Eggs for a buck, buck, buck
Now that the egg farmers in California have to work on keeping their hens out of battery cages, who's going to work on having financially beset consumers buy the cage-free eggs?
The Humane Society of the United States, the force behind Proposition 2, says it will. If you're one of the vast majority of voters who supported the measure, you'll remember that it gave California farmers several years to get rid of their battery cages, where chickens were packed in so tightly they couldn't turn around. What the measure didn't do was require anyone to actually buy all those cage-free eggs. Now the Humane Society says it will "work with consumers and retailers to promote a robust market for compliant California egg producers."
It's an interesting time for such a sales scheme. Families that already have given up most of their discretionary expenditures because of their shrinking wallets--gardeners, house cleaners, dinners out--find that one of the few areas where they can still cut is food. The mortgage is the mortgage, it's not coming down in size. Neither is the life-insurance premium or, unless you live in the dark, the utility bill. The food budget has more flexibility--less meat, more mac and cheese--so fewer people are reaching for the $3.25-a-dozen organic, cage-free eggs, and more are waiting for the supermarket to have the regular ones, produced from the misery of hens, on sale for 99 cents a dozen. Eggs keep fairly well, so you can even stock up.
One possibility under consideration is legislation that would require that all eggs sold in California be cage-free. That would have been a fairer way to write the proposition. The vote might have gone differently if voters realized they were actually going to have to pay for their decision, and if they were willing to pay the extra money, fine. It also would have encouraged egg producers from outside the state to treat their chickens differently, to get a piece of the California market. But is this a time for jacking up the price of one of the cheapest sources of high-quality protein?
Meanwhile, the California farmers have time to switch to a different way of keeping their chickens, but they do have to get moving on new barns or larger, more humane cages if they want to meet the deadline. That means new investment, which usually means loans for money to invest, in a tight credit market.
even thou you guys think that the farmers have rights and they should be able to keep all the chikens in one pen then read this very carefully The U.S. egg industry suffocates, gases, or grinds up alive 250 million male chicks each year; they are not profitable because they will never produce eggs and are not bred to grow at an unnatural speed like broiler chickens Do you think its right that they do that. It starts off with that then it leads into other things. What will they do next to animals. STOP THE ANIMAL CRUELTY
Posted by: bob | October 13, 2009 at 06:27 AM
The cost to convert modern barns to meet the regulations of Prop 2 will be extremely high and will put many California Farmers out of business. The farmer can not pass this expense on to you, the consumer because we don't get to set the price for our products, the market does. For the lady who claimed to be a farmer and said this won't cost the farmer anything, she is wrong. If you have a loan on your barns, like most farmers do, they will have to find a way to pay off their loans by 2015 and exit the industry or find a lending institution to lend them over $30 per bird to convert their barns. These barns protect the chickens from injury from one another, they are important in producing safe and healthy food for you and I. California voters are getting exactly what they voted for, and now California farmers are paying the price, they will be forced to leave their farms, homes and way of providing for their families. Meanwhile, Californians will be paying higher prices for eggs, which are in numerous food items, cookies, cakes, noodles, pies, pancakes, waffles, the list goes on and on.
I hope the rest of the country takes note and stands up to such regulations in the future that have no benefit to agriculture, the animals or consumers. The animals were not harmed or abused, but protected from injury and death.
Posted by: Farmer 2 | February 10, 2009 at 02:08 PM
Why is it that people are willing to spend $3 for a cup of coffee or $1 for a Big Gulp that has zero nutritional value, but get upset if they have to pay $3 for a dozen eggs that are produced cruelty free? The one dollar burgers, drinks, and other fast food crap out there is what is making this country fat, sick and dumb!
Posted by: CJ | February 06, 2009 at 01:48 PM
This stuff is ludicrous. Please do your home work before writing such irresponsible articles. These animals suffer their whole lives while their bodies are used again and again to pump out food for humans and then die a cruel death to feed humans who then go and write heartless stories about how their needs are STILL not met because they have spend a few pennies more to continue to eat them....
Next time you want to write an article about chickens think about these statistics first.
Worldwide, the yearly slaughter count is more than 50 billion. Every second, 1,680 animals are killed for food.
Most farmed animals are killed when they are barely adolescents or even younger, such as the "broiler" chickens raised for meat who are slaughtered at only 6–7 weeks old.
The U.S. egg industry suffocates, gases, or grinds up alive 250 million male chicks each year; they are not profitable because they will never produce eggs and are not bred to grow at an unnatural speed like broiler chickens.
Debeaking. The mutilation of a young bird's beak. The days-old chick or weeks-old turkey is held tightly while a hot guillotine-like blade is used to slice off one-third to one-half of the bird's beak, through horn, bone, and highly sensitive tissue. The severe immediate pain persists even following the mutilation, which also permanently hinders the bird's ability to properly eat, drink, and preen.
Now tell me how horrible your life is that you can't have caged chicken eggs...............
