Articles in this document:

· Agribusiness fights California proposal that expands animal rights

· Yes on Prop 2 for Animals’ Health

· State veal, livestock producers eye California proposition

Agribusiness fights California proposal that expands animal rights

By Julie Schmit, USA TODAY

November 2, 2008

SAN FRANCISCO — A California ballot measure to improve conditions for farm animals has generated national opposition from agribusiness interests.

If passed Tuesday, Proposition 2 would prevent California farmers from confining egg-laying hens, pregnant pigs and veal calves in ways that don't allow them to lie, stand and extend their limbs.

The proposal has grown into the most expensive animal-rights ballot measure ever, with both sides raising almost $8 million each. Some opponents are concerned that it could spur national changes.

"If it passes in California, Oregon will be the next one … and it'll spread through the nation," says Gordon Satrum, co-owner of Willamette Egg Farms in Canby, Ore.

Willamette, like other egg and pork producers nationwide, has contributed money to fund the opposing campaign.

Other measures banning restrictive crates for pigs and veal calves have passed in Florida, Arizona, Colorado and Oregon. California will be the test case for hens. The state doesn't have much of a veal or pork industry but supplies almost 6% of the nation's eggs.

Proposition 2 opponents, who include some poultry veterinarians and academic experts, say the changes would drive egg prices far higher and put California producers out of business because they couldn't compete with out-of-state rivals or Mexican imports.

They also say that giving hens so much more room — as required by the measure — will increase the risk of salmonella and avian flu outbreaks because hens would be more exposed to their feces and that of migrating birds, which spread avian flu.

"It has a number of consequences that has the potential to be hazardous to bird health and to human health," says Nancy Reimers, a California poultry veterinarian who's also a paid consultant to the coalition leading the opposition, Californians for Safe Food.

Small cages at issue

The measure is being pushed by the Humane Society of the United States and is supported by other animal protection groups and the California Veterinary Medical Association.

Earlier this year, the Humane Society gained national recognition for exposing animal cruelty at a California cattle slaughterhouse, which led to the company's closure, the biggest beef recall ever and new regulations regarding the slaughter of non-ambulatory cattle.

Proposition 2 supporters say it's inhumane to keep hens, pigs and calves in crates slightly larger than their bodies. They also say the changes, to be phased in by 2015, may lead to only small increases in egg prices and that salmonella risks drop when hens are not caged. The proposition doesn't require the hens to be outdoors, they say, so no increased avian flu risk is likely.

Current conditions "immobilize animals" and prevent natural behaviors, says Wayne Pacelle, CEO of the Humane Society. He says pigs and calves are confined such that they can't turn around, and that caged hens are "living on top of each other."

He says Proposition 2 would hasten the industry's shift to cage-free eggs, which more buyers want but which cost about 25% more at retail and account for less than 5% of the market.

Burger King last year started buying some cage-free eggs. Trader Joe's has gone cage free, and Google serves only cage-free eggs in corporate dining rooms. Instead of faltering, Pacelle says, California producers can lead the industry's transition.

Space challenges

Today's industry standards call for caged hens to get at least 67 square inches of space each, a little less than a regular-size sheet of paper. Hens are typically caged in groups of two to eight.

Farmers say the hens can stand and turn to reach food and water on different ends of the cage. What hens can't do is stretch their wings without touching the cage or another hen — which Proposition 2 requires.

The measure's opponents say that, if interpreted strictly, the proposition would require more than 5 square feet of space per hen so they can all stretch wings at the same time. That is so much space even cage-free operations — which require 1- to 1.5-square-feet per hen — wouldn't comply, they say.

"We don't have enough land," to do that, says Ryan Armstrong, of the family-owned Armstrong Egg Farms near San Diego. "We'll be out of business."

His 60-year-old company has 660,000 hens; 9% are cage free. He says the measure would require Armstrong to reduce its hen count by two-thirds or invest $20 million. That may not be feasible and would lead to higher egg prices.

Pacelle says the claim that the proposition requires all hens to be able to extend their wings at the same time is "ludicrous." On its website, Proposition 2 supporters say that claim displays the "level of the desperation that factory farms will go to."

usatoday.com

Yes on Prop 2 for Animals’ Health

ONLINE EXCLUSIVE

Andrew Dunn**

Daily Nexus - University of California, Santa Barbara

Published Monday, November 3, 2008

Issue 30 / Volume 89

Factory farming. This relatively new, industrialized method of food production has come to dominate the global marketplace, but at a terrible cost. We are now learning about the horrific conditions in which billions of animals are raised in these farms, but this is a difficult issue to think about. Understandably, we are disgusted that the animals we eat suffer immensely before they are killed; however, we can easily assume that conditions cannot be that bad.

Here, we would be wrong. The truth is that cows, chickens, pigs and all other manner of creatures endure almost unspeakable torture every day they are alive. To save money, factory farms - which produce 74 percent of poultry, 68 percent of eggs and 43 percent of beef worldwide - force animals to live their entire lives in cages that are so small that they often cannot turn around, stand up or even lie down. Each chicken is enclosed in a space smaller than a newspaper folded up. Calves raised for veal are chained by the neck, hardly able to move until they are killed. The conditions are so cramped that animals sit in their own feces and urine, which also fall on their heads from the cages stacked above. Birds, attempting to exercise their wings, impale them on crude wire bars.

