The Office of the Attorney General of the state of Massachusetts is apparently compiling regulations in terms of the 2016 ballot loosely based on California Propositions #2 and #12.  Rules should have been issued in 2019 but were delayed by COVID restrictions.

The sticking point is a requirement of 1.5 square feet of house floor area per hen.  By adopting a non-standard requirement, the Office of the Attorneys General has created a situation in which eggs will be an expensive source of food in the state. Since there are no producers of appreciable size in Massachusetts the state must introduce eggs from Connecticut, Maine, New York and Pennsylvania.

The high area requirement dictates more expensive housing that may not necessarily provide a higher standard of welfare.  Regulations covering six pages issued by the Office of the Attorney General reflect the 1.5 square foot as incorporated in the 2016 ballot question.  As with all ballots, voters are unaware of the financial consequences of their decisions.  It is understandable that as worded, the ballot was carried with a 7 to 3 majority. This is about the same response that would be obtained if seven year olds were asked they were in favor of ice cream.

It would be appropriate for legislators to adjust the ballot to conform to other states that have adopted the UEP standard.  In any event, establishing a standard floor area is irrelevant with aviary systems where birds are able to use the cube volume of a structure and are not confined to a single level.  Unless the Legislature becomes involved, eggs will become an endangered and expensive commodity to the determe