Editorial: Don't stifle probes of animal abuse

Most of us have seen portions of the videos produced by animal rights activists to document cruelty at slaughterhouses and processing plants. And most of us expected that the result would be improved conditions at the worst of the plants.

That may or may not be the case, but the videos have given rise to something most of us didn't see coming. Legislatures in California and other states are considering new laws that would make it harder for animal advocates to investigate abuses. Some states may make it illegal to photograph farming operations while others would make it a crime to lie on an employment application in order to go undercover at a meat plant.

One bill pending in California would require any evidence of abuse to be turned over to law enforcement within 48 hours. The purported reasoning is that it would stop the cruelty more quickly. But anyone who has paid attention to law enforcement operations in rural areas knows that prosecutions for animal cruelty are rare, especially if it involves farming operations. Completing a prosecutable case generally would take much longer than two days and some agencies presented with offensive video would do little more than tip off the responsible.

A bill by Assemblyman Jim Patterson, R-Fresno, would make it a crime not to turn over such a video within 24 hours. His chief of staff, Mike Zimmerman, told the Associated Press, "We believe that folks in the agriculture community and folks from some of the humane organizations share the same concerns about animal cruelty. If there's abuse taking place, there is no sense in letting it continue so you can make a video."

Patterson's bill is sponsored by the California Cattlemen's Association, which has a solid record of supporting humane processing methods. But as with any industry, there is a fringe that doesn't follow the rules, especially if it costs them.

Partly because of videos graphically documenting deplorable activities at plants around the country, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is said to be increasing its emphasis on humane handling rules. AP reported that the Food Safety Inspection Service added 24 positions with the same focus last year—though confirmation of that couldn't be obtained through official channels.

Much of the proposed legislation was drafted by the American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative think that advocates property rights and business interests. Much of the language comes from its model "Animal and Ecological Terrorism Act," which, in its current form, could make criminals out of people who donate to the Humane Society of the United States, which routinely investigates animal cruelty.

The industry should not be condemned by the actions of its worst elements, but the industry also should not be doing anything to protect unscrupulous cost cutters from selling sick animals or killing them with needlessly painful or stressful processes. And legislators from farming areas shouldn't be too eager to carry water for agribusiness. Several of these bills are short-sighted and likely to be counter productive. When the public understands what the industry is doing to protect its bottom feeders, there will be less meat on the kitchen table.