BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 1062
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB
1062 (Lara)
As Amended June 15, 2016
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE: 29-9
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Water |12-2 |Levine, Gallagher, |Harper, Medina |
| | |Bigelow, Dodd, | |
| | |Eggman, Cristina | |
| | |Garcia, Eduardo | |
| | |Garcia, Gomez, Lopez, | |
| | |Olsen, Salas, | |
| | |Williams | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Arts |4-2 |Hadley, Levine, Low, |Obernolte, Medina |
| | |Nazarian | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |16-2 |Gonzalez, Bigelow, |Jones, Obernolte |
| | |Bloom, Bonta, | |
| | |Calderon, Chang, | |
| | |Daly, Eggman, | |
SB 1062
Page 2
| | |Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Roger Hernández, | |
| | |Holden, Quirk, | |
| | |Santiago, Wagner, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Prohibits, beginning January 1, 2018, the use of a
bullhook and other devices designed to inflict pain to train or
control an elephant. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits any person who houses, possesses, manages, or is in
direct contact with an elephant, from using, or authorizing or
allowing an employee, agent or contractor to use, a bullhook,
ankus, baseball bat, axe handle, pitchfork, or other device
designed to inflict pain for the purpose of training or
controlling an elephant. Use includes brandishing,
exhibiting, or displaying the devices in the presence of an
elephant.
2)Makes any person who violates this prohibition subject to a
civil penalty of not less than $500 and not more than $10,000
per violation, and immediate suspension or revocation of a
restricted species permit.
3)Authorizes a person to appeal a restricted species permit
suspension or revocation to the Fish and Game Commission
(FGC).
4)Clarifies that a person who violates the prohibition is not
SB 1062
Page 3
subject to criminal penalties under the Fish and Game Code.
5)Provides that the prohibition in this bill is in addition to
and not in lieu of other existing animal welfare laws,
including any state or local laws.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Prohibits the importation, transportation, possession, or
release of specified wild animals, including elephants, in
California except under a restricted species permit issued by
the Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), in cooperation with
the Department of Food and Agriculture. Authorizes the FGC to
adopt regulations governing the importation, possession,
transportation, keeping, and confinement of wild animals,
including elephants. Makes a violation of these requirements
subject to a civil penalty of not less than $500 and not more
than $10,000 per violation. Also makes a violation a
misdemeanor, punishable by up to six months imprisonment in a
county jail, or a fine of up to $1,000.
2)Makes it a misdemeanor for any owner or manager of an elephant
to engage in abusive behavior towards the elephant, including
disciplining an elephant by any of the following methods:
a) Deprivation of food, water or rest.
b) Use of electricity.
c) Physical punishment resulting in damage, scarring,
or breaking of skin.
SB 1062
Page 4
d) Insertion of any instrument into any bodily orifice.
e) Use of martingales (head immobilizing straps).
f) Use of block and tackle.
3)Makes it unlawful to purchase, sell, offer for sale, possess
with intent to sell, or import with intent to sell, elephant
ivory or rhinoceros horn, or to possess, sell, offer for sale,
trade, or distribute a shark fin in this state. Makes it
unlawful to import into this state for commercial purposes, or
possess with intent to sell, the dead body, or any part or
product thereof, of a polar bear, leopard, ocelot, tiger,
cheetah, jaguar, sable antelope, wolf, zebra, whale, cobra,
python, sea turtle, colobus monkey, kangaroo, vicuna, sea
otter, free-roaming feral horse, dolphin, porpoise, Spanish
lynx, or elephant.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, minor state costs.
COMMENTS: This bill prohibits the use of bullhooks and other
devices designed to inflict pain for the purpose of training or
controlling the behavior of an elephant. According to the
author, bullhooks are used by a dwindling number of elephant
handlers to train, punish and control elephants. The author and
sponsors describe a bullhook as a device that resembles a
fireplace poker, with a sharp metal hook and spiked tip, and a
plastic or wood handle. According to the author, this bill
codifies industry standards for elephant management by
prohibiting the use of bullhooks, bats, and pitchforks to
discipline an elephant. The cities of Los Angeles and Oakland
have prohibited use of the bullhook, and San Francisco has
SB 1062
Page 5
banned performances using elephants and other performing wild
animals. In 2014 the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA)
adopted a policy prohibiting keepers from sharing unrestricted
space with elephants. Protected contact, a new elephant
management method based on positive reinforcement instead of
punishment, was developed and is viewed by supporters as a
viable and more humane alternative. The California Association
of Zoos and Aquariums, in support of this bill, notes that all
zoos accredited by the AZA in California are now using protected
contact and operant conditioning training, making use of the
bullhook obsolete. Today no county fair in California offers
elephant rides, and the Ringling Brothers circus has also ended
all use of elephants for circus performances in California,
effective May 2016.
This bill follows last year's SB 716 (Lara) of 2015, which
proposed to criminalize the use of bullhooks. SB 716 was vetoed
by the Governor, along with several other bills, because the
bills created new crimes. This bill responds to the veto by
proposing to make the use of bullhooks subject to civil
penalties, and grounds for revocation of a restricted species
permit, instead of creating a new crime. Restricted species
permits are issued and enforced by the DFW, and are required for
possession and handling of elephants and other wild animals in
California.
Supporters emphasize that bullhooks have historically been used
by elephant handlers to train, punish and control elephants, and
have been used to inflict pain and evoke fear in order to
forcefully achieve desired behaviors. The presence of the
bullhook even when not in active use is a threat of punishment
for elephants that have been trained by this method. Supporters
assert there have been numerous documented incidents of
elephants being wounded or scarred by abusive use of bullhooks.
In addition to the inhumane treatment of elephants, performances
that use elephants threaten public safety by bringing people
into dangerously close proximity to elephants. Supporters
SB 1062
Page 6
believe use of bullhooks promotes aggression and will not
prevent an elephant from rampaging, or protect the public when
such an incident occurs. Supporters note that since 1990 there
have been 16 human deaths and 135 injuries in the United States
attributed to elephants, primarily in circus-related accidents.
In summary, supporters assert the bullhook is an outdated and
inhumane tool that unnecessarily subjects elephants to fear and
pain, and puts keepers and veterinarians at serious risk of
injury and death. They assert that the protected contact method
of elephant training and management is a superior method of
managing elephants, eliminates the need for bullhooks, and is
now the industry preferred standard. This method relies on
positive reinforcement training and a protected barrier, enables
keepers to provide high quality elephant husbandry and
veterinary care, and is based on cooperation and respect rather
than domination and control. The protected contact method is
now required for all facilities certified by the AZA.
Opponents of this bill, which include members of the circus and
entertainment community, as well a number of veterinarians and
researchers, assert that the bullhook or guide is an important
tool that facilitates the ability of elephant handlers to
provide veterinary care and conduct elephant research. They
prefer the term guide to describe the tool rather than bullhook,
and assert that it is not harmful or abusive when used
correctly. They emphasize that the guide is the only husbandry
tool effective for managing elephants in a free contact
environment where elephants are not confined exclusively to
their enclosures. Opponents also assert that the use of
bullhooks helps those who use them to provide more superior care
than can be provided to those managed without them. They are
concerned that taking away the ability to use bullhooks or
guides will adversely affect their ability to provide elephants
with required care. Some opponents assert the bullhook is
comparable to the use of a harness and reins for horses, or
SB 1062
Page 7
collars and leads for dogs. Because the bullhook or guide is
useful in providing veterinary care, opponents assert the state
of California by removing its use would be removing an essential
safety and welfare tool for handling a large and potentially
dangerous animal.
Some opponents are also concerned that this bill will negatively
impact the ability of the entertainment industry to use
elephants in performances, fairs and festivals, and for people
in the animal industries to maintain their livelihoods. Others
believe it will hamper research and conservation efforts that
are beneficial to elephants.
Analysis Prepared by:
Diane Colborn / W., P., & W. / (916) 319-2096
FN:
0003584