Is protecting economic profitability and big business more important than protecting the environment, public health, and animal welfare? Some opposition to Sonoma County’s citizen-proposed ballot initiative, Measure J, might suggest that is the case for our local government and stakeholders.
Measure J seeks to end “factory farming” in Sonoma County. A group of local citizens making up The Coalition to End Factory Farming organized to obtain more than 37,000 signatures to get this measure on the November ballot.
“A few things inspired the initiative,” Cassie King, a Coalition to End Factory Farming organizer said. “In Sonoma County, there is a long history of undercover investigations revealing systemic violations of California’s animal cruelty laws at CAFOs including Reichardt Duck Farm, Sunrise Farms, and Perdue’s Petaluma Poultry. The authorities have failed to act on this evidence of animal cruelty, but Measure J gives all Sonoma County voters a chance to protect animals from this abuse.”
The overarching goal of the measure is to protect animals from unlivable and inhumane conditions on farms, reduce pollution caused by animal waste, decrease the spread of zoonotic disease, and support smaller family farms.
“Measure J will be the first time voters could decide to prohibit CAFOs in our county permanently. In this way, it is breaking new ground. If passed, Measure J will set a powerful precedent that can support other efforts to stop factory farming around the country,” King said.
This measure has not been without controversy across the county. Petaluma, Rohnert Park, Santa Rosa, Healdsburg, and most recently Cloverdale’s city councils have all voted to oppose Measure J. So has the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors. Cotati, so far, is the only city council declining to take a position on the measure.
The ‘No on J’ rhetoric suggests that Measure J would supposedly drive up demand for out-of-state animal products, where there may be fewer animal welfare protections in contrast to what we have in California. It also states that it would shut down our local family farms like Clover Sonoma or Straus Family Creamery, and cause a significant loss of jobs. The problem, however, is that this rhetoric does not provide any factual evidence or data to support these claims and does not align with what the Measure J text states.
Allison Ford, a Sonoma State Assistant Professor of Anthropology and Geography, Environment, and Planning said, “Local is often framed as sustainable, but it’s possible to have food that is locally produced using unsustainable practices. Supporters and opponents of this measure disagree on those definitions, and there is no single standard because it’s ultimately a political, not a scientific, question.”
‘Yes on J,’ however, provides research methodology for how the initiative identified 21 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs, among the hundreds of existing family farms across the county. A CAFO is defined as “intensive animal agriculture operations in which large numbers of animals are confined and/or a large amount of waste is created.”
The ordinance specifies large CAFOs in the area based on the number and type of animals confined for more than 45 days out of the year and provides photographic evidence of animals experiencing undue suffering on the identified industrialized farms.
“The reality is Measure J requires the downsizing of around 20 factory farms, which all meet the federal definition of a large CAFO, for example confining over 125,000 chickens. These operations represent only 3% of Sonoma County animal farms, but they disproportionately pollute our water, harm animals, and spread diseases like avian flu,” King said.
If passed, Measure J would give the identified CAFOs or factory farms “a 3-year phase-out period to scale down or phase out their operations,” according to the Frequently Asked Questions page on the Measure J website. It would also require the county to provide retraining programs and employment assistance to employees currently working on CAFOs, which King said would be handled by the county’s Human Services Department.
“We do know generally that there is a connection between exploitation of animals and the environment, and exploitation of already marginalized people, including farm workers and migrant workers, who are typically our lowest paid, most exploited workers. Is that happening here? It’s quite possible, but I don’t have evidence for or against this claim,” Ford said.
“Industrial animal agriculture tends to operate out of sight,” King said. She explained that if the measure passes, the Agricultural Commissioner would be responsible for overseeing the modification or closing of existing CAFOs in the county.
Downsizing large-scale factory farms in the area would support smaller and medium-sized family farms by reducing disproportionate competition. As stated on the FAQ page of the ‘Yes on J’ website, “Small family farms cannot compete with industrial farming because factory farms externalize their costs onto animals, society, and the environment. This ordinance will help restore the local diverse agriculture that existed in Sonoma County before the factory farms moved in.”
King explained that in 1941 more than 4,000 egg farms were operating in Sonoma County, in contrast to only 157 by 2015. This industry has been largely dominated by companies like Sunrise Farms LLC and Petaluma Farms. “Measure J will level the playing field, revitalize the local agricultural economy, and promote sustainable farming practices,” King said.
