BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 343 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 17, 2013 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE Susan Talamantes Eggman, Chair AB 343 (Patterson) - As Amended: April 11, 2013 SUBJECT : Animal cruelty: duty to report. SUMMARY : Requires any person, except journalists as specified, who knowingly documents evidence of farm animal cruelty with film, photograph, images, print, recordings or videotapes to (documented evidence) provide a copy to local law enforcement or an animal control officer within 120 hours. Specifically, this bill : 1)Requires any person, except journalists, who willingly or knowingly produce documented evidence of animal cruelty, to provide a copy to local law enforcement within 120 hours, in order to assist law enforcement with a timely investigation and enforcement of suspected animal cruelty. 2)Makes a violation of not reporting documented evidence of animal cruelty to local law enforcement, punishable with a $250 fine. 3)Specifies that the $250 fine be applied only once against a person for withholding documented evidence for an investigation of an individual or employer so long as the information collected demonstrates that documented incidences of cruelty are related to the same person or employer. 4)Exempts the unintended documentation of animal cruelty by video surveillance, security systems or other imaging systems from reporting requirements. 5)Specifies that reporting documented evidence shall not limit or impede ongoing investigations, as long as documented evidence is turned over to law enforcement within 120 hours of the documentation. 6)Specifies that law enforcement is not required or encouraged to reveal the source of the documented evidence to individuals or employers suspected of animal cruelty. 7)Clarifies that reprisal against employees who report AB 343 Page 2 documented evidences of suspected animal cruelty to local law enforcement is prohibited by current law. 8)Specifies that persons who report documented evidence shall not be held civilly or criminally liable. 9)Specifies that a person who reports documented evidence, who is asked by law enforcement to provide information on the individual or employer suspected of cruelty, shall not be held civilly or criminally liable for providing the requested information. 10)Allows the California Department of Food and Agriculture to report individuals suspected on not reporting documented evidence to the appropriate district attorney. 11)Defines animal as any domestic bovine animal, horse, mule, burro, sheep, goat, or swine, or the hide, carcass, or portion of a carcass of any such animal. 12)Defines animal cruelty as maliciously and intentionally maiming, mutilating, torturing, or wounding a living animal, or maliciously and intentionally killing an animal, as specified. 13)Defines poultry as any domesticated bird, whether live or dead 14)Provides that no reimbursement is required by this act. EXISTING LAW: 1)Establishes a variety of offences relating to animal cruelty, including but not limited to, maliciously, intentionally, or cruelly maiming, mutilating, torturing, wounding or killing a living animal. 2)Provides for a fine of up to $20,000 and/or up to one year in jail for a misdemeanor conviction of animal cruelty, or, for a fine of up to $20,000 and/or up to three years in prison for a felony conviction of animal cruelty. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This bill is keyed fiscal by Legislative Counsel. AB 343 Page 3 COMMENTS : California has enacted some of the strongest laws in the nation relating to cruelty of, cruelty towards, or neglect of animals. These laws protect domesticated pets, stray animals, wild animals and farm animals. California does not have a mandatory reporting law for animal cruelty or cruelty. In 2008, a video was released depicting acts of cruelty by employees at a livestock harvesting facility in Chino. This footage was compiled over a six week period in the fall of 2007 and was released to the media in January of 2008. This video led to a recall of 143 million pounds of raw and frozen beef, along with criminal convictions for people involved in the animal cruelty. Under current law, there is no requirement to report witnessed or recorded acts of animal cruelty evidence to law enforcement. According to the sponsors, if the Chino footage had been turned over to management and law enforcement immediately, corrective actions would have instantly occurred, preventing the suffering of additional cattle. The author states this is the sole purpose of the bill, to prevent farm animal cruelty. According to supporters, this bill will, in instances of recorded animal cruelty, ensure corrective actions are taken immediately, improve animal welfare and assist in bringing to justice those responsible for farm animal cruelty. Sponsors state that this bill protects employees and does not infringe of the rights of whistleblowers. Opponents state that this bill is an attempt to chill free speech, and, limit whistleblowers or activists who want to inform the public of animal cruelty and food safety issues. Opponents further state that this bill, if in place in 2008, would have stopped workers from exposing the animal cruelty and fraud, while not preventing the act of cruelty and fraud. Opponents from news gathering organizations have stated that holding a photographer or videographer criminally liability if he or she captures or records images of animal cruelty, but fails to provide them to local law enforcement, would violate both Federal copyright law and the First Amendment. Under copyright law, once an image or recording is lawfully captured, the person who takes the picture or shoots the video has an instantaneous intellectual property interest in the work that is protected. Furthermore, opponents state that this amounts to AB 343 Page 4 the taking of property without due process. The committee may wish to consider if the stated goal of this bill, to "improve animal welfare and ? expeditiously hold those responsible for farm animal cruelty accountable", will be achieved. This bill does not require those who witness farm animal cruelty, whether employees, employers or members of the public, to report the cruelty to anyone. The circumstances which cause a person to become a mandatory reporter, under this bill, are limited. The limitations on who is a mandatory reporter of farm animal cruelty could also limit the protections offered to farm animals, which is the stated purpose of this bill. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support Absher Land & Livestock Company California Cattlemen's Association California Farm Bureau Federation California Grain & Feed Association California Horse Council California Pork Producers Association California Thoroughbred Breeders Association Ventura County Cattlemen's Association Six individual Opposition A Well Fed World ACLU of California American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Animal Legal Defense Fund Animal Place Animal Welfare Institute Born Free USA CA Teamsters Public Affairs Council California Horsemen's Alliance California Labor Federation California Newspaper Publishers Association Compassion in World Farming Compassion Over Killing AB 343 Page 5 Diana Basehart Foundation Ena Valikov, DVM Equal Justice Alliance Farm Animal Reform Movement (FARM) Farm Forward Farm Sanctuary Farmer at Tipping Tree Farm Food & Water Watch Food Empowerment Project Humane Farming Association Humane Society of the United States Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association Injured & Orphaned Wildlife Inland Valley Humane Society & SPCA Jim Reynolds, DVM, MPVM League of Humane Voters Marin Humane Society Mercy for Animals Monterey County SPCA National Press Photographers Association Organic Consumers Association Paul Kortez, Los Angeles City Council Fifth District Paw Pac Paw Project Protecting Earth & Animals with Compassion & Education (PEACE) Public Interest Coalition Public Justice Center Rescue House Resqcats, Inc. San Francisco SPCA Senior Citizens for Humane Legislation and Education Sierra Club California Slow Food USA Governor, Central Valley Region of California Social Compassion in Legislation (SCIL) Socially Responsible Agriculture Project (SRAP) Stare Humane Association of California Sustainable Economies Law Center Take Me Home, Animal Rescue Unitarian Universalist Animal Ministry United Food & Commercial Workers, Western States Council Vegan Coalition Whistleblower Support Fund 11 individual AB 343 Page 6 Analysis Prepared by : Victor Francovich / AGRI. / (916) 319-2084