What Does The Animal Welfare Act Do

Beast Welfare Deed of 1966

Long title	Animal Welfare Human action of 1966 intended to regulate the transport, auction and treatment of dogs, cats, guinea pigs, nonhuman primates, hamsters and rabbits intended to use for research or other purposes.
Acronyms (colloquial)	AWA
Enacted by	the 89th United States Congress
Effective	August 24, 1966
Citations
Public law	P.L. 89-544
Statutes at Large	80 Stat. 350
Codification
U.s.a.C. sections created	vii U.s.a.C. § 2131 et seq.
Legislative history
Signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on Baronial 24, 1966
Major amendments
P.L. 91-579, P.L. 94-279, P.L. 91-579, P.L. 99-198, P.L. 107-171

The Beast Welfare Human action (Laboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966, Pub.L. 89–544) was signed into law past President Lyndon B. Johnson on August 24, 1966.^[one] It is the primary federal law in the Us that regulates the treatment of animals in research and exhibition. Other laws, policies, and guidelines may include additional species coverage or specifications for animal intendance and employ, but all refer to the Brute Welfare Act (otherwise known as the "AWA") as the minimally acceptable standard for animal treatment and intendance. The USDA and APHIS oversee the AWA and the House and Senate Agriculture Committees take primary legislative jurisdiction over the Human activity. Animals covered nether this Human activity include any live or dead true cat, domestic dog, hamster, rabbit, nonhuman primate, guinea pig, and any other warm-blooded animal determined past the Secretary of Agriculture for research, pet employ or exhibition.^[ii] Excluded from the Act are birds, rats of the genus Rattus (laboratory rats), mice of the genus Mus (laboratory mice), subcontract animals, and all cold-blooded animals.^[3]

Equally enacted in 1966, the AWA required all animal dealers to exist registered and licensed likewise as liable to monitoring by Federal regulators and suspension of their license if they violate any provisions of the Brute Welfare Deed and imprisonment of upwardly to a year accompanied by a fine of $1,000.^{[4] : 276, col. 2} As of the 1985 AWA subpoena, all research facilities covered past the Animal Welfare Human action take been required to establish a specialized commission that includes at to the lowest degree i person trained equally a veterinarian and one not affiliated with the facility. Such committees regularly assess animate being intendance, handling, and practices during inquiry, and are required to inspect all animal study areas at least once every six months. The committees are also required to ensure that alternatives to animal apply in experimentation would be used whenever possible.

History [edit]

Worldwide, the first police to regulate creature experimentation was Cruelty to Animals Act 1876, passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It established a central governing trunk that reviewed and canonical all animal use in research. After that, numerous countries in Europe adopted regulations regarding research with animals.^{[five] [half-dozen]}

Although Congress discussed laboratory animal welfare in the early 1960s, there was not enough interest to laissez passer legislation until articles published past Sports Illustrated and Life in 1965 and 1966, respectively, generated a public outcry.^{[5] [7]}

The first commodity, written by Coles Phinizy, appeared in the Nov 29, 1965, consequence of Sports Illustrated. The slice detailed the story of Pepper the Dalmatian, a dog that disappeared from the yard of the Lakavage family unit home in Pennsylvania. It was subsequently discovered that Pepper had been stolen by "domestic dog-nappers," was bought by a Bronx hospital, and had died during an experimental surgical procedure.^[8] On July 9, 1965, Representative Joseph Y. Resnick introduced H.R. 9743 into the House of Representatives, a bill that would require dog and cat dealers, also as the laboratories that purchased the animals to be licensed and inspected by the USDA. A hearing was held on September 30, 1965, and similar legislation was sponsored in the Senate.^[5] The (Laboratory) Animal Welfare Human action of 1966 was signed into law on Baronial 24, 1966.^[9]

In 1966, Life Mag published an article documenting the housing weather at animal dealer facilities.^[10] The article, titled "Concentration Military camp for Dogs," featured pictures of skeletal dogs and described the neglectful weather condition that the investigative journalists and Maryland State Law found at a Maryland dog dealer's farm. As a result of these manufactures, the public lobbied Congress to pass a Federal law that would institute animal housing and care standards. ^[5]

There was increasing evidence that dogs and cats kept as pets were being stolen by dealers, taken across states lines, and resold to inquiry institutions for scientific experimentation.^[iv] Many sportsmen supported national legislation because it was their hunting dogs that often went missing.^[11]