Some pigs are driven mad and attack each other and even practice cannibalism. Hens often peck each other to death. Because the injuries these animals incur do not receive medical treatment, wounds rot and disease spreads rapidly. The employees of factory farms are not required to provide care to the animals and neither are they disciplined when they further abuse them. Undercover investigators have discovered workers hurling live chickens into trashcans, stabbing disabled cows with forklifts and brutally trying to kill a pig by repeatedly dropping a cinder block on its face. Employees brand cattle with red-hot pokers, castrate them and chop off their horns, all without anesthetic. When the animals are finally slaughtered, they are often fully conscious and sometimes fail to die even after their throats are slit several times.

The above abuses are facts, and all have been captured on video on multiple occasions, at numerous slaughterhouses across the world. It’s hard to stomach, but this cruelty is happening every day, everywhere. We can dismiss the atrocities as only part of the necessary process of modern food manufacturing, but in truth it is not necessary. If we want to, we can begin to reform the factory farm system so that animals’ health and well-being will be taken into account. The European Union and four other U.S. states have banned the most horrific types of confinement for animals and California is on the brink of doing so too. It’s not a solution to the suffering, but Proposition 2 is a small step in the right direction. Prop 2 mandates that animals must have enough room in their cages to simply stand up, turn around and spread their limbs. Is that too much to ask?

**Andrew Dunn is a third-year film and media studies major and the UCSB Yes on Prop 2 coordinator.

dailynexus.com

State veal, livestock producers eye California proposition

Initiative designed to prevent cruelty

By Nathan Phelps

Green Bay Press Gazette - Wisconsin

November 3, 2008

It's half a country away, but veal and other livestock producers in Wisconsin will watch what happens with a California ballot item Tuesday.

Voters in California will take up Proposition 2, a ballot initiative designed to "prohibit cruel confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs."

If passed, the law would go into effect in 2015 and violators would be subject to a $1,000 fine, according to the wording of the proposition.

"Both proponents and opponents agree this measure is going to have national reverberations," said Paul Shapio, a spokesman with the Humane Society of the United States, which is backing the ballot initiative. "These ballot measures provide the most modest reforms on an industry that for so long … has been able to treat animals however it likes."

The proposition covers egg-laying hens, pregnant sows and calves raised for veal.

Those in the livestock ag sector say the wellbeing of their animals is a crucial part of their operation.

"When it comes right down to it, if (farmers) didn't have healthy and content animals, they wouldn't be in business," said Casey Langan, a spokesman with the Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation.

Langan contends passage of the measure would damage or dismantle agricultural industries in California and could also shift production to other parts of the world where regulation of both animal welfare and food safety are less stringent.

"As these measures pass, someday they're going to come to a large pork-producing state and use the argument: 'Seven other states have passed this. Why haven't you?'" said Langan. "They're probably seven states that don't have many pigs. …"

He noted the animal rights groups didn't start taking aim at hog gestation pens in Iowa, a large hog-producing state.

"The storm clouds are kind of building and that's why it's more important than ever for producers to explain to consumers how they are raising animals and that their main concern is to have healthy, content animals," he said.

Shapiro said they have taken the issue to states with significant pork production and passed similar legislation in Colorado, phasing out gestation pens in the pork industry.

A similar move in the Nebraska's Legislature failed, he said.

If the measure passes, Shapiro said he expects to see a national movement away from the some of the confinement practices at both the farm and end-user (grocery stores, food service providers) levels.

"California is the largest agricultural state in the country and its ag industry is significant and that's where this battle is being waged," he said. "We're working on this issue at a national level. It's not just looking at state and public policy."

Each side has its own take on the economic impact, some saying it will drive agribusiness out of the state and drive up consumers' costs, others saying the economic impact won't be insurmountable and that consumers are paying attention to farming practices.

The issue is one the American Veal Association has worked on. It passed a resolution in spring 2007 accepting both group and individual pen housing of calves for veal as acceptable practices.

Dale Behnke, a Reedsville veal producer and president of the Wisconsin Veal Growers Association, said passage of the measure could have a detrimental effect on agriculture. He'd like veal producers to get more time to find the best practices.

The American Veal Association resolution recommends the entire veal industry go to group housing by the end of 2017.

"We're hoping that in the next five to seven years we can experiment with some more ways to find out which way is going to be most beneficial for the grower, the animal, the consumer and the animal activists, " Behnke said. "It's going to take some time to do that."

The specially-fed veal industry runs to the tune of about $700 million nationally, according to the American Veal Association.

Wisconsin ranked among the top veal-producing states in the country, according to the group.

The AVA says current housing partitions only go up to the animals' shoulder level and calves are tethered to allow farmers to gently and safely handle them.

The animals can lie down in natural positions and stand up, according to the AVA, and this type of housing also reduces the threat of spreading disease while still allowing socialization.

Behnke points out the stalls are not "crates" and that individual housing has dramatically cut the amount of antibiotics used on the animals and lowers the threat of animal illness.

Across all agricultural sectors — including those not covered by Proposition 2 — farmers and trade groups say humane handling of animals is key not only to the health of the livestock but also for the bottom line.

"Most of us in the business would say animals are well cared for as evidenced by high levels of production," said Scott Gunderson, a Manitowoc County University of Wisconsin-Extension Service agent specializing in dairy operations. "I don't think we'd get there if we weren't treating animals right."

greenbaypressgazette.com