Voters are asked to either approve or reject a law allowing hunters to use airplanes to land and shoot wolves on the same day they fly. The law allows any person with a hunting or trapping license to land and shoot in areas established by the Board of Game. No additional permit may be required. The law also allows the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to use agents, as well as employees, to engage in same day airborne shooting of wolves. A yes vote rejects the law. A no vote approves the law.

This bill would prohibit a person from using a snare with the intent of trapping a wolf. It would also prohibit a person from possessing, buying, selling, or offering to sell the skin of a wolf known by the person to have been caught with a snare. Breaking the law would be a Class A misdemeanor.

These Alabama provisions contain the state's anti-cruelty laws.  The first section (under Article 1 of Chapter 11) provides that a person commits a misdemeanor if he or she subjects any animal to cruel mistreatment, neglect (as long as he or she has custody of the animal), or kills or injures without good cause any animal belonging to another.  The next section (Article 11 of Chapter 11 entitled, "Cruelty to Cats and Dogs"), provides that a person commits the crime of cruelty to a dog or cat in the first degree if he or she intentionally tortures any dog or cat or skins a domestic dog or cat or offers for sale or exchange or offers to buy or exchange the fur, hide, or pelt of a domestic dog or cat. Cruelty to a dog or cat in the first degree is a Class C felony.

These ordinances comprise the municipalities of Mobile and Muscle Shoals, Alabama's animal control provisions.

Proposition 201 would make it illegal to use certain methods of taking "wildlife" on public land, including federal, state, county and municipal land. The listed devices that would be prohibited are "any leghold trap, any instant kill body gripping design trap, or by a poison or a snare."

This statutes states that anyone who maliciously and intentionally maims, mutilates, tortures, or wounds a living animal, or maliciously and intentionally kills an animal, is guilty of an offense punishable by imprisonment in the state prison, or by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($ 20,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment, or, alternatively, by imprisonment in a county jail for not more than one year, or by a fine of not more than twenty thousand dollars ($ 20,000), or by both the fine and imprisonment.  The statute also defines specific forms of torture and mistreatment that qualifies as a crime under this section.

These sections are from the California Penal Code and detail the crimes associated with various forms of cruelty to animals.

This statute forbids anyone from causing a fight between any animal or creature for amusement or gain, or allowing an animal fight to take place on her premises.  It also makes it a misdemeanor for anyone to be present at an animal fight.

This section defines "poling" and "tripping" of a horse and makes both practices a misdemeanor under California state law.   Poling a horse is a method of training a horse to jump which consists of such methods as forcing, persuading, or enticing a horse to jump. Tripping a horse is an act that consists of the use of any wire, pole, stick, rope, or other object or apparatus whatsoever to cause a horse to fall or lose its balance.

This statute makes it a crime to willfully harm or injure in any way a horse or dog under the supervision of law enforcement in the discharge of official duties.  The section distinguishes between serious and less serious injuries and defines the punishment for conviction of this offense accordingly.

Prohibits any person from possessing, transferring, receiving or holding any horse, pony, burro or mule with intent to kill it or have it killed, where the person knows or should know that any part of the animal will be used for human consumption. Provides that a violation constitutes a felony offense.   Also adds a provision making the sale of horsemeat for human consumption a misdemeanor offense, with subsequent violations punished as felonies.

These provisions outline the requirements for fur dealers.  Every person engaging in the business of buying, selling, trading or dealing in raw furs of fur-bearing mammals or nongame mammals is a fur dealer and shall procure a fur dealer license.  An exception is made for those dealers that trap and sell raw furs which he has lawfully taken, or a domesticated game breeder selling raw furs of animals which he has raised.  Fur dealers are required to maintain complete recordings for all of the furs they trade or sell and are prohibited from purchasing raw fur of any fur-bearing mammal or nongame mammal from any person who does not hold a valid trapping license, fur dealer license, or fur agent license.

The following are fur-bearing mammals: pine marten, fisher, wolverine, mink, river otter, gray fox, cross fox, silver fox, red fox, kit fox, raccoon, beaver, badger, and muskrat.  These sections outline the requirements for taking these animals.  A person who takes these animals must, for example, procure a license and are prohibited from using poison and certain enumerated traps.

Requires, rather than permits, the court prior to the sentencing of any person convicted of an animal cruelty crime involving the intentional torture or torment of animals to order an evaluation of such person in order to assist the court in determining an appropriate sentence. Exempts wildlife nuisances from the sentencing provisions for animal cruelty crimes involving the intentional torture or torment of animals. Clarifies that the mandatory sentence for a second or subsequent conviction for committing cruelty to animals through the intentional torture or torment of an animal shall be a sentence of imprisonment within the statutory presumptive range for a class 1 misdemeanor.

Extends the bonding requirements for the impoundment of animals to the owner or custodian of an animal that has been impounded because of investigation of charges of animal fighting. Allows the court, upon its own motion or the motion of the prosecuting attorney, after the defendant's conviction for cruelty to animals or for animal fighting, to order the forfeiture of an animal under certain circumstances.

This ballot proposal addresses the inhumane treatment of animals, specifically, pregnant pigs.  To prevent cruelty to animals and as recommended by The Humane Society of the United States, no person shall confine a pig during pregnancy in a cage, crate or other enclosure, or tether a pregnant pig, on a farm so that the pig is prevented from turning around freely, except for veterinary purposes and during the prebirthing period; provides definitions, penalties, and an effective date.  Note:  this measure appears to have passed in the November 2002 election with 54% of the vote.