The Equus caballus Protection Act (public Law 91-929) was passed in 1970 and protected horses against various damaging practices designed to produce aesthetically appealing horses, for example, "soring" the ankles to produce a high-stepping gait. Marine mammals as a class (whales, porpoises, seals, and polar bears), for the most part, constitute protection under the passage of the Marine Mammal Protection Act (Public Law 92-522) of 1972, which prevented extinction or depletion from indiscriminate taking, including hunting, harassment, capture, and killing (permitted takings, including for subsistence and research purposes, must be accomplished humanely, with "the least caste of hurting and suffering practicable to the animal"). Endangered and threatened species were too protected with the passage in 1973 of the Endangered Species Act (Public Police 93-205), which fabricated illegal the purchase, sale, or transportation in interstate or foreign commerce any species found to be endangered, and as well closely regulated commerce in any species threatened with extinction.^[4]

Amendments [edit]

The Human action was amended eight times (1970, 1976, 1985, 1990, 2002, 2007, 2008, and 2013) and is enforced by the USDA through the Fauna Care sectionalization of APHIS (Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service).

In 1970, the Act was amended (Pub.Fifty. 91–579) to include all warm-blooded animals used in testing, experimentation, exhibition, as pets or sold every bit pets.^[4] Certain cases could be exempted from such definitions unless they used live brute in substantial numbers. Fines were increased for those interfering with an investigation of an experimentation facility. Those found guilty of assaulting or killing Federal inspectors responsible for such tasks also faced additional sentencing. Bones treatment was expanded to include humane and reasonable treatment of the animals, and required shelter from weather and temperature extremes, proper ventilation, adequate housing, decent sanitation, and adequate veterinary care at all stages in the brute's life.^[12]

The Deed was further amended in 1976 (Pub.L. 94–279) to further regulate animal handling during transportation. Animals were to be kept in adequately sized traveling accommodations, and to exist kept from fighting amidst one some other. The definition of beast was broadened to rid the law of the possible estimation that dogs used for hunting, security, and convenance were not included in its protection.^[13]

The Human activity was amended in the Nutrient Security Act of 1985 (Pub.L. 99–198).^[xiv] Under this police, it was not permitted for a unmarried brute to be used in more than ane major operative experiment, from which information technology was as well allowed adequate fourth dimension to recover as guided by a veterinarian with proper training. This subpoena directed new minimum standards for the treatment, housing, sanitation, feeding and other care practices. The psychological well-being of the animals was at present taken into consideration every bit it never had been before. One provision that stood out at this time was the requirement for the practice of dogs and psychological well being of primates. The constabulary besides requires enquiry facilities to be able to depict painful practices equally well every bit implement practices that minimize pain and stress to the animals. Some other requirement made under this law was for each research facility to plant an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) to oversee research proposals and provide oversight of animal experimentation.^[two] The Food Security Act also established an information centre at the National Agricultural Library, the Animal Welfare Data Heart, to assist researchers in searching scientific literature for alternatives to animate being use.

In 1990, The Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Human activity of 1990 was amended past adding SEC. 2503, Protection of Pets (Pub.L. 101–624).^[15] This department established a belongings period for cats and dogs of not less than v days at a belongings facility of the dealer, and then that the fauna could exist adopted or recovered past their original owner before it is sold. The provision applies to operated pounds, research facilities, or private organizations. It also requires that a written certification with the brute's groundwork be provided to the recipient. Details should include a description of the creature, history of the animal's transfers, records, and modifications, and signatures from the dealer and recipient. Repeat violations of this section are subject to a $5000 fine per cat or canis familiaris acquired or sold. 3 or more than violations could outcome in the dealer'southward license being permanently revoked.^[xvi] Prior to the Animal Welfare Act, animate being welfare police force was largely reactive and action could just be taken once an animal had suffered unnecessarily.

