September, 27 2010, 09:27am EDT
Scrambled Eggs: Report Spotlights "Systemic" Abuses in Organic Egg Production
Family Farmers Face Unfair Competition from "Organic" Factory Farms
CORNUCOPIA, Wis.
An independent report has been released that focuses on widespread abuses in organic egg production, primarily by large industrial agribusinesses. The study profiles the exemplary management practices employed by many family-scale organic farmers engaged in egg production, while spotlighting abuses at so-called factory farms, some confining hundreds of thousands of chickens in industrial facilities, and representing these eggs to consumers as "organic."
The report will be formally presented to the U.S. Department of Agriculture at the October meeting of the National Organic Standards Board in Madison, Wisconsin.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group, developed the report, Scrambled Eggs: Separating Factory Farm Egg Production from Authentic Organic Agriculture, following nearly two years of research into organic egg production. The report also contains a scorecard rating various egg brands on how their eggs are produced in accordance with federal organic standards and consumer expectations.
"After visiting over 15% of the certified egg farms in the United States, and surveying all name-brand and private-label industry marketers, it's obvious that a high percentage of the eggs on the market should be labeled 'produced with organic feed' rather than bearing the USDA-certified organic logo," said Mark A. Kastel, The Cornucopia Institute's codirector and senior farm policy analyst.
According to the United Egg Producers (UEP), the industry lobby group, 80 percent of all organic eggs are produced by just a handful of its largest members. Most of these operations own hundreds of thousands, or even millions of birds, and have diversified into "specialty eggs," which include organic. At least one UEP member, Hillandale Farms, has been implicated in the recent nationwide salmonella outbreak affecting conventional eggs.
Cornucopia's report focuses not on the size of some of these mammoth agribusinesses but rather on their organic livestock management practices. It says that most of these giant henhouses, some holding 85,000 birds or more, provide no legitimate access to the outdoors, as required in the federal organic regulations.
The new report comes at a critical juncture for the organic poultry industry. The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), the expert citizen advisory panel set up by Congress to advise the USDA on organic policy, has been debating a set of proposed new regulations for poultry and other livestock that would establish housing-density standards and a clearer understanding of what the requirement for outdoor access truly means. The industry's largest operators, along with their lobbyists, have been loudly voicing their opposition to requirements for outdoor space.
"Many of these operators are gaming the system by providing minute enclosed porches, with roofs and concrete or wood flooring, and calling these structures 'the outdoors,'" stated Charlotte Vallaeys, a farm policy analyst with Cornucopia and lead author of the report. "Many of the porches represent just 3 to 5 percent of the square footage of the main building housing the birds. That means 95 percent or more of the birds have absolutely no access whatsoever."
"If one animal has the legal right to be outdoors, then all animals have the same right, whether they choose to take turns or if they all choose to be outside at the same time," said Jim Riddle, organic outreach coordinator with the University of Minnesota and former chairman of the NOSB.
At previous meetings of the NOSB, United Egg Producers represented industrial-scale producers and publicly opposed proposals to strengthen regulations requiring outdoor access.
"We are strongly opposed to any requirement for hens to have access to the soil," said Kurt Kreher of Kreher's Sunrise Farms in Clarence, N.Y. And Bart Slaugh, director of quality assurance at Eggland's Best, a marketer of both conventional and organic eggs based in Jeffersonville, Pa., noted that, "The push for continually expanding outdoor access ... needs to stop."
Family-scale organic egg farmers, and their allies, intend to challenge corporate agribusiness lobbyists and make their voices heard at the October 25 meeting of the NOSB.
In 2004, The Cornucopia Institute launched a similar campaign to rein in what it called "scofflaws" operating industrial-scale organic dairy farms milking as many as 10,000 cows in confinement/feedlot settings.
A series of legal complaints filed by Cornucopia resulted in the decertification of or sanctions to some factory dairies, and after years of organizing, the organic community was able to persuade the USDA to incorporate strict benchmarks into the standards requiring organic ruminants (cows, sheep and goats) to obtain a significant amount of their feed intake from grazing on pasture. A phase-in of the new regulations ends in June 2011.
"From the beginning our position was that the original organic regulatory language actually means something," said Kastel. "Just because it didn't prescribe exactly how to comply with the requirement for 'access to the outdoors for all organic livestock' or 'access to pasture for ruminants' doesn't mean farm operators could ignore the requirement."
