Animal abuse reporting penalties discussed

The Judiciary Committee heard testimony March 13 on a bill that would change animal abuse reporting requirements and create penalties for animal facility employees who make false application claims.

LB204, introduced by O’Neill Sen. Tyson Larson, would require individuals who suspect animal cruelty or abandonment to report the abuse to authorities within 24 hours of acquiring such information. The report also must include any videos, photographs or audio that is evidence of the alleged abuse.

Under the bill, a person who applies at an animal facility operation and makes false statements or applies with the intent of causing economic damage or bodily injury would be guilty of a:
• Class I misdemeanor if the violation does not instill or result in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury, death or economic damage or if the economic damage is less than $10,000;
• Class IV felony if no bodily injury occurs but there is a reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death and the economic damage exceeds $10,000;
• Class IIIA felony if substantial bodily injury occurs to another individual and the economic damage exceeds $100,000;
• Class III felony if a serious bodily injury to another individual occurs and the economic damage exceeds $1 million; and
• Class IB felony if a death occurs.

An order of restitution also would be required for economic damage or loss of revenue from a violation.

Larson said individuals working for animal rights organizations have applied for jobs at animal facilities with the intent to harm the industry. He said the bill would deter individuals with the intent to harm or interfere with livestock operations from misrepresenting themselves while encouraging employees to report animal abuse immediately so it can be addressed properly.

“In Nebraska, we have every incentive to treat our animals well,” Larson said.

Annette Sweeney, a former Iowa legislator, testified in support of the bill, saying it would protect the livestock industry. Some employees at livestock facilities have been hired under false pretenses, she said, and they have produced videos that negatively depict the industry.

The bill would give livestock producers assurance that their employees are who they claim to be, Sweeney said.

Alan Peterson, representing ACLU-Nebraska, testified in opposition to the bill, calling it disingenuous and unconstitutional. The bill violates the U.S. Constitution’s freedom of speech, unreasonable search and seizure and self-incrimination clauses, he said. Furthermore, he said, the bill is disguised as a means to protect the welfare of animals.

“The purpose of this bill is to protect agricultural industrialists from whistleblowers,” Peterson said.

John Hansen, president of the Nebraska Farmers Union, testified in opposition, saying that Nebraska does not have a problem with animal abuse at its livestock facilities. The bill is part of a national strategy by large industrialized production facilities to target and weaken corporate farming restrictions, he said.

“This approach does not necessarily help protect animals at all,” Hansen said. “It really is about trying to gain control of damaging videos as soon as possible.”

The committee took no immediate action on the bill.