In 2002, Title X, Subtitle D, of the Subcontract Security and Rural Investment Act amended the Animal Welfare Act of 1966 by irresolute the definition of animal (Pub.L. 107–171). Section 2 of the Beast Welfare Act (7 U.s.a.C. 2132) was amended by changing exclusions specifically to birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus to apply in research. Additionally, this law expanded the regulation of animate being fighting, making it a misdemeanor to ship, exhibit, or sponsor birds for fighting purposes. Penalties under this section could issue in a fine of $15000.^[iii]

In 2007, The Animal Fighting Prohibition Reinforcement Act amended section 26 of the Beast Welfare Deed (Pub.L. 110–22). Its purpose was to strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting, and under the provisions of the AWA information technology made animal fighting a felony with punishment of up to 3 years in prison under Title 18 of the U.S Code( Crimes and Criminal Procedure). The act also made it a felony to trade, take knives, gaffs or other objects that aided in apply of animal fighting. As well, these provisions were designed to shut the loopholes from the 2002 amendments.^[2]

In 2008, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Human action of 2008, added several new amendments to the Animal Welfare Deed (Pub.L. 110–246). It added more than prohibitions to training, possessing and advertising animals or precipitous objects for utilize in fauna fighting. The penalties for these crimes were raised to 3–v years imprisonment. The 2008 amendments also prohibited imports for resale of dogs unless they were at least six months of age, have all necessary vaccinations and are in skillful wellness. Furthermore, fines for violations of the Animal Welfare Act increased from $2500 to $x,000 per violation, per animal and per twenty-four hours.^[17]

In 2013, "An Act to Amend the Animal Welfare Deed to Change the Definition of 'Exhibitor'," added an owner of a common, domesticated household pet who derives less than a substantial portion of income from a nonprimary source (every bit determined past the Secretary) for exhibiting an beast that exclusively resides at the residence of the pet owner, after stores, in section 2(h).^[eighteen]

Legislative and regulatory documents tracing the history of the Fauna Welfare Act can be found on the Creature Welfare Act History Digital Collection.^[19]

Licensing and registration [edit]

The U.S Department of Agronomics (USDA) requires businesses that either buy or sell warmblooded animals, exhibit them to the public, ship them commercially, or apply them in educational activity or experiments, must be licensed or registered. Failure to become licensed or registered is a punishable violation of the Animal Welfare Act. Depending on the ground of the business, the Beast and Establish Health Inspection services (APHIS) determines whether the business organization should exist licensed, registered, or both. Business owners are responsible for knowing almost registration and licensing requirements.^[20]

Businesses and activities covered [edit]

Federal animal care standards mainly cover humane treatment, housing, infinite, feeding, sanitation, shelter from extremes of weather, adequate veterinary care, transportation, and handling in transit. The same standards of animal care apply to all registered and licensed businesses. To make certain the regulation and standards are followed, APHIS field inspectors make periodic unannounced visits to all locations where animals are held.

If whatsoever facility does not meet federal standards when they apply for a license or registration, they can receive upwardly to three inspections within a menstruum 90 days to correct whatever bug. The licenses are not issued until all bug are corrected. The facilities have to await for a minimum of 6 months before reapplying for a license if they practise not laissez passer inspection within the 90-day flow. Legal activeness results if the facility operates a regulated business without a license.^[twenty]

Nether the Fauna Welfare Human action, exhibitors and fauna dealers must obtain a license, for which an annual fee is charged. APHIS does non effect a license until it inspects the facility and finds it to be in compliance with its regulations. Research facilities and fauna transporters do non need a license, but must be registered with APHIS.^[ii]

Animate being dealers [edit]

Dealers that brood animals for sale to pet stores must be in compliance with AWA regulations.

Animal dealers are people who sell animals bred at their facility. Examples of dealers include pet and laboratory animate being breeders and brokers, auction operators, and everyone who sells exotic or wild animals, or dead animals or their parts. They must be licensed nether course "A" or "B". Class A licenses are given to breeders who bargain only in animals they brood and raise. Class B licenses are given to people who buy and sell animals they did non raise. Exempt from the law and regulations are retail pet stores, those who sell pets directly to pet owners, hobby breeders, beast shelters, and boarding kennels. The annual license fee for licensed animal dealers (Course A or B) ranges from $30 to $750, depending on the almanac dollar volume of business in regulated animals. An annual application fee of $ten must be paid with all yearly license renewal applications.^[2]

Exhibitors [edit]

An exhibitor is a business or a person that displays animals to the public. Exhibitors must be licensed by APHIS nether Class C licenses. Exhibitors include zoos, educational displays or exhibits, marine mammal shows, circuses, carnivals, and animal acts. The law and regulations exempt agricultural shows and fairs, horse shows, pet shows, game preserves, hunting events, and private collectors who do not exhibit. The annual license fee for Class C licensed animal exhibitors ranges from $thirty to $300, depending on the number of regulated animals held. In addition to the annual license fee, an application fee of $x must exist paid with all yearly license renewal applications.^[ii]

Transporters [edit]

A person with a commercial concern that moves animals from one location to another is considered a transporter under the AWA. Animal transporters must exist registered, including general carriers such as trucking companies, airlines, and railroads. Businesses that contract to ship animals for compensation are considered dealers and must have licenses.^[21]

Research facilities [edit]

Humane care and treatment of research animals are of import aspects of the AWA.

