Animal welfare in the United States

{{Short description|Treatment of and laws concerning non-human animals in the US}} {{Use mdy dates|date=July 2017}} {{Infobox country animal welfare | the_country = United States | image = Baby chickens in a grower broiler house. (25112103855).jpg | caption = Baby chickens in a broiler house in Texas | legislation = Animal Welfare Act of 1966 | api_rating = D | api_rating_year = 2020<ref>{{cite web| url=https://api.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/api_2020_-_usa.pdf| title= Animal Protection Index (API) 2020 - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northen Ireland ranking B| publisher=World Animal Protection| date=March 2020}}</ref> | meat_production = 9.94 billion | meat_production_per_capita = 29.39 | meat_production_year = 2022<ref>{{cite web| author1=Hannah Ritchie| author1-link=Hannah Ritchie |author2=Pablo Rosado| author3=Max Roser| author3-link=Max Roser |date=2023| title=Animal Welfare| url=https://ourworldindata.org/animal-welfare| publisher=Our World In Data}}</ref> | vegetarian = 4% | vegan = 1% | diet_year = 2023<ref>{{cite web| author1=Jeffrey M. Jones| date=2023| title=In U.S., 4% Identify as Vegetarian, 1% as Vegan| url=https://news.gallup.com/poll/510038/identify-vegetarian-vegan.aspx| publisher=Gallup}}</ref> }} '''Animal welfare in the United States''' relates to the treatment of non-human animals in fields such as agriculture, hunting, medical testing and the domestic ownership of animals. It is distinct from animal conservation.

== History == {{For timeline|Timeline of animal welfare and rights in the United States}}

=== 1641–1900 ===

The first known animal welfare laws in North America were regulations against "Tirranny or Crueltie" toward domestic animals included in the 1641 Massachusetts Body of Liberties.<ref name="lane">{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qMjWLkg01IUC&q=%22act+Against+Plowing+by+the+Tayle+and+Pulling+the+Wooll+off+Living+Sheep%22&pg=PA33 |title=Ravished by Beauty: The Surprising Legacy of Reformed Spirituality |author=Belden C. Lane |date=April 21, 2011 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=9780199831685 |accessdate=April 19, 2016 |archive-date=August 24, 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200824202550/https://books.google.com/books?id=qMjWLkg01IUC&pg=PA33&lpg=PA33&dq=%22act+Against+Plowing+by+the+Tayle+and+Pulling+the+Wooll+off+Living+Sheep%22&source=bl&ots=wefA_ACWzS&sig=IAkVHLPUZY2kOon1XlJVP77QB7Q&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjHtpGGtf_KAhXCpR4KHZnyAO4Q6AEIPTAH#v=onepage&q=%22act%20Against%20Plowing%20by%20the%20Tayle%20and%20Pulling%20the%20Wooll%20off%20Living%20Sheep%22&f=false |url-status=live }}</ref>

Starting in the late 1820s, a number of states passed anti-cruelty statutes. Many of these exempted animals used in experiments, and only twice were they invoked on behalf of animals.<ref name="adams">{{cite web |url=https://awic.nal.usda.gov/legislative-history-animal-welfare-act/intro |author=Benjamin Adams |author2=Jean Larson |title=Legislative History of the Animal Welfare Act |accessdate=April 26, 2016 |archive-date=May 13, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160513224105/https://awic.nal.usda.gov/legislative-history-animal-welfare-act/intro |url-status=dead }}</ref> The first Humane Societies and Societies for the Protection of Animals (SPCAs) were formed starting in the late 1860s to run animal shelters and promote the enforcement of animal cruelty laws.<ref name="walls">{{cite web |url=http://www.sonoma.edu/users/w/wallsd/animal-rights-movement.shtml |author=David Walls |title=Animal Rights Movement |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 19, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160419165633/http://www.sonoma.edu/users/w/wallsd/animal-rights-movement.shtml |url-status=live }}</ref>

The American anti-vivisection movement began in response to the opening of the first animal laboratories in the 1860s and 70s. The American Anti-Vivisection Society was formed in Philadelphia in 1883. The anti-vivisection movement failed to achieve federal regulations on animal experimentation and declined as medical science advanced.<ref name="walls" /><ref name="antiviv">{{cite web |url=https://queensanimaldefence.org/2015/02/18/the-history-of-the-anti-vivisection-movement/ |title=The History of the Anti-Vivisection Movement |date=February 18, 2015 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=May 31, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160531174520/https://queensanimaldefence.org/2015/02/18/the-history-of-the-anti-vivisection-movement/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== 1900–present === [[File:Yarding poultry farm 01.jpg|thumb|A yarding poultry farm in Vernon County, Wisconsin.]] The beginning of intensive animal farming is traceable to 1923 in the Delmarva Peninsula, where Celia Steele raised her first flock of chickens for meat.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2011-10-14 |title=Sussex County, Delaware - Historic Events |url=http://www.sussexcountyde.gov/about/history/events.cfm?action=broiler |access-date=2023-05-09 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111014082746/http://www.sussexcountyde.gov/about/history/events.cfm?action=broiler |archive-date=October 14, 2011 }}</ref> Starting in the 1940s, intensive confinement and genetic selection of chickens for characteristics like growth rate, weight, and feed conversion efficiency allowed farmers to obtain chicken meat much more efficiently,<ref name="elfick">{{cite web |url=http://en.aviagen.com/assets/Sustainability/50-Years-of-Selection-Article-final.pdf |author=Dominick Elfick |title=A Brief History of Broiler Selection: How Chicken Became a Global Food Phenomenon in 50 Years |access-date=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=August 24, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150824013055/http://en.aviagen.com/assets/Sustainability/50-Years-of-Selection-Article-final.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> while leading to many welfare concerns including painful skeletal problems.<ref name="foer">{{cite book |author=Jonathan Safran Foer |title=Eating Animals |url=https://archive.org/details/isbn_9780316069908 |url-access=registration |date=2009 |publisher=Little, Brown and Company|isbn=9780316069908 }}</ref><ref name="legprobs">{{cite web |url=http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/863/leg-problems-in-broilers/ |title=Leg Problems in Broilers |date=September 14, 2007 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=June 5, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160605135414/http://www.thepoultrysite.com/articles/863/leg-problems-in-broilers/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Pigs and cows were raised in industrial farming operations starting in the 1960s.<ref>Danielle Nierenberg (2005)'' Happier Meals: Rethinking the Global Meat Industry''. Worldwatch Paper 121: 5</ref> Largely due to the efficiencies brought by industrial animal farming, American meat consumption (and therefore the number of animals in industrial farming facilities) rose dramatically beginning in the 1940s.<ref name="foer" /><ref name="larsen">{{cite web |url=http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2012/highlights25 |author=Janet Larsen |title=Peak Meat: U.S. Meat Consumption Falling |date=March 7, 2012 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 14, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160414025342/http://www.earth-policy.org/data_highlights/2012/highlights25 |url-status=live }}</ref>

