Pet Care & Protection Laws @ Grassroots Animal Rights

If you have concerns that an animal is being abused, or think someone is killing animals without just cause, you may be that animals (or others) only hope.

What To Do First
First, find out which local organization is in charge of investigating and enforcing cruelty to animals laws in your state, county, or town. this may be the SPCA (Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals), Humane Society, or a funded animal shelter. When in doubt, you can contact local police.

If you think the animal is not in an immediate danger, check your local animal protection laws at a local library, city hall, or an online search. Most animal protection laws can be found on this site by state. Make a copy of the law you believe to be in question, and be ready to show your findings to the authorities. For the most part, causing an animal unnecessary suffering is illegal. This can mean anything from beating an animal to neglecting food, fresh water, or shelter, to killing an animal.

If you believe an animal or other animal are in a life threatening situation, contact local authorities immediately. Follow up with them in a timely matter check their findings. If they do not respond, contact PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) immediately.

Once you figure out which law enforcement agency to contact (and you know the animals) are not in immediate danger, provide them with a short, to the point, factual written statement, with the key information of what you observed with dates and approximate times, and location. Evidence gathering in a timely matter is crucial, as the more time that passes, the greater risk there is to specifics being forgotten, witness not being found, evidence disappears, and injuries will be healed up, etc.

If possible, pictures or video tapes with date and time. This will secure your case, and a written statement from witnesses will back up your surveillance.

Keep record of everyone you talk to. Authorities or otherwise. Dates and times you talked to them. And what the outcome of your conversation was. Never pass pictures, letters, statements, etc. without keeping a copy for yourself. Make it clear that you will stay involved, lend your assistance if necessary, and follow this case, and follow up. The more you stay involved, the more authorities will.

Authorities should get a visual inspection of the animals) in question, and if possible get a hand on exam (referred to as “palpating” the animal) in order to find injuries or unhealthy physical and/or living conditions. Authorities are often fooled by a dog who “enthused” by him being there. The animals “happy” behavior does not mean it is safe. The animal may be starved for attention, or anxious to please. The scene should be thoroughly inspected for any indication that abuse has occurred. Suspects and neighbors (potential witnesses) should be interviewed. If the investigator agrees that your complaint is real, a warning may be issued, charges filed, a warrant served, and/or the animals) removed.

Keep following up with the case, many animals have been saved from peoples persistence. If you feel the authorities are not doing a satisfactory job, go straight to their supervisors (such as the mayor, prosecutors, city officials, or county commissionaires. Even a call to TV or newspapers can make a HUGE difference. New coverage often gets authorities in the right gear, and/or get the person in question to stop what he’s doing. This can also motivate others with their past events of animal abuse.

 
When in doubt, call PETA for help. Advocating your own animal abuse case can be heart breaking and difficult, but they are counting on you to have the strength to come forward. PETA will give guidance and support, or if local officials do not act quickly to your claim.

PETA can be reached day or night @ (757) 622-7382 and dial 2.

Internet hunting (also called cyber hunting or computer-assisted remote hunting) allows a person with an Internet connection to fire a rifle from virtually anywhere, killing real prey in “real time.”

Supporters of the practice say it is a way to allow people with disabilities to enjoy the thrill of hunting. Critics say it is not hunting; it is killing and it violates the rules of “fair chase.” Internet hunting has been strongly criticized by the Humane Society of the United States (which calls it pay-per-view slaughter); pro-hunting groups, including the National Rifle Association; and animal rights advocates, among others.

At least 35 states, including all the New England states, but not Connecticut, have banned Internet hunting. Opponents are seeking a federal ban. Two bills currently before Congress (HR 2711 and S. 2422) would prevent the operation of websites allowing Internet hunting (http: //www. govtrack. us/congress/bill. xpd?bill=s110-2422). A 2007 bill (HB 6570) to ban the practice in Connecticut died on the House Calendar.

INTERNET HUNTING AND LEGISLATION

Internet hunting emerged as an issue in 2005 when a Texas businessman launched the website www. live-shot. com promoting the practice as “a real time on-line shooting experience.”

