Assemblyman Nava Joins Humane Society in Endorsing Proposition 2
The reform initiative addresses the treatment of livestock raised on factory farms.
Assemblyman Pedro Nava and U.S. Humane Society President and CEO Wayne Pacelle held a news conference Thursday morning to encourage support for Proposition 2 on November’s ballot.
Proposition 2 is billed as a modest reform initiative that would end the cruel treatment of livestock raised on factory farms — operations that, unlike family-run farms, tend to cram animals in confining and unhealthy conditions.
“When you overcrowd animals on factory farms, you create an environment that is an incubator for ill health and disease among the animals,” Pacelle told Noozhawk. For example, he said, the incidence of salmonella is higher in a battery cage environment, where hens are placed in small cages stacked on top of one another, vs. cage-free environments. The practice of overcrowding also results in a “waste management nightmare,” which affects the local environment as well as nearby property values, he said.
There are exceptions, however, for the transportation of animals and during veterinary procedures.
“We have now what I consider an explosion of factory farms,” Nava said. “Factory farms are operated solely for the profit associated with maximizing the production out of the animal.” Thus, he said, factory farms are not as concerned with the welfare or longevity of their animals.
Against this initiative are several large livestock and egg producers, both in California and out of state. One of their main arguments is that giving the animals more space would cut down on their productivity, potentially forcing them out of California and raising food prices.
Proposition 2 is endorsed by, among others, the Humane Society of the United States, the California Veterinary Medical Association, the Center for Food Safety, the ASPCA, Reps. Lois Capps and Elton Gallegly, Santa Barbara County Supervisors Salud Carbajal and Janet Wolf as well as Santa Barbara Mayor Marty Blum and Councilmembers Iya Falcone, Roger Horton, Grant House, Helene Schneider and Das Williams.
Noozhawk staff writer Sonia Fernandez can be reached at .
» wrote on 10/03/08 @ 01:24 PM
Tax and spend liberals care more about chickens than hard working tax payers.
» wrote on 10/03/08 @ 02:37 PM
“One of their main arguments is that giving the animals more space would cut down on their productivity ...”
Yes, please think of the suffering inflicted on those poor corporations.
» wrote on 10/04/08 @ 02:30 AM
I will be voting YES ON PROP 2. It is such a modest measure. Doesn’t even take effect until 2015. All animals, including those raised for food, deserve to be treated humanely.
We Californians are better than this!!
VOTE YES ON PROP 2!!!!
» wrote on 10/04/08 @ 01:14 PM
Assem Nava is turning his back on the Hispanics who elected him.. Thousands of people ( large Hispanic population) will be out of jobs.Their familes will be even poorer than they are now and face more expesive food prices. Eggs will be more expensive for all of us..not to mention every product that contains eggs…
oh.. and since when has Pacelle ( an avoed vegan who does NOT eat eggs) really care about the people this will affect?? Guess what.. he doesn’t.. he says “let them eat cake”.. as long as it desn’t have any eggs in it.. NO ON PROP 2
» wrote on 10/04/08 @ 01:31 PM
A “modest proposal”???/ LOL.. this what Jonathan Swift wrote when he proposed that the Irish eat their own children to help with poverty and “overpopulation” The ultimate in satire.. Is that what Wayne is proposing? That is is ok to for familes to lose their livelyhoods.. for people to be driven out of thier jobs .. and for their familes to suffer?? A “Modest” proposal .. indeed.. if you are not the one who is now out of work..
NO ON PROP 2.. Keep JOBS in California.. keep TAX MONEY in California…
» wrote on 10/04/08 @ 10:36 PM
I am VOTING YES ON Prop 2 because it is just plain wrong to mistreat farm animals. We should all be outraged that these practices even exists. Factory farms also though contribute to water and air pollution and to the development of antibiotic resistant disease, in not just animals but PEOPLE.
Besides this, Prop 2 will ultimately help workers and the state economy because California will be able to brand its eggs, pork and veal as meeting higher animal-welfare standards than its behind-the-times competition.
For those who approach Prop 2 from an economic perspective, I encourage them to check out a recent Wall Street Journal article about the U.S. Department of Justice’s investigation into price-fixing in the egg industry (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122213370781365931.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#printMode). What you should be mad about is that the egg industry is possibly conspiring to raise your food prices!
I do care about chickens but by caring about them, I also care about your health, and your community. Don’t let the egg industry get away with its shell game.
Prop 2 is not an extreme measure. It is basic. Growers have until 2015 to meet the statute. They have time to retrofit their operations and market their improved product.
VOTE YES ON PROP 2. It is good for you, good for the future of California agriculture, and a much deserved improvement for the animals.
» wrote on 10/05/08 @ 05:25 PM
Has the liberal left lost its mind--Chickens?
» wrote on 10/06/08 @ 08:48 AM
Assemblyman Nava apparently hasn’t done his homework. 99% of farms are family owned. Cage free systems would mean that eggs lay in chicken feces thus increasing the risk for salmonella. He also apparently didn’t ask Mr. Pacelle what defines him as an expert on animal issues. Mr. Pacelle has a B.A. in History and Studies in the Environment from Yale University. I’m from a family farm and I have an animal science degree. I know the difference between animal rights and animal welfare. I also have loved animals my whole life and even volunteered for animal shelter for two years. I eat the cattle we raise on our farm, but care for them while they are on this earth. The animal rights movement wants a vegetarian and ultimately a vegan society.
Humane Society of the United States has an income of $150 million per year. Ask them what they do with that money. California is another example of the animal rights movement manipulating emotions and exploiting human beings to generate revenue. That, to me,is a crime. Assemblyman Nava has unfortunately been duped by the deceiving Wayne Pacelle. How much do you make per year, Wayne Pacelle?
» wrote on 10/06/08 @ 11:33 AM
I didn’t even think that this is worth a discussion. YES on Prop. 2 - and besides what does compassion for another creature have to do with liberal vs. conservative?
» wrote on 10/07/08 @ 12:58 PM
The economy is in deep trouble, and housing prices will probably drop another 50% in S.B and we are more worried about chicken space--get real…