![\"\"](\"https:\/\/kmi2.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/image-2-1024x510.png\")
BYNATASHA DALY<\/p>\n\n\n\n
PUBLISHED AUGUST 13, 2021<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u2022 11 MIN READ<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Stand up, lie down, turn around, and stretch their legs. Pregnant pigs should live in large enough spaces to do those things, Californians have declared.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
So have the people of Massachusetts. Whole Foods concurs, as do McDonald\u2019s, Walmart, and more than 50 other companies that sell pork.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
But the majority<\/a> of the country\u2019s six million breeding sows spend a significant portion of their four-month pregnancies\u2014if not all\u2014in gestation crates: seven-by-two-foot metal cages they can\u2019t turn or stretch in. By keeping pigs isolated in small spaces, pork producers can keep more pigs in a single building and prevent sows from potentially injuring each other, they say. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Nine states have banned the use of gestation crates. In 2018, California voters passed a ballot initiative that took it a step further. As of January 2022, California prohibits the sale of meat produced anywhere in the U.S. from pigs whose mothers were kept in gestation crates and from calves who have been confined in veal crates. The initiative\u2014nearly identical to one Massachusetts passed in 2016\u2014also bans the sale of eggs laid by caged hens. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Veal and egg producers are on track to comply, the AP reports<\/a>, but most pork producers are not. Only 4 percent of the country\u2019s 66,000 pork producers currently meet the new laws\u2019 minimum space requirements of 24 square feet.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Though the law was passed at the state level, it\u2019s having national consequences. It\u2019s been hailed by animal welfare advocates as a groundbreaking improvement\u2014and it\u2019s been attacked by much of the meat industry as an overreach that\u2019ll make meat more expensive for everyone. For example: An Iowa pig farm would have to overhaul its pig housing if it wants to sell pork in California, even if some of the pigs it raises still end up in other states. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Pork is a $23 billion industry in the United States. Trade groups have challenged the law in federal court, but so far, the courts have sided with California voters. With less than five months before the law goes into effect, opponents are running out of options.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Most pigs in the U.S. live in \u201cconcentrated animal feeding operations\u201d (CAFOs). Often referred to as \u201cfactory farms,\u201d these large-scale industrial facilities are designed to maximize production at minimal cost.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Gestation crates and farrowing crates\u2014for newborn piglets, who are kept separated from the mother, suckling through slats\u2014are standard. After three weeks, piglets are removed and sows are impregnated again. Sows can produce up to three litters per year<\/a>, according to the American Meat Science Association. The process is typically repeated until a sow is three or four years old, and then she is slaughtered for meat. While the federal Animal Welfare Act regulates the treatment of animals used in research and for exhibition at places like zoos, there are no federal laws that regulate treatment of animals farmed for food, says Delcianna Winders, director of Vermont Law School\u2019s Animal Law Program. Where regulations do exist, they\u2019ve been imposed at the state level, often following public outrage, such as bans on caging egg-laying hens, currently in place in nine states.<\/p>\n\n\n\n California\u2019s and Massachusetts\u2019 laws will be the strictest in the country. \u201cIt\u2019s really telling about how woefully inadequate our legal protections are,\u201d Winders says. \u201cSomething that gives [pregnant pigs and calves] enough space to turn around is the most celebrated protection for these animals.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Galina Hale<\/a>, a professor of economics at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and expert at sustainability nonprofit Food System Innovations, says the lack of federal regulations is \u201ca form of a subsidy to factory farming. They are allowed to do whatever they want to increase production per dollar of investment.\u201d The lack of regulations applies to all farms but, she argues, but it especially rewards large-scale farms that densely pack their facilities with pigs, putting smaller farms that give their pigs more space at an economic disadvantage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The NPPC and other meat industry trade groups have argued in court that California\u2019s law violates the U.S. Constitution\u2019s Commerce Clause by allowing one state to regulate businesses outside its borders. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCalifornia, which doesn\u2019t have any significant commercial hog production, is seeking to regulate how farmers across the country operate, imposing onerous regulations, inspection and permitting requirements, and highly prescriptive measures on livestock farmers,\u201d the NPPC says<\/a> on its website. <\/p>\n\n\n\n But so far, three federal courts have disagreed with that argument, ruling that Californians have the constitutional right to regulate products sold in their state. The Supreme Court declined to hear the case in June 2021. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The NPCC\u2019s Monroe argues that overhauling the industry to cater to specific states is unsustainable. \u201cHow does our national pork production system respond when another state decides to establish different pork production standards?\u201d he says.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Not all pork producers are pushing back. Hormel, a top pork producer, has said<\/a> that it will fully comply with the law. Perdue has come out in favor of it. Its pork divisions, Niman Ranch and Coleman Farms, make up less than one percent of the national pork industry, but none of their farms, which own 32,800 sows, use crates.