Ashley Chang
When Massachusetts voted Question 3 into law in 2016, it was the strongest farm animal protection law in the United States—at the time. As other US states passed even stronger laws to protect animals, Question 3 needed an upgrade. In 2021, it got one.
In full effect as of January 1, 2022, Question 3—also known as An Act to Prevent Cruelty to Farm Animals—outlaws the cruelest uses of cages within the animal agriculture industry. Bolstered by Senate Bill 2603, which Governor Charlie Baker signed into law in late 2021, Question 3 stands to free millions of animals from the worst forms of confinement on factory farms.
Appearing on the 2016 ballot in Massachusetts as the Massachusetts Minimum Size Requirements for Farm Animal Containment, Question 3 is a landmark law that offers vital protections to egg-laying hens, mother pigs (also called “sows”), and calves raised for veal—three animals who face some of the most restrictive forms of confinement on factory farms across the United States. Thanks to the passage of Question 3, it’s illegal for Massachusetts hens, sows, and veal calves to be confined in such a way that "prevents the animal from lying down, standing up, fully extending its limbs, or turning around freely." And the reach of this law doesn’t just stop there. Question 3 also protects caged animals raised out-of-state when the eggs, pork, and veal from those animals are sold within the Commonwealth. In other words, Question 3 aims to put an end to the cruel confinement of animals within—and beyond—the borders of Massachusetts.
Intensive animal confinement in the US
Like California’s Proposition 12, a law very similar in scope, Question 3 promises to alleviate the extreme misery that hens, sows, and veal calves face on a daily basis on factory farms across the US.
Chickens in cages
Packed neatly into the styrofoam, cardboard, or plastic cartons that line the refrigerated shelves of grocery stores and supermarkets across the nation, eggs are a staple for millions of American households. And demand is high. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation (FAO), as of 2020, the flock of laying hens in the US numbered 390 million, altogether laying 111.5 billion eggs for human consumption.
But the plight of the hens who lay these eggs is extreme. So-called “layer hens” are born into hatcheries, debeaked, and—upon reaching “maturity” at just four months old—go off to a factory farm where they’ll spend the rest of their lives in battery cages. These small crates, often made entirely out of wire, are designed to maximize the number of birds that can fit on a sunless warehouse floor. No bigger than a bathtub, and often the size of a filing cabinet drawer, each battery cage can hold between four and ten birds at a time. So densely crowded, the hens can’t move, stretch their wings, or stand at their full height without hitting the walls of their cage or another captive bird.
At least 30% of egg-laying hens in the US live in cage-free housing, but for the majority of birds, battery cages are a daily reality. Each hen has less than a single square foot of space to herself. Her feathers fall off due to the constant chafing, and the brittleness of her bones—weakened by her non-stop egg production—makes it easier for her to break her ankles on the bare mesh floors that catch her eggs. In the wild, chickens would naturally lay just 12 eggs a year. But layer hens on factory farms lay close to 300, which takes a painful toll on their health.
Pigs in cages
Chickens aren’t the only animals who face intense confinement on factory farms. Mother pigs do too. Continuously impregnated so they’ll produce litter upon litter of piglets, mother pigs spend most of their short lives in metal cages known as "gestation crates." During their pregnancies, which tend to last about four months, sows are confined to a space so small they can’t even turn around. Of the 6.2 million sows held captive by the US pork industry, an incredible 4.6 million of these animals endure the agonies of gestation crates, which make it impossible for them to build nests to prepare for their young, let alone do anything but stand absolutely still as their pregnancies develop. Even after they’ve given birth, they remain in captivity to nurse their piglets before restarting the cycle all over again. As for their newborns, each one is destined for either slaughter—to become pork—or the same intensive confinement as another breeding sow.
Cows in cages
Baby calves raised for veal also endure inhumane confinement on factory farms. Destined to die before they’ve lived even 20 weeks, and torn from their mothers within hours or days of birth, baby cows spend their brief time on earth in tiny cages known as veal crates. These fenced-in huts are just big enough for the calf to stand—but there’s no room to run around, because the veal industry demands calves with severely atrophied and underdeveloped muscles, as a matter of taste.
What is Question 3 in Massachusetts?
Question 3 sets out to protect these particular animals from the punishing confinement they endure—as standard practice—within the animal agriculture industry. Voted into law in 2016, with provisions to go into full effect at the start of 2022, Question 3 is an important Massachusetts law, the first of its kind in the Commonwealth.
