Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: NVDave

You forgot to check the Colorado Code of Regulations which as you know are the rules set up by various State agencies to actually enforce and/or enact the Statutes.

“Livestock” means cattle, horses, mules, burros, sheep, poultry, swine, llama, cervids, bison and goats, regardless of use. Livestock includes any animal that is used for working purposes on a farm or ranch, excluding dogs; or is raised for food or fiber production; and any other animal designated by the Commissioner.

So yes in Colorado law Bison are defined as being livestock. I am assuming the Commissioner has the power under the law to decide which species are regulated under his authority and therefore can define livestock to include animals not specified in Statute.

Course lawyers for one side will argue only the genus Bos should fall under the definition of livestock and the other will point to DOA defintion but hey if things were clear we could get rid of lawyers, right?


95 posted on 05/04/2008 10:50:22 PM PDT by lastchance (Hug your babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies ]


To: lastchance

I did check the CCR’s, but not, I will readily admit, exhaustively. 87 pages of results came back for “livestock” — I found a definition in the sales and use tax section and I read the first 10 pages of results and within that 10 pages, the sales/use tax definition seemed to be held consistently.

Here’s what I find under “sales and use tax” CCR’s for definition of “livestock:”

1 CCR 201-5: ...”Livestock means cattle, horses, mules, burros, sheep, lambs, poultry, swine, ostrich, llama, alpaca and goats or other animal raised for food, fiber or hide production, and alternative livestock under 35-41.5-102, C.R.S. but not pet animal as defined in 35-80-102(10), C.R.S.”

No mention of bison/buffalo in that section except as the “other animals raised for food/fiber...” which then gets into the practices of the producer.

If there are conflicting definitions within the CCR’s, then I’m sure a lawyer will argue the point that the state can’t get their act together on defining livestock.

My experience with regulations and statutes on this issue in Nevada was that the DA said that if the regulations didn’t speak to the statute involved, the statute’s definition won out. This will vary from state to state, of course.

My eyes glazed over when I did a search for “livestock” in the CCR’s — man, do they spend a lot of time filibustering about livestock and mountain lions in the CCR’s.


97 posted on 05/04/2008 11:56:29 PM PDT by NVDave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson