Farmed
Animal Watch
A Project of Animal Place
July 25, 2003
(To Search This Page Press Ctrl F)
Number #24 Volume 2
CONTENTS
1. AVMA Rejects Forced Molting, Gestation Crate Resolutions
2. Canadian Feedlot Owners Threaten Mass Slaughter
3. World Trade Troubles
4. U.K. Warned Against Cheap Battery Egg Imports
5. Soybean Growers Support Animal Agriculture Exports
6. USDA: Meeting Manure Regs Will Cost $2 Billion
1. AVMA REJECTS FORCED MOLTING, GESTATION CRATE RESOLUTIONS
During its annual convention, in mid-July, the American Veterinary Medical
Association (AVMA) House of Delegates voted down a resolution against the
forced molting of hens and one against gestation crates for pigs. Both votes
followed contentious debate. This was the 5th year the Association of
Veterinarians for Animal Rights (AVAR) had petitioned against forced molting
(see
issue #77). The practice is banned in Europe and the Canadian VMA opposes
forced molting via feed withdrawal (see issue #88). PETA and United Poultry
Concerns demonstrated outside the convention center (
http://www.upc-online.org/avma/72403avmaprotest.htm
) and other animal protection organizations published a full-page ad in the
Rocky Mountain News criticizing the AVMA:
http://adserver1.harvestadsdepot.com/denver/2376506/2376506_01.shtml
(the convention was held in Denver). One delegate claimed animal rights groups
are attacking animal agriculture with half-truths and innuendos (see:
http://www.freefarmanimals.org/science.htm
), while another pointed to the financial effect on industry if forced molting
were stopped. This was countered by a delegate who said it should be decided
whether the Association "is for animal welfare or for dollars and
cents." Concern was also expressed about the wording of the resolution,
and AVAR plans to submit a reworded resolution next year.
A resolution submitted by petition from Farm Sanctuary sought to have the AVMA
rescind the position it adopted last year on pregnant pig housing (see
issue
#77). The American Association of Swine Veterinarians presented information
about a forthcoming scientific review which concludes that gestation crates do
not adversely affect pig health or well-being. One delegate argued that they
are necessary to prevent pigs from injuring each other. In opposition, another
delegate showed photos of free-ranging pigs in alternative systems. Holding up
photos of confined pigs he asked "Do we need science to tell us this
isn't right?" He warned that if the AVMA does not resolve the matter
others might, referring to animal protection advocates. The delegates voted
for a resolution calling for further scientific study, to which one delegate
remarked "All we're doing is delaying, delaying, delaying."
2. MASS CANADIAN CATTLE SHOOTING THREATENED
Repercussions from Canada's "mad cow" case (see issue
N.19,
V.2) are
causing some feedlot owners to threaten to "[Dig] a big hole in the
ground, unload cattle into these holes and we are going to start shooting
them." Others oppose the idea due to public reaction and the likelihood
of not getting government compensation for the animals. Canada had been
exporting about 60% of its annual beef production. With 34 countries refusing
Canadian cattle and beef, cattle are being fed but not marketed. Nearly half
the number of cattle are being slaughtered as before the disease was
discovered in the country. Prices for live cattle have plummeted while
retailers have been slow to lower the price of beef. The ban on Canadian
imports may be a long one. Many countries, including Canada, require a country
to go 7 years without another case of the disease before it is considered free
of it. The ban is also affecting the country's dairy industry. Its surplus of
cows was recently exacerbated by a penalty levied by the World Trade
Organization on account of Canada selling subsidized milk. The country is said
to be losing $11 million a day in trade and $7 million a day in depressed beef
prices. The government offered $460 million in aid to the industry but it is
reportedly slow in coming. Alberta has begun discussing the possibility of
mass slaughtering up to a third of the province's 5.2 million cattle this
autumn. Presently, Quebec is killing thousands of sheep in the attempt to
control an outbreak of "mad sheep" disease:
http://tinyurl.com/i1so
Canada recently instituted new rules in response to recommendations from a
four-member international panel. As of July 24th, brains, spinal cords,
eyeballs and other high-risk tissues from cattle older than 30 months are to
be discarded at slaughter. The disease is not thought to develop in cattle
less than 4-6 years of age, and about 85% of cattle slaughtered in Canada are
younger than 30 months. No decision has been made about keeping the high-risk
tissue out of feed for nonruminant animals. (See "Cross-Species
Transmission,"
N.19, V.2. An article about the risk of the use of this
material in dog and cat food can be found at:
http://tinyurl.com/i0gq
) New butchering standards are also being put in place in reaction to the
disease.
"Mad Cow Woes Bring Threats of Drastic Measures," Canadian Press,
July 16, 2003.
http://tinyurl.com/i0hg or
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1058393417931&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968705899037
"Mass Cattle Slaughter Possible," The Edmonton Journal, Kelly
Cryderman & Jason Markusoff, July 19, 2003.
http://tinyurl.com/i0hq
or
http://www.canada.com/edmonton/edmontonjournal/story.asp?id=EC8C5001-7F4C-4C78-97B7-589BA7A97CB1
"Mad Cow Crisis Could Drag On a Long Time," Canadian Press (Toronto
Star), July 20, 2003.
http://tinyurl.com/hjl4 or
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1058698926713&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467
3. WORLD TRADE TROUBLES
The July 20th New York Times ran a lengthy editorial about unfairness in world
trade. In addition to having more effective seeds, fertilizer and equipment,
rich countries protect their products with high tariffs and promote them with
massive subsidies. The U.S., Europe and Japan devote nearly a billion tax
dollars a day to agricultural subsidies. American corn growers, for example,
were the recipients of $34.5 billion in tax supports, enabling them to dump
corn on the world market for two-thirds of its production cost. U.S.
agriculture is also protected from many of the risks other businesses are
forced to take. "The system is sold to the American taxpayers as a way of
preserving the iconic family farm," the Times states, "but it in
fact helps corporate agribusiness interests the most." Developing
countries, home to 96% of the world's farmers, find themselves unable to
compete. The $320 billion that rich counties spent on farm subsidies last year
contrasts with the $50 billion they spent on developmental assistance. The
International Monetary Fund estimates that a repeal of trade barriers and
subsidies by wealthy countries would improve global welfare by about $120
billion. A mere 1% increase in Africa's share of world exports would equal 5
times the amount it receives in aid and debt relief. The Times calls the
global trade game "morally depraved," and explains how it is a
tinderbox for resentment and revolt. A September meeting of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) is predicted to be a reprise of the 1999 Seattle meeting,
during which trade-liberalization talks stalled and protestors threw an
anti-globalization fest.
Compassion in World Farming's Peter Stevenson has prepared a legal analysis of
the adverse impact WTO rules have on animal welfare. It concludes by
explaining how the rules could instead be interpreted less restrictively to
permit measures designed to improve animal welfare:
http://www.worldtradecruelty.com/frameset-report.htm
4. U.K. WARNED AGAINST CHEAP BATTERY EGG IMPORTS
The U.K. House of Commons's Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee
warns that the costs of meeting increasing animal welfare standards will
cripple the British poultry industry unless they are also imposed on imports
(see also
N.16, V.2). The Labor Chairman explained that allowing chicken and
egg imports from countries that do not have to meet the same standards results
in the promotion of welfare problems in other countries. Poultry meat
imports have more than quadrupled in the last 2 decades, now accounting for
more than 20% of the total British market. Imports from countries outside of
Europe, like Brazil and Thailand, have risen even more, from 2,000 metric tons
in 1995 to 45,000 in 2002. A member of the poultry industry complained that
even within Europe, regulations were not being complied with. He told of
seeing battery cages being installed in Italy despite a European Union
regulation banning them last year. (The European Commission recently referred
Austria, Belgium, Greece and Italy to the European Court of Justice for
failure to implement the 1999 Directive on minimum standards for laying hens:
http://tinyurl.com/i122
) The Committee called for the sale of cheap battery eggs to be banned in the
U.K. when the battery cage ban goes into effect. The government was also urged
to include welfare standards as criteria for its purchasing decisions.
5. SOYBEAN GROWERS SUPPORT ANIMAL AGRICULTURE EXPORTS
Over half the U.S. soybean crop is used to produce meal for domestic animal
production. For years the soybean checkoff, a government-administered
marketing program (see
N. 23, V.2), has funded programs within the U.S. Meat
Export Federation (
http://www.usmef.org
) and the USA Poultry and Egg Export Council (
http://www.usapeec.org
) to increase U.S. meat and poultry exports. The United Soybean Board has
proposed a new initiative "to protect and support the long-term growth of
the U.S. livestock industry" in order to increase demand for U.S.
soybeans.
Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman has announced fiscal year 2003 allocations
of $110 million to 65 U.S. trade organizations to promote U.S. agricultural
products exports under the Market Access Program (MAP). The 2002 Farm Bill
more doubled MAP funding to $200 million annually by 2006. Exports are
expected to reach $56 billion this year.
6. USDA: MEETING MANURE REGS WILL COST $2 BILLION
Much of the 350 million tons of manure produced each year by large confined
animal feeding operations (CAFOs) ends up polluting water, land and air. A
recent USDA study has found that it will cost $2 billion for the nation's
213,000 CAFOs to comply with animal waste standards instituted in December.
The costs have primarily been borne by affected communities in the form of
pollution, with only 18% of some 80,000 large pig operations and 23% of a
similar number of large dairies meeting the standards. "Manure Management
for Water Quality: Costs to Animal Feeding Operations of Applying Manure
Nutrients to Land" explains that, with more farmed animals concentrated
on less land, it is increasingly difficult for operations to have enough land
on which to spread manure. North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Delaware,
Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas and California are identified as the states most
likely to experience difficulty. The report states that the costs of
subsidizing CAFOs to induce them to spread manure responsibly would be
enormous, with higher costs affecting mostly larger operations. The Global
Resource Action Center for the Environment (GRACE) points out that subsidies
would also encourage production of more manure. GRACE instead urges a
reduction in the concentration of animals. However it warns that a more likely
prospect is a shift in production to areas where manure disposal is cheaper or
to countries with fewer environmental regulations. The National Pork Producers
Council (NPPC) counters that smaller operations would not be able to meet
consumer demand. An NPPC spokesperson said operators are applying with the
government for conservation money to help cover the new manure management plan
costs. The report can be accessed at:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aer824/aer824.pdf
