Chickens: Related Statutes
|Statute by category||Citation||Summary|
|WV - Humane Slaughter - Article 2E. Humane Slaughter of Livestock.||W. Va. Code, §§ 19-2E-1 to 7||
The West Virginia humane slaughter provisions apply to livestock, defined as cattle, swine, sheep or goats. Humane methods of slaughtering livestock include those where the animal is rendered insensible to pain by a single blow, gunshot or by electrical, chemical or other means, or by slaughtering in accordance with the ritual requirements of the Jewish faith or any other religious faith that prescribes a method of slaughter by the simultaneous and instantaneous severance of the carotid arteries. The section provides a graduating scheme of penalties for violation; a first offense results in a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $100 - $500; a second offense results in a misdemeanor with a fine of $500 - 1,000 and suspension of the license to do business as a slaughtering establishment until the facility is in compliance.
|WI - Chickens, transport - 134.52. Shipment of chickens||W. S. A. 134.52||
This Wisconsin statute requires that poultry not be overcrowded and the shipping container must be at least 13 inches in high on the inside and covered at the top in a way that prevents the chickens from getting caught in the top.
|VT - Humane Slaughter - Humane Slaughter of Livestock||6 V.S.A. § 3131 - 3134||
These statutes comprise Vermont's humane slaughter provisions. The law requires the humane slaughter of all commercial livestock with a "humane method" defined as a method whereby the animal is rendered insensible to pain by mechanical, electrical, chemical or other means that is rapid and effective before being shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast or cut (with exemptions for religious ritual slaughter). A person who violates this chapter shall be fined not more than $100.00 nor less than $50.00 or imprisoned not more than ninety days, or both, and in addition, the secretary may seek an injunction against a slaughterer.
|VA - Fighting - § 3.2-6571. Animal fighting; penalty||Va. Code Ann. § 3.2-6571||
This section makes it unlawful to knowingly promote, prepare, engage in or attend an exhibition of the fighting of animals. The violation becomes a Class 6 felony if: 1) one of the animals is a dog; 2) a device or substance is used to enhance the dog's ability to fight; 3) money or something else of value is wagered; 4) admission is paid; 5) an animal is owned or possessed with the intent to engage in an animal fight; or 6) a person causes a minor to attend or undertake in the activities. An animal used in fighting may be confiscated by law enforcement. Additionally, any person convicted of violating any listed provision shall be prohibited by the court from possession or ownership of companion animals or cocks.
|UK - Farming - UK Welfare of Farmed Animals (Amend.)||Statutory Instrument 2002 No. 1646||
These Regulations may be cited as the Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2002. The provisions mainly concern egg-laying hens.
|UK - Farming - UK General Welfare of Farmed Animals Regs. 2000||Statutory Instrument 2000 No. 1870||
The UK's general animal welfare legislation affecting any animal (including fish, reptiles or amphibians) bred or kept for the production of food, wool, skin or fur or for other farming purposes.
|SC - Dogfighting - Chapter 27. Animal Fighting and Baiting Act.||Code 1976 § 16-27-10 to 80||
This South Carolina section comprises the state's Animal Fighting and Baiting Act. Under the Act, any person who owns an animal for the purpose of fighting or baiting, is a party to any fighting or baiting of any animal, or obtains the use of any structure for the purpose of fighting or baiting any animal is guilty of a felony and upon conviction must be punished by a fine of $5000 or 5 years imprisonment or both. The section also provides for seizure and forfeiture of animals used in fighting operations.
|RI - Transportation - § 4-1-7. Live poultry containers||Gen. Laws, 1956, § 4-1-7||
This Rhode Island statute requires poultry be shipped in sanitary, warm, and ventilated containers.
|PA - Humane Slaughter - Slaughter and Processing of Domestic Animals||3 Pa.C.S.A. § 2361 - 2362||
These laws comprise Pennsylvania's humane slaughter provisions. The section begins with the enabling statute that grants authority to the relevant state agency. It then declares that humane methods shall be used in the handling of domestic animals for slaughter and in the actual bleeding and slaughter of domestic animals except in the cases of slaughter for ritual purposes or individual (e.g., non-commercial) consumption. The law itself does not proscribe penalties for non-compliance (but such may be listed in departmental regulations).
|OR - Humane Slaughter - Chapter 603. Meat Dealers and Slaughterers. Meat Dealers and Slaughterers, in General.||O. R. S. § 603.010 - 992||
These Oregon laws comprise the state's slaughter laws. Among the provisions is the humane slaughter law, which requires that cattle, equines, sheep, or swine are slaughtered by by any method which renders the animal insensible to pain by a single blow or gunshot or by an electrical, chemical or other means that is rapid and effective; or by a method in accordance with the ritual requirements of any religious faith that prescribes a method of slaughter whereby the animal suffers loss of consciousness by anemia of the brain. Violation of ORS 603.065 (the humane slaughter law) is a Class B misdemeanor.
