|
Humane Society 
Mon Sep 28, 2009 at 10:29:54 AM PDT
|
|
Ohio's answer to Prop 2 is Issue 2. Prop 2, if you'll remember, was a ballot initiative that passed overwhelmingly in California last year to ban 3 specific cruel animal agriculture practices - sow gestation crates, veal crates, and battery cages for egg laying hens. Now the Humane Society (who was behind Prop 2) has been targeting Ohio for a similar ban on cruel practices. Ohio's Big Ag contingent has responded with Issue 2- a ballot initiative that would put THEM in charge of animal care standards.
Issue 2 would create a Livestock Care Standards Board to make the rules on how animals are to be treated. It will be on the November ballot in Ohio, and it is backed by the Ohio Farm Bureau and the Ohio Pork Producers Council. Since we already know how the agricultural establishment thinks that animals should be treated, there's no reason to assume that a Livestock Care Standards Board would come up with anything different. In other words - battery cages for hens are A-OK! Debeaking, forced molting, providing hens with no more space than the size of a sheet of paper... all of this is OK. For comparison, I've heard a recommendation that each hen should get 2 to 4 square feet.
If you live in Ohio, it's time to get active. Start by telling your friends and neighbors about Issue 2 and by making sure you're registered to vote. If you wish to get more involved, my hunch is that the Humane Society is the place to go for that.
UPDATE: Check out the website http://www.ohioact.org/ to get active on Issue 2 in Ohio.
|
|
Discuss
:: (3
Comments)
|
|
Mon May 18, 2009 at 15:58:24 PM PDT
|
|
I listened to a fantastic episode of the Hannity of Industrial Agriculture's show - AgriTalk with Mike Adams. It's the May 12 episode, if you want to hear it for yourself. They were at an Animal Agriculture summit, ranting about the crazy animal rights nuts on the left (you know, the Humane Society) who wants to pass legislation or ballot initiatives in several states around the country to make the lives of factory farm animals very slightly less miserable.
I've transcribed it below. Be warned, what you are about to read is insane, arrogant, and at times, totally insulting.
|
|
There's More...
:: (13
Comments, 2175 words in story)
|
|
Wed May 06, 2009 at 09:00:00 AM PDT
|
|
Last year, Californians overwhelmingly voted to pass Prop 2, thus outlawing three of the cruelest agricultural practices (like veal crates). The three affected animals were veal calves, breeding sows, and egg laying hens.
For me, the best effect of Prop 2 was getting factory farm conditions covered on shows like Oprah where people who perhaps never wondered where their meat came from got a look at footage of factory farms. I think the real value of measures like this is not the actual improvements in animal welfare achieved (although I don't dispute that that part is good - it's just not enough by a longshot) but the public discourse that happens when we examine and debate how we treat our livestock.
The hope of animal welfare advocates was that after Prop 2 passed, other states could successfully pass similar measures. Obviously, Prop 2 barely scratched the surface of cruel livestock practices (which are often bad for the environment and bad for food safety as well) but it's a start. And now, it seems that the Humane Society - the group that made Prop 2 happen - is looking to do a Prop 2 redux in Ohio. The choice of Ohio is significant because Ohio is the #2 egg-producing state in the nation (behind Iowa). Details below.
|
|
There's More...
:: (8
Comments, 278 words in story)
|
|
Tue Sep 23, 2008 at 08:00:00 AM PDT
|
|
The Humane Society has an action alert out right now for consumers to Tell the USDA to Close the Downer Cow Loophole. To take action, click the link, fill out the required info, and (most important) CHANGE THE SUBJECT LINE of the email and change the editable part a little bit too.
As I understand it, the "loophole" is as follows: When cows are being examined before slaughter, they must be able to stand up (a cow who can't stand up is a "downer"). If a cow passes the inspection but THEN collapses, that cow must go through a second inspection and - if the vet says it's OK - will go into the human food supply.
The reason we don't want to eat downer cows is because they are at higher risk of mad cow disease than non-downers. Of course it could be any number of things that makes them fall over (including mad cow). They are cared for so poorly on factory farms that it's a wonder any of them are able to walk to their deaths, but still... downer cow = not a cow you want to eat.
|
|
Discuss
:: (0
Comments)
|
|
Tue Jul 29, 2008 at 14:00:00 PM PDT
|
Good on the LA Times for running this op ed! It's about an upcoming vote in California to ban battery cages for chickens in factory farms. As the op ed points out, this will not result in sustainable and humane egg production - just no more cages and a few extra inches of space per bird. They will still reside in enormous barns, filled with the stink of their own excrement. The article questions the environmental impact of such a change, asking if CAFOs complying with the new law (assuming it passes) will use more resources (energy, land) than before. The piece concludes:
But there are small things we can do that might be more meaningful than a cage ban. The eggs I buy come from hens raised free-range on pasture. Their manure fertilizes vegetables on the small farm where they live. And the chickens -- if the deliciousness of their eggs is any indication -- seem content. Do these eggs cost more? Of course, but that seems a small sacrifice given the benefits.
If we want our chickens and other livestock to live in decent conditions, we need a more radical change to our food system than this, or any ballot initiative, can deliver. The problems in industrial agriculture -- and their solutions -- are much bigger than simply banning battery cages.
I plan to vote yes on the measure. It's a small, inadequate start, but it's a start.
|
|
Discuss
:: (4
Comments)
|
|
|
|
|
|
