|WY - Scientific permits - Chapter 33. Regulation Governing Issuance of Scientific Research, Educational or Special Purpose Permi||WY ADC GAME POSS Ch. 33 s 1 - 8||The purpose of this regulation is to govern and regulate the issuance of permits to take, capture, handle, and transport Wyoming wildlife for scientific research, educational or special purposes. Such permits may be issued to persons, educational institutions, or governmental entities when the Wyoming Game and Fish Department determines the scientific research, educational, or special purposes are beneficial to wildlife, the department or the public.|
|WY - Rehabilitation - Chapter 45. Wildlife Rehabilitation||WY ADC GAME POSS Ch. 45 s 1 - 24||The purpose of this regulation is to provide for the care of sick, injured, debilitated or orphaned wildlife, excluding big game animals and trophy game animals, by permitted wildlife rehabilitators and to provide criteria for the issuance of permits to such wildlife rehabilitators. In accordance with this regulation, wildlife rehabilitators issued permits pursuant to this regulation may acquire sick, injured, debilitated, or orphaned wildlife and provide necessary treatment in order that the wildlife may be returned to live in the wild independent of human aid and sustenance. As soon as it can be determined that sick or injured wildlife is not likely to recover within one-hundred eighty (180) days, the wildlife shall be euthanized; unless Department approval is given for extended care.|
|WY - Importation - Section 3. Importation/Possession Permit Required For Live Wildlife.||WY Rules and Regulations GAME POSS Ch. 10 s 3||Except as exempted in this regulation (mainly common domestic animals), a permit from the Department is required prior to importation, possession, confinement, and/or transportation of any living wildlife. Any living wildlife may be transported through the state of Wyoming if the person transporting said wildlife is in possession of a valid permit for interstate transportation of live wildlife. However, wolves (Canis lupus) and/or wolf hybrids may not be possessed, imported or sold.|
|WI - Importation - Wildlife, Chapter 10. Animal Diseases and Movement.||Wis. Adm. Code s ATCP 10.01 - 10.09; 10.80 - 10.85||In this set of Wisconsin regulations, "wild animal" does not include a domestic animal identified in s. ATCP 10.02 (livestock, poultry, and other domestic animals). The majority of the regulations here concern disease detection, inoculation, and prevention in domestic herds. However, a person who imports an animal must comply with importing requirements including obtaining a permit under ATCP 10.07. Importation of specific species (dog, cats, exotic ruminants, camelids, elephants, etc.) are covered in 10.80 - 10.86.|
|WI - Breeder - Chapter ATCP 16. Dog Sellers and Dog Facility Operators.||WI ADC s ATCP 16.01 - 30||This set of administrative regulations from Wisconsin covers the conditions under which dogs must be kept by dog breeders (defined as any person who sells at least 25 dogs from more than 3 litters) and dog dealers. Dog sellers and dog facility operators are required to be licensed under the section. Per ATCP 16.18, a person licensed under this chapter may not transfer a dog to the buyer unless the dog is at least 7 weeks old, the dog is accompanied by its dam, or the department approves the transfer in writing. Minimum standards of care are outlined for licensees for dogs kept indoors or outdoors.|
|WA - Service Dogs - 162-38-105. Removal of dog guides and service animals.||Wash. Admin. Code 162-38-105||This Washington regulation concerns trained guide dogs or service animals. It is an unfair practice to request that a trained dog guide or service animal be removed, unless the person can show: (a) that the presence, behavior or actions of that dog guide or service animal constitutes an unreasonable risk of injury or harm to property or other persons; and (b) a reasonable attempt to eliminate the behavior or actions of that dog guide or service animal that constitutes an unreasonable risk fails.|
|WA - Rabies - 246-100-197. Rabies--Measures to prevent human disease.||WA ADC 246-100-197||Among other provisions concerning rabies, this Washington regulation states that an owner of a dog, cat, or ferret shall have it vaccinated and revaccinated against rabies following veterinary and USDA-licensed rabies vaccine manufacturer instructions.|
|WA - Importation - Chapter 16-54. Animal Importation||Wash. Admin. Code 16-54-010 - 180||This set of regulations is the Washington Department of Agriculture's import requirements for various types of domestic, companion, wild, and exotic animals.|
|WA - Importation - Chapter 16-54. Animal Importation||WASH. ADMIN. CODE §16-54-030||Washington requires health certificates for the importation of most animals into the state.|
|WA - Health, Animal Penalties -Title 16. Agriculture, Department of. Chapter 16-90. Penalty Schedule||WA ADC 16-90-005 - 030||This set of regulations provides the Department of Agriculture's penalties for violations of Washington's animal health laws.|
|WA - Health, Animal - Chapter 246-203. General Sanitation||Wash. Admin. Code 246-203-010, 121, 130, 180, 200||This compilation of regulations includes the Washington Department of Health's sanitation rules involving the possession, maintenance, and disposal of animals.|
|WA - Disaster Planning - Washington State Emergency Operations Plan||
The Washington State Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) includes Emergency Support Function #6 and #11, which concerns service animals and pets. The EOP also defines "animal," "household pet," and "service animal."