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cThere\u2019s nothing humane about keeping a sow in a seven-foot-by-two-foot crate for the four-month gestation period,\u201d says Chris Oliviero, general manager at Niman Ranch, which comprises 740 family farms in Iowa. \u201cThere\u2019s a high cost to cheap food that we don\u2019t talk about very much, and Prop. 12 is one step in the right direction\u2014it\u2019s better for animals, farmers, and communities.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n On the other hand, higher welfare standards translate to higher production costs, and higher costs for supermarket shoppers. Niman Ranch pork costs more on the shelf, but the tradeoff is that its farmers go beyond the requirements set by California\u2019s Proposition 12, Oliviero says. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Sows live either outside on pasture or in groups in barns, with the freedom to move around. Niman farmers don\u2019t cut off pigs\u2019 tails (an industry-standard practice, typically done without painkillers, to prevent pigs from biting each others\u2019 tails). Niman also provides pigs with hay bedding (as opposed to industry-standard concrete or slatted floors), allowing them to engage in natural behaviors like digging and nesting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Opponents, including the NPPC, argue the regulations will decrease productivity and harm small farmers. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Austin Frerick, deputy director and agriculture specialist at the Thurman Arnold Project, a competition policy research group at Yale University, expects the opposite will be true. \u201cThe ones complaining are the industrial operations that pack hogs into metal sheds that never see the light of day or even a blade of grass,\u201d he says. \u201cThat\u2019s why I see this legislation as extremely pro-farmer, as it will enhance the market position of traditional hog farmers over corporate operations.\u201d (Since 1992<\/a> in Iowa, for example, the number of farms has decreased by 80 percent<\/a>, but the number of pigs has risen, as small farms have been replaced by industrial-scale CAFOs<\/a>.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite recent headlines proclaiming otherwise, bacon will not disappear from California in 2021. But it may get more expensive. \u201cThe cost of production has to go up,\u201d Hale says. \u201cThat\u2019s obvious.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n But Californians knew price increases were a possibility when they voted to pass this bill\u2014the opposition made that a central part of their argument against passage of the law<\/a> in 2018.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Just how much pork prices may increase is still unclear, and it will depend in part on how many farms move to comply with the regulations. If many choose not to, California\u2019s pork supply may drop and prices could rise more significantly. One study<\/a>, by a consulting group hired by opponents, estimates that if California\u2019s pork supply decreases by half, prices for pork may rise by 60 percent, for instance. But the California Department of Food and Agriculture estimates<\/a> that the price for pork and veal per Californian will go up by only $10 per year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing that\u2019s certain: Most pork suppliers won\u2019t have upgraded their facilities for pregnant hogs by January 2022, when the law goes into effect. \u201cIf there is not an extension on the timeline and\/or other changes, I currently expect notable reductions in the volume of some pork items available in [California] come January 2022,\u201d says Glynn Tonsor, an agricultural economist at Kansas State University.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Producers that choose to comply likely would renovate only a portion of their facilities and make sure that meat from that section of the farm is allocated to California markets, Tonsor and Hale say.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The industry has long talked about phasing out gestation crates, but it has delayed repeatedly, says Winders, from Vermont Law School. California\u2019s law may be the push that\u2019s needed, she says, \u201cbut I have to underscore that it\u2019s such a baby step.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Nonetheless, it\u2019s a step in the right direction, Oliviero says. \u201cMost change starts small and builds momentum over time.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/kmi2.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/image-3.png\")
PHOTOGRAPH BY STEPHEN BAY, ALAMY<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nMaximized for efficiency<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Jim Monroe, spokesperson for the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), a trade group that opposes California\u2019s law, says the conventional hog farming setup is \u201cinformed by veterinarians based on animal behavior and what\u2019s needed to protect pigs and keep food safe.\u201d Monroe contends that \u201cno one is more committed to excellent animal care than American hog farmers.\u201d
Josh Balk, vice president of farmed animal welfare at the Humane Society of the United States\u2014which drafted Proposition 12\u2014says crates cause physical and psychological distress. It\u2019s \u201cabsolute common sense that an animal should be able to turn around,\u201d Balk says, citing studies that have shown<\/a> that crated sows can suffer from weakened bones, overgrown hooves, urinary tract infections, and repeated bar biting\u2014behavior often indicating psychological distress. <\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/kmi2.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/image-4.png\")
PHOTOGRAPH BY JO-ANNE MCARTHUR, WE ANIMALS MEDIA<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe controversy<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Will bacon disappear?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
It\u2019ll cost \u201cbillions of dollars\u201d for U.S. hog farms to renovate their facilities, the NPPC\u2019s Monroe says. <\/p>\n\n\n\n