Posted on December 26, 2010 by Seth
My quick answer is no, but Scott Heiser from ALDF offers a more detailed explanation about what realistic enforceable judicial options exist to keep abusers like Vick (who recently stated that owning a dog will help with his rehabilitation) from owning animals. You can read Heiser’s Q&A here.
UPDATE: While we are on the subject of punishment and rehabilitation, apparently President Obama went out of his way to praise the Philadelphia Eagles for giving Vick a second chance. Very interesting. You can read the article here.
Filed under: animal advocacy, animal cruelty, animal ethics, animal law, animal rights, animal welfare | Tagged: ALDF, animal abuse, animal advocacy, animal cruelty, animal ethics, animal law, animal rights, animal suffering, animal welfare, animals, dog fighting, dogs, Michael Vick, Philadelphia Eagles, President Obama | 4 Comments »
Posted on December 22, 2010 by David
For this info, a shout out once again to our stellar Pace Law Librarian, Jack McNeill:
Adair, Robert L. Note. Monkeys and horses and ferrets…oh my! Non-traditional service animals under the ADA. 37 N. Ky. L. Rev. 415-439 (2010).
Kotloff, Eric. Note. All dogs go to heaven…or divorce court: New Jersey un”leashes” a subjective value consideration to resolve pet custody litigation in … (Houseman v. Dare, 966 A.2d 24, 2009.) 55 Vill. L. Rev. 447-474 (2010).
Filed under: animal law, animal scholarship, Uncategorized | Tagged: animal law, animal scholarship | Leave a comment »
Posted on December 20, 2010 by David
And speaking of the Endangered Species Act…
This just in:
After a thorough review of all the available science, the Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that the contiguous United States population of wolverine should be protected under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, the rulemaking to propose ESA protections for the wolverine will be delayed while we work on listing proposals for other species in greater need. The wolverine will be added to the list of candidates for ESA protection. As a candidate species, the wolverine will not receive protection under the ESA; however, we will review its status annually and will continue to work with landowners and partners to implement voluntary conservation measures.
The results of status review indicate that climate warming is the primary threat to wolverine. Our evaluation found that the effects of climate warming are serious but so far have not resulted in any detectable population effects to the species. Because the threat of climate warming is not imminent, we will use our resources to work on listing determinations for species at greater risk of extinction.
So, what does this all mean? It means that the Fish & Wildlife Service, whose finding is quoted above, has determined that wolverines meet the criteria for listing under the Act but that no action will be taken right now because other species are a higher priority. Continue reading
Filed under: animal law, climate change, endangered species, environmental law | Tagged: animal advocacy, animal law, endangered species, Endangered Species Act, environmental advocacy, environmental law, environmentalism, Fish and Wildlife Service, wolverines | 4 Comments »
Posted on December 15, 2010 by David
I would like to say a few more words about the so-called “State Sovereignty Wildlife Management Act and its stated intent to strip wolves of all Endangered Species Act protections. While I have no reason to assume this bill will pass (are you listening, Congress?), the fact that officials elected to national office could propose such a thing underscores much of what’s wrong with, well, with everything.
As an initial matter, wolves pose little threat to people. In the 230+ year history of the United States, the number of wolf attacks can probably be counted on one person’s fingers and toes. The number of fatal attacks is far fewer. Wolves do, however, sometimes eat livestock. Since their reintroduction (emphasis on re– introduction because they used to live there until we exterminated them) into the Northern Rockies, ranchers have raised a royal ruckus because they occasionally lose animals to wolves. Rather than treat this as a cost of doing business, ranchers argue that the wolves’ existence constitutes an unwelcome intrusion into the natural order of things. This despite the fact that the wolves used to inhabit the region in far greater numbers than the 1700 or so that currently exist there and that ranching (and the factory farming that it supports) has caused widespread damage to the region’s ecosystem. Continue reading
Filed under: animal advocacy, animal ethics, animal law, endangered species, environmental ethics, environmental law, wolves | Tagged: animal advocacy, animal ethics, animal law, endangered species, Endangered Species Act, environmental advocacy, environmental ethics, environmental law, environmentalism, grey wolves, Northern Rockies, State Sovereignty Wildlife Management Act, wolf hunting, wolves | 4 Comments »
Posted on December 14, 2010 by Seth
To paraphrase the oft quoted excerpt from Animal Farm, all cute and fuzzy animals are equal, but domesticated cute and fuzzy animals are more equal than others. This sentiment was yet again demonstrated over the last week. In one corner, we have human pets, who are mercilessly being tortured for the pleasure of a rather repugnant fetish in crush videos. After U.S. v. Stevens struck down a law aimed a regulating depictions of cruelty, Congress quickly passed a narrower bill that was signed into law by President Obama on Friday. As reported by ALDF, “the more narrowly written law that emerged makes it a crime to sell or distribute videos showing animals being intentionally crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled, or otherwise subjected to serious bodily injury. It exempts depictions of veterinary and husbandry practices, the slaughter of animals for food, as well as depictions of hunting, trapping or fishing.” Hopefully the narrower scope will survive the inevitable legal challenges.
Filed under: animal advocacy, animal cruelty, animal law, animal rights, animal welfare, endangered species, Uncategorized, wolves | Tagged: ALDF, animal advocacy, animal law, animal rights, animal welfare, black bears, Congress, Endangered Species Act, environmental law, hunting, New Jersey, U.S. v. Stevens | 2 Comments »
Posted on December 13, 2010 by David
Apparently still traumatized by their experiences reading Little Red Riding Hood as children, 8 members of Congress have introduced a bill called the State Sovereignty Wildlife Management Act. The sole purpose of HR 6485 is to render any listing of wolves as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act legally irrelevant.
You can’t make this stuff up.
Read an informative post here.
Filed under: animal law, endangered species, environmental law | Tagged: animal law, animal welfare, endangered species, Endangered Species Act, environmental advocacy, environmental ethics, environmental law, HR 6485, State Sovereignty Wildlife Management Act, wolves | 5 Comments »
Posted on December 13, 2010 by David
This is a guest post by Kenji Crosland, a writer for TeachStreet. Teachstreet is a website that provides online and local classes, including classes on law and pet training classes.
In the effort to preserve a certain semblance of order certain laws (don’t steal, don’t kill) have been universal since Hammurabi, although the punishments for disobeying these laws have varied greatly. Laws concerning animal cruelty, however, are unique in that they are not necessarily “required,” to keep the peace. For a society to establish animal cruelty laws it needs to reach a certain level of moral development. These laws, just like the humans who created them, however, aren’t perfect, and those imperfections can give us insights into a particular culture.
These days, India and countries in Europe seem to be the most progressive, while others like China are slowly adding laws to the books. The US is a study in contrasts: while some states are on the progressive side, there are others that are far from it. Continue reading
Filed under: animal advocacy, animal law | Tagged: Alaska, animal advocacy, animal cruelty, animal ethics, animal experimentation, animal law, animal suffering, animal torture, animal welfare, Arkansas, battery cages, European Union, exotic animals, factory farms, farmed animals, Germany, India, industrial farming, international animal law, Montana, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, TeachStreet, veal calves, veal crates, vivisection | 4 Comments »