|NC - Exotic Pets - .0212 Importation Requirements: WIild Animals||2 NC ADC 52B.0212||This North Carolina regulation states that person must obtain a permit from the State Veterinarian before importing any of the following animals into this State: skunk; fox; raccoon; ringtail; bobcat (includes lynx and other North and South American felines as cougars, jaguars, etc.); coyote; marten; brushtail Possum (Trichosurus vulpecula). Permits for the importation into this State of any of these animals shall be issued only if the animal(s) will be used in a research institute, or for exhibition by a USDA licensed exhibitor, or organized entertainment as in zoos or circuses. Any species or hybrid of a mammal not otherwise covered in the Administrative Code that is found to exist in the wild or naturally occurs in the wild must be accompanied by a valid certificate of veterinary inspection.|
|VA - Horse Transport - Chapter 160. Rules and Regulations Governing the Transportation of Horses (repealed 2016)||2 VA ADC 5-160-10 to 90||[Note: these regulations were repealed in 2016 and are provided for historical context only.] These previous Virginia regulations address the transportation of loads of more than six horses being transported to a commercial slaughter facility in a vehicle. Vehicles that have more than one tier holding horses are allowed only if the tier is designed, constructed, and maintained to withstand the weight of the horses held by it.|
|VA - Restaurants, animals - 2 VAC 5-585-3310. Prohibiting animals.||2 VA ADC 5-585-3310||This Virginia regulation states that dogs may be allowed in outdoor dining areas if: (1) the outdoor dining area is not enclosed with floor-to-ceiling walls; (2) there is a separate entrance; (3) there is a sign at the main entrance stating that dogs are allowed in the outdoor dining area that is easily observable by the public; (3) food and water provided to dogs is served using equipment not used for human food service or is put in single-use receptacles; (4) dogs are not allowed to sit on chairs, benches, seats, or tables; (5) dogs are kept on a leash or within a pet carrier and under the control of adults at all times; (6) the establishment provides a means for picking up dog messes; and (7) there is a sign outlining some of these requirements observable to the public.|
|MO - Veterinary - 20 CSR 2270-6.011 Rules of Professional Conduct||20 MO ADC 2270-6.011||Subsection 11 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for veterinarians provides that a licensee shall not reveal confidential, proprietary or privileged facts or data or any other sensitive information contained in a patient's medical records without the prior consent of the client except as otherwise authorized or required by law, regulation, or other order. The subsection specifically states that "[w]hen these situations [of abuse and neglect] cannot be resolved through education, the board considers it the responsibility of the veterinarian to report such cases to the appropriate authorities." Thus, the rule seems to create an ethical responsibility that mandates the reporting of abuse or neglect by veterinarians.|
|US - Marine Mammals - Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing Operations||2000 WL 1214 (F.R.)||
This interim final rule allows the entry of yellowfin tuna into the United States under certain conditions from nations fully complying with the International Dolphin Conservation Program (IDCP). It also allows U.S. vessels to set their purse seines on dolphins in the ETP. The standard for the use of "dolphin-safe" labels for tuna products also is changed.
|US - Marine Mammals - Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals||2000 WL 552235 (F.R.)||
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NMFS, issued an affirmative finding for the Government of Mexico under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) on April 12, 2000. This affirmative finding allows importation into the United States of yellowfin tuna and yellowfin tuna products harvested in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (ETP) after March 3, 1999, by Mexican-flag purse seine vessels or vessels operating under Mexican jurisdiction greater than 400 short tons (362.8 mt) carrying capacity. The affirmative finding was based on documentary evidence submitted by the Government of Mexico and obtained from the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC).
|US - Eagles - Religious Ceremonial Collection of Golden Eaglets from Wupatki National Monument||2001 WL 47456 (F.R.)||
SUMMARY: The National Park Service (NPS) has preliminarily determined that under certain circumstances it is appropriate to allow the Hopi Tribe to collect golden eaglets within Wupatki National Monument, a unit of the National Park System, for religious ceremonial purposes. This rule would authorize this activity upon terms and conditions sufficient to protect park resources against impairment, and consistent with the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
|US - Marine Mammals - Protected Species Special Exception Permits||2001 WL 738878 (F.R.)||
NMFS is proposing to amend the regulations for permits to capture or import marine mammals for purposes of public display under MMPA. The proposed revisions would implement amendments to the MMPA enacted in 1994, affecting marine mammals held captive for public display purposes and clarify the public display requirements relating to permits to capture or import, transport or transfer, and export marine mammals.
