Missouri is challenging California's requirements on cage size for chickens.

[WooingWyandotte]

I say screw Missouri and screw California (I live there) Raise your own chickens or buy your eggs localy. In my opinion most laws only look good on paper anyway. Kinda like engineering blueprints. Lots of thought process very little hands on experience.

 

[newfoundland]

I cannot see that this is anything but a force for good. If this ban raises the issue of humane farming methods and encourages debate amongst the consumer as to how the hens are treated, then it should be taken up by people everywhere. That is how the world moves on. That is why we no longer have small boys climbing up chimneys!

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

This is setting up for a state by state embargo. I would hate to live in California if the courts let this happen. This is not just Missouri but the standard all over the country. Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, exec are not going to play ball ether.

Think about it. If a state can ban import from another state for what ever reason, Why would any state let anything be imported from a state that has a ban on something from them.

Does the state of Ca have the financial power to force a change on the whole country or are they setting them self up to be blackballed by them. Ca is a tiny dot in the world of free trade an this will hurt them.

Is it legal? Probably. Is is smart? No....

 

[Rosa moschata]

You must not be aware that "state by state embargoes" already exist. I am a gardener, and many times in my plant-ordering I see notices such as "may not be sent to WV" or some other state because the plant is restricted from being sold there -- the citrus quarantine in Florida is another example. Back before the federal ban on importation of wild parrots, New York State banned the sale of imported parrots within its borders, allowing only captive-bred parrots to be sold -- another "product" legal (at the time) in some states but which couldn't be sold in another. As I've said to another, I don't think your argument is valid -- and especially considering your posts about "states' rights" in other areas, it's puzzling that you'd argue against one state deciding on what it deems legal to be sold within its borders. And these "dire predictions" of what could happen if this moves forward is an oft-used superstitious fear-tactic to halt progress, and I don't recall the "end of the world" happening as each has passed thus far. It seems more like a response from people who simply fear change.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

You must not be aware that "state by state embargoes" already exist. I am a gardener, and many times in my plant-ordering I see notices such as "may not be sent to WV" or some other state because the plant is restricted from being sold there -- the citrus quarantine in Florida is another example. Back before the federal ban on importation of wild parrots, New York State banned the sale of imported parrots within its borders, allowing only captive-bred parrots to be sold -- another "product" legal (at the time) in some states but which couldn't be sold in another. As I've said to another, I don't think your argument is valid -- and especially considering your posts about "states' rights" in other areas, it's puzzling that you'd argue against one state deciding on what it deems legal to be sold within its borders. And these "dire predictions" of what could happen if this moves forward is an oft-used superstitious fear-tactic to halt progress, and I don't recall the "end of the world" happening as each has passed thus far. It seems more like a response from people who simply fear change.

I am aware of these but they are small issues that effect so few people that as far as I know it has never been challenged in court. This on the other hand is a big industry an will be felt by a lot of people so it is being challenged in court. The court being dragged in to it changes everything. Right now its a iffy issue that states have been treading lightly on. A court ruling one way or the other will change that. It will been deemed illegal an forcing states to stop or legal an opening up floodgates. Whole new ballgame.

I am all for states rights inside the confines of the Constitution but if this was Ga doing this I would be doing everything I could to stop it. Not cause I think they cant but because of the repercussions..

 

[Rosa moschata]

Whaling was also once a big industry. When the practice was banned, industry changed.

I don't see how it's California's concern that other states can't/won't change with what they want -- if other states are unwilling/unable to produce the supply that meets and satisfies California's demand, then California will get it elsewhere -- or produce it itself. When I hear politics from some states amounting to "we don't wanna change" I say "fine, don't change....but don't tell us not to change because that will hurt you."

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Whaling was also once a big industry. When the practice was banned, industry changed.

I don't see how it's California's concern that other states can't/won't change with what they want -- if other states are unwilling/unable to produce the supply that meets and satisfies California's demand, then California will get it elsewhere -- or produce it itself. When I hear politics from some states amounting to "we don't wanna change" I say "fine, don't change....but don't tell us not to change because that will hurt you."

Whaling was stopped at the national an international level.

Again Ca can do what they want but its actions are not taken in a vacuum. They will have to deal with the fallout...

 

[Rosa moschata]

Whaling was stopped at the national an international level.

Again Ca can do what they want but its actions are not taken in a vacuum. They will have to deal with the fallout...

Yes, but my point was that it affected an industry negatively, yet we all moved forward. And I predict that more of the "fallout" will be "dealt with" by Missouri than California. I guess we'll just wait and see how it turns out.

 

[Bullitt]

This is setting up for a state by state embargo. I would hate to live in California if the courts let this happen. This is not just Missouri but the standard all over the country. Mississippi, Georgia, Alabama, exec are not going to play ball ether.

Think about it. If a state can ban import from another state for what ever reason, Why would any state let anything be imported from a state that has a ban on something from them.

Does the state of Ca have the financial power to force a change on the whole country or are they setting them self up to be blackballed by them. Ca is a tiny dot in the world of free trade an this will hurt them.

Is it legal? Probably. Is is smart? No....

California is the 9th largest economy in the world. That means a bigger economy than countries like Australia and Canada.

We see over and over that California passes legislation that forces changes across the United States.

I do not foresee much of a backlash over this issue.

By the way, one state can block importation of goods from another state for many reasons. We see these bans all the time with produce and animals. It can be for something like fear of disease.

 

[seminolewind]

I think hens living out their life in small cages is the equivalent of young children being used for 16 hour shifts in sweat shops.
We see upstanding moral people take responsibility for their animals who can't voice their concerns and are relatively too dumb to know their lives could be a bit better.

But we continue to have those people who think it's fine to keep chickens in small cages never seeing the outside, never picking at the ground, never finding a bug to eat. There is not a whole lot a chicken asks for in their very short life. We are the only species of animal out there that feels empathy. There are just darn too many humans out there that prefer the almighty buck to having any feelings at all. And it's not just chickens, but in this thread it's only chickens.