Enquiry facilities are those that use animals for teaching, experimentation, surgery, or testing purposes. Research facilities must be registered, and include land and local authorities-run research laboratories, universities, and colleges, diagnostic laboratories, and pharmaceutical firms. Federal facilities, elementary and secondary schools, and agricultural research institutions are among those exempt from registration.

Exclusions [edit]

There is much fence every bit to the bodily definition of an animate being, but for the purpose of AWA, birds, rats, mice, horses, and other farm animals were excluded from its protection equally initially legislated in 1966.^[four] The most usually used animals in laboratories are rats and mice, and therefore they were not regulated in the original law. Purpose-bred rats of the genus Rattus and mice of the genus Mus are non covered by the Animate being Welfare Human activity, but are regulated under PHS policy which applies only to research receiving federal funding from certain federal agencies, including the NIH. These are not federal laws but conditions of funding.

Certain conditions are also excluded from coverage by AWA. Animals that are killed prior to usage, such as frogs used in a biology class, are also not included, so long equally they are killed humanely.

Facilities that do not receive Federal funding, such as conduct armories, were also not covered by the Deed.

In Jan 2015 Michael Moss of The New York Times published an exposé on the alleged mistreatment of research animals at the U.South. Meat Beast Inquiry Center. Amidst other things, Moss's article asserted that the center had no veterinarians on its staff, with surgical procedures washed by workers without veterinarian degrees or licenses; and that the Act contains an exemption for farm animals used in agricultural research, which exemption covers the USMARC's activities.^[22]

Enforcement [edit]

Investigations and inspections [edit]

APHIS's Animal Intendance (AC) program oversees the AWA, which includes virtually 10,300 facilities. These AC officials make unannounced facility inspections to ensure they are in compliance with regulations, and to identify unregistered facilities. They make such inspections or investigations of any dealer, exhibitor, research facility, handler, carrier, or operator of an sale auction, to determine if they take violated provisions under this affiliate. Under the Animal Welfare Act, these facilities are to be inspected at to the lowest degree once a year, with follow-upward inspections conducted until deficiencies are corrected. If deficiencies are found, failure to correct them could result in fines, terminate and desist orders, suspensions, confiscation of animals and loss of licensing. There are also penalties for interfering with inspections.^[23]

Violations [edit]

If the Secretarial assistant of Agriculture has any reason to suspect that any licensed dealer, carrier, or operator violates whatever provision of the AWA, and so their license may exist suspended temporarily, but non to exceed 21 days, until a hearing is held. After the hearing, the license may be revoked if the violation is determined to have occurred.^[23]

Any dealer, carrier, exhibitor, handler, operator, or research facility that violates whatsoever provision of the AWA may be assessed a punishment of no more than $10,000 for each violation. Whatever person who knowingly fails to obey an order made by the Secretary of Agriculture is subject to a ceremonious punishment of $one,500 for each criminal offence.^[23]

Any dealer, exhibitor, carrier, handler, auction operator, or inquiry facility may seek a review of an order within 60 days at the United States Court of Appeals.^[23]

Incidents [edit]

The 2006 HBO moving picture "Dealing Dogs" documents an surreptitious operation targeting a "Class B" kennel which treated dogs inhumanely, violating the Act. The owners of the kennel were fined over $200,000 as the result of a USDA adapt.^[24]

In 2011, the Dollarhite family unit of Nixa, Missouri, were fined $90,643 for selling several k dollars worth of rabbits without a license, which is required of people selling more than $500 worth of rabbits sold as pets. The USDA has increased enforcement of the law in contempo years, targeting magicians who perform magic tricks with rabbits.^[25]

In 2013, the USDA found that China Southern Airlines had improperly transported over a thou monkeys without federal permission in insecure crates. The airline was forced to pay $26,038 worth of fines after over a dozen of them died. ^[26]

