AWI Criticizes Chicken Industry’s Revised Animal Care Standards

On February 12, the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) sent a letter to Mike Brown, president of the National Chicken Council (NCC), condemning the trade association’s new guidelines for the humane treatment of the 9 billion chickens raised for meat each year in the United States.

NCC claims that their guidelines are based on scientific knowledge and the principle that chickens raised for food should be cared for in ways that prevent or minimize fear, pain, stress, and suffering. AWI charges, however, that the guidelines are based on commercial expedience and not animal welfare science. And instead of preventing or minimizing fear, pain, and distress, the guidelines actually foster these forms of animal suffering.

The revised guidelines fail to provide an acceptable level of welfare. For example, the guidelines allow for near-continuous, dim lighting that facilitates feed consumption and weight gain but also causes leg abnormalities and eye problems. Confinement to a crowded and barren indoor environment prevents chickens from performing the most basic of natural behaviors, such as preening and flapping their wings, and also leads to high ammonia levels in the air and in the birds’ litter, which causes skin and respiratory ailments.

As to the slaughter of chickens, the guidelines are not in compliance with several recommendations of the World Organization for Animal Health (known by its French acronym, “OIE”):

  • NCC allows 4 percent of birds to have broken bones, while the OIE recommends a maximum of 2 percent, with less than 1 percent being the goal.
  • NCC allows birds to be held at slaughtering facilities for up to 15 hours, while the international standard is 12 hours.
  • NCC fails to limit the amount of time that chickens are forced to hang upside down on shackles, while OIE recommends a maximum of one minute.
  • NCC allows birds with broken or dislocated bones to endure the painful process of shackling, while OIE recommends that injured birds be humanely killed before shackling.
  • Unlike OIE, NCC doesn’t set minimum electric current levels for stunning chickens, which can result in birds being immobilized by a low current—but not necessarily rendered unconscious—before they are killed.

“The guidelines are not designed to ensure welfare but rather to facilitate the raising and slaughtering of as many birds as possible, in as short a time as possible,” said Dena Jones, AWI farm animal program manager. “We urge NCC to adopt the revisions described in our letter to provide these animals a better quality of life as well as a more humane death.”

Chickens raised for food in the United States have no federal legal protections against inhumane treatment on the farm or at the slaughterhouse. AWI, along with the animal advocacy organization Farm Sanctuary, recently petitioned the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to enact regulations requiring humane handling of chickens at slaughter.

Gov. Kotek Called on to Address Growing Disease Risks on Mink Farms

Wildlife-advocacy and animal-protection groups sent an urgent letter today calling on Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek and state officials to address mink fur farms’ escalating threats to public health and wildlife.

The groups are asking the governor to fast-track phasing out commercial mink fur farming in Oregon to stanch the significant risk of dangerous zoonotic diseases being spread from these operations.

The groups’ letter also requests that disease surveillance and control measures quickly be put in place to help prevent the spread of viruses like COVID-19 and avian influenza, which threaten Oregonians and wildlife.

“The spread of these highly contagious, extremely deadly diseases among commercially farmed mink poses growing threats we can’t ignore anymore,” said Hannah Connor, environmental health deputy director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “Gov. Kotek has to act immediately to strengthen animal disease prevention and ultimately phase out commercial mink fur farming in Oregon.”

When bred and farmed for their fur, mink pose a particularly high risk to humans because their upper respiratory tract is similar to ours, making them potentially potent “mixing vessels” for generating novel pandemic viruses. Mink fur farms are also effective reservoirs for viruses due to their tightly confined and unsanitary conditions. COVID-19 affected multiple Oregon mink fur farms in 2020 and 2021, and several mink who tested positive for the virus escaped into the wild.

“Mink on fur farms incubate diseases such as COVID-19 and avian influenza, creating the perfect conditions for new variants to jump to humans—with potentially devastating results. Mink farms risk worsening the current pandemic and ushering in the next one,” said Kate Dylewsky, assistant director of government affairs at the Animal Welfare Institute. “This public health threat is dire, and we hope that Gov. Kotek will act quickly to end mink farming in Oregon.”

In recent months, highly pathogenic avian influenza, or HPAI, has spread in European fur farms, increasing concerns among scientists about the virus mutating and spreading among humans. Farmed mink in Europe are understood to have contracted HPAI from wild birds and then rapidly infected each other with the virus.

HPAI is also prevalent in wild and commercially raised birds in Oregon, increasing the chances that local mink farms could become the next outbreak sites. HPAI can be asymptomatic in farmed mink, which means that improved viral surveillance is vital to reduce risk.

“Fur factory farms pose a clear biosecurity risk to Oregonians and the state’s wildlife, yet are left essentially unregulated,” said Haley Stewart, senior program manager for wildlife policy at the Humane Society of the United States. “Short of closing the handful of fur farms that remain in Oregon, the state must implement regular inspections and require thorough monitoring for infectious diseases to help prevent future pandemics.”