For a $ 14. 95 monthly fee and deposit towards the cost of the animal he or she wished to kill, a subscriber with a high speed Internet connection could log on to the website at a scheduled time and, using a remote controlled . 22 caliber rifle with a webcam mounted on it, shoot animals at a private game farm in Texas. Employees at the farm would lure the animal the subscriber ordered to a feeding station within range of the rifle. When the animal approached, the subscriber used the computer mouse to line up the cross hairs and clicked the mouse to discharge the rifle. Employees at the farm finished the job if the hunter missed. (It appears, after visiting www. live-shot. com, that the remote hunting service is no longer offered. )

Title 42 - The Public Health and Welfare
 Chapter 6A - Public Health Service
  Subchapter III - National Research Institutes
  
Part H - General Provisions
 Sec. 289d. Animals in Research
(A) The Secretary, acting through the Director of NIH, shall establish guidelines for the following:
 (1) The proper care of animals to be used in biomedical and behavioral research.
 
 (2) The proper treatment of animals while being used in such research. Guidelines under this paragraph shall require:
   (A) the appropriate use of tranquilizers, analgesics, anesthetics, paralytics, and euthanasia for animals in such research;
   (B) appropriate pre-surgical and post-surgical veterinary medical and nursing care for animals in such research.
   Such guidelines shall not be construed to prescribe methods of research.
   
 (3) The organization and operation of animal care committees in accordance with subsection (b) of this section.
 
 
(B) Animal care committees; establishment; membership; functions
 (1) Guidelines of the Secretary under subsection (a)(3) of this section shall require animal care committees at each entity which conducts biomedical and behavioral research with funds provided under this chapter (including the National Institutes of Health and the national research institutes) to assure compliance with the guidelines established under subsection (a) of this section.
 
 (2) Each animal care committee shall be appointed by the chief executive officer of the entity for which the committee is established, shall be composed of not fewer than three members, and shall include at least one individual who has no association with such entity and at least one doctor of veterinary medicine.
 
 (3) Each animal care committee of a research entity shall:
   (A) review the care and treatment of animals in all animal study areas and facilities of the research entity at least semi-annually to evaluate compliance with applicable guidelines established under subsection (a) of this section for appropriate animal care and treatment;
   
   (B) keep appropriate records of reviews conducted under subparagraph (A); and
   
   (C) for each review conducted under subparagraph (A), file with the Director of NIH at least annually (i) a certification that the review has been conducted, and (ii) reports of any violations of guidelines established under subsection (a) of this section or assurances required under paragraph (1) which were observed in such review and which have continued after notice by the committee to the research entity involved of the violations.
   
 Reports filed under subparagraph (C) shall include any minority views filed by members of the committee.
 
 
(C) Assurances required in application or contract proposal; reasons for use of animals; notice and comment requirements for promulgation of regulations The Director of NIH shall require each applicant for a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement involving research on animals which is administered by the National Institutes of Health or any national research institute to include in its application or contract proposal, submitted after the expiration of the twelve-month period beginning on November 20, 1985:
 (1) assurances satisfactory to the Director of NIH that:
   (A) the applicant meets the requirements of the guidelines established under paragraphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a) of this section and has an animal care committee which meets the requirements of subsection (b) of this section; and
   (B) scientists, animal technicians, and other personnel involved with animal care, treatment, and use by the applicant have available to them instruction or training in the humane practice of animal maintenance and experimentation, and the concept, availability, and use of research or testing methods that limit the use of animals or limit animal distress; and
   
 (2) a statement of the reasons for the use of animals in the research to be conducted with funds provided under such grant or contract.
 
Notwithstanding subsection (a)(2) of section 553 of title 5, regulations under this subsection shall be promulgated in accordance with the notice and comment requirements of such section.
(D) Failure to meet guidelines; suspension or revocation of grant or contract. If the Director of NIH determines that:
 (1) the conditions of animal care, treatment, or use in an entity which is receiving a grant, contract, or cooperative agreement involving research on animals under this subchapter do not meet applicable guidelines established under subsection (a) of this section;
 
 (2) the entity has been notified by the Director of NIH of such determination and has been given a reasonable opportunity to take corrective action; and
 
 (3) no action has been taken by the entity to correct such conditions;
 
the Director of NIH shall suspend or revoke such grant or contract under such conditions as the Director determines appropriate.
(E) Disclosure of trade secrets or privileged or confidential information. No guideline or regulation promulgated under subsection (a) or (c) of this section may require a research entity to disclose publicly trade secrets or commercial or financial information which is privileged or confidential.

Table 1 shows 35 states that have banned Internet hunting. (Samples of legislation are attached. )

Table I: States that Ban Internet Hunting

State Penalty