Proposition 2 is a measure that prohibits the on-farm confinement of calves raised for veal, pregnant pigs, and egg-laying hens in a manner that does not allow said animals to exhibit a natural range of motion, that is, allows them to lie down, stand up, turn around freely, and be able to fully extend their limbs. The new mandates won’t take effect until January 1, 2015. Certain exceptions are made for veterinary, transportation and lawful slaughter purposes. Violation of the proposed law will result in a misdemeanor charge punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and/or imprisonment in county jail for up to six months.
A “Yes” vote means that certain farm animals kept in a way that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs would be made illegal.
- Prevents the most horrible forms of animal cruelty by allowing all farm animals enough living space to perform natural ranges of motion with all of their limbs.
- Promotes food safety by ending unsanitary confinement practices.
- Protects the environment by encouraging fewer animal densities in factory farms and thus less manure runoff into local waterways and less air pollution.
- Supports family farmers and local economies by leveling the playing field with factory farms. More sustainable, smaller scale units of operation will be encouraged by the measure and enhance competition to bring down prices in a market that has been for so long stifled by destructive agribusiness.
A “No” vote means that the law regarding cruelty to animals would remain unchanged.
- Could cost thousands of farm workers their jobs and egg prices could skyrocket.
- Endangers both food safety and animal welfare by sacrificing science-supported, hygienic farming practices for ones that will increase the risk of salmonella infection, and even worse, Avian flu, to California consumers.
- Should not be a ballot box decision. If such a measure proves fatal to California’s egg and meat industries it would be too late to wait for another round of ballot voting to reverse or amend it.
Comments
Hey Chaz
They are still going to kill the animal. They just get to stretch their legs and look at the outside world through a net everyday before they get slaughtered for meat or culled because their egg production is too low. Please by all means go ahead and stop eating meat or using electricity or paying taxes to fund cruelty in Iraq. Be as militant as you like. But this bill will destroy local industries. Rich and poor alike will pay more for food that they choose to eat. And we will have people like you to thank
Prop 2 is moderate, reasonable, and good for Californians
San Jose Mercury News recommends a yes vote on Prop 2 (http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10624423). "The debate over Proposition 2 begins and ends with the question of whether it's humane for California's egg-laying hens to be forced to live their lives in cages so small that they are virtually immobile — unable to spread their wings, perch or walk around.
The answer should be obvious. Vote yes Nov. 4 to end this callous practice.... "
My post deleted? was i too militent?
Ok maybe i was too "militant" in my comments so i was deleted.
but my point was having reverence for life is about changing a mentality and belief system that starts to turn away from cruelty in all forms. this can only better the human condition and make a more humane society. Abuse of animals and people have to be be seen as something we do not like or condone. i would like to see a kinder and gentler chicken making my omelets! its about a state of mind and not just a focus on Money and finance and industry. why is it big business and industry dictates whats good for us. they have traditionally abused that as they have abused there animals for profit. So i pay more for my brake fast. or i go vegetarian so what. and my other point was it takes more energy to feed the animal then eat the veggies directly therefore helping to save energy and the environment. Oh and I'm not out of state to you people looking for any reason to discredit ones views
I hope this wins
Hahaha go ahead and kill your meat and dairy industries by driving down profits. Vegetarian dog lovers will love seeing the look on your face when you find out that a ham and egg sandwich at denny's costs a week's paycheck and has melamine in it.
CORRECTION: Out-of-state contributors to No on Prop campaign
Sorry, the link in my last comment didn't work. To see a full list of top contributors to the No on Prop 2 campaign, all out of state egg producers, click here: http://www.yesonprop2.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1.... The point is, that if these out-of-state egg producers stood to gain our egg business, they would be in support of Prop 2 but they are paying very big bucks to oppose it! This is not about California farmers, this is about improving industry standards for all states.
Prop 2 opponents are mostly OUT OF STATE!
The primary opponents of Prop 2 are all OUT OF STATE! So why would these out-of-state producers support a California proposition? Because if passed, Prop 2 will lead to industry-wide change. And at that point, California, having passed Prop 2, will be way ahead of the game. Primary Prop 2 opponents: 1. Cal-Maine Foods, Inc, Jackson, MS. 2. Moark, LLC, Missourri. 3. Foster Farms, Kelso, WA. 4. United Egg Producers, Atlanta, GA. 5. Quality Eggs of New England, Turner, Maine. 6. Hillandale Farm, Ohio. 7. National Food Corporation, Arlington, WA. And the list goes on... see http://www.yesonprop2.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1... for the full list.
