The Cost of Cage-Free and the Massachusetts Ballot Question
Voters in Massachusetts will vote in November on a referendum to ban battery cages for chickens. The ballot issue has revived a conversation about the well-being of farm animals and what consumers are willing—or able—to pay to support costlier care for animals.
In 2014, voters in California, and ultimately state legislators, banned sales of battery-cage eggs. Comparing the prices of eggs sold in California before and after the law with the prices of eggs sold in other states reveals that the law increased egg prices for Californians by at least 22 percent. Other estimates were higher.
In a commentary written for the Wall Street Journal, Jayson Lusk, an author and agriculture economics professor, says that while most consumers want farm animals to be treated well, “judging by shopping habits, they’re only willing to pay so much for hens’ amenities.” The market share for affordable, cage-produced eggs (about 90 percent) dominates the more expensive, cage-free eggs (less than 10 percent).
Lusk also writes that it’s not clear that cage-free methods are better for the animal in all respects. They do provide hens more space. The barns allow the birds to exhibit natural behaviors like scratching and dust bathing, and they provide nesting areas for laying eggs. But, the barns are often chaotic, dusty and smelly. A study by the Coalition for Sustainable Egg Supply showed that cage-free systems lead to higher rates of cannibalism and aggression, more bone damage and higher death rates.
He mentions a relatively new type of housing: the enriched-colony cage system, which provide nesting areas for egg laying, a matted area that allows the hens to scratch, and perches for them to get up off the wire floor. Lusk characterizes the colonies as “an innovative compromise that attempts to balance cost and the hens’ well-being.” Source: Wall Street Journal S