|Statute by category||Citation||Summary|
|VT - Impound - Sub Chapter 2. Pounds and Impounds.||20 V.S.A. § 3381 - 3485||The following Vermont statutes require that each organized Vermont town maintain a pound or else the town will be fined $30.00. The statutes also provide provisions for impounding an animal, retrieving an impounded animal, failing to retrieve an impounded animal, and assessing damages of an impounded animal, amongst other topics.|
|VT - Dogs, Wolf-hybrids - Consolidated Dog Laws||20 V.S.A. § 3511 - 3513; 3541 - 3817, 3901 - 3915, 4301 - 4304; 10 V.S.A. § 5001 - 5009, § 4748||These Vermont statutes comprise the state's dog laws. Among the provisions include licensing and control laws for both domestic dogs and wolf-hybrids, laws concerning the sale of dogs, and various wildlife/hunting laws that implicate dogs.|
|VT - Lost dog - Article 2. Killing Unlicensed Dogs; Subchapter 5. Control of Rabies||20 V.S.A. § 3621 - 3626; 20 V.S.A. § 3806 - 3809||These Vermont statute provide the law for seizure, confinement of, and destruction of dogs and domestic wolf-hybrids. It also includes a warrant form necessary for local authorities to seize and impound an offending dog or wolf-hybrid.|
|UK - Fur - Fur Farming (Prohibition) Act 2000||2000 CHAPTER 33||
An Act to prohibit the keeping of animals solely or primarily for slaughter for the value of their fur; to provide for the making of payments in respect of the related closure of certain businesses; and for connected purposes.
|Scotland - Wild Mammals - Protection of Wild Mammals (Scotland) Act 2002||2002 asp 6||An Act to prohibit deliberate hunting of wild mammals with dogs. The Act also makes it an offence for an owner or occupier of land to knowingly allow another person to hunt wild mammals with dogs on their land. Stalking and flushing is exempted in certain circumstances, for example, in order to protect livestock, providing food for animal or consumption, or controlling pest species.|
|US - AWA - 2002 Public Law 107-171||2002 PL 107-171||Enacted January 23, 2002, the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act changed the definition of "animal" in the Animal Welfare Act to specifically exclude birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research. The law also addressed animal fighting ventures by making it a misdemeanor to ship a bird in interstate commerce for fighting purposes, or to sponsor to exhibit a bird in a fight that had been shipped for such purposes.|
|AR - Initiatives - Proposed Initiated Act 1 (cruelty)||2002 Proposed Initiative Act 1||This ballot proposal sought to amend Arkansas' Animal Cruelty Act by making the knowing torture, mutilation, maiming, burning, poisoning, malicious killing, starving, or disfiguring of a non-exempted animal a crime known as "Aggravated Animal Cruelty." This offense would then become a Class D felony subject to enumerated penalties, including psychological counseling and forfeiture of the animal in question. This measure failed at the polls with 38% voting Yes and 62% voting No.|
|Northern Ireland - Zoo Licensing - The Zoo Licensing Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2003||2003 No. 115||Regulations licensing the conduct of zoo facilities in Northern Ireland (similar to the Zoo Licensing Act 1981 that applies to England, Wales and Scotland). Covers permanent establishments where animals are on display to the public, for seven days a year or more. License requirements address matters of animal welfare, conservation and public education.|
|Scotland - Animal Welfare - 2003 Proposal||2003 Proposal, Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912||For historical purposes only. Law has been repealed and/or replaced. The Scottish Executive (SE) issued a consultation paper on 21st March 2003 on proposals to amend the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912. These proposals were aimed at addressing the specific problem of the lack of statutory powers available to local authorities to remove neglected farm livestock, which are suffering or at risk of suffering, to a place of safely. The responses from a number of organisations to that paper have shown a clear desire for a much wider reform of our existing animal welfare legislation. Ministers now wish to consider expanding the proposed amendment to the Protection of Animals (Scotland) Act 1912 and to introduce wider legislation aimed at consolidating and updating much of the existing animal welfare legislation in Scotland. The purpose of any new legislation will be to prevent cruelty to any animal and to set out the obligations of people to promote the welfare of all animals (including domestic pets) for which they are either permanently or temporarily responsible. This will include owning, managing, or in any way keeping any animal, including buying, selling and transporting.|
|Scotland - Wildlife - Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004||2004 asp 6||This Act makes amendments to the protection of wildlife under the Countryside and Wildlife Act 1981, and the Protection of Badgers Act 1992, in respect of Scotland. Wild animal protection is extended to include reckless as well as intentional acts. The Act also makes it an offence to disturb or harass a dolphin, whale or basking shark, and amends the provisions for enforcement.|