|US - Marine Mammals - Taking and Importing Marine Mammals; Taking Marine Mammals Incidental||2001 WL 929542 (F.R.)||
NMFS, upon application from the University of California San Diego, Scripps Institution of Oceanography (Scripps), is issuing regulations to govern the unintentional take of a small number of marine mammals incidental to the continued operation of a low frequency (LF) sound source by Scripps.
|US - Marine Mammals - Preventing Harassment From Human Activities Directed at Marine Mammals in the Wild||2002 WL 111193 (F.R.)||
NMFS is considering whether to propose regulations to protect marine mammals in the wild from human activities that are directed at the animals and that have the potential to harass the animals. Some of these activities include feeding wild marine mammals, and "Swim-With" programs.
|US - AWA - Licensing and Inspection Requirements for Dealers of Dogs Intended for Hunting, Breeding, or Security Purposes||2003 WL 1092620 (F.R.)||
The update of the Definition of Dealer, in Section 1.1 of the Regulation is made to reflect the policy that only wholesale dealers of dogs intended for hunting, security purposes, and breeding, and not dealers of retail services, will be controlled by the regulation. Thus, there is only a minor change to the definition of dealer, in that it now explicitly excludes any retail outlets where dogs are sold for hunting, breeding or security purposes.
|US - Endangered - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule To Reclassify and Remove the Gray Wolf From the List||2003 WL 1697383 (F.R.)||
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) hereby changes the classification of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We establish three distinct population segments (DPS) for the gray wolf in the conterminous United States. Gray wolves in the Western DPS and the Eastern DPS are reclassified from endangered to threatened, except where already classified as threatened or as an experimental population. Gray wolves in the Southwestern DPS retain their previous endangered or experimental population status. All three existing gray wolf experimental population designations are retained and are not affected by this rule. Gray wolves are removed from the protections of the Act in all or parts of 16 southern and eastern States where the species historically did not occur. We establish a new special regulation under section 4(d) of the Act for the threatened Western DPS to increase our ability to respond to wolf-human conflicts outside the two experimental population areas in the Western DPS. A second section 4(d) special regulation applies provisions similar to those previously in effect in Minnesota to most of the Eastern DPS. We find that these special rules are necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of the Western DPS and the Eastern DPS. The classification, under the Act, of captive gray wolves is determined by the location from which they, or their ancestors, were removed from the wild. This final rule does not affect the protection currently afforded by the Act to the red wolf (Canis rufus), a separate species found in the southeastern United States that is listed as endangered.
|US - Wolf - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Western Distinct Population Segment of Gray Wolf From th||2003 WL 1697399 (F.R.)||
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) announces our intention to conduct rulemaking under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), to remove the Western Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in the near future. Specifically, we intend to propose to delist the gray wolf in the Northern Rocky Mountains and western United States where it is presently listed. If this proposal is finalized, the gray wolf would be delisted in the Western Gray Wolf DPS, existing special regulations established under section 4(d) of the Act for the Western DPS would be abolished, the nonessential experimental designations for reintroduced gray wolves would be removed, and future management of this species would be conducted by the appropriate State and tribal wildlife agencies.
|US - Migratory Bird - Migratory Bird Permits; Regulations for Double-Crested Cormorant Management||2003 WL 22295159||
Increasing populations of the double-crested cormorant have caused biological and socioeconomic resource conflicts. In November 2001, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) completed a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) on double-crested cormorant management. In March 2003, a proposed rule was published to establish regulations to implement the DEIS proposed action, Alternative D. In August 2003, the notice of availability for a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was published, followed by a 30- day comment period. This final rule sets forth regulations for implementing the FEIS preferred alternative, Alternative D (establishment of a public resource depredation order and revision of the aquaculture depredation order). It also provides responses to comments we received during the 60-day public comment period on the proposed rule. The Record of Decision (ROD) is also published here.
|US - Cormorant - Depredation order for double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities||2003 WL 22295159 (F.R.)||
The purpose of this depredation order is to help reduce depredation of aquacultural stock by double-crested cormorants at private fish farms and State and Federal fish hatcheries.
