PROPOSITION 204
AN INITIATIVE MEASURE
PROPOSING AMENDMENT TO TITLE 13, CHAPTER 29, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES BY ADDING SECTION 13-2910.07; RELATING TO CRUEL AND INHUMANE CONFINEMENT OF ANIMALS.
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Arizona:
Sec. 1.
Title
This measure shall be known as the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
Sec. 2. Title 13, Chapter 29 is amended by adding a new section 13-2910.07 as follows: 13-2910.07.
CRUEL AND INHUMANE CONFINEMENT OF A PIG DURING PREGNANCY OR OF A CALF RAISED FOR VEAL
A. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY OTHER PROVISION OF TITLE 3 OR TITLE 13, A PERSON SHALL NOT TETHER OR CONFINE ANY PIG DURING PREGNANCY OR ANY CALF RAISED FOR VEAL, ON A FARM, FOR ALL OR THE MAJORITY OF ANY DAY, IN A MANNER THAT PREVENTS SUCH ANIMAL FROM:
1. LYING DOWN AND FULLY EXTENDING HIS OR HER LIMBS; OR
2. TURNING AROUND FREELY.
B. THIS SECTION SHALL NOT APPLY TO:
1. PIGS OR CALVES DURING TRANSPORTATION.
2. PIGS OR CALVES IN RODEO EXHIBITIONS, STATE OR COUNTY FAIR EXHIBITIONS, OR OTHER SIMILAR EXHIBITIONS.
3. THE KILLING OF PIGS OR CALVES ACCORDING TO THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 13, TITLE 3 AND OTHER APPLICABLE LAW AND REGULATIONS.
4. PIGS OR CALVES INVOLVED IN LAWFUL SCIENTIFIC OR AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH.
5. PIGS OR CALVES WHILE UNDERGOING AN EXAMINATION, TEST, TREATMENT OR OPERATION FOR VETERINARY PURPOSES.
6. A PIG DURING THE SEVEN DAY PERIOD PRIOR TO THE PIG'S EXPECTED DATE OF GIVING BIRTH.
C. A PERSON WHO VIOLATES THIS SECTIONS IS GUILTY OF A CLASS 1 MISDEMEANOR.
D. THE FOLLOWING DEFINITIONS SHALL GOVERN THIS SECTION:
1. "CALF" MEANS A CALF OF THE BOVINE SPECIES.
2. "CALF RAISED FOR VEAL" MEANS A CALF RAISED WITH THE INTENT OF SELLING, MARKETING OR DISTRIBUTING THE MEAT, ORGANS OR ANY PART OF SUCH CALF AS A FOOD PRODUCT DESCRIBED AS "VEAL."
3. "FARM" MEANS THE LAND, BUILDING, SUPPORT FACILITIES, AND OTHER EQUIPMENT THAT IS WHOLLY OR PARTIALLY USED FOR THE PRODUCTION OF ANIMALS FOR FOOD OR FIBER.
4. "PIG" MEANS ANY ANIMAL OF THE PORCINE SPECIES.
5. "TURNING AROUND FREELY" MEANS HAVING THE ABILITY TO TURN AROUND IN A COMPLETE CIRCLE WITHOUT ANY IMPEDIMENT, INCLUDING A TETHER, OR, IN THE CASE OF AN ENCLOSURE (INCLUDING WHAT IS COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS A "GESTATION CRATE" FOR PIGS AND A "VEAL CRATE" FOR CALVES) WITHOUT TOUCHING ANY SIDE OF THE ENCLOSURE.
Sec. 3.
Effective Date
This initiative measure shall take effect December 31, 2012.
Sec. 4.
Severability
Each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or other portion of this initiative measure as adopted shall be deemed to be a separate, distinct and independent provision. If any portion thereof is held invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by any court of competent jurisdiction, the holding shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other portion of this initiative measure, which can be given effect without the invalid provision. To this end, the provisions of this initiative measure are declared to be severable.
Sec. 5.
No Mandatory Expenditures
Nothing in this initiative measure proposes a mandatory expenditure of state revenues for any purpose, establishes a fund for any specific purpose, or allocates funding for any specific purpose.
Sec. 6.
Conditional Funding Source
Subject to Section 7 of this initiative measure, Title 13, Chapter 29 is amended by adding a new section 13-2910.08 as follows:
13-2910.08.
THE HUMANE TREATMENT OF FARM ANIMALS FUND
THE "HUMANE TREATMENT OF FARM ANIMALS FUND" IS HEREBY ESTABLISHED TO BE ADMINISTERED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL UNDER THE CONDITIONS AND FOR THE PURPOSES PROVIDED BY THIS SECTION. UPON RECEIPT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL SHALL DEPOSIT IN THE FUND ANY MONIES RECEIVED FOR THE STATE AS A RESULT OF ENFORCEMENT OF THE HUMANE TREATMENT OF FARM ANIMALS ACT AND ANY MONIES RECEIVED BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL AS A MONEY DONATION TO THE FUND FROM ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE GROUP, SOCIETY, ASSOCIATION OR INDIVIDUAL. THE MONIES IN THE FUND SHALL BE USED ONLY FOR MANDATORY EXPENDITURES, IF ANY, REQUIRED BY THE HUMANE TREATMENT OF FARM ANIMALS ACT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE FUND. MONIES IN THE FUND ARE NOT SUBJECT TO LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATION. THE FUND IS EXEMPT FROM STATUTORY PROVISIONS RELATING TO LAPSING OF APPROPRIATIONS AND SHALL NOT REVERT TO THE GENERAL FUND.
Sec. 7.
Conditional Enactment
Section 13-2910.08 does not become effective unless a court of competent jurisdiction holds that section 13-2910.07 proposes a mandatory expenditure of state revenues for any purpose, establishes a fund for any specific purpose, or allocates funding for any specific purpose.
Beginning January 1, 2013, Proposition 204 would amend the Arizona criminal code to make it a class 1 misdemeanor to tether or confine a pig during pregnancy or a calf raised for veal on a farm for all or the majority of a day in a manner that prevents the animal from lying down and fully extending its limbs or turning around freely. The law would not apply to:
1. Pigs or calves during transportation.
2. Pigs or calves in rodeo exhibitions, state or county fair exhibitions or other similar exhibitions.
3. The lawful slaughter of pigs or calves.
4. Pigs or calves involved in lawful scientific or agricultural research.
5. Pigs or calves while undergoing an examination, test, treatment or operation for veterinary purposes.
6. A pig during the seven day period before the pig's expected date of giving birth.
Proposition 204 would tentatively establish an enforcement and administration fund consisting of fines, penalties and other monies generated by the enforcement of this proposition and donations made to the fund. This fund would only be fully implemented if a court ultimately determined that creation of this fund is required by a separate state law dealing with the funding of programs created by a vote of the people.