|VT- Pet Sales - Rule 308 Part III Sale of Cat and Dogs||VT ADC 20 022 017||These regulations detail the disclosures a pet dealer must make to a consumer at the time of sale of a cat or a dog pursuant to 20 V.S.A § 4302. According to the regulations, the consumer, at the time of sale, must be provided a copy of the Consumer Right-To-Know form, the Cat or Dog Request for Restitution form, the Consumer's Rights under 20 V.S.A. § 4302(a),(e) and § 4303, and the applicable state laws regarding rabies and licensing.|
|VT - Primates - Rule 300. Animal Welfare Regulations.||VT ADC 2-4-300:1.1 - .88||These Vermont regulations provide animal welfare standards for all licensees, including recordkeeping requirements, holding periods, and inspection provisions. Subpart D then outlines the specifications for the humane handling, care, treatment, and transportation of nonhuman primates. Facility requirements, feeding, watering, veterinary care, and transportation requirements are described, among other things.|
|VT - Kennels - Rule 300. Animal Welfare Regulations||VT ADC 20 022 001 - 3.14||These Vermont regulations for animal welfare set out the requirements kennels, pet stores and other animal facilities must follow in order to ensure the safe handling, care, treatment and transportation of animals is met. Precisely, the following regulations include: provisions regarding registration and licensing periods; government inspections; and specific instructions for the housing and care of cats and dogs.|
|VT - Disaster - Vermont Emergency Operations Plan SSF 11||The Vermont State Emergency Operations Plan (SEOP) is the basis for the Vermont emergency management system. The Vermont Division of Emergency Management and Homeland Security (DEMHS) is the primary state agency. The Base Plan includes language for an "incident management and disaster response teams include Domestic Animal and Wildlife Emergency Response." The State Support Functions (SSFs) number 11 listed in Appendix III deals with animals, but with a focus more on eradication of zoonotic outbreaks.|
|VA - Veterinarian Issues - Professional Conduct||18 150-20-140||The following regulation lists what is considered unprofessional conduct by a Virginia veterinarian. Violation of this regulation may result in a refusal to grant or renew a license; or may result in a suspension or revocation of a license, as described in § 54.1-3807(5) of the Code of Virginia. Subsection 14 states that "[f]ailing to report suspected animal cruelty to the appropriate authorities" is unprofessional conduct.|
|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.|
|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 - Exotic Pets - Chapter 30. Definitions and Miscellaneous||4 VA ADC 15-30-5 to 60||The following regulations implement Virginia's exotic pet laws.|
|UT- Animal Disease Control - R58. Animal Industry.||U.A.C. R58-1||These are the regulations for Utah's Control of Animal Disease Act. The regulation states, "It is the intent of these rules to eliminate or reduce the spread of diseases among animals by providing standards to be met in the movement of animals within the State of Utah (INTRASTATE) and the importation of animals into the state (INTERSTATE)." Included in the rule are all import requirements for all major livestock species as well as dogs, cats, and ferrets. The rule also covers exotic animals, zoological animals, and wildlife (section 18).|
|UT - Wildlife Possession - R657-3. Collection, Importation, Transportation, and Possession of Animals.||UT ADC R657-3||This set of Utah rules concerns the collection, importation, and possession of zoological animals under circumstances described in the rules. Commonly kept domestic animals such as alpacas, donkeys, cats, dogs and hybrid dogs, gerbils, goats, hamsters, and many others are not governed by these rules. A person shall obtain a certificate of registration before collecting, importing, transporting, or possessing any species of animal or its parts classified as prohibited or controlled. A person may not release to the wild or release into any public or private waters any zoological animal, including fish, without first obtaining authorization from the division. Certain species are prohibited for collection, importation, and possession. These species include bighorn sheep, bears, coyotes, gray wolves, wild cats, skunks, lemurs, great apes, and those species listed in Appendix I or II of CITES, among others listed in R657-3-24.|
|US - Wolf - Reinstatement of Protections for the Gray Wolf in the Western Great Lakes and Northern Rocky Mountains||
Reinstates the listing of the Western Great Lakes and Northern Rocky Mountains gray wolf populations in accordance with court orders.
