Equine Issues
Displaying 41 - 50 of 273
Title |
Summary |
|---|---|
| CA - Horse slaughter - § 597o. Humane transportation of equine to slaughter; vehicle requirements; | This statute outlines the requirements for transporting equine to slaughter, including, but limited to, proper ventilation, sufficient space for equine to stand, and the use of ramps and floors with nonskid surfaces. |
| CA - Horse slaughter - § 598c. Horse slaughter for human consumption | This statute makes it unlawful to possess, to import into or export from the state, or to sell, buy, give away, hold, or accept any equine with the intent of killing it for the purpose of human consumption. Violations could result in a felony conviction with a prison sentence of up to three years. |
| CA - Horse slaughter - § 598d. Sale of horsemeat for human consumption | This statute prohibits the sale of horsemeat for human consumption. No restaurant, cafe, or other public eating place may offer horsemeat for sale for human consumption. A first time violation is a misdemeanor. |
| CA - Horse tack - § 597k. Bristle bur, tack bur, etc.; use on animals | This section makes it a misdemeanor to use a bristle bur, tack bur, or similar device, to be used on a horse or any other animal. A violation is punishable with imprisonment and/or imprisonment. |
| CA - Horse transportation - § 597x. Disabled equine; sale or transport for commercial slaughter; misdemeanor | This statute makes it a misdemeanor to sell, load, or transport, any live equine that is disabled, if it is intended to be sold, loaded, or transported for commercial slaughter out of the state. |
| CA - Horse Tripping - Poling or tripping a horse; offenses; exceptions | This section makes it a misdemeanor to pole or trip a horse for entertainment or sport. Poling is a method of training a horse to jump by forcing, persuading, or enticing a horse to lift its legs higher over a jump by hitting its front legs with a pole, rope, stick, etc. Tripping a horse is using a wire, pole, stick, rope, etc. to cause a horse to fall or lose its balance. |
| CA - Horses docking - § 597r. Docked horses; exception of imported stock; registration | This statute makes it a misdemeanor to violate any of the horse docking provisions, but creates an exception from the provisions of Sections 597n, 597p, and 597q, to persons owning or possessing any docked purebred stallions and mares imported from foreign countries for breeding or exhibition purposes only. |
| CA - Vehicle - § 23117. Transportation of animals; enclosure or restraint requirements | This California law prohibits any person from transporting any animal in the open back of a vehicle on a highway unless the vehicle has sides that extend 46" vertically, or the animal is secured in a cage and cross-tethered to prevent it from jumping out of the vehicle. The law targets the transporting of dogs in the back of pickup trucks. Exclusions include the transportation of livestock and farm dogs. |
| Central Park Sightseeing LLC v. New Yorkers for Clean, Livable & Safe Streets, Inc. | This New York cases balances animal right protestors' First Amendment rights against the government's interest in preserving public safety and flow of traffic on public streets. Plaintiff here is a business that operates horse-drawn carriage rides in Central Park. Defendant is an animal rights organization that protests the horse-and-carriage industry, often demonstrating where carriage operators drop off and pick up customers. At issue, is the manner in which defendants conduct their protests in the designated horse-drawn carriage zones. Plaintiff's claim defendants harass and threaten customers and drivers, and create a public safety issue by chasing after carriages. The court granted a preliminary injunction that enjoined defendants from things like physically blocking or impeding persons from riding or disembarking from carriages, physically touching associated persons or horses, yelling or shouting at persons or horses, obstructing the progress of a carriage ride, and handing literature to a person situated within a horse carriage. The court found the plaintiffs also established a likelihood of success on an action for public nuisance and a showing of a "special injury" aimed at plaintiff's business. Finding the injunction was content-neutral, this reviewing court then considered whether the challenged portions of the injunction burden speech no more than is necessary to assert the significant government interest. The court agreed with defendant that the "floating buffer zone" of the original order would be difficult for a protestor to assess and would burden speech more than is necessary. Thus, this court modified the order to prohibit any person from knowingly approaching within nine feet of a person in the loading/unloading carriage zone (a “conversational distance," said the court). The court also noted that the First Amendment does not require that protestors be allowed to interrupt the flow of traffic or endanger the public in the delivery of speech. The court also limited language in the original order that extended the reach of the injunction to “anyone else who becomes aware of this [d]ecision and [o]rder.” The court changed to this to defendants and “those acting in concert with the named parties” The order from the Supreme Court, New York County was modified as specified in this decision. |
| CO - Equine Activity Liability Statute - Article 21. Damages. | This Colorado statute embodies the intent of the general assembly to encourage equine activities and llama activities by limiting the civil liability of those involved in such activities. This section also contains specific provisions related to llama activities. Liability is not limited by this statute where the equine or llama sponsor provided faulty equipment or tack, failed to make reasonable and prudent efforts to determine the ability of the participant to engage safely in the activity, owned or otherwise possessed the land upon which an injury occurred where there was a known latent condition, or if he or she commits an act or omission that constitutes willful or wanton disregard for the safety of the participant or intentionally injures the participant. |