Dog Confinement Agreement

Veröffentlicht am

1. The number of dogs subject to importation shall be in accordance with the objectives of the Agreement on the Keeping of Dogs. (3) history of non-compliance with detention agreements issued by HHS/CDC; Since animals that have been denied entry into the United States are immediately re-exported to ports of entry into the United States in accordance with standard operating procedures, any successful objection to the refusal of entry, after the dog or dogs have already been re-exported, would only allow the importer to reintroduce the dog(s) into the United States in accordance with the requirements of the Containment Agreement. The complaint would not allow the importer to recover the costs associated with the re-export and re-import of the dog(s). The policy and program operations described above will come into effect on August 11, 2014. Because of the risk that insufficiently immunized dogs pose to public health, HHS/CDC issues these guidelines that write down how it will use its discretion to grant detention agreements to dog importers. In deciding whether a delivery agreement is issued, HHS/CDC considers several factors to ensure that the terms of the delivery agreement are not violated or that an insufficiently immunized dog does not pose a danger to public health. As a rule, the absence of a detention agreement leads to the refusal of entry of the dog(s). “Refusal of entry” usually involves the immediate return of the dog(s) to the country of origin at the expense of the importer.

The maintenance of the dog(s) until its final decision is also the responsibility of the importer. Among other important factors that may pose a risk to public health, are listed below the circumstances that HHS/CDC will consider when deciding whether or not to establish a canine detention agreement: however, subsection 71.51(c)(2) states that “the Director of [CDC] may authorize the admission of dogs that have not been properly immunized against rabies, provided that dogs are locked in conditions limiting their contact with humans and other animals until they have been immunized. Generally speaking, the use of the term “shall” in a regulation indicates a regulatory requirement, while the use of the term “may” indicates that the Agency has a margin of appreciation as to how it imposes this particular aspect of its rules. .