State law requires the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) Staff to prepare a summary of the fiscal impact of certain ballot measures. State and local governments may receive additional revenues in the form of fines and penalty assessments from violators of provisions of Proposition 204. The language of the proposition states that the measure does not impose mandatory expenditure of state revenues for any purpose. If, however, a court rules that the proposition results in mandatory expenditure of state revenue, a Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Fund is established and funded through enforcement related revenue and donations. The total amount of fines will depend on the level of compliance, which is difficult to predict in advance.
VOTE "YES" ON PROPOSITION 204
END THE INHUMANE TREATMENT OF FARM ANIMALS
Arizonans for Humane Farms is a coalition of animal welfare organizations, veterinarians, and conservationists.
The Problem:
-
In Arizona, 20,000+ breeding pigs are housed in 2' x 7' metal "gestation crates." Sows are kept immobile for most of their lives and suffer from muscle atrophy, pressure sores, joint maladies, and immense frustration.
-
Family farming operations are threatened, and often put out of business, by these hog factories which refuse to treat animals humanely.
-
Disease and ground water contamination can result from the massive waste produced in these operations.
The Solution:
-
This initiative ONLY requires a larger PEN SIZE or access to pasture, allowing pigs during pregnancy and calves raised for veal to turn around and fully stretch their limbs.
-
Family farms do not use gestation and veal crates - they are therefore PROTECTED.
-
Crates are still allowed after pregnancy to protect the sow from crushing her offspring, and during medical procedures or transport.
-
Rodeos, 4-H and county fairs are exempt from these provisions.
-
There is no cost to taxpayers.
-
Only one large hog factory farm, an out-of-state Delaware Limited Liability Company, accounts for almost all of the factory-farmed pigs in Arizona
- Arizona does not yet have a meaningful veal industry - however, vote "YES" to discourage large factory farms from coming into our state.
-
Any producer, even the Delaware-based corporation, will have 6 years - until 2013 - to phase in more humane housing methods under the provisions of the Humane Farming Act.
-
This initiative has nothing to do with your choice to eat meat
-
it simply establishes a standard that animals raised for food are humanely treated.
A "YES" vote will result in more humane care for factory-farmed animals.
|
Cheryl Naumann, Chairwoman, Arizonans for Humane Farms, Phoenix
|
|
Paid for by "Arizonans for Humane Farms"
|
Being a veterinarian and having family involved with pork production, I would like to share my perspective on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act. I have seen the two-foot-wide crates that 450-pound sows are forced to spend pregnancy after pregnancy in. Hormel may trot out their well-paid industry vets to try to convince you that never being able to turn around and lie down with limbs extended is no hardship. They may even try to tell you these pigs are comfortable, but the truth is they are frustrated and scared. Their muscles are weak from inactivity making them prone to injury. Their joints are stiff from lack of use. Behavioral changes such as increased aggression are associated with this confinement. These animals are anguished from never being able to act on a single natural impulse
I would like to make this prediction: Because conditions at Arizona's Hormel factory farm are so horrendous, they will never allow reporters inside. Hormel's PR firm will try to convince you that they care about animals, they care about farmers, and they care about you, and they'll spend a lot of money doing so, but they'll never show how they are treating animals.
98% of the pigs in Arizona are inside of Hormel's plant. You'll hear about small farmers, but to Hormel they are just competition. Every time Hormel cuts another corner, Arizona farmers have to follow suit or go out of business. I have seen this happen with my relatives and it is happening to farmers here in Arizona. This measure will mean that animals have a basic minimum of room and that the playing field has been leveled for real farmers and corporate agri-business. A vote for this measure will be a vote for both animals and family farms.
|
Janet M. Forrer, DVM, Tucson
|
We, the undersigned members of Arizona's veterinary community, endorse the Humane Treatment of Farms Animals Act and urge you to vote "yes" on this important measure. Room for veal calves and pregnant sows to turn around, lie down, and extend their limbs is a modest and reasonable proposal. Farm animals deserve at least this minimum standard of care.
|
Amy Afek, DVM, Phoenix
|
Warren H. Ahnell, DVM, Tucson
|
Lynda Beaver, DVM, Gilbert
|
|
Nancy Beeuna, DVM, Tucson
|
Christina L. Bejarano, DVM, Tucson
|
Kellee J. Blackwell, DVM, Glendale
|
|
Bert Blumenfeld, DVM, Tucson
|
James Boulay, DVM, MS, DACVS, Tucson
|
John S. Brett, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Holly S. Burgess, DVM, Tucson
|
Fred Bush, DVM, Flagstaff
|
Corissa Canny, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Pam Clark, DVM, Tucson
|
Bernard N. Cohen, DVM, Tucson
|
Edward Cohen, DVM, Phoenix
|
|
Walter Cole, DVM, Tucson
|
Kelly Collins, DVM, Scottsdale
|
Heather E. Connally, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Kayomee Daroowalla, DVM, Tucson
|
Ruth Ann DeCou, DVM, Flagstaff
|
Todd Driggers, DVM, Gilbert
|
|
Randall J. Eberhard, DVM, Tucson
|
S. Evans-Linsell, DVM, Tucson
|
Christine A. Farrar, DVM, Mesa
|
|
Janice L. Flack, DVM, Scottsdale
|
T.D. Flack, DVM, Scottsdale
|
Jim Flegenheimer, DVM, Chandler
|
|
Lori A. Forgues, DVM, Tucson
|
Janet M. Forrer, DVM, Tucson
|
Desiree Garthe, DVM, Phoenix
|
|
Anthony J. Gilchrist, DVM, Scottsdale
|
Barbe Glenn, DVM, Tucson
|
Barbara R. Gores, DVM, DACVS, Tucson
|
|
Christina Guerrero, DVM, Fountain Hills
|
Ken Halbach, DVM, Tucson
|
Steven Hall, DVM, Scottsdale
|
|
Mark S. Halver, DVM, Phoenix
|
Kenneth Harding, DVM, Cave Creek
|
Havah Haskell, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Douglas W. Hauser, DVM, Sun City
|
Danielle Hettler, DVM, BS, Payson
|
Suzanne M. Higgins, DVM, Phoenix
|
|
Andrea Hilden, DVM, Tucson
|
Lynne Hoban, DVM, Fountain Hills
|
Bruce P. Hull, DVM, Phoenix
|
|
Duane Hunt, DVM, Mesa
|
Pollyann P. Johnson, DVM, Sun City
|
Sharmie Johnson, DVM, Peoria
|
|
Harold M. Klein, DVM, Tempe
|
Jill C. Lang, DVM, Phoenix
|
Tanya Lopez, DVM, Scottsdale
|
|
Linda J. Lueth, DVM, Tucson
|
Rodolfo Manriquez, CVT, Phoenix
|
Jennifer Marshall, DVM, Surprise
