US pork firms divided on Congress bill to reverse California animal welfare law
US pork firms divided on Congress bill to reverse California animal welfare law
Pork Producers Lukewarm About Proposed Legislation Overturning California Law
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/M4EUTS7GZJLZVNNDHY6BXKWJ2I.jpg)
In a surprising turn of events, some major U.S. pork producers are expressing lukewarm support for proposed legislation that aims to overturn a California law requiring more living space for certain farm animals. The National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), the leading trade group for the pork industry, has given their backing to the Ending Agricultural Trade Suppression (EATS) Act, introduced by U.S. Senator Roger Marshall and Representative Ashley Hinson. This bill seeks to restrict the ability of states to regulate agricultural products sold within their borders.
At the center of the debate is California’s Proposition 12, a law enacted by ballot initiative in 2018, which prohibits the sale of pork, veal, and eggs from animals that do not meet certain housing standards. While producers such as Hormel, Smithfield, and Tyson have publicly stated their intention to comply with Proposition 12, Clemens Food Group, the fifth-largest pork processor in the country, has come out against the EATS Act. This divide within the industry reflects differing views on the potential impact of the legislation on animal welfare, farming costs, and further state restrictions.
The NPPC has been fighting Proposition 12 since its inception, even taking the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, where they ultimately lost. In their efforts to oppose the law, the lobby group spent a considerable sum of $780,000 between April and June on lobbying, including campaigning against the EATS Act.
Animal welfare groups argue that Proposition 12 is necessary to address the issue of animals being confined to small cages. They claim that some sows and hens have such limited space that they are unable to turn around. Supporters of the law believe it is crucial to improving animal welfare standards.
CEO of the NPPC, Bryan Humphreys, challenges this notion, stating that the law would not enhance animal welfare but instead increase costs for hog producers and pave the way for more “ideological” state restrictions. However, while the NPPC is against the EATS Act, Chris Carey, COO of Clemens, affirms that his company has invested resources and time to comply with Proposition 12.
- Fitch informed Treasury about the Jan. 6 insurrection before US dow...
- Brazil central bank cuts rates aggressively
- Advantage Tesla in India as Chinese automakers face pressure
Even though the EATS Act might have divided the industry, it has already garnered support from companies within the pork and egg sector. Executives from Smithfield Foods and Clemens have remarked that they are expanding their production to meet the standards set by Proposition 12. According to Brian Moscogiuri, a global trade strategist at egg supplier Eggs Unlimited, approximately one-third of the egg industry is already in compliance.
If the EATS Act is passed, it could potentially negatively impact food companies, as they might lose the ability to differentiate their products and market them at higher prices. Galina Hale, an economics professor at the University of California-Santa Cruz, warns of these implications. A report by Harvard Law School’s Animal Law & Policy Program further suggests that the broad language of the bill could nullify over a thousand state and local public health and safety regulations.
According to Chris Green, the executive director of the program, the potential repercussions of the EATS Act are extensive and likely to face significant challenges from various sides. The bill’s complexity and potential controversy make it a contentious piece of legislation.
PASTURED PIGS
Should Proposition 12 remain in place, hog farming in the future could resemble operations like Randy Hutton Jr.’s farm in Chestertown, Maryland. Hutton Jr. raises hogs for Niman Ranch, a subsidiary of Perdue Farms known for its commitment to high animal welfare standards. His pregnant sows enjoy the freedom of a fenced pasture, rather than being confined to gestation crates commonly found in industrial hog farming.
Niman Ranch opposes the EATS Act, with all of its 750 ranchers already in compliance with Proposition 12. The shift towards pasture-based farming was economically driven for Hutton Jr., as it proved to be a more affordable alternative to constructing costly confinement barns, which can exceed $700,000.
The divide among pork producers regarding the EATS Act raises important questions about the future of animal welfare standards and the regulation of agricultural products. As the industry grapples with these competing interests and potential legislative changes, the welfare of farm animals remains a focal point in the ongoing discussion.
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/WZPZHOJURBOE5NGVAQ5LZS4GRQ.jpg)