|US - AWA - Animal Welfare; Inspection, Licensing, and Procurement of Animals||2004 WL 1561072 (F.R.)||
Several changes and updates have been made to the licensing requirements, the procedures for licenses renewals, and restrictions upon acquisitions of dogs, cats, and other animals. Although there have been several minor changes, with little affect to the regulation, there have been some more significant changes as well. The new regulation seems to tighten restrictions, and provides specific guidelines for license applicants.
|US - Whales - Notice of Availability of the Draft Revised Recovery Plan for the North Atlantic Right Whale||2004 WL 1924051 (F.R.)||
NMFS announces the availability for public review of the draft revised Recovery Plan (Plan) for the North Atlantic Right Whale (Eubalaena glacialis). NMFS is soliciting review and comment from the public and all interested parties on the Plan, and will consider all substantive comments received during the review period before submitting the Plan for final approval. (Note that the specific concern with right whales is collisions with ships.)
|US - Critical Habitat - Critical Habitat Listing for Five Endangered Mussels in the Tennessee and Cumberland River Basins||2004 WL 1924143 (F.R.)||
The FWS has designated designate 13 river and stream segments in the Tennessee Cumberland River Basins, for a total of approximately 885 river as critical habitat for five endangered mussels: Cumberland elktoe ( Alasmidonta atropurpurea ), oyster mussel ( Epioblasma capsaeformis ), Cumberlandian combshell ( Epioblasma brevidens ), purple bean ( Villosa perpurpurea ), and rough rabbitsfoot ( Quadrula cylindrica strigillata ). All five mussels belong to the Unionidae family.
|US - Marine Mammals - 50 CFR Part 216. Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental to Commercial Fishing||2004 WL 2019268 (F.R.)||NMFS issues a final rule to implement provisions of the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act (IDCPA). This rule replaces the interim rule published in the Federal Register on January 3, 2000. This final rule makes technical changes and clarifications to the interim final rule which is already in effect. The interim final rule allows the entry of yellowfin tuna into the United States under certain conditions from nations fully complying with the International Dolphin Conservation Program (IDCP) and the Agreement on the IDCP. The interim final rule establishes a standard for the use of "dolphin-safe" labels for tuna products and also establishes a tuna-tracking and verification program to ensure that the dolphin-safe status of tuna domestically produced and imported into the United States is documented.|
|US - Critical Habitat - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Klamath River and||2004 WL 2232024 (F.R.)||
This final rule is written to designate a critical habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia River populations of Bull Trout. The critical habitat designation includes approximately 1,748 miles of streams and 61,235 acres of lakes and marshes. The reason for this designation is that at the time of listing, there are only seven remaining non-migratory populations of bull trout, and the designation is mandatory pursuant to a court order.
|US - Critical Habitat - Statements by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Regarding the Designation of Critical Habitat||2004 WL 2232024 (F.R.)||
This excerpt is from the Designation of Critical Habitat for the Klamath River and Columbia River Populations of Bull Trout, 69 FR 59996-01, 2004 WL 2232024 (F.R.). It apparently expresses the opinion of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service that the current process for designating critical habitat does little for the conservation of listed species.
|US - Critical Habitat - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the California tiger||2004 WL 2671444 (F.R.)||
The FWS through this rule has designated a critical habitat in Santa Barbara County, California for the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma califoniese) (CTS) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. This rule fulfills the final requirements of the settlement agreement reached in Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The reason for the designation of critical habitat for the CTS is the net loss in CTS grazing land over a 10 – 12 year period due to extensive farming, regardless of the efforts made to increase the amount of suitable grazing land.
|US - Whales - Regulations Governing the Approach to North Atlantic Right Whales||2004 WL 2701022||
NMFS issues a correcting amendment to clarify the regulations that prohibit approaches within 500 yards (460 m) of North Atlantic right whales (right whales). The purpose of this action is to correct errors contained in the text of the regulation that inadvertently refers to regulations contained in the previous paragraph within 50 CFR part 224. These technical amendments will not change the regulations for approaching right whales found in Sec. 224.103.
|US - AWA - Animal Welfare; Transportation of Animals on Foreign Air Carriers||2004 WL 724205 (F.R.)||
There has been a regulation update where a decision has been made to regulate the transportation of animals in commerce to all foreign air carriers, to or from any point within the United States. If an animal is protected by the AWA, it will continue to be protected when being transported within or from the United States. This update essentially increases the level of protection that animals protected under the AWA will receive.
