California Leadin'

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about my hope that President-elect Barack Obama would ask his Agriculture Secretary nominee, former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack, to break the hold of Big Agribusiness on the U.S. Department of Agriculture and to broaden the agency's outlook and constituency. Following Obama's election, Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times wrote two trenchant columns about renaming the agency the Department of Food, to reflect that we all have a stake in how food gets to our tables and that USDA can no longer be the handmaiden of Big Ag. In addition to mentioning the need to address animal welfare, Kristof echoed author Michael Pollan's view that we cannot solve our nation's big problems of energy policy, national security, and global warming without enacting serious reforms to America's agricultural policies.

Tomorrow, the Senate Agriculture Committee will hold its hearing on the Vilsack appointment, and we expect to see some of these issues aired out. But today, we saw some movement on this issue -- at the state level.

California's stepping up again and I am in Sacramento to participate in a press conference called by California Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and Senate Majority Leader Dean Florez to announce a newly constituted Senate Committee on Food and Agriculture. Sen. Florez will chair the committee, and it is no longer going to be dominated by lawmakers from rural areas who are beholden to agribusiness. While the committee will certainly attend to the needs of production agriculture, it will also look at animal welfare, food safety and security, nutrition, and the environment.

When it comes to farm animal welfare, California agriculture was ground zero for the Humane Society of the United States' work in 2008. We started the year by releasing the results of an investigation into the Hallmark/Westland slaughter plant in Chino, exposing the gross mistreatment of spent dairy cows. Our investigation led to the nation's largest-ever meat recall. Then in November, voters overwhelmingly approved Proposition 2, adopting a phase-out of some of the most extreme confinement methods for 20 million farm animals in the state.

The fact is, we would have needed neither the undercover investigation at Chino nor a ballot initiative like Prop 2 if agribusiness had paid more attention to public attitudes and been held by lawmakers to a higher standard of animal welfare. The reorganization of this committee is in large part a reaction to Hallmark and Prop 2 -- which cast a spotlight on the failures of agribusiness.

There are other problems with animal agriculture in California and the rest of the nation that still need attention, including painful mutilation of animals without anesthesia, the rampant use of antibiotics on factory farms, and enormous waste generated by these industrialized operations.

We look forward to working with Sen. Florez and all of the other committee members and stakeholders to address these problems. In the past -- and as it is in every other state -- the Senate Agriculture Committee was a dead-end street for meaningful dialogue and reforms, but now in California we have the prospect of participating in a robust examination of important policy matters.

But this conversation can't happen without you. The table may be set, but we have to pull up a chair, create the menu, and join in the discussion. You can provide your thoughts on what the focus and agenda of this new committee should be by visiting www.californiasafefood.com. Leave a message for Sen. Florez and his colleagues about key animal welfare issues you'd like to see addressed. It is an extraordinary opportunity, and we should make the most of it.

Comments

[skippypicasso]

I tried to post something earlier, but Huffington probably didn't want the first post coming from an avowed cheeseburgarian. The basic gist of my argument is that if the whole lobbying system is corrupt why should I cheer the fact that the PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) gets more access than PETA (People for the Eating of Tasty Animals). Neither side represents my viewpoint even remotely.

[Halsey]

hmmm..no other comments...years ago..I became a vegetarian (not a vegan.but eat ONLY cage free chicken eggs...thinking..these little hens running around MUST lay un-fertilized eggs anyway..why should they go to waste)..

The videos...(the infamous one behind prop2)..and others..taken by brave, undercover PETA activists...)..only serve to enhance my result. I have animal loving friends..who "have" to pretend the stuff wrapped in celophane in the meat dept....is a vegetable...I'm no so good at that...I WAS encouraged that a recent study indicated that 1 out of 200 "children" consider themselves vegetarian...it's a start...and when industrial farming becomes unprofitable (tossing out unsold MEAT)..then and only then...will it end. Picking an AG Sec from Iowa.....this gives me pause..as big AG is solidaly in place... but...if while sober..you watch a video of those poor cows..or a pig getting a dart (non-fatal for quite some time)...in its skull....you should finally realize that eating meat..is wrong from all angles...we don't need it...(our smooth teeth and yes.heart disease)..prove it...thank you for the article..

[Vickster]

Re: "...and when industrial farming becomes unprofitable (tossing out unsold MEAT)... than and only then... will it end."

First, industrial farming includes fruits and vegetables. That said, I support banning factory farms, especially where animals are concerned. What I don't support is ending livestock farming because these animals will go extinct if humans stop relying on them. Since World War II, half of all farm breeds have disappeared and half of the remaining breeds are endangered because they've been replaced by more "profitable" breeds. And while there is a movement to save rare breeds, this will involve creating markets for their milk or meat so farmers can afford to feed them.

Also, re; "...if while sober... you watch a video of those poor cows... or a pig getting a dart (non-fatal for quite some time)... in it's skull... you should finally realize that eating meat is wrong from all angles... we don't need it... (our smooth teeth and yes, heart disease)... prove it..."

I'm not sure what you mean by "dart". And you may have misinterpreted what you saw in those videos. It isn't uncommon for animals to twitch and kick after death has occurred. (Sometimes, chickens run around after their heads are cut off.) As for our teeth, most herbivores are ruminents (cows, goats, sheep, deer, etc.). Herbivores don't have upper front teeth. Also, a link between meat consumption and heart disease hasn't been established. That's why epidemiologists are still doing studies.

[katiedex]

This is very encouraging news. We should all be ashamed at how we treat the living, breathing, feeling creatures that supply us with our food and milk. Would it be so hard for us to treat them humanely? Would it really cost us so much? It is worth whatever the cost may be and I hope that change comes quickly. Thank you for this article.

[Gudrun]

Thanks for your update on this. Ethical treatment of animals is a good thing in itself, as well as contributing to the safety of our food supply and better health for the humans who consume them as food, and for the environment.