I'm going to go back to one of the previous questions.
We know that animal rights groups have expressed some concerns about the bill, stating that it's not about the health of animals as much as it's about a trespass law. Hopefully you can help me with that.
We know that many instances of animal abuse on farms have been documented by farm employees who work there. I think you've been very supportive of that in stating that. If a farm employee with lawful authority or excuse to be on the farm property were to document an instance of animal abuse using a “thing”, as I raised earlier, for example a cellphone camera, it seems that what you're seeking to do here is have that farm employee indirectly subject to a $50,000 to a $200,000 fine and possible jail time. Does that not seem like an awfully tough punishment for documenting instances of animal abuse?
Maybe you can dive in a little more on that, the concern about that language, because that's where it could lead.