Skip to content
S59Senate2015-2016 SessionSame asA384

Confinement of certain animals for food producing purposes

Sponsor Phil BoyleSD-4+1 co-sponsorAffects Economy
Status
In Senate Committee
Agriculture
Impact
Pending
Passage
Pending

Bill progress

Step 2 of 7

In committee · Agriculture

What's happening

Writing a plain-English summary… Track this bill to get it by email.

Why it matters

The daily · weekday mornings

Albany, before your first meeting.

Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.

Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.

Who cares

Headline styles

Sponsors

Primary sponsor
Phil Boyle

Senator · Senate District 4

Chair, Commerce, Economic Development And Small Business

1 Co-sponsor

History

  1. Referred to agriculture
  2. Print number 59a
  3. Amend and recommit to agriculture
  4. Referred to agriculture

Companion bill

The same bill in the other chamber. A bill becomes law when one version passes both houses and the governor signs it, so either number can carry it.

A384Assembly

Confinement of certain animals for food producing purposes

In Assembly Committee · Agriculture · Sponsor Linda Rosenthal

Full text

The text isn't available here yet. Check nysenate.gov.

Sponsor's memo

BILL NUMBER:S59A

Title of bill

An act to amend the agriculture and markets law, in relation to the confinement of certain animals for food producing purposes

Purpose

This bill will phase out pig gestation crates and veal crate cages by 2016.

Summary of provisions

Section 1 subdivision one amends the agriculture and markets law by adding a new section 353-g that defines the terms employed for the purposes of this bill. Subdivision two would make it unlawful for any person to confine any covered animal in a manner that prevents them from lying down, standing up and fully extending its limbs and turning around freely. Subdivision 3 lists exemption's to the rules set forth in the previous subdivision, Subdivision 4 would make any violation of the provisions of this section a Class A misdemeanor. Subdivision 5 provides that nothing contained in this section shall conflict with humane local laws. Subdivision 6 stipulates that nothing in this section shall reduce the protection afforded to animals or the enforcement of such protection. Subdivision 7 sets out the enforcement mechanism for this section.

Section 2 sets out the effective date.

Justification

Harsh confinement within confinement crates and cages deprives calves and pigs of the ability to engage in natural behavior. Animals confined in such circumstances experience extensive and significant physical and psychological trauma.

Nationwide, about 1 million calves raised for veal and 6 million breeding sows (female pigs) suffer nearly their entire lives inside tiny crates so small the animals can't even turn around. According the Humane Society of the United States, veal factory farmers separate calves from their mothers within the first few days of birth and cram them into individual crates or stalls, tethered by their necks. Inside these enclosures, the calves can barely move.

Breeding sows suffer under similar circumstances. Gestation crates board pregnant pigs for nearly their entire four-month pregnancy, These tiny metal crates are not even large enough for the pig to move or perform natural behaviors such as cleaning themselves or simply turning around.

Veal and pork producers nationally are already in the process of phasing out veal and gestation crates. All veal producers have set a deadline of 2017 for themselves to phase out veal crates. In January 2007, Smithfield, the nation's largest pork producer, announced that they would phase out the confinement of pigs over the next decade and

Cargill, the nation's eighth biggest pork producer, has also stated that it is working on phasing out confinement.

Bans on gestation crates are not without precedent. In 2002, Florida voters banned gestation crates in a 55% - 45% vote. In 2006, Arizona voters banned both gestation crates and veal crates. In 2007, the Oregon legislature banned gestation crates and in 2006, the Colorado legislature banned both gestation crates and veal crates. Finally, this past November, California voters passed Proposition 2 which banned gestation crates, veal crates and battery cages. The entire European Union has also banned both veal crates and gestation crates, effective 2007 and 2013, respectively.

Legislative history

A.9449/2012

Fiscal implications

None.

Effective date

This act shall take effect twenty-four months after it shall have become law.

Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.