Proposition 2, the proposed Standards for Confining Farm Animals initiative statute, is a California ballot proposition in that state's general election on November 4, 2008. The proposition would add a chapter to Division 20 of California's Health and Safety Code to prohibit the confinement of certain farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to tum around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs. The measure would deal with three types of confinement: veal crates, battery cages, and sow gestation crates. If approved by the voters, the statute would become operative on January 1, 2015. Farming operations would have until that date to implement the new space requirements for their animals, and the measure would prevent animals in California from being confined in these ways in the future.
[edit] Ballot Label summary
The California Secretary of State's summary from the Official Voter Information Guide of Proposition 2 is as follows:[1]
"STANDARDS FOR CONFINING FARM ANIMALS. INITIATIVE STATUTE. Requires that certain farm animals be allowed, for the majority of every day, to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up and turn around. Limited exceptions apply. Fiscal Impact: Potential unknown decrease in state and local tax revenues from farm businesses, possibly in the range of several million dollars annually. Potential minor local and state enforcement and prosecution costs, partly offset by increased fine revenue."
[edit] Similar laws enacted in The United States and Europe
- On November 5, 2002, Florida voters passed Amendment 10, an amendment to the Florida Constitution banning the confinement of pregnant pigs in gestation crates. The Amendment passed by a margin of 55% for and 45% against.[2]
- On November 7, 2006, Arizona voters passed Proposition 204 with 62% support. The measure prohibits the confinement of calves in veal crates and breeding sows in gestation crates.
- On June 28, 2007, Oregon's governor Ted Kulongoski signed a measure into law prohibiting the confinement of pigs in gestation crates (SB 694, 74th Leg. Assembly, Regular Session).[3]
- On May 14, 2008, Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed into law a bill, SB 201, that phases out gestation crates and veal crates.[4][5]
- 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.
[edit] Similar legislation attempted in California and other states
- On January 14, 2004, the bill AB-732 was withdrawn from the State Assembly. The primary author of AB-732 was Loni Hancock of the 14th District. The bill would have banned gestation and veal crates, eventually being amended to include only veal crates, despite California's lack of veal farmers. [6]
- On May 9, 2007, the bill AB-594 was withdrawn from the State Assembly. The primary author of AB-594 was Mervyn Dymally of the 52nd District. AB-594 was very similar to the current language of Proposition 2. [7].
- In January of 2008, Nebraska State Senator DiAnna Schimek, at the behest of the The Humane Society of the United States, submitted bill LB 1148 to ban the use of gestation crates for pig farmers. It was withdrawn within 5 days amidst controversy, and a kill motion was filed by State Senator Phil Erdman. [8]
[edit] Assertions by proponents
Prop 2, the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, is a modest measure that ends the cruel and inhumane confinement of specified animals on factory farms, ending the practice of forcing them to spend their entire lives in spaces so small that they are physically unable to turn around, lie down, or fully extend their legs and/or wings. Prop 2 does the following:
[edit] Prevents cruelty to animals
Currently, large-scale, industrialized, "factory" farms house veal calves, breeding pigs, and egg-laying hens in tightly confined enclosures that are barely larger than their own bodies. Veal calves are tethered by the neck and spend their entire lives standing side-by-side to each other, unable to even turn around or lie down fully. Mature female pigs are placed into restrictive pens, with metal bars and concrete floors, which prevent them from taking even a single step forwards or backwards for the remainder of their lives, while they are impregnated. Egg-laying hens in modern housing systems are placed into "battery cages," where the space given to each bird is no larger than a single sheet of notebook paper, and the animals must have their beaks painfully cut off to prevent them from attacking each other due to overcrowding. Animals living their entire lives in such overcrowded conditions often develop severe medical and/or psychological problems. The American Veterinary Medical Association agrees that the best housing environments for farm animals must take into consideration freedom of movement and expression of normal behaviors. A similar law was passed in Arizona two years ago, which applied to veal crates and gestation pens but not battery cages, resulting in the phasing out of these factory farming methods by meat producers nationwide. Thus, the measure improved not only animal welfare in the state, but it encouraged reform in the rest of the nation as well. Industry leaders agree that a similar experience will likely take place in the egg industry when Californians pass Prop 2.
