Proposition 2 is a well-intentioned effort - that voters should reject

Published online on Thursday, Oct. 16, 2008

Proposition 2 is a well-intentioned effort to end a practice -- the caging of farm animals -- that many regard as inhumane. But, like so many propositions that California's voters have faced in recent years, it is flawed in ways that could render it not simply ineffective, but counterproductive. The Bee recommends a "no" vote on Proposition 2.

While Proposition 2 would affect all animals in cages on farms, its principal impact would be on the production of eggs. Hog and veal production -- the other main uses of cages for animals -- are limited in the state, and those industries are already moving in the direction that Proposition 2 would compel.

Eggs are a different story. Chickens are kept in cages for a number of reasons, only one of which is that it reduces costs. The practice also reduces infections in the birds, and allows the eggs to be carried away on conveyor belts rather than sitting in animal wastes, lowering the risk of contamination.

Proponents of Proposition 2 say the measure would barely affect the price of eggs, adding no more than 12 cents to the cost of a dozen. But an independent study released in July by the University of California Agricultural Issues Center put the increased cost at 90 cents per dozen.

The proponents' cost estimate doesn't included the expense involved in changing current egg-producing operations to meet the new standards of Proposition 2. That added cost would be sufficient to drive the industry from the state altogether, the UC report concluded.

Thus we'd have humane new standards for caging farm animals that applied to no one, and we'd be buying eggs from other states and from Mexico, where the old practices would still be in place.

The net result: We'd pay more for eggs raised the same old way, but they'd be less fresh because they'd travel farther -- and we'd be out thousands of jobs in the farm sector.

It's hard to quarrel with an initiative -- it's sponsored by the Humane Society -- that seeks to make the lives of animals better. But like so many of the propositions that land on the state ballot each year, Proposition 2 is chock-full of ambiguities and unintended consequences. We urge voters to reject it.