If Measure J aims to end animal cruelty, reduce a negative impact on the environment, support an increase of smaller family farms, and protect public health, what is the resistance about?
“Many legislators in California receive large campaign contributions from the animal agriculture industry and are too timid to take a stand and do what must be done for animals and our planet,” King said.
Why couldn’t existing farms currently designated as large factory farms in Sonoma County, just build more shelters for their animals during periods of confinement in the winter months? What is the problem with scaling down?
“We don’t know what will happen because the measure is unprecedented, and [it] will set off a complicated chain of events. So, when either side says something will happen, what they are saying is that they are worried that this will happen, or fear it. Or, they are making overly deterministic statements to make us feel fearful of the outcome,” Ford said.
“The No on J campaign has raised over $1 million to defeat Measure J and ensure the continuance of CAFOs in the county,” King said. Much of this money came from local CAFOs like Weber, Sunrise, Perdue, and Clover Sonoma.
These large-scale farms bring in significant revenue, certainly they can afford to treat their animals, which provides them with substantial income, with dignity. Any slight decrease in profit and increase in accountability as a business owner, of course, incites fear and defense mechanisms.
“Trusted organizations including the Sierra Club, American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and American Public Health Association support policies to stop CAFOs, and polling shows overwhelming support for prohibiting new CAFOs,” King said. “This widespread public support for stopping CAFOs is why lobbying groups opposed to Measure J have resorted to fear tactics and deception.”
The opposition is appealing to issues it knows the public cares about– like jobs, family business, and sustainability. However, it seems the primary goal of the opposition is to protect “economic gains for a small few because the overall economy is not benefited by CAFOs,” King said.
“Property sale and taxable values depress in areas surrounding CAFOs. Industrial farming requires fewer workers than small-scale farming. CAFOs rely on lower employment and management costs to help maximize gains by standardizing and consolidating jobs. And significantly, CAFOs contribute to tremendous costs that must be spent dealing with polluted waterways, disease outbreaks like the recent avian flu outbreak in Sonoma County, and health care for adversely affected residents,” she said.
It seems important, now as much as ever, that we do as much as we can as a community to reduce our harmful impact on the environment and treat non-human animals with compassion and respect. We know that non-human animals are sentient beings and that they can and do experience suffering.
According to a study done by the Pew Research Center, a majority of Americans say they love their animal companions as their family members. The majority of Americans also regularly consume animal products. Duality suggests that two opposing things can be true at the same time. But how often do we think about the conditions the animals were living in, or what impact getting their meat or products to our plates has on the environment, while we’re eating it?
A poll on Data for Progress suggests that 80% of likely voters in the U.S. are strongly opposed to animal cruelty. And yet, according to another study done by the John Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, “Americans are now among the top per capita meat consumers in the world; the average American eats more than three times the global average.”
In 2018, Californians voted overwhelmingly in favor of Proposition 12– a law that bans the confinement of animals on farms cruelly. However, there has been a lack of transparency among some companies that are still not “fulfilling these promises,” according to Data for Progress.
At the end of November 2023, there was a surge in Avian Influenza, or bird flu cases, on Sonoma County poultry farms. This detection resulted in the immediate euthanization of more than 1 million chickens and ducks.
“Overall, the virus affected 11 commercial producers in Sonoma County resulting in 1.2 million birds being euthanized at an estimated loss of $20 million in value and a reduction in egg production,” according to a press release by the County of Sonoma.
Further, “Nearly every stream and river in Sonoma County is listed by the EPA as impaired due in part to nitrogen and/or phosphorus, of which animal waste is a primary source,” King said.
“A ballot initiative provides citizens an opportunity to take the power back and directly pass legislation ourselves,” King said. “We know that Californians overwhelmingly care about animals and the environment. If our legislators won’t act, we will.”
Ford said, “For me, a better question is, are the regulations aligned with our values for how to produce local food in a way that is sustainable and humane? If we decide that they are, we should be willing to pay the cost of changes within the industry because it moves us closer to living in alignment with that value.”
There is abundant evidence that factory farming harms animals, the environment, our health, and contributes to the spread of zoonotic disease. So again, is the excess economic profit of some industrialized businesses more important than the quality of life for all living creatures?