Before Question 3 appeared on the ballot, no laws regulated the confinement of animals on factory farms in Massachusetts. In 1988, the Massachusetts Treatment of Farm Animals Act—also called Question 3, and also an effort to regulate the treatment of farm animals—was defeated. Since then, several measures have regulated the use of hunting traps and the racing of dogs. In 1996, Question 1 prohibited the use of traps “designed to grip an animal's body or body part, such as steel jaw leghold traps, padded leghold traps, and snares.” And in 2008, Massachusetts outlawed dog racing and approved the closure of the state’s two greyhound racetracks. But neither of these initiatives addressed the problem of confinement in animal agriculture. It wasn’t until the 2016 ballot that Massachusetts voters got another chance to protect the rights of animals on factory farms.
Path to the ballot
In 2015, a coalition of animal welfare organizations, veterinarians, family farmers, and experts in food safety submitted the text of Question 3 to Maura Healey, the Massachusetts Attorney General, who promptly cleared the way for the coalition to move forward with its efforts to get the measure in front of voters the following year. Supporters of the measure rallied to collect the signatures required to present the proposal to the state legislature. In order to appear on the ballot, the proposal would need at least 64,750 signatures of Massachusetts registered voters. Thanks to the efforts of over 1,000 volunteers, the coalition gathered more than 130,000 signatures in support of the statewide ballot initiative—more than double the minimum required. In fact, once Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin certified the campaign signatures, his office confirmed that the farm animal protection petition had collected the most certified signatures—95,817—out of all the ballot proposals up for consideration that year. Finally, in order to secure its place on the ballot, the proposal needed to collect an additional round of 10,792 signatures during the summer of 2016. It gathered 40,000.
This resounding support for the ballot measure wasn’t just limited to Massachusetts voters seeking to put a stop to animal cruelty. In their own way, animal agriculture heavyweights came around, too. In 2015, Politico reported, the nation’s largest egg industry trade group—United Egg Producers—indicated that it wouldn’t resist the proposed law, signaling the egg industry’s growing acceptance of cage-free standards. United Egg Producers took a conciliatory stance towards Question 3, acknowledging the significant losses it faced when it attempted to challenge California’s Proposition 2, an earlier cage-free ballot initiative known as the Prevention of Cruelty to Farm Animals Act. The trade group’s legal challenges against Prop 2 fared poorly in court, failing to overturn the law that over 8 million Californians—63% of the vote—had approved. “We had every coalition in a state that you would want on our side,” United Egg Producers President Chad Gregory told Politico in an interview. “We didn’t just spend $10 million and do a couple TV ads. We built an unbelievable campaign—and we got clobbered.”
This is why Question 3 passed in Massachusetts
In 2016, Question 3 passed in Massachusetts with more than 77% of the vote. 2,530,143 people voted in favor of the statewide ban on the cruel confinement of egg-laying hens, sows, and calves raised for veal.
As a commonsense proposal granting modest welfare considerations to animals on factory farms, Question 3 passed with flying colors. It was endorsed by a broad coalition of advocates, farmers, veterinarians, and food science experts, including the Humane Society of the United States, the Massachusetts Sierra Club, United Farm Workers, Compassion in World Farming, The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and the Humane Society Veterinary Medical Association, among others. The Center for Food Safety and the Center for Science in the Public Interest also backed the measure, on the grounds that “facilities using cages have higher rates of Salmonella than their cage-free counterparts.”
Opponents of the bill argued that the changes would force the price of eggs higher, but as The Boston Globe argued in its endorsement, “the initiative would translate into an additional cost of maybe $10 per Massachusetts resident per year—and probably less. Raising the cost of food essentials by any amount should never be done lightly, since it’s the most vulnerable who are hit hardest. But in this case, the premium seems like a price worth paying.” Question 3, the Globe maintained, “would dial up pressure on food producers nationally to treat confined animals with more decency.”
What are the regulations of Massachusetts Question 3?
Prior to the upgrades it received in 2021, ahead of its implementation in 2022, the law itself prohibited farmers 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 also kept businesses from selling whole eggs, cuts of pork, and cuts of veal in Massachusetts if the hens, sows, and calves that produced those products were confined in such a manner.