|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 - Wolf - Final Rule To Identify the Western Great Lakes Populations of Gray Wolves as a Distinct||
Identifies the Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment of the gray wolf and removes this Segment from the protection of the Endangered Species Act. In accordance with court order, provides an explanation as to how simultaneously identifying and delisting a DPS is consistent with the Act's text, structure, policy objectives, legislative history, and any relevant judicial interpretations.
|US - Wolf - Final Rule To Identify the Northern Rocky Mountain Population of Gray Wolf as a Distinct Population Segment and To R||
The FWS identifies the gray wolf in the Northern Rocky Mountains as a Distinct Population Segment (DPS) and removes this DPS from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife, except in Wyoming. The wolf population in this area is about 5 times higher than the minimum population recovery goal and 3 times higher than the minimum breeding pair recovery goal. The gray wolf is not removed from the list in Wyoming because of inadequate regulatory mechanisms
|US - Wolf - Final Rule Designating the Northern Rocky Mountain Population of Gray Wolf as a Distinct Population Segment and Remo||
Establishes a distinct population segment (DPS) of the gray wolf in the Northern Rocky Mountains and removes the DPS from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife.
|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 - 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 - Wolf - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Regulations for Nonessential Experimental Populations of the Western||FR Doc. 04-5248||
We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) propose regulations for the nonessential experimental populations of the western distinct population segment (DPS) of the gray wolf (Canis lupus). In addition, we propose regulations so that States with wolf management plans approved by the Service can apply for additional authorities to manage wolves consistent with those approved plans. These proposed regulations would only have effect in States that have an approved State management plan for gray wolves.
|US - Wolf - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Final Rule Designating||
Establishes the Western Great Lakes Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the gray wolf and removes the DPS from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife.
|US - Wolf - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants: Removing the Eastern Distinct Population Segment (DPS) of the Gray Wo||
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces that we will hold one additional public hearing on the proposed rule to remove the Eastern Distinct Population Segment of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife established under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In a notice made in the Federal Register on August 13, 2004 (69 FR 50147), we announced the locations for nine other public hearing previously scheduled.
|US - Wildlife - § 12.36 Donation or loan.||67 FR 47660||This provision describes the applicable donation or loan procedures for forfeited or abandoned wildlife property. Of particular interest is the section that requires that donation of eagle parts to Native Americans for religious purpose must proceed according to the Indian religious permit procedures outlined in 50 C.F.R. 22.22.|
|US - Wildlife - Subpart D. Disposal of Forfeited or Abandoned Property. § 12.37 Sale.||This provision allows for sale of forfeited or abandoned property acquired by the federal government. It specifically excludes species of animals that fall under the BGEPA, the ESA, the MMPA, and other statutes.|
|US - Wildlife - Disposal of Forfeited or Abandoned Property||
The Service proposes regulations to dispose of property forfeited or abandoned to the United States under the provisions of 50 CFR Part 12. This property, which includes wildlife, plants, vehicles, vessels, aircraft, cargo, guns, nets, traps, and other equipment, would be separated into two types for disposal. All property, except wildlife and plants, would be disposed of under existing Service procedures, which are based on current Federal Property Management Regulations and Interior Property Management Regulations. Wildlife and plants, however, would be disposed of at the discretion of the Director by one of the following means: return to the wild, use by the Service or transfer to another government agency for official use, donation or loan, sale, or destruction.
