Animal Poo and Prop 2

1. On Star Tribune's website, I read an article about an E. coli contamination of beef products in California. Although E. coli contamination is relatively rare - consider how much beef is consumed versus how much beef is contaminated - it is extremely widely reported. In this particular article, the meat was only distributed in California.
Recently in California, Prop 2 was passed, which banned raising farm animals in confined spaces. However, this allows the animals enough room turn themselves around and defecate in their food. E.coli and Salmonella are bacteria found in the intestines in mammals and in fecal matter. Will Prop 2 raise contamination rates?

2. Dear Editor,
I am writing in response to the article "California meat company expands recall of beef and veal due to E. coli fears." Firstly, I think that it is important to be aware of the dangers of food contamination. But why is beef contamination in California important to Minnesotans? Minnesota has a large cattle farming industry, and we do not rely on California for beef. Relative to the amount of beef eaten, rates of contamination are minuscule. Is over-reporting of contamination leading to panic?
Secondly, it may be important that the site of contamination was California. In 2008, California passed Prop 2, which banned raising farm animals in confined spaces. While this appears to be a great step for animal rights, it can damage food production. With the new law, animals must be able to stretch their legs and be able to turn around. With this newfound freedom, the animals are also able to defecate in their food, whereas the former system kept food and fecal matter separate. Contaminants like E. coli and Salmonella are found in the digestive tracts of mammals and in fecal matter. Will rates of food contamination drastically increase before California seriously reconsiders Prop 2? I hope not.
Sincerely,
Alyssa Brown