|US - Marine Mammals, Endangered - Establishment of Species of Concern List, Addition of Species to Species of Concern List, Desc||2004 WL 791908 (F.R.)||
NMFS establishes a species of concern list, places 45 species on this list, describes the factors it will consider when identifying species of concern, and revises the candidate species list. NMFS also solicits information and comments concerning the status of, research and stewardship opportunities for, and the factors for identifying species of concern.
|US - Critical Habitat - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule To Designate Critical Habitat for the Buena Vi||2005 WL 123168 (F.R.)||
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designated critical habitat for the Buena Vista Lake shrew (Sorex ornatus relictus) (referred to here as the shrew) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, approximately 84 acres (ac) (34 hectares (ha)) occur within the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. The critical habitat is located in the Central Valley floor of Kern County, California.
|US - Endangered Species - Final Rule To Designate Critical Habitat for the Santa Ana Sucker (Catostomus santaanae)||2005 WL 12396 (F.R.)||
Under this final rule, the FWS has designated critical habitat for the Santa Ana Sucker, in 3 noncontiguous populations in The lower and middle Santa Ana River in San Bernardino, Riverside, and Orange counties; the East, West, and North Forks of the San Gabriel River in Los Angeles County; and lower Big Tujunga Creek, a tributary of the Los Angeles River in Los Angeles County. We have identified 23,719 acres (ac) (9,599 hectares (ha)) of aquatic and riparian habitats essential to the conservation of the Santa Ana sucker.
|US - Wolf - Regulation for Nonessential Experimental Populations of the Western Distinct Population Segment of the Gray Wolf; Fi||2005 WL 20189 (F.R.)||
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) establish a rule for the nonessential experimental populations (NEPs) of the Western Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the gray wolf (Canis lupus), so that in States and on Tribal reservations with Service-approved wolf management plans, we can better address the concerns of affected landowners and the impacts of a biologically recovered wolf population. In addition, States and Tribes with Service accepted wolf management plans can petition the Service for lead management authority for experimental wolves consistent with this rule.
|US - Marine Mammals - Endangered Fish and Wildlife; Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement||2005 WL 41294 (F.R.)||
NMFS will be preparing an EIS to analyze the potential impacts of applying new criteria in guidelines to determine what constitutes a ``take'' of a marine mammal under the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and Endangered Species Act (ESA) as a result of exposure to anthropogenic noise in the marine environment. This notice describes the proposed action and possible alternatives and also describes the proposed scoping process.
|US - Critical Habitat - Critical Habitat Listing for the Topeka Shiner||2005 WL 676950 (F.R.)||
This rule is a correction to a previous final rule designating critical habitat for the Topeka Shiner ( Notropis Topeka ), published in the Federal Register on July, 24, 2004 (69 FR 44736). In the previous final rule, the FWS designated as critical habitat 1,356 kilometers of stream in Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska. They excluded from designation all previously proposed critical habitat in Kansas, Missouri, and South Dakota, and excluded the Fort Riley Military Installation in Kansas from critical habitat designation .
|US - Critical Habitat - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the Riverside Fairy S||2005 WL 828405 (F.R.)||
FWS has designated critical habitat pursuant to section 3 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for the federally endangered riverside fairy shrimp that encompasses 306 miles within Ventura, Orange, and San Diego Counties in California. The riverside fairy shrimp is a freshwater crustacean that is found in vernal pools (a shallow depression that fills with rainwater and does not drain into the lower drainage section) in the coastal California area. The shrimp is the second most primitive living crustacean and is the most recently discovered crustacean in California.
|US - Slaughter - Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food||2007 WL 2010444 (F.R.)||
The Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is affirming, with changes, the interim final rule "Prohibition of the Use of Specified Risk Materials for Human Food and Requirements for the Disposition of Non-Ambulatory Cattle," which was published in the Federal Register on January 12, 2004. The Agency is also affirming the interim final rule "Prohibition of the Use of Certain Stunning Devices Used to Immobilize Cattle During Slaughter," also published on January 12, 2004. FSIS issued these interim final rules in response to the confirmation on December 23, 2003, of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in an imported dairy cow in Washington State. FSIS is taking this action to make permanent interim measures implemented by the Agency to minimize human exposure to cattle materials that could potentially contain the BSE agent.