Animal experimentation also increased significantly over the course of the twentieth century, largely driven by the development of new drugs.<ref name="hajar">{{cite journal |author=Rachel Hajar |title=Animal Testing and Medicine |date=2011 |pmc=3123518 |pmid=21731811 |doi=10.4103/1995-705X.81548 |volume=12 |issue=1 |journal=Heart Views |pages=42 |doi-access=free }}</ref>

Following the decline of the anti-vivisection movement in the early-twentieth century, animal welfare and rights movements did not re-emerge until the 1950s. In 1955, the Society for Animal Protective Legislation (SAPL) was founded to lobby for humane slaughter legislation, and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) was passed in 1958.<ref name="armovement">{{cite web |url=http://www.sonoma.edu/users/w/wallsd/pdf/Animal-Rights-Movement.pdf |title=Animal Rights Movement |accessdate=April 20, 2016 |archive-date=December 13, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161213044541/http://www.sonoma.edu/users/w/wallsd/pdf/Animal-Rights-Movement.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Following public outcry over abuses of dogs reported in the media, the Animal Welfare Act was passed in 1966.<ref name="adams"/>

The animal welfare and rights movements grew in the 1970s with the publication of philosopher Peter Singer's influential ''Animal Liberation'',<ref name="singerbio">{{cite web |url=http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/01/peter-singer/ |title=Peter Singer |date=January 29, 2007 |accessdate=April 21, 2016 |archive-date=April 24, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160424145414/http://advocacy.britannica.com/blog/advocacy/2007/01/peter-singer/ |url-status=live }}</ref> and Henry Spira's successful and highly publicized campaigns against animal testing.<ref name="ari">{{cite web |url=http://www.ari-online.org/ |title=Animal Rights International: A Historical Note and Tribute to Henry Spira |accessdate=April 21, 2016 |archive-date=February 24, 2008 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080224045229/http://www.ari-online.org/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="feder">{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1998/09/15/business/henry-spira-71-animal-rights-crusader.html |author=Barnaby Feder |title=Henry Spira, 71, Animal Rights Crusader |website=The New York Times |date=September 15, 1998 |accessdate=April 21, 2016 |archive-date=March 10, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160310091149/http://www.nytimes.com/1998/09/15/business/henry-spira-71-animal-rights-crusader.html |url-status=live }}</ref> The movements became more popular still with the founding of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) in 1980 and PETA's years-long legal battle over the Silver Spring monkeys, 17 research macaques found to be living in welfare-compromised conditions in an undercover investigation by PETA's Alex Pacheco.<ref name="carlson">{{cite news |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/magazine/1991/02/24/the-great-silver-spring-monkey-debate/25d3cc06-49ab-4a3c-afd9-d9eb35a862c3/ |author=Peter Carlson |title=The Great Silver Spring Monkey Debate |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=February 24, 1991 |accessdate=April 21, 2016 |archive-date=May 31, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160531072610/https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/magazine/1991/02/24/the-great-silver-spring-monkey-debate/25d3cc06-49ab-4a3c-afd9-d9eb35a862c3/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

== Laws ==

===Federal=== The 1958 HMSA was the first major federal law concerning animal welfare. The HMSA stipulates that animals be "rendered insensible to pain...before being shackled, hoisted, thrown, cast, or cut", and sets out which methods of slaughter are appropriate for which species.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Humane Methods of Slaughter Act {{!}} National Agricultural Library |url=https://www.nal.usda.gov/animal-health-and-welfare/humane-methods-slaughter-act#:~:text=The%20Humane%20Methods%20of%20Slaughter,and%20Inspection%20Service%20(FSIS). |access-date=2023-05-09 |website=www.nal.usda.gov}}</ref> The enforcement of the HMSA is questionable. The law lacks a general enforcement mechanism - its original enforcement mechanism, the prohibition of federal purchases of animal products whose slaughter violated the HMSA, was repealed in 1978.<ref name="hodges">{{cite web |url=https://www.animallaw.info/article/detailed-discussion-humane-methods-slaughter-act |author=Cynthia F. Hodges |title=Detailed Discussion of the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act |date=2010 |accessdate=April 26, 2016 |archive-date=March 24, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160324015324/https://www.animallaw.info/article/detailed-discussion-humane-methods-slaughter-act |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2010 the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report criticizing the United States Department of Agriculture's (USDA) enforcement of the HMSA.<ref name="pacelle">{{cite web |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wayne-pacelle/action-needed-to-better-e_b_488424.html |author=Wayne Pacelle |title=Action Needed to Better Enforce Humane Slaughter Act |website=HuffPost |date=May 5, 2010 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=August 9, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160809091744/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/wayne-pacelle/action-needed-to-better-e_b_488424.html |url-status=live }}</ref> Chickens, which account for over 95% of farm animals slaughtered in the U.S.,<ref name="killtotal">{{cite web |url=http://www.humanesociety.org/news/resources/research/stats_slaughter_totals.html |title=Farm Animal Statistics: Slaughter Totals |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 28, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160428172740/http://www.humanesociety.org/news/resources/research/stats_slaughter_totals.html |url-status=live }}</ref> are exempt from protection under the HMSA.<ref name="hodges" />

The basis of animal welfare legislation in the US is the Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (AWA).<ref name="Aglaw">{{cite web|title=The Animal Welfare Act: Background and Selected Legislation|url=http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/crs/RS22493.pdf|publisher=Congressional Research Service|accessdate=June 1, 2012|author=Tadlock Cowan|date=September 9, 2010|archive-date=September 27, 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130927184240/http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/assets/crs/RS22493.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref> The original AWA was aimed at regulating the sale and transport of animals.<ref name="Aglaw"/> The AWA is enforced by the USDA, APHIS, and the Animal Care agency.

