THE AYCTO 

OF TEXAS 

Honorable H. Q. Sibley, D. V. M. 

Executive Director 

Texas Animal Health Commission 

1020 Sam Houston State Office Building 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Dear Dr. Sibley: 

Opinion No. H- 148 

Re: The requirement that 

brucellosis infected 

cattle be branded and 

slaughtered. Article 

152513, $ 23A, V.T.P.C. 

You have asked whether the Texas Animal Health Commission can 

require slaughter of brucellosis diseased animals within fifteen days of 

their designation as a “reactor. ” 

Section 23A of Article 1525b, Vernon’s Texas Penal Code, provides: 

“(I) Purpose. It is the purpose of this Section to 

bring about the effective control and eventual eradication of bovine brucellosis in the State of Texas and 

to accomplish that purpose in the most effective, 

practical, and expeditious manner. 

‘I.. . . 

“(18) Should evidence of infection be disclosed in any 

of the animals required to be tested, such animals 

that react to the test shall be fire branded with the 

,letter ‘B’ on the left jaw and such cattle and herds 

shall be handled in accordance with regulations of the 

[Texas Animal Health Commission] which sha,ll provide 

for the issuance of quarantines, the manner, method 

and system of disposing of reactor cattle, the testing 

and retesting of infected herds, and the cleaning and 

disinfection of premises following removal of reactor 

cattle. ” 

p. 694 
. . - 

The Honorable H. Q. Sibley, page 2 (H-148) 

Among the regulations and procedures adopted by the Texas Animal 

Health Commission is “Plan A - Voluntary Cooperative Agreement for the 

Control and Eradication of Brucellosis in Bovine Animals. ” Section II 

provides in part: 

“2. All animals designated as reactors must be fire 

branded with the fetter ‘B’ on the left jaw as required 

by Saw and disposed of within fifteen (15) days by consigning them for immediate slaughter to establishments 

maintaining Federal, State or Municipal veterinary 

post-mortem inspection. ” 

You have informed us that the acceptance of Plan A is a prerequisite 

to the issuance of a Grade A milk permit by the State Department of Health. 

By the express language of the statute, the Legislature empowered 

the Commission to determine the manner, method and system of disposal 

of reactor cattle. It is clear that the Legislature has the power to give 

this authority and discretion to the Commission. Mulkey v. State, 201s. W. 

991 (.Tex. Crim. 1918) ; Attorney General Opinion WW-835 (1960). 

We do not believe that the method chosen for the identification and 

destruction of contaminated cattle is violative of any constitutional protection. See specifically, United States Constitution, Amendment 14; Texas 

Constitution, Article 1, $ $17 and 19. The exercise of the police power of 

the State in designating diseased cattle and consigning them for slaughter 

is not a constitutionally proscribed “taking” or “damaging” of property. 

Nunley v. Texas Animal Health Commission, 471 S. W. 2d 144 (Tex. Civ.App. 

San Antonio, 1971, error ref’d, n. r. e.). Likewise, there is no constitutional 

defect in a procedure which permits summary administrative action subject 

to later judicial review in the interest of health and safety. North American 

Cold Storage Co. v. City of Chicago, 211 U.S. 306 (1908); Nunley v. Texas 

Animal Health Commission, supra. 

p. 695 
. . 

The Honorable H.Q. Sib:Ley, page 3 (H-148) 

SUMMARY 

The Texas Animal Health Commission may 

require the slaughter of brucellosis infected cattle 

within fifteen days of the determination of infection. 

Very truly yours, 

Attorney General of Texas 

APPROV.ED: ‘ 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

p. 696