Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Detailed Discussion of South Carolina Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | The following article discusses Great Ape law in South Carolina. In the state of South Carolina, there is no specific law that mentions great apes or contains an outright ban on private ownership of great apes. Any protection great apes receive in the state is due to their status as federally-protected endangered species. Regulations issued under the authority of the South Carolina Nongame and Endangered Species Conservation Act ban the possession of federally-listed endangered or threatened species except by scientific or conversation permit issued by the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources. This would exclude many uses of apes in the private sector. Great apes are generally protected from intentional abuse and neglect under the state’s anti-cruelty law. However, this law excludes certain activities permitted under Title 50 of the state’s fish and game code such as scientific collection and zoological purposes. |
| FAQ: Veterinary Malpractice | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This article provides a short reader-based FAQ on veterinary malpractice. |
| Detailed Discussion of South Dakota Great Ape Laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | The following article discusses Great Ape law in South Dakota. Generally, in South Dakota, it is unlawful to possess a great ape in the state of South Dakota under the state’s endangered species law. Violation of that chapter is a misdemeanor.In the event that the endangered species law is bridged, South Dakota requires possessors of “captive nondomestic mammals” to obtain a permit. Additionally, great apes are generally protected from intentional abuse and neglect under the state’s anti-cruelty law. The law excludes properly conducted scientific experiments or investigations performed by personnel following guidelines established by the National Institute of Health and the United States Department of Agriculture |
| 2008 - 2009 Significant Animal Law Cases | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This table provides a summary of the significant animal law cases from 2008 and early 2009. The federal cases are listed first followed by the state cases, which are listed alphabetically by case name. |
| How Can I Report Animal Abuse Shown on Social Media? | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | This FAQ discusses the issue of reporting animal cruelty witnessed on a social media website. |
| FAQ: Advocating for animal laws | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This reader-based FAQ provides information on how to begin animal advocacy. |
| Overview of Recent Dog Breeding Laws (2010) | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This article provides an overview of recently added or amended commercial breeder laws (from 2008 - 2010). On the whole, the new laws both mandate minimum standards of care for dogs at breeding facilities and place a limit on the number of dogs a breeder can maintain. |
| Summary of 2008 Animal-Related Ballot Measures | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This overview provides a summary of the animal-related ballots measures presented to voters in 2008. Links to the text of the ballot measures are provided. |
| Domestic Violence and Pets: List of States that Include Pets in Protection Orders | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center | This document lists the states that include pets in domestic violence protection orders with links to the actual statutes. As of 2025, 41 states as well as D.C. and Puerto Rico have enacted such laws. Also, see the Map of Pets in Domestic Violence Orders linked below. |
| Detailed Discussion of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Law Legal and Historical Center |
This article explores the history and text of the BGEPA. It further examines the relevant legal issues spawned by the Act, including free exercise challenges by Native Americans, the abrogation of treaty rights, commerce in eagle parts, and requisite intent for criminal prosecution under the Act. |