Prop. 2: City slickers try to tell farmers how to run their farms
The November ballot is filled with hot-button proposals -- a proposed ban on gay marriage, a parental notification requirement for a girl to have an abortion, and an effort by city-dwelling animal lovers to tell farmers how to run their businesses.
OK, I put a negative spin on that last one, but it's the way that many people in agriculture see Proposition 2, the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act. The initiative affects three kinds of animals: egg-laying chickens, calves raised for veal and pregnant pigs. The act is vague, simply requiring "that an enclosure or tether confining specified farm animals allow the animals for the majority of every day to fully extend their limbs or wings, lie down, stand up and turn around." It would impose a fine of as much as $1,000 or six months in jail for violations. Read More
As I continue to monitor what is being said about Proposition 2 in California I have noticed that proponents of the bill like to dismiss the affect it’s passage will have on the economics of raising livestock there. The California Veterinary Medical Association didn’t even consider it when they agreed to support the measure. I would imagine if there business was going to be more regulated by a proposed law that they would consider the economic impact it would have on their livelihood. However, it didn’t seem to concern them when it will hurt the livestock producers.