Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Summary of State Lost Property Statutes | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This summary provides links to the twenty or so states that have enacted lost and found property statutes. These statutes outline a procedure finders must follow when finding lost property, which supplement traditional property laws. |
| Detailed Discussion of Wyoming Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | The following article discusses Wyoming Great Ape law. Wyoming has no law that restricts or otherwise mentions great apes. In fact, Wyoming does not even have a state endangered species provision providing additional state protection for endangered or threatened species. The only possible reference that could include great apes is the definition for “exotic species” under the general fish and game code definitions. However, there are no accompanying restrictions on possession or importation of those exotic species. The state’s cruelty law is broad enough to include great apes. There are no exceptions under the cruelty for scientific research or testing. |
| Detailed Discussion of South Carolina Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | The following article discusses Great Ape law in South Carolina. In the state of South Carolina, there is no specific law that mentions great apes or contains an outright ban on private ownership of great apes. Any protection great apes receive in the state is due to their status as federally-protected endangered species. Regulations issued under the authority of the South Carolina Nongame and Endangered Species Conservation Act ban the possession of federally-listed endangered or threatened species except by scientific or conversation permit issued by the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. This would exclude many uses of apes in the private sector. Great apes are generally protected from intentional abuse and neglect under the state’s anti-cruelty law. However, this law excludes certain activities permitted under Title 50 of the state’s fish and game code such as scientific collection and zoological purposes. |
| Detailed Discussion of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Law Legal and Historical Center |
This article explores the history and text of the BGEPA. It further examines the relevant legal issues spawned by the Act, including free exercise challenges by Native Americans, the abrogation of treaty rights, commerce in eagle parts, and requisite intent for criminal prosecution under the Act. |
| Detailed Discussion of South Dakota Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | The following article discusses Great Ape law in South Dakota. Generally, in South Dakota, it is unlawful to possess a great ape in the state of South Dakota under the state’s endangered species law. Violation of that chapter is a misdemeanor.In the event that the endangered species law is bridged, South Dakota requires possessors of “captive nondomestic mammals” to obtain a permit. Additionally, great apes are generally protected from intentional abuse and neglect under the state’s anti-cruelty law. The law excludes properly conducted scientific experiments or investigations performed by personnel following guidelines established by the National Institute of Health and the United States Department of Agriculture |
| Overview of the Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act (MBTRA) | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This overview discusses the recent amendment to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). Under a bill introduced in May of 2004, all bird species not considered "native" to the United States would be excluded from protection. This new law, known as the Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act, has been the center of much controversy, especially as it concerns the cause of mute swans in the U.S. It became law on December 8, 2004, as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2005. |
| Brief Summary of Dog Bite Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This brief overview examines the basic provisions of most state dog bite laws, including the traditional elements of negligence and principles of strict liability. |
| Species at Risk Act (SARA) Summary and Press Release | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This page provides a summary of the recent Species at Risk Act legislation passed in Canada in December of 2002. The act, set to come into force in 2003, seeks to protect those species deemed to be endangered, threatened or "at risk" from extinction or extirpation as well as habitat critical to the survival of those species. |
| How to Search for Your Municipality's Animal-Related Ordinances | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This document briefly explains how one may search for electronic versions of his or her municipality's animal control ordinances over the Interent. |
| Overview of States that Prohibit BSL | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | This document lists the states that prohibit the regulation of dogs by local governments based on breed, commonly known as breed-specific legislation. The laws are divided into two general categories: (1) states that prohibit breed-specific legislation (BSL) in all animal regulation (10 states); and (2) states that prohibit BSL in dangerous/vicious dog laws (16 states). In total, there are approximately 22 states with some sort of anti-BSL legislation (combining both (1) and (2) together, and not counting DE, IL, and VA twice because they have both such laws). The pertinent part of the legislation is included in this list as well as a link to the actual laws. A further distinction has to be made in the application of some of these laws in the dangerous dog category. Some laws state that municipalities may not regulate dangerous dogs based solely on breed while other laws simply say that breed cannot be used to prove a dangerous dog declaration. |