IBJNews

Sides speak out in hearing over so-called ag-gag bill

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Farming groups told lawmakers Wednesday they need legal protection from people who shoot photos and videos of their private operations.

But critics of so-called ag-gag proposals say they are unnecessary and could violate constitutional rights to free speech.

The debate before the Economic Development Study Committee comes five months after House Speaker Brian Bosma, R-Indianapolis, killed a bill that would have made it a crime to secretly shoot photos or video on private property with the goal of harming a business.

Lawmakers instead sent the proposal to the study committee for more deliberation.

At issue in part are videos or images that animal rights groups use to try to discredit farming operations. Sometimes those are obtained when members trespass on private property and other times when they’re on tours or working at the businesses.

On Wednesday, Josh Trenary, the director of business development at the Indiana Pork Producers Association, said the group has policies against animal abuse and is not arguing that such practices shouldn’t be exposed.

“But just as we don’t stand for animal abuse, we don’t support any illegal act like trespassing.” Trenary said.

The pork producers support strengthening laws against trespassing and making it illegal to obtain a job under false pretenses.

“We don’t want our farms to be exploited by any activist's agenda,” Trenary said.

But some of proposals under consideration last year would have gone farther by making it a crime for news organizations to run footage obtained secretly on private property. Lawmakers amended the legislation to strengthen the state’s trespassing laws, a proposal that seemed likely to become law.

But in the last days of the session, a broader version emerged that would have allowed prosecutors to charge individuals with trespassing – a Class A misdemeanor – if they secretly took photos or video on any private property and meant to do the business harm.

Critics said that could have ensnared someone taking photos at a restaurant to show a problem with their meal or an individual capturing images of a loved one’s bruises at nursing home to show to police.

That’s when Bosma killed the bill.

On Wednesday, supporters said protections for farmers are still needed.

The Indiana Farm Bureau’s Amy Cornell said that if a farmer takes the time and expense to put up a fence, it must be seen as a clear boundary line that the farmer does not want crossed.

“People have a right to explore and express their opinions but not at the expense of private-property rights of others,” she said. “Farmers do not need to give up their property rights just because they are farmers.”

But Dave Menzer, lobbyist for the Citizens Action Coalition, told the committee that farmers are not worried about trespassers; they’re worried about what they’ll find.

“We believe the intent of this ag-gag bill from the get-go has been to shield the public from what happens in a factory farm setting,” Menzer said. “Whether it's legal or not, if more people saw how some of these factory farm operations operated, they might change how they purchase their food.”

Steve Key, executive director of the Hoosier State Press Association, said state law already addresses many of the problems that farmers and businesses are raising.

“If the problem is trespassing, then there is criminal trespass and civil trespass, so there are options a property owner has.” said Key. “If a person starts voicing false accusations, there have always been laws against libel.”

But Key said the press association could support legislation that strengthens those laws.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Bad bill
    The Ag-Gag Bill seeks to hide animal cruelty.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT