Summary:
These Portsmouth, New Hampshire ordinances provide licensing, inspection, and penalty provisions for milk, slaughterhouses, butchers and restaurants.
These Portsmouth, New Hampshire ordinances provide licensing, inspection, and penalty provisions for milk, slaughterhouses, butchers and restaurants.
Summary:
The city of Blue Hill, Maine exempts local food processors or producers from licensure and inspection when selling food for home consumption and when that transaction occurs only between a producer or a processor and a patron; patrons may also enter into an agreement with a producer or a processor in order to waive liability for food consumption. Producers and processors are also exempt from licensure and inspection when their products are prepared for, or consumed or sold at a community social event. Additionally, this ordinance grants citizens the right to adopt measures to prevent violations of these provisions, as well as grants them standing to vindicate any rights secured by this ordinance that may have been violated. This ordinance also makes it unlawful for any law or regulation adopted by the state or the federal government to interfere with the rights recognized by this ordinance, as well as makes it unlawful for any corporation to interfere with said rights.
The city of Blue Hill, Maine exempts local food processors or producers from licensure and inspection when selling food for home consumption and when that transaction occurs only between a producer or a processor and a patron; patrons may also enter into an agreement with a producer or a processor in order to waive liability for food consumption. Producers and processors are also exempt from licensure and inspection when their products are prepared for, or consumed or sold at a community social event. Additionally, this ordinance grants citizens the right to adopt measures to prevent violations of these provisions, as well as grants them standing to vindicate any rights secured by this ordinance that may have been violated. This ordinance also makes it unlawful for any law or regulation adopted by the state or the federal government to interfere with the rights recognized by this ordinance, as well as makes it unlawful for any corporation to interfere with said rights.
Summary:
These ordinances prohibit a person from operating a slaughterhouse in Montgomery County, Maryland without first obtaining an annual license from the Department of Health and Human Services. The requirements to obtain a license are provided, as well as the provisions for denying or revoking the license. These ordinances also contain the health standards and regulations necessary to operate a slaughter house, as well as the penalties for violating this chapter.
These ordinances prohibit a person from operating a slaughterhouse in Montgomery County, Maryland without first obtaining an annual license from the Department of Health and Human Services. The requirements to obtain a license are provided, as well as the provisions for denying or revoking the license. These ordinances also contain the health standards and regulations necessary to operate a slaughter house, as well as the penalties for violating this chapter.
Summary:
The purpose of these Maui County, Hawaii ordinances is to promote the development of diversified agriculture by providing appropriately-sized agricultural lots at reasonable rent and long-term tenure in the Kula Agricultural Park. In order to carry out this purpose, the ordinances contain provisions on how a bona fide farmer, a new farmer, or a displaced farmer may obtain such a lot.
The purpose of these Maui County, Hawaii ordinances is to promote the development of diversified agriculture by providing appropriately-sized agricultural lots at reasonable rent and long-term tenure in the Kula Agricultural Park. In order to carry out this purpose, the ordinances contain provisions on how a bona fide farmer, a new farmer, or a displaced farmer may obtain such a lot.
Summary:
According to Oxford, Connecticut's Right to Farm ordinances, quoting Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-341, an agricultural or farming operation shall not be deemed a public or private nuisance due to odor emanating from livestock or manure, or due to water pollution caused by livestock. Under these ordinances, a landowner or agent who fails to disclose that a buyer or tenant is about to acquire or occupy property in a town where farming activities occur shall be fined $100. These ordinances also contain exceptions to the nuisance provision, as well as provide a resolution process for any person who seeks to complain about a farm’s operations.
According to Oxford, Connecticut's Right to Farm ordinances, quoting Conn. Gen. Stat. § 19a-341, an agricultural or farming operation shall not be deemed a public or private nuisance due to odor emanating from livestock or manure, or due to water pollution caused by livestock. Under these ordinances, a landowner or agent who fails to disclose that a buyer or tenant is about to acquire or occupy property in a town where farming activities occur shall be fined $100. These ordinances also contain exceptions to the nuisance provision, as well as provide a resolution process for any person who seeks to complain about a farm’s operations.
Summary:
Title 10 comprises the animal law ordinances for Los Angeles County, California. Chapter 10.08 contains definitions; Chapters 10.12 and 10.16 are the laws pertaining to the Department of Animal Care and Control and its volunteer program. Chapter 10.20 outlines licensing, vaccinations, spaying and neutering requirements for dogs and cats. Chapter 10.32 prohibits animals running at large, and 10.36 contains impoundment procedures. Chapter 10.37 deals with dangerous dogs. Chapter 10.52 contains the laws regarding stockyards and hog ranches. The importation of animals is covered in Chapter 10.56. Tuberculosis and quarantine laws are found in Chapters 10.60 and 10.64. Title 10 also covers sanitation (10.68), animal disease reports (10.72), apiaries (10.76), dogs in open vehicles (10.80), feeding of predators (10.84), interference with police dogs (10.86), and fees (10.90).
Title 10 comprises the animal law ordinances for Los Angeles County, California. Chapter 10.08 contains definitions; Chapters 10.12 and 10.16 are the laws pertaining to the Department of Animal Care and Control and its volunteer program. Chapter 10.20 outlines licensing, vaccinations, spaying and neutering requirements for dogs and cats. Chapter 10.32 prohibits animals running at large, and 10.36 contains impoundment procedures. Chapter 10.37 deals with dangerous dogs. Chapter 10.52 contains the laws regarding stockyards and hog ranches. The importation of animals is covered in Chapter 10.56. Tuberculosis and quarantine laws are found in Chapters 10.60 and 10.64. Title 10 also covers sanitation (10.68), animal disease reports (10.72), apiaries (10.76), dogs in open vehicles (10.80), feeding of predators (10.84), interference with police dogs (10.86), and fees (10.90).
Summary:
Court held that the forsed feeding of geese for making foie Gras was a violation of the laws of Israel.(In Hebrew)( English language .pdf - translated by CHAI)
Court held that the forsed feeding of geese for making foie Gras was a violation of the laws of Israel.(In Hebrew)( English language .pdf - translated by CHAI)
Summary:
State of Iowa sued the owner of a hog confinement operation for violations of manure disposal and animal control regulations.
State of Iowa sued the owner of a hog confinement operation for violations of manure disposal and animal control regulations.
Summary:
The court held that a statutory immunity provision designed to protect farming operations from nuisance litigation constituted a taking under the Fifth Amendment because the right to maintain an action for nuisance at common law was considered an easement.
The court held that a statutory immunity provision designed to protect farming operations from nuisance litigation constituted a taking under the Fifth Amendment because the right to maintain an action for nuisance at common law was considered an easement.
Summary:
The issue of county versus local control over livestock regulations came to a head when the Iowa Supreme Court invalidated a series of ordinances that had been enacted by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors to add additional regulations to the livestock industry and to address problems created by confined animal feeding operations in the county. The court ruled that the ordinances were inconsistent with state law and invalid under the doctrine of implied preemption.
The issue of county versus local control over livestock regulations came to a head when the Iowa Supreme Court invalidated a series of ordinances that had been enacted by the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors to add additional regulations to the livestock industry and to address problems created by confined animal feeding operations in the county. The court ruled that the ordinances were inconsistent with state law and invalid under the doctrine of implied preemption.