|AK - Initiatives - Ballot Measure 3 (bear baiting or feeding)||2004 Ballot Measure 3||This Alaska ballot measure was defeated in the November 2004 election. It would have made it illegal for a person to bait or intentionally feed a bear for purposes of hunting, viewing, or photographing the bear. A person who violated this proposed law would have been guilty of a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one-year imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000. It failed with only 43.3% of the vote.|
|England and Wales - Hunting, mammals - Hunting Act 2004||2004 CHAPTER 37||An Act controlling the hunting of wild animals with dogs, and prohibiting hare coursing. The hare coursing prohibition covers facilitating, attending, spectating or otherwise. Schedule 1 of the Act provides for exemptions to hunting wild mammals with dogs, to include: stalking, or flushing a wild mammal out of cover provided that this is done to prevent or reduce potential damage elsewhere, for example to livestock or crops; to obtain meat for human or animal consumption or; participation in a field trial competition. For this hunting to be exempt, the stalking or flushing must not involve more than two dogs, or take place on land without the owner’s permission. Further exemption requirements are that one dog may go below ground only, to flush or dig out the mammal in circumstances where the purpose is to prevent or reduce serious damage to game birds or wild birds. Further, conditions require that the mammal must subsequently be shot as soon as possible after being found or flushed. Other exceptions include the hunting of rabbits or rats with dogs.|
|England - Fur - The Mink Keeping (Prohibition) (England) Order 2004||2004 No. 100||An Order imposing an absolute prohibition upon the keeping of mink in England.|
|US - Rodent - Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003||2004 P.L. 108-16; 2004 P.L. 105-322||
Nutria are large, semi-aquatic rodents that are native to South America and have invaded the marshland of certain U.S. states. There are no natural predators to control nutria, no market for their fur, and private trappers have failed to keep pace with the animals' ability to reproduce. P.L. 108-16 of 2003 and P.L. 105-322 of 1998 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to provide financial assistance to the States of Maryland and Louisiana for a program to implement measures to: (1)eradicate nutria in Maryland; (2)eradicate or control nutria in Louisiana and other States; and (3) restore marshland damaged by nutria.
|US - MBTA - Senate Bill 2547 An Act to Amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)||2004 Senate Bill 2547||
This Act, now known as the Migratory Bird Treaty Reform Act (MBTRA), revamps the MBTA by excluding species of birds that are "non-native" to the United States. Under the bill, a bird species shall not be treated as native to the United States if the species occurs in the United States solely as a result of intentional or unintentional human-assisted introduction after the date of adoption of the treaty in 1918. As a result, some 94 species of birds currently protected under the treaty would lose their protected status.
|EU - Transport - 2004/544/EC: Council Decision on the signing of the European Convention for the protection of animals during in||2004/544/EC||
This Council Decision directs the signing the of the European Convention for the protection of animals during international transport.
|AZ - Initiatives - Proposition 204 (inhumane confinement)||2006 Arizona Proposition 204||This comprises Proposition 204 also known as the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act. A "yes" vote shall have the effect of establishing misdemeanor fines and penalties for tethering or confining a pregnant pig or a calf raised for veal for all or a majority of the day in a manner that prevents the animal from lying down and fully extending its limbs or turning around freely but excepts transportation of the animal, rodeo and fair exhibitions, lawful slaughters, research, veterinary purposes and the seven day period before a pig's expected date of giving birth. The measure passed with 62% voting "yes."|
|Scotland - Animal Welfare - Animal Health and Welfare (Scotland) Act 2006||2006 asp 11||An Act establishing penalties for engaging in certain activities that are considered detrimental to animal welfare in Scotland. Part 1 of the Act contains detailed provisions concerning animal health and preventing the spread of disease. Activities that constitute offenses under Part 2 of the Act include: causing an animal unnecessary suffering, mutilating an animal’s body, docking a dog’s tail (with certain limited exceptions), administering a poisonous or injurious substance to an animal, and engaging in or attending animal fighting. Nothing in the Act applies to anything lawfully done under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 or to anything which occurs in the normal course of fishing.|
|GA - Initiatives - Georgia Amendment 2 (right to hunt)||2006 Georgia Amendment 2||This Georgia constitutional amendment was presented to voters on the 2006 ballot. The measure preserves the state's tradition of hunting and fishing for the public good. Amendment 2 passed by a margin of 81% to 19%.|
|MI - Initiatives - Michigan Proposal 3 (mourning dove hunting)||2006 Michigan Proposal 3||
In 2006, Michigan voters were presented with Proposal 3 that would have legalized the hunting of mourning doves by adding the species to the state game list. The measure was defeated by a 69 to 31 percent vote.
