But proponents of the measure say those estimates are overblown, and that measure will protect animals and the environment.
“This measure is designed to ban farming in Sonoma County — period.”
That is the view of Mark Weber, owner of Sunrise Farms LLC, a major poultry farm in Sonoma County and one of the main targets of a controversial ballot measure that could ban factory farming in the rural county north of San Francisco.
If passed, Measure J would prohibit so-called “Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs)”, from operating in the county. CAFOS are defined as animal agriculture facilities that meet varying livestock thresholds and/or pollute their local surface water. Critics of the measure say this could decimate the county’s economy by $500 million over the next three years.
Sunrise Farms has a huge stake in the issue as it operates seven of the 21 CAFOs that the Coalition to End Factory Farming seeks to shrink or close, and Weber warns that this countywide measure could cripple the entire state’s food supply.
The county’s local egg market, he said, will be particularly hard hit. California already imports 70% of its eggs, and Measure J targets some of the state’s largest poultry operations — including his own.
Organic milk may also become less available, he added, noting that California relies on Sonoma county for “50% of the organic milk produced in [the] state.” Large creameries such as Straus and Clover, both with extensive ties to Sonoma, have joined the No on J campaign.
Sonoma County residents “won’t have milk, eggs and other fresh produce from this community — we’ll be left with nothing,” Weber said of the impact if the measure passes.
That’s a gross exaggeration, responded the Coalition to End Factory Farming’s lead organizer, Kristina Garfinkel. She said that Sonoma county is an ideal community for the measure’s provisions because CAFOs only make up 3% of the county’s animal farms.
“There’s about 700 animal farms in the county, which means that we can enforce a CAFO ban without having the catastrophic kind of economic devastation that you would have in a place like Kern County where suddenly you are looking at thousands of jobs,” she said. “It’s actually mostly small and medium farms that we can just invest more in, that could happily take up the space that these CAFOs currently operate.”
Garfinkel added that she hopes the measure will serve as a model statewide — and even nationwide — for how to bolster small farms while curbing both animal cruelty and pollution.
“I would hope that through this initiative, people throughout the US and even globally, but looking more at a national level, are inspired and can learn from our campaign, whether it’s successful or not, to try to do this in their local jurisdiction,” Garfinkel said.
Still, even Garfinkel acknowledged that the measure is unlikely to pass.
The Measure is unpopular among small and large farmers alike. The No on J campaign boasts 96 business and organizational supporters, and seven cities have also adopted resolutions opposing the measure.
According to the Press Democrat, the No on J coalition has raised approximately $2 million, much of it from large companies that Sonoma County farms export to, such as Straus and Clover Sonoma.
No on J’s overwhelming support is largely motivated by the measure’s potential financial fallout as outlined in a recent report by Chico State’s Agribusiness Institute via the University of California Cooperative Extension (UCCE).
The UCCE’s study found that Measure J would cause a $259 million loss in livestock and poultry output, a $122 million loss for related industries like veterinarians and farm suppliers, $38 million in reduced spending across the county and $80 million in lost labor income. In total, this represents a $498 million loss for Sonoma County’s economy.
Garfinkel dismissed the report, calling it a “cute little thought experiment,” because its authors say that there is “uncertainty regarding which [CAFOs] would be prohibited by the proposed ordinance.”
Therefore, its findings reflect a hypothetical total loss of all livestock and poultry production in Sonoma County. Given that Measure J wouldn’t ban all animal farming in the county and considering the debate surrounding how many farms it would affect, it’s hard to measure its potential consequences.
While large CAFO owners like Mark Weber believe that “economically, [Measure J] just doesn’t make sense,” Garfinkel countered that these farmers are exaggerating its consequences because “they see it as a threat to their very destructive industry, as they should.”
Image courtesy of the Coalition to End Factory Farming.