Limitations on the Confinement of Food Animals in the United States
- 734 Downloads
Citizen petitions and legislative bills in seven states in the US have established space and movement limitations for selected species of farm animals. These actions show Americans becoming concerned about the humane treatment of confined farm animals, and willing to use governmental intervention to preclude existing confinement practices. The individual state provisions vary, including the coverage of species. All seven states deal with sow-gestation crates, five states address veal calf crates, and two states’ provisions also apply to battery cages used for egg-laying hens. The actions show citizen and legislative opposition to current animal production practices, and suggest a movement to provide better treatment for farm animals. Accompanying the actions are challenges for animal production industries in remaining competitive while meeting social expectations on the ethical treatment of food animals. While the actions are only a small step in addressing welfare issues, they may be the beginning of a significant movement to do more to address human and animal welfare issues.
KeywordsAnimal welfare Battery cages Food animal confinement Gestation crates Humane treatment of animals Space and movement limitations
I would like to thank the several anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper. The research presented here is based on work supported by the Cooperative State Research Education and Extension Service (CSREES), U.S. Department of Agriculture Project No. GEO00526.
- Animal Health and Welfare Panel. (2005). The welfare aspects of various systems of keeping laying hens. The European Food Safety Authority Journal, 197, 1–23 plus annex. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/cs/BlobServer/Scientific_Opinion/lh_opinion1.pdf?ssbinary=true.
- Arizona Revised Statutes. (2009). Sections 13-802, 13-2910.07, 13-2910.08.Google Scholar
- Barnett, J. L. (2007). Effects of confinement and research needs to underpin welfare standards. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2, 213–218.Google Scholar
- Bell, D. (2005). A review of recent publications on animal welfare issues for table egg laying hens. United Egg producers annual meeting, Nov, http://animalscience.ucdavis.edu/Avian/WelfareIssueslayingHens.pdf.
- California Health and Safety Code. (2009). Sections 25990-25994.Google Scholar
- Cargill. (2009). Cargill achieves eight critical animal welfare assurance goals. Minneapolis, Minnesota. http://www.cargill.com/news-center/news-releases/2009/NA3011043.jsp.
- Colorado Revised Statutes. (2009). Sections 35-50.5-101, 35-50.5-102, 35-50.5-103.Google Scholar
- Cupp, R. L., Jr. (2009). Moving beyond animal rights: A legal/contractualist critique. San Diego Law Review, 48, 27–84.Google Scholar
- Engelsman, S. J. (2005). ‘World leader’—At what price? A look at lagging American animal protection laws. Pace Environmental Law Review, 22, 329–369.Google Scholar
- European Commission. (2006). The community action plan on the protection and welfare of animals 2006–2010. Brussels, Belgium. http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/welfare/actionplan/actionplan_en.htm.
- Florida Constitution. (2009). Article X, section 21.Google Scholar
- Francione, G. L. (1996). Animal rights and animal welfare. Rutgers Law Review, 48, 397–469.Google Scholar
- Francione, G. L. (2000). Introduction to animal rights: Your child or the dog?. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
- Francione, G. L. (2006). Equal consideration and the interest of nonhuman animals in continued existence: A response to professor Sunstein. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 2006, 231–252.Google Scholar
- Francione, G. L. (2007). Reflections on animals, property, and the law and rain without thunder. Law and Comtemporary Problems, 70, 9–57.Google Scholar
- Garner, R. (2006). Animal welfare: A political defense. Journal of Animal Law and Ethics, 1, 161–174.Google Scholar
- Haynes, R. P. (2008). Animal welfare: Competing conceptions and their ethical implications. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Humane Society of the United States. (2007). Strauss Veal and Marcho farms eliminating confinement by crate. Factory Farming Campaign, Feb 22. Washington, DC. http://www.hsus.org/farm/news/ournews/strauss_and_marcho_veal_crates.html.
- Jones, D., & McGreevy, J. E. (2007). How much space does an elephant need? The impact of confinement on animal welfare. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2, 185–187.Google Scholar
- Kaufman, M. (2007). Largest pork processor to phase out crates: Va.-based Smithfield to end practice of keeping pregnant pigs in small cages. Washington Post (January 26, sec. A06).Google Scholar
- Lexmon, Å. (2007). Animal welfare legislation in Sweden. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200702/146280080.pdf.