|England - Transport - The Welfare of Animals (Transport) (England) Order 2006||2006 No. 3260||Regulations to provide general protections to vertebrate and cold blooded invertebrate animals during transport. It is an offence to transport an animal in a way which causes, or is likely to cause, injury or unnecessary suffering to that animal. Similar legislation is in place for the rest of the UK (Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.)|
|England - Animal Welfare - The Mutilations (Permitted Procedures) (England) Regulations 2007||2007 No. 1100||These Regulations specify the procedures that are exempt from the Section 5 mutilation prohibition of the Animal Welfare Act 2006. Procedures include: ear tagging for identification and castration for control of reproduction, for certain species. Anaesthetics, and other requirements, are also set out concerning certain species.|
|England - Dogs - The Docking of Working Dogs' Tails (England) Regulations 2007||2007 No. 1120||
These Regulations exempt hunt, spaniel and terrier breeds from the tail docking prohibition under the Animal Welfare Act 2006, provided that certain conditions are met. Tail docking must be carried out by a veterinary surgeon, and not past 5 days old.
|England - Farm animals - Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) Regulations 2007||2007 No. 2078||These Regulations set minimum welfare standards for farm animals generally whilst kept and reared on a farm. Some more specific provisions address laying hens, calves confined for rearing and fattening, cattle, pigs, boars, sows, piglets and rabbits. These 2007 Regulations repeal the 2000 Regulations, and also repeal the 2002 and 2003 Regulation Amendments.|
|US - AWA - 2007 Public Law110-22||2007 PL 110-22||The Animal Fighting Prohibition Enforcement Act of 2007 was signed into law on May 3, 2007. The law upgrades current penalties by creating felony-level jail time (up to 3 years) for violations of the federal animal fighting law, and it also prohibits interstate and foreign commerce of cockfighting weapons (e.g., knife, gaff, etc.).|
|EU - Farming - Council Directive 2007/43/EC laying down minimum rules for the protection of chickens kept for meat production||2007/43/EC||
Community measures regulate the management of holdings that rear chickens for meat production in order to improve animal welfare, particularly for chickens kept on intensive farms.
|US - AWA - 2008 Public Law 110-234||2008 PL 110-234||2008 Amendments to the Animal Welfare Act concerning the importation of live dogs.|
|US - AWA - 2008 Public Law 110-246||2008 PL 110-246||The Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, P.L. 110-246 amends the Animal Welfare Act by strengthening penalties related to animal fighting, including an increase in imprisonment. The 2008 bill also contained language prohibiting imports for resale of dogs unless they are at least six months of age, in good health, and have all necessary vaccinations, with some exemptions defined. Finally, fines for violations of the Animal Welfare Act increased from $2500 to $10,000 per violation, per animal, per day.|
|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%.|
|EU - Farming - Council Directive 2008/119/EC (Calves)||2008/119/EC||
Even before passage of this important new directive setting down minimum standards for the protection of calves, the use of veal crates for rearing calves had already been illegal in the EU (since 2006). The new directive, however, passed on December 18, 2008, fleshed out older one, establishing new welfare minimums under which veal could be raised. According to the new directive, veal calves may, when very young, be kept in individual pens, but must be able to turn around and to see and touch other calves through perforated walls. Once they are more than eight weeks old, veal calves must be reared in groups. To guard against the nutrient-deficient diet veal calves have long been fed on factory farms—and continue to be fed on farms in the United States—European calves must, at least twice a day, be fed a diet that meets basic health requirements to ensure their bodies develop normally.
|England - Farm animals - The Welfare of Farmed Animals (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2010||2010 No. 303||Regulations to address the welfare of chickens raised for meat. Provisions include: maximum stocking densities, and minimum management, training and monitoring requirements.|
|England - Greyhounds - The Welfare of Racing Greyhounds Regulations 2010||2010 No. 543||These Regulations cover license requirements, including renewal, suspension and cancellation; and license conditions for the racing of greyhounds in England. Conditions include the attendance of a veterinary surgeon at every race, kennels at races, microchipping and race injury records.|
|Wales - Collars, electronic - The Animal Welfare (Electronic Collars) (Wales) Regulations 2010||2010 No. 943 (W.97)||Regulations prohibiting the use of electronic collars on dogs and cats in Wales.|
|MO - Breeding - Proposition B||2010 Proposition B||
The official ballot title asks voters if Missouri law be amended to (1) require large-scale dog breeding operations to provide each dog under their care with sufficient food, clean water, housing and space; necessary veterinary care; regular exercise and adequate rest between breeding cycles; (2) prohibit any breeder from having more than 50 breeding dogs for the purpose of selling their puppies as pets; and (3) create a misdemeanor crime of “puppy mill cruelty” for any violations.