[edit] Improves our health and food safety
As the result of a Humane Society investigation of a Southern California slaughter plant earlier this year, we all witnessed the introduction of sick and crippled cows into our food supply. As diseased animals are more likely to carry illnesses that can be transmitted to humans, this prompted authorities to pull meat off school menus and initiate a nationwide recall. The agricultural industry clearly does not do an adequate job of policing itself when it comes to food safety. Factory farms put human health at risk by cramming tens of thousands of animals into tiny cages, fostering the spread of diseases that may affect people. Research studies have shown that animals under stress, including the stress of intensive confinement, have higher levels of pathogens in their intestines. When we use these animals as food, these disease-causing mircro-organisms are passed along to us. Studies have also shown that increased density of birds in battery cages leads to increased incidences of Salmonella. Buildings housing battery cages, where literally thousands of egg-laying hens are stacked on top of one other, are very difficult to keep clean. They often are infested by large numbers of flies and rats. There is also an increased need for the use of drugs such as antibiotics in the diseased and/or stressed animals living on factory farms, and these drugs end up contaminating our food and water supply. Prop 2 is better for both animal and human health, which is why it is endorsed by The Center for Food Safety, United Farm Workers, Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, Center for Science in the Public Interest, and Union of Concerned Scientists.
[edit] Supports family farmers
California family farmers support Prop 2 because they know that farming practices which promote better animal welfare enhance food quality and safety. Increasingly, smaller farms which raise animals under more natural and humane methods are supplying major retailers like Safeway, Burger King, and Wolfgang Puck, under pressure from consumers concerned about the taste and nutritional value of their food. Passing Prop 2 means that smaller, local, family farms will have an increased competitive edge over larger factory farms. Currently, when these factory farms cut corners by inhumanely treating farm animals as mere cogs in their machine, they drive family farmers out of business. Industrialization of farming has been accompanied by increasing farm size and gross farm sales, lower family income, higher poverty rates, lower retail sales, lower housing quality, and lower wages for farm workers. The main concern of the agribusiness industry is maximizing their own profits, not supporting local farmers, farm workers, animal welfare, or human health. More than 100 family farmers, the Cesar Chavez Foundation, and United Farm Workers have all endorsed Prop 2.
[edit] Protects air and water and safeguards the environment
The American Public Health Association has called for a moratorium on new factory farms because of the devastating effects that these operations can have on surrounding communities. Industrialized farming operations spread untreated waste on the ground and toxic ammonia emissions in the air, contaminating our waterways, lakes, groundwater, soil, and atmosphere. Often, land surrounding highly concentrated animal-farming operations becomes contaminated to the point that it is no longer suitable for human use, and property values in these communities drop drastically. Studies have found that neighbors of industrialized animal farms report more frequent occurrences of headaches, excessive coughing, diarrhea, and burning eyes as well as respiratory problems, weakness, and nausea. Furthermore, recent studies have found that children who attend schools near factory farms suffer increased incidences of asthma. The United Nations and the Environmental Protection Agency have identified factory farms as major sources of greenhouse gases which cause global warming. Prop 2 helps stop some of the worst abuses of our environment and protects our precious natural resources. That’s why Greenpeace USA, California Clean Water Action, Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club‐California, Center for Environmental Health, and Silicon Vally Toxics Coalition support Prop 2.
[edit] A reasonable and common‐sense reform
Prop 2 provides ample time--until 2015--for factory farms using these severe confinement methods to shift to more humane practices. Arizona, Colorado, Florida, and Oregon have passed similar laws. Prop 2 is supported by The Humane Society of the United States, the ASPCA, hundreds of California veterinarians, including the California Veterinary Medical Association, California family farmers, the Center for Food Safety, the Consumer Federation of America, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the United Farm Workers, the Union of Concerned Scientists, Family Farm Defenders, the Cesar Chavez Foundation, Republican and Democratic elected officials, California religious leaders, the National Catholic Rural Life Conference, and many others.