|US - Air travel, service animals - Guidance Concerning the Carriage of Service Animals in Air Transportation Into the United Kingdom||2007 WL 555627 (F.R.)||
This notice publishes guidance concerning the carriage of service animals in air transportation from the United States (U.S.) to the United Kingdom (U.K.). These guidelines address the differences between U.K. laws regulating the transport of service animals on flights into the U.K. and U.S. law with respect to the carriage of service animals in air transportation. U.K. laws affecting the transport of service animals in air travel differ significantly from the requirements of the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA), 49 U.S.C. 41705, and its implementing regulation in 14 CFR Part 382, resulting in uncertainty for carriers and persons with disabilities about the requirements that apply on flights into or transiting the U.K.
|US - Air travel, service animals - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel (proposed rules)||2008 WL 2018571 (F.R.)||
The Department of Transportation is amending its Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) rules to apply to foreign carriers. The final rule also adds new provisions concerning passengers who use medical oxygen and passengers who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. The rule also reorganizes and updates the entire ACAA rule. The Department will respond to some matters raised in this rulemaking by issuing a subsequent supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.
|US - Service animals - Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities||2008 WL 2413721 (F.R.)||
The Department of Justice (Department) is issuing this notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in order to: Adopt enforceable accessibility standards under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) that are "consistent with the minimum guidelines and requirements issued by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board" (Access Board); and perform periodic reviews of any rule judged to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, and a regulatory assessment of the costs and benefits of any significant regulatory action as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act, as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 (SBREFA).
|US - Pets and Housing - Pet Ownership for the Elderly and Persons With Disabilities||2008 WL 4690497 (F.R.)||
This final rule amends HUD's regulations governing the requirements for pet ownership in HUD-assisted public housing and multifamily housing projects for the elderly and persons with disabilities. Specifically, this final rule conforms these pet ownership requirements to the requirements for animals assisting persons with disabilities in HUD's public housing programs, other than housing projects for the elderly or persons with disabilities.
|US - Wolf - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reinstatement of Protections for the Gray Wolf in the Western Great L||2009 WL 2947315 (F.R.)||
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are issuing this final rule to comply with a court order that has the effect of reinstating the regulatory protections under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA), for the gray wolf (Canis lupus) in the western Great Lakes. This rule corrects the gray wolf listing in our regulations which will reinstate the listing of gray wolves in all of Wisconsin and Michigan, the eastern half of North Dakota and South Dakota, the northern half of Iowa, the northern portions of Illinois and Indiana, and the northwestern portion of Ohio as endangered, and reinstate the listing of wolves in Minnesota as threatened. This rule also reinstates the former designated critical habitat for gray wolves in Minnesota and Michigan and special regulations for gray wolves in Minnesota.
|US - Endangered - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Reissuance of Final Rule||2011 WL 1670025 (F.R.)||
On April 15, 2011, President Obama signed the Department of Defense and Full-Year Appropriations Act, 2011. A section of that Appropriations Act directs the Secretary of the Interior to reissue within 60 days of enactment the final rule published on April 2, 2009, that identified the Northern Rocky Mountain population of gray wolf (Canis lupus) as a distinct population segment (DPS) and to revise the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife by removing most of the gray wolves in the DPS. This rule complies with that directive.
|US - Chimpanzees - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; 90-Day Finding on a Petition To List All Chimpanzees (Pan trog||2011 WL 3840975 (F.R.)||
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce a 90-day finding on a petition to list all chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) as endangered under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). Based on our review, we find that the petition presents substantial scientific or commercial information indicating that listing all chimpanzees as endangered may be warranted. Therefore, with the publication of this notice, we are initiating a review of the status of the species to determine if listing the entire species as endangered is warranted. To ensure that this status review is comprehensive, we are requesting scientific and commercial data and other information regarding this species. Based on the status review, we will issue a 12-month finding on the petition, which will address whether the petitioned action is warranted, as provided in section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Act.
