Then the eggs will go to twenty dollars a dozen no matter who bares the cost and their isn't any reason that they should, if the farmers had more support from OTHER ANIMAL USE persons such as our selves. As for," serves them right comments" . Think you better read the thread again because those comments are there and it seems that some folks think that it looks good on California that they bought into, H$U$ lies.

Yup. Dairy, meat, leather, fur, wool, silk, circus, & all animal use benefits to man one peg at a time till the tent is pulled apart.

Mira, you are spoton about what the farmer's are in for with the hsus,and slim your right about the trapper a well,so why not try and fight them on this issue of the egg rather the issue of trapping.We would have more dog in the fight on this issue than we might trying to stand alone,and we just might get help from these ag group's if we have a fight on our hands someday..............ringtailtrapper

That is the motivation for 90% of my posts here Ringtail. I post these articles so that people will eventually motivate themselves into becoming more vocal in supporting other animal use groups. If farmers in your area are under attack by folks complaining about smell or barns get out there and support your farmers. They will start recognizing you as a supporter and will start sticking up for you.




I get emails all the time from folks that read my posts and don't bother to answer or put general input into those posts till it affects them. Then they send requests to me to give them council on how to fight PETA or H$U$ in their cause. We trappers must become more pro-active in helping other animal use groups such as these egg farmers.

Proposition 2 passed by a vote of 63%.

Now, this new legislation is designed to apply the Prop. 2 standards to all states who ship eggs to California.

And who created this new bill that will shaft egg producers in other states? According to the article, the California egg producers did. It was drafted by an assemblyman representing the egg producers, so they could compete with those out of state egg producers.

So, this new bill isn't a product of animal rights groups. It is a product of the egg producers in California.

In other words, this isn't a battle between AR groups and egg producers, anymore. It is now a battle between California egg producers and egg producers in all the other states.

Would be kinda like if California banned foothold traps, so the AR groups and California trappers teamed up to ban foothold traps in all the other states.

I guess they are now in a position where they know they aren't going to get those Government subsidies you saw coming Buckne. Now they are trying to stave off bankruptcy as they are the ones that have no farms if they don't try to keep ahead of the RULES set up by the ARA groups.

Mira, after rereading the article, it became apparent that the issue isn't Proposition 2. That has already passed. The issue is California egg producers trying to pass this new legislation to apply Proposition 2 standards to the rest of the country so they can compete.

And frankly, if the California egg producers are trying to apply the Prop. 2 standards to the rest of the country, I hope they DO fail

How do you feel about the guy who represented H$U$ in Connecticut in trying to ban leg hold traps and push for his type of expertise built on falsehoods? He did it for his reasons & personal gain but the Connecticut trappers are left holding the bag. The ARA would not have gained the ground they did in California if all animal use orgs were more aligned to each other and had formed alliances to turn back H$U$ propaganda. .

They fail and they loose a multi million dollar industry because H$U$ put the first knife into their back. They need time to get their house in order and H$U$ actions in other states to make it apparent that society can not survive on animal rights monetary crucifixion of such markets. With time those California farmers will be able to hold the fort till the general public starts seeing the real costs of allowing idiots to rule the roost.

Mira, I agree 100%. But IN THIS CASE, concerning THIS legislation, it is an issue of AR groups and California egg producers teaming up to force Prop. 2 standards on the rest of the country. I'll support egg producers in other states fighting this legislation, but I will NOT support this new team of HSUS and California egg producers.

Thank you for your input Buckne. By the two of us having this discussion it allows others to get a better grasp of just why we MUST become more proactive in extending our olive branch to other animal use people.

Mira, the California egg producers are not the heros in this battle. They are the villains. They sponsored the legislation you and I are so against.

That statement would be wrong Buckne. In fact the farmers fought the Prop 2 propsal which was primarily forced upon them by H$U$. They are now trying to buy time with this new proposal in the hopes of staving off the losses to their economy long enough for other states to come to the realization that the public can not afford twenty dollar a dozen eggs.

http://www.uslaw.com/library/Media_&...php?item=269548




http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jul2008/2008-07-31-093.asp


http://thebatavian.com/blogs/philipansel...e-vigilant/3577


http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:QXahLcF-SokJ:magissues.farmprogress.com/WAL/WF08Aug06/wal05.pdf+Florida+farmers+new+confinement+laws&cd=20&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ca&client=firefox-a







Actually these farmers are in the same boat as the states that have had trapping banned. They are hoping we can hold things together long enough to see legislators turn back anti-trapping bans.

