Translator needed for LA Times Opinion piece on chickens.
UPDATED: here.
Ooh, good, I thought. An opinion on chickens. This is something I might want to read understand.
Chicken Run, by Julia Olmstead, is about an initiative by the Humane Society to outlaw battery cages for farm animals.
If we’re going to eat eggs, I think the chickens that lay them should be able to stretch their wings, stand up and turn around, and not be caged. So I buy cage-free eggs, and I’m not alone. Demand for these eggs has outpaced supply in the last few years.
So far, so good. I like to agree with writers. Then she quotes a lot of numbers on how many chicken farmers there are, the problem with manure and ammonia to the environment, etc. Very true for all farm animals.
If passed, the Prevention of Farm Cruelty Act would ban some livestock confinement systems. Sounds like a no-brainer…
But I’m not certain I’ll vote yes.Unfortunately, a California ban may carry unintended costs for the environment.
Not quite understanding…you mean, new environmental problems, other than those you just listed? She doesn’t elaborate on this. The chickens (and other farm animals, like pigs, veal, etc) will have bigger cages, not GROW humongous themselves, Ms. Olmstead.
She goes on to say farms might move to other states, or Mexico. Those flighty farmers, traveling men, always pulling up stakes, wondering if the grass is greener somewhere else!
She says this law isn’t strong enough. Why save the lives and suffering of animals now, when you can wait until things might get better down the road?
Her last point is good, although it’s nothing to do with how chickens are raised, but rather how the eggs are labeled:
Further, cage-free isn’t the same thing as free-range. The label does not ensure that chickens can get outdoors.
Heaven forbid that the Opinion section actually put LINKS in their articles, even when they’re online! Ooh, scary, someone might leave the page. (Should I go into my whole story about how a goofy opinion about what to do with Silver Lake made its way into the Opinion section, and did link to my server, but without my name or blog mentioned? Okay! They linked only to my large photo. They loved my copyrighted photo and bandwidth, but not me, apparently. Took several phone calls to get that corrected – sort of.)
So I had to Google the Prevention of Farm Cruelty Act to find it. This is fantastic. Vote YES on Prop 2. The Humane Society, which is sponsoring this legislation, also has an excellent page on the opposition’s points.
At least I know now where the Humane Society stands, and what the pros and “cons” are. I have no idea what the writer in the Opinion page is trying to say, or even which way she rolls.
Los Angeles Times, this time I’m putting my foot down. Bring back the copy editors, stat.
5 Comments
Paul Shapiro
I agree with one point Julia Olmstead made, which is that the Prop 2 is very moderate. That’s one of the reasons it has such a huge coalition of supporters, including Sierra Club-California, Defenders of Wildlife, Greenpeace USA, Environmental Integrity Project, Friends of the Earth Action, Union of Concerned Scientists, and the Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production. These organizations know just how terrible factory farms are for the environment, which is part of the reason they’re endorsing the YES vote on Prop 2.
Some other endorsers include The Center for Food Safety and the California Veterinary Medical Association.
Anyone concerned about animal welfare, food safety, or the environment should vote YES on Prop 2.
Donna Barstow
Thanks, Paul.
Although the writer seemed to say that being moderate is bad…didn’t she?! And she seemed to imply that the environment would get worse with bigger cages for the animals. I don’t know. Glad you understood it.
Anonymous
Veal tastes good
Veal Proponent
Although this may seem like cruel treatment of animals, I should point out two very important things. First, as humans we are the dominant predator on this earth – we have earned this position. Survival of the fittest applies here and we, as a species, have earned the ability to devour our prey in whatever manner we wish. Secondly, these animals never experience anything but this kind of lifestyle. They don’t have the capacity to think that there is something better or a better way of life. This comes down to the food chain. We are on top, deal with it.
PS
Fuck you, you hippie tree hugging sissy’s who are afraid to consume the animals around you just like your ancestors before you.
Donna Barstow
Because of the f-word, this went into spam filter, so be grateful I bailed you out of there.
Your first sentence is correct: seems like cruel treatment, because it is. For the rest: um, competitive, much? Go find a sport to play, because that macho attitude is really ugly and unattractive to thinking people. Civilized people don’t torture anyone, animals included. You could keep a child in prison his whole life – and it happens – and he wouldn’t know the difference, either. How is either of them okay, when we have choices on how to be better?
No one says hippie anymore, or tree-hugging – so I’m guessing you are an older person or live in a cave somewhere. And our ancestors didn’t eat meat all the time – it was hard work to get, expensive, etc. That’s a bedtime story to tell hunters like you.