|
Animal rights headed for the ballot
Locals push state initiative on farm animal living conditions
Share
Email
Print
CommentMonths of hard work culminated in a preliminary victory for animal rights groups in Napa and across the state Wednesday when California Secretary of State Debra Bowen certified the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act for the November general election.
If passed, the legislation would ban three types of small structures used to house commercial farm animals, requiring larger cages for the millions of calves, pigs and egg-laying hens that live on commercial California farms.
If passed, the legislation would ban three types of small structures used to house commercial farm animals, requiring larger cages for the millions of calves, pigs and egg-laying hens that live on commercial California farms.
Cris Kelly — who co-founded Napa’s Animal Action Network with her husband, Michael Christophel — said members of her organization and other local volunteers began campaigning locally for the measure and collecting signatures for the initiative in October of 2007.
Across California, Kelly said, volunteers gathered more than 536,000 signatures for the initiative from registered voters. Only 477,000 were needed to qualify the measure for the ballot, she said.
Across California, Kelly said, volunteers gathered more than 536,000 signatures for the initiative from registered voters. Only 477,000 were needed to qualify the measure for the ballot, she said.
“I’m thrilled that it passed quite above the number of signatures needed,” she said. “I’m very happy and now the hard work starts.”
Kelly said the next step is to get the initiative endorsed by local veterinarians, business people and state and federal lawmakers.
Kelly said the next step is to get the initiative endorsed by local veterinarians, business people and state and federal lawmakers.
In one state that passed a similar measure, supporters found themselves up against opposition from agribusiness officials, Kelly said. Yet she and other Napa volunteers didn’t run into the same trouble in Napa County.
“Locally when we were out trying to get support for this ballot, not many opposed it,” she said. “A lot of the local farmers signed it.”
Jane Albert, executive director of Napa Humane, said although her organization typically focuses on the well-being of “companion animals,” her organization endorses the measure.
“We support the hundreds of thousands of California voters who successfully campaign to place the (initiative) on the November ballot. ... (The measure) will phase out certain cruel confinement practices to make way for more humane standards in factory farming.” said Albert.
Similar laws have been passed in Arizona, Florida and Oregon, Kelly said.
“Locally when we were out trying to get support for this ballot, not many opposed it,” she said. “A lot of the local farmers signed it.”
Jane Albert, executive director of Napa Humane, said although her organization typically focuses on the well-being of “companion animals,” her organization endorses the measure.
“We support the hundreds of thousands of California voters who successfully campaign to place the (initiative) on the November ballot. ... (The measure) will phase out certain cruel confinement practices to make way for more humane standards in factory farming.” said Albert.
Similar laws have been passed in Arizona, Florida and Oregon, Kelly said.
Join the conversation
Comment guidelines
All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on Napavalleyregister.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines, click here.
|
|
anotherguyinnapa wrote on Apr 12, 2008 2:03 AM:
Suze wrote on Apr 12, 2008 6:58 AM:
jfz wrote on Apr 12, 2008 7:49 AM:
hudds5 wrote on Apr 12, 2008 7:57 AM:
JimClark wrote on Apr 12, 2008 10:26 AM:
Yes, we have to protect and defend our pets but, "animal rights" is merely another control device of the Liberal Intellectual Establishment (LIE). These people have entirely too much time on their hands. "
Dwayne wrote on Apr 12, 2008 11:12 AM:
greyhoundgirl wrote on Apr 12, 2008 12:09 PM:
The only line between animals and people are that people get to complain. Animals make the best of what they have so we assume that means we can treat them like garbage. They're only given one life just like people. We are responsible for allowing them to make the best of it. "
entity wrote on Apr 12, 2008 5:07 PM:
vocal-de-local wrote on Apr 12, 2008 10:00 PM:
barefoot wrote on Apr 12, 2008 10:37 PM:
beaelliott wrote on Apr 13, 2008 11:41 AM:
"Humanity" at some point has to question the validity of killing animals for food - under any circumstances.... Factory -farm, free-range, cloned or otherwise.... It all leads to the slaughterhouse -
en route - there is massive deforestation, wasteful use of resources, human health issues, greenhouse & methane gasses etc., ..... all in the manufacture of "animals as food" -Animals as food is 20th century thinking - bound in tradition, myth and money interests.
Personally, I find all factory farms and abusing/using/killing/eating animals unacceptable - Happily, I've found a substitute for all animal products and thrive on a plant based diet instead....
It's healthier for me, the environment - and yeah.... the cows, hens and pigs too - Go Vegan! "
Econut wrote on Apr 22, 2008 11:41 AM: