Is it too expensive to be humane?
The US presidential elections happened on 4.November. Here in California we had proposition on the ballot titled “Standards for Confining Farm Animals”.
The proposition passed (63% in favor) enacting the “Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act”
What does the law prohibit?
Simply it prohibits confining farm animals in a way that does not allow them to freely turn around, lie down, stand up and fully extend their limbs. (My cats do most of that to me when I sleep… but then I’m not a farm animal 
)
Basically this outlaws “veal crates”, “battery cages” and “sow gestation crates”.
The law becomes effective on 1.January.2015 so farmers using these methods have 6 years to change.
The folks who put the proposition on the ballot want to end what they consider cruel practices. They also contend that these practices allow more disease and encourage greater use of anti-biotics.
The folks opposed to the proposition cite that it will dramatically increase the price of food.
Those in favor do not deny that it will increase the cost of certain food (eggs, veal, pork products). Tho, how much of an increase is debatable.
My sense was that most people understood voting yes would increase their food costs. And they still voted yes. It could be they were convinced by the couple of commercials that showed some of the conditions.
What about the rest of our “cheap” food. Those “efficient” farm practices that put cheap food on the grocery store shelves require heavy doses of pesticides and insecticides… not good for the person eating it, or for the environment being polluted by it, or for the workers on the front line with it.
So the question is: are we willing to spend more for more “humanely” farmed food?
It’s doubtful you could create an advertising campaign featuring an in-humanely treated bunch or broccoli to “gross us out” into to voting against the current factory farming practices. So what kind of campaign would it take to convince us to adapt more humane crop farming practices?
What other states and countries have done
There were bills in 2004 and 2007 to curb some of the cruel animal farming methods that never got through the California Senate.
In 2002 Florida passed a state Constitutional Amendment (Amendment 10) banning pig gestation crates.
In 2006 Arizona passed Proposition 2004 banning veal crates and pig gestation crates.
In 2007 Oregon Governor Kulongoski signed a measure prohibiting pig gestation crates.
In 2008 Colorado Governor Ritter signed a State law phasing out veal crates and pig gestation crates.
Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, and Austria have all banned battery cages for egg-laying hens.
The entire European Union is phasing out battery cages by 2012.
No related posts.
Mark Hawthorne said:
Prop 2 will do a lot to redress the increasingly egregious privations that factory farmers have subjected upon hens, pigs and calves. Those of us in California who supported Prop 2 believe it is torture to cram hens into grim wire cages with six or more other birds, leaving each hen less room than a sheet of letter-sized paper on which to live. That’s not even enough room to spread a single wing. Such confinement is cruel to animals and it jeopardizes human health. While this won’t end all cruelty, Prop 2 is a big step in the right direction.
Patti said:
Hopefully it will raise the bar… or at least awareness.
I remember channel surfing a couple decades ago and landing on this documentary type show about eggs. I believe it was pre-”battery” cages, but they did keep them in cages without enough room to move.
That turned me into a vegetarian.
A little awareness can often make a difference.