|
|
Michael E. Matz, DVM, Tucson
|
Melissa McGinnis, DVM, Tempe
|
Margo McKinney, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Karen McWhirter, DVM, Tucson
|
Laura L. Millikan, DVM, Yuma
|
Marilyn W. Millman, DVM, Scottsdale
|
|
Richard W. Morehouse, DVM, Tucson
|
Kristen L. Nelson, DVM, Scottsdale
|
Benjamin Nigg, DVM, Peoria
|
|
Gene T. Nightengale, DVM, Tucson
|
Melanie Olson, DVM, Tucson
|
Caroline Oreel, DVM, Sedona
|
|
Heather Oyan, DVM, Glendale
|
Judith A. Parker, DVM, Tucson
|
Robin Paterson, DVM, Kingman
|
|
Beryl Patterson, CVT, Litchfield Park
|
Mary L. Pencin, DVM, Willcox
|
Sally Rademaker, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Jessica Reed, DVM, Glendale
|
Tom Remmler, DVM, Sedona
|
Elizabeth Reno, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Celeste Roy, DVM, Tucson
|
J.R. Sampson, DVM, Phoenix
|
Kathryn Schulze, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Brian Sessink, DVM, Mesa
|
Paul Silvagni, DVM, Flagstaff
|
Leigh Ann Stastny, DVM, Glendale
|
|
Richard Stolper, DVM, Scottsdale
|
Carin Sunderman, DVM, Phoenix
|
Jennifer Tave, DVM, Phoenix
|
|
Rachel Temkin, DVM, Tucson
|
Tara Lyn A. Temple, DVM, Scottsdale
|
Gregg A. Townsley, DVM, Scottsdale
|
|
Bob Vasilopulos, DVM, DACVS, Tucson
|
Bonnie L. Walker, DVM, Cave Creek
|
William F. Wallace, DVM, Tucson
|
|
Charlotte Lee Watson, DVM, Gilbert
|
Elizabeth Weintraub, VMD, Tucson
|
Linda Rae Westbrook, DVM, Flagstaff
|
|
Teri D. Wiblin, DVM, Phoenix
|
Tayna Wyman, DVM, Phoenix
|
|
|
Paid for by "Janet M. Forrer"
|
ARIZONA HUMANE SOCIETY ASKS YOU TO VOTE "YES" ON PROPOSITION 204
Arizona Humane Society, the state's largest nonprofit animal welfare organization, is asking you to help alleviate animal suffering by voting "YES" on Proposition 204, the "Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act."
Since 1957, we have served Arizona residents through our programs including adoptions, spaying and neutering, humane education, disaster response, animal rescue and cruelty investigation services. We are concerned about alleviating the suffering of ALL animals, regardless of their species. We believe that in a civilized society,
even animals raised for food should receive the most basic types of humane care.
Currently, in our state, over 20,000 breeding pigs are kept in horrendous conditions by large, corporate "factory farms" - during the entirety of their short lives,
they are forced to lie in their own filth and are kept in pens so small that they can never turn around or fully extend their limbs.
Although there is no significant veal industry in Arizona yet, we must deter profit-motivated operators from moving into our state. Veal calves are kept in narrow pens, typically tethered at the neck, and are never allowed outside.
When taken to slaughter at 16 weeks of age, most must be dragged because their muscles are so weak they are unable to stand.
Our state has a rich tradition of family farming, where animals are not treated this way
- family farms are protected by this proposition.
We are proud of our citizens, who year after year have made their voice heard at the polls - unnecessary animal suffering will not be tolerated in Arizona!
Voting "YES" will not cost Arizona taxpayers a dime!
As voters, you have the power to address the horrors of factory farming by your "YES" vote on Proposition 204 - thank you.
|
Cheryl Naumann, President and CEO, Arizona Humane Society, Phoenix
|
Ann Harwood, Esq., Chairman of the Board, Arizona Humane Society, Phoenix
|
|
Paid for by "Arizona Humane Society"
|
SHERIFF JOE URGES YES ON THE HUMANE FARMING PROPOSITION
As Sheriff of Maricopa County, I fight crime and do my best to make our communities in Arizona safe.
But there's another aspect of my work that you may know less about.
I have a heart for animals, and I despise cruelty in any form. I have fought for stronger laws to crack down on animal cruelty. The serious abuse of animals is a felony in Arizona. And when our deputies find people breaking laws against animal cruelty, there is always room for them in my jails.
All animals deserve to be treated with respect, and that's why I am supporting the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act on the state-wide ballot this November.
I am a meat eater, and I enjoy a good steak as much as the next guy. But I believe that even animals raised for food deserve a decent life and a merciful death.
It's wrong to put a pig or a veal calf in a crate so small that the animal cannot even turn around. And they are in these crates almost all the time. When I think of their misery, it just makes me sick.
It's one thing for a criminal to be housed in confinement. They deserve to be incarcerated. But the animals didn't do anything wrong, yet they get a life sentence of harsh and constant confinement.
So I say, we have to raise animals for food, but we have to do it the honorable way. Let's not allow people to treat them in a way that causes them to suffer. Join me in voting YES on The Humane Farming Proposition.
|
Joseph M. Arpaio, Sheriff, Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, Phoenix
|
|
Paid for by "Arizona Humane Society"
|
VOTE YES ON 204
IT IS TIME TO STOP KILLING ANIMALS!
IT IS TIME TO STOP KILLING ANIMALS FOR MEAT!
IT IS TIME TO STOP KILLING AND HUNTING ANIMALS!
IT IS TIME TO STOP FAMERS AND RANHERS FROM KILLING THESE ANIMALS FOR MEAT.
THEIR SLAUGHTERING OF ANIMALS IS CAUSING SUFFERING.
THEIR PRODUCTION OF MEAT AND MEAT PRODUCTS IS A CRUEL AND BARBARIC PROCESS.
IT IS TIME TO STOP KILLING ANIMALS FOR MEAT. IT IS TIME TO STOP KILLING ANIMALS PERIOD! LET'S STOP THIS MADNESS OF KILLING OR HUNTING ANIMALS - PROP 204 IS A GOOD PLACE TO START!
Please vote yes on Proposition 204.
There are serious negative environmental impacts from large Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) where thousands of animals are confined in one facility. These facilities are not only inhumane, but they also produce enormous amounts of animal waste. This waste can leak into our rivers and streams contaminating our drinking water and spreading disease. According to the Environmental Protection Agency, hog, chicken and cattle waste has polluted 35,000 miles of rivers in 22 states and contaminated groundwater in 17 states.
Factory farms negatively affect air quality as well. They are the largest source of toxic ammonia air pollution in the U.S., plus the air around factory farms is contaminated with suspended dust particles. These particles can trigger asthma attacks and cause other respiratory problems.
Proposition 204 deals with one aspect of factory farms by ensuring that the animals have more space to turn around and that they are not tethered in a manner that restricts their ability to move around.
