NEWSMEAT

Animal welfare and food safety advocates just won a big victory! Smithfield Foods, the world's largest pork producer and processer, has agreed to phase out the use of gestation crates by 2017.

Gestation crates are tiny, two-foot-by-seven-foot stalls that factory farms use to confine pregnant sows. Because pigs on factory farms are virtually always pregnant, they spend a huge portion of their lives crammed into these stalls. Most pigs held in these cruel, unsanitary cages don't even have enough room to turn around and are limited to two positions: standing or lying on their stomachs.

Gestation crates are currently banned or in the process of being banned in eight states and the European Union.

Smithfield originally promised to phase out gestation crates back in 2007, but by 2009, the company had gone back on its promise citing economic concerns. Even after the economy rebounded and Smithfield boasted record profits, the company failed to re-commit to its gestation crate promise. That prompted the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to start a petition here on Change.org.

Smithfield Foods, the world's largest pork producer, heard you, and it's making some progress in phasing out cruel, unsanitary gestation crates.

You see back in 2007, Smithfield announced a goal to phase out all of its gestation crates — tiny two-foot-by-seven-foot stalls that factory farms use to confine pregnant female pigs — by 2017.  In 2009, however, Smithfield changed its mind, and said it could no longer meet its own goals because of poor economic conditions. The company recently boasted record profits, yet it still hasn't come back to its initial plan to ditch all gestation crates.

That lack of commitment prompted the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) to start a campaign on Change.org urging the company to go back to its original goal. Dennis Treacy, Smithfield's Senior Vice President of Corporate Affairs and Chief Sustainability Officer, recently responded to HSUS's campaign. Here's what he had to say:

"While the recession that impacted pork producers nationwide has set us back somewhat in reaching our original goal of 2017, our commitment has never wavered, as evidenced by our progress  in converting 30 percent of our sows to group housing by the end of 2011 and our commitment to spend more than $300 million to achieve our stated goal." He encourages anyone interested to read more at www.smithfieldcommitment.com.

Gestation crates are some of the cruelest and most unsanitary devices found on factory farms. These enclosures — largely used by major pork producers like Smithfield Foods — keep breeding sows locked in cages so small they can't even turn around. Sows frequently develop sores and infections from staying in the same position for long periods of time, and the boredom causes the animals to engage in repetitive behaviors like bar biting and head swaying.

That's why activists and organizations are working towards shifting businesses away from gestation crates. One of their main targets is the fast food industry.

With cheap pork meals like McRibs, Egg McMuffins, and Junior Bacon Cheeseburgers popping up on fast food menus across the U.S., it's certainly an industry that's ripe for a change. As a result of pressure from food safety and animal welfare advocates, some restaurant chains have already made moves in the right direction:

• Burger King said in 2007 that it would gradually eliminate gestation crate pork from its supply chain.
• At least 10 percent of Wendy's pork products already come from suppliers that don't use gestation crates.
• And 10 years ago, McDonald's announced that moving towards gestation crate-free pork was "at the top of its agenda."

McDonald’s is the largest customer of the largest pork company in the world, Smithfield Foods. And lately, Smithfield has been proving itself to be one of the food industry's biggest lying liars.

Back in 2007, Smithfield said it would phase out the use of gestation crates by 2017, a decision that was lauded by McDonald's. Some producers use gestation crates to house pregnant sows, and the enclosures are so restrictive and unsanitary that pigs can't even move around without hurting themselves.

In McDonald’s 2008 Corporate Responsibility Report, the company notes that “McDonald’s has long supported suppliers that choose to move away from sow gestation crates and tethers.” It goes so far as to quote Smithfield’s CEO in saying "...when McDonald's and other customers told us they believe group housing to be more comfortable for animals, we listened."

Unfortunately, Smithfield seems to have forgotten what it welcomed with open ears just a few years ago. In 2009, Smithfield went back on its promise to phase out gestation crates by 2017, claiming economic difficulties. Though the company recently boasted record profits, it still hasn't re-committed to phase out gestation crates. Even after 12,000 activists on Change.org asked the company to tell us why it won't get back on track to phase out gestation crates, Smithfield remained frustratingly silent.

More than 6,500 people have signed an online petition asking the Derbyshire County Council to vote against a proposed factory pig farm in the village of Foston, Derbyshire. The campaign urges all U.K. residents to sign the petition on Change.org and register their opposition on the Derbyshire County Council’s Web site. More than 7,500 people have spoken out against the factory farm on the County Council’s Web site.

“Cheap pork is flooding U.K. supermarket shelves from mainland Europe where, according to Compassion in World Farming (CIWF), 90 percent of the farms are not obeying European Union animal welfare legislation,” said Tracy Worcester, director of the documentary Pig Business. “Instead of trying to compete with these cheap imports by building mega farms with a few small improvements in terms of animal welfare and green credentials, our government should be ensuring that our small-scale family farms receive payments that reflect their benefits to society.”

The petition on Change.org, the world’s fastest-growing platform for social change, was started by the makers of Pig Business, a documentary that explores the health, animal welfare and environmental impacts of industrial-scale pig farms. If approved, Midland Pig Producers’ farm would become one of the largest factory farms in all of the U.K., housing more than 25,000 pigs and sending more than 1,000 to slaughter every week.

