News
December 21, 2011: Sec. of Interior Salazar announces plan to remove Great Lakes' population of gray wolf from federal Endangered Species List. A final rule will be published by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service that removes wolves in Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin, and in portions of adjoining states, from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife and plants. For more, see the FWS Press Release.
Lawsuit filed against National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) challenging exclusion of captive populations of Southern Resident killer whales from ESA protections. Plaintiffs claim that captive members of the species are kept in conditions that cause "great harm and suffering" at locations such as commercial aquariums. Read the Complaint filed in federal district court. For more on captive killer whales, see the Topic Page.
New Topic Area: Pets and Disaster Planning. This topic discusses state and federal laws/regulations that concern pets or other animals in disaster plans. Also see the Map of state disaster planning laws.
2012 Agriculture Appropriations Bill removes horse slaughter restriction. Since 2005, restrictions were added to appropriations bills that prevented the use of federal funds to inspect horse slaughter facilities. That restriction was not included in this year's bill passed on November 17th, thereby ending the de facto ban on horse slaughter for human consumption in the U.S. To read more about horse laws, with a particular focus on challenges to horse slaughter, see the Horse Topic Area.
"Anne" the elephant's owners face cruelty charges under UK's Animal Welfare Act 2006 after failing to stop groom from beating elephant with pitchfork. The case, which is now being prosecuted by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), is the first of its kind under the 2006 Act. Anne, a 58-year-old originally from Sri Lanka, now resides at a sanctuary. To read the CPS' statement of the case, click here.
U.S. House of Representatives proposes restrictions on using wild or exotic animals to perform in traveling circuses. The "Traveling Exotic Animals Protection Act," HR 3359, would create an amendment to the Animal Welfare Act that prevents an exhibitor from using a wild or exotic animal if that animal was traveling in a mobile housing facility.
Grizzly Bears back on Endangered Species List. The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals holds that the US Fish & Wildlife Service did not articulate a rational connection between data and decision to remove grizzly bears from Endangered Species List. The decision centered around the decline of one of the bears' major food sources, the whitebark pine, and that effect on the bears' foraging for food.
The USDA and Ringling Bros./Feld Entertainment reach settlement agreement of $270,000, largest ever assessed, for alleged violations of the AWA from 2007 to 2011. Feld admits no wrongdoing as part of the agreement. This settlement came after the Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, upheld dismissal of elephant abuse lawsuit against Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. The Court agreed with the district court that the Animal Protection Institute (API) and a former circus employee did not have standing to sue the circus.
Check out the new searchable Local Ordinances. Search for local codes by State or by Topic in the left navigation. Many codes are available under "Breed Specific Legislation."
Journal of Animal Law Vol. 7 now available - See the Table of Contents.
New Article! Wildlife Jurisprudence, by Professor David Favre, 25 J. Envtl. L. & Litig. 459 (2010) (pdf - 228.58 KB)
Back to menu
Cases
Center for Biological Diversity v. Salazar, Slip Copy, 2011 WL 6000497 (D.Ariz.). Plaintiffs filed action against Interior and FWS to set aside FWS's finding that the desert bald eagle does not qualify as a distinct population segment (“DPS”) entitled to protection under the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”). Plaintiff's motions for summary judgment was granted. The Court found that FWS' 12–month finding was based on the 2007 delisting rule, which failed to comport with the notice, comment, and consultation requirements of the ESA. The Court set aside the 12–month finding as an abuse of discretion.
Adrian v. Vonk, --- N.W.2d ----, 2011 WL 6260860 (S.D.). Ranchers sued State for damage to their property from prairie dogs from public lands. The Supreme Court held that statutes governing State's participation in programs to control prairie dogs did not contain express waivers of sovereign immunity; State's statutorily-mandated actions in controlling prairie dogs were discretionary acts, and ranchers' action was barred by sovereign immunity; and statute did not provide for a nuisance cause of action against the State.
Phillip v. State, --- S.E.2d ----, 2011 WL 6187084 (Ga.App.). Defendant was sentenced to 17 years imprisonment after entering a non-negotiated guilty plea to 14 counts of dogfighting and two counts of aggravated cruelty to animals. Upon motion, the Court of Appeals held that the sentence was illegal and void because all counts, which were to run concurrently, had the maximum prison sentence of five years.
State v. Morival, --- So.3d ----, 2011 WL 6058299 (Fla.App. 2 Dist.). Defendant moved to dismiss charges of two felony counts of animal cruelty. The District Court of Appeal held that systematically depriving his dogs of nourishment was properly charged as felony animal cruelty rather than misdemeanor. Defendant fed his dogs so little that they suffered malnutrition over an extended period of time. This amounted to “excessive or repeated infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering” rather than “depriv[ing an animal] of necessary sustenance.”
Dog Case of the Month
Pierce, County, WA fee requirement to challenge county's dangerous animal declaration (DAD) violates due process. Downey v. Pierce County, --- P.3d ----, 2011 WL 5931911 (Wash.App. Div. 2). Dog owner sued county challenging county's dangerous animal declaration (DAD) proceedings. The Court of Appeals held that charging a fee to obtain an initial evidentiary review of a DAD violated owner's due process rights because it impacted owner's property and financial interests and potentially subjected her to future criminal sanctions. The court also held that the lack of an adequate evidentiary standard regarding review of DADs violated due process because the ordinance required only that the reviewing auditor determine if there was sufficient evidence to support the DAD.
Back to menu
Articles
Designing a Model Dog Park Law, John J. Ensminger and Frances Breitkopf (2011).
Cueing and Probable Cause: Research May Increase Defense Attacks on and Judicial Skepticism of Detection Dog Evidence, John J. Ensminger and L.E. Papet (2011).
Monkeys and Horses and Ferrets...Oh My! Non-traditional Service Animals Under the ADA, Robert L. Adair, 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 415 (2010).
Protecting Cats and Dogs in Order to Protect Humans: Making the Case for a Felony Companion Animal Statute in Mississippi, Deborah J. Challener, 29 Miss. C. L. Rev. 499 (2010).
Dealing Dogs: Can We Strengthen Weak Laws in the Dog Industry? Sandra K. Jones Jones, 7 Rutgers J. L. & Pub. Pol'y 442 (Spring, 2010).
Sacrificing the Sacrifice of Animals: Legal Personhood for Animals, the Status of Animals as Property, and the Presumed Primacy of Humans, Taimie L. Bryant, 39 Rutgers L.J. 247 (2008).
