Category: Law

Taking water from puppies?

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 2007:
SACRAMENTO–California Governor Arnold Sc-warzenegger on
October 14, 2007 endorsed into law a new set of regulations for pet
stores.
As with other legislation adopted in the most populous U.S.
state, the new regulations may become the default standard for the
pet industry throughout the U.S. Whether that would be good remains
a subject of bitter debate among California animal advocates.
The new law, introduced as AB 1347 by Assembly member Anna
Caballero, somewhat parallels a bill promoted by the Animal
Protection Institute that Schwarzenegger vetoed in 2006.
Said the API victory announcement, “AB 1347 was brought forth
by Petco and the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council as a result of
API’s sponsored legislation introduced in 2006. The original
language in AB 1347 would have protected the pet industry, but
failed to protect animals in custody of the industry. API and other
animal protection advocates invested considerable effort in helping
to transform AB 1347 into legislation that actually elevates the
standards of care for pet shop animals.”

Read more

Legal path clear for California communities to ban declawing

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 2007:
SAN FRANCISCO–California cities and counties may ban
declawing cats, the California Supreme Court affirmed on October 10,
2007, refusing to hear an appeal filed by the California Veterinary
Medical Association against a West Hollywood ordinance adopted in
2003. The West Hollywood ordinance is the only local anti-declawing
law in California, but other communities are expected to adopt
similar legislation now that the legal path is clear.
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors, for instance,
passed a non-binding anti-declawing resolution in 2003, and filed a
brief in support of West Hollywood when the CVMA case reached the
appellate level. Matt Dorsey, spokesperson for San Francisco city
attorney Dennis Herrera, told San Francisco Chronicle staff writer
Bob Egalko that the state Supreme Court “preserved the right of San
Francisco to enact an ordinance like this if it chose to in the
future.”

Read more

Non-native species extermination bill clears U.S. House unopposed

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 2007:

WASHINGTON, D.C.–HR 767, possibly the
most sweeping feral animal extermination mandate
ever put before Congress, unanimously cleared
the U.S. House of Representatives on October 23,
2007, completely eluding any visible notice from
national humane organizations.
No national humane organization issued a
legislative alert about HR 767. No national
humane organization even mentioned it in online
lists of animal-related bills under
consideration–not even Alley Cat Allies, whose
concerns are most directly targeted.
Introduced by Representative Ron Kind
(D-Wisconsin), HR 767 is officially titled the
Refuge Ecology Protection, Assistance, and
Immediate Response Act, or REPAIR Act.
Informally, it is called the Kind Act, but the
closest approach to kind language in it is a
passage requiring that funded extermination
programs must minimize “adverse impacts to the
structure and function of national wildlife
refuge ecosystems and adverse effects on
nontarget species.”
No restrictions are placed on the species
that may be targeted or the methods that may be
used to kill them.
An October 22 press release from Kind’s
office promoting HR 767 mentioned only purple
loosestrife, black locust, and zebra mussels as
examples of invasive species, but the bill
appears to have originated chiefly out of birder
antipathy toward feral cats.
“In response to the exploding threat that
invasive species pose to the health and abundance
of many birds,” said publicist Steve Holmer of
the American Bird Conservancy, an organization
built on fierce opposition to neuter/return feral
cat control, “Kind championed legislation which
provides grants to states to identify harmful
non-native species and establish priorities for
preserving native birds, fish, other wildlife,
and their habitats. The REPAIR Act now moves to
the Senate, where ABC hopes to see quick
passage.”
A native of LaCrosse, Wisconsin, Kind
still has one of his two constituency offices in
LaCrosse–the same city where birder Mark Smith
in 2005 organized a campaign to authorize hunters
to shoot feral cats.

Read more

Canada takes seal product bans to WTO Canadian trade minister will not oppose dog & cat fur imports to avoid precedent

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, October 2007:
GENEVA–Defying the court of world
opinion, Canadian international trade minister
David Emerson on September 26, 2007 appealed to
the World Trade Organiza-tion to try to stop
Belgium and the Netherlands from banning Atlantic
Canadian seal products.
Emerson asked the WTO to hold “formal
consultations” with the European Union on the
Belgian and Dutch actions, “which is the first
step in the organization’s dispute settlement
process,” explained James Keller of Canadian
Press.
Belgium banned seal product imports in
January 2007, allowing an exemption for Inuits
in the Far North who hunt seals by traditional
methods. The Netherlands published a similar ban
in July 2007, taking effect in September.
Both bans are symbolic, since neither
nation has recently imported seal products, but
Emerson “said Canada is worried the bans will
encourage other countries that have expressed
similar concerns, including Austria, Germany,
and Italy, to follow with their own bans,”
wrote Keller.
Dutch agriculture minister Gerda Verburg
responded that the Dutch law “fits within the
rules established by the WTO.”
European Union trade commissioner Peter
Mandelson said in a written statement that he is
“naturally disappointed by this move” on the part
of the Canadian government. Mandelson “said the
EU would defend its member states before the WTO,
while continuing to study whether a EU-wide ban
on seal products is justified,” summarized
Keller.

