Ohio Humane Campaign Leads to Animal Welfare Reforms

Following the landmark success in California of Proposition 2, which requires the phase out of some of the cruelest confinement practices in animal agriculture, such as battery cages (for egg-laying hens) and gestation (pregnant pigs) and veal (male baby cows) crates, animal protection organizations, such as the Humane Society of the United States, launched a ballot initiative in Ohio calling for similar reforms. Last week that campaign led to an agreement among HSUS, Ohioans for Humane Farms, Ohio Governor Ted Strickland, and "leading livestock organizations" that will enact certain animal welfare reforms in Ohio. The reforms agreed upon include:

• A ban on veal crates by 2017, which is the same timing as the ballot measure.
• A ban on new gestation crates in the state after Dec. 31, 2010. Existing facilities are grandfathered, but must cease use of these crates within 15 years.
• A moratorium on permits for new battery cage confinement facilities for laying hens.
• A ban on strangulation of farm animals and mandatory humane euthanasia methods for sick or injured animals.
• A ban on the transport of downer cows for slaughter.
• Enactment of legislation establishing felony-level penalties for cockfighters.
• Enactment of legislation cracking down on puppy mills.
• Enactment of a ban on the acquisition of dangerous exotic animals as pets, such as primates, bears, lions, tigers, large constricting and venomous snakes, crocodiles and alligators.

The agreement puts the planned ballot initiative "on hold."

In a recent blog post, HSUS CEO, Wayne Pacelle, said,

"Everybody was a winner because we all avoided an acrimonious and costly fall campaign with an uncertain outcome, began to see each other as sincerely minded people, and advanced eight very tangible, material reforms for animals.

"....As a movement, if we do not sit down with our adversaries and try to solve problems, we will never succeed. Instead, we will be wrapped up in an endless cycle of wins and losses and polarizing political campaigns. At times, we must pursue such campaigns when lawmakers or industry slam the door in our face and reject the common good. But, in the end, we need not only to change laws, but also to understand human nature and build on our shared concerns and values."

This agreement is a great opportunity to explore a variety of issues, including the connections between human and animal oppression; the impact of our food choices on animals; the power of citizen activism and collaboration; the value of both/and and third side thinking; and the importance of transforming destructive systems.

Additionally, the responses to this agreement from the animal agriculture industry and from animal protection advocates offer a chance to critically explore how our lenses and perspectives shape our views. Just skimming the news reports of reactions from such groups shows an amazing diversity of perspective about what this agreement means and who "won."

~ Marsha

Like our blog? Please share it with others, comment, and/or subscribe to our RSS feed.