WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE NEW CALIFORNIA STATE CHICKEN CONFINEMENT LAW FOR EGG FARMERS ?????

[enola]

You are fooling yourself if you think hens in a commercial laying house are laying 2 eggs a week. If a flock was doing that poorly, the ownwer would not think twice about sending them off to the soup factory. Two eggs a week would not make him a profit.

 

[WYNot]

Apples and oranges.

In your example of superfund sites, yes the gov can and should step in because there is harm to other people. If I spew and dump toxins and chemicals then yes I am harming other people if those substances escape the confines of my property. I am trespassing and/or harming other people.

In the case of how chickens are treated their behavior is not harming other people nor is it trespassing upon them. If I abuse my livestock (horrible as that might be) I would be doing NO harm to any other people. If potential customers don't like the way I treat my livestock then they are free to take their business elsewhere. I will either change my ways or go out of business.

Agreed, gov can play a role in keeping a civil/safe society... so long as its actions are strictly limited and controlled. Gov should be there to keep one person from agressing against another. Gov should NOT be their to protect people from their own stupidity. Telling people how manage their property when that management causes no harm to any other people is wrong. Example... I have absolutely no issue with people putting any substance they want into their body. It can be stupid as heck but they own themselves. However, as soon as they steal or commit fraud to support that action then all bets are off. Nail them to the wall.

Some regulation is generally a good thing.  I don't necessarily think that an industry can self-regulate...Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle" for example....and how many super-fund sites do we have in this country due to industries polluting with no regard for the health and welfare of people (let a lone other animals whether livestock or wild).

Do I think that the government is the do all and end all to keeping things in line...no, folks in industry still bear the bulk of responsibility.  Do I think the government should have regulations and inspect industries on a regular basis in order to help safeguard folks...yes.

People, the government isn't always the enemy.  I think government plays an important role to help keep a safe/civil society.  It just seems that people over react, isn't there a middle ground?

 

[WYNot]

No by force of the gun. The people simply voted to have gov use force and threat of violence when they themselves were too cowardly to just quit supporting the "offending" businesses. If they thought the businesses were operating under such horrible conditions and still bought their products then they are nothing more than hypocrites.

I'm not arguing that what the factory farms are doing is right in any way, shape, or form. I grew up on a farm and around ranches. Livestock and land are precious and should be treated with respect and care. They are a legacy we leave for our children. However, with matters were one person is not harming another then the matter needs to be settled in the marketplace of ideas not by gov and threat of violence.

"By force"? You mean the "force" of the ballot box, aka proof that the people do indeed want this and are in fact willing to pay for what they want.

 

[ChickenWolf126]

It's not as much space as I would like it to be, but I believe it is a step in the right direction.

 

[pdirt]

The Humane Society of the United States and only the HSUS wanted this law. You who keep free range chickens are the HSUS's next target, so hip-hip hurray all the way to the sanitary land fill with your poultry where at some date in the future you will be required by law and the HSUS to wring your own chickens' necks.

The up start of all of this is that your eggs will forever hereafter be produced in Mexico because they are not under the thumb of the California Department of Agriculture and are over and above California law by virtue of international laws and treaties like NAFTA.

The HSUS is a militant vegetarian organization who condemns all animal husbandry of any type, even bee keeping. Arm yourselves with knowledge.

Huh, interesting. I had no idea. I googled about the HSUS and came up with this:

http://www.humanesocietydonations.org/making-donation-count/?gclid=CJuS06_rgsMCFUGUfgodeoYAdw

It seems, while they are doing good works, they are deceiving their constituents about where the money goes.

I am not always against regulation, I think there is a time and place for it. But those on this thread making anti-regulation statements make some good points.

As for your last claim, that the HSUS condemns all animal husbandry, do you have any links or resources that support this?

As to the law passing and it's effects, I am generally for it. Regardless of who was behind this law, it's better for the animals. As for the HSUS trying to take control and eliminate all animal husbandry...good luck. People would not vote for that. There are those who can thrive on a vegetable-based diet and those who can't. I think there are just too many of the latter that this would ever become an issue.

As for the increased cost...people will get used to it.

As for the militant vegetarian attitude of the HSUS you claim, perhaps we need a little bit of that. Perhaps it will increase awareness of the conditions of how animals are kept. Will it start a revolution of awareness? Probably not, but it is a step in the right direction.

