Wildlife
Displaying 31 - 40 of 352
Title |
Summary |
|---|---|
| Brief Summary of Whaling | Early in the twentieth century, the technology used in whaling advanced so significantly that the global whale population became threatened. Efforts to decrease the number of whales killed grew after World War II and resulted in a major victory in the 1980s when commercial whaling was banned. However, this ban is still a major source of controversy as Japan continues to kill hundreds of whales each year in the Antarctic under what it calls a scientific whaling exception, but Australia labels as mere cover for a commercial whaling program. |
| Brief Summary of Wildlife Services | This summary describes the role and function of Wildlife Services within the USDA. It describes management practices, both lethal and non-lethal as well as the concerns that have been raised with respect to WS methods. |
| Buffalo Field Campaign v. Zinke | Plaintiffs Buffalo Field Campaign and other environmental groups petitioned the Fish and Wildlife Service ("Service") to add the Yellowstone bison population to the federal endangered species list. After the Service made a threshold “90–day” determination that Buffalo Field's petition failed to present sufficient scientific evidence that listing the bison may be warranted, Buffalo Field brought suit under the Administrative Procedure Act, alleging that the Service's determination was arbitrary and capricious. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Service applied an improper standard when evaluating Buffalo Field's petition, granted Buffalo Field's motion for summary judgment, denied the Service's cross-motion, and remanded the case for the agency to conduct a new 90–day finding using the proper standard. In particular, the court observed that the Service "simply picked a side in an ongoing debate in the scientific community," thereby in inappropriately heightening the standard of evaluation for a 90-day petition. Because of that, the court agreed with the Service that remand is the appropriate remedy as opposed to to directing the Service to begin a 12-month review. |
| CA - Bighorn Sheep - Chapter 11. Bighorn Sheep | The California Legislature declares that bighorn sheep are an important wildlife resource of the state to be managed and maintained at sound biological levels. The policy of the state is to encourage the preservation, restoration, utilization, and management of California's bighorn sheep population. To achieve these goals, these sections provide for the creation of management unit plans. |
| CA - Birds - Part 2. Birds. | These various sections are all related to the protection of birds in California. Within these sections, the Legislature has enumerated fully protected birds in the state, prohibited activities such as destroying bird nests and eggs, required licenses for duck hunting, and outlined several provisions to guide state efforts in preserving and rehabilitating the California Condor. |
| CA - Burro - § 4600. Killing or capturing undomesticated burro; prima facie evidence | This section makes it unlawful to kill, wound, capture, or have in possession any undomesticated burro. An undomesticated burro is a wild burro or a burro which has not been tamed or domesticated for a period of three years after its capture. |
| CA - Burro - § 53074.5. Undomesticated burros; removal by officer or employee of local | This California law allows an officer or employee of a local animal control agency to remove an undomesticated burro that strays onto private land at the request of the landowner. Such officer can also remove an undomesticated burro that strays onto a public roadway to ensure public safety. |
| CA - Cruelty, exemptions - § 599c. Construction of title; game laws; | This statute makes it clear that the title is not meant to interfere with “game laws” or the right to destroy venomous reptiles or other dangerous animal. Neither is there an intent to interfere with laws regarding the destruction of certain birds, interfere with the right to kill animals used for food or with scientific experiments. |
| CA - Endangered Species - CHAPTER 1.5. ENDANGERED SPECIES | The California Fish and Game Code considers that endangered and threatened species are of ecological, educational, historical, recreational, esthetic, economic, and scientific value to the people of the State of California. The State of California has legislation that allows the state to protect endangered and threatened species by acquiring land for these species to protect, restore and enhance the habitat of these species. Section 2080 prohibits the importing, taking, exporting, possessing, purchasing, or selling, any species, or any part or product thereof that is endangered or threatened. |
| CA - Fish & Game - Chapter 6.5. Control of Illegally Taken Fish and Wildlife | This set of laws outlines various violations involving the possession and movement of illegally obtained animals and imposes liability for those activities. |