Ohio escape renews call for exotic-animal crackdown - …

Public entities that are subject to the ADA as well as other Federal disability discrimination laws must be aware of the requirements of all applicable laws and must comply with these laws and their implementing regulations. Although in many cases similar provisions of different statutes are interpreted to impose similar requirements, there are circumstances in which similar provisions are applied differently because of the nature of the covered entity or activity or because of distinctions between the statutes. For example, emotional support animals that do not qualify as service animals under the Department's title II regulation may nevertheless qualify as permitted reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities under the FHAct and the ACAA. , , 666 F. Supp. 2d 850 (S.D. Ohio 2009). Public entities that operate housing facilities must ensure that they apply the reasonable accommodation requirements of the FHAct in determining whether to allow a particular animal needed by a person with a disability into housing and may not use the ADA definition as a justification for reducing their FHAct obligations. In addition, nothing in the ADA prevents a covered entity subject to one statute from modifying its policies and providing greater access in order to assist individuals with disabilities in achieving access to entities subject to other Federal statutes. For example, a public airport is a title II facility that houses air carriers subject to the ACAA. The public airport operator is required to comply with the title II requirements, but is not covered by the ACAA. Conversely, the air carrier is required to comply with the ACAA, but is not covered by title II of the ADA. If a particular animal is a service animal for purposes of the ACAA and is thus allowed on an airplane, but is not a service animal for purposes of the ADA, nothing in the ADA prohibits an airport from allowing a ticketed passenger with a disability who is traveling with a service animal that meets the ACAA's definition of a service animal to bring that animal into the facility even though under the ADA's definition of service animal the animal could be lawfully excluded.

25/10/2011 · Ohio is one of about eight states that does not regulate exotic animals

(3) When the court orders the defendant's rights in the exotic animal to be forfeited, the court may further order that those rights be given over to an appropriate person or agency demonstrating a willingness to accept and care for the animal or to the county or an appropriate animal care agency for further disposition in accordance with accepted practices for humane treatment of animals. This subsection shall not constitute or authorize any limitation upon the right of the person or agency to whom rights are granted to resell or otherwise make disposition of the animal. A transfer of rights under this subsection constitutes a transfer of ownership. {1985 c.437 '6}

Comments Off on Wild and Exotic Animal Legislation in Ohio and ..

Included in the packet are 1) a summary of the exotic animal permit process, 2) copies of the Oregon laws and administrative rules concerning exotics, and 3) an exotic animal permit application.

CODE §901: 1-2 - Dangerous Wild Animals

Thus importation, possession, propagation and sale, etc. of wild carnivores, whether exotic or native, is prohibited in Arizona without a State permit and applicable Federal authorizations to conduct such activities. The only species recognized by this Department (Arizona Game & Fish Commission )(AGFC) as being domestic in the canid and felid families are: Canis familiaris, the dog, and Felis catus, the house cat. AGFC does not consider a "tamed" individual of a wild species to be a "domestic" animal, and thus out of our jurisdiction. For example, a tamed or captive-bred mountain lion remains wildlife and under out jurisdiction.