Federal animal care standards mainly cover humane handling, housing, space, feeding, sanitation, shelter from extremes of weather, adequate veterinary care, transportation, and handling in transit.<ref name=aphis1>{{cite web|title=Licensing and Registration Under the Animal Welfare Act Guidelines for Dealers, Exhibitors, Transporters, and Researchers |url=http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/aw/awlicreg.pdf |publisher=U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) p |accessdate=June 2, 2012 |author=USDA - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) |date=August 2005 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120616074557/http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/aw/awlicreg.pdf |archivedate=June 16, 2012 }}</ref>

The AWA was amended eight times, in 1970, 1976, 1985, 1990, 2002, 2007, 2008, and 2013.

In 1970, the Act was amended (Pub.L. 91–579) to include all warm-blooded animals used in testing, experimentation, exhibition, as pets or sold as pets.<ref name=OTT>{{cite book |title=Alternatives to Animal Use in Research, Testing, and Education |url=http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk2/1986/8601/8601.PDF |publisher=U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment |accessdate=June 1, 2012 |author=U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment |date=February 1986 |id=NTIS order #PB86-183134 |via=princeton.edu |archive-date=September 28, 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130928010940/http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk2/1986/8601/8601.PDF |url-status=live }}</ref> Certain cases could be exempted from such definitions unless they used live animals in substantial numbers. Fines were increased for those interfering with an investigation of an experimentation facility. Those found guilty of assaulting or killing Federal inspectors responsible for such tasks also faced additional sentencing. Basic treatment was expanded to include humane and reasonable handling of the animals, and required shelter from weather and temperature extremes, proper ventilation, adequate housing, decent sanitation, and adequate veterinary care at all stages in the animal's life.

The Act was further amended in 1976 (Pub.L. 94–279) to further regulate animal treatment during transportation. Animals were to be kept in adequately sized traveling accommodations, and to be kept from fighting amongst one another. The definition of animal was broadened to rid the law of the possible interpretation that dogs used for hunting, security, and breeding were not included in its protection.

The Act was amended in the Food Security Act of 1985 (Pub.L. 99–198). Under this law, it was not permitted for a single animal to be used in more than one major operative experiment, from which it was also allowed adequate time to recover as guided by a veterinarian with proper training. This amendment directed new minimum standards for the handling, housing, sanitation, feeding and other care practices. Requirements for psychological well-being of dogs and primates were made. The law also requires research facilities to be able to describe painful practices as well as implement practices that minimize pain and stress to the animals. Another requirement made under this law was for each research facility to establish an Institutional Animal Care committee to oversee research proposals and provide oversight of animal experimentation.<ref name="Aglaw" />

In 1990, The Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 was amended by adding SEC. 2503, Protection of Pets (Pub.L. 101–624). This section established a holding period for cats and dogs of not less than 5 days at a holding facility of the dealer, so that the animal could be adopted or recovered by their original owner before it is sold. The provision applies to operated pounds, research facilities, or private organizations. It also requires that a written certification with the animal's background be provided to the recipient. Details should include a description of the animal, history of the animal's transfers, records, and modifications, and signatures from the dealer and recipient. Repeat violations of this section are subject to a $5000 fine per cat or dog acquired or sold. Three or more violations could result in the dealer's license being permanently revoked.<ref>{{cite web|title=PUBLIC LAW 101-624--NOV. 28, 1990 |url=https://www.nal.usda.gov/programs/awic |work=Public Law 101-624, Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990, Section 2503 - Protection of Pets |publisher=United States Department of Agriculture |access-date=July 1, 2012 |author=101ST CONGRESS |date=November 28, 1990 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130603181319/http://awic.nal.usda.gov/public-law-101-624-food-agriculture-conservation-and-trade-act-1990-section-2503-protection-pets |archive-date=June 3, 2013 |df=mdy }}</ref> Prior to the Animal Welfare Act, animal welfare law was largely reactive and action could only be taken once an animal had suffered unnecessarily.

In 2002, Title X, Subtitle D, of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act amended the Animal Welfare Act of 1966 by changing the definition of animal (Pub.L. 107–171). Section 2 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2132) was amended by changing exclusions specifically to birds, rats of the genus ''Rattus'', and mice of the genus ''Mus'' to use in research. Additionally, this law expanded the regulation of animal fighting, making it a misdemeanor to ship, exhibit, or sponsor birds for fighting purposes. Penalties under this section could result in a fine of $15000.<ref name="Farm">{{cite web|title=Public Law 107-171--Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 |url=http://awic.nal.usda.gov/pl-107-171-farm-security-and-rural-investment-act-2002 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120707123152/http://awic.nal.usda.gov/pl-107-171-farm-security-and-rural-investment-act-2002 |url-status=dead |archive-date=July 7, 2012 |work=United States Department of Agriculture - National Agricultural Library |publisher=United States Department of Agriculture |accessdate=July 1, 2012 |author=107th Congress, H.R. 2646 |date=January 23, 2002 }}</ref>

In 2007, The Animal Fighting Prohibition Reinforcement Act amended section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act (Pub.L. 110–22). Its purpose was to strengthen prohibitions against animal fighting, and under the provisions of the AWA it made animal fighting a felony with punishment of up to 3 years in prison under Title 18 of the U.S. Code (Crimes and Criminal Procedure). The act also made it a felony to trade, have knives, gaffs or other objects that aided in use of animal fighting. Also, these provisions were designed to close the loopholes from the 2002 amendments.<ref name="Aglaw" />