Smithfield Foods, the largest U.S. pig producer, is phasing out gestation crates, and the American Veal Association voted to urge the entire veal industry to phase out veal crates. Colorado-based chain Chipotle already refuses to buy any pork from producers that use gestation crates. Chains such as Safeway, Burger King, Carl’s Jr. and Hardees have also implemented policies to reduce their reliance on gestation crate pork. Burger King, Denny's, Carl's Jr. and Hardee's are beginning to move away from cage eggs. Wolfgang Puck has ended his use of cage eggs. Restaurant chains Burgerville and Finagle A Bagel have instituted cage-free egg policies, while Bruegger's is exclusively using cage-free eggs in its Wisconsin, Vermont, and Western Massachusetts bagel cafes. Ben & Jerry's is phasing out its use of cage eggs as well. Even companies such as AOL and Google exclusively use cage-free eggs in their employee cafeterias. Chicago's Swedish Covenant Hospital will only serve cage-free eggs to its patients, and Omni Hotels will not serve battery cage eggs to its hotel guests in their 40 locations. The egg industry's own economist has estimated that eliminating battery cages for egg-laying hens will result in increased production costs of less than one cent per egg, and a recent U.C. Davis study concluded that Prop 2 will have no major impact on egg prices for California consumers. This is a simple and straightforward initiative intended to stop the cruel treatment of farm animals. In fact, when most people first learn about the intense confinement of animals on factory farms, they are surprised to find out that these inhumane living conditions are not already prohibited by law in California or most of the United States.
[edit] Assertions by opponents
Opponents claim that Proposition 2 - which they call "the UN-SAFE Food Initiative" - is a risky, dangerous and costly measure banning almost all modern egg production in California. Proposition 2 jeopardizes food safety and public health, wipes out Californians’ access to locally grown, fresh eggs, and harms consumers by driving up prices at grocery stores and restaurants and creates a dependency on eggs shipped from other states and Mexico.
[edit] Undermines animal welfare & food safety in California
California egg farmers, working with leading animal scientists have developed leading egg production methods to ensure that fundamental components of sound animal care are provided to egg-laying hens: optimal feed, light, air, water, space and sanitation for egg-laying hens. By arbitrarily altering space configurations, Prop. 2 ignores how this change could negatively impact these other essential animal care components.
-The humane treatment of animals, including farm animals, is already required by California law. Enclosing animals without proper care and treatment is prohibited, and animals must have adequate room to “exercise” themselves. Modern housing systems for egg-laying hens are designed so hens can groom, lie down, stand, stretch, turn around and engage in other natural behaviors.
-In California, 98 percent of egg farms already adhere to the toughest, most stringent food safety standards in the U.S. under the California Egg Quality Assurance Plan (CEQAP). CEQAP requires that California egg farms use the most modern, safe and practical egg farming techniques and standards.
-The United Egg Producers Certified Animal Welfare Program, established and maintained by an independent scientific advisory board, mandates certified U.S. egg farmers follow responsible, science based modern production methods in the care of their hens. Certified farmers must place top priority on the comfort, health and safety of hens and submit to independent USDA audits. Approximately 95% of California’s egg farmers are UEP-certified.
[edit] Threatens food safety and increases salmonella risk
-Our food safety is already at risk, with infections, poisoning and even deaths from food borne Salmonella contamination.
-Dangerous Salmonella contamination can be transmitted through animal feces, including egg-laying hens. Modern housing systems, banned under Proposition 2, are more sanitary because they effectively separate eggs from feces and other fluids.
-According to the California Department of Food and Agriculture, CEQAP standards have been credited with helping control egg-associated Salmonella enteritidis (SE) infections in California.
