That was the situation in the meat packing industry in the early 20th Century. Upton Sinclair's novel, The Jungle, led to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act.Quote:
Unless its something you want horribly managed, made worse or destroyed completely, our federal govt shouldn't be put in charge of it.
This times 1000.ToddyHill said:
I worked in the meat industry for several years. First, there are MANY Federal laws on the books regarding Animal Welfare. Further, as it pertains to USDA, many of the federal gov't decision makers come from the industry, so many of the rules on the books are developed by people who worked first hand with livestock.
The California rule is just terrible because it does not take into account the safety of the piglets if the sow wasn't in a crate. Morbidity can occur as a 600 pound sow could easily crush a piglet if she wasn't in a crate. Further, sows, at times, can be cannibalistic and will literally eat their young (it's rare, but it does occur). A crate provides protection.
Many, if not all, of these animal rights activists don't understand that producers or packers are not hell bent on stressing their livestock. Stress an animal up to the point of slaughter and the quality of the finished product will be affected.
Unfortunately, many of these California lawmakers don't follow the science, but are led by their emotions.
I would bet many, if not all, have never heard of Dr. Temple Grandin, who set the standard for the Animal welfare practiced in industry today.
Quote:
Why should we have endless traceability on our individual animals yet allow Brazil or Australia to send literally thousands of tons of meat our way without the same requirements?
Quote:
Every major producer should just stop selling pork in commiefornia.
Quote:
California lawmakers don't follow the science, but are led by their emotions.
You are spot on Sir. Australia has been a world leader for many years. Further, their sanitation practices are exceptional. Years ago, I was in Canada and checked out the meat case at a local grocery store. They had refrigerated, portioned-cut, vacuum packaged Australian steaks with a 90 day shelf life. Incredible.Quote:
I just spent 2 weeks in Australia this year and they actually have some of the highest traceability standards out there.
A whole lot of the population - hell, a majority of it - has absolutely zero exposure to anything ag related, whether that be livestock, poultry or farming. Easy to be ignorant when it has never once been any component of your life.96ags said:This times 1000.ToddyHill said:
I worked in the meat industry for several years. First, there are MANY Federal laws on the books regarding Animal Welfare. Further, as it pertains to USDA, many of the federal gov't decision makers come from the industry, so many of the rules on the books are developed by people who worked first hand with livestock.
The California rule is just terrible because it does not take into account the safety of the piglets if the sow wasn't in a crate. Morbidity can occur as a 600 pound sow could easily crush a piglet if she wasn't in a crate. Further, sows, at times, can be cannibalistic and will literally eat their young (it's rare, but it does occur). A crate provides protection.
Many, if not all, of these animal rights activists don't understand that producers or packers are not hell bent on stressing their livestock. Stress an animal up to the point of slaughter and the quality of the finished product will be affected.
Unfortunately, many of these California lawmakers don't follow the science, but are led by their emotions.
I would bet many, if not all, have never heard of Dr. Temple Grandin, who set the standard for the Animal welfare practiced in industry today.
The ignorance of basic agriculture is stunning at times.
Because producers aren't going to willingly give up 25% of the market. So they are going to follow stupid guidelines that have no basis in any actual ag practice and are instead 100% feels....which means prices across the board are going to increase as a result.BrazosDog02 said:
I'm confused on what the problem is.
Ag is a daily part of our life from cattle to chickens to crops. I think we, as a civilized society, have a moral responsibility to raise animals ethically and humanely. I have no problem with California laws on that. I encourage them. Why can't California simply set their requirements and leave it up to the producers as to whether they want to sell to California?
It seems pretty straightforward. If you don't want to comply with their laws then you'll have to sell your meat elsewhere. And if California wants to force that on others then it seems they need to grow their own.
If I was a pork producer, then I'd tell them to get bent and just give up that market. Either that or comply. California would eventually have to decide on starving or relaxing laws right?
Either that, or make the necessary changes and sell them $75 packs of bacon. Lol.
