|IN - Liens - 32-33-8-1 Feed and care bestowed upon livestock; mechanic's and tradesman lien||
This statute allows the keeper of a livery stable or any person engaged in feeding horses, cattle, hogs, and other livestock to place a lien on any of the animals that he or she cares for.
|IN - Property - (Repealed by P.L.162-2006, SEC.49.) - Dogs as Personal Property for Taxation||
|IN - Rabies - Rule 5. Rabies Immunization||These regulations contain Indiana's rabies provisions.|
|IN - Spay, neuter - Chapter 4. Spay-Neuter Requirement for Animal Care Facilities||This Indiana chapter added in 2016 concerns the spay-neuter requirements for animal care facilities. Beginning July 1, 2021, except as provided in this chapter, a companion animal shall be spayed or neutered before adoption from an animal care facility.|
|IN - Trust - 30-4-2-18. Trust to provide for care of an animal alive during settlor's lifetime||
|IN - Veterinary - Article 38.1. Veterinarians.||
These are the state's veterinary practice laws. Among the provisions include licensing requirements, laws concerning the state veterinary board, veterinary records laws, and the laws governing disciplinary actions for impaired or incompetent practitioners.
|IN - Wild Animal - Chapter 25. Importation Permit||
|IN - Wild Animal - Chapter 28. Permit to Take, Kill, or Capture Wild Animal Damaging Property||
|IN - Wild Animal - Rule 11. Wild Animal Possession Permits.||
|Indiana Dept. of Natural Resources v. Whitetail Bluff, LLC||Appellee established a business that allowed for "high fence" hunting, which refers to hunting wild animals on property that is enclosed by a fence, of privately-owned whitetail deer. The pivotal question in this appeals case was whether the Indiana Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) was correct in asserting that the current statutory scheme prohibited this practice, and therefore allowed the agency to promulgate rules effectuating that prohibition. The Indiana Court of Appeals held that IDNR did not have the power to regulate fish and wildlife that were legally owned or held in captivity under a license. The IDNR therefore went beyond its express powers conferred upon it by the General Assembly when it promulgated rules that prohibited "high fence" hunting. The lower court's grant of summary judgment to the appellee was affirmed.|