This action would enable the Service to insure that wildlife and plants are disposed of in accordance with the conservation aims of the statute under which they were obtained while establishing an orderly, cost efficient disposal procedure. This procedure is needed both to eliminate unnecessary expense and overcrowding at government storage facilities and to provide a uniform means of satisfying the variety of possible uses of wildlife and plants which are ready for disposal.
|US - Whales - Whaling Provisions; Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Quotas||FR Doc. 05-2001||
NMFS announces the aboriginal subsistence whaling quota for bowhead whales, and other limitations deriving from regulations adopted at the 2002 Special Meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC). For 2005, the quota is 75 bowhead whales struck. This quota and other limitations will govern the harvest of bowhead whales by members of the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC).
|US - Whales - Whaling Provisions: Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Quotas||FR Doc. 04-3755||
NMFS announces the aboriginal subsistence whaling quota for bowhead whales, and other limitations deriving from regulations adopted at the 2002 Special Meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC). For 2004, the quota is 75 bowhead whales struck. This quota and other limitations will govern the harvest of bowhead whales by members of the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission (AEWC).
|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 - Whales - Proposed Threatened Status for Southern Resident Killer Whales||
We, the NMFS, have completed an update on the status review of Southern Resident killer whales (Orcinus orca) under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Based on the review of the best available scientific and commercial information, including new data, published papers, and workshop reports available since the review in 2002, we are proposing to list the Southern Resident killer whales as threatened because these killer whales constitute a distinct population segment (DPS) under the ESA and are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their range. We are not proposing to designate critical habitat at this time, but are requesting public comments on the issues pertaining to this proposed rule.
|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 - 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 - Slaughter - Humane Slaughter of Livestock Regulations||These regulations outline the requirements for the humane treatment of livestock prior to and during slaughter. Included are the requirements for pens, holding, and transportation areas, and the special circumstances for transporting and holding "downed" (nonambulatory) livestock. The regulations emphasize the minimization of "excitement and discomfort" to the livestock prior to transportation or slaughter. Of special note are the requirements for humane methods of slaughter, including the use of carbon dioxide gas, captive bolt "stunners" and projectiles, gunshot, and electrical current.|
|US - Slaughter - Ante Mortem Inspection||Progulmated under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FIMA), Part 309 of the FIMA regulations covering livestock inspection state that alll livestock offered for slaughter in an official establishment shall be examined and inspected on the day of, and before, slaughter. Such ante-mortem inspection shall be made in pens on the premises of the establishment at which the livestock are offered for slaughter. If an establishment fails to present animals for ante-mortem inspection in accordance with 9 CFR 309.1, inspection program personnel will be unable to determine that carcasses are not adulterated during postmortem inspection, and therefore cannot permit the carcasses to be marked as inspected and passed. Livestock may also be determined to be non-ambulatory disabled, US suspect, or US Condemened. Read a petition that requests the Food Safety and Inspection Service amend 9 C.F.R. § 309.3 by adding a provision: ―(f) Non-ambulatory disabled pigs that are offered for slaughter must be condemned and humanely euthanized in accordance with § 309.13.|
|US - Service animals - Part 36. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability||This regulation defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more of the major life activities of such individual; a record of such an impairment; or being regarded as having such an impairment. It also defines service animal as any guide dog, signal dog, or other animal individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including, but not limited to, guiding individuals with impaired vision, alerting individuals with impaired hearing to intruders or sounds, providing minimal protection or rescue work, pulling a wheelchair, or fetching dropped items.|
|US - Service Animals - Part 35. Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in State and Local||The purpose of this part is to effectuate subtitle A of title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12131), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. The section defines "service animal" as any dog that is individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability, including a physical, sensory, psychiatric, intellectual, or other mental disability. Other species of animals, whether wild or domestic, trained or untrained, are not service animals for the purposes of this definition.|
|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 - Primate - Animal Welfare; Draft Policy on Environment Enhancement for Nonhuman Primates||
Under the Animal Welfare Act, our regulations require that dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities that maintain nonhuman primates develop and follow a plan for environment enhancement adequate to promote the psychological well-being of the nonhuman primates. We have developed a draft policy to clarify what we believe must be considered and included in the plan in order for dealers, exhibitors, and research facilities to adequately promote the psychological well-being of nonhuman primates.
|US - PPIA Regulations- Sanitation||The following sanitation regulations are implemented under the Poultry Product Inspection Act. The general rule states: Each official establishment must be operated and maintained in a manner sufficient to prevent the creation of insanitary conditions and to ensure that product is not adulterated.|
|US - PPIA Regulations - Operating, Ante and Post Mortem Inspection||The following Poultry Products Inspection Act regulations detail the provisions for operating a poultry slaughterhouse, and for ante and post mortem inspection.|
|US - PPIA and FMIA Regulations - Rules of Practice||The following Poultry Products Inspection Act and Federal Meat Inspection act regulations detail the provisions for when the Food Safety and Inspection Service can take regulatory control.|