By KEVIN WALKER
Michigan Correspondent LANSING, Mich. — Legislation that looks and sounds a lot like California’s Proposition 2 has passed the state House.
A substitute to House bill 5127, sponsored by Rep. Mike Simpson (D-Jackson, Mich.), would codify animal care standards endorsed by the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) but sometimes criticized by farmers and their advocates.
The amendment that changed the legislation, called section 46, would prohibit farmers from confining pigs during pregnancy, veal calves and egg-laying hens on a farm all day or most of the day, that would prevent them from lying down, standing up, fully extending their limbs, or turning around freely.
The new rules for veal calves would apply one year after the bill’s effective date and, for pregnant pigs and laying hens, 10 years after the bill’s effective date.
“We supported the pork and poultry industries’ compromise,” said Tonia Ritter, state governmental affairs manager for the Michigan Farm Bureau. “It is very similar to California’s Proposition 2.”
Paul Shapiro, a spokesman for the HSUS in Washington, D.C., confirmed that it had discussions with pork and poultry producers over the new bill.
“We support the new bill,” Shapiro said. “The stakeholders have reached a compromise agreement and we look forward to working together in the legislature to advance the agreed upon bill.”
Ritter said that there are some things about the legislation as it stands that would make it somewhat less onerous for farmers than the California law. A study done in 2008, shortly before Proposition 2 was passed, predicted that the initiative would eliminate the egg production business altogether in California.
A spokesman for Simpson said he supported the legislative change because the industry sat down with the HSUS and agreed to the compromise. Ritter said that some in the Democratic leadership, Pam Byrnes (D-Ann Arbor, Mich.) in particular, were instrumental in engineering the change.
Rep. Dave Agema (R-Grandville, Mich.) voted against the substitute bill.
“I’m kind of hesitant to vote for legislation that’s going to cost businesses more money,” Agema said. “I’ve talked with farmers on both sides of the issue.”
Agema said he doesn’t think it’s a good idea, in principle, to pass legislation in the hopes of avoiding something worse that might or might not happen. He added that now everything is focused on what will happen in the Senate. He also stated that this issue is going to take a back seat for the moment to negotiations over the state budget. George House, executive director of Michigan Allied Poultry Industries, said that Michigan is a state that allows ballot initiatives and so is being targeted by animal rights activists. House’s association represents producers of eggs, broilers and turkeys.
“The rationale is that if we did not reach a compromise understanding there would be a ballot initiative, and we would be like California and the requirements would be more difficult to obtain and achieve than what we’ve been able to negotiate,” House said. “We conclude that before the 10 years is done there will be a national standard. We believe that it needs to be resolved nationally. We want to put it behind us.”
House went on to say that, while he can’t lay out what will happen, exactly, in the long term, he believes that a modified cage system or something similar will eventually become the national standard. Systems like that exist in Michigan right now, he said. He also stated that he disagrees with those who are saying that California’s egg laying industry will be destroyed by Proposition 2.
“10 years is a long time in today’s environment,” he said. “We think the way eggs get produced in 10 years will be different from the way they are produced today.”
Kathleen Hawkins, executive vice president of the Michigan Cattlemen’s Assoc., said that her organization has a problem with the short amount of time veal producers are being given to change their operations.
“There is some concern on the part of our board of directors that the veal farmers only got one year to change their housing,” Hawkins said. “We’re not in disagreement that the housing needs to be changed in the long term. The veal industry is moving more toward group housing.”
She said that the Senate agriculture committee was set to meet and that “they know we have some concern about it. I’m hoping reasonable minds will weigh in on this and adjust the time frame.”
Meanwhile, House Bill 5128, which would have set up an industry dominated board to oversee animal care practices, appears to be going nowhere. It was tie-barred with House Bill 5127, which has been substituted with the modified legislation.
Sam Hines, executive vice president of the Michigan Pork Producers Assoc., portrayed the substitute bill as an acceptable compromise. He stated that concentrated animal feeding operations would by no means be put out of business by the new legislation.
“We looked at the various options and this looked like the best available,” Hines said. “Our producers wanted to avoid the uncertainties of a ballot measure.”
Hines added, “Pork producers, to a person, are sensitive to the animals under their care.” Published on Sept. 30, 2009 |
