BOISE, Idaho — Animal activist groups say a new Idaho law that makes it a crime to secretly film agricultural operations proves the industry has something to hide.
But Idaho farm leaders say the Ag Security Act is about protecting the private property rights of farmers and ranchers and ensuring they aren’t prosecuted in the court of public opinion.
They also say activists threw the first stone by using a secretly recorded videotape to try to damage Idaho’s largest dairy operator.
The Idaho law, which went into effect earlier this year, is the latest round of a nationwide battle over undercover animal activists who secretly film agricultural operations in an effort to show mistreatment of animals. Seven states have similar laws on the books, and legislatures in others have debated them.
“This bill is designed to protect all of agriculture,” Rep. Gayle Batt, R-Wilder, a former farmer who sponsored the bill in the House, said. “This is a very real threat. Idaho is being proactive and saying, ‘We’re not going to allow this type of behavior in Idaho and we’re not going to allow you to treat our citizens this way.’”
Secret Video
Agricultural leaders say the impetus for the law was video footage secretly obtained in 2012 by an undercover animal activist working for Los Angeles-based Mercy for Animals. The video showed animal abuse at a Bettencourt Dairies operation near Twin Falls. Footage from the video was turned into commercials for the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) and posted on the internet.
Dairy industry leaders say it was also used to try to harm Bettencourt, which operates six milking facilities with about 35,000 cows.
In a letter to lawmakers in support of the bill, Jerome Cheese Co. CEO Jon Davis said Mercy for Animals used the video to attempt to damage Bettencourt as well as Jerome Cheese, which purchases milk from the dairy.
Davis said the activist group also attempted to pressure the companies that purchase their cheese as well as the retailers who sell that cheese.
“These intimidating and threatening tactics were used at every level of the supply chain leading from the dairy to the retailer,” Davis stated.
Davis said those actions prove that “these activist groups will go to great lengths to damage production agriculture and our customers” and that “they are well-funded and have an agenda that is to harm agriculture, not protect it.”
Idaho Dairymen’s Association executive director Bob Naerebout said Bettencourt Dairies owner Luis Bettencourt immediately fired five employees involved in the abuse when he was informed of it.
He also made all 500 employees watch the video and sign a zero-tolerance statement against animal abuse and installed 20 cameras around the installation to prevent further abuse.
Twin Falls County prosecuting attorney Grant Loebs told the Capital Press that three people were charged in the incident. One was convicted and two others fled and have warrants out for their arrest.
Loebs said there is no evidence that Luis Bettencourt or any of the dairy’s management “had any involvement in or knowledge of this incident.”
Naerebout said the Bettencourt incident forced the industry’s hand.
“If they didn’t try to destroy Mr. Bettencourt … we wouldn’t even be here,” Naerebout said during a public hearing on the bill. “They were trying to ruin a good dairyman.”
Matt Rice, director of investigations for Mercy for Animals, said his group used the video to try to get major customers such as Burger King and Kraft to pressure all of their suppliers, not just Bettencourt, to implement animal welfare changes.
He said his group did not specifically target Bettencourt and said the bill is an attempt by the industry to cover up animal abuse.
“This legislation is a desperate attempt to sweep evidence of animal abuse under the rug,” he said. “It sends a clear message to the public that the industry has a lot of horrible and corrupt practices to hide.”
The Capital Press has obtained copies of dozens of threatening emails sent to Luis Bettencourt. Several threaten Bettencourt, his family and employees.
“I hope somebody kills you all,” one states.
Another states, “I hope your company is burned to the ground and that all your employees are shot in the head. Go to hell.”
“I was personally threatened to be killed, my family was threatened to be beaten and dragged. My employees … were also threatened with physical violence,” Bettencourt said in a letter to lawmakers.
Bettencourt said he understood he is taking a risk by speaking out against activists. “I understand those risks, but want to speak out and share my experiences with the hope that other farmers in Idaho may not have to face the same attacks and threats that my family and I have,” he stated.
Bettencourt declined to be interviewed for this article and recently sold the dairy where the incident occurred.
Industry Supporters
Dairy industry supporters say the bill is about protecting private property rights and ensuring farmers and ranchers aren’t unfairly targeted in the court of public opinion.
Emmett, Idaho, dairyman Terry Jones said producers need the law “not to hide what we’re doing but to protect what we are doing.”
The key word in this debate is security, said Lou Murgoitio, a member of IDA’s board of directors.
“I believe every family farm has a reasonable right to their privacy, whether in their home or their operations,” he said during a public hearing. “Our industry needs this legislation.”
Murgoitio and other dairymen bristled at the insinuation they would tolerate or condone animal abuse and pointed out that doing so would be counter-productive.
“A happy cow produces more milk,” he said. “It’s that simple. It’s not rocket science.”
Activist Opposes Law
Matthew Dominguez, national public policy manager for HSUS, said the public wants to know more about how food is produced but that the bill shows the industry wants to operate in secrecy.
In the wake of dozens of undercover investigations exposing animal abuse by HSUS and other groups, the industry’s response has not been to take steps to prevent abuse, but “to criminalize anyone who speaks out against them and stop undercover investigations,” he said.
“It clearly shows the industry has something to hide,” said Dominguez, who helped lead opposition to the bill. “Those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.”
Dominguez said four states—Idaho, Iowa, Missouri and Utah—have passed what he calls “ag-gag” laws in the past three years, and three other states—Kansas, Montana and North Dakota—have had them on the books since the early 1990s.
About 20 states have rejected similar bills, he said.
The Idaho bill, which passed the House 56-14 and the Senate 23-10, became effective Feb. 28 when Gov. Butch Otter signed it into law.
A coalition of animal rights, civil liberty, food safety and other groups filed a federal lawsuit March 7 that seeks to overturn it.
A hearing on the state’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit will take place June 25 in Boise.
Beyond Dairy
Sen. Jim Rice, a Republican attorney from Caldwell who supported the bill, said it boils down to a private property rights issue.
“What we’re talking about are private facilities that are not open to the public,” he said. “The property owner has a right to determine what activities go on on his property.”
“We are all at risk, and that’s why all of agriculture came together on it,” said Sen. Jim Patrick, a Republican farmer from Twin Falls who carried the bill in the Senate.
Source: Capital Press