scale of animal involvement in Australian science is likely broader than this first snapshot suggests.

• 1,193,619 mice were used in Australian research, teaching and testing in 2024.
• 46,961 rats were recorded in the same period.
• The count excludes animals bred for research but not used.
• Mice and rats were chosen first because they are widely used and clearly defined.
• Australia has historically lacked overall national data on research animals.

How Australia Compares With Other Countries

France's central argument is that Australia is out of step with peer nations. The US, Canada, the EU, the UK and New Zealand all publish national statistics that allow year-on-year comparison and public scrutiny.

Without equivalent data, Australia has struggled to demonstrate transparency or track trends in animal use over time. The pilot study is intended to close that gap, at least for the two most common laboratory species.

Who Is Affected by the Findings

The count touches researchers, universities, teaching institutions and testing facilities that rely on mice and rats. It also matters to animal welfare advocates who have long called for greater visibility into how research animals are used.

For the public, the release offers the first clear national picture of two species that underpin a large share of laboratory work. France's hope is that publishing these figures becomes routine rather than exceptional.

What to Watch Next

The pilot study is described as a first step, not a finished system. The next question is whether Australia will extend national reporting to fish, rabbits, birds and monkeys, which the study explicitly names as part of the broader goal.

Whether the figures are published annually, and whether they include bred-but-unused animals, will determine how useful they become for policy and public trust. For now, the count establishes a baseline where none existed before.

Transparency debates in Australian public life often follow a similar pattern, where official silence gives way to overdue disclosure. The long campaign for an Australia Military Apology for LGBTQ+ Veterans Long Overdue shows how pressure for accountability can build for years before institutions respond. The background to this story is set out in 21 Unique Animals That Nature Made One-of-a-Kind. A related thread runs through UK PIP Benefit Overhaul: Disabled Could Swap Cash for In-Kind Support. Earlier coverage in The best glasses and cups for every drink, according to the experts - Grand Goldman shows how the argument developed.

Similar questions of institutional responsibility surface in the push behind an LGBTQ+ Veterans' Apology Long Overdue, Says Former ADF Member, where one person's persistence forced a national conversation. Animal research reporting may follow a comparable arc. A closer look at the same subject appears in Apple Watch 10 turned out to be the most accurate device for counting calories, according to a study. Anyone following the wider picture can start with Marie-France van Heel: A New Kind of Prime Minister's Wife. The same theme surfaces in Australia: latest articles, which takes a different angle.

Cost-of-living pressures also shape how the public weighs government priorities, as seen in reporting that Raising Two Children in Australia Now Costs $36,500 Annually. Transparency in research spending sits within that same broader debate about where public money and trust should go. Context on how this played out before sits in T rex Fossil Sale Sparks Scientific Concerns and Debate. A companion piece, Australia's Child Violence Crisis: Listening to Kids Before They Slip, approaches the same subject from another angle.