Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| FEDERAL ANIMAL PROTECTION STATUTES | Henry Cohen | 1 Animal L. 153 (1995) | This report contains brief summaries of federal animal protection statutes, from the African Elephant Conservation Act to the Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act. While not including treaties, it does include statutes enacted to implement treaties. It includes statutes concerning animals that are not entirely, or not at all, animal protection statutes. For example, it includes a statute authorizing the eradication of predators, because one of the statute's purposes is to protect domestic and "game" animals; and it includes statutes to conserve fish, although their ultimate purpose may not be for the fishes' benefit. It also includes statutes that allow the disabled to use service animals, and even includes statutes aimed at acts of animal rights advocates. Among recent statutes included in the report are the 1992 and 1994 amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, section 404C of the Public Health Service Act, the 1994 amendments to the TwentyEight Hour Law, and the Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992. |
| THE KENTUCKY HORSE: THE REALITY VS. THE MYTH AND WHAT COULD BE DONE TO CLOSE THE GAP | Virginia F. Coleman | 21 Animal L. 181 (2015) | The iconic status of the horse in Kentucky belies the bitter reality faced by the vast majority of horses in that state. This Article explains how multiple aspects of the current law enforcement system in the state permit the persistent failure to protect horses against gross neglect and abuse, as exemplified in particular by two case studies. The Kentucky Equine Health and Welfare Council, a legislative construct promoted by its backers as a unique safeguard for Kentucky horses, was in fact ill-suited ab initio for this role and has proved uninterested in it. Although there is no legislative cure for indifference on the part of those charged with enforcing laws against neglect and abuse, there are a number of legislative changes that would improve the now lamentable odds faced by Kentucky's horses. These changes, discussed in Part IV of this Article, are designed to increase the likelihood of action being taken against an offender, including through civil as well as criminal proceedings; secure immediate care for horses which have been victimized and prevent recidivism by offenders; increase the severity of the offense; dampen the current robust market for slaughter horses, and fund the costs inherent in creating a more effective enforcement system. All of the changes proposed are already law in at least some other states-in some instances in many other states--and these existing laws offer a ready model for Kentucky to follow if it so chooses. Although the focus of this Article is on Kentucky, all the legislative recommendations made are more broadly applicable to any state which does not yet have a statute as proposed in place. |
| Just Say Neigh: A Call for Federal Regulation of Byproduct Disposal By the Equine Industry | Mary W. Craig | 12 Animal L. 193 (2005) |
This article discusses the thousands of foals born each year that are bred for industrial purposes. These foals must then be disposed of as unwanted byproducts of the equine industry. PMU mares are bred to collect urine rich with hormones used in the production of a drug to treat menopausal symptoms. Nurse mares are bred to produce milk to feed foals other than their own. If adoptive homes cannot be found quickly, both industries dispose of their equine byproducts by slaughtering the foals, and sometimes the mares, for profit or convenience. This paper calls for an amendment to the Animal Welfare Act enabling the Department of Agriculture to regulate the PMU and nurse mare farms, and requiring both industries to responsibly dispose of these horses. |
| LEGAL PROTECTION FOR HORSES: CARE AND STEWARDSHIP OR HYPOCRISY AND NEGLECT? | Lafcadio H. Darling | 6 Animal L. 105 (2000) | Horses have a strong connection to America and Americans. They have played a pivotal role in our history, they have been a part of our work and our play, and we cherish them as companion animals. The legal system has made significant steps to protect horses in a number of ways. However, quite ironically, horse protection laws are often ineffective, unenforced, and sometimes non-existent. This article will explore America's relationship with the horse, horse protection laws-their strengths and their failures. |
| Anti-Horse Slaughter Legislation: Bad for Horses, Bad for Society | Laura Jane Durfee | 84 Ind. L.J. 353 (Winter, 2009) |
Part I of this Note will discuss the domestic horse slaughter industry. It will examine what types of horses are sent to slaughterhouses and by whom, as well as how slaughterhouses operate. Part II will discuss the current state of horse slaughter legislation and the legislative histories that led to the current situation. Part III will discuss the forecast for equine welfare and will explain why the closure of the U.S. equine slaughter industry is detrimental to equine welfare, and Part IV will discuss the negative economic effects that will be felt by the abolition of the domestic slaughter industry. This Note concludes by calling for the repeal of state laws criminalizing the slaughter of horses for human consumption, the reopening of equine slaughterhouses in the United States, and the rejection of the proposed Prevention of Equine Cruelty Act of 2008. |
| Oats, Water, Hay, And Everything Else: The Regulation of Anabolic Steroids In Thoroughbred Horse Racing | Bradley S. Friedman | 16 Animal L. 123 (2009) |
This Article provides an overview of those anabolic steroid regulations in the context of the history of regulation in Thoroughbred horse racing. This Article concludes that while the current limitation on the effectiveness of anabolic steroid regulation is a lack of research and accurate laboratory testing, using a pervasive federal law might be the most effective way of ending the use of anabolic steroids in horse racing. |
| Survey of Illinois Law: Liability for Animal-Inflicted Injury | Harold W. Hannah | 24 S. Ill. U. L.J. 693 (2000) |
This article attempts to explain how Illinois law affects the liability of people who are owners or are in control of animals at the time that an injury occurs, as a consequence of that animal’s actions. The section of this article that is related to equine law discusses how there has been a growing concern of stable owners as a result of increased litigation and insurance costs with respect to equine activity injuries. Furthermore, the article mentions that the purpose of the Illinois Equine Activity Liability Act is to alleviate some risk of liability from those involved in equine activities. |
| US - Horse Slaughter- APHIS 2010 audit | Gil H. Harden /s/ Assistant Inspector General | OIG, USDA APHIS Administration Horse Protection Program , Audit Rep. 33601-2-KC, 32 (2010) | This report presents the results of the Office of Inspector General’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service Administration of the Horse Protection Program and the Slaughter Horse Transport Program. The September 20, 2010, written response to the official draft report is included with excerpts and the Office of Inspector General’s position incorporated into the relevant sections of the report |
| Brief Overview of Trainer Responsibility for Racehorse Breakdowns in New York | Cynthia F. Hodges | The Animal Legal and Historical Center |
This brief summary presents reasons why trainers should be held criminally liable when racehorses break down under the New York anti-cruelty statute, Agriculture and Markets Law § 353. This section prohibits anyone from unjustifiably overdriving, torturing, injuring, or killing animals. By racing unfit horses, the trainers are not only withholding medical care, but are causing pain and further injury to the horses, which is cruel under the statute. Knowingly racing an unfit horse meets the definition of “cruelty” under § 353, and a guilty trainer should be held to account. |
| Trainer Responsibility for Racehorse Breakdowns in New York | Cynthia F. Hodges | The Animal Legal and Historical Center |
Trainers should be held criminally liable when racehorses break down under the New York anti-cruelty statute, Agriculture and Markets Law § 353. This section prohibits anyone from unjustifiably overdriving, torturing, injuring, or killing animals. By racing unfit horses, the trainers are not only withholding medical care, but are causing pain and further injury to the horses, which is cruel under the statute. Knowingly racing an unfit horse meets the definition of “cruelty” under § 353, and a guilty trainer should be held to account. |