Jul01

Logic Prevailed in Rhode Island Battle of Bill to Ban Cages

The National Association of Egg Farmers believe that treating animals humanely is in the best interest of both the farmer and the chicken.  How do we know if were doing that?  By basing production practices on science and not emotion. 

 

In the 2015 Legislative Session of the State of Rhode Island was a bill that passed the House and went to the Senate (H5505) that would ban the production of eggs from chickens kept in cages.  Why chose Rhode Island for this battle.  There’s only one egg farmer producing eggs in cages; Little Rhody Farms.  Included in the efforts to persuade the Rhode Island Legislature, there was an effort to persuade the general public.  This took on the form of a televised video of chickens in cages filmed in another state.  Also the opposing groups wrote Opinion Editorials (Op-Eds) sent to newspaper; The Providence Journal in the Capital of Rhode Island.  Below are two links; the first is the Op-Ed submitted by the NAEF.  The second link is from HSUS attacking our position and NAEF’s President personally.  This is what is done by a desperate opponent fighting a losing battle.

 

This was a victory for NAEF at defending the only egg farmer in Rhode Island who produces eggs from caged layers by using the available science.  The Rhode Island Senate adjourned without considering the bill (H5505) to ban caged layers.  HSUS  attacking the National Association of Egg Farmers calling it a "fringe group" and its President as an "outlier in the egg industry" is just more misinformation from HSUS.  NAEF, has a membership base of 278 farmers, one of the largest egg farmer based national associations with some of those members also participating in the other national association representing eggs, thus refuting the charges of "fringe" and "outlier". Science and logic should always prevail over emotion. This time it did!

 

http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20150624/OPINION/150629696/13831

http://m.providencejournal.com/article/20150625/OPINION/150629498/2011