Results

Displaying 111 - 120 of 6638
Title Citation Alternate Citation Agency Citation Summary Type
IA - Veterinary Liens - Chapter 581. Veterinarian's Lien I. C. A. § 581.1 - 4 IA ST § 581.1 - 4 This section of Iowa laws relates to veterinary liens related to treatment of livestock. A veterinarian shall have an agricultural lien as provided in section 554.9102 for the actual and reasonable value of treating livestock, including the cost of any product used and the actual and reasonable value of any professional service rendered by the veterinarian. In order to perfect the lien, the veterinarian must file a financing statement in the office of the secretary of state as provided. “Livestock” means an animal belonging to the bovine, caprine, equine, ovine, or porcine species, ostriches, rheas, emus, poultry, or fish or shellfish. Statute
NJ - Stone Harbor - Chapter 147: Animals (Article V: Feral Cats) Borough of Stone Harbor, New Jersey Code of Ordinances, Article V: Feral Cats, Secs. 147-24 to 147-32

This Borough of Stone Harbor feral cat ordinance sets up a Trap, Neuter and Return (TNR) program outside of the area between 111th Street and the southern end of the Borough, as well as outside of the entire Bird Sanctuary and Stone Harbor Point areas. Under this ordinance, any feral cats found within the area between 111th Street and the southern end of the Borough, the Bird Sanctuary, or the Stone Point area must be captured and transported to the County Animal Shelter for handling in accordance with the interlocal agreement between the Borough and the county applicable to such animals. Caregivers, who are uncompensated volunteers, serve to facilitate the TNR program and their duties, as well as potential penalties for not complying with their duties, are indicated within this ordinance.

Local Ordinance
AK - Hunting - § 16.05.797. Computer-assisted remote hunting prohibited AS § 16.05.797 AK ST § 16.05.797 This law makes it a class A misdemeanor to engage in computer-assisted remote hunting or or provide or operate a facility for computer-assisted remote hunting in Alaska. Statute
Dias v. City and County of Denver 567 F.3d 1169 (C.A.10 (Colo.),2009) 2009 WL 1490359 (C.A.10 (Colo.))

The Tenth Circuit took up a challenge to Denver's breed-specific ban against pitbull dogs. The plaintiffs, former residents of Denver, contended the ban is unconstitutionally vague on its face and deprives them of substantive due process. The district court dismissed both claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) before plaintiffs presented evidence to support their claims. On appeal, the plaintiffs argue that the district court erred by prematurely dismissing the case at the 12(b)(6) stage. The Tenth Circuit agreed in part, finding that while the plaintiffs lack standing to seek prospective relief for either claim because they have not shown a credible threat of future prosecution, taking the factual allegations in the complaint as true the plaintiffs have plausibly alleged that the pit bull ban is not rationally related to a legitimate government interest.

Case
U.S. v. Moon Lake Electric Ass'n, Inc. 45 F.Supp.2d 1070 (D. Colo. 1999)

Defendant on appeal contends that its conduct of electrocuting migratory birds does not fall within the ambit of either the MBTA or the BGEPA because each statute is directed at the more traditional "physical" takings of migratory birds through hunting and poaching.  The court disagrees, finding the plain language of the statute and legislative history demonstrate an intent to include electrocutions.  The court further delineates the differences in intent under each statute, finding that while the MBTA is a strict liability crime, the BGEPA is not.  For further discussion on the intersection of the MBTA and the BGEPA, see Detailed Discussion of Eagle Act.

Case
IN - Cattle Slaughter - MAHARASHTRA ANIMAL PRESERVATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 1995 The Act amends the Maharashtra Animal Preservation Act, 1976. While the 1976 Act prohibited the slaughter of cows, the Amendment additionally prohibits the slaughter of bulls and bullocks. Statute
VA - Research Animals - § 32.1-162.32. Definitions VA Code Ann. § 32.1-162.32 This 2018 law states that no funds appropriated, granted, or awarded by the Commonwealth shall be used by any person or entity, public or private, to directly fund medically unnecessary research classified under pain and distress category E by the U.S. Department of Agriculture on animal subjects. “Medically unnecessary” means not carried out solely for the better health, welfare, or safety of the animal subject. Statute
US - Critical Habitat - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for the California tiger 2004 WL 2671444 (F.R.) 50 CFR Part 17, RIN 1018-AT44

The FWS through this rule has designated a critical habitat in Santa Barbara County, California for the California Tiger Salamander (Ambystoma califoniese) (CTS) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973. This rule fulfills the final requirements of the settlement agreement reached in Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The reason for the designation of critical habitat for the CTS is the net loss in CTS grazing land over a 10 – 12 year period due to extensive farming, regardless of the efforts made to increase the amount of suitable grazing land.

Administrative
Animal Law Amendments and Significant Cases

Animal Law Amendments and Significant Cases

Policy
China Intro

Animal Law in China

 

Policy

Pages