"As in organic dairying, we discovered similar flagrant violations of the law in the organic egg business," lamented Kastel. "Some of the largest operators even have a note from their veterinarian, or some state official, saying 'we recommend that you not let your birds outside to protect their health.' And some accommodating, corporate-friendly organic certifiers have signed-off on this," Kastel said.
Cornucopia has again filed legal complaints against several poultry companies that either offer their birds no access to the outdoors or "faux" outdoor access--very small enclosed porches.
After visiting scores of egg producers in nine states, the authors of the Cornucopia report also conclude that the vast majority of family-scale producers are complying with the organic regulations and meeting consumer expectations. "This is the good news in this report," explained Kastel. "Now the USDA needs to step up and protect ethical organic farmers from unfair and illegal competition."
"An important subset of organic farmers are even going far beyond the minimum requirements in the organic standards: not just providing access to the outdoors but rotating birds on high-quality pasture," affirmed Vallaeys.
The report profiles some of these producers who have mobile chicken coops, like Alexandre Ecodairy Farms in Northern California, with 2,800 birds in three movable henhouses. Alexandre's eggs are available at Whole Foods stores in Northern California and the North Coast Co-op, in Eureka-Arcata, California.
"When consumers buy organic eggs, I think they expect that the hens were out on pasture, enjoying fresh air, running around, foraging in the pasture," said Stephanie Alexandre of Alexandre Ecodairy Farms.
"In addition to the pastured poultry producers with mobile coops, most organic family-scale producers have fixed henhouses holding 1,000-10,000 birds," stated Vallaeys, who is an expert on farm policy and animal welfare issues, with advanced degrees from Harvard and Tufts.
The best producers with permanent housing profiled in Scrambled Eggs have plenty of pasture available surrounding their chicken houses, multiple popholes (doors) of adequate size and maintain the birds by rotating them into separate paddocks, allowing a rest period for the pasture to recover.
Laying hens on pasture-based farms tend to be under less stress--based on their greater opportunity to exercise and ability to engage in instinctive foraging behaviors that cuts down on aggression toward their flock mates-- and frequently live closer to three years instead of the one year that is common on industrial-scale farms.
"Our hens are healthy, live longer, and produce better-tasting and more nutritious eggs. How can you go wrong with pasturing?" said Tim Koegel of Windy Ridge Natural Farms, an organic producer in Alfred, New York.
Organic customers are also becoming increasingly aware of a growing body of scientific literature confirming the nutritional superiority of eggs when the birds have an opportunity to eat fresh forage, seeds, worms and insects.
"Our job, and the basis of this research and report, is protecting the livelihoods of family-scale organic farmers who are being placed at a distinct competitive disadvantage by corporations that are more than willing to ignore the rules and cut corners in pursuit of profit," added the Cornucopia's Kastel.
One of these producers is Ivan Martin of Natural Acres in Millersburg, Pennsylvania, whose pastured poultry operation went out of business last year. "Consumers saw my eggs next to other so-called organic eggs bearing the exact same USDA Organic label, and probably thought they were equivalent in terms of outdoor access and nutrition. We could not compete with those [factory farm] eggs," said Martin, who hopes to re-launch his organic poultry business.
Scrambled Eggs and the organic egg brand scorecard can be viewed here.
MORE:
"The commercial size egg industry--both conventional and organic--has great concerns with birds having outdoor access," wrote The United Egg Producers in testimony before the National Organic Standards Board."
Riddle, a former NOSB chairman, illustrating the illegality of the small porches as a substitute for true outdoor access, added, "The outdoor access space needs to be sufficient in size and designed to accommodate all animals being outdoors at once."
"Just as with our dairy brand scorecard, our goal is to empower consumers and wholesale buyers with information to make good, discerning purchasing decisions--rewarding the heroes and sending a strong message to the bad actors," Kastel stated.
"These giant 'factory farms,' or Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), generally produce eggs from caged birds, but they have diversified, depending on which way the marketing winds blow, to cage-free, vegetarian, omega-3 and the organic label," Kastel added.
"Whether it's laying hens for eggs, hogs for meat, or cows for dairy, organic customers expect livestock to be treated with respect and in compliance with the standards," added Kastel. "The good news in this report is that the vast majority of organic farmers meet these high expectations. Now the USDA needs to step up to protect them from unfair competition. Congress gave the USDA the authority to protect these farmers from unscrupulous competitors. It needs to wield that power!"
