United States

Summary: The undersigned submit this petition to request that the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) amend the ante-mortem inspection regulations to prohibit the slaughter of non-ambulatory disabled (NAD) pigs.1 Specifically, Petitioners request that FSIS amend 9 C.F.R. § 309.3 by adding a provision: "(f) Non-ambulatory disabled pigs that are offered for slaughter must be condemned and humanely euthanized in accordance with § 309.13." Read the regulation this petition challenges.

Summary: The Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) formally requests that the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) list the pygmy three-toed sloth (Bradypus pygmaeus) as endangered under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) on an emergency basis. Alternatively, if the USFWS determines that an emergency listing is not warranted in this case, AWI requests that it process this listing petition pursuant to the standard timetable as required under the ESA.

Summary: This section comprises Florida's veterinary lien law. A lien exists in favor of any veterinarian who renders professional services to an animal at the request of the owner of the animal, the owner's agent, or a bailee, lessee, or custodian of the animal, for the unpaid portion of the fees for such professional services. The lien remains valid and enforceable for a period of 1 year from the date the professional services were rendered, and such lien is to be enforced in the manner provided for the enforcement of other liens on personal property in this state.

Summary: This Alabama section relates to veterinary liens. The law states that every licensed veterinarian has a lien on every animal kept, fed, treated or surgically treated or operated on by him or her while in his or her custody and under contract with the owner of such animal. This lien is for payment of the veterinarian's charges for keeping, feeding, treating or surgically treating or operating on such animal, and the vet has the right to retain such animal until said charges are paid.

Summary: The purpose of this commentary is to respond to the question, “Should laws criminalizing animal abuse apply to animals raised for food?” The simple answer to the question is “yes,” but the reality is not simple. It requires analyzing both the science of raising livestock and the current legal framework, which we must understand before discussing what to require and how to implement those requirements. Continued improvements in the livestock and meatpacking industries and the rising expectations of consumers add to the complexity of the issue.

Summary: This new chapter (effective January 1, 2016) covers the sale of animals at swap meets in the state. A swap meet operator may allow a vendor to sell animals at a swap meet so long as the local jurisdiction has adopted standards for the care and treatment of the animals. The care and treatment of the animals must include that time that the animals are at the swap meet and during the transportation to and from the swap meet. The swap meet vendors must maintain, among other things, sanitary facilities for the animals, provide proper heating and ventilation in the facilities, provide adequate nutrition and humane care and treatment, and provide adequate space for all kept in the facilities. A swap meet vendor who offers for sale at a swap meet in a jurisdiction that has not authorized the sale is guilty of an infraction punishable by a fine up to $100. If a swap meet vendor is found guilty of this infraction for a subsequent time, he or she will be fined up to $500 per violation. Some exceptions include: events held by 4-H Clubs, Junior Farmers Clubs, Future Farmer Clubs, the California Exposition and State Fair, the sale of cattle on consignment at any public cattle sales market, and a public animal control agency or shelter.

Summary: This second annual western lands conference explored federal initiatives about policy objectives and management approaches for public lands in the West, including the Colorado Grazing Roundtable and Rangeland '94, Option 9 and the Pacific Northwest forests, bypass flows and Colorado national forests, and wilderness protection in Utah. Speakers were from federal agencies; from states; from groups concerned with the use and protection of the public lands; and from academia.

Summary: In 1996, the Endangered Species Act was up for reauthorization, and with it, a variety of reform proposals were debated in the Biodiversity Protection Conference at the University of Colorado—Boulder. The following conference proceeding -- which included natural resource scholars, experts from the private and nonprofit sectors, and government officials--examined the rationale for biodiversity protection, the legal framework of the Endangered Species Act, and examples of implementation of the Act from across the West. Special attention was given to major issues raised by the Act that cut across all regions, including: consultations and recovery planning; habitat conservation plans; the ESA and water rights; the ESA and state programs; the ESA and tribal rights; economic impacts of the ESA; and ESA reform proposals.

Summary: This document lists the states that prohibit the regulation of dogs by local governments based on breed, commonly known as breed-specific legislation. The laws are divided into two general categories: (1) states that prohibit breed-specific legislation (BSL) in all animal regulation (8 states); and (2) states that only prohibit BSL in dangerous/vicious dog laws (15 states). In total, there are approximately 21 states with some sort of anti-BSL legislation (combining both (1) and (2) together, and not counting DE and IL twice because both have such laws). The pertinent part of the legislation is included in this list as well as a link to the actual laws. A further distinction has to be made in the application of some of these laws in the dangerous dog category. Some laws state that municipalities may not regulate dangerous dogs based solely on breed while other laws simply say that breed cannot be used to prove a dangerous dog declaration.