Question 3 and chickens
The original version of Question 3 granted egg-laying hens—meaning any female domesticated chicken, turkey, duck, goose, or guinea fowl kept for the purpose of producing eggs at a commercial scale—enough space to fully spread both wings without touching the side of the enclosure or other hens. Each hen also had to have at least 1.5 square feet of floor space.
Question 3 and pigs
According to the original language of the law, breeding sows also had to be able to turn in a complete circle without touching the side of an enclosure—something that’s not possible in gestation crates, which force animals to face in one static direction for the duration of their pregnancies.
Question 3 and cows
Under Question 3, calves raised for veal would also need to be able to turn in a complete circle without impediment, including a rope tether, which farmers often use to keep calves confined.
Upgrades to Massachusetts livestock laws
Prior to going into effect in 2022, Question 3 received crucial updates. Other state laws, like California’s Prop 12, go further than Massachusetts Question 3 in specifying the minimum space requirements for hens, sows, and calves. That’s why, in 2021, the Massachusetts General Court passed Senate Bill 2603 (SB 2603), also known as An Act Further Regulating Hen Welfare and Establishing Uniform Cage-Free Standards.
Officially signed into law on December 22, 2021, SB 2603 rules that egg-laying hens must have cage-free housing with areas for the birds to perch, nest, and dust bathe. And, while Question 3 offered protections for hens whose eggs are sold in the shell—also known as “whole eggs,” which shoppers purchase in cartons—the new law extends these protections to hens whose eggs are sold in liquid form, which often serve restaurants and university dining halls. The Humane Society of the United States estimates that this clause alone will save “an additional two million chickens annually from ever being confined in a cage.”
SB 2603 also granted a temporary extension to pork producers, delaying the date when Question 3 regulations would take effect to August 15, 2022. Unfortunately, following a new lawsuit brought by the pork industry, enforcement has been delayed yet again. A coalition (led by the National Pork Producers Council, with restaurant and hospitality trade groups) has sued the state of Massachusetts, seeking urgent injunctive relief—and, despite Question 3’s popular support, asking the court to find the law unconstitutional. Already given additional time to eliminate gestation crates from their facilities (beyond the originally proposed deadline of January 1, 2022), pork producers still are not required to give pigs enough space to stand up, lie down, turn around, or extend their limbs.
Ultimately, despite these enforcement challenges, Question 3—along with the new stipulations of SB 2603—still give animals significant protections that they didn’t have prior to the passage of these laws.
When does Question 3 take effect?
Question 3 was successfully passed in 2016, and its protections for egg-laying hens, breeding sows, and veal calves were scheduled to take effect in 2022, giving egg, pork, and veal producers more than five years to fully eliminate battery cages, gestation crates, and veal crates.
As of January 1, 2022, the provisions for egg-laying hens and veal calves are actively in effect. Due to the latest court order, Massachusetts will not enforce rules for pork producers until 30 days after the Supreme Court decision on Proposition 12, expected at the end of 2022 or early 2023.
Of course, the fact that portions of the law are in effect doesn’t mean all facilities will comply. Violations can result in fines up to $1,000 per sale, and beyond that, compassionate consumers can continue to apply pressure to meat producers to meet the requirements of the law.
What you can do
Laws like Question 3 and SB 2603 are creating tangible change for animals across the country. Ten years ago, almost all egg-laying hens in the US lived in battery cages. Now, more than a third of the eggs produced in the US are laid by cage-free hens. People are demanding better for animals—and these demands are making it into law. Other US states have outlawed the caging of hens raised in-state, and most have also banned the sale of eggs from caged hens raised out-of-state as well: Utah, Colorado, Michigan, Washington, Oregon, California, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Nevada. Colorado, Michigan, Oregon, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Arizona, Ohio, Maine, and Florida have laws protecting breeding sows from gestation crates. And Colorado, Michigan, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Arizona, Ohio, Maine, and Kentucky are keeping veal calves out of veal crates.
In no small part thanks to these powerful laws, over 100 corporations in the US are reporting on their progress towards eliminating battery cages from their supply chains. Over 80 have already completed the transition—including Chipotle, Nestle, Ben & Jerry’s, Sprouts, and Whole Foods.
Advocates are driving the transformation of our broken food system: passing crucial laws, calling out companies, and—step by step—ending the abuse of animals raised for food. Will you join us on this journey?