Court cases [edit]

International Primate Protection League v. Institute for Behavioral Enquiry [edit]

In 1981, a graduate pupil and PETA member, Alex Pacheco, volunteered at a enquiry center in Silver Bound, Maryland. At the fourth dimension, Edward Taub was conducting inquiry on monkeys for neuroplasticity purposes at that center. While Alex spent time at the enquiry eye, he noticed the inhumane treatment of the monkeys under the AWA and reported it to the constabulary. He filed adapt against Edward Taub, who was researching afferent ganglia. Edward Taub was convicted of vi creature cruelty charges, which were appealed in the second trial.^{[27] [28]} They proved to exist meaning in the understanding of the constabulary. While this case provided an advancement in neurology research, it was doing and so only by risking inhumane treatment of animals.^[29] As the court wrote in its stance:

To imply a cause of action in these plaintiffs might entail serious consequences. It might open the use of animals in biomedical enquiry to the hazards and vicissitudes of court litigation. Information technology may describe judges into the supervision and regulation of laboratory inquiry. Information technology might unleash a spate of private lawsuits that would impede advances fabricated by medical [sic] science in the alleviation of man suffering. To risk consequences of this magnitude in the absence of clear management from the Congress would be ill-advised. In fact, we are persuaded that Congress intended that the independence of medical [sic] enquiry be respected and that administrative enforcement govern the Fauna Welfare Act.^[27]

Animal Legal Defense Fund 5. Glickman [edit]

In 1998, a court case was argued on behalf of the Animal Legal Defence force Fund v. Daniel Glickman (then the Secretary of Agriculture), for the inhumane treatment of a primate named Barney at a Long Island game farm park and zoo. A man named Marc Jurnove had visited this park on a regular footing and noticed this primate had been neglected. He filed suit against the USDA for failing to meet the minimum standards nether the AWA and his allegations were supported by investigations. The U.S. Courtroom of Appeals, D.C. Circuit Courtroom ruled that he had standing to sue.^[30] The claim of the example were adamant by a afterward case: Animal Legal Defence Fund v. Glickman, 204 F.3d 229 (2001), in which the Court rejected Jurnove'due south statement and upheld the validity of the USDA regulations.

907 Whitehead Street, Inc. 5. U.S. Secretary of Agriculture [edit]

In 2012, in the case of 907 Whitehead Street, Inc. vs U.S. Secretarial assistant of Agronomics (USDA), the plaintiff challenged the jurisdiction of the USDA and its Fauna and Plant Health Inspection Service to regulate the Ernest Hemingway Abode and Museum every bit an animal exhibitor.^[31] The museum is home to dozens of polydactyl cats, the progeny of a cat that Ernest Hemingway was given equally a pet when he lived there during the 1930s. Following a complaint by a museum visitor, the USDA visited the museum and in Oct 2003, determined that the Museum was an beast exhibitor subject to regulation under the AWA considering the Museum exhibited the cats for the cost of an access fee, and the cats were used in promotional advertising. Under USDA regulations, the museum is required to obtain a USDA exhibitor's license, give each cat a tag for identification purposes, provide additional resting surfaces within their existing enclosures, and innovate i of several specified improvements required to ensure the cats remain contained to the museum's grounds. The museum challenged on several grounds the USDA'south authority in the case, noting that the Hemingway cats do not have an effect on interstate commerce sufficient to merit federal regulation. As of Dec 2012, the case had reached the U.s. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which upheld before district court rulings.^[31]

Public relations [edit]

The USDA enforces the AWA and conducts regular inspections. Animal care will perform inspections in response to public concerns for the conditions of regulated facilities. They encourage individuals to report unregulated facilities that may require licenses or registration. Many state and local governments take animal welfare laws of their own.^[32]

Creature care seeks to educate the public and create a cooperative relationship with licensed and registered entities, the animal protection community, and other Federal and State agencies. To accomplish this goal, Brute care conducts workshops regarding minimum care standards as outlined in the AWA.^[32]

Proposed amendments [edit]

Many creature welfare groups and animate being activists support strengthening and further enforcement of the deed. The deed is often criticized for its exclusions of rats and mice, which are the most widely used laboratory animals.^[33] Although the human action was amended to include all warmblooded animals in 1970, birds, mice, and rats were subsequently excluded in 2002.^[3] Some, withal, experience that boosted animals that are not warmblooded, should be included in the human action'due south protection. Some members of Congress have supported boosted funding for enforcing the human activity.^[34]