Filthy conditions can't be healthy for chickens or humans!
In the story I saw, they showed farms with both methods. I was thoroughly disgusted by the "factory" farm method for egg production. The chickens were stacked 3-4 cages high with the lower level chickens covered with the excrement of the ones above. How healthy can these chickens, and therefore their eggs be in such conditions. I switched to cage free after viewing that story, so I have already voted with my dollars. Now I'll voice that with my ballot vote.
Higher egg prices and more egg imports
Look at the retail stores that are currently doing well and you can see that most people want things at the lowest price. So if California egg production goes down (as it must as less animals will be allow in the current space under Prop 2) then Calif egg prices will increase. People will not pay more (some may but not the majority) so eggs will come in from other states. So the Calif egg industry declines and more egg production goes up in other states so these measures really do nothing. People will NOT pay more for eggs because they are produced with these new standards. There is no guarentee of that. If people wanted it you'd see a stronger market already for it and producers would have the financial insentive to make the changes. This is just pure socialism and even the EU is seeing their egg farmers having issues with this type of regulation. This is just very short sighted.
Go visit a farm? If only it were that easy...
I have lived off and on in the country for the last 36 years, including my first 11 in rural Oregon. As a boy, I was surrounded by ranches and farms, including a dairy just down the road. Another neighbor raised chickens, several grew filberts, one raised beef cattle on a fairly small scale. We didn't have any eggs or major commercial livestock operations in our area - I only saw those later in life and never interacted with the proprietors the way I did with our neighbors 30 years ago. However, I suspect that some of my observations would apply to small egg operations as well.
Farmers come in all types. Some were nice folks, others were not. Some were neat, some were messy. I would be comfortable eating the beef, chickens, and milk produced by most of our neighbors of 30 years ago (though honestly on milk, once it's pasteurized it does not much matter). There were a couple whose barns and corrals were not very confidence-inspiring, but most seemed to be trying to produce a high quality product and generally succeeding.
Major commercial egg, poultry, feedlot, and dairy operations are another story. I did not really encounter these until I spent several years in the midwest, but they are not like the small farms I knew as a kid. Some not very admirable practices are adopted to increase throughput, and the aforementioned runoff alone can indeed be pretty staggering. As a kid, I knew the beef in our freezer when it was still on the hoof. We had control over what those steers ate (grass in the summer, hay, alfalfa, silage - great smelling stuff that last one, in the winter) and what antibiotics they received (none, unless they got sick and needed them). After seeing a huge feedlot in the midwest as a youngster, I never again felt comfortable buying beef from the store. No offense to those who do - it's just not for me. To this day I get my beef from a local rancher who lets me meet the cows. This probably sounds strange to those who have never seen a feedlot. Go visit one some time, then have them in California, though I'm not aware of any close to the Bay Area. You will not look at beef in the grocery store the same way again. By the way, the huge pork feedlots in the midwest that produce most of the pork we eat here in CA are every bit as bad.
Our former neighbor the dairy farmer got out of the business by the time I was in college. I didn't get to talk to him about exactly why, but I suspect it was because competition from large commercial dairies made his operation no longer viable. I have read that the break-even point as far as gallons of milk per animal per day has crept steadily upward over the last 30 years, to the point where the only way it can be done is via a diet of straight grain, hormone supplimentation, and proactive use of antibiotics to try and keep the cows in some state of health. Notice all those holsteins in the pro-prop 2 commercials? Ever wonder why you are seeing holsteins at a slaughterhouse (instead of angus, which are traditionally raised for beef)? They are cows that are no longer able to keep up at commercial dairy operations. And it doesn't take long. Average working life span for dairy cows is something like 3 years for a factory dairy now. Cows treated well can be productive at 8, 9 years old - just not at the levels that are required in a modern dairy operation that pays the bills.
