Wildlife

Displaying 11 - 20 of 371
Titlesort descending Summary
AL - Hunting - Article 19. Hunting of Native Game Animals and Certain Nonindigenous Animals. This Alabama statute makes it unlawful to hunt or kill any species of nonindigenous animals for a fee or for recreation. This section does not apply to feral swine, nuisance animals, or to any nonindigenous animal lawfully brought into this state prior to 2006.
AL - Leash - When dogs permitted in areas; liability of owners of dogs at large in areas (wildlife management areas) This Alabama statute provides that no dog shall be permitted except on leash within any wildlife management area except in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by the Commissioner of Conservation and Natural Resources. The owner of any dog at large within any wildlife management area shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Am. Wild Horse Campaign v. Raby In reviewing consolidated challenges to the Bureau of Land Management's 2022 amendments to its Regional Management Plan for wild horse herds in Wyoming's checkerboard region, this court holds that the agency's decision to convert two Herd Management Areas to Herd Areas with population goals of zero contravenes the Administrative Procedure Act. The BLM erroneously argued that the "thriving natural ecological balance" standard of Section 3 of the Wild Horse Act does not apply to resource management plan amendments, but such determinations constitute management decisions to which the statutory standard necessarily attaches. Because the agency candidly admitted it made no finding regarding ecological balance, the decision failed to consider an essential aspect of the problem and was not based on the relevant statutory factors. The petitioners' remaining claims under the National Environmental Policy Act fail, as the agency did not predetermine its outcome, reasonably explained the infeasibility of land swaps, and properly deferred analysis of potential increased grazing impacts to future site-specific decisions. Similarly, the FLPMA challenge lacks merit because the record demonstrates the agency considered multiple-use values and did not commit undue degradation by altering the balance of land uses. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is reversed and the matter remanded for application of the Allied-Signal factors to determine the appropriate remedy.
Animal Law in South Africa
Animal Lovers Volunteer Ass'n Inc., (A.L.V.A.) v. Weinberger

The Animal Lovers Volunteer Association (ALVA) brought this action to enjoin the Navy from shooting feral goats on San Clemente Island (a military enclave under the jurisdiction of the Navy). After the district court granted (Cite as: 765 F.2d 937, *938) summary judgment for the Navy, the ALVA appealed. This Court found that the ALVA failed to demonstrate standing, where it only asserted an organizational interest in the problem, rather than allegations of actual injury to members of the organization. The organization failed to demonstrate an interest that was distinct from an interest held by the public at large. Affirmed.
Animal Lovers Volunteer Ass'n, Inc. v. Cheney


Plaintiff Animal Lovers Volunteer Association (ALVA) brought suit against Defendants United States Fish and Wildlife Service, United States Navy and United States Department of Defense alleging that the EIS for trapping red fox at a national wildlife refuge violated NEPA, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act (NWRSAA), and the APA. The agencies had recently begun trapping red fox at the Seal Beach National Wildlife Refuge in order to protect two endangered bird species on the Refuge, the California least tern and the light-footed clapper rail. On review of defendants' motion for summary judgment, the District Court held that the predator control program did not violate the NWRSAA and the APA. Further, plaintiff's claim that defendants' decision not to terminate oil production at the refuge, which they contended placed the endangered species at a greater risk than the predation by foxes, was based on substantial evidence that was supported by the findings in the EIS. The court found that a rational connection existed between the findings and the decision to allow the limited amount of oil production to continue. Thus, defendants' conduct complied fully with the requirements of the NWRSAA and the APA.
Animal Welfare Institute v. BP America, INC
Argentina - Endangered species - Ley 25.463, 2001 This law declared the Panthera onca, also known as yaguareté, Jaguar, overo tiger or painted onca, a natural monument. Ley 25.463/01 instructs the National Park Administration and the Directorate of Wildlife and Flora of the Nation to work together on the management plan for the species in the areas of its jurisdiction, making sure it is in accordance to the national faunal policy. The Enforcement Authority will guarantee the planning and execution of preventive measures in cases in which a specimen becomes circumstantially harmful to humans or their productive activities.
Argentina - Endangered species - Ley Nº 24.702, 1996
Argentina - Environmental - Ley 25.335, 2000

Pages