Read more

New animal protection laws in Texas, New York, Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maine

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 2007:

 

New Texas legislation permits felony prosecution of people
whose dogs kill or maim other humans, but attorneys familiar with
handling dog attack cases and representatives of the animal control
officers who will have the primary duty of enforcing the new law told
Roy Appleton of the Dallas Morning News that it does not actually
eliminate the ancient “one free bite” rule for determining if a dog
is vicious, and will require animal control officers to do criminal
investigation, whereas the typical animal control offense is a
summary infraction. “This is better than what we have now,” said
Dallas attorney and Animal Legal Defense Fund president Robert
Trimble, “but whether it solves the problem, I guess we’ll have to
wait and see.”
Texas also banned keeping dogs tethered between 10 p.m. and 6
a.m., and limited tethering to three hours within any 24-hour
period. Waco police department animal control chief Clare Crook
noted to Waco Tribune-Herald staff writer David Doerr that
enforcement may be complicated by thin animal control staffing during
night hours, but felt the law would be helpful.

Read more

Fourteen of 26 defendants are sentenced & lectured in British dogfighting case

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 2007:

 

BIRMINGHAM–Four-teen of 26 defendants in
one of the biggest dogfighting cases brought to
British courts in decades pleaded guilty on
September 3, 2007, and were fined from £500 to
£1,300, plus £80 court costs.
The case is unusual in that all 26 men
arrested at the February 2006 dogfight are
Muslims –as is Birmingham Magistrates Court
district judge Kal Qureshi, who lectured the men
about their “sadistic and cruel” behavior.
“The event itself is best described as
sadistic,” Qureshi said. “In my view it
involved inflicting unimaginable pain without any
pity for the animals.”
Qureshi fined them less than the maximum
£2,500 because they were first-time offenders.
Dogfighting in Britain has historically
not involved immigrants and ethnic minorities,
and in recent years has often been a pursuit of
so-called skinheads espousing anti-minority
attitudes.
Twelve defendants elected to go to trial,
including the two men who allegedly organized the
fight. Both dogs involved were killed.

Five Makah arrested for killing whale without permit

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 2007:

NEAH BAY, Washington– Frustrated by eight years of failing
to obtain a new federal permit to kill gray whales, after killing
one in May 1999, Makah tribal whaler Wayne Johnson, 54, and four
other Makah– Theron Parker, Andy Noel, Billy Secor and Frank
Gonzales Jr.–on September 8, 2007 killed a whale without a permit
and without tribal authorization or awareness.
“Crew members plunged at least five stainless steel whaling
harpoons into the animal. Then they shot it,” wrote Seattle Times
staff reporter Lynda V. Mapes. “The Coast Guard, alerted to the
hunt by onlookers, was on the scene within hours. Johnson and the
others quickly found themselves in handcuffs,” recounted Mapes.
“The Coast Guard confiscated the gun and their boats, and cut the
whale, harpoons and all, loose to drift on the current. By evening,
the whale was dead, and sank out of sight.

Read more

Court awards no fees to Primarily Primates receiver

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 2007:

AUSTIN–Travis County Probate Court Judge Guy Herman on
September 10, 2007 denied the request of Lee Theisen-Watt for
“Payment of Receiver Fees and Reimbursement of Attorneys’ Fees” for
the time she spent as court-appointed receiver at the Primarily
Primates sanctuary near San Antonio, Texas, from October 15, 2006
until May 1, 2007.
Herman noted that Theisen-Watt testified “she had agreed to
offer her services pro bono, that her original attorney would
represent her pro bono, that she assumed her original attorney would
pay for the fees of her other attorneys, and that she gave a
charitable receipt from Primarily Primates to the original attorney
for the $42,000 the original attorney said he paid” to another law
firm.

Read more

Chicago foie gras ban a year later

Leave a comment

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, September 2007:

CHICAGO–Responding to a complaint that Cyrano’s Bistrot,
Wine Bar, & Cabaret was illegally selling foie gras, the Chicago
Department of Public Health on September 5, 2007 closed the upscale
restaurant after finding a cockroach-infested kitchen –but no foie
gras.
The raid indicated that the Chicago ban on selling foie gras
appears to be holding, a year after the city council approved it
48-1, and that Department of Public Health spokes-person Tim Haddac
erred two weeks earlier when he alleged to Chicago Tribune restaurant
critic Phil Vettel that “Every hour we spend on foie gras is an hour
we don’t spend protecting people against food-borne illnesses.”
Vettel reported on the August 22, 2007 first anniversary of
the passage of the foie gras ban that, “Aficionados can still dine
on foie gras, if they know where to look.”

Read more

1 … 38 39 40 41 42 … 169