|OK - Initiative - State Question 687/Initiative Petition 365 (Ban Cockfighting)||State Question 687/Initiative Petition 365 (Ban Cockfighting)||This petition makes it a felony to instigate or encourage cockfighting, possess or train birds for cockfighting, or maintain a facility for cockfighting in the state of Oklahoma. The ballot proposal also makes it a misdemeanor to knowingly be a spectator at a cockfight. It passed in 2002 with 56% of the vote.|
|OH - Humane Slaughter - Chapter 945. Humane Slaughter of Livestock.||R.C. § 945.01 - 99||
These laws comprise Ohio's humane slaughter provisions. After July 1, 1967, no method of slaughtering livestock or handling in connection with the commercial slaughtering of livestock shall be utilized unless it is humane. Humane methods are defined as those that render animals insensible to pain by a single blow or gunshot or an electrical, chemical, or other means that is rapid and effective. Slaughter in accordance with the ritual requirements of the Jewish faith or any other religious faith that prescribes a method of slaughter whereby the animal suffers loss of consciousness by anemia of the brain is also allowed. Violation of the act results in a fine of not more than one hundred dollars.
|New Zealand - Animal Welfare - Code for Layer Hens 2012||This code sets the minimum standards for the care and management of layer hens under all forms of management used in New Zealand. The purpose of this code is to provide guidance to the owners of layer hens and to persons who are in charge of them about the standards they must achieve in order to meet their obligations under the Animal Welfare Act 1999.|
|New Zealand - Animal Welfare - Code for Layer Hens 1999||Code of Animal Welfare No. 18||In New Zealand, hens are kept under conditions ranging from large commercial enterprises where the birds are totally reliant on humans for all their daily requirements to free-ranging hens which have access to outdoor runs or pasture. Provided those concerned with the day-to-day care of the hens treat them with skill and consideration, their welfare can be safeguarded under a variety of management systems. The code takes account of five basic requirements: freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition, the provision of appropriate comfort and shelter, the prevention, or rapid diagnosis and treatment, of injury, disease or infection, freedom from distress, and the ability to display normal patterns of behavior.|
|IN - Humane Slaughter - Chapter 5. Meat and Poultry Inspection; Humane Slaughter Act||I.C. 15-17-5-1 to 31||
This Indiana statutory section comprises both the state's meat processing laws and humane slaughter provisions. The state board responsible for carrying out this Act are empowered to adopt rules governing humane methods to make livestock or poultry insensible to pain before incision of an instrument for severance of the carotid arteries. The rules must conform as far as applicable to the regulations promulgated under the Federal Humane Slaughter Act. Most of the laws in this section pertain to inspection of commercial livestock facilities and the labeling of postmortem and antemortem animals. However, violation of the humane slaughter provisions appear to result in a Class B misdemeanor where there has been a "reckless violation."
|EU - Farming - Egg regulation, Number 557||(EC) Number 557/2007||
In May 2007, the Commission passed an egg regulation, Number 557, building upon the prior one (Number 1028) and delineating detailed marketing standards for eggs. The Regulation sets out rules, applicable to virtually all hen eggs sold in the EU, for the quality and weight grading, packaging, marking, storage, transport and presentation for retail sale of eggs, to ensure that they are marketed on an evenhanded, competitive basis. Though the regulation’s focus is primarily on egg marketing rather than animal welfare, it includes certain provisions that bear upon animal welfare. For instance, the regulation sets out detailed requirements for hen living conditions that must be met before eggs can qualify as “free range,” including open-air runs of low hen density.
|EU - Egg Labeling - Egg Labeling Directive Number 1028 - Council Regulation (EC) No 1028/2006||(EC) No 1028/2006||
In June of 2006, the Commission passed a broad regulation on egg labeling—Number 1028—that served mainly to set out labeling requirements distinguishing between Class A eggs (eggs for direct human consumption) and Class B eggs (other eggs). It paved the way for more detailed egg labeling legislation, such as Regulation 557 of 2007, that had a more direct impact on hen welfare.
|CT - Transport - Connecticut Cruelty to Poultry Statute||C. G. S. A. § 53-249||
This statute makes it illegal to transport poultry in any manner that is not sanitary, warm, and ventilated. Poultry must receive "reasonable care" to "prevent unnecessary suffering." Violation of this provision is a class D misdemeanor
|Costa Rica- Animal Fighting - Cock Fighting||LEY N.º 3 (1922)||This 1922 law, in Spanish, outlaws cock fighting in Costa Rica.|
|Connecticut General Statutes 1918: Chapter 329: Section 6268||Conn. Gen. Stat. § 6268 (1918)||
Section 6268 of Chapter 329 from the 1918 General Laws of Connecticut covers the unlawful injury to certain property of another. Specifically, the statute states the punishment for hurting, maiming, poisoning anther's cattle, ox, horse, and mule.
