United States
Displaying 1091 - 1100 of 4831
Title |
Summary |
|---|---|
| Detailed Discussion of Legal Implications of Dolphin and Human Interactions | This article explores recent legal and regulatory issues associated with dolphins both in the wild and in captivity. It pays special attention to areas involving human-dolphin interaction, such as entertainment, research, and therapy. It also explores current regulatory issues in the United States related to both swim-with dolphins encounters. It concludes by examining larger themes drawn from each of these areas. |
| Detailed Discussion of Legal Protections of the Domestic Chicken in the United States and Europe |
|
| Detailed Discussion of Legal Rights and Duties in Lost Pet Disputes |
|
| Detailed Discussion of Local Breed-Specific Legislation |
|
| Detailed Discussion of Louisiana Great Ape Laws | According to the Louisiana Wildlife and Fisheries Commission (LWFC), the possession of certain nonhuman primates “poses significant hazards to public safety and health,” and “is detrimental to the welfare of the animals.” The following discussion begins with a general overview of the various state statutes and regulations affecting Great Apes. It then analyzes the applicability of those laws to the possession and use of apes for specific purposes, including their possession as pets, for scientific research, for commercial purposes, and in sanctuaries. |
| Detailed Discussion of Maine Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Maine Great Ape law. While Maine does not ban the private possession of great apes, the state only issues licenses to keep apes to a select few. The state of Maine controls possession and importation of great apes under its exotic pet law and accompanying regulations.Private possession of great apes in the state is allowed but quite limited. However, state law and accompanying regulations clearly allow the use of apes and other wild animals in exhibitions, wildlife rehabilitation, and research facilities. While these regulations specifically address the caging requirements for great apes, enforcement and inspection provisions are vague. As is true with many states, there is not an overall law that directly addresses the possession of apes or the specific needs of apes in captivity. |
| Detailed Discussion of Maryland Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Maryland Great Ape law. Maryland regulates possession of Great Apes both expressly via state law as well as indirectly via reference to federal law. At the state level, it bans the importation, sale and transfer of dangerous animals through its anti-cruelty law. (MD CRIM LAW § 10-621) Maryland does not define the term “dangerous animal,” but section (b) lists all non-human primates as one of eight categories of animal that “[a] person may not import into the State, offer for sale, trade, barter, possess, breed, or exchange….” Although Maryland does have several laws that either reference Great Apes specifically or reference federal laws meant to protect Great Apes, many exceptions have been carved out of these protections. As such, Maryland's laws regulating possession and usage of Great Apes is mediocre compared to other states at best. |
| Detailed Discussion of Massachusetts Great Ape Laws | The following article discusses Massachusetts Great Ape law. Although Massachusetts does not have a law that specifically addresses Great Apes, several state laws cover them as protected endangered species. Its Endangered Species Act (MA ST 131A § 1 - 7) bans just about all activities related to the acquisition, possession, transport and sale of an endangered species. The Act's definition of “endangered species” specifically includes animals covered under federal law, encompassing Great Apes. The article argues that compared to other states, Massachusetts has perhaps slightly better than average laws with respect to the ownership and possession of Great Apes. The Commonwealth does not have any specific standards for keeping Great Apes in captivity, however it does reference federal standards in both its endangered species law as well as its exotic animal ban. It also does not contain the broad exception for research that many other state cruelty laws do. |
| Detailed Discussion of Medical Research and Animals | This paper will examine the various federal regulations on animal biomedical testing within the United States as well as the industry’s standards and trends. The first four sections examine the FDA requirements for medical products in the United States, federal animal welfare regulations, the general structure of a research facility, and industry regulations for animal use. The second half of this paper examines the species of animals used in research as well as their source of purchase. Accepted methods of euthanasia per species are also examined. By comparing the options available for a research facility to animal use regulations in the United States, it is hoped that the structure of animal welfare in the laboratory can be understood from both economic and legal motivations that influence animal research use today. |
| Detailed Discussion of Michigan Anti-animal Cruelty Law |
|