Offences in "Prevention of Harm" section of theAnimal Welfare Act 2006 (UK) include:
A. causing a protected animal to suffer unnecessarily knowing it would suffer – s4(1); unreasonably allowing an animal in that person's care to suffer from somebody else – s4(2); mutilating an animal (except where destroying an animal in an appropriate and humane manner) – s5
B. docking a dog's tail where prohibited – s6(1), s6(2), s6(3); shows a dog with an illegally docked tail at a dog show with fee-paying patrons – s6(9)
C. administers a poison to an animal (or permits to be administered) – s7(1), s7(2)
D. animal fighting – s8 — causes an animal to fight; receives money from admission to or publicizes an animal fight; provides information about an animal fight to another to enable or encourage attendance; — makes a bet as to the outcome of an animal fight; takes part in an animal fight; trains an animal to take part in a fight; keeps any animal fighting premises; attends an animal fight (without lawful excuse) — possesses a recording of an animal fight that took place in the UK (without lawful excuse) with intent to supply; shows another person a recording of an animal fight that took place in the UK (without lawful excuse)
Laws&PolicesonlaboratoryanimalwelfareintheUSinclude:
A. HealthResearchExtensionActof1985(PublicLaw99-158)
B. U.S.GovernmentPrinciples(1985);PHSPolicyonHumaneCareandUseofLaboratoryAnimals(2015revised)
C. GuidefortheCareandUseofLaboratoryAnimals (8th version)
D. AVMAGuidelinesfortheEuthanasiaofAnimals;InternationalGuidingPrinciples for Biomedical Research Involving Animals (2012)
The Universal Declaration on Animal Welfare is a proposed inter-governmental agreement to recognize that animals are sentient, to prevent cruelty and reduce suffering, and to promote standards on the welfare of animals such as farm animals, companion animals, animals in scientific research, draught animals, wildlife and animals in recreation. Itsdeclarations for animal welfare include:
A. Recognition that animals are living, sentient beings and therefore deserve due consideration and respect; recognition that animal welfare includes animal health and encompasses both the physical and psychological state of the animal and that good practices in animal welfare can have major benefits for humans and the environment
B. Recognition that humans inhabit this planet with other species and other forms of life and that all forms of life co-exist within an interdependent ecosystem; recognition of the importance of the ongoing work of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) in setting global standards for animal welfare and that Member States should adopt all necessary measures to give effect to the principles of UDAW, including the implementation of these standards
C. Acknowledgment that many states already have a system of legal protection for animals, both domestic and wild and that the continued effectiveness of these systems must be ensured, with the development of better and more comprehensive animal welfare provisions.
D. Awareness that the Five Freedoms (freedom from hunger, thirst and malnutrition; freedom from fear and distress; freedom from physical and thermal discomfort; freedom from pain, injury and disease; and freedom to express normal patterns of behavior) and the Three Rs (reduction in numbers of animals, refinement of experimental methods, & replacement of animals with non-animal techniques) provide valuable guidance for the use of animals; recognition that the provisions contained in this declaration do not affect the rights of any state
In the case of the Animal Legal Defense Fund vs Daniel Glickman in the US, what happened?
A. In 1998, a court case was argued on behalf of the Animal Legal Defense Fund vs Daniel Glickman (the Secretary of Agriculture), for the inhumane treatment of a primate named Barney at a Long Island Game Farm Park and Zoo.
B. A man name Marc Jurnove had visited this park on a regular basis & noticed this primate had been neglected.
C. He filed suit against the USDA for failing to meet the minimum standards under the AWA & his allegations were supported by investigations.
D. The U.Court of Appeals, D.Circuit Court ruled that he had standing to sue. The merits of the case were determined by a later case: Animal Legal Defense Fund v. Glickman, 204 F.3d 229 (2001), in which the Court rejected Jurnove's argument and upheld the validity of the USDA regulations.
Inthecaseofthe907 Whitehead Street, Inc. vs US the Secretary of AgricultureintheUS,whathappened?
A. In 2012, in the case of 907 Whitehead Street, Inc. vs U.Secretary of Agriculture (USDA), the plaintiff challenged the jurisdiction of the USDA and its Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service to regulate the Ernest Hemingway Home and Museum as an animal exhibitor.
B. The museum is home to dozens of polydactyl cats, the progeny of a cat that Ernest Hemingway was given as a pet when he lived there during the 1930s. Following a complaint by a museum visitor, the USDA visited the museum and in October 2003, determined that the Museum was an animal exhibitor subject to regulation under the AWA because the Museum exhibited the cats for the cost of an admission fee, and the cats were used in promotional advertising.
C. 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 introduce one of several specified improvements required to ensure the cats remain contained to the museum's grounds.
D. The museum challenged on several grounds the USDA's authority in the case, noting that the Hemingway cats do not have an effect on interstate commerce sufficient to merit federal regulation. As of December 2012, the case had reached the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which upheld earlier district court rulings.
微信支付 
支付宝支付