Someone asked facetiously (and a bit rhetorically) why farmers would abuse their animals. It's not that simple. Most farmers treat their animals with respect, but the animals are there for a purpose too. Poultry farmers have to do lots of culling of the chicks - it's not a nice task, but it's a necessary one. It doesn't mean they are cruel or abusive to the animals. I imagine there are some dairy farmers who are horrified or outraged at what is happening in the industry, but have to adopt the same practices because what else are they going to do? A lucky few find a niche clientele who will pay above-market prices for 'natural' milk, many more just go out of business. I also believe that there are few, if any actual farmers (or at least what I would recognize as a farmer) at modern large-scale feedlots, egg ranches, and dairies.
My feeling on prop 2 is that most small farmers probably have little to worry about. Unless they have adopted the practices of the industrial-scale operations, the great majority are either already in compliance or can get there with a pretty modest amount of effort. The factory farms are going to have a lot more trouble complying. Some may indeed close shop in CA. I have to ask though - would you really want to get your eggs, chicken, or beef from a commercial operator who can't comply with prop 2? Pay a few bucks more and support your local farmers.
The time is now
Politicians historically cannot or will not stand up to the politically entrenched agriculture industry. The issue of farm animal welfare is never regarded as important enough to risk a political career on. The Humane Society had been trying to facilitate this process for the last 20 years before it resorted to the ballot proposition strategy. Prop 2 is extremely moderate. It simply ensures that the farm animals included are not kept in inhumane enclosures. Sure we could wait for a politician to make this happen, but fortunately we don't have to. All we need to do now is vote Yes on Prop 2.
hmmm
I think we need to be very skeptical about voting for regulatory propositions. If regulation is done wrong it can be crippling and counter-productive. Our best bet to improve animal rights, is to elect a politician who will appoint an informed and educated person to create appropriate regulations. A person like that can balance the needs of animals,farmers with scientific results, and make corrections if a regulation doesn't work as expected.
Prop 2
The act of tight confinement of these livestock animals increases the likelihood of disease transmission. Anything that more resembles a natural setting has to be healthier.
What is "hygienic" farming anyway? Does that include spraying with chemicals or feeding the animals antibiotics? The CON argument is strictly tactics to provoke fear of higher prices and disease.
Progress
Progress is not cheap, never was, never will be. The fact is that egg farmers have had a sweetheart deal for a couple of decades now cramming hens in cages with no restriction while they raked in bucks off of the backs of those miserable hens. Well they now have to pay that unfair advantage back. That is how it is, you take from the weak until you get caught, then the jig is up. Step aside and let progress progress. Vote yes on Prop 2!
Bio-OrganicFarmer
The Meat & Milk Industry (M & M) is threatening an increase in prices due to upgrading the deplorable conditions of farm animals. Why is this a false basis for threatening a cost hike on the consumers? The M & M is using a classic propaganda fear tactic because they have no other possible way to defend themselves so they are attacking. They refuse to address the issue of 1) devastating the environment through mountains of excrement filled with antibiotics that is fouling the countryside. The air is unfit to breathe, befouled by the current money greedy practices to get the most for the least when it comes to care safety and protection towards animals, employees, the environment and the consumer. “Several studies have found that odors from large hog operations can affect neighbors' health. One study in North Carolina found that people living near these facilities reported more tension, depression, anger, fatigue, confusion, and less overall vigor than control subjects. (Schiffman, et.al., 1995)” Of course the farm animals breathe that nitrogen turned to ammonia filled air all their lives, become sick with diverse ailments notably bronchitis get antibiotics to keep them alive and that is served on our plates not to mention that the putrid excrement filled with tons of antibiotics leeches into the ground causing harm to the land, flora and fauna. Misshapen frogs, deformed fish, unexplained asthma, allergies, cancers and the list goes on. What happened to our beautiful countryside where we go to escape the noisy polluted city? Completely contaminated by factory farm sludge. We are being poisoned as is our food so that these enormous animal prisons can keep their filthy, heinous treatment of us and the animals their corrupt secret. We have got to expose what is being done behind the agri-business IRON CURTAIN.
They want the consumer to pay for the cost. Why? They have blighted the environment and treat their animals in an atrocious manner and we the consumer should pay for their intolerable acts. Not only are they despicable but they are a twisted dangerous and devious lot who think they are not only above the law but want to be the makers of the laws that are suitable to them so the status quo reigns.
On every principal known to god and man, I say, expose the Factory/Prison Farmers for the devious money-mongers that they are. Small farms, family farms and organic farms will pick up the slack. Google - Factory farms pollution criminal and there are more than 10 pages of information regarding the horrendous acts committed by these criminals/abusers/unsavory characters. Knowing they produce food the way they deem profitable makes me nauseous and is making consumers ill, some have died due to their techniques. Many millions of cows, chickens and pigs are horrifically slaughtered every day in the most agonizing, sub-human conditions.
