The headline is a grabber to get people angry or to read the article, which essentially suggests prices could go up, and supply will temporarily go down. The law definitely doesn't mean the permanent end of bacon. It most likely means bacon could be in short supply for a while, but once things stabilize, that bacon burger might be 25 cents more expensive.
California's New Animal Welfare Law Could Mean The End Of Bacon
https://www.npr.org/2021/08/02/10237...nia-animal-law
Quote:
|
At the beginning of next year, California will begin enforcing an animal welfare proposition approved overwhelmingly by voters in 2018 that requires more space for breeding pigs, egg-laying chickens and veal calves. National veal and egg producers are optimistic they can meet the new standards, but only 4% of hog operations now comply with the new rules. Unless the courts intervene or the state temporarily allows non-compliant meat to be sold in the state, California will lose almost all of its pork supply, much of which comes from Iowa, and pork producers will face higher costs to regain a key market.
|
Quote:
arry Goodwin, an economist at North Carolina State University, estimated the extra costs at 15% more per animal for a farm with 1,000 breeding pigs.
If half the pork supply was suddenly lost in California, bacon prices would jump 60%, meaning a $6 package would rise to about $9.60, according to a study by the Hatamiya Group, a consulting firm hired by opponents of the state proposition.
At one typical hog farm in Iowa, sows are kept in open-air crates measuring 14-square-feet when they join a herd and then for a week as part of the insemination process before moving to larger, roughly 20-square foot group pens with other hogs. Both are less than the 24 square feet required by the California law to give breeding pigs enough room to turn around and to extend their limbs. Other operations keep sows in the crates nearly all of the time so also wouldn't be in compliance.
|
2018 article talking about the 2018 law that built on prior legislation from 2008, so these laws continue to progress. In some ways, this is like pulling off a bandaid slowly; it would be better just to rip it off. Slow and progressive changes to the law often means the industry changes and then has to change again and then change again. Farmers and producers will always want to maximize their profits, so they will do the bare minimum. It would be better if they just did a reasonable, single mandate, and then the industry had to adapt. While such a drastic change would seem worse for the industry than gradual changes, for some, the changes that need to be made represent an expense to things like pens. It is a Catch 22 situation.
Obviously, my position is known. This mandate for 24 square foot pens for pigs is pretty pathetic, especially if it changes things from 14-20 square foot pens to 24 square foot pens. We are talking about changing a pen that is anywhere from 2.8x5'-4x5' to its new size of 4x6'.
California makes cage-free hens a state law
https://apnews.com/article/7caa07ba4...dc7498fd573950
Quote:
Dubbed the Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act, Proposition 12 builds on an earlier ballot measure, Proposition 2, that passed in 2008 and banned keeping hens, calves and pigs in tiny cages so cramped they couldn’t stand up, lie down or turn around.
That measure took effect in 2015 but lacked specific size requirements and did not apply to out-of-state farmers whose products were sold in California.
Proposition 12 specifies how much floor space farmers need to give each animal.
|