Cal Poly’s agricultural majors and professors have been clucking about the effects this election season will have on them if Proposition 2, the proposed Standards for Confining Farm Animals Act, passes Nov. 4.
The statute would require that calves raised for veal, egg-laying hens and pregnant pigs be confined in ways that allow them to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.
This would eliminate gestation crates for sows and veal crates for calves and would allow most egg-laying chickens to become free-range because not many farmers will be able to afford replacing all of their current battery cages, stacked wire enclosures which usually hold six to eight hens per cage.
Violators would be slapped with a misdemeanor penalty and a fine of up to $1,000 or imprisonment up to six months in county jail.
As California does not have a large pork and veal industry and both producers do not generally use the crates anymore, the state egg industry will be most affected by the proposition.
Proposition 2 has been supported by organizations such as the Humane Society, the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, the California Veterinary Medical Association, the Center for Food Safety, the Consumer Federation of America, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the United Farm Workers and the Cesar Chavez Foundation.
It has been opposed by several newspapers including the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Fresno Bee and the Santa Rosa Democrat. The California Food Animal Veterinary Medical Association, California Poultry Federation, the Latino Voters League, The California Black Chamber of Commerce, Californians for SAFE Food and the California Restaurant Association are some of the organizations that oppose it as well.
A SurveyUSA poll released Sept. 25 showed that 72 percent of Californians were in favor of the proposition with 10 percent against it and 17 percent still undecided.
“I would vote yes,” said horticulture and crop science professor John Phillips. “I think anything that would move us away from the degree of close confinement of livestock that we have in many operations today would be a good thing,”
Although a few of Cal Poly’s chickens will be exempt from the statute due to a research exception, most of them will have to be moved out of their cages.
Steven Soderstrom, Cal Poly’s poultry center manager, said the proposition would affect Cal Poly Eggs financially, most likely forcing it to downgrade from its current number of approximately 5,000 caged chickens to 2,000.
Animal science professor and Cal Poly alumnus Robert Spiller has been working with egg laying birds since 1959. He now specializes in the egg laying birds at Cal Poly.
Spiller said he is concerned about the health issues associated with having cage-free chickens.
“Birds are better off health-wise in a cage,” he said. “They get far more bacterial diseases on the floor than in cages so you’ve got internal parasite issues, you’ve got a protozoal issue and you’ve got a bacterial issue (and) you also got a canabalism issue; there’s more canabalism on the floor than there is in our modern cages.”
Spiller added that the egg-laying White Leghorn hens are very flighty, tending to kick up a lot of dust and pile on top of each other suffocating themselves when startled.
He said that there are human health concerns to consider as well.
“The biggest issue with food safety has to do with salmonella and by having them in a cage free setting; a lot of the eggs are laid on the ground and that is where the feces is contained,” he said. “(Also), a lot of countries have outlawed free range (birds) because of Avian Influenza (which is) transmissible to humans. Because we keep birds in cages, that has substantially reduced the risk of the pandemic in the US.”
Phillips was not as convinced of the possible health issues with cage-free birds.
“A lot of people have experiences with free range livestock and what they find is that there are fewer problems with pathogens at least in the livestock themselves,” Phillips said. “I’m sure you can find vets who would testify on either side of the issue. but my personal belief is that those fears have not been demonstrated to be real.”
The other issue with Proposition 2 that perplexes Spiller is the potential loss of jobs.
“The state of California hired a panel of expert economists and they analyzed it,” he said. “Basically their conclusion is, the egg industry in the state of California will leave.”
He added that only three to five percent of Californians currently pay the extra dollar to dollar and a half for organic cage-free eggs.
“The bulk of the population in the state is not going to pay $4.29 for a dozen eggs,” he said. “They want $1.29 eggs and we will continue to have cheap eggs but they will not be produced here.”
Animal science junior Sara Vatnsdal said she, like many other animal science majors, does not support the proposition.
“I’m worried that the eggs are going to come from Mexico and have diseases,” she said. “You either have to have the chicken or the egg.”
Christopher Bettencourt, an agricultural business junior with a poultry minor, said Proposition 2 is unfair and worries about finding a job.
“I feel like if it passes, it will harder to get a job in the poultry industry in California,” Bettencourt said. “It’s almost kind of radical that people are going to try to pass legislation that will dictate how you can run a business. (There will only be jobs) in Mexico or across state lines.”
Lisa Franzetta, spokesperson for the Animal Legal Defense Fund in Cotati, Calif., said farmers need not worry if they follow in the footsteps of farmers already in compliance of the standards the statute would ask of them.
“There are over 100 family farms in the state of California who are strongly supporting Proposition 2,” Franzetta said. “There are plenty of farmers who are already using relatively more humane methods who think it’s completely feasible to have commercially viable egg production that would be in compliance with what Proposition 2 is speaking to.”
She added that those concerned about having to overhaul their business models have until January 1, 2015 to abide by the new standards.
“Like all things in society, the industries adjust and technology allows for industries to make changes.there is no reason why the way things are done today in farming should be the way that they always be done,” Franzetta said. “The situation we’re in right now is one where thousands of birds are in a single shed, crammed into cages so small where they can’t engage in (normal) behaviors. This is a situation that never should have allowed to be in the first place.”
Animal science professor Brooke Humphrey thinks supporters of Proposition 2 need to consider its consequences from a cerebral point of view.
“My concern is.evaluating it not from an emotional perspective but from a scientific-based perspective,” Humphrey said. “That’s fantastic (that you support animal rights) but have you been to a farm where birds are raised in cages or is everything you’ve seen just on the Internet? Because what’s on the Internet is just horrible and it’s not a good reflection of what it’s really like.”
Whatever happens with Proposition 2, the world, especially those involved with livestock affected by the bill, will be watching, according to Humphrey.
“I was actually at a veal conference in Florence, Italy and I had veal vets from France, The Netherlands, Germany and Italy asking me about what’s going on with Prop. 2,” Humphrey said. “This is something that the whole world is watching to see the outcome and I think they’re curious because they know the decision that’s made is going to have potentially local impact.”