There have been numerous sanctions taken against individuals and agencies that take been found in violation. A database of violations, reports, and sanctions on behalf of the United States Section of Agriculture (USDA) can exist found on the Animal and Plant Wellness Inspection Service website.^[35]

Come across also [edit]

• Animal Welfare Act 2006
• Brute Welfare Institute
• The Humane Guild of the Usa

References [edit]

1. ^ Pritt, Stacy (xx May 2015). "Spotlight on Beast Welfare". ALN Mag. Archived from the original on 24 May 2015. Retrieved 21 May 2015 – via alnmag.com.
2. ^ ^{a b c d eastward f} Tadlock Cowan (nine September 2010). "The Brute Welfare Act: Background and Selected Legislation" (PDF). Congressional Research Service. Retrieved one June 2012.
3. ^ ^{a b c} 107th Congress, H.R. 2646 (23 January 2002). "Public Constabulary 107-171--Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002". United States Department of Agriculture - National Agronomical Library. U.s. Department of Agronomics. Archived from the original on 7 July 2012. Retrieved 1 July 2012.
4. ^ ^{a b c d e} U.S. Congress, Office of Applied science Assessment (February 1986). Alternatives to Beast Use in Research, Testing, and Education (PDF). U.Due south. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. NTIS social club #PB86-183134. Retrieved 1 June 2012 – via princeton.edu.
5. ^ ^{a b c d} Animate being Welfare Information Center. "Legislative History of the Brute Welfare Human activity - Introduction: Animal Welfare Information Center". Nal.usda.gov. Archived from the original on 2013-03-02. Retrieved 2012-06-08 .
6. ^ Brown, Congressman Yard.Due east. (1997). 30 Years of the Fauna Welfare Human action. Animal Welfare Data Center Message 8: 1-2, 23.
7. ^ Stevens, C. (1990). Laboratory Brute Welfare. In: Animals and Their Legal Rights, Animal Welfare Institute: Washington, D.C., p. 66-111.
8. ^ Daniel Engber (1 June 2009). "Where's Pepper?". Slate. Washington Mail Visitor. Retrieved 1 July 2012.
9. ^ "An Act to Authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to Regulate the Transportation, Sale, and Handling of Dogs, Cats, and Certain Other Animals Intended to Exist Used for Purposes of Research and Experimentation, and for Other Purposes : 89-544". Fauna Welfare Act History Digital Collection. August 24, 1966. Retrieved Nov 18, 2020.
10. ^ Wyman, Stan (4 Feb 1966). "Pets for sale cheap—no questions asked: Concentration camps for dogs". Life Mag. 60 (5): 22. Retrieved 27 September 2015.
11. ^ B. Eastward. Rollin, Animal Welfare, Beast Rights, and Agriculture, American Society 68, no. 3456–3461 (1990)
12. ^ "An Act to Amend the Act of August 24, 1966 Relating to the Care of Certain Animals Used for Purposes of Enquiry, Experimentation, or Held for Auction equally Pets : Public Law 91-579". Brute Welfare Human activity History Digital Collection. December 24, 1970. Retrieved November eighteen, 2020.
13. ^ "An Deed to Amend the Act of August 24, 1966, every bit Amended, to Increase the Protection Afforded Animals in Transit and to Assure Humane Treatment of Certain Animals, and for Other Purposes : Public Law 94-279". Animal Welfare Act History Digital Drove. April 22, 1976. Retrieved November eighteen, 2020.
14. ^ "Nutrient Security Act of 1985. Part 2 Public Laws". Fauna Welfare Human action History Digital Drove. December 20, 1985. Retrieved Nov xviii, 2020.
15. ^ "Nutrient, Agriculture, Conservation, and Merchandise Act of 1990: To Extend and Revise Agricultural Price Support and Related Programs, to Provide for Agronomical Export, Resource Conservation, Farm Credit, and Agricultural Research and Related Programs, to Ensure". Animal Welfare Act History Digital Collection. October 28, 1990. Retrieved Nov eighteen, 2020.
16. ^ 101ST CONGRESS (28 November 1990). "PUBLIC Constabulary 101-624--Nov. 28, 1990". Public Law 101-624, Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Human activity of 1990, Section 2503 - Protection of Pets. U.s.a. Department of Agriculture. Archived from the original on iii June 2013. Retrieved i July 2012.
