Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Scent lineups compared across eleven countries | Barbara Ferry, John J. Ensminger, Adee Schoon, Zbignev Bobrovskij, David Cant, Maciej Gawkowski, IIlkka Hormila, Pavel Kos, Ferenc Less, Elena Rodionova, Klim T. Sulimov, Leif Woidtke, Tadeusz Jezierski | A scent lineup is generally a procedure whereby a dog's alerting behavior is used to establish that the dog detects two scents, one from a crime scene and one from a suspect, as deriving from the same person. The aim of this article is to compare methodologies of using dogs in scent lineups as a means of identifying perpetrators of crimes. It is hoped that this comparative approach, looking at countries where the method is currently or has in the past been used, will help determine what issues should be addressed in order to assure that the scent lineup will have a future as a forensic technique. Participants from eleven countries—Belgium, The Czech Republic, Finland, France, Germany, Hungary, Lithuania, The Netherlands, Poland, Russia, and the U.S.—completed a survey questionnaire regarding key aspects of the scent lineup procedures used by the police in their countries. Although there was broad overlap on certain matters, such as the use of control and zero trials, collection of decoy scents from individuals of similar gender and race as the suspect, materials for holding scent, frequency of cleaning and changing stations, and use and timing of rewards, there were significant differences in the degree of blindness required, who calls an alert (handler or experimenter), and whether handlers can work with more than one dog. The gap between recommendations and results available from the scientific literature and procedures used in police practice was greater for some countries than others, even taking into account that some scientific methodologies might be expensive or impractical given agency resources. The authors make recommendations about how to go forward if scent lineups are to remain a valid forensic technique. | Article | |
| Shark Finning-Who Is The Real Predator? | Mallory Field | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This paper explores the demise of sharks due to the increased demand for shark-fin products. The current legal protections against shark finning are discussed, including CITES and IPOA-Sharks, and solutions for the future are presented. |
Article |
| 2001 Legislative Review | Alicia Finigan | 7 Animal L. 145 (2001) |
This article provides an overview of 2001 state and federal animal related legislation. |
Article |
| OBSTACLES TO LEGAL RIGHTS FOR ANIMALS CAN WE GET THERE FROM HERE? | Susan Finsen | 3 Animal L. i (1997) | This article gives a brief introduction regarding the obstacles to legal rights for animals. | Article |
| "No Animals Were Harmed . . .": Protecting Chimpanzees From Cruelty Behind The Curtain | Lorraine L. Fischer | 27 Hastings Comm. & Ent L.J. 405 |
In this law review, Lorraine L. Fischer hopes to effect change in the way chimpanzees and other exotic animals are perceived in filmed media. Fischer argues that the exploitation of these animals is unacceptable because they (and other great apes) are not only sentient beings, but beings capable of suffering, forming relationships, expressing emotion, mourning death, communicating thoughts, and expressing love. Additionally, Fischer argues that since chimpanzees are a severely endangered species, using them as actors contradicts and offends the strong public policy of conservation and preservation that should be afforded to this precious species. To illustrate how laws fail to protect chimpanzees used in entertainment, this law review examines the Endangered Species Act, the Animal Welfare Act, and various state anti-cruelty laws. |
Article |
| Did United States v. Hayashi Fail to Provide a Safe Harbor for Marine Mammals Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act? | April Fisher and Amber A. Bell | 27 Golden Gate U.L. Rev. 67 (1997) |
This article examines the holding in United States v. Hayashi and concludes that by narrowly defining what constitutes "harm" under the MMPA, the Ninth Circuit ignored the plain meaning of the term, the legislative history of the MMPA and the regulations interpreting the MMPA. Moreover, the Ninth Circuit's holding in Hayashi allows fishermen to harass marine mammals as long as the action does not seriously disrupt normal marine mammal behavior. |
Article |
| Dysfunctional Downlisting Defeated: Defenders of Wildlife v. Secretary, U.S. Department of the Interior | Edward A. Fitzgerald | 34 B.C. Envtl. Aff. L. Rev. 37 (2007) |
Abstract: In 2003, the United States Department of the Interior (DOI) established three distinct population segments (DPSs) for the gray wolf, which encompassed its entire historic range. In addition, DOI downlisted the gray wolf from an endangered to threatened species in the Eastern and Western DPSs, despite the wolf's continued absence from ninety-five percent of its historic range. The U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon properly invalidated DOI's dysfunctional downlisting of the gray wolf. DOI's interpretation of “significant portion of its range” was inconsistent with the text, intent, and purposes of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). In addition, DOI inverted its DPS policy, which provides different populations of the species different levels of protection in different portions of its historic range. Achieving the recovery plan goals did not warrant downlisting the gray wolf. DOI also failed to address the five downlisting factors of section 4(a) of the ESA across a significant portion of the gray wolf's historic range. Nevertheless, DOI could have established two DPSs encompassing the populations of gray wolves in the western Great Lakes and northern Rocky Mountains, and could have accordingly downlisted these populations to threatened species status. |
Article |
| The Alaskan Wolf War: The Public Trust Doctrine Missing In Action | Edward A. Fitzgerald | 15 Animal L. 193 (2008) |
This article argues that the courts should have invoked Alaska’s public trust doctrine, which prevents the granting of preferences over state natural resources. The courts should have also rigorously examined the BOG’s wolf killing policies and protected the wolf as a valuable public trust resource. The BOG’s wolf killing policies have not been supported by the public, leading to ballot initiatives to protect the wolf. Congress is currently considering the Protect America’s Wildlife Act, which will prevent the same day airborne hunting of Alaska’s wolves. |
Article |
| Good Badger, Bad Badger: The Impact of Perspective on Wildlife Law and Policy | Peter L. Fitzgerald | 10 J. Animal & Nat. Resource L. 41 | The Law Commission of England and Wales is examining how the country’s rich patchwork of wildlife laws might be updated. At the same time the government, advocates, and the public are in the midst of a vigorous debate over whether badgers should be culled in an effort to control the spread bovine tuberculosis within the United Kingdom. Both of these efforts highlight how divergent views regarding our relationship to wildlife and the natural environment in the 21st century influence both broad questions regarding the structure of laws and regulations affecting wildlife, generally, as well as how to approach very specific problems and issues. While these sorts of debates over wildlife are not new, the vast majority of the population in the U.K. and many other industrialized countries has lost much of its connection to the wild as urbanization has continued to grow. Accordingly, what is new in today’s world is the degree to which popular support for one or another position advanced by interested parties depends not upon actual experience with nature and wildlife but rather with the popular public image of the wildlife at issue—and whether they are perceived as either “good” or “bad”. | Article |
| Using A Jury Of Her Peers To Teach About The Connection Between Domestic Violence And Animal Abuse | Caroline Forell | 15 Animal L. 53 (2008) |
In this essay, the author discusses using Susan Glaspell’s 1917 short story A Jury of Her Peers to teach about the connection between domestic violence and animal abuse. |
Article |