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