MA Question 3: The 3,000 Chickens at the Center of the Debate

WENDELL, MA — Third-generation, family-run Diemand Farm raises chickens for eggs and meat, turkeys for Thanksgiving and a small herd of beef cattle. It sits in the northern half of Massachusetts in Wendell, cradled between the Montague State Forest to its west, Wendell State Forest on the east, and Millers River to the north.

It's also square in the center of the debate over Question 3, a ballot initiative that introduces size requirements for caging chickens and other livestock.

Diemand is the only farm in the state that would be impacted, according to multiple reports and to the owners themselves. It currently houses 3,000 birds in cages its owners consider humane, but it would have to refurbish its barn, reduce that number to 500 and stop selling eggs wholesale if the ballot initiative passes, according to a statement from the farm.

• Patch is at the polls Election Day! Follow your Patch for local results as they come in.

It's a question that's more complicated than it at first seems, particularly in a state that generally tracks liberal and where polls show strong support for the animal welfare ballot question.

The owners of Diemand Farm are imploring the public for a closer look.

This is the third in a four-part series on Massachusetts' November 2016 ballot initiatives. Through these articles, Patch hopes to shed light on voters' choices through the eyes of the people the outcomes impact. Please email alison.bauter@patch.com to share your thoughts and experiences with these important issues.

As written, Question 3 will ask Massachusetts voters for a "yes" or "no" on a proposed law that would "prohibit any farm owner or operator from knowingly confining any breeding pig, calf raised for veal, or egg-laying hen in a way that prevents the animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending its limbs, or turning around freely."

It additionally bans the sale of food products that come from animals raised in such conditions, even if they're being brought in from outside state lines.

After months of ballot question debate, Diemand Farm's owners are done doing interviews, one of Diemand's employees said in an email thanking Patch for its interest, but they are releasing videos and hosting events to try to reach voters.

Here is their case, as explained in a message the farm has been sharing with its customers:

"Our cages fit the size that they are calling for except where it says that the chickens must be able to 'fully spread both wings without touching the side of the an enclosure.' Chickens do not spread their wings side to side like eagles. They spread them to the back one at a time. Our chickens are one per cage and can stand and move around. A few years ago we were inspected by (Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) and (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals) and were told that our hens are treated humanly. There are a number of benefits to caging the hens - it keeps them safe from predators, it helps in not spreading disease and chicken will peck (and cannibalize each other). ... there isn't push back because we are the only farm could possibly effect. We do not in any way condone the cruel treatment of animals but feel that this bill isn't needed in Massachusetts."

The farm elaborates in a video posted to Youtube:

A glance through commenters' responses to Diemand Farm's online posts show the conflict of conscience it creates. Writes one woman, "I appreciate supporting local business but ANY business that supports animal cruelty is not alright with me."

Others don't entirely buy the farm's explanation of chicken behavior, or the arguments it seems to be making about caged versus non-caged birds, rather than the question posed by Question 3, which relates to cage size.

One Youtube viewer commented on the farm's video, "... just as people blame animal rights activists for making their decisions based on emotion, people who are looking at one family farm and are deciding not to take action because it might negatively affect it when overall the effect will benefit so many animals, is just as emotionally charged, while also being very narrowly focused."

Others are more blunt, writing: "Maybe Mr. Diemand should spend a day in a cage that is barely bigger than he is and see what his opinion is after that."

The MSPCA and ASPCA said in a joint statement shared with Patch that they do not have a formal inspection program through which they deem cages like the Diemands' to be "humane," although the ASPCA does meet with farmers "to discuss how we can help them continually improve conditions for their farm animals."

Both of the organizations advocate for hens to be raised out of cages, in environments that allow them to express their natural behaviors like perching, dust bathing, roaming and stretching their wings, the groups' statement said.

In her argument in favor of the ballot question, which would take effect in 2022, Question 3 proponent Stephanie Harris, Campaign Director of Citizens for Farm Animal Protection, writes in part:

"A YES vote prevents animal cruel treatment of animals in Massachusetts by ending the practice of cramming farm animals into cages so small they can't turn around or stretch their limbs."

That's part of the reason behind the MSPCA and ASCPA's endorsement, as well. They additionally support Question 3's prohibition on selling meat or eggs in the state that do not meet the ballot initiative's standards.

In their statement, the organizations write:

Many farmers agree with us that animals deserve better lives than caged environments can afford. Question 3 is endorsed by more than 150 Massachusetts family farmers who recognize that there are economically viable and more humane ways to raise animals that are better aligned with our society’s values.

The Act to Prevent Cruelty to Farm Animals, on the ballot as Question 3, will prevent farm animals from being crammed into cages so small they can’t even turn around or extend their limbs. It will also ensure that food items sold in the Commonwealth are compliant with these modest standards.

We hope Massachusetts voters will stand up for farm animals on November 8 by voting “Yes on 3” to ban the cruel confinement of veal caves, egg-laying hens, and mother pigs in the state and prevent the sale of food items produced in this inhumane way.

Backers of the bill have also said it would protect against the future introduction of inhumanely housed livestock methods in Massachusetts. But for now, it's just Diemand that the ballot question would impact.

Quick Look: Learn About All Four Massachusetts Ballot Questions for November 2016

There's also the broader, fiscal argument, with proponents bolstering Question 3 with the promise it would "remove inhumane and unsafe products from the Massachusetts marketplace," according to Harris' argument in the state-circulated explainer of all four ballot questions.

William Bell, of the New England Brown Egg Council, argues in that same ballot mailer that the result will be an increase in egg prices that disproportionately impacts low-income families.

Moreover, there's the argument made by Bell, and even by Harris, that the market is already dictating a move away from factory-farmed eggs, with strong consumer support for cage-free hens. As Harris notes in her ballot question explainer, companies "from McDonald's to Wal-Mart... are switching to cage-free eggs." Bell takes that idea a different direction, arguing Massachusetts should "let the free market respond to consumer concerns."

The Breakdown: Here's How Much All Four Massachusetts Ballot Questions Cost

Peter Ubertaccio is the Associate Dean for Interdisciplinary Programs and Director of The Joseph Martin Institute for Law & Society at Stonehill College, where he has been studying all four ballot questions up for a vote on Tuesday.

In transitions like McDonald's toward cage-free eggs, he sees evidence the market is already moving away from the practice on its own, offering an economic argument not to pass the ballot initiative.

There's evidence, he said, that "you don't need the heavy hand of the ballot initiative."

Still, in the run-up to an election dominated by the presidential race, and competing against higher-profile ballot initiatives such as the move to legalize recreational marijuana or lift the cap on charter schools, Ubertaccio said voters may well be too swamped to dig far beyond a first-read on the ballot questions.

"People have gut-level reactions to these things," he said. "What it will come down to is, 'How do you vote at a gut level?'"

And in this case, polling indicates that more than 65 percent of the state isn't looking too closely at a small farm in Wendell.

Image via Youtube

This story has been updated to include comment from the MSPCA-ASPCA.