Prop 2 Passes in California n Egg Industry Affected First

By Sarah Young Livestock Editor
Thursday, November 13, 2008 12:47 PM CST

The presidential election may have been one for the record books, but all agriculture eyes were on a ballot initiative in California that would ban sow gestation and veal crates along with cages for egg laying hens.

Passing at a vote of 63.2 to 36.8 percent, the proposition requires that hens, sows and veal calves be given enough room to stand up, lie down, turn around and fully extend their limbs n banning modern production practices.

Although ballot initiatives banning gestation crates and veal crates have passed in Florida and Arizona, Prop 2, titled Standards for Confining Farm Animals, in California is the first to ban cages n which some say will end California’s egg production.

Producers will have until Jan. 1, 2015, to change their housing systems, but no one is sure if farmers will make the changes or go out of business all together.

How big those pens and cages must be could determine whether California farmers can stay in business as production costs go up.

Veal and pork production are not major industries in California so the impact of the proposition will be felt largely by the state's egg farmers, whose production last year was valued at $337 million in a study by the University of California Agricultural Issues Center at UC Davis.

Egg industry study

The study released claims the new housing system will raise production costs to 20 percent higher compared to other states. The increase in cost comes from higher feed costs, hen mortality, labor costs and direct housing costs.

Higher costs are difficult for California’s competitive egg industry to swallow; accounting for 6 percent of the nation’s egg production it’s a major industry in California.

Currently non-caged production accounts for only 5 percent of California’s total egg production.

The proposition will give out of state egg producers a huge advantage. Out-of state shipments will increase, while costs of California produced eggs could increase by 20-30 percent.

The report predicts that within the six-year adjustment period included in the initiative, the egg industry in California would ultimately be eliminated due to the increased costs of non-cage egg production and competition with other states' conventional egg markets.

Disappointment

The proposition is extremely disappointing not only for agriculture in California, but across the country according to several agriculture organizations.

The American Farm Bureau Federation expressed disappointment in the passage of California’s Proposition 2, a ballot initiative that phases out the use of modern housing methods in the production of eggs, pork and veal. Passage of the measure will cause more of these products to be produced outside the state of California and is likely to have serious impacts for consumers and California’s egg producers.

“The result points out the lack of understanding that people who voted for Proposition 2 have of agriculture, and it highlights the need for all of America’s farm and ranch families to focus on engaging consumers to communicate their knowledge of and commitment to animal care,” said AFBF President Bob Stallman. “The realities of modern, family-owned and -operated agriculture and the professional dedication of our farm families are largely not understood by America’s consumers. As an industry, we must help non-farmers understand our industry.”

The success of this measure and other such anti-animal agriculture initiatives will likely trigger increased food imports from countries that do not have food safety laws equivalent to those in the United States, AFBF believes.

“If eggs and other food products produced by California farmers are displaced by production from other nations, we believe that Proposition 2 will have serious implications for food safety,” Stallman said.

Stallman said passage of Proposition 2 points out the continued need for farm and ranch families to “talk to neighbors, lawmakers, business leaders n essentially anyone who will listen n to help them acquire a realistic picture of modern agriculture.”

“While caring for their animals is the clear No. 1 priority for America’s livestock producers, it is also clear that correcting misinformation from those opposed to modern farming is a close second,” Stallman said.

The United Egg Producers said it is disappointed to see the preliminary results from the California Prop 2 election, which appear to indicate the Prop. 2 was passed by California voters by a margin of approximately 60 percent to 40 percent.

From the beginning, the group knew it was fighting an uphill battle. Animal rights groups succeeded in convincing voters in California into thinking Prop. 2 was about animal cruelty by using images of pets in their ads, when in fact Prop. 2 simply was a means to try to end animal farming in that state.

U.S. egg farmers and the industry are proud of the fight they waged. While still disappointing, they would rather fight and lose when they are in the "right" than to simply turn tail and run. They are thankful for the support they received from Governor Schwarzenegger, the California Republican Party, California Grocers Association, California Chamber of Commerce, National Latino Congreso, Congress of California Seniors, California State Conference of the NAACP, and hundreds of other politically-powerful groups and individuals. They received the endorsement of more than 30 of the largest and most influential newspapers in the state, including the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Sacramento Bee and others.

They ran an aggressive, sophisticated political campaign. But sometimes even the best candidates lose. In the coming days, they will be analyzing the results of the election and their campaign and developing lessons that everyone can all learn from in the future.

Because the wording of Proposition 2 is so vague, the state of California will have to determine how this new law will actually be implemented and enforced when it comes into effect six years from now. Proponents of Prop. 2 have said publically during the campaign that it was not their "intent" to ban cage free production. Will they be true to their word when it comes time for the state to implement Prop. 2?

Will other states be targeted for initiatives similar to Prop. 2? Probably. But just because voters in one state like California pass Prop 2. doesn't mean that the other 49 states should follow suit.

The National Pork Producers Council also commented on the Prop. 2 outcome. “We are disappointed that the voters of California adopted a proposition outlawing a husbandry practice deemed appropriate by decades of farmer experience, as well as by university researchers and the nation’s leading veterinarian association,” said NPPC President Bryan Black, a pork producer from Canal Winchester, Ohio.

The American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Association of Swine Veterinarians recognize gestation stalls and group housing systems as appropriate for providing for the well-being of sows during pregnancy. The groups also point out that the key factor that most affects animal well-being is husbandry skills n that is the care given to each animal.

”It is regrettable that animal-rights groups were successful in vilifying honest, hardworking farmers and ranchers who treat their animals humanely and provide them a safe, healthy environment in which to grow,” said Black.

The ballot initiative was backed mainly by the Humane Society of the United States, which helped pass similar ballot initiatives in Arizona in 2006 and in Florida in 2002.

“California often is a bellwether, so it’s likely this ban will be pushed in other states,” Black said. “We certainly don’t expect the Humane Society to stop with California.”

Comments »

Comment on this story

Comments will be approved within 48 hours

Name:

Email: (optional)

Comments:

Image Verification: (Case sensitive)