17. ^ "Public Law 110-246 - Food, Conservation, and Free energy Act of 2008". awic.nal.usda.gov. 2008-06-18. Retrieved 2012-06-08 .
18. ^ An Act to Ameliorate the Animal Welfare Act to Modify the Definition of "Exhibitor."
19. ^ "Animal Welfare Human activity History Digital Drove". National Agricultural Library . Retrieved November 18, 2020.
20. ^ ^{a b} USDA - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) (August 2005). "Licensing and Registration Under the Animal Welfare Act Guidelines for Dealers, Exhibitors, Transporters, and Researchers" (PDF). U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) p. Archived from the original (PDF) on xvi June 2012. Retrieved ii June 2012.
21. ^ Staff (22 March 2010). "Abode > Animal Welfare". USDA. U.s.a. Section of Agronomics. Archived from the original on 14 June 2012. Retrieved 2 June 2012.
22. ^ Moss, Michael (Jan 19, 2015). "U.S. Research Lab Lets Livestock Suffer in Quest for Profit". The New York Times.
23. ^ ^{a b c d} Staff (2009). "CHAPTER 54—TRANSPORTATION, SALE, AND Treatment OF CERTAIN ANIMALS". U.s.a. Lawmaking, 2009 Edition. United States Congress. Retrieved 1 July 2012.
24. ^ New York Times
25. ^ "USDA fines Missouri family $90k for selling a few rabbits without a license". 24 May 2011. Archived from the original on 2011-05-28.
26. ^ Mainland china Southern Airlines charged with violations of the Animal Welfare Human activity of 1966. Retrieved from Prc Southern Airlines#Controversy
27. ^ ^{a b} "International Primate Protection League v. Establish for Behavioral Inquiry, 799 F.2d 934". Apa.org. Retrieved 2012-06-08 .
28. ^ "animal welfare act 1966 primate - Google Scholar". Retrieved 2012-06-08 .
29. ^ "Constraint-Induced Move Therapy". Strokeassociation.org. 2012-04-18. Retrieved 2012-06-08 .
30. ^ "beast welfare act of 1966 - Google Scholar". Retrieved 2012-06-08 .
31. ^ ^{a b} "Example: xi-14217: 907 Whitehead Street, Inc. vs U.Southward. Secretarial assistant of Agriculture and Dr. Chester A. Gipson" (PDF). U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit. 7 December 2012. Archived from the original on 2013-10-nineteen. Retrieved 2012-12-17 . {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)
32. ^ ^{a b} "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2012-05-14. Retrieved 2012-04-26 . {{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived re-create equally title (link)
33. ^ Krinke, George J. (June 15, 2000). "History, Strains and Models". The Laboratory Rat (Handbook of Experimental Animals). Gillian R. Bullock (series ed.), Tracie bunton (series ed.). Bookish Press. pp. three–16. ISBN 0-12-426400-Ten.
34. ^ Chris Smith (March three, 2012), "Animal Welfare Enforcement."
35. ^ "Creature Welfare". The Animal and Plant Wellness Inspection Service. United States Department of Agriculture. 29 Apr 2010. Archived from the original on 1 July 2012. Retrieved 1 July 2012.

Farther reading [edit]

• Irvine, Leslie. 2009. Filling the Ark: Brute Welfare in Disasters. Philadelphia: Temple Academy Press. ISBN 978-one-59213-834-0
• Alix Fano, Lethal Laws (White Lotus Co. Ltd, 1997).
• Bekoff, Marc, Encyclopedia of Fauna Rights and Fauna Welfare, vol. 1, 2nd ed. (ABC-CLIO, 2010).
• Jann Hau and G. L. Van Hoosier, Handbook of Laboratory Animal Science: Essential principles and practices.

External links [edit]

• Animate being Welfare Act and Animal Welfare Regulations from the U.s. Department of Agriculture
• Animal Welfare Human activity History Digital Drove from the National Agronomical Library (U.S.)
• Biosecurity New Zealand - guide to the New Zealand Animal Welfare Act
• Animal Welfare Information Heart, National Agricultural Library (USDA)
• grants.nih.gov

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_Welfare_Act_of_1966

Posted by: smiththared1978.blogspot.com

Share this post