|
GA - Alligators - Article 7. Feeding of Wild Alligators |
Ga. Code Ann., § 27-3-170 |
GA ST § 27-3-170 |
|
This Georgia law makes it illegal to willfully feed or bait any wild alligator not in captivity. Violation is a misdemeanor with a fine of up to $200 or confinement up to 30 days, or both. |
Statute |
|
CA - Cats - Consolidated Cat Laws |
West's Ann. Cal. Food & Agric. Code § 31750 - 31766; West's Ann. Cal. Fish & G. Code § 4150 - 4151 |
CA FOOD & AG § 31750 - 31766; CA FISH & G § 4150 - 4151 |
|
These statutes comprise California consolidated cat laws. Among the provisions include possession requirements for non-domestic cats, vaccination and impound procedures for domestic cats, and legislative policy statements about feral cats. |
Statute |
|
AR - Endangered Species - 002.00.1-05.27. Endangered Species Protected |
|
AR ADC 002.00.1-05.27 |
Ark. Admin. Code 002.00.1-05.27 |
This Arkansas regulation states that it is illegal to import, transport, sell, purchase, take or possess any endangered species of wildlife or parts thereof except as provided. |
Administrative |
|
Derecho Animal Volume 10 Núm 1 |
|
|
|
Tabla de contenidos | | Editorial | | Persona y Animal: una aproximación sin prejuicios Marita Giménez-Candela | 8 - 20 PDF (English) |
|
Policy |
|
IN RE: S.S. FARMS LINN COUNTY, INC., JAMES W. HICKEY, MARIE HICKEY, JAMES JOSEPH HICKEY AND SHANNON HANSEN |
50 Agric. Dec. 476 (1991) |
1991 WL 290584 (U.S.D.A.) |
|
Reliance is to be no longer placed on "severe" sanction policy set forth in prior decisions; rather, sanction in each case will be determined by examining nature of violations in relation to remedial purposes of regulatory statute involved, along with all relevant circumstances, always giving appropriate weight to recommendations of administrative officials charged with responsibility for achieving congressional purpose.
|
Case |
|
GA - Restaurant, animals - 511-6-1-.07. Physical Facilities. |
|
GA ADC 511-6-1-.07 |
Ga Comp. R. & Regs. 511-6-1-.07 |
This Georgia regulation has an exception for dogs in outdoor dining areas in the subsection of the regulation that prohibits animals in food service establishments. Subsection (5)(o)(vi) states that pet dogs may be allowed in outside dining areas of a food establishment provided patrons access the area from the outdoors and several other conditions are met. Pet dogs must not come into contact with any serving dishes, utensils, or tableware nor are they allowed on chairs, tables, or other furnishings. Employees and consumers must not provide food to pet dogs. The pet dogs must be kept on a leash and under control of the consumer at all times. At no time is the pet dog allowed to travel through the interior portion of the food service establishment. The establishment must also establish processes for training employees not to handle or pet the dogs and a procedure and equipment for the clean up of pet waste. |
Administrative |
|
Creekstone Farms Premium Beef v. United States Department of Agriculture |
517 F.Supp.2d 8 (D.D.C.,2007) |
2007 WL 1020786 (D.D.C.,2007) |
|
Creekstone Farms Premium Beef (Creekstone) sought to independently test their slaughtered cows so they could more safely provide meat to consumers. Creekstone requested testing kits from the USDA, the same kits that USDA inspectors use to test for BSE.
The district court ruled that Creekstone could perform the tests.
|
Case |
|
CA - Burro - § 53074.5. Undomesticated burros; removal by officer or employee of local |
West's Ann. Cal. Gov. Code § 53074.5 |
CA GOVT § 53074.5 |
|
This California law allows an officer or employee of a local animal control agency to remove an undomesticated burro that strays onto private land at the request of the landowner. Such officer can also remove an undomesticated burro that strays onto a public roadway to ensure public safety. |
Statute |
|
MT - Initiatives - Constitutional Amendment 41 |
Constitutional Amendment 41 (2004) |
|
|
This 2004 ballot measure was an amendment to the constitution proposed by the legislature. The 2003 Legislature submitted this proposal for a vote. It would amend the Montana Constitution by adding a provision specifically to recognize and preserve the opportunity of Montana citizens to harvest wild fish and wild game animals. The amendment specifies that this new provision does not create a right to trespass on private property or diminish any other private rights. This amendment is effective upon approval by the electorate. It was passed in 2004 by 80.6% of voters. |
Statute |
|
DC - Assistance Animals - Chapter 20A. Pet Ownership Restriction in Assisted Housing. |
DC Code § 8-2031 - § 8-2035; DC CODE § 7-1002, 1006, 1009; DC CODE § 8-1804 |
DC ST § § 8-2031 - § 8-2035; DC ST § 7-1002, 1006, 1009; DC ST § 8-1804 |
|
The owner or operator of locally assisted housing accommodations for elderly or disabled people may not prevent a tenant from keeping common household pets. However, an owner or operator may require the removal of pets whose conduct or condition constitutes a threat or nuisance to the health or safety of the other occupants. A violation is a civil infraction that may result in a fine of up to $300. |
Statute |