Organic farmers, and their urban allies, can obtain full information (including talking points) regarding attending the upcoming NOSB meeting or submitting written comments by visiting the action alert section at: https://www.cornucopia.org/category/action-alerts/. The USDA's National Organic Program website is: www.ams.usda.gov/nop.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
LATEST NEWS
Climate Movement Cheers Michigan AG's Plans to Sue Big Oil
"Pursuing this litigation will allow us to recoup our costs and hold those responsible for jeopardizing Michigan's economic future and way of life accountable," said the state attorney general
May 09, 2024
Advocates of holding fossil fuel giants accountable for their significant contributions to the climate emergency welcomed Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's Thursday announcement that she intends to sue the polluting industry.
"Big Oil knew decades ago that their products would cause catastrophic climate change, but instead of doing the right thing they lied about it," declared Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity. "The people of Michigan deserve their day in court to make these companies pay for the massive harm they knowingly caused."
Dozens of municipalities and attorneys general for the District of Columbia and eight states—California, Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and Vermont—have already filed climate liability suits against Big Oil in recent years.
"Our 'Pure Michigan' identity is under threat from the effects of climate change," said Nessel, whose state was praised last year for passing clean energy legislation. "Warmer temperatures are shrinking ski seasons in the UP and disrupting the wonderful blooms of Holland's Tulip Time Festival. Severe weather events are on the rise."
"These impacts threaten not only our way of life but also our economy and pose long-term risks to Michigan's thriving agribusiness," she continued. "The fossil fuel industry, despite knowing about these consequences, prioritized profits over people and the environment. Pursuing this litigation will allow us to recoup our costs and hold those responsible for jeopardizing Michigan's economic future and way of life accountable."
The Democratic attorney general's office explained that she is "seeking proposals from attorneys and law firms to serve as special assistant attorneys general to pursue litigation related to the climate change impacts caused by the fossil fuel industry on behalf of the state of Michigan."
The Detroit Newsnoted that "Nessel took a similar tact in suing drugmakers for the opioid crisis, farming out much of the work to outside law firms in Michigan, Texas, and Florida."
According to the newspaper:
Nessel's office is working with other state departments to assess the costs associated with climate change, such as the cost of expanding storm water systems to handle flooding caused by stronger storms, responding to natural disasters, or supporting northern Michigan tourism economies dealing with dwindling ice and snow.
"This is going to be a massive discovery effort to find out exactly what our Michigan damages are now already and what can we expect to see in the future as a result of climate change," she said.
"I don't know that there's a bigger issue facing the state of Michigan than climate change," Nessel told the outlet. "We are talking about billions and billions of dollars in damages and we're already starting to see that on a day-to-day basis. We know this is only going to get worse."
The youth-led Sunrise Movement applauded Nessel's plans and asserted that U.S. President Joe Biden—who is seeking reelection in November—and the Department of Justice "must follow suit."
The group's call echoed similar demands that emerged last week in response to the U.S. Senate Budget Committee's hearing about a three-year investigation into "Big Oil's campaign of deception and distraction."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Compare Biden's Proposed Asylum Rule to 'Failed Trump-Era Policies'
"The Biden administration and Congress must not erect any more unjust barriers to asylum that will sow further disorder and result in irreparable harm," said one migrant rights advocate.
May 09, 2024
Immigrant rights advocates on Thursday slammed the Biden administration's proposal to fast-track the rejection of certain migrants seeking asylum in the United States.
On Thursday the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) proposed a rule that would empower immigration officials to disqualify certain asylum-seekers during their initial eligibility screening—called the credible fear interview (CFI)—using existing national security and terrorism-related criteria, or bars.
DHS said the rule would apply to noncitizens who have "engaged in certain criminal activity, persecuted others, or have been involved in terrorist activities."
"I urge President Biden to embrace our values as a nation of immigrants and use this opportunity to instead provide relief for the long-term immigrants of this nation."
Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas called the proposed rule "yet another step in our ongoing efforts to ensure the safety of the American public by more quickly identifying and removing those individuals who present a security risk and have no legal basis to remain here."
However, Greg Chen, senior director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, argued that while "bars are an important feature of our immigration laws to ensure that dangerous individuals are not allowed into the country," they must be "accurately applied where warranted."
"This change could make the process faster by excluding people who would not be entitled to stay," he noted. "However, due process will likely be eroded by accelerating what is a highly complex legal analysis needed for these bars and conducting them at the preliminary CFI screening."
As Chen explained:
At that early stage, few asylum seekers will have the opportunity to seek legal counsel or time to understand the consequences of a bar being applied. Under the current process, they have more time to seek legal advice, to prepare their case, and to appeal it or seek an exemption. Ultimately to establish a fair and orderly process at the border, Congress needs to provide the Department of Homeland Security with the resources to meet its mission and also ensure the truly vulnerable are not summarily denied protection without due process.