- Maine Revised Statutes Annotated. (2009). Title 7, section 4020; title 17, section 1039.Google Scholar
- Matheny, G., & Leahy, C. (2007). Farm-animal welfare, legislation, and trade. Law and Contemporary Problems, 70, 325–358.Google Scholar
- McDonald’s Corporation. (2008). McDonald’s 2008 corporate responsibility report. Oak Brook, Illinois. http://www.crmcdonalds.com/publish/csr/home/report/sustainable_supply_chain/product_survey/antibiotics_and_animal_cloning.html.
- Mellor, D. J., Patterson-Kane, E., & Staffors, K. J. (2008). The sciences of animal welfare. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
- Michigan Comparative Laws Annotated. (2009). Section 287.746.Google Scholar
- Natural Resources Defense Council versus Reilly, modified in Natural Resources Defense Council versus Whitman. (1992). Federal district court of the District of Columbia, case number 89-2980.Google Scholar
- Nicol, C. (2007). Space, time, and unassuming animals. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 2, 188–192.Google Scholar
- Norwood, F. B. (2009). Lessons abound on animal welfare issue. American Farm Bureau Federation, Washington, DC, Nov 26. http://www.fb.org/index.php?fuseaction=newsroom.focusfocus&year=2007&file=fo1126.html.
- Norwood, B., Lusk, J., & Prickett, R. (2007). Survey looks into what consumers think about various farm animal welfare issues. Feedstuffs (42), Oct 8. http://www.feedstuffsfoodlink.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?sid=&nm=&type=news&mod=News&mid=9A02E3B96F2A415ABC72CB5F516B4C10&tier=3&nid=24B0C3FDC332453FB2466A1A15A23FD6.
- Oregon Revised Statutes. (2009). Sections 153.018, 600.150.Google Scholar
- Oregon Senate Bill No. 694. (2007). 74th Oregon legislative assembly.Google Scholar
- Perz, J. (2007). Adulterating animal rights: Joan Dunayer’s “advancing animal rights” refuted. Journal of Animal Law and Ethics, 2, 123–171.Google Scholar
- Polet, Y. (2005). Abolition of battery cages to cost €354 million to EU-25 egg producers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service. http://www.fas.usda.gov/gainfiles/200504/146119304.pdf.
- Porcher, J. (2006). Well-being and suffering in livestock farming: Living conditions at work for people and animals. Sociologie du travail, 48, e56–e70 (English translation).Google Scholar
- Promar International. (2008). Economic impact on California of the treatment of farm animals act. Virginia: Alexandria.Google Scholar
- Regan, T. (2004). The case for animal rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
- Schmit, J. (2008). California vote could change U.S. agribusiness. USA Today 4b (November 6, sec. Money).Google Scholar
- Sierra Club Mackinac Chapter versus Department of Environmental Quality. (2008). Northwestern reporter 2d, 747, 321–336.Google Scholar
- Singer, P. (1993). Practical ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Smithfield Foods, Inc. (2007). Smithfield Foods makes landmark decision regarding animal management. Smithfield, Virginia. http://investors.smithfieldfoods.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=295899.
- Smithfield Foods, Inc. (2008). Corporate social responsibility report 2007/08. Smithfield, Virginia. http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/PDF/smi_csr_08.pdf.
- State of Oklahoma versus Tyson Foods, Inc. Complaint. (2005). Attorney general of the State of Oklahoma, filed in Federal District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma, case no. 4:05-cv-329.Google Scholar
- Strauss Veal. (2009). Free raised veal frequently asked questions. Franklin, Wisconsin. http://www.straussveal.com/veal_faq.shtml.
- Sumner, D. A., Rosen-Molina, J. T., Matthews, W. A., Mench, J. A., & Richter, K. R. (2008). Economic effects of proposed restrictions on egg-laying hen housing in California. University of California Agricultural Issues Center, July, 1–6.Google Scholar
- Thu, K. (2002). Public health concerns for neighbors of large-scale swine production operations. Journal of Agricultural Safety & Health, 8, 175–184.Google Scholar
- Treaty of Amsterdam. (1997). Treaty of Amsterdam amending the treaty on European Union, the treaties establishing the European Communities and certain related acts. Luxembourg: Official publications of the European Communities. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/treaty/pdf/amst-en.pdf.
- Turner, J. (2000). The welfare of Europe’s sows in close confinement stalls. Compassion in World Farming Trust. Petersfield, Hampshire, United Kingdom. http://www.ciwf.org.uk/resources/publications/pig_farming/default.aspx.
- Tyson Foods, Inc. (2007). Tyson to use new label for raised without antibiotics chicken. Springdale, Arkansas. http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=133435.
- Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. versus Environmental Protection Agency. (2005). Federal reporter 3rd, 399, 486–524.Google Scholar