“Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act” in California might require eggs to be cage free and no gestation crates (buying, organic)

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Good. I've recently decided to become vegan. So, this is good. My decision is based on personal health, but with the bonus of affecting animal rights and environmental issues. So, this is fine with me.

[banjomike]

Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust

I'm against this.

There is an increasing abundance of cage-free and even pasture-raised eggs simply due to awareness and demand.

Eggs are an amazing source of nutrition - let's not put them totally out of reach for people who don't have the budget for premium eggs.

The more egg producers get into it, the cheaper the prices will become. Competition always does that in agriculture.

In a climate like California's, the cost of production would actually be cheaper than the old style egg factories. Keeping those huge barns cool is hugely expensive, as is cleaning them and maintaining them.

They're like a lot of the 20th century ideas and practices, where everything was supposed to be super-effecient, but the efficiency proved to be much more elusive than they thought. Back then, no one thought anything about stuff like egg quality, the environment, or human health and safety all that much; the object was to get the cost of eggs down as cheaply to the producer as possible.
It was only after millions were spent that the growers figured out that sick chickens lay poor quality eggs, and that started off a chain of attempted fixes that made everything worse as time went by.

But once a company commits to that kind of enormous expense, the factories had to operate long enough to pay their costs back. So like it or not, the owners were stuck with what they had built for a very long time.

[CCbaxter]

Originally Posted by No_Recess

You didn't make the first cut for debate club in high school...did you?

Has nothing to do with debate. Has to do with someone being so emotional over an economic issue that has zero impact on them.

[CA4Now]

Originally Posted by CCbaxter

You don't live here, why do you care.

I second that one.

[Annie53]

Originally Posted by expatCA

Good for CA

Ditto!

[mountainrose]

Originally Posted by Pilot1

I buy my eggs, and a lot of produce from a local farmer. However, I can afford to do that, and you can afford to pay higher prices for eggs, and other food, but what about the poor, or people with families living pay check to pay check? All protein is VERY expensive today. Eggs are still one of the items that are pretty low in cost for what you get. Do you want to raise costs on those that can not afford it because of your social convictions about animals?

You see the unintended consequences of seemingly good liberal/progressive policies are often catastrophic.

LOL -- I am clearly not a liberal.
But I do not believe humans have the right to abuse and torture animals for cheap food....

There was an article from research I read a few years ago that showed farmers could actually save money by raising free range instead of tiny cages where chickens can't move or turn around. The egg production was a bit less, but something positive balanced that -- maybe it was less deaths or disease - can't remember. Free range does not also mean "pastured" it can just mean they are in a large area inside or outside where they can move around freely. It's "pastured" chicken that can be so expensive because of the predator problem, but chicken tractors ( cages on the ground that are moved every day) let them out on grass and protect from predators.

Most of these big Ag industry farmers have a lot of money tied up in the tiny cage equipsment and hormones that increase egg production and antibiotics to keep the infections and disease down -- Yuck. Perhaps incentive would be needed for them to change to free range -- an initial tax cut?? Don't know....

Another answer is encouraging community gardens with chicken coops, chicken tractors, for poor communities. I've seen this work before. Chickens provide fertilizer and bug eating for the gardens while giving healthy eggs and meat.
Much of the chicken feed can be raised there easily plus high-protein worms in worm bins. I do this on my farm and have almost no feed expense for chickens.
Poor people get healthy vegetables they can't afford, get exercise, raise chickens for meat and eggs and brings a real community together.

There is a revolution in CHEAP HUMANE chicken raising now with having chickens only forage compost they lay one egg less a year and have no disease and live longer. Plus you can then sell the compost. My point being -- there ARE cheap alternatives to raising chickens humanely.
https://permaculturenews.org/2013/12...eding-compost/

Feeds 600 chickens on compost only (there's lots of these stories)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=IWChH9MHkHg

Joe Salatin's chicken tractor farming (Polyface Farm)
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=O1-MbPwaY6Y

[Wintergirl80]

Originally Posted by Pilot1

I buy my eggs, and a lot of produce from a local farmer. However, I can afford to do that, and you can afford to pay higher prices for eggs, and other food, but what about the poor, or people with families living pay check to pay check? All protein is VERY expensive today. Eggs are still one of the items that are pretty low in cost for what you get. Do you want to raise costs on those that can not afford it because of your social convictions about animals?