This is a guest post from Wenonah Hauter, the Executive Director of Food & Water Watch. If you would like to join the non-profit's campaign for fair farm rules, sign the petition here.

President Obama made a promise back when he campaigned in farm states. He needs to keep it.

The President told farmers that his administration would help fix the rules that allow the meat industry to take advantage of the people who raise the animals Americans eat. But, under pressure from Big Meat, the Obama Administration has failed to implement the fair farm rules (also known as GIPSA rules, named for the branch of the USDA that would oversee the rules, the Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyard Administration).

Fair farm rules and GIPSA might sound wonky, but implementing them is crucial to leveling the playing field for farmers. As is often the case, the devil is in the details. If we want to move towards a more sustainable and regional food system, we need a fair market. We need to start fixing the nuts and bolts of what keeps farmers from being able to fairly market their products. And consolidation of the food industry is one of the major factors in why our food system is dysfunctional.

In a big win for environmentalists and sustainable foodies, Pfizer recently suspended sales of roxarsone, an arsenic-based feed additive traditionally used to control intestinal parasites in chickens. The move came after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released data showing that roxarsone increases inorganic arsenic levels in chicken livers. In other words, consumers who chow down on conventionally produced chicken oftentimes ingest small amounts of arsenic.

Roxarsone has been used for decades to control parasites and promote growth in poultry. Factory farm operations also favor the drug  because it “improves” the color of the meat, making chicken cuts look pinker. But according to Food Safety News, the organic arsenic present in roxarsone may be transforming into the more toxic inorganic form of arsenic (found in the livers of chickens treated with the drug).

It's great that Pfizer voluntarily pulled roxarsone from the market after the FDA's findings came out. What Pfizer doesn't want you to know, though, is that while the company is suspending roxarsone due to its arsenic issues, execs are continuing to market another arsenic-based poultry drug, nitarsone. Will consumers have to wait for an FDA study of nitarsone with similar negative results to get Pfizer to drop it?

With Mother's Day coming up, it seems an appropriate time to hear what moms have to say. With that in mind, the Pew Charitable Trusts just released a study that looked into how moms feel about antibiotics used in meat production. An overwhelming 80 percent responded that they are concerned about antibiotic use on factory farms. In fact, when the moms interviewed were presented with seven proposed regulations to control antibiotic use in livestock, 78 percent supported implementing all seven rules.

Factory meat farm operations use antibiotics not just when animals become ill, but also to promote extra growth and simply to guard against the filthy conditions inherently present in a factory farm system. These sub-therapeutic doses lead to resistant strains of bacteria that end up in our food system. An appalling 80% of  our antibiotics go to the livestock industry.

Surprisingly, according to the Pew study, this is not a partisan issue either. In fact Republicans—a group routinely in favor of deregulation—interviewed supported regulation even slightly more so than Democrats interviewed.

The head of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) research branch recently stated that hog farmers are going overboard with antibiotics, and consumers may be paying the ultimate price. Antibiotic-resistant bacteria, also known as "superbugs," are a growing threat to human health.  With 80 percent of antibiotics in the U.S. going to livestock, antibiotic-resistant bacteria showing up in supermarket meat, and drug-resistant bacteria literally crawling off factory farms, the finding that factory pig farmers are overusing drugs should come as no newsflash.

And here's another morsel of recent information: Last year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) shared guidelines with hog, cattle, and chicken producers, urging these farmers to stop using antibiotics in feed. This was not because there was a new law in the works to ensure more "judicious" antibiotic use — the FDA was merely offering voluntary suggestions. Shockingly, no one seems to be following the guidelines, but the USDA wants to do more research. The agency is asking for more money in the 2012 budget to go towards study on alternatives to antibiotic overuse in factory hog farms.

The National Pork Producers Counsel says this is all a bunch of hogwash, pardon the pun. The industry group fully supports all antibiotic use in raising hogs and denies that there is a link between human antibiotic resistance and the massive quantity of drugs used in factory hog farming.

"This is an issue that makes sense to ten out of ten people," Maryland's Del. Tom Hucker recently told the Baltimore Sun. Hucker was referring to legislation that would ban the state's poultry farmers from feeding their birds roxarsone, an arsenic-based feed additive that reportedly can cause human health problems and environmental damage. Apparently, Hucker was wrong about how much sense the bills make to Maryland's lawmakers.

The chairwomen of Maryland's House and Senate Environment Committees, Delegate Maggie McIntosh and Senator Joan Carter-Conway, are trying to delay the vote on the bills to ban roxarsone, SB 417 and HB 754. In order for this proposed legislation to stand a chance of becoming law, it must pass at least one chamber before March 28th. To get to the full floor, though, HB 754 and SB 417 must first pass the House and Senate Environment Committees. If McIntosh and Carter-Conway push the vote back beyond this week, it could be the death knell for the bills to ban arsenic.

Let's just say that the death of this bill could usher in a lot more death and destruction. Because trace amounts of arsenic from roxarsone linger in chickens' flesh, consumers are exposed to serious health risks just by eating poultry regularly.