« Go Back   « Go Back
Summary of Question 3
This proposed law 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. The proposed law would also prohibit any business owner or operator in Massachusetts from selling whole eggs intended for human consumption or any uncooked cut of veal or pork if the business owner or operator knows or should know that the hen, breeding pig, or veal calf that produced these products was confined in a manner prohibited by the proposed law. The proposed law would exempt sales of food products that combine veal or pork with other products, including soups, sandwiches, pizzas, hotdogs, or similar processed or prepared food items. The proposed law’s confinement prohibitions would not apply during transportation; state and county fair exhibitions; 4-H programs; slaughter in compliance with applicable laws and regulations; medical research; veterinary exams, testing, treatment and operation if performed under the direct supervision of a licensed veterinarian; five days prior to a pregnant pig’s expected date of giving birth; any day that pig is nursing piglets; and for temporary periods for animal husbandry purposes not to exceed six hours in any twenty-four hour period. The proposed law would create a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation and would give the Attorney General the exclusive authority to enforce the law, and to issue regulations to implement it. As a defense to enforcement proceedings, the proposed law would allow a business owner or operator to rely in good faith upon a written certification or guarantee of compliance by a supplier. The proposed law would be in addition to any other animal welfare laws and would not prohibit stricter local laws. The proposed law would take effect on January 1, 2022. The proposed law states that if any of its parts were declared invalid, the other parts would stay in effect.

2016 - Franklin County - Question 3Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives on or before May 3, 2016?

View as: # | %

Franklin County Results
« Return to Aggregate Results

 
City/Town Ward Pct Blanks Total Votes Cast
Totals
22,766
15,925
840 39,531
Ashfield
 
701
420
34
1,155
Bernardston
 
655
559
30
1,244
Buckland
 
615
437
15
1,067
Charlemont
 
415
304
16
735
Colrain
 
449
468
17
934
Conway
 
759
460
16
1,235
Deerfield
 
1,849
1,194
52
3,095
Erving
 
377
442
15
834
Gill
 
501
442
10
953
Greenfield More »
 
5,192
3,301
204
8,697
Hawley
 
106
96
4
206
Heath
 
274
176
9
459
Leverett
 
832
429
35
1,296
Leyden
 
261
228
13
502
Monroe
 
44
15
0
59
Montague More »
 
2,419
1,969
103
4,491
New Salem
 
307
296
11
614
Northfield
 
946
787
24
1,757
Orange More »
 
1,941
1,405
89
3,435
Rowe
 
140
90
11
241
Shelburne
 
663
499
35
1,197
Shutesbury
 
870
376
36
1,282
Sunderland
 
1,322
595
31
1,948
Warwick
 
258
211
5
474
Wendell
 
238
340
13
591
Whately
 
632
386
12
1,030
County Totals
22,766
15,925
840 39,531