Currently, Arizona has relatively few of these operations. We should keep it that way. Proposition 204 moves Arizona another step in the right direction. Please support Proposition 204.
|
Ken Langton, Chair, Sierra Club - Grand Canyon Chapter, Tucson
|
Don Steuter, Conservation Chair, Sierra Club - Grand Canyon Chapter, Phoenix
|
|
Paid for by "Sierra Club Grand Canyon Chapter"
|
I strongly support Proposition 204 Here's why.
I was raised on our family farm in North Dakota that has been in my family since 1896. My father was a traditional farmer who practiced responsible sustainable farming practices and took pride in being a steward of the land.
In 2003 we learned that a huge hog operation was being planned a little over a mile from our family farm. Due to the size of this operation we had concerns on how this operation could impact our community; what we found was very disturbing. These operations can have devastating effects on the soil, water quality, and surrounding community. Studies show that living by one of these operations creates health risks and decreases property value. These farms operate under unrestricted agricultural laws when in fact they're industrial. The particular operation by our farm was permitted for 20,900 hogs that would "turn over" 3 times a year. Their terminology is "growing" pigs rather than "raising" them. The term used for factory farms is CAFOs, Confined Animal Feeding Operations, and the "confined" aspect of this industry is what Arizonans for Humane Farms takes issue with.
You don't have to be an "animal rights radical" to have concerns about factory farming, especially when you see hogs packed into metal crates so small they can't turn around. They're fed "specialized diets" with growth hormones and antibiotics. Antibiotics --to help avoid disease among so many animals in confined spaces, and growth hormones because the faster they grow, the faster they can be "turned around". Unfortunately, the term "turned around" only applies to marketing and not to humane treatment.
Arizonans should support family farmers and ranchers and vote yes on the Humane Farming Initiative.
|
Candace Jackson, Born and Raised in North Dakota (not grown), Mesa
|
|
Paid for by "Arizonans for Humane Farms"
|
PEOPLE OF FAITH SUPPORT HUMANE TREATMENT OF ALL GOD'S CREATURES
As pastor of the Corpus Christi Parish, I'm heartened by the presence of the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act on the ballot, and I encourage voters to support this important initiative.
One of our greatest duties is to be good stewards of the Lord's creation, including the animals with whom we share this planet. Unfortunately, on today's factory farms, good stewardship is sorely absent. Mother pigs are confined in crates too narrow for them to turn around, while calves raised for veal are chained by the neck inside similarly restrictive crates, barely able to move for months on end. These animals are abused in ways that would shock and caring person of faith.
God created these animals with the need to move about. When it comes to their intensive confinement inside tiny crates, little could be a greater perversion of God's will.
Pope Benedict XVI put it best when discussing factory farming, asserting that "this degrading of living creatures to a commodity seems to me in fact to contradict the relationship of mutuality that comes across in the Bible."
While God has given us dominion, that is not a license for ruthless domination of animals, especially those we raise for food. We take so much from these creatures; offering a small amount of common decency in return is truly the very least we owe them.
Catholics, and all people of faith, should support offering the mere ability to turn around and extend all limbs to pigs and calves. Abusing these animals in the ways we commonly do on factory farms is sinful, and we can take a modest step toward reducing our abuse of power over them by voting YES on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
|
Father Albert Francis Hoorman, Pastor of Corpus Christi Catholic Church, Phoenix
|
|
Paid for by "Karen Michael"
|
The Animal Defense League of Arizona urges you to vote yes on Proposition 204.
Farm animals have the least legal protection of all animals in our state. They deserve the modest protection that would be given, if voters approve the Humane Farming Initiative.
Here is what Proposition 204 does
-
Applies only to pregnant pigs and calves raised for veal
-
Requires that these animals be given enough room to lie down, turn around and fully extend their limbs
-
Gives farms plenty of time--until 2013-- to comply with the new law
-
Allows rodeos, county fairs, 4-H and similar events to go on as usual
-
Preserves family farms
To clear up misconceptions, Proposition 204
-
Does NOT restrict the sale or consumption of meat
-
Does NOT change how animals are transported
-
Does NOT ban research on animals
-
Does NOT cost taxpayers any money
-
Does NOT change the methods of slaughter of animals for food
Industrialized, factory farms owned by huge agricultural companies are sweeping across the country and coming to Arizona. They use cruel and inhumane methods to confine livestock. They treat pregnant pigs and calves raised for veal like inanimate production units, rather than thinking, feeling animals. They place them in enclosures so small that they can't move, lie down, turn around or even fully extend their limbs. Sows are kept constantly pregnant, and held in these tiny crates 24 hours a day seven days a week, for almost their entire lives. It is a horrible existence, and it is happening here in Arizona.
To stop cruel and inhumane treatment of farm animals, Vote YES on Proposition 204.
|
Stephanie Nichols-Young, President, Phoenix
|
Karen Michael, Secretary, Peoria
|
|
Paid for by "Animal Defense League of AZ"
|
On today's industrialized farms, many pigs are confined in "gestation crates" just two feet wide and calves are tethered in "veal crates" where they can barely move, a source of pain and suffering.
Voting yes on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act upholds the traditional standards of farming by providing these animals with the most basic humane consideration. The proposal simply requires that calves and pigs be given adequate space to turn around and stretch their limbs.
While protecting animals from cruel and relentless confinement, this measure will also help protect the environment from the massive runoff of waste from confined animal feeding operations. And it will help protect family farms and rural communities from the harms of industrialized animal agriculture.
Having cared for farm animals for the past twenty years and holding a masters degree in agricultural economics from Cornell University, I have great respect for family farmers and the values they live by. At their best, they live by the values of personal responsibility, integrity, and compassion.
We oppose factory farming because it is a betrayal of traditional farming values. It puts efficiency above everything, forgetting the duty to treat animals decently. I agree with the Iowa hog farmer who said of factory farmers, "They treat the animal like a machine. But it's not a machine. It's an animal, and it needs care."
Farmers have raised pigs and calves for ages without confining them in narrow crates and treating them as unfeeling units of production. These devices are an insult to honorable farming traditions, and the law should set a higher standard. With the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act, Arizona voters have a chance to relieve many animals of needless misery, and to show that cruelty to animals is not an Arizona value.
|
Gene Bauston, President, Watkins Glen
|
Holly McNulty, Secretary/Treasurer, Watkins Glen
|
|
Paid for by "Farm Sanctuary, Inc."
|
Adapted from Arizona Republic column, February 2006:
". . . Pork producers figured out some years ago that if they packed the maximum number of pigs into the minimum space, if they pinned the creatures down into fit-to-size iron crates and turned the `farm' into a sunless hell of metal and concrete, it made everything so much more efficient. . . . As for veal, it is by definition the product of a sick, anemic, deliberately malnourished calf, a newborn dragged away from his mother in the first hours of life. . . .
