Feathers flying over California's Proposition 2

The state ballot initiative that would outlaw confining hens, pigs and calves in movement-restricting cages has become a high-profile and costly fight between celebrity-backed animal activists and agricultural groups, Times reporter Carla Hall writes.

The treatment of farm animals has been on the radar of national animal welfare organizations for more than two decades. But no initiative or legislation has raised the profile of the issue like Proposition 2 has. The measure, aimed at protecting creatures that many urban Californians may never have seen up close, has captivated animal welfare advocates and galvanized their opponents well beyond state lines.

Talk show host Ellen DeGeneres promoted it on her program and co-hosted a gala fundraiser with her spouse, actress Portia de Rossi. Oprah weighed in last week, hosting both sides of the debate on her show.

Meanwhile, the measure's opponents have received hundreds of thousands of dollars not just from California farmers but also from out-of-state agricultural interests, concerned that their practices could be targeted next.

Earlier this week, Times columnist George Skelton weighed in on the issue, opining that the comfort of chickens is something that should be worked out among farmers, activists and consumers, not by way of the ballot box.

"I'm for chicken compassion," he wrote. "But I feel more compassionate about the chicken farmer in this bankrupting economy."

--Tony Barboza

Photo: Farm Sanctuary

Comments

[John]

If the government can't make a law to protect animals from a basic standard of decency, what can and should it do?

[humanity doesn't have to cost extra]

I hope that in the next life, George Skelton comes back as a calf in a veal pen, living his short life in misery while waiting for the farmers, activists and consumers to "work out" his comfort.

Yes on 2.

[eric mills]

The beauty of Prop. 2 is that it helps animals AND people, egg/hog/veal farmers and the general public alike. And let's not forget that the farmers have until 2015 to come into compliance, when Prop. 2 passes, as expected.

Quite frankly, if farmers can't do any better by the 20 million animals raised under the current horrendous conditions, then they DESERVE to be put out of business.

Of the estimated 10 BILLION animals we eat every year in this country (not including fish), most will never see the light of day or set foot to earth. Of equal concern, more than half the pharmaceuticals produced in this country are fed to farm animals, creating serious health problems for them and for the people who eat these products.

This is a no-brainer, folks! YES ON PROP. 2. It's supported by the California Veterinary Medical Association, Cesar Chavez's United Farm Workers, the State Democratic Party, Senators Boxer and Feinstein, Joe the Plumber, and God. Join the party, you'll sleep better.

Cheers,
Eric Mills, coordinator
ACTION FOR ANIMALS
Oakland

[AW]

Why eat food raised inhumanely? It isn't good for you.

Thomas Jefferson and Frank Lloyd Wright would be appalled.

Read Skelton's op-ed. It's a string of logical flaws that most 16 year-olds could shred. For example: Why are producers fighting so hard against restricting it if they aren't doing it?

My anecdotes:
1. The poultry, beef and pork don't taste like it used to because it isn't raised like it was even 2 decades ago.
2. Food raised in healthy conditions has unbelievably better flavor and color.

Hear me now, believe me later:
I grew up on a farm; so I know what is good food.

[AW]

Why would anyone want to eat food raised in unhealthy conditions? It's not good for you.

Thomas Jefferson and Frank Lloyd Wright would be appalled.

Why are the producers fighting restrictions against inhumane practices if they are not engaging in them?

The animal products don't taste as good as they did because they aren't raised as well as they were even 20 years ago.

I grew up on a farm. I know what is good food.

If you don't believe me, then drive I-5 north of Coalinga past the cow lots and ask yourself, Why do fast food franchises smell the same? It's not the "char-broilng".

It's the poorly raised food.

Think about it... and your health.

[Curtis]

I'd like to remind my fellow Californians that we have the opportunity to pass Proposition 2, which would require that farmed animals be given enough room to stand up, turn around, lie down, and extend their limbs.

Please vote YES on PROP 2!

[Brien Comerford]

Any person with even a semblance of humanity and respect for life must support more ethical treatment of these wrongfully truamtaized creatures.

[Liz]

Yes on 2
Because it's the Right Thing to Do!!

[L.A. Voter]

The Egg Board's own analysts concluded that IF Prop 2 raised prices it would be less than one cent per egg. That's not going to bankrupt any chicken farmer. Besides, the ones who are fighting this aren't small farmers buffeted by the economy, it's multi-million dollar agribusinesses. Lots of small farmers are in favor of Prop 2.

But that isn't really the point. The point is that either we are a moral, humane people or we aren't. The way chickens live now is like taking a human and making him live his entire life in an elevator -- with five or ten other humans. No stretching out, no lying down in comfort, barely any room to move. It's cruel. We can alleviate some of the pain farmed animals feel at very, VERY little cost to ourselves. How is it even a question of what we should do?

[JMGallo]

"I'm for chicken compassion," he wrote. "But I feel more compassionate about the chicken farmer in this bankrupting economy."

This comes down to right and wrong. It shouldn't be about the farmers bank account. If we have to treat these animals so inhumanely to sell eggs at $2 a dozen, then maybe we need to consider raising the price of eggs. The poor chickens do all the work, yet get none of the benefits of the profit. The VERY LEAST we can do is give them a humane, pain free life - for all they are giving us.

[Ben H.]

Please take a closer look at Proposition 2 and consider this. The pork and veal provisions in the proposition are just a smokescreen as that is a small part of the California agricultural sector. This proposition is about chickens, primarily the egg production industry. This is a huge industry, employing thousands and giving California one of its largest agricultural tax bases. The proposition was written so that out of state egg producing operations do not have to follow the humane animal treatment provisions that will be written into code. It is estimated that California egg producers will have to raise the price of eggs to the consumer by 25% to break even. Obviously, California egg producers will not be able to compete with out of state producers. They will have to move out of state, taking their jobs and multi-million dollar tax base with them. Meanwhile, the carbon footprint of eggs, an important, low cost source of protein for Californians, will go way up. Humane treatment of farm animals is something we all wish for. This proposition does not do this. This is just another scam that will cost well meaning Californians jobs and millions in lost revenue.