Animal Law

Animal Law Tweets of the Week

Another week, another group of tweets! Read on for a roundup of links about the Dairy Pride Act, the Nonhuman Rights Project, dachshund racing (?!), and more…

The dairy industry claims this bill is designed to end “confusion” among consumers, but the idea that consumers would believe almond milk comes from a cow is absurd. The full name of the bill reveals its true motive: “Defending Against Imitations and Replacements of Yogurt, milk, and cheese to Promote Regular Intake of Dairy Everyday Act.” The bill would forbid makers of dairy alternatives from using “milk” or “cheese” in their name, even when that is what consumers expect for such products and when changing the name would only cause more confusion, not less.

 I actually hate this article. It’s actually making light of an abusive situation. I should write an article about this bill.

San Francisco has become the latest jurisdiction to outlaw the sale of commercially bred dogs and cats in retail stores. San Francisco’s new ordinance, passed unanimously by the city’s Board of Supervisors on February 14, 2017, prohibits retail stores from selling commercially bred dogs and cats, and instead encourages stores to partner with animal shelters and rescue groups to display adoptive animals. It also bans the sale of puppies and kittens under eight weeks old.

 On Thursday, [Steven] Wise — who founded the Nonhuman Rights Project on behalf of the great apes, cetaceans and elephants — will go before the appellate division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York in Manhattan and argue that two of his clients, chimpanzees Kiko and Tommy, should be afforded the rights of “personhood.”

“‘Personhood’ is not synonymous with ‘humans.’ It is not now and never has been,” Wise told NBC News. “A ‘person’ is the law’s way of saying that entity has the capacity for rights. A ‘thing,’ which chimpanzees are now, don’t have capacity for any kind of rights.”

 The federal Endangered Species Act has been called the world’s gold standard for environmental protection. Passed in 1973, it strengthened earlier federal protections for animals that had been nearly wiped out by humans, including bald eagles, humpback whales and California condors.

But the act has faced opposition from those who believe it unfairly protects animals that sometimes poach livestock and that it unfairly restricts land use.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s