|US - AWA - Animal Welfare; Retail Pet Stores and Licensing Exemptions||2013 WL 5206012(F.R.)||SUMMARY: We are revising the definition of retail pet store and related regulations in order to ensure that the definition of retail pet store in the regulations is consistent with the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), thereby bringing more pet animals sold at retail under the protection of the AWA. Specifically, we are narrowing the definition of retail pet store to mean a place of business or residence at which the seller, buyer, and the animal available for sale are physically present so that every buyer may personally observe the animal prior to purchasing and/or taking custody of that animal after purchase, and where only certain animals are sold or offered for sale, at retail, for use as pets. Retail pet stores are not required to be licensed and inspected under the AWA. In addition, we are removing the limitation on the source of gross income from the licensing exemption in the regulations for any person who does not sell or negotiate the sale of any wild or exotic animal, dog, or cat and who derives no more than $500 gross income from the sale of the animals other than wild or exotic animals, dogs, or cats during any calendar year. We are also increasing from three to four the number of breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals that a person may maintain on his or her premises and be exempt from the licensing and inspection requirements if he or she sells only the offspring of those animals born and raised on his or her premises, for pets or exhibition. This exemption applies regardless of whether those animals are sold at retail or wholesale. These actions are necessary so that all animals sold at retail for use as pets are monitored for their health and humane treatment.|
|TX - Rabies control - § 169.22. Definitions||25 TX ADC § 169.22||This code is the definition section for the Texas Administrative Code's regulations on rabies control.|
|TX- Dangerous Animals - G. Caging Requirements and Standards for Dangerous Wild Animals.||25 TX ADC § 169.131, 132||This regulation establishes caging requirements and minimum standards of care for "dangerous wild animals," including: gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, baboons, lions, tigers, cheetahs, ocelots, cougars, leopards, jaguars, bobcats, lynxes, servals, caracals, hyenas, bears, coyotes, jackals, and all hybrids thereof.|
|TX- Circus, entertainment animals - Subchapter B. Care of Animals by Circuses, Carnivals, and Zoos||25 TX ADC § 169.41 - 169.48||[Note: §§ 169.41 to 169.48 were repealed eff. Nov. 13, 2016. This information is provided for historical purposes only.] This set of regulations sets license conditions and fees for circuses, carnivals, and zoos that are regulated by the Department of Health Services and establishes standards regarding the care of animals maintained by those facilities. All circuses, carnivals, and zoos that are regulated by the United States Department of Agriculture under the Federal Animal Welfare Act are exempt from these regulations.|
|DE - Exotic Animals - Chapter 903. Exotic Animal Regulations||3 DE ADC 903-1.0 - 14||These regulations govern the permitting process, possession, sale, rehabilitation and exhibition of exotic animals, i.e., live wild mammals, hybrids of wild mammals, and live reptiles not native to or generally found in the State of Delaware. The State Veterinarian or her or his designee shall have the authority to administer these regulations and shall be solely responsible for making the determinations required herein.|
|MO - Hunting, Internet - 3 CSR 10-7.410. Hunting Methods||3 MO ADC 10-7.410||In paragraph (R) of this Missouri regulation, the state prohibits computer-assisted, remote hunting. "Except as otherwise permitted in this Code, wildlife may be taken only in the immediate physical presence of the taker and may not be taken by use of computer-assisted remote hunting devices. . ."|
|MO - Wildlife - Wildlife Code Definitions||3 Mo. Code of State Regulations 10-20.805||This chapter includes the definitions for the Missouri Wildlife Code.|
|KY - Exotic Wildlife, Native Wildlife - Transportation and holding of native wildlife/301 KAR 2:082. Transportation and holding||301 Ky. Admin. Regs. 2:081, 2:082||These regulations provide Kentucky's administrative rules for the possession of wild animals or exotic pets. Except as specified in Section 2 of this administrative regulation and subsection (2) of this section, a person shall not import or possess species such as an alligator snapping turtle, black bear, cougar, copperbelly watersnake, wild turkey, wolf, or any federally threatened or endangered species. Specific transportation and importation requirements are outlined in great detail.|
|KY - Endangered - 301 KAR 3:061. Endangered species of fish and wildlife||301 Ky. Admin. Regs. 3:061||It is unlawful for any person to import, transport, possess, process, sell or offer for sale any endangered species of fish and wildlife, or parts thereof, except as provided in Sections 3 and 4 of this administrative regulation.|
|TX - Rehabilitation, wildlife - Subchapter C. Wildlife Rehabilitation Permits||31 TX ADC § 69.43 - 53||This chapter of Texas regulations provide the requirements to obtain a wildlife rehabilitation permit. The qualifications to obtain a wildlife rehabilitation permit are also outlined. General facilities standards and inspection requirements are provided.|
|IN - Rehabilitation, wildlife - 312 IAC 9-10-9 Wild animal rehabilitation permit||312 IAC 9-10-9,||This Indiana regulation sets for the requirements to obtain a permit to possess wild animals for rehabilitation.|