In 2008, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, added several new amendments to the Animal Welfare Act (Pub.L. 110–246). It added more prohibitions to training, possessing and advertising animals or sharp objects for use in animal fighting. The penalties for these crimes were raised to 3–5 years imprisonment. The 2008 amendments also prohibited imports for resale of dogs unless they were at least six months of age, have all necessary vaccinations and are in good health. Furthermore, fines for violations of the Animal Welfare Act increased from $2500 to $10,000 per violation, per animal and per day.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nal.usda.gov/animal-health-and-welfare |title=Public Law 110-246 - Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 |publisher=awic.nal.usda.gov |date=June 18, 2008 |access-date=June 8, 2012 |archive-date=January 21, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170121193502/https://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/public-law-110-246-food-conservation-and-energy-act-2008 |url-status=live }}</ref>

In 2013, "An Act to Amend the Animal Welfare Act to Modify the Definition of 'Exhibitor'," added ‘‘an owner of a common, domesticated household pet who derives less than a substantial portion of income from a nonprimary source (as determined by the Secretary) for exhibiting an animal that exclusively resides at the residence of the pet owner,’’ after ‘‘stores,’’ in section 2(h).<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://purl.fdlp.gov/GPO/gpo34753|title=An Act to Amend the Animal Welfare Act to Modify the Definition of "Exhibitor."|access-date=June 25, 2017|archive-date=August 24, 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200824202557/https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-112publ261/pdf/PLAW-112publ261.pdf|url-status=live}}</ref>

No federal laws regulate the living conditions of farm animals.<ref name="aldf">{{cite web |url=http://aldf.org/resources/advocating-for-animals/farmed-animals-and-the-law/ |title=Farmed Animals and the Law |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 28, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160428044539/http://aldf.org/resources/advocating-for-animals/farmed-animals-and-the-law/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Based on its policies towards animals, the U.S. received a grade of D out of possible grades A, B, C, D, E, F, G on World Animal Protection's Animal Protection Index in both 2014 and 2020.<ref name="wap">{{cite web |url=http://api.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/api_us_report.pdf |title=United States of America |date=2014 |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=August 27, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160827230338/http://api.worldanimalprotection.org/sites/default/files/api_us_report.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>

In regards to legislative attitudes towards animal welfare, a legislator's political party is the biggest influencer on how they will vote on a proposed animal welfare bill. Legislators representing the democratic party usually are the most in favor of bills that support legislation that improves animal welfare.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Tauber|first1=Steven|title=State Legislator's Roll- Call Votes on Farm Animal Protection Bills: The Agricultural Connection|journal=Society and Animals|date=January 2013|volume=21|issue=6|pages=501–522|doi=10.1163/15685306-12341313}}</ref>

===State=== This table shows which states have enacted bans on various industrial farming practices considered to be inhumane.<ref name="bans">{{cite web |url=http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/confinement_farm/timelines/timeline_farm_animal_protection.html?referrer=https://www.google.com/ |title=Major Advancements in Farm Animal Protection |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 23, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160423042115/http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/confinement_farm/timelines/timeline_farm_animal_protection.html?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F |url-status=live }}</ref>

{| class="wikitable sortable" |- ! !!Gestation crates !Veal crates !Extreme confinement of hens !Tail-docking !Foie gras |- |Arizona|| X || X || || || |- |California|| X || X || X || X || X |- |Colorado|| X || X || || || |- |Florida|| X || || || || |- |Maine|| X || X || || || |- |Michigan|| X || X || X || || |- |Ohio|| X || X || X || X || |- |Oregon|| X || || X || || |- |Rhode Island|| X || X || || X || |}

== Animal issues ==

=== Animals used for food ===

==== Animal agriculture ==== According to the USDA, the total number of land animals slaughtered for food in the U.S. has ranged between 8.9 and 9.5 billion since 2000. In 2015, approximately 9.2 billion land animals were slaughtered for food; 8.8 billion of these were chickens.<ref name="killtotal"/> The total number of farm animal deaths each year is considerably higher than the slaughter total, since at least tens of millions die before they are slaughtered.<ref name="countinganimals">{{cite web |url=http://www.countinganimals.com/is-vegan-outreach-right-about-how-many-animals-suffer-to-death/ |title=Is Vegan Outreach right about how many animals suffer to death? |date=October 24, 2011 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 19, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160419141200/http://www.countinganimals.com/is-vegan-outreach-right-about-how-many-animals-suffer-to-death/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

While there are no official statistics on the number of aquatic animals killed for food in the U.S., scientist Noam Mohr estimated that 56 billion sea animals were killed to feed Americans in 2011.<ref name="mohr">{{cite web |url=http://www.upc-online.org/slaughter/2011americans.pdf |title=Average and Total Numbers of Land Animals Who Died to Feed Americans in 2011 |author=Noam Mohr |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=October 22, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161022101858/http://www.upc-online.org/slaughter/2011americans.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>

==== Animal product consumption ==== In 2013, American meat consumption was second-highest among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries (behind Australia) at 200.6 lbs per capita annually.<ref name="mccarthy">{{cite web |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/08/05/which-countries-eat-the-most-meat-each-year-infographic/#78bf1f813140 |author=Niall McCarthy |title=Which Countries Eat The Most Meat Each Year? |website=Forbes |date=August 5, 2015 |accessdate=April 26, 2016 |archive-date=June 1, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160601212352/http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/08/05/which-countries-eat-the-most-meat-each-year-infographic/#78bf1f813140 |url-status=live }}</ref> Cow consumption has been decreasing since the 1970s, while chicken consumption has doubled.<ref name="haspel">{{cite web |url=http://fortune.com/2015/10/27/red-meat-consumption-decline/ |author=Tamar Haspel |title=The decline of the (red) meat industry - in one chart |date=October 27, 2015 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=May 27, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160527033450/http://fortune.com/2015/10/27/red-meat-consumption-decline/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

According to a 2009 Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), American egg consumption was higher than the developed countries’ average.<ref name="fao09">{{cite web |url=http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i0680e/i0680e.pdf |author=Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations |title=The State of Food and Agriculture |date=2009 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=March 14, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160314083725/http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i0680e/i0680e.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> Per-capita egg consumption in the U.S. climbed to 263 in 2014, the highest in recent years.<ref name="eggboard">{{cite web |url=http://www.unitedegg.org/GeneralStats/default.cfm |title=General US Stats |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160503081412/http://www.unitedegg.org/GeneralStats/default.cfm |archive-date=May 3, 2016 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref>

Per capita availability of dairy products dropped from 339.2 lbs in 1970 to 275.9 in 2012.<ref name="bentley">{{cite web |url=http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2014-june/trends-in-us-per-capita-consumption-of-dairy-products,-1970-2012.aspx#.VyBPSfkrLIU |author=Jeanine Bentley |title=Trends in US Per Capita Consumption of Dairy Products, 1970-2012 |date=June 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160417005033/http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2014-june/trends-in-us-per-capita-consumption-of-dairy-products,-1970-2012.aspx#.VyBPSfkrLIU |archive-date=April 17, 2016 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref>

==== Vegetarianism and veganism ==== 6% of respondents in a 1999 Gallup poll identified themselves as vegetarian, while 5% identified themselves as vegetarian a 2012 poll of 1014 respondents. 2% identified themselves as vegan in the 2012 poll.<ref name="gallup">{{cite web |url=http://www.gallup.com/poll/156215/consider-themselves-vegetarians.aspx |author=Frank Newport |title=In U.S., 5% Consider Themselves Vegetarians |date=July 26, 2012 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=February 17, 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170217204914/http://www.gallup.com/poll/156215/consider-themselves-vegetarians.aspx |url-status=live }}</ref> In a much larger survey (over 11000 respondents) conducted by the Humane Research Council in 2014, only 1.5% of respondents were vegetarian and 0.5% vegan.<ref name="hrc">{{cite web |url=https://faunalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Faunalytics_Current-Former-Vegetarians_Full-Report.pdf |title=Study of Current and Former Vegetarians: Initial Findings |date=December 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=March 6, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160306113449/https://faunalytics.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Faunalytics_Current-Former-Vegetarians_Full-Report.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref>

While these poll numbers do not indicate an increase in vegetarianism and veganism, plant-based diets and the consumption of fewer animal products seem to be a growing trend.<ref name="haupt">{{cite web |url=http://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2012/07/24/me-give-up-meat-vegan-diets-surging-in-popularity |author=Angela Haupt |title=Me, Give Up Meat? Vegan Diets Surging in Popularity |date=July 24, 2012 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=May 14, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160514021925/http://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2012/07/24/me-give-up-meat-vegan-diets-surging-in-popularity |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Animals used for clothing ===

==== Leather ==== The United States is a major producer of leather. In 2012, it was the world's largest producer of bovine hide,<ref name="faoleather">{{cite web |url=http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/est/COMM_MARKETS_MONITORING/Hides_Skins/Documents/COMPENDIUM2013.pdf |title=World Statistical Compendium for raw hides and skins, leather and leather footwear 1993-2012 |author=Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Trade and Markets Division |date=2013 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=January 28, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150128005513/http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/est/COMM_MARKETS_MONITORING/Hides_Skins/Documents/COMPENDIUM2013.pdf |url-status=live }}</ref> and in 2013-2014 leather exports were among the highest ever.<ref name="leatherexports">{{cite web |url=https://www.meatinstitute.org/index.php?ht=d/ReleaseDetails/i/102311 |title=U.S. Hide, Skin, and Leather Industry Exports $1.43 Billion of Product in First Half of 2014 |date=August 12, 2014 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=May 13, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160513054310/https://www.meatinstitute.org/index.php?ht=d%2FReleaseDetails%2Fi%2F102311 |url-status=live }}</ref>

==== Fur ==== 3.76 million mink were killed for their fur on fur farms in the U.S. in 2014.<ref name="mink">{{cite web|url=https://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Mink/Mink-07-24-2015.pdf |title=Mink |author=United States Department of Agriculture |date=July 24, 2015 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160513223333/http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Mink/Mink-07-24-2015.pdf |archivedate=May 13, 2016 }}</ref> There are very few federal or state regulations on fur farming aside from labeling laws and bans on dog and cat fur trade.<ref name="peterson">{{cite web |url=https://www.animallaw.info/intro/fur-production-and-fur-laws |author=Lesley A. Peterson |title=Fur Production and Fur Laws |date=2010 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=December 1, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161201082445/https://www.animallaw.info/intro/fur-production-and-fur-laws |url-status=live }}</ref>

Americans trap and kill more wild animals for fur than any other country (up to 7 million annually), and the number of animals killed has increased substantially in recent years due to international demand. The steel-jaw trap, a trapping method widely considered inhumane and banned in over 80 countries, is legal in 42 of 50 American states and is the most common trapping method.<ref name="knudson">{{cite web |url=https://www.revealnews.org/article/americas-trapping-boom-relies-on-cruel-and-grisly-tools/ |author=Tom Knudson |title=America's Trapping Boom Relies on Cruel and Grisly Tools |date=January 14, 2016 |access-date=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=April 25, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160425112534/https://www.revealnews.org/article/americas-trapping-boom-relies-on-cruel-and-grisly-tools/ |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="trapmyths">{{cite web |url=http://www.bornfreeusa.org/facts.php?p=53&more=1 |title=Exposing the Myths: the Truth about Trapping |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160513082043/http://www.bornfreeusa.org/facts.php?p=53&more=1 |archive-date=May 13, 2016 |url-status=dead }}</ref>

=== Animals used in science ===

thumb|300px|A laboratory rabbit being checked upon by an USDA inspector<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_welfare/content/printable_version/animal_welfare4-06.pdf|title=Animal|last=|first=|date=2012-02-14|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120214063645/http://www.aphis.usda.gov/publications/animal_welfare/content/printable_version/animal_welfare4-06.pdf|archive-date=February 14, 2012|access-date=2019-10-23}}</ref> In the US, every institution that uses vertebrate animals for federally funded laboratory research must have an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://speakingofresearch.com/facts/research-regulation/ |title=Research Regulations |date=April 10, 2010 |accessdate=October 22, 2012 |archive-date=November 30, 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121130230356/http://speakingofresearch.com/facts/research-regulation/ |url-status=live }}</ref> Each local IACUC reviews research protocols and conducts evaluations of the institution's animal care and use which includes the results of inspections of facilities that are required by law. The IACUC committee must assess the steps taken to "enhance animal well-being" before research can take place. This includes research on farm animals.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{Cite FTP |url=ftp://ftp.grants.nih.gov/IACUC/GuideBook.pdf |server=ftp.grants.nih.gov |url-status=dead |title=FTP link }}</ref>

According to the National Institutes of Health Office of Laboratory Animal Welfare, researchers must try to minimize distress in animals whenever possible: "Animals used in research and testing may experience pain from induced diseases, procedures, and toxicity. The Public Health Service (PHS) Policy and Animal Welfare Regulations (AWRs) state that procedures that cause more than momentary or slight pain or distress should be performed with appropriate sedation, analgesia, or anesthesia.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

However, research and testing studies sometimes involve pain that cannot be relieved with such agents because they would interfere with the scientific objectives of the study. Accordingly, federal regulations require that IACUCs determine that discomfort to animals will be limited to that which is unavoidable for the conduct of scientifically valuable research, and that unrelieved pain and distress will only continue for the duration necessary to accomplish the scientific objectives. The PHS Policy and AWRs further state that animals that would otherwise suffer severe or chronic pain and distress that cannot be relieved should be painlessly killed at the end of the procedure, or if appropriate, during the procedure."<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

The National Research Council's Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals also serves as a guide to improve welfare for animals used in research in the US.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.nal.usda.gov/animal-health-and-welfare/animal-housing-care-welfare |title=Research Animals | Animal Welfare Information Center |publisher=Awic.nal.usda.gov |date=November 20, 1985 |access-date=October 16, 2012 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121017062147/http://awic.nal.usda.gov/research-animals |archive-date=October 17, 2012 |df=mdy }}</ref> The Federation of Animal Science Societies' Guide for the Care and Use of Agricultural Animals in Research and Teaching is a resource addressing welfare concerns in farm animal research.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.fass.org/docs/agguide3rd/Ag_Guide_3rd_ed.pdf |title=AGGuideCovers2010.indd |accessdate=October 16, 2012 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20121212013248/http://www.fass.org/docs/agguide3rd/Ag_Guide_3rd_ed.pdf |archivedate=December 12, 2012 |df=mdy }}</ref> Laboratory animals in the US are also protected under the Animal Welfare Act. The United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) enforces the Animal Welfare Act. APHIS inspects animal research facilities regularly and reports are published online.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://acissearch.aphis.usda.gov/LPASearch/faces/CustomerSearch.jspx |title=Usda - Aphis - Animal Care - Search |accessdate=February 21, 2012 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130521023231/http://acissearch.aphis.usda.gov/LPASearch/faces/CustomerSearch.jspx |archivedate=May 21, 2013 }}</ref>

According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the total number of animals used in the U.S. in 2005 was almost 1.2 million,<ref name=USDA2006>{{cite web|url=http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/awreports/awreport2005.pdf |title=2005 Report on Enforcement of the Animal Welfare Act |publisher=U.S. Department of Agriculture |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20130301102117/http://www.aphis.usda.gov/animal_welfare/downloads/awreports/awreport2005.pdf |archivedate=March 1, 2013 }}</ref> but this does not include rats, mice, and birds which are not covered by welfare legislation but make up approximately 90% of research animals.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20080308163109/http://www.nabr.org/pdf/orange.pdf The humane care and treatment of laboratory animals]. ''National Association of Biomedical Research''</ref><ref name=Trull>{{cite journal |last1=Trull |first1=F. L. |title=More Regulation of Rodents |journal=Science |volume=284 |page=1463 |year=1999 |doi=10.1126/science.284.5419.1463 |issue=5419|pmid=10383321 |bibcode = 1999Sci...284.1463T |s2cid=10122407 }}</ref>

In 2015, an article in ''The New York Times'' on the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center, a scientific facility containing over 30,000 farm animals, stated that the animals there are grossly mistreated because farm animals are not included under the Animal Welfare Act of 1966.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/20/dining/animal-welfare-at-risk-in-experiments-for-meat-industry.html|title=U.S. Research Lab Lets Livestock Suffer in Quest for Profit|last=Moss|first=Michael|date=2015-01-19|work=The New York Times|access-date=2019-11-12|language=en-US|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=November 12, 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191112103846/https://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/20/dining/animal-welfare-at-risk-in-experiments-for-meat-industry.html|url-status=live}}</ref> In September 2016, the United States Department of Agriculture released a report on an investigation into the material covered by the ''Times'' article, and recommended that the USDA "establish adequate policies, procedures, and processes related to oversight of animal welfare at USMARC."<ref name=":1">[https://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/02007-0001-31.pdf ''U.S. Meat Animal Research Center Review: Audit Report 02007-0001-31''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191013040545/https://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/02007-0001-31.pdf |date=October 13, 2019 }}; p. 4 of PDF. Retrieved January 24, 2017.</ref>

=== Animals used in cosmetics tests ===

Testing cosmetics on animals is currently legal in the US. The Humane Cosmetics Act to prohibit testing cosmetics on animals was re-introduced to Congress in 2015.<ref name="engebretson">{{cite web |url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/monica-engebretson/humane-cosmetics-act-intr_b_7648492.html |author=Monica Engebretson |title=Humane Cosmetics Act Introduced with Bipartisan and Industry Support |website=HuffPost |date=June 23, 2015 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=June 20, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160620221540/http://www.huffingtonpost.com/monica-engebretson/humane-cosmetics-act-intr_b_7648492.html |url-status=live }}</ref>