Don’t let this continue. The M & M has MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of $$$$ that they could use to upgrade and even lower costs but they want to foist the consumer who is already eating their shoddy products even higher prices. Hold strong, vote for Prop 2, they will never stop their shameless practices unless we vote to stop them now.
The Meat & Milk Industry is flush with money. There is a possibility for them to lower prices.
http://www.sierraclub.org/factoryfarms/factsheets/air.asp
http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/0/9/7/2/7/p9...
Clean Water and Factory Farms
Reports and Factsheets
Air Pollution from Factory Farms
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) produce air pollutants and odors that can threaten health and the environment, and reduce local property values. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and most states fail to regulate any air emissions from CAFOs.
But will it help
It's true that some change is probably needed in the California animal products industry. But will the proposal really change anything. I'm pretty doubful. The proposal adds cost to our local providers but allows them no protection so they have to compete at a disadvantage. Many local companies will either close or move to less restrictive locations. Many probably to Mexico where regulations are all but non-existant. In the end we will pay more for an inferior product and the animals will be no better off. If we want a solution we need a whole solution not piece meal.
Prop 2
Why does this measure not require that all produce sold in California meet the same standards? Does the "modern housing system" for egg laying meet the requirement of this propasal? Does the beaf and pork industry have the same "modern housing systems" the egg laying industry has?
Prop 2 is not like the negative commercials make it.
Prop 2 still would not be free range, we'd still have the differences, prop 2 is about slightly increasing cage sizes. Given that it doesn't come into place until 2015 gives a lot of time for farmers to make adjustments, though I would be in more favor of Prop 2 if there were some sort of support for farmers to get started. Raising the animals like plants in such stressful environments does have negative effects on our diets, the food quality is worse, and the potential for contamination increases greatly (multiply that by the number of animals in the farms and you see why they need to wear suits in the presence of the animals).
I'm conflicted on Prop 2 however, because neither side also speaks of the issues that Land in California is not cheap. Rather than expanding the size of their farms, many Factory farms will reduce the size of their production because of it, raising prices. We get so much from Mexico that it won't make much a difference, but what we will probably see is more out of state produce. This can bring to something that may not be any apparent differences because we may be getting eggs and pork from factory farms in other states. So this is a big issue, and it's really for the animals, both sides seem to be shifty with shady and misleading commercials, so this is an issue to think about.
We already have a
We already have a choice..
Just buy free range animal products or become a vegetarian...
Our daily actions prove our true beliefs!
The cons are nonsense. Prop 2 is carefully crafted and moderate
The cons say that it will cost farm workers their jobs, that it's experimental and will be too late to turn back if it doesn't work out, and that it endangers safety. Similar laws have passed in seven other states with none of the negative effects claimed. NAFTA provides that farmers could go to mexico now anyway, but they don't because it's not economical. The Union of Concerned scientists and the Center for Food Safety endorse the law because of the health benefits of this law on the public.
Most importantly to prove these con arguments are ridiculous: the law doesn't go into effect until 2015!
?
I would like to know how the act of allowing livestock have more physical space will increase the spread of salmonella infection and Avian flu?? It seems to me that keeping animals in TIGHTER, as opposed to looser quarters, would promote such infection at a significantly higher rate.
Prop 2
A little more money for eggs, chicken, pork and beef in order to have less egregious methods sounds like the right long term method. If it costs a little more then so be it. We still need to be protected from disease, but I don't see that small family farms are synonymous with the spread of bacteria/viruses. In fact it seems to me that the closer contact enabled by mass production runs a higher risk of the spread of contaminants into our food supply. Diversification may lead to cheaper prices and less overall risk.
Ask Yourself
Does saving a few dollars justify cruelty to animals? As long as there is no regulation requiring adequate enclosure space for animals raised for food, producers compete to cut costs at all costs, including disregard for animal welfare, to meet the demand for cheap eggs. For this reason, regulation is needed to ensure humane treatment of animals, not to mention ensuring better standards for our food and environment.
Facebook
YouTube
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Twitter
Newsvine
Propeller
Mixx
Xanga
LinkedIn