BILL ANALYSIS



C.S.H.B. 2472
By: Clemons
05-05-95
Committee Report (Substituted)


BACKGROUND

Producers and users of animals are increasingly faced with animal
welfare/animal rights issues.  One problem that has arisen is that
the public, now predominately urban and city dwellers, simply does
not understand the behavior of most farm animals.

Almost all animals, to some degree, display antagonistic behavior. 
This may be recognized in the form of fighting, flight, or
posturing, but in most circumstances where animals are located
together, the likelihood of conflict exists.  From the sometimes
awesome spectacle of two bulls fighting, or the savage battle
between two stallions, down to the common barnyard hen fighting for
her place in the "pecking order," nature dictates that some animals
are dominant and some are subordinate.  Yet, because they have no
way to control the instincts of farm animals, some farmers are
being threatened with prosecution for merely breeding and/or
raising animals that tend to be aggressive when confined together.

PURPOSE

If enacted, H.B. 2472 would protect those who breed and/or raise
livestock from people who could misuse the current cruelty to
animals statutes against those who are farmers only.  Under no
circumstances does this bill attempt to legalize the fighting of
any animals, especially game roosters, nor prevent the prosecution
of those who would cause such animals to fight.

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly
grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer,
department, agency, or institution.

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS

SECTION 1.  Amends Section 42.09, Penal Code (CRUELTY TO ANIMALS),
by amending Subsection (c) and adding Subsection (f) as follows:

     (c) in this section:

           (1) renumbered;

           (2) defines "shelter."

     (f) exonerates a person from intending to cause an animal to
     fight with another animal if sheltering the animals in the
     same enclosure, even if the animals are of the type that are
     aggressive when confined together.

SECTION 2.  Change in law made by this Act applies to an offense
committed before, on, or after the effective of the Act, except
that a final conviction for an offense under Section 42.09(a)(6),
Penal Code, that exists on the effective date of this Act is
unaffected.

SECTION 3.  Effective date:  September 1, 1995.

SECTION 4.  Emergency clause.

COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE

SECTION 1, Subsection (c)(2) of the substitute adds language that
clarifies the definition of "shelter."

SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION

HB 2472 was considered by the full committee in a public hearing on
April 19, 1995.  The following persons testified for the bill:

     Joe Kring, representing Citizens for the Preservation of Rural
     Lifestyles (CPRL) and TGBA; and
     Dean Hodges, representing CPRL and TGBA.

The following persons testified against the bill:

     James Bias, representing the Humane Society of North Texas;
     Ellis Gilleland, representing himself;
     Karen L. Medicus, representing the Humane Society, SPCA,
     Austin;
     Rick Evans, representing himself;
     Robert French, representing himself; and
     Richard Martinez, representing himself.

The bill was left pending.  HB 2472 was considered by the full
committee in a formal meeting on May 5, 1995.  The committee
considered a complete committee substitute.  An amendment was
offered to the substitute.  The amendment was adopted without
objection.  The substitute, as amended, was adopted without
objection.  The chair directed the staff to incorporate the
amendment into the substitute.  HB 2472 was reported favorably as
substituted, with the recommendation that it do pass and be
printed, by a record vote of 5 ayes, 1 nays, 2 pnv, and 1 absent.