Proposition results. (Davis: agriculture, food, business)

[LASam]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

I think I can figure out what constitutes cruelty to animals, even if not personally a farmer.

I've never owned a chicken/rooster, can I have an opinion about cockfighting?

Meanwhile, how is this severely financially challenged state going to pay for 1A?

It's going to be more difficult to pay for 1A with a shrinking livestock industry due to livestock companies moving to neighboring states to take advatage of those states competitive advantage in production costs. The thing about Prop 2 is that the cruelty isn't going to be eliminated... it's just be exported to our neighboring states.

[bigcats]

Now take some of that caring and do something about the tens of thousands of homeless, alcoholic, drug addicted, uneducated, uninsured people out there instead of wasting it on a CHICKEN

It's absolutely offensive and ridiculous to insinuate that people who care about the welfare of animals do not care about the welfare of people too. How do you know that I, or anyone else, don't dedicate a large part of our lives to those causes too?

Farmers with a sense of decency will not be hurt by this. In fact, they may be helped by it. Many people I know are eager to buy eggs from small, family-owned farms to avoid the alternative. I pay my friends for theirs. And they're cheaper, too. Factory farms possibly might be hurt a little, and they deserve it.

As far as increased costs, well, those have been artificially jacked up already by the same agro-giants who were having a fit to oppose this measure. So clearly that's not the concern. And I personally think the Mexico thing that keeps coming up is just to get some of the immigrant haters on board with opposing it. The salmonella thing is the most ridiculous of all. Chickens covered in their own **** and dying all over each other are certainly more likely to be ill than a chicken with slightly more room. Food safety is a major reason to support this proposition, not oppose it. In this day and age, with these giant agrobusinesses doing crazy things with our food supply, we need to set some limits with them.

CA has an enormous influence on agriculture throughout the country, and we're also not the only state that has passed measures like this recently. Any exportation will be temporary while the rest of the country catches up.

It actually is important how we treat other living beings. I'm sorry if you don't agree.

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by LASam

It's going to be more difficult to pay for 1A with a shrinking livestock industry due to livestock companies moving to neighboring states to take advatage of those states competitive advantage in production costs. The thing about Prop 2 is that the cruelty isn't going to be eliminated... it's just be exported to our neighboring states.

So, we go for lowest common behavior. If this is your economic philosophy, why not provide public services and minimum wages comparable to places such as Mississippi?

Don't you think the minimal cost for being less cruel is cheaper than moving a production facility. As I recall, Ohio fixed a similar situation with an operation known as Buckeye Egg, and eventually drove them out of business.

[LASam]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

So, we go for lowest common behavior. If this is your economic philosophy, why not provide public services and minimum wages comparable to places such as Mississippi?

Don't you think the minimal cost for being less cruel is cheaper than moving a production facility. As I recall, Ohio fixed a similar situation with an operation known as Buckeye Egg, and eventually drove them out of business.

You can debate with me, or you can read the information at the following link from you hometown university of UC Davis:

http://aic.ucdavis.edu/publications/...initiative.pdf

According to the executive summary in that report... they expect "almost complete elimination of egg production in California within the six-year adjustment period." I trust that UC Davis knows more about this stuff than I do... that's why I voted NO.

More quotes:

"Under new rules that eliminated the use of conventional low-cost cage housing systems, the costs of production in California would be significantly higher than out-of-state farms that have already demonstrated their ability to compete successfully in the California market."

"Thus the impact of the initiative would not affect how eggs would be produced, only where eggs would be produced."

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by LASam

You can debate with me, or you can read the information at the following link from you hometown university of UC Davis:

http://aic.ucdavis.edu/publications/...initiative.pdf

According to the executive summary in that report... they expect "almost complete elimination of egg production in California within the six-year adjustment period." I trust that UC Davis knows more about this stuff than I do... that's why I voted NO.

More quotes:

"Under new rules that eliminated the use of conventional low-cost cage housing systems, the costs of production in California would be significantly higher than out-of-state farms that have already demonstrated their ability to compete successfully in the California market."

"Thus the impact of the initiative would not affect how eggs would be produced, only where eggs would be produced."

In other words, yet another industry leaves California at the hand of good intentions.

[NewToCA]

The Davis Report assumes all caged processes would be eliminated, the initiative itself didn't specify this to be a requirement:

A YES vote means that farm enclosures for certain hens, calves and pigs must provide enough room for the animal to lie down, stand up, and move about.

A NO vote means that current laws relating to these animals will remain unchanged.


LWV California. Pro & Con Analysis of Proposition 2. November 4, 2008 (http://ca.lwv.org/lwvc/edfund/elections/2008nov/pc/prop2.html - broken link)

[Happy Cells]

Prop 8 WON!

It IS over....the chickens have come home to roost....

[LASam]

Originally Posted by NewToCA

The Davis Report assumes all caged processes would be eliminated, the initiative itself didn't specify this to be a requirement:

A YES vote means that farm enclosures for certain hens, calves and pigs must provide enough room for the animal to lie down, stand up, and move about.

A NO vote means that current laws relating to these animals will remain unchanged.


LWV California. Pro & Con Analysis of Proposition 2. November 4, 2008 (http://ca.lwv.org/lwvc/edfund/elections/2008nov/pc/prop2.html - broken link)

To quote UC Davis:

"The specific wording of the initiative is imprecise. Nonetheless, informed expectations and careful assessments are that, if passed, the resulting regulations would eliminate the use of cage systems for laying hens in California and may be even more restrictive. If passed, the initiative would mean that remaining egg production in California would be from non-cage systems and could mean that typical non-cage systems would be restricted as well."

If you can show me an equally reputable source that contradicts the UC Davis report, I'll take a look at it.

[NewToCA]

Originally Posted by LASam

To quote UC Davis:

"The specific wording of the initiative is imprecise. Nonetheless, informed expectations and careful assessments are that, if passed, the resulting regulations would eliminate the use of cage systems for laying hens in California and may be even more restrictive. If passed, the initiative would mean that remaining egg production in California would be from non-cage systems and could mean that typical non-cage systems would be restricted as well."

If you can show me an equally reputable source that contradicts the UC Davis report, I'll take a look at it.

The wording of the Prop itself doesn't mandate the elimination of cages, it was assumed in the development of the Davis study. Cages allowing sufficient free movement are permissable within the context of the Prop 2 requirements, even with multiple animals per cage.

Here is an academic study showing cost difference of about a dime per dozen eggs, and this doesn't even take into account simply providing somewhat larger cages as an alternative to "roaming free" (Pg 4 is the summary box):

http://animalscience.ucdavis.edu/Avi...layingHens.pdf

[Rhenzanite]

Have any of you actually personally visited an 'egg farm'?? I'm not talking about a university, but a real egg producing viable business? It's horrible, absolutely horrible. This prop is simply giving livestock enough room to turn around or stand up in it's living environment. How is that a bad thing? Oh...money...right... everything is about money, heaven forbid we make decisions about anything BUT money.