|Canada - Saskatchewan - Northern Municipailities Act (dangerous animal)||2010, c.N-5.2, s.395; 2018, c A-21.2, s.40.||Saskatchewan's The Municipalities Act, The Cities Act and The Northern Municipalities Act, 2010 provide the basic legislative framework for all of the province's municipalities, and give municipalities what is referred to as "Natural Persons Power." This term is commonly understood to mean that municipalities possess all of the same powers that a normal person would. Essentially, a municipality can take any action that a natural person or business could to carry out its purposes unless or until legislation prohibits an action or places limitations or conditions on an action. Northern municipalities have specific authority to declare any animal or class or classes of animal to be dangerous. Legislative provisions within The Northern Municipalities Act, 2010 respecting dangerous dogs may meet local needs.|
|Scotland - Wildlife - Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011||2011 asp 6||This Act provides various protections to certain wild animals in Scotland, and makes amendments to the Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004.|
|Northern Ireland - Wildlife - Wildlife and Natural Environment Act (Northern Ireland) 2011||2011 Chapter 15||This Act provides various protections to certain wild animals, and prohibits facilitating, attending or participating in hare coursing events.|
|Northern Ireland - Animal Welfare - Welfare of Animals Act (Northern Ireland) 2011||2011 CHAPTER 16||An Act establishing penalties for engaging in certain activities that are considered detrimental to animal welfare in Northern Ireland. Activities that constitute offences include: causing an animal unnecessary suffering, mutilating an animal’s body, docking a dog’s tail (with certain limited exceptions), administering a poisonous or injurious substance to an animal, and engaging in or attending an animal fight. Activities lawfully done under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, and the normal course of fishing, hunting and (hare) coursing are exempt from the 2011 Act. Hare coursing events have since been banned in separate legislation.|
|PA - Cruelty - De protección a los animales domésticos||2011 De protección a los animales domésticos||
This document provides a link to De protección a los animales domésticos (.pdf).
|KY - Initiatives - Right to Hunt||2012 Amendment||This measure proposes to amend the Constitution of Kentucky to create a right to hunt, fish, and harvest nonthreatened species using traditional methods. It passed by 84.5% of the vote.|
|UK - Research Animals - The Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations 2012||2012 No.||Protected animals are extended under the 1986 Act to include cephalopods (i.e., octopus or squid). The principles of replacement, reduction and refinement (the 3Rs), are encompassed in section 2A of the amendment; The Secretary of State must be satisfied that a scientific objective could not be achieved without using animals, by using fewer animals, or by causing less suffering.|
|England - Circus - The Welfare of Wild Animals in Travelling Circuses (England) Regulations 2012||2012 No.||These Regulations set out license conditions for wild animals in travelling circuses, including animal welfare requirements. Licensing conditions include providing lifelong care for the retirement of every licensed animal.|
|Wales - Fur, mink - The Mink Keeping (Prohibition) (Wales) Order 2012||2012 No. (W. )||An Order imposing an absolute prohibition upon the keeping of mink in Wales.|
|Northern Ireland - Farm animal - Welfare of Farmed Animals Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012||2012 No. 156||Regulations placing duties on persons responsible for farmed animals, to include: the conditions under which animals are kept; and specific conditions for laying hens, reared meat chickens, caves, cattle, pigs and rabbits.|
|Scotland - Slaughter - The Welfare of Animals at the Time of Killing (Scotland) Regulations 2012||2012 No. 321||These Regulations replace the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995 for Scotland in respect of slaughterhouse activities (the 1995 Regulations continue to have full effect in England and Wales). Provisions include: certificates of competence and handling and stunning requirements for a number of farmed species.|
|England - Slaughter - The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) (Amendment) (England) Regulations 2012||2012 No. 501||These Regulations amended the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995. Provisions extend the range of birds that can be killed by gas mixtures in specific circumstances, and extend the time limits under which a prosecution may be brought.|
|Wales - Dogs - The Animal Welfare (Breeding of Dogs) (Wales) Regulations 2014||2014 No. 3266 (W. 333)||Regulations to license persons breeding dogs in Wales.|
|US - AWA - 2014 Public Law113-79||2014 PL 113-79||The 2014 amendments to the Animal Welfare Act allows the Secretary of agriculture to define de minimis, as well as several grammatical changes. The public law also provides the prohibits anyone from allowing a person who has not attained the age of 16 from attending an animal fighting venture.|
|England - Dogs - The Microchipping of Dogs (England) Regulations 2015||2015 No. 108||Regulations making it compulsory for dog owners to ensure their dog is microchipped, and that their contact details are kept up to date on a database.|
|England and Wales - Dogs - The Dangerous Dogs Exemption Schemes (England and Wales) Order 2015||2015 No. 138||An order providing exemptions from the immediate destruction of a dangerous dog, by way of a Contingent Destruction Order. Following a conviction under the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991, the Court must either order the immediate destruction of the dog, or the contingent destruction of a dog if satisfied that the dog is not a danger to public safety. Contains conditions that must be met in relation to the dog, and requirements that the person in charge of the dog must comply with.|