 

[chickengeorgeto]

... I believe that, yea, some regulators might start looking at small hobby farms in the backyards of people. But, if the chickens are well-fed, have an adequate shelter, and enough space to flap their wings, you should have nothing to worry about!....

At the risk of being banned from this forum for discussing animal r-I-g-h-t-s The Humane Society of The United States at my last knowledge will not even hire someone who eats eggs, regardless of the condition under which those eggs are produced. The correct time frame to when they start looking at small hobby farms is not if or might Their objection is the fact that you hold these hens in (to them) chattel bondage, not the way or conditions that you keep, feed, or house your hens. You are already guilty in the eyes of HSUS by virtue of the simple fact that you keep chickens.

 

[WYNot]

Actually no we don't. The US was never intended to be a democracy. It is a representative republic. HUGE difference. True democracy is about as evil as you can get. If the majority votes that all blonds be put to the sword then by your "logic" it is good to go. The gov was not put in place to give us whatever the majority wants. It was put in place to protect the rights of ALL of us. Nothing more, nothing less. Please explain to me how some stranger should have the right to have a say in how I raise my birds? The only right that stranger has is to take his business elsewhere and try and convince others to do the same. If they can convince enough people to go elsewhere, then I either change my ways or go out of business. Edit to add... I do not run a factory farm. I own just 5 very spoiled hens.

As for guns... Like my daughters t-shirt says, "Don't like guns, don't buy one." They are simply a tool. Any evil done with them originates in the hearts of man and will be done regardless of the tool. My firearms are not offensive weapons. They are defensive tools. Their only reasons for existing is to defend myself and my loved ones and to put food on the table. They are no different than the multiple fire extinguishers I keep around the house; I pray every day that I never have to use either. But should I ever need to use one, I'll thank God that I had them.

As I said above I feel zero sympathy for the people who keep any livestock in horrid conditions.

Oh my!  We live in a democracy (kind of).  When things get voted on somebody "wins" and somebody "loses".  If the majority says they what these laws, then that's the way it is.  Who knows, may be some of those people that wanted these regulations are poor but still think animal welfare is more important than what they pay for eggs.  Maybe we should make sure that everyone who works earns a living wage and those that can't work get the assistance that they need so they can afford those eggs.

I'm sorry, but I'm getting tired of folks only liking votes when they win (and then bemoan the fact that sometimes their ideology is on the losing end of the stick).  I don't like our gun laws, but I'll be darned if my desire for strict gun control keeps getting voted down...I except the fact that I live in a gun loving crazy society and continue to hope that someday gun rights advocates will be enlightened.

 

[CrazyTalk]

George, you're making an awful lot of extreme claims - do you have any evidence for them?
Quote:

The HSUS is actually considered pretty conservative for these sort of groups - PETA has all sorts of problems with them specifically because they don't feel the same way that you're purporting they do. They also give a whole lot of grant money to shelters and spay/neuter clinics. Their official policy documents make it pretty clear that they're not opposed to animals being used for food, or kept as pets.

I think you have your groups mixed up.

 

[Nupe]

I look at this much differently. To me, this is all bad timing, if not inconsiderate and poorly thought through. The country as a whole, but California especially, is in terrible financial and economical trouble. Why on earth would they go after regulation that would make a basic necessity more expensive??? If they really gave a crap about the economic woes of the poor and middle class, they would be regulating (deregulating) to make food less expensive. Instead of conforming, the out of state companies will simply stop selling them to California, smaller commercial operations will go under because they don't have the real estate and capital to expand and we will send more of our hard earned money into some other country's economy.

Sometimes the right thing to do is the wrong thing to do.

 

[matt44644]

I look at this much differently. To me, this is all bad timing, if not inconsiderate and poorly thought through. The country as a whole, but California especially, is in terrible financial and economical trouble. Why on earth would they go after regulation that would make a basic necessity more expensive??? If they really gave a crap about the economic woes of the poor and middle class, they would be regulating (deregulating) to make food less expensive. Instead of conforming, the out of state companies will simply stop selling them to California, smaller commercial operations will go under because they don't have the real estate and capital to expand and we will send more of our hard earned money into some other country's economy.

Sometimes the right thing to do is the wrong thing to do.

The law was passed in 2008.
Michigan has a similar law that passed 2009 taking effect in 2020