=== Animals used for entertainment ===

The controversial practice of circus animal acts is legal in the US.<ref name="Anastasia Niedrich">{{cite web |url=https://www.animallaw.info/article/animals-circuses-and-laws-governing-them |title=Animals in Circuses and the Laws Governing Them |author=Anastasia Niedrich |date=2010 |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=May 4, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160504230542/https://www.animallaw.info/article/animals-circuses-and-laws-governing-them |url-status=live }}</ref> In 2015 Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus announced it will phase out its use of elephants by 2018,<ref name="northam">{{cite web |url=https://www.npr.org/2015/03/05/391041916/ringling-bros-circus-to-phase-out-elephants-by-2018 |title=Ringling Bros |author=Jackie Northam |website=NPR |date=March 5, 2015 |accessdate=April 28, 2015 |archive-date=April 19, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150419031848/http://www.npr.org/2015/03/05/391041916/ringling-bros-circus-to-phase-out-elephants-by-2018 |url-status=live }}</ref> but ended up shutting down in 2017. In May 2022, the circus announced it would resume touring in 2023 without the use of animals.

The keeping of cetaceans in captivity for entertainment is also legal. California has proposed legislation to ban the captive display of orcas, and the state of Washington has proposed banning the captivity of any cetacean for entertainment.<ref name="cetaceans">{{cite web |url=https://awionline.org/content/cetacean-anti-captivity-legislation |title=Cetacean Anti-Captivity Legislation |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=March 23, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160323212320/http://awionline.org/content/cetacean-anti-captivity-legislation |url-status=live }}</ref> Following major public backlash prompted by the 2013 film ''Blackfish'', SeaWorld announced in 2015-16 that it will end its controversial orca shows and breeding program.<ref name="howard">{{cite web |url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/160317-seaworld-orcas-killer-whales-captivity-breeding-shamu-tilikum/ |author=Brian Clark Howard |title=SeaWorld to End Controversial Orca Shows and Breeding |date=March 17, 2016 |access-date=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=April 20, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160420052351/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/160317-seaworld-orcas-killer-whales-captivity-breeding-shamu-tilikum/ |url-status=dead }}</ref>

==== Dog fighting ==== {{Main|Dog fighting in the United States}}

In 2007, the U.S. Congress passed a Federal law against interstate dog fighting activities.<ref name="Aglaw" /> ''The Animal Fighting Prohibition Reinforcement Ac''t provided for felony-level penalties including multi-year prison sentences and large fines for each offence.<ref name="Aglaw" /> Passage of this law was followed by the involvement of the Inspector General's Office of the U.S. Department of Agriculture in ongoing investigations around the United States.

In addition to the controversial treatment a dog receives when he has potential as a fighter, according to a filing in U.S. District Court in Richmond by Federal investigators in Virginia, which was obtained under the Freedom of Information Act and published by ''The Baltimore Sun'' on July 6, 2007, a losing dog or one whose potential is considered unacceptable faces "being put to death by drowning, strangulation, hanging, gun shot, electrocution or some other method".<ref>[http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/football/bal-vick0706,0,1487730.story?track=rss]{{dead link|date=July 2014}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/07/AR2007070700250_pf.html|title=Feds: Dog Fights Staged on Vick Property|newspaper=The Washington Post|access-date=August 24, 2017|archive-date=March 5, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160305055752/http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/07/AR2007070700250_pf.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.foxnews.com/story/gruesome-details-in-indictment-naming-nfl-quarterback-michael-vick-in-dogfighting-case/|title=Gruesome Details in Indictment Naming NFL Quarterback Michael Vick in Dogfighting Case|work=Fox News|date=March 25, 2015 |access-date=April 4, 2016|archive-date=April 16, 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160416065451/http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/07/18/gruesome-details-in-indictment-naming-nfl-quarterback-michael-vick-in.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

"Bait" animals are often used to test a dog's fighting instinct. The "bait" is mauled or killed in the process. Often "bait" animals are stolen pets.<ref name=NatGeo>{{cite news |url=http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0218_040218_dogfighting.html |title=U.S. Dog-Fighting Rings Stealing Pets for "Bait" |first=Maryann |last=Mott |publisher=National Geographic News |date=February 18, 2004 |accessdate=September 26, 2007 |archive-date=September 23, 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070923021115/http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0218_040218_dogfighting.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

=== Rodeo === {{Main|Animal treatment in rodeo}}

[[File:Mexican charro forefooting on horseback.jpg|thumb|250px|Horse tripping is a controversial charreada event banned in nine US states.<ref name=hardsell>{{cite web|url=http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=12386|title=Horse Tripping Ban a Tough Sell in Some States|work=TheHorse.com|accessdate=August 16, 2015|archive-date=April 3, 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120403022213/http://www.thehorse.com/ViewArticle.aspx?ID=12386|url-status=live}}</ref>]]

The welfare of animals in rodeo has been a topic of discussion for the industry, the public, and the law for decades. Protests were first raised in the 1870s, and, in the middle twentieth century, laws were enacted to curb events using animals.<ref name="Westermeier: 436">Westermeier: 436</ref> The American Humane Association (AHA) has worked with the rodeo industry (specifically, the PRCA) to establish rules improving animal welfare in rodeo and the treatment of rodeo animals.