-In nearly a decade, there has not been a reported case of SE linked to California eggs. However, 118,000 Americans become ill each year from SE-contaminated eggs coming from other states, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
-Out-of-state and foreign egg producers, such as Mexico, do not have the same high food-safety standards as California.
[edit] Jeopardizes public health
-Modern housing systems were developed to protect egg-laying hens from direct contact with migratory and wild birds, which can carry life threatening Avian Influenza (Bird Flu), Exotic Newcastle Disease and other diseases that can be deadly to humans or hens.
-According to the World Health Organization, transmission of Bird Flu from poultry to humans results in “very serious disease” and “could mark the start of a global outbreak (a pandemic).”
-Proposition 2 wipes out almost all modern egg production in California, despite the U.S. Animal Health Association’s assertion that moving flocks inside has “contributed significantly to the improvement in health of the nation’s chicken and turkey flocks.”
[edit] Eliminates fresh, safe, & local eggs in 2015; forces a dependence on eggs from Mexico & out-of-state unless CA farms employ humane practices
-Wide-sweeping and onerous, Proposition 2 effectively bans all egg production in California and will drive the state’s egg industry out of business.
-California consumers will have virtually no options to purchase or consume locally-produced, fresh eggs, as Prop. 2 bans almost all modern egg production in the state, making it economically infeasible for California farmers to compete against foreign production.
-Californians will be forced to rely on imported eggs, trucked in from out of state and Mexico, where food safety standards are not as high.
[edit] Drives up consumer prices and costs
-Agriculture is California’s #1 industry. Proposition 2 wipes out an entire segment of that industry, as egg production costs will rise by an estimated 76 percent under the measure.
-Proposition 2 will significantly increase – and could even triple – the price of locally-produced California eggs, forcing consumers to pay higher prices for eggs at a time when Californians are already experiencing sky-rocketing prices for groceries, gasoline and other basic living expenses.
-California will lose thousands of jobs and $615 million in economic activity, and millions more in lost state and local tax revenues.
[edit] Broad coalition of family farmers, veterinarians, public health and food safety experts, & consumers opposed
-Proposition 2 is opposed by Californians for SAFE Food, a broad-based and growing coalition of public health and food safety experts, labor unions, consumers, family farmers and veterinarians. The coalition includes groups like the Agricultural Council of California, Armstrong Egg Farms, Association of California Veterinarians, California Agricultural Teachers' Association, California Grocers Association, California Women for Agriculture, Kern County Taxpayers Association, Mexican American Political Association and National Animal Interest Alliance.
[edit] Police power given to the people
One of the lesser known effects of Proposition 2 would be the use of police powers by organizations and groups that up until now have never had such powers granted to them. The following legal opinion was drafted by legal analysts for Feedstuffs magazine ("a weekly newspaper serving agribusiness decision-makers involved in the manufacture, production and distribution of products and services for livestock and poultry" [9]) and was subsequently published in the 7/18/08 edition. "...Normally, investigations surrounding and arrests for alleged violations of criminal statutes are conducted by law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities.
However, in a paper based on legal opinion and provided to Feedstuffs, it was noted that California law is unique in that enforcement of animal cruelty and welfare laws "can be undertaken and/or compelled by any individual or by certain non-profit organizations."
The paper quoted California Penal Code 599a, which provides that an individual, who can represent a non-profit organization, can compel issuance of search warrants upon making a complaint under oath.
When such a complaint is made to any magistrate authorized to issue warrants that the complainant believes that any law relating to, or in any way affecting, "dumb animals or birds is being, or is about to be, violated in any particular building or place," that magistrate must issue a warrant to any law enforcement officer or to an officer of a legally qualified association "authorizing him to enter and search that building or place and to arrest any person there violating, or attempting to violate," the law, according to the paper's summation of the penal code.
