|
National Meat Ass'n v. Harris |
Trade association representing packers and processors of swine livestock and pork products sued the State of California for declaratory and injunctive relief barring a ban on slaughter and inhumane handling of nonambulatory animals on federally regulated swine slaughterhouses. The Supreme Court held that the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) preempted the California Penal Code provision prohibiting the sale of meat or meat product of “nonambulatory” animals for human consumption and requiring immediate euthanization of nonambulatory animals.
|
|
New Jersey Soc. for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. New Jersey Dept. of Agriculture |
This New Jersey case concerns several challenges to the adoption of livestock regulations by the state Department of Agriculture.
Specifically, several animal welfare groups contended that several of the regulations were inhumane and in violation of the state’s legislative mandate to issue humane livestock standards. The Superior Court of New Jersey, appellate division, agreed with the Department, holding that
the challenged regulations are consistent with the agency's legislative mandate, and are neither arbitrary, nor unreasonable.
This Judgment was Affirmed in Part, Reversed in Part by New Jersey Soc. for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. New Jersey Dept. of Agriculture, 196 N.J. 366,955 A.2d 886 (N.J., 2008).
|
|
New Jersey Soc. for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. New Jersey Dept. of Agriculture |
The issue in the case was whether the regulations promulgated by the NJDA pursuant to this authority were invalid for failing to comply with the “humane” standards requirement. Although the court held that the regulations in their entirety were not invalid, the court found that NJDA acted arbitrarily and capriciously in enacting its regulations by allowing all “routine husbandry practices,” as there was no evidence that those practices were “humane.” The court further rejected NJDA regulations allowing cattle tail docking, finding no evidence to support that the practices were “humane.” Finally, the court rejected the assertion of NJDA that certain controversial farm practices, such as castration, de-beaking, and toe-trimming, are “humane” if they are performed by a “knowledgeable individual” “in a way to minimize pain.”
|
|
NH - Humane Slaughter - Chapter 427. Livestock and Meat Inspection. Humane Slaughter |
These laws comprise New Hampshire's humane slaughter provisions. A humane method is defined as one where the animal is rendered insensible to pain by a single blow or shot of a mechanical instrument or by electrical, chemical or other means that is rapid and effective, before being shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast, or cut. Ritual slaughter required by the ritual of the Jewish faith, whereby the animal suffers loss of consciousness by anemia of the brain is also allowed. Any slaughterer who violates this subdivision shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. |
|
NJ - Livestock - Chapter 8. Humane Treatment of Domestic Livestock. |
This subchapter establishes humane standards for the humane raising, treatment, care, marketing, and sale of cattle, pursuant to the authority accorded by N.J.S.A. 4:22-16.1. |
|
OH - Humane Slaughter - Chapter 945. Humane Slaughter of Livestock. |
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. |
|
OR - Humane Slaughter - Chapter 603. Meat Dealers and Slaughterers. Meat Dealers and Slaughterers, in General. |
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. |
|
Overview of CAFOs and Animal Welfare Measures |
This overview of CAFOs and animal welfare measures introduces CAFOs and the agricultural industry. Briefly, the overview notes the animal welfare, environmental, and human health concerns that have arisen with CAFOs. Finally, the overview notes the legislation and ballot initiatives that have been enacted to address these concerns.
|
|
Overview of Hog Farming in Iowa |
This article describes the decline of family hog farming in Iowa and how farming has transitioned to an industrial model of swine production.
|
|
PA - Humane Slaughter - Slaughter and Processing of Domestic Animals |
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). |