Today, animal cruelty complaints in rodeo are still very much alive. The PRCA (which governs about a third of the rodeos conducted in the United States annually) has provided rules for its members regarding animal welfare. Some local jurisdictions have banned the use of certain rodeo tack or certain events such as tie down roping or steer tripping.{{citation needed|date=June 2016}}

==Public opinion== A 2015 Gallup poll found that 32% of Americans agreed that animals should have the ”same rights as people”, up from 25% in 2008. 54% were "somewhat" or "very" concerned about animals raised for food and 67% about animals in research.<ref name="riffkin">{{cite web |url=https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHWA_enUS632US632&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=us%20animal%20rights%20public%20opinion |author=Rebecca Riffkin |title=In U.S., More Say Animals Should Have Same Rights as People |date=May 18, 2015 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=July 22, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160722014352/https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHWA_enUS632US632&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=us%20animal%20rights%20public%20opinion |url-status=live }}</ref> A 2014 Pew Research Center poll found that 50% of respondents oppose animal testing, up from 43% in 2009.<ref name="funk">{{cite web |url=http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/07/01/chapter-7-opinion-about-the-use-of-animals-in-research/ |author=Cary Funk |author2=Lee Rainie |title=Opinion about the use of animals in research |date=July 1, 2015 |accessdate=April 27, 2016 |archive-date=May 6, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160506164100/http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/07/01/chapter-7-opinion-about-the-use-of-animals-in-research/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

== Animal movement ==

Animal activism is commonly divided into two camps: animal welfare and animal rights. Animal welfare is concerned with the humane treatment of animals but does not oppose all uses of animals, while animal rights is concerned with ending all human use of animals.<ref name="rightswelfare">{{cite web |url=http://furcommission.com/animal-welfare-v-animal-rights/ |title=Animal Welfare versus Animal Rights |date=January 27, 2016 |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=April 25, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160425005732/http://furcommission.com/animal-welfare-v-animal-rights/ |url-status=live }}</ref> The largest American animal nonprofit, The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), is an animal welfare organization. PETA, Farm Animal Rights Movement (FARM),<ref name="FARM">{{cite web|url=http://www.farmusa.org/about.htm |title=About FARM |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20160503172758/http://www.farmusa.org/about.htm |archivedate=May 3, 2016 }}</ref> and Direct Action Everywhere (DxE)<ref name="dxe">{{cite web |url=http://directactioneverywhere.com/why-direct-action/ |title=Why Direct Action? |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=April 14, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160414050555/http://directactioneverywhere.com/why-direct-action/ |url-status=live }}</ref> are animal rights organizations based in the U.S.

The activities of animal welfare and rights organizations include lobbying for animal protection legislation and better corporate animal welfare policies (e.g. cage-free egg campaigns), promoting reductions in animal product consumption, and conducting undercover investigations of industrial animal farms and animal research laboratories.<ref name="ace">{{cite web |url=http://www.animalcharityevaluators.org/research/foundational-research/social-movements-project/animal-activism-case-study/ |title=Animal Activism Case Study |author=Amanda Lueke |date=Summer 2014 |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=May 4, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160504025849/http://www.animalcharityevaluators.org/research/foundational-research/social-movements-project/animal-activism-case-study/ |url-status=live }}</ref> The HSUS has been instrumental in the passage of several state-level bans on cruel farming practices,<ref name="bans" /> and Mercy for Animals' ongoing (as of April 2016) corporate cage-free egg campaign has helped bring about a number of corporate pledges to use cage-free eggs.<ref name="mfasuccess">{{cite web |url=http://www.mercyforanimals.org/successes |title=Our Success |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=May 5, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160505025818/http://www.mercyforanimals.org/successes |url-status=live }}</ref><ref name="cornfield">{{cite web |url=http://www.foodmanufacturing.com/news/2016/04/group-releasing-undercover-video-cage-free-egg-push |title=Group Releasing Undercover Video for Cage-Free Egg Push |author=Josh Cornfield |date=April 13, 2016 |access-date=April 28, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160416024840/http://www.foodmanufacturing.com/news/2016/04/group-releasing-undercover-video-cage-free-egg-push |archive-date=April 16, 2016 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref>

The Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) is an American civil rights organization working to obtain legal personhood for some animals. In 2013 the NhRP filed the first-ever lawsuits on behalf of chimpanzees, demanding courts grant them the right to bodily liberty via a writ of ''habeas corpus''.<ref name="nhrp">{{cite web |url=http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/2013/11/30/press-release-re-nhrp-lawsuit-dec-2nd-2013/ |title=First-Ever Lawsuits Filed on Behalf of Captive Chimpanzees |date=December 2, 2013 |accessdate=April 21, 2016 |archive-date=December 22, 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151222152933/http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/2013/11/30/press-release-re-nhrp-lawsuit-dec-2nd-2013/ |url-status=live }}</ref> The original petitions were denied,<ref name="mountain">{{cite web |url=http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/2013/12/10/new-york-cases-judges-decisions-and-next-steps/ |author=Michael Mountain |title=New York Cases – Judges' Decisions and Next Steps |date=December 10, 2013 |accessdate=April 23, 2016 |archive-date=May 25, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160525213227/http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/2013/12/10/new-york-cases-judges-decisions-and-next-steps/ |url-status=live }}</ref> and legal efforts on behalf of the chimps are ongoing as of spring 2016.<ref name="nhrpnews">{{cite web |url=http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/in-the-news-2/ |title=Animals in the News |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160422030157/http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/in-the-news-2/ |archive-date=April 22, 2016 |url-status=dead |df=mdy-all }}</ref> The NhRP plans to file a ''habeas corpus'' lawsuit on behalf of captive elephants later in 2016.<ref name="elephant">{{cite web |url=http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/2016/03/07/nhrp-legal-team-meets-in-new-york-city-to-discuss-elephant-habeas-corpus-case/ |title=NhRP Legal Team Meets in New York City to Discuss Elephant Habeas Corpus Case |date=March 7, 2016 |accessdate=April 28, 2016 |archive-date=April 26, 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160426233859/http://www.nonhumanrightsproject.org/2016/03/07/nhrp-legal-team-meets-in-new-york-city-to-discuss-elephant-habeas-corpus-case/ |url-status=live }}</ref>

== References == {{Reflist|30em}} {{Animal welfare by country}} {{Animal rights|state=expanded}}

Category:Animal welfare and rights in the United States Category:Pets in the United States