Democratic lawmakers—some of whom held a press conference Wednesday on protecting undocumented immigrants in the U.S.—also criticized the proposal.
"As the Biden administration considers executive actions on immigration, we must not return to failed Trump-era policies aimed at banning asylum and moving us backwards," said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), referring to former Republican President Donald Trump, the presumptive 2024 GOP nominee to face President Joe Biden in November.
"I urge President Biden to embrace our values as a nation of immigrants and use this opportunity to instead provide relief for the long-term immigrants of this nation," he added.
One year ago, critics accused Biden of "finishing Trump's job" by implementing a crackdown on asylum-seekers upon the expiration of Title 42—a provision first invoked during Trump administration at the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic and continued by Biden to expel more than 1 million migrants under the pretext of public safety.
Earlier this week, the advocacy group Human Rights First released a report detailing the harms of the policy on its anniversary. The group held a press conference to unveil the report and warn of the dangers of further anti-migrant policies.
"The interviews with hundreds of asylum-seekers make clear that the asylum ban and related restrictions strands in danger children and adults seeking asylum, punishes people for seeking protection, leads to the return of refugees to persecution, spurs irregular crossings, and denies equal access to asylum to people facing the most dire risks," Human Rights First director of research and analysis of refugee protection Christina Asencio said during the press conference.
"The Biden administration and Congress must not erect any more unjust barriers to asylum that will sow further disorder and result in irreparable harm," Asencio added.
On Wednesday, three advocacy groups—Al Otro Lado, the Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center, and the Texas Civil Rights Project—sued the federal government on behalf of noncitizens with disabilities seeking more information regarding CBP One, the problem-plagued Customs and Border Protection app migrants must use to schedule asylum interviews at U.S. ports of entry.
"We have and continue to see migrants with disabilities facing unlawful discrimination and unequal access to the asylum process due to the inaccessibility of the app," said Laura Murchie, an attorney with the Civil Rights and Education Enforcement Center involved in the case.
"CBP needs to release these documents so we can advocate for and ensure compliance with the law so asylum-seekers with disabilities do not continue to be harmed by CBP's disregard for rights that are guaranteed by federal disability law," she added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Netanyahu Says Israel 'Will Stand Alone' as Biden Threatens to Withhold Arms
"If we have to, we will fight with our nails," the Israeli prime minister said in response to the American leader's warning against a major Rafah invasion.
May 09, 2024
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday responded to U.S. President Joe Biden's threat to withhold shipments of arms used by the Israel Defense Forces to kill thousands of Palestinian civilians by declaring that his far-right government would continue its assault on Gaza with or without American help.
"If we are forced to stand alone, we will stand alone," Netanyahu said in a video ahead of next week's anniversary of Israel's establishment in 1948, largely via the ethnic cleansing of Palestine's Arabs. "I have already said that if we have to, we will fight with our nails."
Echoing Netanyahu, Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Daniel Hagari said the IDF already has the "necessary weapons" to wage war, "including in Rafah," where over 1 million people forcibly displaced from other parts of Gaza are sheltering alongside around 280,000 local residents, all of them bracing for a full-scale Israeli invasion.
The prime minister's remarks came a day after Biden threatened to withhold bombs and artillery shells from Israel if it launches a major invasion of Rafah—even as critics noted that Israeli forces have already attacked and entered the city. Some accused Biden of walking back a previous "red line" warning against any assault on Rafah.
Common Dreamsreported Tuesday that Biden is delaying shipments of two types of bombs to Israel in order to send a message that the president's tolerance for what he called Israel's "indiscriminate bombing" of Gazan civilians is waning.
However, observers noted that Biden recently signed off on $14.3 billion in emergency armed assistance for Israel atop the nearly $4 billion the key ally already receives from Washington each year. The Biden administration has quietly approved more than 100 arms sales to Israel since October 7, while pushing for billions of dollars worth of additional deals, including advanced fighter jets.
Biden has also repeatedly bypassed Congress to fast-track weapons transfers to Israel as it wages what the International Court of Justice in January called a "plausibly" genocidal war that's killed, injured, or left missing more than 124,000 Palestinians—mostly women and children—since October 7.
The U.S. administration also provides diplomatic cover for Israel's policies and practices in the form of United Nations Security Council vetoes.
Despite all this support—which comes as most election-year voters supporting Biden's Democratic Party believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza—Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir on Thursday tweeted, "Hamas ❤️ Biden."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular