Brief Summaries of Federal Animal Protection Statutes

^Pr^ep^ar^{ed f}^o^r^M^e^m^b^ers^an^d^Com^mⁱ^t^t^ees^of^C^ong^r^e^ss
View Page Image

This report contains brief summaries of federal animal protection statutes, listed alphabetically. It
does not include treaties, although it does include statutes enacted to implement treaties. It
includes statutes concerning animals that are not entirely, or not at all, animal protection statutes.
For example, it includes a statute authorizing the eradication of predators, because one of the
statute’s purposes is to protect domestic and “game” animals; and it includes statutes to conserve
fish, although their ultimate purpose may not be for the fishes’ benefit. It also includes statutes
that allow the disabled to use service animals, and even includes statutes aimed at acts of animal
rights advocates (the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992, and the Recreational Hunting
Safety and Preservation Act of 1994).
James E. Nichols, Law Clerk, American Law Division, contributed to the current update of this
report.

View Page Image

Adoption of Military Animals, 10 U.S.C. § 2583.....................................................................1
African Elephant Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 4201-4245..................................................1
Agriculture Appropriations Act, 2006, P.L. 109-97 (2005).......................................................1
Airborne Hunting Act, 16 U.S.C. § 742j-1................................................................................2
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act....................................................................2
Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213...................................................2
Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 757a-757f.................................................2
Animal Damage Control Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 426-426c................................................................2
Animal Disease Risk Assessment, Prevention, and Control Act of 2001, P.L. 107-9
(2001) ......................................................................................................................... ............ 3
Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, 18 U.S.C. § 43.....................................................................3
Animal Health Protection Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 8301-8321............................................................4
Animal Welfare Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 2131-2159............................................................................4
Animal Fighting, 7 U.S.C. § 2156, 18 U.S.C. § 49.............................................................6
Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978, 16 U.S.C. §§ 2401-2412.................................................6
Antarctic Marine Living Resources Convention Act of 1984, 16 U.S.C. §§ 2431-2444..........7
Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997, 16 U.S.C. §§ 4261-4266......................................7
Atlantic Coastal Fisheries Cooperative Management Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5101-5108...............7
Atlantic Salmon Convention Act of 1982, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3601-3608.......................................7
Atlantic Striped Bass Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5151-5158..........................................7
Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975, 16 U.S.C. §§ 971-971k............................................7
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 668-668d..............................................8
Captive Wildlife Safety Act: See Lacey Act Amendments of 1981.........................................8
Chimpanzee Health Improvement, Maintenance, and Protection Act, 42 U.S.C.
§ 287a-3a................................................................................................................................8
Commercial Transportation of Equine for Slaughter, 7 U.S.C. § 1901 note............................8
Department of Defense Appropriations Acts............................................................................9
Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related
Agencies Appropriations Act for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 1993.....................9
Depictions of Animal Cruelty, 18 U.S.C. § 48........................................................................10
Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 777-777l....................................10
Disposition of Unfit Horses And Mules, 40 U.S.C. § 1308....................................................10
Dog and Cat Protection Act of 2000, 19 U.S.C. § 1308..........................................................10
Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1385.........................................11
Driftnet Impact Monitoring, Assessment, and Control Act of 1987, 16 U.S.C. § 1822
note ........................................................................................................................... ............. 11
Eastern Pacific Tuna Licensing Act of 1984, 16 U.S.C. §§ 972-972h....................................11
Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544..................................................................11
Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3604........................................................................................12
Federal Hazardous Substances Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1261-1275................................................12
Federal Law Enforcement Animal Protection Act of 2000, 18 U.S.C. § 1368......................12
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 2901-2912...............................................12
Fish And Wildlife Coordination Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 661-667d.................................................13
Fishery Conservation Amendments of 1990, P.L. 101-627.....................................................13
Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, 7 U.S.C. § 5801(a)(5)..................13
Fur Seal Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1151-1175.......................................................................13
Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000, 16 U.S.C. §§ 6301-6305.............................................14

View Page Image

High Seas Fishing Compliance Act of 1995, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5501-5509.................................14
Horse Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1821-1831......................................................................14
Humane Slaughter Act, 7 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1906.....................................................................14
ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000, 42 U.S.C. §§ 285l - 285l-6..........................................15
International Dolphin Conservation Act, P.L. 105-42 (1997).................................................15
Lacey Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 41-48 (see also Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992,
and Depictions of Animal Cruelty) .....................................................................................16
Lacey Act Amendments of 1981, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3371-3378....................................................16
Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1801-
1891d.................................................................................................................................... 16
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1361-1423h.....................................17
Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987, P.L. 100-220, Title II..............18
Marine Protection, Research, And Sanctuaries Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1431-
1445b.................................................................................................................................... 18
Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2004, 16 U.S.C. §§ 6601-6607.......................................18
Migratory Bird Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 715-715s.....................................................18
Multinational Species Conservation Fund, 16 U.S.C. § 4246.................................................19
National Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy Act of 1977, 7
U.S.C. §§ 3191-3202............................................................................................................19
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3701-3710...........19
National Housing Act, 12 U.S.C. § 1701r-1............................................................................19
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, 16 U.S.C. §§ 668dd-
668ee .......................................................................................................................... .......... 20
Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 6101-6109..............................20
Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990, 16 U.S.C. §§
4701-4751 ............................................................................................................................ 20
North Pacific Anadromous Stocks Act of 1992, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5001-5012.............................21
Northern Pacific Halibut Act of 1982, 16 U.S.C. §§ 773-773k.............................................21
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5601-5612..................21
Pacific Salmon Treaty Act of 1985, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3631-3645................................................21
Pacific Whiting Act of 2006, 16 U.S.C. §§ 7001-7010...........................................................21
Partnerships for Wildlife Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3741-3744..........................................................21
Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006, 42 U.S.C.
§§ 5170b(a)(3)(J), 5196(e)(4), 5196(j)(2), 5196b(g)...........................................................22
Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 669-669k...................................22
Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 283e, 289d..............................................................22
Recreational Hunting Safety and Preservation Act of 1994, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5201-5207..........23
Rehabilitation Act of 1973: See Americans with Disabilities Act...........................................23
Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5301-5306..........................23
Salmon and Steelhead Conservation and Enhancement Act of 1980, 16 U.S.C. §§
3301-3345 ............................................................................................................................ 23
Shark Finning Prohibition Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1822 note...........................................................24
Sikes Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 670a-670o.........................................................................................24
South Pacific Tuna Act of 1988, 16 U.S.C. §§ 973-973r........................................................24
Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1527......................................................................................24
Tuna Conventions Act of 1950, 16 U.S.C. §§ 951-962...........................................................24
Twenty-Eight Hour Law, 49 U.S.C. § 80502..........................................................................25
United States Housing Act of 1937: See National Housing Act.............................................26
United States-Russia Polar Bear Conservation and Management Act of 2006, 16
U.S.C. §§ 1423-1423h..........................................................................................................26

View Page Image

Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21^st Century, 49 U.S.C.
§ 41721.................................................................................................................................26
Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Convention Implementation Act, 16 U.S.C. §§
6901-6910 ............................................................................................................................ 26
Whale Conservation And Protection Study Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 917-917d..............................26
Whaling Convention Act of 1949, 16 U.S.C. §§ 916-916l.....................................................26
Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992, 16 U.S.C. §§ 4901-4916..............................................27
Wild Free-Roaming Horses and Burros Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1331-1340..................................27
Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs Improvement Act of 2000, 16 U.S.C.
§§ 669-669k.........................................................................................................................27
Yukon River Salmon Act of 1995, 16 U.S.C. §§ 5701-5709..................................................27
Author Contact Information..........................................................................................................27

View Page Image

This statute provides, in part: “The Secretary of the military department concerned may make a
military animal of such military department available for adoption ... under circumstances as
follows: (1) At the end of the animal’s useful life. (2) Before the end of the animal’s useful life, if
such Secretary ... determines that unusual or extraordinary circumstances justify [it]. (3) When
the animal is otherwise excess to the needs of such military department.” The statute defines
“military animal” as “[a] military working dog” or “[a] horse owned by the Department of
Defense.” When this statute was first enacted in 2000, it applied only to military working dogs;
prior to then, under Department of Defense policy, such dogs were caged, sometimes for as long
as a year, and then euthanized. See 146 Cong. Rec. H 9599 (daily ed. October 10, 2000). The
statute was amended to cover horses in 2006.
This statute establishes an African Elephant Conservation Fund, from which the Secretary of the
Interior may provide financial assistance “for approved projects for research, conservation,
management, or protection of African elephants.” It requires the Secretary to establish a
moratorium on the importation of raw and worked ivory from an ivory producing country that
does not meet specified criteria, including being a party to CITES and adhering to the CITES
Ivory Control System. (“CITES” is the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.)
The act imposes civil and criminal penalties on any person who, among other things, imports raw
ivory from any country other than an ivory producing country, or from a country for which a
moratorium is in effect, or who exports raw ivory from the United States. A person who furnishes
information that leads to a civil penalty or a criminal conviction under the act may be rewarded
up to one-half of any criminal or civil penalty or fine, or $25,000, whichever is less.
Section 794 of this act provides:
^Ef^f^e^c^tⁱ^v^{e 120 da}^y^s^a^f^t^e^{r t}^h^{e dat}^e^of^en^act^m^eⁿ^t^o^f^t^hⁱ^s^act^,ⁿ^{one of}^t^h^e^fuⁿ^d^s^m^a^{de a}^v^ai^l^a^bl^e
^by^t^hⁱ^s^act^m^a^y^{be u}^s^{ed t}^o^pa^y^t^h^{e s}^a^l^a^ri^e^s^{or ex}^pen^s^e^s^of^pers^onⁿ^e^l^t^oⁱⁿ^s^p^ect^h^o^rs^es^un^der
^s^ectⁱ^oⁿ^{3 of}^t^h^{e F}^e^deral^Meat^In^s^p^ectⁱ^oⁿ^A^c^t^{(21 U}^.^S^.^C^.^{603) or u}ⁿ^d^{er g}^uⁱ^delⁱⁿ^e^sⁱ^s^su^ed
^uⁿ^d^{er s}^ectⁱ^oⁿ^{903 [of}^]^t^h^{e F}^e^deral^A^g^ri^c^u^l^t^u^r^{e I}^m^prov^e^m^eⁿ^t^aⁿ^{d R}^e^f^o^r^m^A^c^t^o^f^{1996 (7}
^U^.^S^.^C^.^{1901 n}^o^t^e^;^P.L^.¹⁰^4-¹²^7).
This provision was apparently intended to effectively prohibit the slaughter of horses for human
consumption from March 10, 2006 until September 30, 2006. The Department of Agriculture,
however, announced on February 7, 2006, that it would charge slaughter plants to pay for
inspections by the Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service so that horses ¹
could continue to be slaughtered for human consumption.

¹^Lⁱ^bby^Q^u^aⁱ^d,^H^o^r^s^e^Sl^au^ghte^r^t^o^C^ontⁱⁿ^ue^D^e^s^p^ite^Ac^tioⁿ^,^Fe^brua^ry^{7, 200}^{6, a}^t^htt^p^://w^ww^.boston.^c^o^m^/^ne^w^s^/ⁿ^a^tio^n/
^w^a^s^h^ing^t^on/^a^r^tic^le^s^/²⁰⁰^6/^02/^07/^h^o^r^s^e^_^s^l^a^u^g^h^te^r^_^t^o_c^oⁿ^ti^nue^_^d^e^s^p^ite^_a^c^tion/^?^r^s^s^_^id=^B^os^t^on.c^o^m^%^2B^/^%^2B^N^e^w^s^.

View Page Image

This statute makes it a crime (1) while in an aircraft, to shoot any bird, fish, or other animal, or
(2) to use an aircraft to harass any bird, fish, or other animal. These prohibitions do not apply to
persons employed by or licensed by a state or the federal government to administer or protect
“land, water, wildlife, domesticated animals, human life, or crops.”
Sections 1313-1314 of this act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 3201-3202, authorize the Secretary of the Interior to
designate zones within national preserves in Alaska “where and when no hunting, fishing,
trapping, or entry may be permitted,” and prohibits “the taking of fish and wildlife” in national
parks or national park system monuments in Alaska, except as specified in the act.
Section 1005 of the act, as amended in 1990, 16 U.S.C. § 3145, provides that the Secretary of the
Interior
^sh^all^w^o^r^k^clo^s^el^y^wⁱ^t^h^th^{e Sta}^t^{e o}^f^A^l^as^k^a^an^d^Nati^v^e^Villa^g^e^an^d^Regⁱ^oⁿ^{al Co}^r^p^o^r^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^sⁱⁿ
^e^v^a^l^ua^tⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^eⁱ^m^p^a^c^t^o^f^oⁱ^l^aⁿ^d^ga^{s e}^x^p^l^oratⁱ^oⁿ^,^dev^e^l^o^p^m^ent^,^pro^d^u^c^tⁱ^oⁿ^,^an^d^t^r^an^s^port^a^tⁱ^oⁿ
^an^d^o^t^h^e^r^h^u^m^aⁿ^acti^v^itie^{s o}ⁿ^t^h^e^w^ild^li^f^e^r^e^so^u^r^{ces o}^f^th^e^s^{e l}^aⁿ^d^{s, i}ⁿ^clu^dⁱⁿ^gⁱ^m^p^act^{s o}ⁿ^t^h^e
^A^r^{ctic a}ⁿ^{d P}^o^rcu^pⁱⁿ^{e caribou}^h^e^rds^,^{polar bears}^,^m^u^s^k^o^x^{, g}^r^izzl^y^bear,^w^o^l^f^,^w^o^lv^eriⁿ^e,
^s^eabi^r^ds^{, s}^h^orebi^r^ds^{, an}^d^mⁱ^g^r^at^ory^w^a^t^e^r^f^o^w^l^.
This statute (together with the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. §§ 791-794) prohibits
discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, public services, and public ²
accommodations. Discrimination includes refusing to make reasonable accommodations for
individuals with disabilities, and a reasonable accommodation generally includes permitting the
use of service animals, such as seeing eye dogs. See, e.g., 28 C.F.R. § 36.302(c). See also, Fair
Housing Act, discussed below.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to take various actions for the protection of
fishery resources.
This statute directs the Secretary of Agriculture:
^to^coⁿ^d^u^c^{t in}^v^e^stig^a^tioⁿ^s^{, ex}^p^e^rⁱ^m^eⁿ^t^{s, an}^d^te^{sts a}^s^h^e^m^a^y^d^eemⁿ^ece^ssar^yⁱⁿ^o^r^d^e^r^to
^det^e^rmⁱⁿ^{e, de}^m^ons^t^r^at^{e, an}^{d prom}^u^l^g^a^t^e^t^h^{e bes}^t^m^e^t^h^ods^of^eradi^catⁱ^oⁿ^,^s^u^ppres^sⁱ^on^{, or}
^briⁿ^gⁱⁿ^g^un^{der con}^t^rol^{on n}^a^tⁱ^on^al^f^o^res^t^{s an}^{d ot}^h^e^{r areas}^{of t}^h^{e pu}^blⁱ^c^do^m^aⁱⁿ^as^w^e^l^l^a^s^on

²^T^h^e^Re^ha^bilita^tio^{n A}^c^{t a}^pplie^{s t}^o^f^e^de^ra^{l e}^x^e^c^u^tiv^e^braⁿ^c^h^a^g^eⁿ^cⁱ^e^s^{, f}^e^de^ra^{l c}^ontra^c^t^{ors, a}ⁿ^d^f^e^de^ra^{l prog}^ra^m^s
^recei^viⁿ^g^f^e^d^e^ral^fⁱⁿ^aⁿ^cⁱ^a^l^assi^st^aⁿ^ce.^T^h^{e A}^D^A^ap^p^lⁱ^e^{s t}^o^l^e^gi^sl^atⁱ^v^{e b}^r^an^ch^agen^ci^es,^t^h^{e st}^at^es,^and^t^h^e^p^rⁱ^v^at^{e sect}^o^r^.

View Page Image

^S^t^at^{e, T}^e^rri^t^o^ry^{, or pri}^v^at^el^y^o^w^{ned l}^aⁿ^d^s^o^f^m^o^un^t^aⁱⁿ^lⁱ^oⁿ^s^,^w^o^l^v^es^{, bobcat}^s^,^prai^ri^{e dog}^s^,
^g^oph^ers^,^g^r^ouⁿ^d^s^q^uⁱ^rrel^s^{, j}^ack^rabbits^{, bro}^wⁿ^{tree s}ⁿ^ak^e^s^,^an^{d oth}^e^{r a}ⁿⁱ^m^al^sⁱⁿ^j^u^riou^s^to
^a^g^rⁱ^c^u^l^t^ur^e^,^ho^r^tⁱ^c^u^l^t^u^r^e^{, f}^o^res^t^ry^{, a}ⁿⁱ^m^{al hu}^s^b^an^dry^,^w^{ild g}^a^m^e^anⁱ^m^al^s^,^fu^r-^bearing^anⁱ^m^a^l^s^,
^an^{d bi}^rds^.
This statute was enacted in 1931 (though “brown tree snakes” were added in 1991). The functions
of the Secretary of Agriculture under it were transferred to the Secretary of Interior in 1939, and ³
back to Agriculture in 1985. In 1987, P.L. 100-202, 101 Stat. 1329-331, added the following
provision to the act:
^T^h^{e Secretary}^o^f^A^g^ric^u^lt^u^r^e^is^au^t^h^orized,^e^x^c^e^p^t^fo^r^ur^b^a^{n r}^o^d^e^nt^c^o^nt^r^o^l^,^t^o^c^o^nd^uc^t
^activ^itie^{s a}ⁿ^d^en^terⁱⁿ^to^ag^r^e^e^m^en^ts^wⁱ^th^{States, lo}^{cal j}^u^rⁱ^sdⁱ^c^tioⁿ^s^{, i}ⁿ^dⁱ^vⁱ^d^u^{als, a}ⁿ^d^p^u^b^lic
^an^{d priv}^{ate ag}^en^cie^s^{, org}^aⁿⁱ^zat^ion^s^{, an}^{d ins}^tit^u^tionsⁱⁿ^t^h^{e control of}ⁿ^uⁱ^s^aⁿ^c^e^m^a^m^m^a^l^s^aⁿ^d
^birds^an^{d th}^os^e^m^a^mm^{al an}^{d bird s}^p^ecies^th^at^{are res}^e^rv^oirs^f^o^{r zoon}^{otic dis}^eas^es^{, an}^{d to}
^depos^{it any}^m^oⁿ^e^y^collected^un^{der any}^s^u^ch^a^g^ree^m^en^tⁱⁿ^{to t}^h^{e appropriation}^accouⁿ^t^s^th^at
ⁱⁿ^cu^r^t^h^{e co}^{sts to}^b^e^av^ailab^l^{e i}^m^m^e^dⁱ^atel^y^aⁿ^d^to^r^e^m^aⁱⁿ^av^ailab^l^{e u}ⁿ^{til e}^x^p^eⁿ^d^ed^f^o^r
^Anⁱ^m^{al Da}^m^a^g^e^Coⁿ^t^r^o^{l acti}^v^ities.
This statute requires the Department of Agriculture to submit to the House and Senate agriculture
committees a preliminary report by June 23, 2001, and a final report by October 20, 2001,
concerning foot-and-mouth disease, bovine spongiform encephalopathy, and related diseases.
This statute, which replaced the Animal Enterprise Protection Act of 1992, makes it a crime to
“travel[ ] in interstate or foreign commerce, or use[ ] ... the mail or any facility in interstate or
foreign commerce—(1) for the purpose of damaging or interfering with the operations of an
animal enterprise; and (2) in connection with such purpose—(A) intentionally damag[ing] or
caus[ing] the loss of any real or personal property ... [or] (B) intentionally plac[ing] a person in
reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to that person, a member of the immediate
family ... of that person, or a spouse or intimate partner of that person. ...” The statute defines
“animal enterprise” as:
^(A^{) a com}^m^e^{rcial or academ}^ic^en^terpris^e^th^{at u}^s^e^s^{or s}^e^lls^anⁱ^m^als^{or an}ⁱ^m^a^l^produ^cts^f^o^r
^profⁱ^t^,^f^{ood or f}ⁱ^{ber p}^r^odu^ctⁱ^oⁿ^,^ag^ri^c^u^l^t^u^r^{e, edu}^catⁱ^oⁿ^,^res^e^a^r^ch^{, or t}^e^s^tⁱⁿ^g^;
^{(B) a}^zoo^,^aqu^a^ri^um^{, an}ⁱ^m^al^shel^t^e^{r, pet}^s^t^ore,^bree^{der, f}^u^rri^er^{, ci}^rcu^s^{, rodeo}^,^or^ot^h^e^{r l}^a^w^f^u^l
^com^p^eti^tiv^{e a}ⁿⁱ^m^{al e}^v^en^t^;^or

³^T^h^e^traⁿ^sf^e^r^{in 198}⁵^didⁿ^o^{t e}^x^pl^ic^itly^a^ppe^a^r^{in a}ⁿ^y^f^e^de^ra^{l sta}^t^ute^;^ra^the^r^,^P.L^.^99-¹⁹^0,^{§ 1}⁰¹⁽^a⁾^{, in}^c^o^rpora^t^e^d
^H.^Rep^t^.⁹⁹^-43⁹^,^and^Am^en^d^m^en^t^No^.³¹^t^o^H.^Rep^t^.⁹⁹^-43⁹ⁱⁿ^c^o^rporat^ed^{a S}^eⁿ^a^t^e^am^en^d^m^en^t^t^h^at^app^{ears at}¹³¹
^C^ong^{. Re}^c^.²⁷⁴⁴⁹^(Oct^ob^{er 1}⁵^,¹⁹⁸⁵^).^T^h^{ese p}^r^o^vⁱ^sⁱ^oⁿ^s^{are set}^f^o^rt^hⁱⁿ^“F^ed^eral^L^a^{ws E}ⁿ^act^edⁱⁿ¹⁹⁸⁵^Con^cernⁱⁿ^g
^Aⁿⁱ^m^al^{s” (F}^eb^ru^ar^y¹⁹^,¹⁹⁸⁵^),^a^CRS^rep^o^r^t^b^y^t^h^{e p}^r^esen^t^aut^h^o^r^.^T^h^{ese p}^r^o^vⁱ^sⁱ^oⁿ^s^w^e^{re d}^ecl^ared^“effectⁱ^v^{e a}^sⁱ^f
^eⁿ^a^c^t^e^d^int^o^la^w^”^b^y^P^.^L^.¹^00-²⁰^{2, §}¹^06,¹⁰¹^Sta^t^.¹³^29-⁴³^{3 (}¹⁹⁸⁷⁾^.^T^h^e¹⁹⁸⁵^tr^aⁿ^s^f^e^r^{to t}^h^e^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}
^Ag^ric^u^lture^w^a^{s, a}^c^c^o^rding^t^o^the^W^a^shing^t^on^{Post (Ja}^nua^ry^{2, 1}⁹⁸⁶^{), “}^t^o^the^de^lig^ht^of^we^ste^r^{n c}^a^ttle^m^e^{n a}^{nd she}^e^p
^pr^o^duc^e^r^s^a^nd^the^dis^m^ay^o^f^c^ons^e^r^v^a^tionis^t^s^”^{; the}^is^s^u^e^is^de^ba^te^d^a^t¹³¹^Con^g^.^R^ec.²⁷⁴⁵^{9 (}^O^ct^o^b^e^r¹⁵^,¹⁹⁸⁵⁾^.

View Page Image

⁽^C⁾^an^y^f^a^ir^o^r^si^mⁱ^lar^ev^en^{t in}^ten^d^ed^to^adv^aⁿ^{ce ag}^ric^u^lt^u^r^al^arts^an^{d s}^c^ien^c^e^s^.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture, if he determines it to be necessary to prevent
the introduction into or dissemination with the United States of any pest or disease of livestock, to
prohibit or restrict, among other things, the importation or exportation of any animal into or from
the United States, the movement in interstate commerce of any animal, or the use of any means of
conveyance in connection with the importation or entry of livestock. The statute also authorizes
the Secretary, if it is necessary for the above purpose, to order the destruction or removal from the
United States of any animal, or to seize, quarantine, or dispose of any animal.
The AWA authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to “promulgate standards to govern the humane
handling, care, treatment, and transportation of animals by dealers, research facilities, and ⁴
exhibitors.” 7 U.S.C. § 2143(a)(1). Such standards must include requirements “for animal care,
treatment, and practices in experimental procedures to ensure that animal pain and distress are
minimized. ...” 7 U.S.C. § 2143(a)(3)(A). The act also requires the Secretary to “promulgate
standards to govern the transportation in commerce, and the handling, care, and treatment in
connection therewith, by intermediate handlers, air carriers, or other carriers, of animals
consigned by any ... person ... for transportation in commerce.” 7 U.S.C. § 2143(a)(4).
The AWA’s definition of “animal” makes the act applicable to any warmblooded animal used “for
research, testing, experimentation, or exhibition purposes, or as a pet; but such term excludes (1)
birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus, bred for use in research, (2) horses not
used for research purposes, and (3) other farm animals. ...” 7 U.S.C. § 2132(g). Prior to this
provision’s amendment by P.L. 107-171 (2002), § 10301, it did not exclude birds, rats, or mice.
Nevertheless, the Secretary had promulgated regulations that excluded birds, and rats and mice
bred for use in research, from coverage under the act. A federal court found this exclusion to
violate the act, but the decision was overturned on appeal on the ground that the plaintiffs lacked ⁵
standing to bring the suit. Subsequently, in a case unrelated to the birds, rats, and mice question,
the en banc D.C. Circuit held that a plaintiff who “suffered [injuries] to his aesthetic interest in
observing animals living under humane conditions” had standing to sue the Secretary of ⁶
Agriculture to enforce the act.
Subsequently, another suit was brought to challenge the exclusion of birds, rats, and mice, and a
federal district court, citing the D.C. Circuit case, denied the Department of Agriculture’s motion ⁷
to dismiss for lack of standing. As a result, the Department of Agriculture settled the case by

⁴^T^h^e^AWA^de^fⁱ^ne^{s “}^e^x^hibitor”^a^s^“^aⁿ^y^pe^{rson ... e}^x^hi^biti^ng^aⁿ^y^aⁿ^im^a^l^{s, w}^h^ic^{h we}^re^purc^h^a^s^e^d^{in c}^o^m^m^e^rc^e^{or ... w}^ill
^a^ffe^c^t^c^o^m^m^e^r^c^e^{, ... a}ⁿ^d^s^u^c^h^te^rm^inc^l^ude^s^c^a^r^niv^a^ls^{, c}ⁱ^rc^us^e^s^{, a}^{nd z}^oos^,”^bu^{t “}^e^x^c^l^ude^s^re^ta^{il pe}^{t s}^t^ore^s^{, ...}^Sta^t^e^aⁿ^d
^c^ounty^f^a^ir^s^,^liv^e^s^toc^k^s^h^o^w^s^,^r^o^d^e^os^{, p}^u^r^e^br^e^d^dog^aⁿ^{d c}^a^t^s^h^ow^s^,^a^{nd a}ⁿ^y^othe^r^f^a^ir^s^or^e^x^hibitⁱ^oⁿ^s^inteⁿ^d^e^d^t^o
^a^d^v^a^nc^e^a^g^rⁱ^c^u^ltur^a^{l a}^r^ts^a^{nd s}^c^ie^nc^e^s^.”^{7 U}^.^S.C^.^§²¹³²⁽^h⁾^.^T^h^e^D^e^pa^r^t^m^e^{nt of}^A^g^rⁱ^c^u^ltur^e^a^dde^{d a}^not^he^r^e^x^c^l^us^ion:
^“h^o^r^{se an}^d^d^o^g^races.^”⁹^C.^F^.^R.^{§ 1}^.^1.
⁵^Aⁿⁱ^m^a^l^Le^g^a^{l D}^e^f^e^ns^e^Fund^v^.^E^s^py^{, 23 F.}^3d⁴⁹^{6 (}^D^.C^.^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁴⁾^.
⁶^Aⁿⁱ^m^a^l^Le^g^a^{l D}^e^f^e^ns^e^Fund^v^.^G^lic^km^aⁿ^{, 154}^F.^3d⁴²^6,⁴²^{9 (}^D^.C^.^Cⁱ^r^.¹⁹⁹⁸⁾^,^cert^.^d^eⁿⁱ^ed^{, 5}²⁶^U^.^S.¹⁰⁶⁴⁽¹⁹⁹⁹⁾^.
⁷^A^lte^rⁿ^a^tiv^e^s^R^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^&^D^e^v^e^lopm^eⁿ^{t Fou}^nda^ti^{on v}^.^G^lic^km^aⁿ^{, 1}⁰¹^F.S^u^p^p^.2^d^{7 (}^D^.D^.C^.²⁰⁰⁰⁾^.

View Page Image

agreeing to revise its regulations to include birds, rats, and mice. Then Congress intervened, and,
in the Department of Agriculture appropriations for FY2001 (P.L. 106-387, § 772), prohibited
FY2001 funds from being used to “modify the definition of ‘animal’ in existing regulations
pursuant to the Animal Welfare Act.” The FY2002 appropriations contained the same prohibition
(P.L. 107-76, § 732), and then P.L. 107-171, § 10301, amended the statute to exclude birds, rats,
and mice bred for research. Section 10304 of the statute, however, directs the National Research
Council, by May 13, 2003, to submit to the House and Senate Agriculture Committees “a report
on the implications of including rats, mice, and birds within the definition of animal under the
regulations promulgated under the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.).” No report
appears to have been written.
The AWA requires every research facility to establish an Institutional Animal Committee of at
least three members, at least one of whom shall not be affiliated in any way with the facility and
who is intended to represent “general community interests in the proper care and treatment of
animals.” The Committee’s responsibilities include to review practices involving pain to animals
and to file a report with the Secretary. 7 U.S.C. § 2143(b).
The AWA also provides for the licensing of dealers and exhibitors (7 U.S.C. § 2133) and prohibits
research facilities from purchasing dogs or cats from unlicensed dealers or exhibitors (7 U.S.C.
§ 2137). The act defines “dealer” in part as a person who, for compensation, transports, buys, or
sells any animal “for research, teaching, exhibition, or use as a pet,” but it excludes from the
definition a retail pet store that does not sell “animals to a research facility, an exhibitor, or a
dealer” (7 U.S.C. § 2132(f)). The act defines “exhibitor” to include carnivals, circuses, and zoos,
but to exclude retail pet stores, state and country fairs, livestock shows, rodeos, and purebred dog
and cat shows (7 U.S.C. § 2132(h)).
The AWA also prohibits dealers and exhibitors from selling or otherwise disposing of any dog or
cat within five business days after they acquire it, except that this requirement does not apply to
operators of auction sales. 7 U.S.C. § 2135. A 1990 amendment requires public and private
pounds and shelters, and research facilities licensed by the Department of Agriculture, to “hold
and care for” any dog or cat they acquire “for a period of not less than five days to enable such
dog or cat to be recovered by its original owner or adopted by other individuals before such entity ⁸
sells such dog or cat to a dealer.” 7 U.S.C. § 2158(a). Does this provision prohibit a pound,
shelter, or research facility from euthanizing a dog or cat before five days? Perhaps not on its ⁹
face, but that appears to be its intent, as to read it otherwise would seem to defeat its purpose.
Another 1990 amendment authorized the Attorney General to seek, and federal courts to issue,
injunctions against dealing in stolen animals or placing the health of an animal in serious danger
in violation of the act. 7 U.S.C. § 2159.
P.L. 110-234, § 14210 (2008) added a new section to the AWA (7 U.S.C. § 2148) that prohibits
any person from importing a dog into the United States for purposes of resale unless the Secretary
determines that the dog is in good health, has received all necessary vaccinations, and is at least
six months old. This section does not apply, however, if a dog is imported for research purposes
or veterinary treatment, or if it is imported into Hawaii from the British Isles, Australia, Guam, or

⁸^A^“^d^e^a^l^e^r^”^{is de}^fⁱ^ne^{d to i}ⁿ^c^l^u^d^e^aⁿ^y^pe^{rson w}^{ho b}^u^y^s^aⁿ^aⁿ^im^a^l^{, a}^{nd the}^r^e^f^ore^c^oul^{d i}ⁿ^c^l^ude^a^re^se^a^r^c^h^f^a^c^ilit^y^.⁷
^U.^S^.^C^.^§²¹³²⁽^f⁾^.
⁹^T^h^e^r^e^g^u^la^tions^d^o^not^a^ddr^e^s^s^th^is^que^s^tⁱ^on.^Se^e^{9 C}^.^F.R^.^§^2.1³³⁽^a⁾^.

View Page Image

New Zealand, if the dog is not transported out of Hawaii for purposes of resale at less than six
months of age. P.L. 110-234, § 14214, also amended the AWA (7 U.S.C. § 2149(b)) to increase,
from $2,500 to $10,000, the civil penalty that the Secretary of Agriculture may assess for any
violation of any provision of the act, or of any rule, regulation, or standard promulgated by the
Secretary.
The Animal Welfare Act, as amended, most recently by P.L. 110-234, § 14207 (2008) prohibits
any person “to knowingly sponsor or exhibit an animal in an animal fighting venture,” or “to
knowingly sell, buy, possess, train, transport, deliver, or receive any animal for the purposes of
having the animal participate in an animal fighting venture.” However,
^[^w^]ⁱ^t^h^r^e^sp^e^c^t^t^o^fi^g^h^tⁱ^ng^ve^nt^ur^e^sⁱⁿ^vo^l^vⁱⁿ^{g l}ⁱ^ve^bⁱ^r^d^sⁱⁿ^a^St^a^t^e^w^h^e^r^eⁱ^t^w^o^ul^d^no^t^b^e^a
^vⁱ^ol^atⁱ^oⁿ^o^f^t^h^{e l}^a^w^,ⁱ^t^s^h^a^l^l^{be u}ⁿ^l^a^w^f^u^l^un^{der t}^hⁱ^s^su^bs^ectⁱ^oⁿ^f^o^{r a pers}^on^t^o^s^pons^{or or}
^ex^hⁱ^b^{it a b}ⁱ^r^dⁱⁿ^{a f}ⁱ^g^h^tin^g^v^eⁿ^t^u^r^{e o}ⁿ^l^y^if^t^h^{e p}^e^r^s^oⁿ^kⁿ^e^{w th}^{at an}^y^bⁱ^r^dⁱⁿ^th^{e f}ⁱ^g^h^tiⁿ^g
^v^eⁿ^t^u^r^e^w^a^s^kn^o^w^ing^l^y^boug^h^t^,^s^o^{ld, deliv}^ered,^traⁿ^s^{ported, or receiv}^e^{d in inters}^tate¹⁰
^co^m^m^e^r^ce^f^o^r^th^{e p}^u^r^p^o^s^{e o}^f^p^a^r^ticip^atioⁿⁱⁿ^th^e^fⁱ^g^h^tiⁿ^g^v^eⁿ^t^u^r^e.
On August 15, 2008, a Louisiana statute (14:102.23) took effect that made it the 50^th state (plus
the District of Columbia) to outlaw cockfighting, thereby essentially rendering moot this
exception in the AWA.
P.L. 110-22 (2007) made it “unlawful for any person to knowingly sell, buy, transport, or deliver
in interstate or foreign commerce a knife, a gaff, or any other sharp instrument attached, or
designed or intended to be attached, to the leg of a bird for use in an animal fighting venture.”
P.L. 110-22 also increased the penalty for violations of the animal fighting ventures section from
a misdemeanor to a felony, with a maximum term of three years’ imprisonment per violation. P.L.

110-234 (2008) then increased the maximum term of imprisonment to five years per violation.

The animal fighting section of the AWA also prohibits knowingly using the mail or any
instrumentality of interstate commerce to advertise an animal, or a sharp instrument, for use in an
animal fighting venture, or to promote or further an animal fighting venture, except that this
prohibition applies “to fighting ventures involving live birds only if the fight is to take place in a
State where it would be in violation of the laws thereof.”
This statute makes it unlawful for any United States citizen, unless authorized by the Director of
the National Science Foundation, to engage in commerce in any native animal or native bird
taken in Antarctica.

¹⁰^{7 U}^.^S^.^C^.^{§ 2}¹⁵⁶⁽^a⁾^,^a^s^a^m^e^nde^{d by}^P^.^L^.¹⁰^7-¹⁷¹^,^§¹⁰³^{02 (}²⁰⁰²⁾^;^s^e^e^a^l^s^o^{39 U}^.^S.C^.^§³⁰⁰¹⁽^a⁾^.^Prⁱ^o^r^to^its²⁰⁰²
^am^e^ndm^eⁿ^{t, 7 U}^.^S.C^.^§²¹⁵⁶⁽^a⁾^dⁱ^{d n}^o^{t a}^pply^a^t^a^{ll to f}ⁱ^g^h^ting^v^e^nt^ur^e^s^inv^o^lv^ing^liv^e^bir^d^sⁱⁿ^s^t^a^t^e^s^w^h^e^r^e^s^u^c^h
^a^c^tiv^it^y^w^a^s^le^g^a^l.

View Page Image

This statute implements the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living
Resources, and makes it unlawful to harvest, or knowingly to engage in commerce in any
Antarctic marine living resource harvested in violation of the Convention.
This statute establishes the Asian Elephant Conservation Fund and directs the Secretary of the
Interior to use amounts in the Fund for projects for the conservation of Asian elephants.
The statute requires the Secretary of Commerce, in cooperation with the Secretary of the Interior,
to develop and implement a program to support the interstate fishery management efforts of the
Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission.
This statute limits salmon fishing pursuant to the Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in
the North Atlantic Ocean.
This statute directs the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior to jointly declare
a moratorium on fishing for Atlantic striped bass within the coastal waters of any state that does
not comply with the plan for managing Atlantic striped bass that is adopted by the Atlantic States
Marine Fisheries Commission.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to promulgate regulations to “limit the size of
the fish and the quantity of the catch which may be taken from each area ... [and] limit or prohibit
the incidental catch of a regulated species. ...”

View Page Image

This statute makes it a crime to possess, buy, sell, or transport any bald or golden eagle, alive or
dead, or any part, nest, or egg thereof. The Secretary of the Interior may issue regulations
authorizing exceptions “for the scientific or exhibition purposes of public museums, scientific
societies, and zoological parks, or for the religious purposes of Indian tribes, or ... for the
protection of wildlife or of agricultural or other interests in any particular locality. ...”
The CHIMP Act, P.L. 106-551 (2000), as amended by P.L. 110-170 (2007), added § 481C to the
Public Health Service Act. It requires the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to
“provide for the establishment and operation ... of a [sanctuary] system to provide for the lifetime
care of chimpanzees that have been used, or were bred or purchased for use, in research
conducted or supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration,
or other agencies of the Federal Government,” when such “surplus chimpanzees” are not needed
for such research. Non-federal chimpanzees may also be accepted into the system. Chimpanzees
in the system may not be used in research except as specified in the statute, and must be cared for
in accordance with the Animal Welfare Act.
The sanctuary system shall be operated by a nonprofit private entity under a contract awarded by
the Secretary of HHS. The nonprofit private entity shall have a board of directors composed of
not more than 13 voting members, who shall include individuals with expertise and experience in
various fields, including primate veterinary care, animal protection, behavioral primatology,
management of nonprofit organizations, laboratory animal medicine, and biohazards.
This statute, enacted as part of Public Law 104-127, 110 Stat. 1184 (1996), provides that “the
Secretary of Agriculture may issue guidelines for the regulation of the commercial transportation
of equine for slaughter by persons regularly engaged in that activity within the United States.”
Specifically, “the Secretary of Agriculture shall review the food, water, and rest provided to
equine for slaughter in transit, the segregation of stallions from other equine during transit, and
such other issues as the Secretary considers appropriate.” The Secretary’s regulations ¹¹
implementing this statute were issued in 2001 and are published at 9 C.F.R. Part 88.

¹¹^For^a^dditi^ona^l^inf^o^r^m^a^{tion, s}^e^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^t^R^S²¹⁸⁴²^,^Ho^{rse S}^l^a^u^g^h^{ter Preven}^tioⁿ^Bills^aⁿ^d^Issu^es^{, by}^G^e^o^f^f^r^e^y^S.
^Becker,^Ho^{rse S}^l^a^u^g^h^t^{er Preven}^ti^oⁿ^B^{ills a}ⁿ^d^Issu^es^{, by}^G^e^o^f^f^r^e^y^{S. Be}^c^k^e^r^.

View Page Image

P.L. 101-511, § 8019 (1990) provides:
^Noⁿ^e^o^f^th^{e f}^uⁿ^d^{s ap}^p^r^o^p^r^iated^b^y^th^is^A^c^{t o}^r^h^e^r^eaf^ter^sh^a^{ll b}^e^u^s^ed^to^p^u^r^c^h^a^s^e^d^o^g^s^o^r^c^a^t^s
^{or ot}^h^e^r^wⁱ^s^e^fun^d^t^h^e^u^s^{e o}^f^dog^s^{or cat}^s^f^o^{r t}^h^{e pu}^rpos^{e of}^t^r^aiⁿⁱⁿ^g^D^e^part^m^eⁿ^t^of^D^e^f^eⁿ^s^e
^s^t^u^d^eⁿ^t^s^{or ot}^h^e^{r pers}^onⁿ^e^lⁱⁿ^s^u^r^gⁱ^cal^or^ot^h^e^{r m}^e^di^cal^t^r^eat^m^e^nt^o^f^w^o^uⁿ^d^s^produ^ced^b^y
^any^t^y^{pe o}^f^w^eapon^:^Pr^ovide^d^,^T^h^{at th}^{e s}^t^an^dards^of^s^u^c^h^trainⁱ^ng^wⁱ^t^h^res^p^{ect to th}^e
^t^r^e^a^t^m^eⁿ^t^o^f^aⁿⁱ^m^a^l^s^s^h^a^l^l^a^d^h^e^r^e^t^o^t^h^e^F^e^d^e^r^a^l^Anⁱ^m^a^l^W^e^l^f^a^r^e^La^w^aⁿ^d^to^th^o^s^e^p^r^ev^ailin^g
ⁱⁿ^th^{e ci}^vⁱ^lⁱ^an^m^e^{dical co}^m^m^uⁿⁱ^t^y^.
This provision, without the words “or hereafter,” had been included in Department of Defense
appropriations statutes since P.L. 98-212, § 791 (1984). However, because of the words “or
hereafter” in the language quoted above, this prohibition on the use of funds continues to operate
unless it is repealed.
Other Department of Defense appropriations statutes use the phrase “this Act or any other Act”
instead of “this Act or hereafter.” The Comptroller General has “held that the words ‘or any other
act’ do not indicate futurity, but merely extend the effect of the provisions to other appropriations
available in that fiscal year.” 65 Comp. Gen. 588, 589 (1986). The following example of the use
of this phrase in connection with the use of animals in research appeared in P.L. 103-139, § 8044
(1993), and P.L. 104-61, § 8034 (1995):
^Noⁿ^e^o^f^th^e^f^uⁿ^d^{s p}^r^o^v^id^edⁱⁿ^th^is^A^c^{t o}^r^an^y^o^t^h^e^r^A^c^{t s}^h^all^b^e^av^ailab^l^{e to}^coⁿ^d^u^c^{t b}^oⁿ^e
^tr^au^m^a^r^e^sear^ch^a^t^aⁿ^y^A^r^m^y^Resear^ch^L^a^b^o^r^ato^r^y^uⁿ^{til t}^h^e^Secr^etar^y^o^f^th^e^A^r^m^y^cer^ti^fⁱ^e^s
^t^h^at^t^h^e^syⁿ^t^h^e^tⁱ^c^co^m^poun^{d t}^o^{be u}^s^edⁱⁿ^t^h^e^ex^peri^m^e^nt^sⁱ^s^of^su^c^h^{a t}^y^{pe t}^h^atⁱ^t^s^u^s^e^wⁱ^l^l
^r^e^su^{lt i}ⁿ^{a sig}ⁿⁱ^f^ican^t^m^e^dⁱ^{cal f}ⁱⁿ^dⁱⁿ^g^,^th^{e r}^e^sear^ch^h^a^s^m^ilitar^y^ap^p^licatioⁿ^,^t^h^e^r^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^wⁱ^l^l
^{be con}^d^u^c^{ted in}^accordan^{ce w}ⁱ^th^th^{e s}^t^aⁿ^dards^s^e^{t b}^y^an^ani^m^{al care an}^{d u}^s^{e com}^mⁱ^t^t^ee,^aⁿ^d
^th^{e res}^earc^h^doesⁿ^o^{t d}^u^plicat^{e res}^earch^a^l^read^y^con^d^u^c^ted^by^a^m^aⁿ^u^f^a^c^t^u^r^{er or any}^ot^h^e^r¹²
^res^earch^org^aⁿⁱ^zat^ion^.
Finally, some limitations on the use of Department of Defense funds for animal research have
applied only to a particular appropriations statute. For example, P.L. 103-139 § 8043 (1993), and
P.L. 104-61, § 8032 (1995), provide:
^N^oⁿ^e^of^t^h^e^fuⁿ^d^s^appropri^a^t^e^{d by}^t^hⁱ^s^A^c^t^sh^al^l^{be av}^ai^l^a^bl^{e f}^o^{r pay}^m^ent^s^un^{der t}^h^e
^Depart^m^eⁿ^t^{of Def}^e^ns^{e con}^t^ract^w^{ith t}^h^e^L^o^uⁱ^sⁱ^aⁿ^{a S}^t^at^{e Un}ⁱ^v^ersⁱ^t^y^Medical^C^eⁿ^t^er
ⁱⁿ^v^o^l^vⁱⁿ^g^t^h^e^u^s^{e of}^cat^s^f^o^{r Brain}^Mis^s^{ile Wou}ⁿ^d^R^e^s^earch^.^...
P.L. 102-394, § 213 (1992) provides:
^N^o^fuⁿ^d^{s appropri}^a^t^e^{d u}ⁿ^d^{er t}^hⁱ^s^A^c^t^or^s^u^bs^eq^u^e^nt^D^e^par^t^m^eⁿ^t^{s of}^L^a^{bor, H}^eal^t^h^aⁿ^d
^H^u^m^aⁿ^S^e^r^vⁱ^ces^{, an}^{d Edu}^catⁱ^oⁿ^,^an^{d R}^e^l^a^t^e^{d A}^g^eⁿ^ci^es^A^ppropri^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^A^c^t^s^s^h^a^l^l^b^e^u^s^e^d^by

¹²^T^h^e^bone^t^r^a^u^m^a^r^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^inv^o^lv^e^s^the^us^e^of^dog^s^;^s^e^e^H^.^R^e^pt.¹⁰¹^-³^45,¹⁰¹^st^Co^ng^.,¹^st^s^e^s^s^.¹⁵^{3 (}¹⁹⁸⁹⁾^.

View Page Image

^th^{e Nation}^a^{l Ins}^tit^u^t^e^s^of^Healt^h^{, or an}^y^ot^h^e^{r Federal ag}^en^c^y^,^or^recipien^{t of}^{Federal f}^uⁿ^d^s
^on^any^proj^{ect th}^{at en}^tails^t^h^e^captu^{re or p}^r^ocu^r^em^eⁿ^{t of}^c^hⁱ^m^pan^zee^s^obtain^e^{d f}^r^o^m^t^h^e
^w^ild^{. Fo}^r^p^u^r^p^o^s^{es o}^f^t^h^is^sec^tioⁿ^,^th^e^ter^m^“^r^ecipⁱ^eⁿ^{t o}^f^Fe^d^e^r^a^{l f}^uⁿ^d^{s” i}ⁿ^clu^d^e^s^p^r^iv^ate
^citizen^{s, co}^r^p^o^r^atioⁿ^s^{, o}^r^o^t^h^e^r^r^e^sear^chⁱⁿ^s^tit^u^tioⁿ^s^lo^cated^o^u^tsid^{e th}^e^Uⁿ^it^e^d^S^t^a^t^e^s^t^h^at^a^r^e
^reci^pi^en^t^s^of^F^e^deral^f^uⁿ^d^s^.
This provision had previously appeared, without the reference to subsequent acts, in P.L. 101-166,
§ 214 (1989), P.L. 101-517, § 211 (1990), and P.L. 102-170, § 213 (1991).
This statute, enacted as P.L. 106-152 (1999), makes it a crime knowingly to create, sell, or
possess any visual or audio “depiction of animal cruelty with the intention of placing that
depiction in interstate or foreign commerce for commercial gain.” It provides an exception for
“any depiction that has serious religious, political, scientific, educational, journalistic, historical,
or artistic value.” The statute was aimed at outlawing “crush video” films, in which small animals
are crushed to death. A federal court of appeals has held that the statute violates the First
Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech, and the government has asked the U.S. Supreme
Court to review the case. United States v. Stevens, 533 F.3d 218 (3d Cir. 2008) (en banc), petition
for cert. filed, No. 08-769 (Dec. 15, 2008).
This statute is also known as the “Federal Aid in Fish Restoration Act” and the “Fish Restoration
and Management Projects Act.” It directs the Secretary of the Interior “to cooperate with the
States through their respective State fish and game departments in fish restoration and
management projects.” It includes the New England Fishery Resources Restoration Act of 1990,
16 U.S.C. § 777e-1. This statute was amended by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration
Programs Improvement Act of 2000, discussed below.
This statute provides, in full:
^Su^b^j^{ect to}^ap^p^licab^{le r}^e^g^u^l^at^ioⁿ^s^uⁿ^d^e^r^thⁱ^s^s^u^b^title^an^d^t^{itle I}^I^I^o^f^th^e^Fed^e^r^a^{l P}^r^o^p^e^r^t^y^aⁿ^d
^A^d^mⁱⁿⁱ^s^t^ratⁱ^v^e^S^e^rvⁱ^c^e^s^A^c^t^{of 1949 (41 U}^.^S^.^C^.^{251 et}^s^e^{q.), h}^o^rs^es^aⁿ^d^m^u^l^e^{s bel}^oⁿ^gⁱⁿ^g^t^o
^t^h^e^F^e^deral^G^o^v^e^rⁿ^m^eⁿ^t^t^h^a^t^hav^e^beco^m^e^unfⁱ^t^f^o^r^s^e^rvⁱ^c^e^m^a^y^{be des}^t^ro^y^e^{d or p}^u^t^o^u^t^t^o
^pas^t^u^r^{e, ei}^t^h^{er o}ⁿ^pas^t^u^r^es^bel^oⁿ^gⁱ^ng^t^o^t^h^{e G}^o^v^e^rnm^eⁿ^t^{or t}^h^os^{e bel}^ongⁱⁿ^g^t^o^fⁱⁿ^aⁿ^cⁱ^a^l^l^y
^s^o^uⁿ^d^aⁿ^d^r^e^p^u^t^a^b^l^e^h^u^m^aⁿ^e^o^r^g^aⁿⁱ^z^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^s^wh^o^s^e^f^aci^{lities p}^e^r^m^{it th}^e^m^to^car^{e f}^o^r^th^{e h}^o^r^s^es
^an^d^m^u^{les d}^u^rⁱⁿ^g^th^{e r}^e^m^aⁱⁿ^d^e^r^o^f^th^eirⁿ^a^t^u^r^a^{l li}^v^e^{s, at n}^o^c^o^{st to}^th^{e Go}^v^e^rⁿ^m^eⁿ^t^.
This statute, P.L. 106-476, §§ 1441-1443 (2000), makes it unlawful to import into, or export
from, the United States any dog or cat fur product; or to engage in interstate commerce in any dog
or cat fur product.

View Page Image

This statute, as amended by § 5 of the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act, P.L. 105-

42 (1997), makes it a violation of § 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45,

^f^o^{r any}^produ^{cer, i}^m^port^e^{r, ex}^port^e^r,^di^s^t^ri^bu^t^o^{r, or}^s^e^l^l^e^r^o^f^aⁿ^y^t^uⁿ^a^p^r^o^d^u^c^t^t^h^a^tⁱ^s^ex^p^o^r^t^e^d
^f^r^o^m^o^r^o^f^f^e^r^e^d^f^o^r^saleⁱⁿ^th^e^Un^ited^States^toⁱⁿ^clu^d^{e o}ⁿ^t^h^e^lab^e^{l o}^f^th^at^p^r^o^d^u^{ct th}^e^ter^m
^“^dol^phⁱⁿ^s^a^f^{e” or any}^ot^h^e^{r t}^e^r^m^{or sy}^m^bol^t^h^at^f^a^l^s^el^y^cl^ai^m^s^{or s}^ugg^es^t^s^t^h^at^t^h^{e t}^uⁿ^a
^c^o^nt^aⁱ^ne^dⁱⁿ^t^h^e^p^r^o^d^u^c^t^w^e^r^e^ha^r^v^e^s^t^e^d^usⁱⁿ^{g a}^me^t^h^o^d^o^f^fi^s^hⁱⁿ^{g t}^h^a^tⁱ^s^no^t^ha^r^m^f^u^l^t^o
^dol^phⁱⁿ^sⁱ^f^t^h^{e produ}^ct^con^t^ai^ns^t^uⁿ^a^h^a^r^v^es^t^e^d—
⁽^A⁾^oⁿ^t^h^e^hi^g^h^se^a^s^b^y^a^ve^s^s^e^l^e^nga^ge^dⁱⁿ^d^rⁱ^f^tⁿ^e^t^fi^shiⁿ^g;^o^r
^(B^{) ou}^ts^{ide th}^{e eas}^tern^{tropical P}^acifⁱ^{c Ocean}^b^y^a^v^e^s^s^e^{l u}^sⁱⁿ^g^p^u^rs^{e s}^eⁱⁿ^{e n}^e^t^s^...
^(C^{) in}^t^h^{e eas}^terⁿ^{tropical P}^aci^fⁱ^{c Ocea}ⁿ^b^y^{a v}^e^s^s^e^l^us^ing^a^pu^rs^{e s}^eⁱⁿ^{e n}^e^t^un^les^s^t^h^{e tun}^a
^m^{eet t}^h^{e requ}^ire^m^eⁿ^ts^f^o^{r being}^con^s^{idered dolph}ⁱⁿ^s^a^f^e^un^d^e^{r parag}^r^aph^(2).^...
Violators are subject to a civil penalty of up to $100,000.
This statute finds that “the use of long plastic driftnets is a fishing technique that may result in the
entanglement and death of enormous numbers of target and nontarget marine resources in the
waters of the North Pacific Ocean, including the Bering Sea.” It therefore provides that the
Secretary of Commerce, through the Secretary of State, shall negotiate with foreign governments
to monitor driftnet fishing, and shall evaluate the feasibility of various methods of reducing the
number of driftnets discarded or lost at sea.
The Driftnet Act Amendments of 1990, 16 U.S.C. § 1826, incorporate and expand upon
provisions of the Driftnet Impact Monitoring, Assessment, and Control Act of 1987.
This statute makes it unlawful to fish for designated species of tuna within the “Area Agreement”
specified in the act without a license, or in contravention of regulations promulgated by the
Secretary of Commerce.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (the Secretary of Commerce in the case of
marine mammals) to promulgate lists of species which are endangered or threatened (defined as
“likely to become ... endangered”) and to designate critical habitats of such species. Among other
things, the act prohibits any person or private or governmental entity from importing, exporting,
taking, possessing, selling, or transporting any endangered species. 16 U.S.C. § 1538. It prohibits

View Page Image

federal agencies, unless granted an exemption, from taking action “likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of [critical] habitat of such species.” 16 U.S.C. § 1536(a)(2). (No similar
prohibition applies to entities other than federal agencies.) The act also requires the Secretary to
develop and implement recovery plans for the conservation and survival of endangered and
threatened species. 16 U.S.C. § 1533(f).
In 1988, P.L. 100-478 amended the act to require the Secretary to develop and implement
recovery plans for the conservation and survival of endangered species and threatened species,
and to implement a system in cooperation with the states to monitor the status of recovered
species. It also directed the Secretary of Commerce to contract for an independent review, by the
National Academy of Sciences, of scientific information pertaining to the conservation of sea
turtles.
This statute, as interpreted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
requires that all public and private housing (except as exempted in 42 U.S.C. §§ 3603(b) and §

3607) allow seeing eye dogs, even if they otherwise have a “no pets” policy. 24 C.F.R. § 100.204.

The act prohibits discrimination “in the terms, conditions, or privileges of sale or rental of a
dwelling, or in the provision of services or facilities in connection” with such a dwelling, because
of a race, color, religion, sex, familial status (living with children), national origin, or handicap.
One form of discrimination based on handicap is “a refusal to make reasonable accommodations
in rules, policies, practices, or services, when such accommodations may to necessary to afford [a
handicapped] person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling.” HUD has determined that
allowing seeing eye dogs is a reasonable accommodation.
The Consumer Product Safety Commission, which administers this statute, adopted a policy
statement on animal testing “intended to minimize the number of animals tested and to reduce the
pain associated with such tests.” The statement notes “that neither the FHSA nor the
Commission’s regulations require any firm to perform animal tests,” although it adds that “animal
testing may be necessary in some cases.” 49 Fed. Reg. 22522 (May 30, 1984).
This statute makes it a crime “willfully and maliciously” to harm a dog or horse used by a federal
agency in law enforcement.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to approve state conservation plans for
“nongame fish and wildlife,” which are defined as “wild vertebrate animals that are in an
unconfined state and that—(A) are not ordinarily taken for sport, fur, or food ...; (B) are not listed
as endangered species or threatened species ... and (C) are not marine mammals. ...” A 1988

View Page Image

amendment (adding 16 U.S.C. § 2912) requires the Secretary to undertake research and
conservation activities concerning population trends of, and the effects of environmental changes
and human activities on, “migratory nongame birds.”
This statute authorizes the Secretary of the Interior:
^t^o^provⁱ^d^{e as}^sⁱ^s^t^aⁿ^{ce t}^o^{, an}^{d c}^ooperat^e^wⁱ^t^h^{, F}^e^deral^,^S^t^a^t^{e, an}^{d pu}^blⁱ^c^{or pri}^v^at^{e ag}^eⁿ^ci^e^s
^an^{d org}^aⁿⁱ^zatⁱ^oⁿ^sⁱⁿ^t^h^{e dev}^e^l^opm^eⁿ^t^,^prot^ectⁱ^oⁿ^,^reariⁿ^g^,^an^{d s}^t^ockⁱⁿ^g^of^al^l^s^p^eci^es^of
^w^ild^li^f^e^{, r}^e^so^u^r^{ces t}^h^er^eo^f^,^an^d^th^eir^h^a^b^{itat, an}^dⁱⁿ^coⁿ^t^r^o^l^lin^g^lo^{sses o}^f^th^{e sa}^m^e^f^r^o^m
^dis^eas^{e or oth}^e^{r cau}^s^e^s^,ⁱⁿ^mⁱⁿⁱ^mⁱ^ziⁿ^g^da^m^a^g^e^s^f^r^o^m^ov^era^b^uⁿ^d^an^t^s^p^ecies^{, i}ⁿ^prov^iding
^pu^{blic s}^h^ootiⁿ^g^aⁿ^{d f}ⁱ^s^hⁱⁿ^g^areas^{. ...}
In addition to containing numerous amendments of the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and
Management Act and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975, this statute includes the
Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act, which this report summarizes separately.
This statute funds “research designed to increase our knowledge concerning agricultural
production systems that” serve six specified purposes, one of which is to “promote the well being
of animals.”
This statute prohibits the “taking” (defined as to “harass, hunt, capture, or kill”) of fur seals in the
North Pacific Ocean or on any lands or waters under the jurisdiction of the United States, or to
engage in commerce in fur seals’ skins taken contrary to the act or the Interim Convention on the
Conservation of North Pacific Fur Seals.
The act contains an exception allowing taking by “Indians, Aleuts, and Eskimos who dwell on the
coasts of the North Pacific Ocean,” and authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to permit taking
for “educational, scientific, or exhibition purposes.” The act also directs the Secretary to
administer the fur seal rookeries on the Pribilof Islands to “ensure that activities on such Islands
are consistent with the purposes of conserving, managing, and protecting the North Pacific fur
seals and other wildlife. ...” The 1983 amendments to the act repealed the Protection of Sea Otters
on the High Seas Act, formerly 16 U.S.C. §§ 1171-1172, as unnecessary because of the enactment
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972.

View Page Image

This statute “established in the Multinational Species Conservation Fund a separate account to be
known as the ‘Great Ape Conservation Fund.’” The Secretary of the Interior shall use the fund for
projects that he approves for the conservation of great apes.
The purpose of this statute is “(1) to implement the Agreement to Promote Compliance with
International Conservation and Management Measures by Fishing Vessels on the High Seas ... ,
and (2) to establish a system of permitting, reporting, and regulation for vessels of the United
States fishing on the high seas.”
This statute makes it a crime to exhibit, or transport for the purpose of exhibition, any “sore”
horse, which is a horse whose feet have been injured in order to alter the horse’s gait. The
Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to enforce the act.
The Horse Protection Act also provides that “no horse may be exported by sea from the United
States, or any of its territories or possessions, unless such horse is part of a consignment of horses
with respect to which a waiver has been granted” by the Secretary of Commerce. Such waivers
may be granted only “if the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with the Secretary of
Agriculture, determines that no horse in that consignment is being exported for purposes of ¹³
slaughter.”
The central provision of the Humane Slaughter Act (HSA) reads:
^N^o^m^e^t^h^o^d^o^f^sl^a^u^ght^e^r^o^r^ha^nd^lⁱⁿ^{g i}ⁿ^c^o^nne^c^tⁱ^oⁿ^wⁱ^t^h^s^l^a^u^g^h^t^e^rⁱ^ng^sha^l^l^b^e^d^e^e^m^e^d^t^o
^co^m^p^l^y^wⁱ^t^h^t^h^{e p}^u^b^{lic p}^o^lic^y^o^f^t^h^{e U}ⁿ^ited^State^s^uⁿ^less^{it i}^s^h^u^m^aⁿ^{e. Ei}^th^er^o^f^t^h^e
^f^o^l^l^o^wⁱ^ng^t^w^o^m^e^t^h^ods^of^s^l^a^u^g^h^t^eriⁿ^g^an^{d h}^aⁿ^d^lⁱⁿ^g^{are h}^e^re^by^f^oun^{d t}^o^{be h}^u^m^aⁿ^e^:
⁽^a⁾ⁱⁿ^th^{e case o}^f^{cattle, calv}^e^{s, h}^o^r^s^es,^m^u^le^{s, sh}^eep^{, s}^wⁱⁿ^{e, an}^d^o^t^h^e^r^liv^esto^ck^{, all an}ⁱ^m^al^s
^{are ren}^d^eredⁱⁿ^s^e^ns^{ible to pain}^by^{a s}ⁱ^ng^{le blo}^w^{or g}^uⁿ^s^h^o^{t or}^an^electrical^,^c^h^emⁱ^c^a^l^o^r^o^t^h^e^r
^m^eans^t^h^{at is}^{rapid an}^{d eff}^ecti^v^{e, bef}^o^{re bein}^g^s^h^ac^k^l^{ed, h}^oⁱ^s^{ted, th}^ro^wⁿ^{, cas}^{t, or cu}^{t; or}

¹³^{18 U}^.^S.C^.^§¹⁸^24a^.^T^h^is^s^e^c^tion^w^a^s^or^ig^ina^lly^eⁿ^a^c^t^e^d^a^s^pa^r^t^of^the^Ex^por^t^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion A}^m^e^ndm^eⁿ^ts^A^c^{t of}
¹⁹⁸^5,^P.L^.⁹⁹^-6^{4, a}ⁿ^{d w}^a^{s c}^odifⁱ^e^d^a^t⁴⁶^U.S^.^{C. A}^pp.^§⁴⁶^{6. I}ⁿ^a^d^d^ition^,^P.L^.¹⁰^7-1^71,^§¹⁰⁴¹^8(a⁾⁽²⁾⁽²⁰⁰²⁾^{, re}^pe^a^l^e^d
^{42 U}^.^S.C^.^§§³⁹⁰¹^-³⁹⁰^{2, w}^h^ic^h^h^a^{d a}^u^th^or^iz^e^d^t^h^e^Se^c^r^e^t^a^r^y^o^f^A^g^rⁱ^c^u^ltur^e^t^o^“^p^r^e^s^c^rⁱ^be^r^e^g^u^la^tions^g^o^v^e^rⁿ^ing
^acco^mm^o^d^a^tioⁿ^s^oⁿ^b^o^a^rd^v^e^ssels^f^o^{r cattle, h}^o^r^{ses, m}^u^{les, asses, s}^h^eep^{, g}^o^{ats, an}^d^swⁱⁿ^{e to}^b^e^carried^f^r^o^m^th^{e Un}^ited
^{States to}^{a f}^o^reigⁿ^co^uⁿ^try^.^T^h^{e re}^g^u^latioⁿ^s^s^h^{all p}^r^escrib^{e stan}^d^a^rd^{s f}^o^{r sp}^{ace, v}^eⁿ^tilatioⁿ^,^f^ittiⁿ^g^{s, fo}^o^d^an^d^w^a^ter
^s^upply^,^a^nd^ot^he^r^r^e^quir^e^m^e^nts^th^e^Se^c^r^e^t^a^r^y^of^A^g^rⁱ^c^u^ltur^e^c^ons^id^e^r^sⁿ^ecessar^y^f^o^{r t}^h^{e sa}^f^e^an^d^p^r^op^{er t}^r^an^spo^r^t^a^tⁱ^oⁿ
^a^{nd h}^u^m^a^ne^tr^e^a^t^m^e^{nt of}^thos^e^aⁿ^im^a^l^s^.^”

View Page Image

^(b)^by^s^l^a^u^g^h^teringⁱⁿ^accordance^wⁱ^t^h^th^{e rit}^u^{al requ}^ir^em^en^t^s^o^f^t^h^e^J^e^wⁱ^s^h^f^aⁱ^t^h^o^r^aⁿ^y^o^t^h^e^r
^relig^ious^f^a^ith^t^h^{at pres}^cribes^a^m^e^t^h^{od of}^s^l^a^u^gh^ter^w^h^ereby^t^h^{e a}ⁿⁱ^m^{al s}^u^f^f^e^r^s^los^s^o^f
^con^s^ciousⁿ^e^s^s^b^y^an^e^m^{ia of th}^{e brain}^cau^s^e^{d b}^y^th^{e s}ⁱ^m^u^ltan^e^o^u^s^aⁿ^{d in}^s^t^aⁿ^taⁿ^e^ous
^s^e^v^e^ran^{ce o}^f^t^h^{e carotid arteries}^wⁱ^t^h^{a s}^h^{arp i}ⁿ^s^t^r^u^m^eⁿ^t^a^{nd h}^aⁿ^d^liⁿ^gⁱⁿ^conn^ectioⁿ^wⁱ^t^h
^suc^h^sl^a^u^ght^e^rⁱⁿ^g.
The Humane Slaughter Act is enforced by the Secretary of Agriculture under provisions of the
Federal Meat Inspection Act, 21 U.S.C. §§ 603(b), 610(b), 620(a). The HSA does not apply to ¹⁴
chickens or other birds. In 2002, Public Law 107-171, § 10815, 7 U.S.C. § 1907, added a
section to the HSA directing the Secretary of Agriculture to submit a report to Congress on
practices involving nonambulatory livestock (commonly known as “downed animals”). It also
authorized the Secretary, based on the findings of the report, to promulgate regulations to provide ¹⁵
for the humane treatment of such animals.
This statute provides that the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of
Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) shall, among other things, “[r]eview and evaluate new or revised
or alternative test methods,” and “[f]acilitate appropriate interagency and international
harmonization of acute or chronic toxicological test protocols that encourage the reduction,
refinement, or replacement of animal test methods.”
The ICCVAM was established by the Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health
Sciences pursuant to section 463A(b) of the Public Health Services Act (NIEHS), 42 U.S.C.
§ 285l-1(b). The ICCVAM Authorization Act of 2000 requires the Director of the NIEHS to
designate the ICCVAM “as a permanent interagency coordinating committee of the Institute [the
NIEHS] under the National Toxicology Program Interagency Center for the Evaluation of
Alternative Toxicological Methods.” The new act also provides that the ICCVAM shall be
composed of the heads (or their designees) of 15 named federal agencies plus “[a]ny other agency
that develops, or employs tests or test data using animals, or regulates on the basis of the use of
animals in toxicity testing.”
This statute amended the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, the Dolphin Protection ¹⁶
Consumer Information Act, and the Tuna Conventions Act of 1950, all discussed in this report.

¹⁴^L^e^vⁱ^ne^v^.^C^onne^r^,⁵⁴⁰^F.^Su^pp.²^d¹¹¹³⁽^N^.D^{. C}^a^l^.²⁰⁰⁸⁾^.
¹⁵^T^h^e^s^t^udy^ha^s^not^be^eⁿ^c^o^m^p^le^te^{d, b}^u^{t U}^S^D^A^ha^s^publ^is^he^{d e}^s^tim^a^t^e^s^{on t}^h^e^num^be^{r of}^no^na^m^bula^t^ory^c^a^ttle^,
^horse^{s, she}^e^p^,^aⁿ^d^g^o^a^t^{s in}^the^Un^ite^{d Sta}^t^e^s^{. Re}^g^u^la^tio^ns^on^no^na^m^bula^t^ory^c^a^ttle^a^r^e^c^odifⁱ^e^d^a^t^{9 C.F.R. §}³^09.^3(e⁾^.
^For^a^d^diti^ona^l^inf^o^r^m^a^{tion, s}^e^e^C^R^S^R^e^por^t^R^S²²⁸¹⁹^,^N^o^nam^bul^at^or^y^Liv^e^s^toc^k^an^{d t}^h^e^H^u^m^a^ne^M^e^thods^of^Sla^u^g^h^te^r
^Ac^t^{, by}^G^e^off^r^e^y^{S. Be}^c^k^e^r^.
¹⁶^S^ee,^Kri^s^tⁱⁿ^L^.^S^t^ew^art^,^D^o^lp^hi^n-^Safe^T^uⁿ^a^:^T^h^e^Ti^de^is^C^h^an^gi^ng^,^{4 A}ⁿ^im^a^l^L^a^w^{111 (}¹⁹⁹⁸⁾^.

View Page Image

This statute makes it a crime to (1) willfully disturb or kill any bird, fish, or wild animal, or take
or destroy the eggs or nest of any bird or fish, on any lands or waters set apart or reserved under
federal law as sanctuaries, refuges, or breeding grounds for such birds, fish, or animals (18 U.S.C.
§ 41); (2) import species of wild animals, wild birds, fish (including mollusks and crustacea),
amphibians, reptiles, or the offspring or eggs or any of the foregoing which the Secretary of the
Interior prescribes by regulation to be injurious to human beings or to the interests of agriculture,
horticulture, forestry, or wildlife, except that the Secretary may permit importation for zoological,
education, medical, or scientific purposes (18 U.S.C. § 42); or (3) use an aircraft or a motor
vehicle to hunt, or to pollute a watering hole of, any wild unbranded horse, mare, colt, or burro ¹⁸
running at large on any public land or ranges (18 U.S.C. § 47).
This statute, as amended in 1988, makes it unlawful to engage in commerce in any fish or wildlife
or plant taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any treaty, or any federal or state law
or regulation, or any Indian tribal law. This statute was amended by the Captive Wildlife Safety
Act, P.L. 108-191 (2003), to cover “prohibited wildlife species,” which it defines as “any live
species of lion, tiger, leopard, cheetah, jaguar, or cougar or any hybrid of such species.” The
Captive Wildlife Safety Act, however, “does not apply to any licensed, registered, and federally
inspected exhibitor (zoos, circuses, etc.) or research facility. It also exempts sanctuaries, humane
societies, animal shelters, or societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals that meet specified ¹⁹
crit er ia.”
This statute, which was amended by the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and
Management Reauthorization Act of 2006, P.L. 109-479, provides that, except with respect to
highly migratory species of fish, “the United States claims, and will exercise in the manner
provided for in this act, sovereign rights and exclusive fishery management authority over all fish,
and all Continental Shelf fishery resources. ...” 16 U.S.C. § 1811(a). See also, “Shark Finning
Prohibition Act.”

¹⁷^{18 U}^.^S.C.^§⁴⁹^pr^ov^ide^s^pe^na^ltie^{s f}^o^{r v}ⁱ^ola^tions^of^the^aⁿ^im^a^l^fⁱ^g^h^ting^pr^ohi^biti^ons^of^the^Aⁿ^im^a^l^We^lf^a^r^e^A^c^t,
^dis^c^us^s^e^{d a}^bov^e^.
¹⁸^P^.^L^.¹⁰^1-⁶⁴⁷^,^§¹²⁰⁶⁽^a⁾⁽¹⁹⁹⁰⁾^{, r}^e^pe^a^l^e^d^a^s^e^c^{tion of}^the^L^a^c^e^y^A^c^{t tha}^t^pr^ote^c^t^e^d^c^a^r^rⁱ^e^r^pⁱ^g^e^ons^o^w^ne^{d by}^the
^Uⁿ^ite^{d S}^t^a^t^e^s^or^be^a^rⁱⁿ^g^a^ba^nd^o^w^ne^{d a}^{nd is}^s^u^e^d^by^the^Uⁿ^ite^d^St^a^t^e^s^{. 18 U}^.^S^.^C^.^{§ 4}⁵^.
¹⁹^S.R^e^pt.¹^08-¹⁷^2,¹⁰⁸^th^Cong^.,¹^st^s^e^s^s^.^{3 (}²⁰⁰³⁾^.

View Page Image

This statute imposes a moratorium on the taking (“take” means “harass, hunt, capture, or kill”)
and importation of all marine mammals or their products, except that the Secretary of Commerce
or Interior (depending on the type of animal) may grant permits to allow taking and importation
(1) for scientific research and public display, (2) incidentally, in the course of commercial fishing,
and (3) “in accord with sound principles of resource protection and conservation.” The act also
makes it unlawful, except pursuant to a permit for scientific research, to import a marine mammal
that is (1) pregnant, (2) nursing or less than eight months old, (3) taken from a species or
population stock designated by the Secretary as depleted, or (4) taken in a manner deemed
inhumane by the Secretary.
The act also establishes a Marine Mammal Commission whose duties include undertaking studies
and making recommendations as to the protection and conservation of marine mammals. 16
U.S.C. §§ 1401-1402.
An exception to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 authorizes the Secretary of Defense
to “authorize the taking of not more than 25 marine mammals [not a member of an endangered or
threatened species] each year for national defense purposes. Any such authorization may be made
only with the concurrence of the Secretary of Commerce after consultation with the Marine
Mammal Commission. ...” 10 U.S.C. § 7524.
In 1988, P.L. 100-711 added “a number of provisions to the act for the specific purpose of
reducing the morality [sic] of porpoise in the course of fishing for yellowfin tuna in the ETP ²⁰
[Eastern Tropical Pacific].”
In 1992, Congress added two new laws to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972. P.L. 102-
523 added the International Dolphin Conservation Act of 1992, “to prohibit certain tuna
harvesting practices.” P.L. 102-587, Title III, added the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding
Response Act, which directed the establishment of the Marine Mammal Health and Stranding
Response Program, the purpose of which is to collect data on marine mammal health and to
coordinate effective responses to unusual mortality events by establishing a process in the
Department of Commerce.
The Marine Mammal Protection Act Amendments of 1994, P.L. 103-238, was intended “to
improve the program to reduce the incidental taking of marine mammals during the course of ^rd^nd
commercial fishing operations, and for other purposes. ...” S.Rept. 103-220, 103 Cong., 2 sess.
(1994). The 1994 statute, among other things, amended 16 U.S.C. § 1374 to authorize the
Secretary of Commerce to issue permits “for the importation of polar bear parts (other than
internal organs) taken in sport hunts in Canada,” but required the Secretary to “undertake a
scientific review of the impact of [such] permits ... on the polar bear population stocks in Canada
within 2 years. ...” 108 Stat. 539 (1994).
The 1994 statute also amended 16 U.S.C. § 1374 to provide that the Secretary of Commerce may
issue permits “to take or import a marine mammal for the purpose of public display only to a

²⁰^H^.^R^e^pt.¹⁰^0-⁹^70,¹⁰⁰^th^Cong^.,²^nd^s^e^s^s^.^{29 (}¹⁹⁸⁸⁾^;^re^printe^dⁱⁿ¹⁹⁸⁸^U^.^S.^C^o^de^C^ong^{. &}^A^d^{. N}^e^w^s⁶¹⁷⁰^.

View Page Image

person which the Secretary determines ... is registered or holds a license issued under” the Animal
Welfare Act. The effect of this provision apparently is that the Department of Agriculture rather
than the National Marine Fisheries Service is authorized to regulate such marine mammals once ²¹
they are held in captivity. 108 Stat. 537 (1994).
In 1997, the International Dolphin Conservation Act, P.L. 105-42, amended various provisions of
the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972. In 2007, title IX of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Reauthorization Act of 2006, P.L. 109-479, added the United
States-Russia Polar Bear Conservation and Management Act of 2006 to the Marine Mammal
Protection Act of 1972.
This statute amended the act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1901-1915, to, among
other things, direct the Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Secretary of
Commerce, to study “improper disposal practices and associated specific plastic articles that
occur in the environment with sufficient frequency to cause death or injury to fish or wildlife.”
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to designate national marine sanctuaries.
This statute states that its purpose “is to assist in the conservation of marine turtles and the
nesting habitats of marine turtles in foreign countries by supporting and providing financial
resources for projects to converse the nesting habitats, conserve marine turtles in those habitats,
and address other threats to the survival of marine turtles.”
This statute authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to purchase or rent such areas as have been
approved for purchase or rental by the Migratory Bird Conservation Commission “which he
determines to be suitable for use as an inviolate sanctuary, or for any other management purpose,
for migratory birds.”

²¹^T^h^{is prov}^isio^{n w}^a^{s opp}^ose^d^by^aⁿ^im^a^l^rig^h^{ts a}^d^v^o^c^a^t^e^s^,^w^{ho to}^ok^the^p^o^sitio^{n t}^h^a^t^“^N^MFS^ha^{s y}^e^a^r^{s of}^e^x^pe^rieⁿ^c^e
^{in m}^onitorⁱ^ng^th^{is a}^c^t^{, a}^s^w^e^{ll a}^s^othe^{r m}^a^rine^m^a^m^m^a^{l issu}^es.^In^coⁿ^t^rast^,^t^h^{e US}^DA^h^a^{s l}^acked^b^o^t^h^t^h^{e c}^o^mmⁱ^t^m^eⁿ^t
^an^d^abⁱ^lⁱ^t^y^t^o^p^r^ot^ect^anⁱ^m^al^{s u}ⁿ^d^{er t}^h^{e f}^e^d^e^ral^Aⁿⁱ^m^al^W^e^l^f^ar^{e Ac}^t^.^{” A}ⁿⁱ^m^al^L^e^gal^De^fen^s^{e F}^uⁿ^d^,^Th^e^Aⁿⁱ^m^a^l^s^’
^A^d^vo^ca^t^e⁽^s^p^rⁱⁿ^{g 19}⁹⁴⁾^at²^.

View Page Image

This fund was created in 1998 to carry out the African Elephant Conservation Act, the Asian
Elephant Conservation Act, and the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act. Separate accounts in
the fund were established as the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Account, and the Great
Ape Conservation Fund.
This statute is designed to promote “the improved health and productivity of domestic livestock,
poultry, aquatic animals, and other income-producing animals that are essential to food supply of
the United States and the welfare of producers and consumers of animal products.” 7 U.S.C. §
3191, as amended by P.L. 104-127 (1996), § 810. It was amended in 1990 to require the Secretary
of Agriculture to commission the National Academy of Sciences “to conduct a study of the
delivery system utilized to provide farmers ... and ranchers with animal care and veterinary
medical services, including animal drugs.” The study shall assess opportunities to, among other ²²
things, “advance the well-being and treatment of farm animals.” 7 U.S.C. § 3193.
P.L. 104-127 (1996), § 812, amended 7 U.S.C. § 3196(c) to provide:
^Iⁿ^o^r^d^e^r^to^estab^lis^h^a^r^a^tioⁿ^a^{l allo}^catioⁿ^o^f^f^uⁿ^d^s^ap^p^r^o^p^rⁱ^ated^uⁿ^d^er^t^hⁱ^s^sec^tioⁿ^,^t^h^e
^S^ecret^ar^y^s^h^a^l^l^es^t^a^blⁱ^s^h^annu^a^l^pri^o^ri^t^y^lⁱ^s^t^s^of^anⁱ^m^al^h^eal^t^h^an^{d di}^s^eas^{e, f}^{ood s}^a^f^e^t^y^{, an}^d
^anⁱ^m^al^w^e^ll^-^b^eiⁿ^g^proble^m^s^ofⁿ^a^tion^a^{l or regi}^on^al^sⁱ^gnⁱ^f^ic^an^{ce. ... In}^es^tabli^s^hing^s^u^c^h
^p^r^io^r^{ities, th}^{e Secr}^etar^y^,^t^h^{e J}^oⁱⁿ^{t Co}^uⁿ^{cil, t}^h^{e A}^d^vⁱ^so^r^y^B^o^ar^d^,^an^d^th^{e B}^o^ar^d^sh^a^l^l^c^oⁿ^sⁱ^d^e^r
^th^e^f^o^llo^wⁱⁿ^g^f^actors^:^{... (3) is}^s^u^es^of^aⁿⁱ^m^al^w^e^ll^-^b^{eing relat}^e^{d to produ}^ction^m^e^t^h^ods^t^h^at
^wⁱ^l^lⁱ^m^prov^{e th}^e^h^ous^ing^an^d^m^aⁿ^a^g^e^m^eⁿ^t^of^anⁱ^m^al^s^{to i}^m^prov^{e th}^e^w^e^ll^-^b^eⁱⁿ^g^o^f^lⁱ^v^es^t^o^c^k
^produ^ction^s^p^ecies^.
This statute created the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation as a nonprofit corporation to,
among other things, “encourage, accept and administer private gifts of property for the benefit of,
or in connection with, the activities and services of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service.
...”
A 1983 amendment to this statute prohibits owners or managers of federally assisted rental
housing for the elderly or handicapped to (1) as a condition of tenancy or otherwise, prohibit, or
prevent tenants from keeping “common household pets,” or (2) restrict or discriminate against

²²^T^hⁱ^s^st^at^u^t^{e al}^so^requⁱ^r^ed^t^h^{e S}^e^c^r^et^ar^y^t^o^est^a^b^lⁱ^s^h^t^h^{e A}ⁿⁱ^m^al^H^e^al^t^h^S^cⁱ^eⁿ^{ce Research}^A^d^vi^so^r^y^Bo^ard^,^w^hⁱ^c^h
^expⁱ^red^S^e^p^t^em^b^e^{r 3}⁰^,¹⁹⁹⁵^.^It^w^a^{s d}ⁱ^rect^ed^t^o^a^d^vi^{se t}^h^{e S}^ecret^ar^{y w}ⁱ^t^h^resp^ect^t^o^t^h^{e i}^m^p^l^e^m^en^t^a^tⁱ^oⁿ^o^f^anⁱ^m^al^h^eal^t^h
^a^{nd d}ⁱ^s^e^a^s^e^r^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^pr^og^r^a^m^s^{, a}ⁿ^{d w}^a^s^r^e^quir^e^{d to}^ha^v^e^tw^e^l^ve^m^e^m^b^e^r^s^,^one^of^w^h^o^m^ha^{d to}^be^a^“^p^e^r^s^on
^r^e^pr^e^s^eⁿ^ting^aⁿ^o^r^g^a^niz^a^{tion c}^onc^e^r^ne^{d w}^{ith the}^g^e^ne^r^a^{l pr}^ote^c^tioⁿ^a^{nd w}^e^ll-^be^ing^of^aⁿ^im^a^l^s^.^”^{7 U}^.^S.C^.^§³¹⁹⁴^.

View Page Image

any person in connection with admission to, or continued occupancy of, such housing by reason
of the presence of such pets. The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development and the Secretary
of Agriculture are authorized to issue regulations establishing guidelines under which housing
owners or managers may prescribe reasonable rules for the keeping of pets, including restricting ²³
pet size and types of pets. Owners or managers may require the removal of pets “duly
determined” to constitute a nuisance or a threat to health or safety.
P.L. 105-276, § 526 (1998), added a new § 31 to the United States Housing Act of 1937, 42
U.S.C. § 1437z-3, which extended the right to keep common household pets to residents of all
public housing, not only to residents of public housing designated for the elderly or handicapped.
(The right to keep pets in federally assisted rental housing for the elderly or handicapped remains
under the National Housing Act.) The new provision took effect August 9, 2000. 24 C.F.R. Part

960.

This statute established the National Wildlife Refuge System, which is administered by the
Secretary of the Interior through the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. The purpose of the
System is to “consolidat[e] the authorities relating to the various categories of areas that are
administered by the Secretary of the Interior for the conservation of fish and wildlife. ...”
This statute “established in the Multinational Species Conservation Fund of the Treasury a
separate account to be known as the ‘Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Account.’” The
fund is to be used for a program, established by the Secretary of the Interior, “to provide financial
assistance for projects to promote the conservation of neotropical migratory birds.”
This statute is intended “to prevent unintentional introduction and dispersal of nonindigenous
species into waters of the United States through ballast water management and other
requirements.” The statute finds that nonindigenous species, such as the zebra mussel, if left
uncontrolled, would disrupt the economy and “the diversity and abundance of native fish.”

²³^R^e^g^u^la^tions^un^de^r^this^s^e^c^{tion a}^r^e^pub^lis^he^d^a^t²⁴^C^.^F^.^R^.^§§^5.³⁰⁰^-^5.3⁸⁰^.

View Page Image

This statute authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to enforce the Convention for the
Conservation of Anadromous Stocks in the North Pacific Ocean.
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Commerce to enforce the Convention between the United
States of America and Canada for the preservation of the Halibut Fishery of the Northern Pacific
Ocean and Bering Sea.
This statute implements the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention.
This statute implements a treaty between the United States and Canada, the purposes of which
were to “prevent overfishing and provide for optimum production” and to “provide for each Party
to receive benefits equivalent to the production of salmon originating in its waters.” The act
repealed the Sockeye Salmon or Pink Salmon Fishing Act of 1947, formerly 16 U.S.C. §§ 776-

776f.

This statute requires the Secretary of Commerce to
^es^tablis^h^t^h^{e U}ⁿ^ited^States^cat^ch^le^v^e^l^f^o^{r P}^acifⁱ^c^w^h^itiⁿ^g^a^ccordin^g^{to t}^h^e^s^t^aⁿ^dards^an^d
^procedu^r^es^of^th^{e A}^g^ree^m^ent^[betw^e^eⁿ^th^e^Gov^e^rⁿ^m^eⁿ^t^o^f^th^{e United States}^an^{d th}^e
^Gov^e^rnm^e^{nt of}^C^aⁿ^a^{da on}^P^acifⁱ^{c Ha}^k^e^/Whⁱ^tⁱ^ng^{] an}^{d this}^[s^t^a^tu^{te] ... rath}^{er th}^an^uⁿ^d^{er th}^e
^s^t^an^dards^an^{d procedu}^r^es^of^th^{e Mag}ⁿ^u^s^on-Stev^eⁿ^s^Fis^h^er^y^C^oⁿ^s^er^v^a^tion^aⁿ^{d Man}^a^g^e^m^e^nt
^A^c^t^{(16 U.S}^.^C^.^{1801 et s}^e^{q.), e}^x^{cept to t}^h^{e e}^x^teⁿ^tⁿ^ecess^a^r^y^t^o^addres^s^th^e^rebu^ildiⁿ^{g n}^eeds
^of^oth^e^{r s}^p^ecies^.
“The purposes of this title are to establish a partnership among the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service, designated State agencies, and private organizations and individuals—(1) to
carry out wildlife conservation and appreciation projects. ...” 16 U.S.C. § 3742.

View Page Image

This statute (P.L. 109-308) amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster and Emergency Assistance
Act to authorize federal disaster assistance in the “rescue, care, shelter, and essential needs” of
“household pets and service animals”; to authorize the Director of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) to develop “plans that take into account the needs of individuals
with pets and service animals prior to, during, and following a major disaster or emergency”; to
authorize the Director of FEMA to “make financial contributions ... to the States and local
authorities for animal emergency preparedness purposes, including the procurement, construction,
leasing, or renovating of emergency shelter facilities...; and to require the Director of FEMA,
“[i]n approving standards for State and local emergency preparedness operational plans..., [to]
ensure that such plans take into account the needs of individuals with household pets and service
animals prior to, during, and following a major disaster or emergency.”
Also known as the “Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Act,” this statute authorizes the Secretary
of the Interior to cooperate with the states, through their respective fish and game departments, in
wildlife restoration projects, which are defined as the “selection, restoration, rehabilitation, and
improvement of areas of land or water adaptable as feeding, resting, or breeding places for
wildlife.” This statute was amended by the Wildlife and Sport Fish Restoration Programs
Improvement Act of 2000, discussed below.
Section 404C of this statute, 42 U.S.C. § 283e, directs the Director of the National Institutes of
Health (NIH), by October 1, 1993, to prepare a plan for the NIH to conduct or support research
into methods of biomedical research and experimentation that do not require the use of animals,
that reduce the number of animals used, that produce less pain and distress in animals used, and
that involve the use of marine life other than marine mammals.
Section 495 of this statute, 42 U.S.C. § 289d, directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
acting through the Director of the NIH, to establish guidelines for research facilities as to the
proper care and treatment of animals, including the appropriate use of tranquilizers, analgesics,
and the like; but such guidelines may not prescribe methods of research. Entities that conduct
biomedical and behavioral research with NIH funds must establish animal care committees which
must conduct reviews at least semi-annually and report to the Director of NIH at least annually. If
the Director determines that an entity has not been following the guidelines, he must give it an ²⁴
opportunity to take corrective action, and, if it does not, suspend or revoke its grant or contract.

²⁴^Aⁿ^o^t^h^e^{r sect}ⁱ^o^{n o}^f^t^h^{e act}^,^en^act^edⁱⁿ¹⁹⁸⁵^and^rep^eal^edⁱⁿ¹⁹⁸⁸^,^a^u^t^h^o^rⁱ^zed^t^h^{e S}^ecret^ar^y^t^o^m^a^{ke g}^r^an^t^s^t^o^scho^ol^s
^o^f^vet^e^riⁿ^a^r^y^medⁱ^ciⁿ^e^f^o^{r “t}^h^e^d^e^vel^o^p^m^en^t^o^f^cu^rri^cu^l^a^f^o^{r t}^r^aiⁿⁱ^{ng i}ⁿ^t^h^{e care o}^f^anⁱ^m^al^{s u}^s^edⁱⁿ^re^search^,^t^h^e
^t^r^eat^m^eⁿ^t^o^f^anⁱ^m^al^s^w^hⁱ^l^e^b^eⁱⁿ^{g u}^s^edⁱⁿ^research^,^an^d^t^h^{e d}^e^vel^o^pmen^t^o^f^al^t^e^rn^atⁱ^v^{es t}^o^t^h^e^u^s^{e o}^f^anⁱ^m^al^{s i}ⁿ
^re^s^e^a^r^c^h^{. ...”}^P^.^L^.⁹⁹^-1^29,^§²¹^7(e⁾⁽¹⁹⁸⁵⁾^{, 4}²^U^.^S^.^C.^{§ 2}^95g^-8(f^{); r}^e^c^odifⁱ^e^d^by^P^.^L^.⁹⁹^-6^60,^§⁶⁰^1(a⁾⁽¹⁹⁸⁶⁾^{, a}^s⁴²
^U^.^S.C^.^{§ 2}^95g^-⁸⁽^g⁾^;^r^e^pe^a^l^e^d^by^P.L^.¹⁰^0-⁶^07,^§⁶¹³⁽^a⁾⁽¹⁹⁸⁸⁾^{. Y}^e^{t a}^nothe^r^s^e^c^tⁱ^on,^eⁿ^a^c^t^e^dⁱⁿ¹⁹⁸⁶^aⁿ^d^r^e^pe^a^l^e^dⁱⁿ
⁽^c^onti^nue^d.^..)

View Page Image

This statute makes it a violation, subject to a civil penalty of up to $10,000, “intentionally to
engage in any physical conduct that significantly hinders a lawful hunt ... on Federal lands.” The
conference report states that, to be a violation, “the conduct must be intentional, and must be done ²⁵
with the intention of significantly hindering a lawful hunt.” The statute also authorizes
injunctive relief against violations.
The conference report gives examples of violations of the statute, including “using visual, aural,
olfactory, or physical stimuli to affect wildlife behavior.” Ibid. This suggests the possibility that a
court could construe mere words addressed to a hunter as “physical conduct,” if such words
affected wildlife behavior (or a hunter’s concentration) so as significantly to hinder a hunt. This
apparently would not violate the First Amendment’s guarantee of freedom of speech, provided
that the statute’s civil penalty were imposed on the speaker for the effect of the sound of his
words and not for their content. The statute states that “[t]he term ‘conduct’ does not include
speech protected by the first article of amendment to the Constitution” (the statute does not
otherwise define “conduct” or “physical conduct”), but this of course would go without saying, as
Congress cannot punish speech that is protected by the First Amendment.
This statute created the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund “to provide financial assistance
for projects for the conservation of rhinoceros and tigers.”
This statute authorizes the establishment of a cooperative program involving the United States,
the States of Washington and Oregon, and Indian Tribes, to “encourage stability in and promote
the economic well being” of commercial fishing through “coordinated research, enhancement,
and management of salmon and steelhead resources and habitat.”

^(...c^on^tin^ue^d)
¹⁹⁹^2,^dir^e^c^t^e^d^t^h^e^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^tor^of^the^A^l^c^{ohol, D}^r^ug^A^bus^e^,^a^nd^Me^nta^l^H^e^a^{lth A}^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion t}^o^e^s^ta^blis^{h g}^u^ide^lⁱⁿ^e^s
^f^o^{r t}^h^{e f}^o^l^l^o^wⁱⁿ^g^:^“(1⁾^T^h^{e p}^r^op^er^{care o}^f^anⁱ^m^al^{s t}^o^b^e^u^s^edⁱⁿ^rese^arch^coⁿ^d^u^c^t^e^d^b^y^an^d^t^h^r^o^u^g^h^ag^en^ci^{es o}^f^t^h^e
^A^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^{tion, (}²⁾^T^h^e^pr^ope^r^tr^e^a^t^m^e^{nt of}^aⁿ^im^a^l^s^w^h^ile^be^ing^u^s^e^d^{in r}^e^s^e^a^r^c^h^...⁽³⁾^T^h^e^or^g^a^niz^a^{tion a}ⁿ^d^ope^r^a^tioⁿ
^o^f^anⁱ^m^al^c^a^{re co}^mmⁱ^t^t^ee[^s]^[^t^o^assu^{re co}^m^p^lⁱ^aⁿ^ce^wⁱ^t^h^t^h^{e gu}ⁱ^d^elⁱⁿ^es]^.^”⁴²^U^.^S^.^C.^§²⁹⁰^aa-1⁰⁽^{a) (}^P^.^L^.⁹⁹^-⁵⁷^0,^{§ 42}⁰
⁽¹⁹⁸⁶⁾^{; r}^e^pe^a^l^e^d^by^P^.^L^.¹⁰^2-³^21,^{§ 1}²⁰⁽^a⁾⁽¹⁹⁹²⁾⁾^.
²⁵^H^.^R^e^pt.¹⁰^3-⁷^11,¹⁰³^rd^Co^ng^{., 2}^nd^s^e^s^s^.⁽¹⁹⁹⁴⁾^{; r}^e^pr^inte^{d i}ⁿ¹⁹⁹⁴^U^.^{S. C}^o^de^C^o^ng^{. &}^A^d^{. N}^e^w^s^1874.

View Page Image

This statute amended the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act by
adding 16 U.S.C. § 1857(1)(P) to make it unlawful “to remove any of the fins of a shark
(including the tail) and discard the carcass of the shark at sea.” It also requires the Secretary of
Commerce, acting through the Secretary of State, to, among other things, “initiate discussions as
soon as possible for the purpose of developing bilateral or multilateral agreements with other
nations for the prohibition of shark-finning.”
This statute authorizes the Secretary of Defense
^t^o^carry^o^u^t^{a prog}^ra^m^of^pl^aⁿⁿⁱⁿ^g^f^o^{r, a}ⁿ^{d t}^h^{e de}^v^e^l^o^p^m^eⁿ^t^,^m^aⁱⁿ^t^eⁿ^aⁿ^{ce a}ⁿ^{d coordi}ⁿ^a^tⁱ^on
^o^f^,^w^ild^li^f^e^{, f}ⁱ^sh^{, a}ⁿ^d^g^a^m^e^coⁿ^s^er^v^a^tioⁿ^aⁿ^d^reh^a^b^ilitatⁱ^oⁿⁱⁿ^each^mⁱ^litar^y^reser^v^atioⁿⁱⁿ
^accordan^ce^wⁱ^t^h^{a cooperativ}^{e plan}^m^u^t^u^all^y^a^g^{reed u}^pon^b^y^th^{e S}^ecretar^y^of^Def^eⁿ^s^{e, t}^h^e
^Secretar^y^of^In^{terior, an}^{d th}^e^a^ppro^p^{riate State ag}^en^c^y^desⁱ^{gnated by}^t^h^{e State in}^w^h^ic^h^t^h^e
^res^e^rv^ationⁱ^s^located.
This statute implements the Treaty on Fisheries Between the Governments of Certain Pacific
Island States and the Government of the United States, signed April 2, 1987.
This section of the Tariff Act of 1930 (also known as the “Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act” and the
“Smoot-Hawley Act”) prohibits the importation into the United States of any wild mammal or
bird, alive or dead, or any part of product of any wild mammal or bird, if the laws or regulations
of the country where the wild mammal or bird lives restrict its “taking, killing, possession, or
exportation to the United States,” unless the wild mammal or bird is accompanied by a
certification of the U.S. consul that it “has not been acquired or exported in violation of the laws
of regulations of such country. ...”
Any mammal or bird, alive or dead, or any part of product thereof, imported into the U.S. in
violation of the above shall be subject to seizure and forfeiture under the customs laws. The Tariff
Act of 1930 does not apply in the case of (1) articles the importation of which is prohibited by
any other law, including 18 U.S.C. § 42(a) (the Lacey Act), (2) articles imported for scientific or
educational purposes, or are migratory, or (3) certain migratory game birds.
This statute prohibits fishing in violation of any regulation adopted by the Secretary of Commerce
pursuant to the Convention for the Establishment of an Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commis-
sion, and prohibits commerce in fish taken in violation of such regulations.

View Page Image

Prior versions of this law were enacted in 1873 (Ch. 252, 42d Cong., 17 Stat. 584, R.S. §§ 4386-^th

4389) and 1906 (Ch. 3594, 59 Cong., 34 Stat. 607). The 1906 law was repealed and reenacted in ²⁶

amended form (but “without substantive change”) in 1994 by P.L. 103-272. (It was previously
codified at 45 U.S.C. §§ 71-74.) It is also known as the “Cruelty to Animals Act,” the “Live Stock
Transportation Act,” and the “Food and Rest Law.” As amended in 1994, it provides that “a rail
carrier, express carrier, or common carrier (except by air or water), a receiver, trustee, or lessee of
one of those carriers, or an owner or master of a vessel transporting animals” across state lines,
“may not confine animals in a vehicle or vessel for more than 28 consecutive hours without
unloading the animals for feeding, water, and rest.”
It also provides that “[a]nimals being transported shall be unloaded in a humane way into pens
equipped for feeding, water, and rest for at least 5 consecutive hours.” The statute “does not apply
when animals are transported in a vehicle or vessel in which the animals have food, water, space,
and an opportunity for rest.”
The 28-hour period is subject to the following exceptions:
^Sh^eep^m^a^y^b^e^coⁿ^fⁱⁿ^ed^f^o^r^an^ad^d^itioⁿ^a^{l 8}^coⁿ^s^ecu^tiv^e^h^o^u^r^s^wⁱ^t^h^o^u^{t b}^eⁱⁿ^g^uⁿ^lo^ad^ed^w^h^eⁿ
^th^{e 28-}^h^o^u^r^{period of}^con^fⁱⁿ^e^m^{ent en}^ds^{at n}ⁱ^g^h^t^.^Anⁱ^m^als^ma^y^{be con}^fⁱⁿ^{ed f}^o^r—(^A⁾^m^o^re
^th^an^{28 h}^o^u^r^s^w^h^eⁿ^th^{e a}ⁿⁱ^m^a^l^s^canⁿ^o^{t be u}ⁿ^l^{oaded becau}^s^e^of^acciden^t^{al or u}ⁿ^a^v^o^idable
^cau^s^e^s^th^{at could n}^o^{t h}^a^v^e^been^an^tic^{ipated or av}^{oided w}^h^en^being^carefu^{l; an}^{d (B}^{) 36}
^con^s^ecutⁱ^v^e^h^o^u^r^s^w^h^en^t^h^{e o}^w^{ner or pers}^on^h^a^vⁱⁿ^g^c^u^st^ody^of^aⁿⁱ^m^al^s^beiⁿ^g^t^r^ans^port^e^d
^r^e^q^u^{ests, in}^w^r^itiⁿ^g^an^d^sep^a^r^a^{te f}^r^o^m^{a b}^{ill o}^f^ladⁱⁿ^g^o^r^o^t^h^e^r^r^a^{il f}^o^r^m^{, th}^{at t}^h^{e 2}⁸^-^h^o^u^r
^peri^od^{be ex}^t^eⁿ^d^{ed t}^o^{36 h}^o^u^r^s^.
The Twenty-Eight Hour Law is enforced by the Attorney General, who, “[o]n learning of a
violation ... shall bring a civil action” to collect a penalty of at least $100 but not more than $500
for each violation. The statute does not provide for criminal penalties. The statute does not
mention any federal agency or official besides the Attorney General, but its 1906 version
provided, “It shall be the duty of all U.S. Attorneys to prosecute all violations of this Act reported
by the Secretary of Agriculture,” and, as noted above, the 1994 amendment was intended to be
“without substantive change” to the 1906 version. In addition, in 1963, the USDA issued
regulations under the act that remain in effect. 9 C.F.R. §§ 89.1-89.5. Therefore, it appears that
the USDA continues to play a role in enforcing the act.
In 2006, noting “that the plain meaning of the statutory term ‘vehicle’ in the Twenty-Eight Hour
Law includes ‘trucks’ which operate as express carriers or common carriers,” the USDA decided ²⁷
for the first time to interpret the act to include the transportation of animals by trucks. In the
same document in which it announced this decision, the USDA noted: “The Twenty-Eight House
Law was never construed as being applicable to poultry, and ... USDA does not intend to change
this longstanding interpretation of the statute.”

²⁶^H^.^R^e^pt.¹⁰^3-¹^80,¹⁰³^rd^Co^ng^{., 2}^nd^s^e^s^s^.⁽¹⁹⁹⁴⁾^a^t^{1; r}^e^pr^inte^dⁱⁿ¹⁹^{94 U}^.^{S. C}^ode^C^o^ng^{. &}^A^d^{. N}^e^w^s⁸¹⁸^.
²⁷^L^e^tte^r^f^r^om^W^.^R^{on D}^e^H^a^v^e^{n, A}^d^mⁱ^nis^t^r^a^tor^,^t^o^P^e^te^r^A^.^B^r^a^ndt,^Es^{q., T}^h^e^H^u^m^a^ne^Socⁱ^e^t^y^of^the^Uⁿ^ite^{d S}^t^a^t^e^s
⁽^S^e^p^te^m^b^e^r^22,²⁰⁰⁶⁾^.

View Page Image

This statute, which is part of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, makes it unlawful “to
take any polar bear in violation of the Agreement [Between the Government of the United States
of America and the Government of the Russian Federation on the Conservation and Management
of the Alaska-Chukotka Polar Bear Population].” It also makes it unlawful “to import, export,
possess, transport, sell, receive, acquire, or purchase, exchange, [or] barter ... any polar bear, or
any part or product of a polar bear, that is taken in violation of” the agreement or other restriction
that is adopted by the commission established under the agreement. The Secretary of the Interior
is authorized to enforce the act.

This statute, enacted April 5, 2000, requires air carriers that provide scheduled passenger air
transportation to submit monthly reports to the Secretary of Transportation on any incidents
involving the loss, injury, or death of an animal. The statute requires the Secretary to publish this
data in a manner comparable to other consumer complaint and incident data.
This statute provides for the representation of the United States on the Commission for the
Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central
Pacific Ocean.
This statute directs the Secretary of Commerce to “undertake comprehensive studies of all whales
found in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.”
This statute prohibits whaling and commerce in whale products in violation of the International
Whaling Convention for the Regulation of Whaling or in violation of any regulation of the
International Whaling Commission or the Secretary of Commerce.

View Page Image

The purpose of this act is to promote the conservation of exotic birds by assisting wild bird
conservation and management programs in the countries of origin of wild birds, and limiting the
importation of exotic birds.
This statute makes it a crime, with respect to any wild free-roaming horse or burro, to (1) remove
it from the public lands without authority from the Secretary of the Interior or Agriculture
(depending on the public land), (2) convert it to private use, without authority from the Secretary,
(3) maliciously cause its death or harassment, (4) process its remains into commercial products,
or (5) sell it if it is maintained on private or leased land.
This statute amends the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act to authorize firearm and bow
hunter education and safety program grants, and to establish a multistate conservation grant
program. Grants under the latter may not be used “for an activity, project, or program that
promotes or encourages opposition to the regulated hunting or trapping of wildlife” (§ 113).
This statute also amends the Dingell-Johnson Sport Fish Restoration Act to establish a multistate
conservation grant program, grants under which may not be used “for an activity, project, or
program that promotes or encourages opposition to the regulated taking of fish” (§ 122).
This statute implements “the interim agreement for the conservation of salmon stocks originating
from the Yukon River in Canada. ...”
^H^e^nr^y^Co^heⁿ
^L^e^gⁱ^s^l^at^iv^{e A}^t^torn^e^y
^h^c^oh^eⁿ^@^c^r^s^.l^oc.g^ov^{, 7-}⁷⁸⁹²

View Page Image