|CO - Humane Slaughter - Article 33. Custom Processing of Meat Animals.||C. R. S. A. § 35-33-101 to 407||
This Colorado section includes both the meat processing laws and the humane slaughter provisions. It covers livestock, which are defined as cattle, calves, sheep, swine, horses, mules, goats, and any other animal which may be used in and for the preparation of meat or meat products. No processor shall shackle, hoist, or otherwise bring livestock into position for slaughter or shall slaughter livestock except by humane methods as defined by regulation; the use of a manually operated hammer, sledge, or poleax is not permitted. Additionally, poultry shall be slaughtered in accordance with "good commercial practices" and in a manner that will result in thorough bleeding. Any person who violates any provision is subject to a civil penalty of not more than $750 per violation for each day of violation and commits a class 2 misdemeanor.
|California General Laws of 1913: Title 14: Section 596-599f||Cal. Penal Code §§ 597 - 599f (1913)||
The General Laws of California from 1913, title 14, covers Malicious Mischief which includes sections concerning: Cruelty to Animals, Poisoning of Cattle, killing of birds in cemeteries and killing of gulls or cranes. The Cruelty to Animal section describes laws concerning horses, abandoned animal, torture and maiming of animals, use of animals in fights, and arrest without warrants. In addition, the section covers evidence, stallions, and impounding without food and water. The section about the killing of birds in the cemetery concerns also killing and detaining of homing pigeons. The last section about killing of gulls and cranes also concerns the destruction of eggs and nests. In addition, the section covers killing of elk and prosecution for these offenses.
|CA - Slaughter - Part 3. Slaughtered Animals. Chapter 6. Slaughter||CA FOOD & AG § 19501 - 19503||
These sections enumerate the prescribed methods for slaughtering cattle, calves, horses, mules, sheep, swine, goats, fallow deer, and poultry. The regulations adopted under this chapter are required to conform as far as possible to the regulations of the United States Department of Agriculture governing methods of slaughtering.
|CA - Prize animals - § 599. Selling or giving away poultry or rabbits as inducement to enter contest, place of amusement or busi||CA PENAL § 599||
This statute makes it a misdemeanor to sell or give away, any live chicks, rabbits, ducklings, or other fowl as a prize for, or as an inducement to enter, any contest, game or other competition. It also makes it a crime to dye or artificially color any of these animals, or display them without adequate facilities.
|CA - Initiatives - Proposition 2 (farm cruelty)||2008 Proposition 2||This 2008 California initiative measure would add to the Health & Safety Code with a law entitled, "The Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act." Specifically, the proposed law requires that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined only in ways that allow these animals to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely. Exceptions are made for transportation, rodeos, fairs, 4-H programs, lawful slaughter, research and veterinary purposes. The law provides misdemeanor penalties, including a fine not to exceed $1,000 and/or imprisonment in jail for up to 180 days and would go into effect on January 1, 2015. It was approved in November 2008 by a margin of 63% to 37%.|
|CA - Cockfighting - § 597j. Persons who own, possess or keep or train any bird or other animal with intent that it be used or en||CA PENAL § 597j||
This section prohibits any person from owning, possessing, or keeping any cock with the intent that it shall be used in any exhibition of fighting.
|CA - Cockfighting - § 597i. Cockfighting implements; prohibitions; penalties||CA PENAL § 597i||
This statute makes it unlawful for anyone to manufacture, buy, sell, barter, exchange, or have in his possession any of the implements commonly known as gaffs or slashers, or any other sharp implement designed to be attached in place of the natural spur of a gamecock or other fighting bird. The section also provides for forfeiture of such items, in addition to any sentence imposed by the court.
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 201 (cockfighting)||Proposition 201 (1998)||Proposition 201 would amend state law to create the crime of cockfighting. Cockfighting would be classified as a class 5 felony, generally punishable by a possible fine of up to $150,000 and a possible prison term ranging from nine months to two years. Presence at a cockfight would be classified as a class 1 misdemeanor, generally punishable by a possible fine of up to $2,500 and a possible jail term of up to six months. This proposition would extend existing state law animal cruelty exemptions and defenses that apply to lawful hunting, ranching, farming, rodeos and related activities to also apply to cockfighting. The measure passed in 1998 with 68.1% of the vote.|
|AU - Cruelty - Queensland Animal Care and Protection Regulation 2002||This regulation implements the Animal Care and Protection Act 2001; it contains the codes of practice to be observed for securing animal welfare.|