"Over the years, one miserly deprivation led to another, ever harsher methods were applied to force costs lower and lower, and so on until the animals ceased to be understood as living creatures at all. . . . `Cost-saver' in industrial livestock agriculture usually means `moral shortcut.' For all of its "science-based" pretensions, factory farming is really just an elaborate, endless series of evasions from the most elementary duties of honest animal husbandry. . . .To the factory farmer, in contrast to the traditional farmer with his sense of honor and obligation, the animals are `production units,' and accorded all the sympathy that term suggests. . . .
". . . In the quiet of the voting booth, ask yourself why any creature of God, however humble, should be made to endure the dark, lonely, tortured existence of the factory farm. The answer will send an unequivocal message, to factory farmers here and to all concerned, that unbridled arrogance, bad faith, and rank cruelty are not Arizona values."
(Matthew Scully worked for Arizona governors Mecham, Mofford, and Symington. A former special assistant and speechwriter for President Bush, he is author of Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy.)
|
Matthew Scully, Los Angeles
|
|
Paid for by "Arizona Humane Society"
|
As a conservative, fifth-generation Arizonan and mother of four children, I support the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
I believe we owe a duty of stewardship to the farm animals we raise for food. We fail in that duty when we allow those animals--be they pigs or calves--to be confined day after day in cramped spaces too small for them to even turn around or lie down and extend their legs. The Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act is a measured and reasonable provision that allows Arizona's industrial farm operations several years to adjust their confinement practices. This measure will have no effect on Arizona's traditional farmers or traditional farming practices and will be of no cost to the taxpayers.
As Arizonans, we should honor our conservative heritage and live up to our stewardship.
I urge you to vote YES on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
|
Julie Dana Young, Phoenix
|
RE: Argugment FOR Humane Farming ballot proposition
The voters of Arizona now are presented with the grandest opportunity to share in helping animals who are defenseless against acts of cruelty imposed on them. The general public through information and education have come to realize the intense cruelty suffered by pregnant sows and veal calves in that they cannot move their bodies including their limbs while crammed into crates. These acts of cruelty are happening on industralized animal production facilities commonly known as "factory farms".
Arizona has a high volume factory farm which utlilizes about 20,000 sow gestation crates. The sows up to the time of birthing cannot move within these crates. The Humane Farming initiative will permit by act of law the sows to at least be able to stand up, extend their limbs, and turn around. This act will also apply to confined veal calves. The owners of these production facilites, large agri corporations, have until the end of 2012 to comply with the requirements of the law. Thus the costs to expand the crate sizes over a period of 6 years will be very minimal.
The issue of cruelty to animals as addressed in this initiative is a moral one. We the voters of Arizona must take the high road through our hearts to diminish the inhumane treatment of veal calves and pregnant sows. We are their only voices.
Arizonans have already shared their humane hearts in that over 1000 volunteer signature gatherers and 218,000 signers paved the way to place the Humane Farming initiative on the November 2006 ballot. They are all to be congratulat and so shall Arizona voters who will make our State a shining example of treating all animals with humane respect.
I support Proposition 204, the Humane Farming Initiative, and I grew up on a small farm (which my family still owns) where I participated in the raising and slaughter of pigs and cows for years.
When this initiative was first proposed, the large factory farm lobby started a campaign of name-calling and scare-tactics, claiming that those who supported the Humane Farming Initiative were "radicals" with an "anti-meat" agenda. This is not the case.
The initiative language simply seeks to prevent a pig or calf from being confined so tightly that it cannot lie down or turn around for the majority of a day. This is not a radical or anti-meat concept. At no time were any of the animals on our family farm ever constrained to the point that they could not lie down or turn around for an entire day. I cannot think of a legitimate reason to treat a farm animal so poorly and neither can the large factory farm lobby - - which is why they have decided to launch a campaign against the Initiative's supporters while ignoring the Initiative's true purpose.
Please do not be fooled by the political tactics of big business and vote
YES
on Proposition 204, the Humane Farming Initiative. We CAN farm animals humanely.
|
Sherry R. Scott, Scottsdale
|
The Second Chance Center for Animals in Flagstaff encourages Arizona voters to vote "YES" on Proposition 204, "Arizonans for Humane Farms."
As the largest animal welfare organization in the Northern Arizona region, we have had the pleasure of seeing the care and concern that residents of our community, and the other rural communities in our area, have for animals. Many farming and ranching operations dot the countryside of Northern Arizona - cattle and other livestock can be seen grazing over thousands of acres along interstate highways and country roadsides. This is farming and ranching as it was meant to be, as many of us experienced as children, and how some in the "industrial farming" world would have us believe is still the norm. Sadly, these pastoral scenes are becoming a "vanishing resource" and are coming under greater threat of large-scale factory farms who have little regard for animals as anything more than "production units" designed to put money into corporate pockets.
Our organization was founded out of a deep sense of obligation to alleviate the suffering of animals in the northern Arizona community. As a compassionate people, we as citizens of Arizona must speak out against the horrible suffering endured by animals raised in industrialized factory farms. This proposition does not prohibit animal slaughter or restrict the consumption of meat products, as opponents would like to have you think. It is about one thing only - pen size. Who would seek to deny an animal the simple freedoms of laying down, stretching out, and turning around? We must demand basic decency and the reduction of unnecessary suffering from all animals in our great state.
Please join the Second Chance Center for Animals, and our rural neighbors, in voting "YES" for Proposition 204, and setting the standard for humane care for all animals.
|
Robert W. Koons, President, Board of Directors, Second Chance Center for Animals, Flagstaff
|
Richard F. Wilson, Treasurer, Board of Directors and Founder, Second Chance Center for Animals, Flagstaff
|
|
Paid for by "Second Chance Center for Animals"
|
As scientists, we are concerned about the serious danger that factory farming presents to public health.
Over half of U.S. farm animals are now concentrated on 5 percent of livestock farms. As these concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) grow, so do health concerns.
CAFOs generate an estimated 2 trillion pounds of animal manure yearly. Stored in open air lagoons, manure wastes generate organic dust, molds, toxic bacteria, and volatile gases such as ammonia and hydrogen sulfide.
Researchers from the Centers for Disease Control, the University of Iowa and Iowa State all agree that CAFO emissions may in fact constitute a hazard to public and worker health, finding increased incidents of headaches, brain damage, gastrointestinal illnesses and even life-threatening pulmonary edema.
Moreover, children who attend school near large-scale livestock farms may be at higher risk for asthma, according to a study in the Journal of the American College of Chest Physicians (June 2006).
To sustain animals in the crowded and unnatural conditions of industrial farming, antibiotics and related drugs are used in massive quantities. This produces antibiotic-resistant bacteria, which can render drugs ineffective in protecting and saving human lives. Children especially are at high risk of infections with drug-resistant organisms linked directly to the agricultural use of antimicrobials. According to a peer-reviewed study by researchers at Johns Hopkins University, inhaling air from industrial hog farms can serve as another pathway for antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Hundreds of organizations, including the American Medical Association, oppose the routine use of antibiotics as feed additives.
