9 C.F.R. § 71.4

Maintenance of certain facilities and premises in a sanitary condition required; cleaning and disinfection, when required; animals classed as “exposed.”

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Yards, pens, chutes, alleys, and other facilities and premises which are used in connection with the interstate movement of livestock or poultry shall be maintained by the person in possession of the facilities and premises in a clean and sanitary condition, in accordance with good animal husbandry practices, and shall be subject to inspection by an APHIS or State representative. When an APHIS or State representative determines that such facilities or premises are not in such clean and sanitary condition and gives written notice of his determination to such person, the facilities and premises shall be cleaned and disinfected in accordance with §§ 71.7 and 71.10 through 71.12 by such person under the supervision of an APHIS or State representative or an accredited veterinarian before such premises are again used for livestock or poultry.

(b) Yards, pens, chutes, alleys, and other facilities and premises which have contained interstate shipments of cattle, sheep, swine, poultry, or other animals affected with, or carrying the infection of, any contagious, infectious, or communicable disease of livestock or poultry other than slight unopened cases of actinomycosis or actinobacillosis (or both), bovine foot rot, atrophic rhinitis, ram epididymitis, ringworm, infectious keratitis, and arthritis (simple lesions only), shall be cleaned and disinfected under the supervision of an APHIS or State representative or an accredited veterinarian in accordance with §§ 71.7 and 71.10 through 71.12 before such premises are again used for animals, and any poultry or other animals unloaded into such yards or premises before they have been so cleaned and disinfected shall thereafter be classed as “exposed” within the meaning of the regulations in this subchapter and shall not be moved interstate except in compliance with the provisions of such regulations applicable to “exposed” animals.

[34 FR 15641, Oct. 9, 1969, as amended at 55 FR 11156, Mar. 27, 1990; 55 FR 15320, Apr. 23, 1990; 62 FR 27933, May 22, 1997]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 1 case, 1992–1992 · leading case: Moore v. Madigan, 789 F. Supp. 1479 (W.D. Mo. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Moore v. Madigan, 789 F. Supp. 1479 (W.D. Mo. 1992). · cites it 2× “Authority to Suspend Operations Plaintiffs only challenge to the USDA’s authority to suspend the “specifically approved stockyard” status is that the *1486 suspension is contrary to the language in regulation 9 C.F.R. § 71.4 (a) (1991). 7 Section 71.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.