WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SR 66

URGING THIS BODY TO INTRODUCE AND PASS LEGISLATION TO ESTABLISH STRICT LIABILITY FOR INDIVIDUALS WHO KEEP, HARBOR, OR FEED CERTAIN ANIMALS IN A MANNER THAT RESULTS IN DAMAGE TO PROPERTY.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Tim Richards and 1 co-sponsor

Hawaii resolution urges strict liability laws making animal keepers automatically responsible for property damage regardless of negligence.

Offered.
#chickens #felids #penalties #propertydamage #report #study #ungulates
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SR 66

Legislative bill overview

SR 66 is a non-binding resolution urging the Hawaii legislature to create strict liability laws holding individuals legally responsible for property damage caused by animals they keep, harbor, or feed, regardless of negligence or intent. The resolution calls for legislation that would make owners/feeders automatically liable without needing to prove the defendant was careless or knew the animal was dangerous.

Why is this important

Strict liability would shift financial responsibility entirely to animal keepers/feeders rather than requiring victims to prove negligence, potentially making it easier for property owners to recover damages from wildlife-related incidents. This could particularly affect people who feed feral animals, manage livestock, or live near wildlife-prone areas, as they could face automatic liability even if they acted responsibly.

Potential points of contention

  • Definition ambiguity: "Certain animals" is vague—unclear whether this applies to domesticated pets, livestock, feral/wild animals, or all categories, creating uncertainty about who faces liability
  • Feeding wildlife consequences: Strict liability for "feeding" could penalize people who inadvertently attract animals (leaving trash accessible, having fruit trees) versus intentional feeding, raising fairness questions
  • Burden on rural/agricultural communities: Farmers and rural residents managing livestock or living in wildlife areas could face disproportionate liability exposure compared to urban residents
  • Unintended consequences: May discourage animal rescue operations or feeding programs for feral populations without clear exemptions for welfare-oriented activities

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.