The initiative qualified for the ballot through a petition carried by animal activists led by Farm Sanctuary and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), both non-profit organizations. Accordingly, the paper suggested that any representative of Farm Sanctuary, HSUS or other animal activist group "would be free to demand and execute warrants and make arrests" to enforce the initiative, the paper said.
The empowerment of non-profit organizations to enforce California animal cruelty laws is further provided for in California Corporations Code Sections 10400 and 14502, the paper said, noting that representatives of such organizations can obtain "peace officer" powers with respect to animal welfare laws.
This unique enforcement feature is almost never referred to by supporters of Prop 2 and is not ordinarily understood by the voting public, the paper said." Feedstuffs "Animal rights activists receive more police power with proposed law" published 7/18/08.
Supporters of Prop 2, however, counter that this is a scare tactic, and we've heard it before. All California anti-cruelty laws, including the ones which currently govern factory farms and which they are claiming are sufficient, are enforced by police officers and humane agencies that have local jurisdiction. There is no precedent here and nothing different created by Prop 2.
[edit] Supporters of Prop 2 - broad coalition of family farmers, veterinarians, public health and food safety experts, consumers, churches, farm workers, environmental groups, public officials, and humane societies
Key endorsements as of August 26, 2008
- The Humane Society of the United States, Sierra Club‐California, California Veterinary Medical Association, California Democratic Party, Center for Food Safety, Consumer Federation of America, the ASPCA, and United Farm Workers.
- California veterinary professionals -- The California Veterinary Medical Association, 700 California veterinarians and more than 150 California veterinary medical students, the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association, the San Diego County Veterinary Medical Association, and nearly 60 veterinary hospitals and clinics
- California farmers -- More than 70 California farmers, including Bill Niman, Prather Ranch, Dobson Dairy Ranch, Eatwell Farms, Flores Ranch, Lunny Ranch, and US Farms, Inc.
- Animal protection charities -- More than 100 organizations, including more than a dozen California humane societies and SPCAs in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Sacramento and beyond; the State Humane Association of California; and leading national organizations like Farm Sanctuary, the National Federation of Humane Societies, and Best Friends Animal Society
- Elected officials and local governments -- The city councils of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Davis, Santa Monica, Santa Cruz, West Hollywood, and Berkeley; US Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein; State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell; US Representatives John Campbell (Orange County), Elton Gallegly (Santa Barbara), Barbara Lee (East Bay), Brad Sherman (San Fernando Valley), and Maxine Waters (Los Angeles); Mayors Gavin Newsom (San Francisco), Marty Blum (Santa Barbara), and Craig Litwin (Sebastapol); state Senators Dean Florez (Bakersfield/Fresno), Sheila Kuehl (Los Angeles), Christine Kehoe (San Diego) and Carole Migden (San Francisco); Assembly Speaker pro Tem Sally Lieber (Mountain View); and Assembly members Mike Davis (Los Angeles), Merv Dymally (Los Angeles), Loni Hancock (Albany), Paul Krekorian (Glendale), Mark Leno (San Francisco), Lloyd Levine (Van Nuys), and Jose Solorio (Anaheim); and former Mayor Richard Riordan (Los Angeles) and former US Representative John Burton (San Francisco)
- Celebrities & public figures -- Nearly 70 well‐known experts, authors, actors, actresses, chefs, and others, including Dr. Jane Goodall, Michael Pollan, Ed Begley, Jr., Bill McKibben, Eric Schlosser, Ellen DeGeneres, Daryl Hannah, Alicia Silverstone, Ed Asner, and more
- Leading nonprofit and advocacy organizations -- More than 45 organizations across the country that are working to address the public health, environmental, social justice and animal welfare impacts of factory farming, including the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Compassion in World Farming, United Farm Workers, the Cesar Chavez Foundation, Defenders of Wildlife, Greenpeace USA, Organic Consumers Association, and the Union of Concerned Scientists