Posted by: amber | February 04, 2009 at 11:13 PM
I am so sick and tired of people being so self centered and so self -serving. If people were a little more caring about other creatures that also have a right to be on this earth, i can guarantee you, our world would be a better place.. instead you close your eyes to the truth about how food gets to your table and hide behind the fact that just because you have a voice you are the only thing that matters.. Well Your Not ! Get off your high horse and try to be compassionate for once in your life and care about other things other than yourself! And if i have to pay a few cents more to puchase eggs, so be it and so can everyone else. It doesnt cost the farmers any more to do the right thing and if they say it does they are full of baloney! And guess what im a farmer!
Posted by: denise | February 04, 2009 at 05:02 PM
The following is from Wayne Pacelle, head of HSUS, re Karen Klein's 2/2 article:
"Pity that Klein apparently has no clue about the egg industry’s rampant price-fixing that’s come to light. Between August 2007 and March 2008 egg prices rose by 45 percent—rates faster than have been seen in 30 years. The egg industry hatched the scheme to gouge consumers and deliver record profits long before Prop 2 was in motion.
The HSUS sniffed out the scheme and the federal Department of Justice launched a criminal price-fixing investigation. This antitrust story has been reported by The Wall Street Journal, Business Week and the Minneapolis Star Tribune in just the last few months.
On the heels of these reports, a remarkable 20 federal class action price-fixing cases were filed against the egg industry. The cases have been consolidated in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (In Re: Processed Egg Products Antitrust Litigation).
Just days before the Feb. 2 Los Angeles Times piece argued for the need to keep hens in small cages, the plaintiffs filed their consolidated amended class action complaint—a 144-page treatise outlining egg producers’ scheme to drive egg prices to record highs under the guise of sham “animal welfare” guidelines. The guidelines were used by the industry to deceive consumers about the quality of care given to egg-laying hens, and restrict output in order to squeeze more profits out of ordinary Americans.
The class action complaint is chock-full of defendants’ own statements about their participation in a massive undertaking to drive egg prices up and bilk consumers in the process.
So let’s be clear about the problem: It is not The HSUS and other reformers who want to promote humane treatment of animals—nor millions of citizens who agree. Rather, it’s an industry that wants to strip away voters’ rights and then slam them with higher prices in the marketplace through anti-competitive price-fixing."
Indeed. Let's be clear. A substantial majority of California voters understood that it was cruel to cage egg laying hens in small cages, to keep young calves and pregnant sows in close confinement. That is why they voted FOR Prop. 2. Let the people lead!
Posted by: DianHardy | February 04, 2009 at 03:06 PM
Has anyone really asked the question, "Why are so many chickens in one cage?" Did you know free range chickens are more susceptible to diseases and predators?
Farmers need to keep their animals healthy, so they can produce good products and healthy offspring. I'm tired of the animal rights groups portraying farmers as cruel, animal haters. I don't want to be a vegitarian! Before you jump to conclusions, please take the time to contact a farmer, and ask him or her why they implement particular farming practices on their farm. If you don’t know a farmer there are various websites that allow you to ask a farmer a question. Please visit them!
Posted by: Others | February 03, 2009 at 01:55 PM
Cage-free is not necessarily more humane. Cage-free hens are more likely to have diseases, they are more likely to be injured, and they are more likely to die in their pens. The Discovery Channel just did a report on this.
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/01/23/free-range-chickens.html
Posted by: CRG | February 03, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Why is it that I am able to buy large eggs from supposedly cage-free chickens at Whole Foods in Hollywood (Santa Monica & Fairfax) for $1.99? The price went up to maybe $2.19 recently. I buy them all the time.
Posted by: Cathy | February 03, 2009 at 10:32 AM
The reason the animal rights groups are doing this is for control of Americans. We have identified 4 animal rights groups inside the socialist party. This includes the National Socialist Party. The Nationals shifted into the Socialist Party out of party loyalty. You will remember the National Socialist Party from the Oklahoma City Bombing. Stop the ar movement before it's to late.
Posted by: skippy | February 03, 2009 at 09:46 AM
The threat that CA egg farmer's will be at a disadvantage, I don't believe it. To truck, refrigerate and pack eggs costs a lot of money. Refitting your cages ONCE is more affordable to eggs than buying out of state eggs.
Further it's just the right thing to do! I don't care what the economy is...chickens are TORTURED. We don't have to have eggs AT ALL to live. Not at all. People if they just look into it, can find other foods to eat that are not only cheaper but also more healthy.
Posted by: Soliel | February 03, 2009 at 09:17 AM
"But is this a time for jacking up the price of one of the cheapest sources of high-quality protein?"
Time to sample the least expensive high-quality protein you can buy, tofu.
Posted by: Torr | February 02, 2009 at 06:25 PM
Prop 2 was an example of a well-intentioned but poorly thought-out idea. It felt good for people to vote for it, but they didn't realize the impact it would have on the egg farmers and themselves. It should have applied to all eggs SOLD in California, but the Humane Society realized that this would not have passed. This will drive the egg farming business out of California.
Posted by: kristin | February 02, 2009 at 03:17 PM