And exactly HOW would that statement be wrong? Did the egg producers in California, or did they not, start this legislation to spread the Prop. 2 standards to other states? According to the article you posted, they did. And according to the article you posted, both HSUS and the California egg producers are now working to get the legislation passed to spread Prop. 2 standards to other states.

It's like if the California trappers, having had footholds banned in California, decided to work to have footholds banned in every other state so they could compete. Would you support California trappers if that had happened? No? I didn't think so. So why are you supporting California egg producers, now?

By the way, Mira, in your second post on this thread, you indicated you are opposed to this legislation. And you seemed to think that HSUS was trying to push their agenda on the other states outside California. Until I pointed out to you that HSUS didn't start this legislation, the California egg producers did, according to the article you posted. Now you seem to be SUPPORTING the legislation.

I don't know how you could be so confused by my point of view. I have been quite clear about it. (1) the farmers should be in control of raising their livestock and not have people passing legislation such as prop 2. However Prop two was passed and now California farmers are trying to buy time so that they can prevent the loss of their market niche. They didn't ask for this problem and now that they have it they might just be trying to get other people to start fighting against the legislation in other states by making them face the same idiot laws as they are facing. That attempt might just motivate other farm bureaus into action. In fact I have had other trappers on this board who belong to other states & are involved in Agriculture contact me on THIS forum wanting to know how to use ARA previous actions against them. Prop two is such a lightening rod and now the second phase isn't necessarily a goal of condemning other farm boards as much as getting them to face the same silly laws as California so those other states will help get federal action over the next few years to protect all farmers from the ARA lunacy.




I am definitely opposed to having ARA call the shots and have farmers pigeon holed by Prop 2. However , I am also quite understanding of why those same farmers are trying to protect their farms from bankruptcy or unfair marketing from outside their state. This issue must become a loss for ARA and interstate commerce might be a wedge that California farmers might apply in order to make Feds and other states more PRO-ACTIVE against such lunatic ARA policy. HSUS definitely did cause this proposition because they initiated prop two and the California farmers are now trying to protect themselves from total loss of market.

Mira, your post



indicated to me that you were opposed to the bill.

Now you appear to support the bill, hoping it will force egg producers in other states to fight the restrictions.

Now, after reading the article ONCE AGAIN, I can find nothing that supports your suggestion that the bill is aimed at drawing support from farmers in other states. On the contrary, every quote by every legislator mentioned in the article clearly states that the purpose of the bill is to impose the same restrictions on the other states in order to make their ability to produce eggs as restrictive as California's, suggesting that the goal is to RAISE the production costs of the other states so that California egg producers can compete. They state that very plainly.

Mira, the bottom line is, before Prop. 2 goes into effect, the government will supply the egg producers with subsidies to cover the costs of the new regulations.

Right now, with no government subsidies and no new legislation, the egg farms in California would fold. The egg producers in Oregon and Nevada would have huge new markets. But the price of eggs to the consumer wouldn't change much.

But, with the proposed legislation, Oregon and Nevada egg producers' costs to produce eggs would also increase, driving up the price of eggs to the consumer in California. And the egg farmers in California know that.

They also know that the government isn't going to let the price of eggs sky rocket, which means more government subsidies.

So, the best way to assure government subsidies to the egg farmers in California is to create a situation where the costs would go up without the subsidies. And that situation is the proposed legislation that you posted about.

You guys can argue about this all you want, the bottomline is that the egg producers in California see cheaper eggs coming in to compete with the market and these imported eggs don't have to adhere to the same standards that the local producers do.

My question is why wouldn't the local producers be well within their rights to hold the out of state eggs to the same standards? The voters approved the proposition in the first place creating the unfair standards, it only makes sense for the California producers to say "Hey wait a minute, these guys are importing eggs that don't have to meet the same standards as I do."

Make the voters pay for their decision or make for fair markets. Its the same thing. The era of cheap food is coming to an end partially due to the AR movement.