The American Public Health Association has issued a call for local, state, and federal officials to enact a moratorium on any new factory farms because of their devastating effects on human health and the environment. Your YES vote on the Humane Farm Act is a crucial step in the right direction.
|
Cynthia J. Jacquemart, MD, Pediatrics, Phoenix
|
Heather Lane, CPNP, Pediatrics, Glendale
|
|
Jeffrey L. Maxcy, MD, Pediatrics, Glendale
|
Mary J. McGee, MD, Pediatrics, Waddell
|
|
Nolawi M. Mengesha, Internal Medicine, Phoenix
|
Cecil F. Michael, Jr., MD, Pediatrics, Peoria
|
|
Sangeeta N. Ojha, MD, Pediatrics, Phoenix
|
Krystal Palmer, Pediatrics, Peoria
|
|
Robin Silver, MD, Emergency Medicine, Phoenix
|
Carrie L. Walters, Neurosurgery, Phoenix
|
|
Deborah Wilson, MD, Gynecology, Advanced Laparoscopic Surgery, Paradise Valley
|
|
|
Paid for by " The Law Office of Stephanie Nichols-Young"
|
The Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act is a chance for Arizonans of every background - from conservative Republican to liberal Democrat - to join in agreement that abusing helpless animals is wrong.
Consider what some noted conservatives have recently had to say about factory farming.
Veteran conservative columnist George F. Will wrote of the "intrinsic evil" of cruelty to animals, citing the "pain-inflicting confinements and mutilations" of factory farming that make it a "serious issue of public policy."
Conservative Fred Barnes, a Fox commentator, observed in The Wall Street Journal: "On the old family farms, pigs and cattle and chickens were raised for food, but they were free for a time. . . They had a life. On industrial farms they don't."
Conservative author Andrew Ferguson wrote in Bloomberg News about the attitude that views farm animals as "mere production units." Gestation crates that prevent pigs from even turning around are, he observed, "just one of the cruel innovations the modern industrial farm depends upon."
Conservative Jeffrey Hart of National Review defined factory farming as "the horrific treatment of millions of farm animals." And Father Richard John Neuhaus of National Review wrote of "the horrors perpetuated against pigs on industrial farms." The facts of industrial farming, said Father Neuhaus, constitute "a prima facie case that such methods entail cruelty to animals that warrants public and governmental attention."
Charles Colson, the Christian author, urged his fellow conservatives to find out "the cattle of the earth are treated on factory farms," because "we have a duty to prevent the needless torment of animals."
On Election Day, that's what the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals really comes down to - our duty to prevent cruelty and needless animal suffering. And Arizonans can affirm that simple moral principle with a resounding "Yes" for humane farms.
|
The Honorable Kathleen Dunbar, Former Arizona State Representative, Legislative District 13, Tucson
|
The Honorable Barbara Leff, Arizona State Senator, Legislative District 11, Paradise Valley
|
|
The Honorable Carolyn S. Allen, Arizona State Senator, Legislative District 8, Scottsdale
|
The Honorable Toni Hellon, Arizona State Senator, Legislative District 13, Tucson
|
|
Paid for by "Arizona Humane Society"
|
The Humane Society of Southern Arizona, an organization dedicated to rescuing, protecting and saving the lives of animals for over sixty years, strongly endorses a "yes" vote on Proposition 204, "Arizonans for Humane Farms." This ballot initiative will outlaw the cruel and intensive confinement of pregnant pigs and veal calves on factory farms.
For decades, Arizona's farmers raised animals in a humane manner - allowing them to go outdoors and engage in other natural behaviors. Today, many family farmers have been displaced by corporate farming interests that show little concern for basic animal husbandry standards. Instead, they raise animals in intensive confinement - in conditions so severe that the animals cannot even turn around in their cages or crates. The extreme overcrowded conditions cause suffering for the animals while polluting the air, contaminating groundwater and threatening human health. This proposition will restore Arizona's tradition of humane farming and protect animals, the environment and human health.
This proposition simply states that calves raised for veal and pregnant pigs should not be confined in a manner that prevents them from lying down and fully extending their limbs, or from being able to turn around freely. It would continue to allow the use of pig farrowing crates, which are commonly used during the time of birthing when the young pigs are most at risk from injury. It would, however, eliminate a cruel practice that has no place in this state.
This is not a radical proposition; even those animals raised for slaughter deserve to be treated decently and humanely. This proposition is about setting clear and ethical standards of animal husbandry within our state, and defining the limits of acceptable treatment to animals raised for food. It bars the worst cruelties of factory farming, and puts the law on the side of compassion.
|
Susan Wilson, President/CEO, Humane Society of Southern Arizona, Tucson
|
M. Jo Smith, Chair Board of Directors, Humane Society of Southern Arizona, Tucson
|
|
Paid for by "The Humane Society of Southern Arizona, Inc."
|
As a fourth generation rancher, I urge you to support the Humane Farming Initiative.
Several large housed hog factories were planned and developed near my family's ranch in northeastern Colorado. As I saw what was involved by the sheer number of hogs and volume of waste, I became very concerned about the Ogallala Aquifer which is the sole source of water for our community and other impact to our way of life. I soon realized that these operations would do more to destroy and devastate rural communities and our way of life than enhance it.
I helped build support for a grassroots citizens' initiative in the state of Colorado in 1998. We placed an initiative on the ballot that voters approved by 63% to regulate big hog factories. Amendment 14 set-out protections for air standards and water regulations on the waste from large commercial hog operations, in an attempt to keep these industrialized facilities from adversely affecting Colorado's valuable water, air, and land.
This fight is being waged all over the country on many fronts, pitting small ranchers and farmers and their rural lifestyle against the industrial animal factories, many of which are owned by large, out of state corporations. They tend to divide the communities they locate in and tear the social fabric often beyond repair.
I live near these sites and have first-hand experience on how small, rural communities are affected. Industrialized animal factories also use what I believe to be cruel animal husbandry practices which most traditional family farmers and ranchers do not condone. That's why I support the efforts of Arizonans for Humane Farms.
Don't be fooled, in my opinion and experience, Big Agribusiness does not represent the position of family ranchers and farmers.
|
Sue Jarrett, Wray
|
|
Paid for by Karen Michael
|
Dear fellow Arizonans,
I'm an Arizona resident and I grew up on a small family farm, so I understand what family farming is all about. I'm also aware of what's happened to small family farmers and the environment in our neighbor state of Utah since a mega-factory pork operation opened up in the mid-1990s. I strongly encourage my fellow Arizonans to vote YES on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
In Utah, when a mega-factory pork producer opened up just over a decade ago, it severely harmed the local farming families. The number of small pig farmers in the state has dwindled since the opening of this factory farm, but the number of pigs raised in the state has skyrocketed. In just a three-year period, the number of Utah pig farms fell from 800 to 500, while pork production increased nearly seven-fold: from 44,000 to 295,000 pigs. In addition, the Utah operation had several large "spills" of contaminated waste, resulting in fines and severely harming the environment.