You see the unintended consequences of seemingly good liberal/progressive policies are often catastrophic.

Thing is Pilot, is that there are consequences for the animals too. Ever read about how average chickens are kept for egg production? Its inhumane. So if costs slightly go up, so be it. Its better for the animal and healthier eggs for human consumption. Check out "Project Animal Farm" by Sonia Faruqi

[Wintergirl80]

Originally Posted by banjomike

The more egg producers get into it, the cheaper the prices will become. Competition always does that in agriculture.

In a climate like California's, the cost of production would actually be cheaper than the old style egg factories. Keeping those huge barns cool is hugely expensive, as is cleaning them and maintaining them.

They're like a lot of the 20th century ideas and practices, where everything was supposed to be super-effecient, but the efficiency proved to be much more elusive than they thought. Back then, no one thought anything about stuff like egg quality, the environment, or human health and safety all that much; the object was to get the cost of eggs down as cheaply to the producer as possible.
It was only after millions were spent that the growers figured out that sick chickens lay poor quality eggs, and that started off a chain of attempted fixes that made everything worse as time went by.

But once a company commits to that kind of enormous expense, the factories had to operate long enough to pay their costs back. So like it or not, the owners were stuck with what they had built for a very long time.

Can't rep you again, but you make some great points.

[RosieSD]

First, if you read the article the original poster linked to, this is a proposed 2018 California Ballot Measure. It's not even on the ballot yet.

Second, the article notes that if this passes, California will be one of two states with similar requirements for egg farms.

Last year, Massachussetts voters passed the same rules for chickens.

It seems that there are many posters who don't live in California who feel that Californian voters are too dumb to make decisions about our own state.

So, I'm wondering if any of the non-Californians posting about this issue live in Massachusetts. If so, perhaps you can give us your insights on how this has affected your prices for eggs.

That might help us dumb Californians make a better informed choice about this proposed ballot issue than just constantly telling us how dumb we are.

Otherwise, what non-residents think about this really doesn't matter. You won't be voting on this, nor will you be buying eggs (and meat) in California.

That's assuming, of course, that this proposed measure even makes it onto the California ballot next year. They haven't gotten enough signatures for it yet.

[joejerryronnie]

Originally Posted by RosieSD

First, if you read the article the original poster linked to, this is a proposed 2018 California Ballot Measure. It's not even on the ballot yet.

Second, the article notes that if this passes, California will be one of two states with similar requirements for egg farms.

Last year, Massachussetts voters passed the same rules for chickens.

It seems that there are many posters who don't live in California who feel that Californian voters are too dumb to make decisions about our own state.

So, I'm wondering if any of the non-Californians posting about this issue live in Massachusetts. If so, perhaps you can give us your insights on how this has affected your prices for eggs.

That might help us dumb Californians make a better informed choice about this proposed ballot issue than just constantly telling us how dumb we are.

Otherwise, what non-residents think about this really doesn't matter. You won't be voting on this, nor will you be buying eggs (and meat) in California.

That's assuming, of course, that this proposed measure even makes it onto the California ballot next year. They haven't gotten enough signatures for it yet.

Well Rosie, you know that the trends we see in California today will be sweeping across the rest of the nation in just a few short years - policies, attitudes, and demographics. This is not necessarily because California trends are better, it's a pure numbers game. CA has 40 million residents and growing; with many of those residents looking to cash out on the real estate boom and take their money and view points to a friendly state near you.

So those out of state posters should really take notice of what's happening here because, one day, this will be their reality whether they like it or not - Californians are coming and you will be assimilated.