2008 California Proposition 2
The proposition adds a chapter to Division 20 of the California Health and Safety Code [2], to prohibit the confinement of certain farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs.
However, unlike eggborne salmonellosis of past decades, the current epidemic is due to intact and disinfected grade A eggs.
The reason for this is that Salmonella enteritidis silently infects the ovaries of healthy appearing hens and contaminates the eggs before the shells are formed.
This is because the cage-farmed hens had a manure belt that ran under their enclosures and transported the feces to collection receptacles, common to battery cage systems in California.
That investigation discovered badly decomposed chicken carcasses in the same cages with hens which were still laying eggs for human consumption.
Supporters of Prop 2 note that furnished cages for egg-laying hens have already been developed in Europe,[27] which allow birds to move freely and display natural behaviors.
The waste material in these systems is far less concentrated than with battery cages, and the animals are healthier and calmer with a stronger natural immunity to disease.
[32] Opponents of Proposition 2 claim that California's current regulations ensure sanitary and healthy conditions for egg-laying hens in the care of law-abiding organizations.
Proponents of Prop 2 say the best housing environments for farm animals must take into consideration freedom of movement and expression of normal behaviors.
[33] Furthermore, although Proposition 2 offers hens additional space, it doesn't address other behavioral needs such as nesting, foraging, and dust bathing.
It went on to say that hens in battery cages did not have significantly higher levels of stress measured by the hormones in blood and fecal matter.
The study qualified that finding by stating: "It is possible, however, that these [stress] measures may not be sensitive enough to detect the differences in housing conditions.
[35] Animal welfare advocates assert that, in order to maximize profits, hens in factory farms are treated like units of production rather than as living beings.
The instinctual needs of each hen are denied, and most spend their entire lives indoors in filthy, cramped conditions in immense dark warehouses.
They say that UEP certification permits routine cruel and inhumane factory farm practices[39] such as intensive confinement in restrictive, barren cages such that the hens cannot perform many of their natural behaviors such as perching, nesting, foraging or even fully stretching their wings.
[40] Prop 2's supporters say[41] it is a modest measure that ends the cruel and inhumane confinement of specified animals on factory farms, requiring their living spaces to be big enough for them to turn around, lie down, and fully extend their legs and/or wings.
Prop 2's opponents say that "Proposition 2 is a risky, dangerous and costly measure banning almost all modern egg production in California.
Key endorsements as of October 16, 2008 are: Food Safety & Public Health Experts & Veterinarians (titles and affiliations are used for identification purposes only): Alex Ardans, DVM, Former Director University of California Animal Health & Food Safety Laboratory System , Art Bickford, DVM, Former Associate Director, Turlock, University of California Animal Health & Food Safety Laboratory System, Patricia Blanchard, DVM, Branch Chief, Tulare, University of California Animal Health & Food Safety Laboratory System, Bruce R. Charlton, DVM, PhD, Branch Chief, Turlock, University of California Animal Health & Food Safety Laboratory System, Roy Curtiss III, PhD, Director, Center for Infectious Diseases & Vaccinology, Arizona State University, and Craig Reed, DVM, Former Deputy Administrator, Food Safety & Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture among many other experts.
Newspapers: San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times, The Sacramento Bee, The Bakersfield Californian, Orange County Register, The Fresno Bee, The Modesto Bee, Antelope Valley Press, The Press Democrat, Napa Valley Register, Chico Enterprise-Record, Eureka Reporter, Visalia Times-Delta, Long Beach Press-Telegram, Colusa County Sun-Herald, Hollister Free Lance, Redding Record Searchlight, and The Milpitas Post.
Accordingly, then-Assemblyman Jared Huffman authored AB 1437[60] The bill passed the legislature and was signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger on July 6, 2010.
In 2012, William Cramer, an egg farmer in Riverside, California, filed a lawsuit alleging that Prop 2 is unconstitutionally vague under the Fourteenth Amendment's due-process clause because it lacks details about the exact cage size required to avoid criminal prosecution.
[63][64] In 2014, Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster filed a lawsuit alleging the law is unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause of the US constitution.
[1] On May 6, 2013, the California Department of Food and Agriculture issued regulations[66][67] stipulating the minimum number of square inches of floorspace per laying hen that shall be deemed to constitute compliance with Prop 2 and AB 1437.
The regulations say, in part: "An enclosure containing nine (9) or more egg-laying hens shall provide a minimum of 116 square inches of floor space per bird."
