Proponents of SQ 777 "Right to Farm" cited two specific initiatives, both California bills, which could have been stopped if California had the "Right to Farm" in its constitution. Proposition 2, a ballot initiative, was voted on in 2008 - which increased the cage sizes for chickens, the pen sizes for veal calves, and gestation crate sizes for hogs (sows). As it was before Prop. 2, the sizes of these cages, pens, and crates - where livestock spends its entire lives - was too small for the chicken, calf, or sow to "stand upright, turn around, and even stretch limbs". Proposition 2 required cage and pen sizes to increase, to allow for this limited movement. It's a fact that only industrial corporate farms raised and produced livestock under the previous conditions, not family owned farms and ranches. Family farms do not raise and produce livestock in this way, so it's difficult for them to "compete" with the giant corporate farms, hence many went out of business - since only corporate farms grow and raise livestock like a gardener would grow a tomato plant. Most corporate entities such as Farm Bureau, only interested in the profit motive, did not like Prop.2 - as corporate executives and share-holders could see profits shrinking. Corporate execs said that egg prices would increase, as it would cost more to produce eggs. What actually happened, though, was egg prices initially increased - not because of the increased cage sizes - but because California was entering a drought period along with an outbreak of the avian flu (caused by small cage sizes). Egg prices are now, as of 2016, lower than they were before Prop. 2! In addition, since prop. 2 was a ballot initiative instead of a state law, it could not have been stopped by a "SQ 777" in California. By the way, corporations only interested in corporate profits, always support the corporate side of any initiative or law - not individual farmers and ranchers. A corporation which has share-holders and company executives are always concerned with corporate profits, and not concerned in the least with family farmers and ranchers. They are not concerned about how many family farmers they flush down the toilet, just as Wal-Mart is not concerned about how many family owned grocery stores, tire shops, pharmacies, optometrists, etc. it puts out of business.
Senate Bill 1383 is the California law which forces local dairy farmers to drastically reduce methane pollution by 40% within 15 years. In order to comply with the new law, small family owned dairies (less than 3000 cows) will probably have to install $1 million "digesters" - giant manufactured tarp coverings which fit over cattle manure pits and designed to capture the escaping methane. The methane gas is then sold to electric companies for a profit. California has allocated $50 million for dairies to use for purchasing and installing "digesters". The only problem with this scenario is that there are over 450 dairies in California, so the only dairies that can afford to comply with the law would be the giant corporate dairies. In my opinion, SB 1383 is another corporate bill designed to consolidate the small dairies into the corporate giants. Several giant dairies already have the "digesters" in place, so the motivation behind the bill is to run the smaller family-owned dairies out of existence (like Seaboard Farms did in Oklahoma to our family owned hog farms). SB 1383 was fronted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in California because of air quality and greenhouse gases present in California only, not in Oklahoma. If the California Legislature had not taken action, the Federal government would have - so a Right to Farm bill in California would not have stopped the EPA. The good news for Oklahoma, is that several family owned dairies might relocate to our state, in order to avoid buying a $1 million digester.
The bottom line for me is this: If I lived and worked a family farm in California, I would have been dead set against SB 1383 - as it is designed (just like SQ 777 in Oklahoma) for corporate farm advantages, for increased corporate profits. Once again, SB 1383 and SQ 777 pitted "corporate conservatives" against "traditional conservatives" In the case of SB 1383, however, the corporate conservatives and corporate liberals won, while in Oklahoma with SQ 777 - traditional conservatives won.
No comments:
Post a Comment