- Religious organizations and leaders National and state leaders from across the religious spectrum, including: the National Catholic Rural Life Conference, The Right Reverend Marc Handley Andrus, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of California, Bishop Beverly J. Shamana, California Nevada Conference, United Methodist Church, Bishop Mary Ann Swenson, California‐Pacific Conference, United Methodist Church, The Right Reverend James R. Mathes, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Diego, Richard Mouw, President of Fuller Seminary, and nearly 80 leaders of individual California congregations
- California businesses and business owners -- Nearly 300 California businesses from all walks of commerce, including restaurants, artists, pet‐related stores and services, real estate brokers, grocery stores, health care professionals, construction, and more
- See complete list of endorsements at http://www.yesonprop2.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=52&Itemid=85
[edit] Opponents of Prop 2
Californians for SAFE Food is a broad-based and growing coalition of public health and food safety experts, labor unions, consumers, family farmers and veterinarians who want to keep food choices in California safe, local and affordable. The coalition has already received the endorsement of a number of prominent groups and individuals, including the American College of Poultry Veterinarians; Agricultural Council of California; Association of California Veterinarians; Association of Veterinarians in Egg Production; California Conference Board of the Amalgamated Transit Union; California Grocers Association; California Teamsters Public Affairs Council; California Women for Agriculture; Kern County Taxpayers Association; Marin County Farm Bureau; Merced County Board of Supervisors; Mexican American Political Association; National Animal Interest Alliance; National Latino Congreso; San Diego County Farm Bureau; Sonoma County Farm Bureau; Dr. Craig Reed, DVM, former Deputy Administrator, Food Safety and Inspection Service, USDA; among many others.
The experts who specialize in the veterinary care of egg-laying hens – avian scientists, poultry veterinarians and other food animal veterinarians – overwhelmingly oppose Prop. 2. National and statewide veterinary groups that have joined the coalition opposing Prop. 2 include: Association of California Veterinarians, American Association of Avian Pathologists, American College of Poultry Veterinarians, Association of Veterinarians in Egg Production and California Food Animal Veterinary Medical Association.
View the complete list of opponents of at http://www.safecaliforniafood.org/node/20
[edit] Field Poll
According to a Field Poll released on 7/22/08, after hearing a description of Prop 2, 63% of likely California voters polled said they would vote "yes", 24% said "no", and 13% were undecided.
[edit] Vote totals
| Proposition 2 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Yes or no | Votes | Percentage |
| Yes | ||
| No | ||
| Invalid or blank votes | ||
| Totals | 100.00% | |
| Voter turnout | ||
[edit] References
- ^ "Title and Summary", Secretary of State of California (2008-07-03). Retrieved on 2008-07-29.
- ^ "PorkNet Newsletter", MetaFarms.com, Inc (2002-11-07). Retrieved on 2008-07-03.
- ^ "Back door activists gain momentum", Learfield Communications, Inc. (2007-07-05). Retrieved on 2008-07-03.
- ^ "Farm Sanctuary Applauds Colorado for Passing Legislation Phasing out Veal and Gestation Crates", Reuters (2008-05-14). Retrieved on 2008-07-03.
- ^ "Farm Animal Welfare Measure Becomes Law", Federation of Animal Science Societies (FASS) (2008-05-14). Retrieved on 2008-07-03.
- ^ "AB-732 Analysis". California State Assembly (2008-01-14).
- ^ "AB-594 Analysis". California State Assembly (2008-05-09).
- ^ ""Farm Animal Welfare Bill Killed in Legislature"", Omaha World Daily (2008-02-17).
- ^ "Feedstuffs". Retrieved on August 4, 2008.
[edit] External links
- Text of Proposition 2
- Californians for Humane Farms – pro-proposition website
- Californians for SAFE Food – anti-proposition website
- The Public Health Benefits of Proposition 2: An Evidence-Based Analysis
- Feedstuffs Magazine - link to legal analysis at Foodstuffs magazine
From the Official Voter Information Guide (draft copy) for the November 4, 2008, California General Election:
More links:
|
||||||||||||||