Don't be fooled by the opposition to this initiative. The Humane Farming Act IS about protecting small family farms and the environment. We shouldn't allow Arizona to become like Utah. A YES vote is the right thing for Arizona and it's of no cost to the taxpayer. For the sake of our state's small family farmers and our environment, please VOTE YES on The Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
|
Kelly Cooney, Queen Creek
|
The twentieth century has witnessed the rise of industrialized, confinement animal agriculture, a different approach from the traditional animal husbandry eloquently described in the 23rd Psalm, which approach created a fair, symbiotic, mutually beneficial and ancient contract between humans and animals.
In my opinion, as author of books on farm animal welfare and teacher of animal science, veterinary, and philosophy classes, sow stalls represent confinement practices at their worst. Given the natural behavior of sows, involving extensive foraging on soft loam and building nests on hillsides for excreta to run off, and their high intelligence, confining them in small enclosure typically measuring 2' X 7' by 3', called gestation crates, for most of their productive lives is morally unacceptable. No sows can turn around in these crates, and many cannot stand up or scratch; some cannot lie down with their body fully extended. Behavioral anomalies, signs of unmitigated stress, and "production disease" problems arise; not a major problem in extensive situations.
The industrialization of swine production has caused other societal problems. These include the loss of small producers (Between 1974 and 1996 numbers of producers declined from 750,000 to 157,000). Between 1994 and 1996, one out of every four hog producers left the business. This in turn led to loss and devitalization of rural communities based in hog production. In addition, "pig-smart" workers have been replaced by unskilled, minimum-wage labor in many industrial operations. The concentration of hogs in large numbers in confinement operations leads to air and water pollution, problems of waste disposal, odor problems, decline in property values, problems of sustainability and issues of worker health, as well as problems of "political health", with large operations exerting unhealthy influence on the political process. We must recall Jefferson's dictum that small, independent farmers are the backbone of democracy.
|
Bernard Rollin, Fort Collins
|
|
Paid for by "Arizona Humane Society"
|
As the nation's largest animal welfare group with more than 9.5 million supporters--including 188,000 who live in Arizona, 1 in every 27 state residents--The Humane Society of the United States urges a "Yes" vote on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
-
All animals deserve humane treatment, including those animals raised for food.
Farm animals should not be subjected to cruel and intensive confinement that prevents even the most basic movement. Unrelieved confinement causes their muscles to weaken, joints to stiffen, bones to become brittle and break, and causes the animals undue stress and immense frustration.
-
Leading farm animal welfare scientists oppose these cruel crates.
Farm animal expert Dr. Temple Grandin states, "Gestation crates for pigs are a real problem...Basically, you're asking a sow to live in an airline seat...I think it's something that needs to be phased out."
-
This measure protects traditional farms and their ethic of common sense animal husbandry.
Family farmers have a proud tradition of ensuring that their animals have decent lives. Arizona's pig farms never resembled industrial hog factories, where the animals live their entire lives in crates and never feel the sun or the soil.
-
Just as animals deserve a merciful death, they deserve a merciful life.
There is a law requiring humane slaughter of farm animals, but no laws to require humane treatment while they are being reared.
-
This measure will prevent massive new corporate hog farms from taking root in Arizona.
In Utah, a corporate farm, housing nearly 1 million pigs, set up operation in the Utah desert, with detrimental effects on animals, groundwater, and local communities.
-
Giving animals enough space to turn around and fully extend their limbs is just common sense and common decency.
|
Wayne Pacelle, President and CEO, Bethesda
|
David Wiebers, M.D., Chair, Board of Directors, Rochester
|
|
Paid for by "The Humane Society of the United States"
|
I have devoted my life to studying animals in the wild, and now I am attempting to use my experience and understanding of animals to advocate for their well-being. I am proud to join my friends at the Arizona Humane Society and the Humane Society of the United States in supporting the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
All animals deserve humane treatment, including those raised for food. On factory farms, animals are treated as mere machines. Two of the most notorious factory farming practices are the confinement of pigs and calves in restrictive crates, which this measure seeks to change:
-
Pigs are highly intelligent--as intelligent as dogs. Yet sows kept for breeding on factory farms are confined in tiny individual crates so narrow they cannot even turn around. Deprived of nearly all opportunity to express their natural behavior, they bite at anything they can reach. Then they give up, become listless, and behave as though they are in mourning - with head lowered and eyes glazed.
-
Most calves raised for veal are chained by the neck inside of similarly restrictive crates. They cannot lie in comfort. They cannot even turn around. At the end, after four months of suffering, they are dragged from their prisons, their legs so weak that they can barely walk.
Not only is this mistreatment of animals unconscionable and inhumane, the future of small family farmers hangs in the balance as more and more traditional farmers give up, unable to compete with the corporate factory farms whose sole aim is to make as much profit per animal as possible.
Anyone concerned about the humane treatment of animals or the viability of small family farms should vote yes on Measure 204, and approve the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
|
Jane Goodall, PhD, DBE, Founder, Arlington
|
William Johnston, President, Arlington
|
|
Paid for by "The Jane Goodall Institute"
|
VOTE NO on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
While the Act on the surface is benign, it represents the beginning of a campaign by Animal Rights - Animal Worshipers to force us to become vegetarians.
-
New Zealand has banned cooking live lobsters in boiling water alleging that it is painful for the lobsters. A restaurant in Italy was fined for displaying live lobsters on ice alleging that it was painful. In Norway they tried to have the Government ban the use of worms as fish bait on the grounds that it was painful for the worms. Invertebrates such as lobsters and worms can not feel pain.
-
In the U.K they are trying to have angling (sports fishing) banned on the grounds that the fish feel pain when caught on a fishhook. There is no evidence that fish consciously feel pain.
-
They are trying to have the Kosher slaughter of cows banned in the United States. It is banned in Germany, Norway, Switzerland, and New Zealand. One of the first actions Nazi Germany took against the Jews was to ban the Kosher slaughter of animals.
-
Extremist Animal Rights - Animal Worshippers have burned down animal slaughter plants.
-
They have demanded that the University of Arizona shut down its Animal Sciences Program. (Arizona Daily Wildcat, April 22, 2003: p. 1)
-
They are opposed to the mutilation of cockroaches (Science, May 19, 2006: p. 979)
Stop this Nonsense Now. Vote No on the Humane Treatment of Farm Animals Act.
VOTE NO on Prop 204
It's a sad day when
out-of-state
,
anti-meat
,
anti-science
based interest groups can come to Arizona from back East to push their cruel and inhumane agenda on Arizona's farm families.
They paid petition signature gatherers to
spread false-hoods and distort
modern, humane and science-based agricultural practices.
The U.S. is already becoming a net importer of agriculture this year.
Vote `NO' and let the liberal Farm Sanctuary and the other outside backers know that their agenda won't fly in Arizona!
Chris Udall, Executive Director
Agri-Business Council of Arizona, Inc.
N.W. "Bill" Plummer, Secretary
Agri-Business Council of Arizona, Inc.
|
Chris Udall, Executive Director, Agri-Business Council of Arizona, Inc., Mesa
|
N.W. "Bill" Plummer, Secretary, Agri- Business Council of Arizona, Inc., Scottsdale
|
|
Paid for by "Agri-Buisness Council of Arizona, Inc."
|
As a small family producer of pork products and a third generation born and raised Arizonan, I am very concerned of an initiative that will be presented to the Arizona voters by out of state special interest groups in an attempt to place unnecessary regulations on Arizona's pork producers.
Arizona pork producers follow industry guidelines, which are tested, researched, and approved by the American Veterinary Medical Association. A stress free environment is critical to all pork production operations as well as fresh water and nutritious feed. Our herd is fed a fresh ration that is ground on site from corn, soybean, minerals and vitamins. No hormones, old or spoiled products are ever added to our feed.
Arizona pork producers work many long hours from the break of day, feeding and caring for the herd to all hours of the night as sows farrow bringing the next generation into the world. These tasks are necessary to bring the pork product to harvest in State and Federally inspected processing plants.
Many Arizona jobs are dependant on the production of pork in Arizona. Placing impractical restrictions will effect the production and inevitability put the family farm out of business. This will in turn have the "trickle down" effect with loss of jobs in many other supporting industries that employ Arizona citizens. Arizona we must vote
NO !
|
Vicki Trump, Arizona Berkshires, Buckeye
|
As a small producer of pork products, we ask that the Arizona voters are informed of an initiative that will be presented by out of state special interest groups like HSUS (Humane Society of the United States) Farm Sanctuary, PETA, and others as an attempt to place regulations on Arizona's pork producers.
As an Arizona pork producer for 35 years, we use industry accepted methods in our swine production. Agriculture is an important part of Arizona history as well as its future and feeding Arizonan's is the goal of the pork producer. An environment with the least amount of stress to ensure top quality product for the consumer is imperative to a successful harvest.
Many jobs in Arizona are dependent on Agriculture; initiatives like Proposition 204 will put many Arizona jobs in jeopardy including the occupation of the small pig farmer. We will Vote
NO
on this Proposition.
|
Pam Fiakas, PamLann Farms, Litchfield Park
|
Lanny Fahs, PamLann Farms, Litchfield Park
|
I am a contributor to the Arizona Humane Society and I do not support this initiative.
We all have a moral obligation to respect and treat animals humanely. That is why we have laws dealing with cruelty. Farmers and Ranchers go beyond their moral obligation and care for their animals because of the products they produce. Animals that are treated poorly do not produce as well as the animals that are cared for using today's modern, safe, and sanitary practices. Today's food products from these animals are safe, wholesome and affordable.
I hope voters see this initiative for what it is. It was brought to Arizona by two out-of-state animal rights groups with their pro-vegetarian, and anti-meat agendas.
Farmers and ranchers take very good care of their animals as though their family's livelihood depends on it. To say otherwise is HOGWASH.
Please vote NO.
|
Cecil H. Miller, Jr., Litchfield Park
|
Out-of State Anti-Farm Groups Target Arizona Farmers and Ranchers.
I am a teacher, counselor and a small family farmer. These out-of-state animal rights groups, Farm Sanctuary and Humane Society of the U.S. shut down two family farm operations in Florida with this same initiative. Now they are here in Arizona with their anti-farm agenda.
I know Arizona farmers large and small treat their animals humanely.
I have Christian values that include respecting and caring for God's creations.
Farmers have an additional reason to give proper care and attention to farm animals. Animals that are not treated with proper care do not produce the food products we enjoy at our dinner table.
I hope voters will join me and vote NO on Proposition 204.
PETA and PETA Wannabes Do Not Speak for Arizona.
PETA activists are responsible for burning down buildings, vandalizing businesses and harassing citizens with their pro-vegan, anti-meat, anti-fur, anti-research and anti-farm agenda. Their New York and Washington D.C. based kissing cousins, Farm Sanctuary and Humane Society of the U.S. are telling Arizona voters that Arizona farmers treat their pigs and veal calves inhumanely.
First,
we do not raise veal in Arizona so that is their first
lie
to voters.
Second,
our one large hog operation that these radicals have targeted, has a clean bill of health from our own Environmental Department. So, that is
lie
number two when they say we are polluting the air and water.
Third,
this modern livestock facility provides a safe and sanitary environment that reduces stress on the animals. Their statements that pigs are being treated cruelly and are under stress, is
lie
number three. The American Veterinarian Medical Association says these modern facilities cause no more stress on the animal than do other types of pens.
Fourth,
the hogs can lie down and stretch their legs. Their
lie
number four says they cannot.
Their
fifth lie
is that they are protecting the small farmer. These radical groups successfully ran this same initiative in Florida and the result was that the two small family operations that were in Florida are no longer raising hogs.
Their arguments in Arizona are
HOGWASH. If some of them hold water in other states, they should take the initiative there. Arizona farmers and ranchers should not be saddled with criminal offenses for a problem that does not exist here.
Vote NO on Proposition 204.
|
Elizabeth Foster, Gilbert
|
Proposition 204 is
HOGWASH!
The Humane Society of the United States and Farm Sanctuary, the out-of-state backers of this initiative, have an extremist agenda of eliminating livestock agriculture and meat consumption in this country. They are not friends of farmers. They are not friends of consumers. Their agenda for you is anti-choice. Their agenda for Arizona farmers is anti-meat and anti-science.
Modern agriculture is humane and science based - just ask the American Veterinarian Medical Association. These out-of-state radicals challenge the morality and ethics of farmers at the same time saying they are defending the family farm. This same initiative by these same groups put Florida family hog farmers out of business in 2002. Now they have come to Arizona.
They are defenders only of their extremist agenda, and we hope Arizona voters see through the "hogwash" they serve up - let's label their message "return to sender".
Vote NO on 204. It is HOGWASH!
|
Kevin G. Rogers, President, Arizona Farm Bureau, Mesa
|
James W. Klinker, Chief Administrative Officer, Arizona Farm Bureau, Mesa
|
|
Paid for by "Arizona Farm Bureau"
|
Vote NO on Proposition 204
As a practicing Veterinarian and life long caretaker of animals - I ask you to join me in voting NO on Proposition 204. It does not provide for a single measure that will actually improve the care or lives of hogs and calves. It ignores decades of animal husbandry and animal science practices which have proven to increase the care and health of these animals.
Most of the animals I see e |