Infected mink can also imperil Oregon wildlife. Studies show that HPAI can have a remarkable ability to infect mammals, including carnivores like mink. Oregon is home to several carnivores similar to mink, like river otters, and federally protected species such as Humboldt martens and wolverines. One endangered Pacific fisher, another carnivore similar to mink, has already been confirmed to have contracted HPAI in the wild.

“As disease transmission vectors, mink fur production facilities pose a risk to public health and human safety,” said Jennifer Hauge, senior legislative affairs manager at the Animal Legal Defense Fund. “Mink farms, in particular, house animals in cruel, stressful environments in close proximity to each other so viruses can spread rapidly, which is why it is critical that Gov. Kotek take action on this issue.”

The additional consequences of further HPAI outbreaks in Oregon are potentially severe. Last November more than 700,000 chickens had to be killed in Oregon counties where mink fur farms operate after the birds contracted the disease. HPAI can also be dangerous, and even fatal, to humans, sometimes causing high mortality rates.

Illinois Bill Would End Mink Farming to Safeguard Human Health

The Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) commends today’s filing of the Mink Facility Disease Prevention Act, which would end mink farming in Illinois to protect human health.

Sponsored by State Senate Assistant Majority Leader Linda Holmes, S.B. 3262 recognizes that mink on fur farms incubate diseases such as COVID-19 and avian influenza, creating the perfect conditions for new variants to jump to humans—with potentially devastating results. The handful of mink farms in Illinois would be required to cease operations by Jan. 1, 2025.

Due to the physiological similarities between human and mink upper respiratory tracts, mink can become infected by—and potentially transmit—some of the same respiratory viruses that affect people. Moreoever, mink can serve as potent “mixing vessels” for generating novel pandemic viruses.

“There is no practical way to operate a mink farm without creating a petri dish that could produce the next pandemic virus,” said Susan Millward, AWI’s executive director and chief executive officer. “We must listen to the scientists sounding the alarm: Mink farms risk worsening the current pandemic and ushering in the next one. It’s time to close the chapter on this declining industry. By passing this bill, Illinois can become a leader in combatting this threat to public health.”

Mink farms raise and slaughter animals to sell their pelts to the fashion industry. They typically pack thousands of mink together in long rows of barren pens barely large enough for them to move around. The conditions not only are inhumane, they also create an ideal setting for pathogens to circulate among and across species.

COVID-19, in fact, has infected millions of farmed mink on more than 480 mink farms across 12 countries. In several instances, mink have passed a mutated form of this virus back to humans. New variants can emerge in such scenarios, undermining the effectiveness of vaccines and jeopardizing efforts to contain the pandemic.

A deadly avian influenza virus (H5N1) has also infected tens of thousands of mink on dozens of fur farms since 2022. During an October 2022 outbreak on a mink farm in Spain, the virus mutated in a way that enabled it to spread between mink. Prior to this, mammals had primarily contracted the virus through direct contact with infected birds, not from infected mammals. H5N1 infections have also been detected at multiple mink farms in Finland since last summer, demonstrating the potential for this dangerous virus to continue causing outbreaks on mink farms and raising the specter that it will mutate into a form transmissible to and between humans.

Fur farming has been banned or is being phased out in several other European countries, including the Netherlands, Ireland, and Norway, due to concerns about animal welfare, the spread of COVID-19, or both. Closer to home, California prohibited all fur sales in 2019, and lawmakers in Hawaii, Rhode Island, and Washington have introduced legislation that would ban fur sales or production.

Recently, AWI and other animal protection and conservation groups sent an urgent letter to Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek and state officials to fast-track the phasing out of commercial mink farming across Oregon due to the threats to public health and wildlife.

Media Advisory: Dr. Temple Grandin to Receive Schweitzer Medal

On March 14, renowned author and animal behaviorist Dr. Temple Grandin will be awarded the 2024 Schweitzer Medal from the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) in recognition of her enduring advocacy for the humane treatment of farmed animals. For more than 60 years, the prestigious Schweitzer Medal has been a symbol of outstanding achievement in the advancement of animal welfare.

What: Schweitzer Medal ceremony honoring Dr. Temple Grandin

Who: Introductory remarks by Susan Millward, AWI’s executive director and chief executive officer. US Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) will present the medal to Dr. Grandin. Additional remarks by Sandra Eskin, the US Department of Agriculture’s deputy under secretary for food safety.

When: Thursday, March 14, 2024 at 4:45 p.m. (Doors open at 4 p.m., reception to follow)

Where: YOTEL (Grand Hub West), 415 New Jersey Avenue, NW, in Washington, DC

About Dr. Temple Grandin:
Dr. Temple Grandin is arguably the world’s preeminent proponent for the humane treatment of farmed animals on the farm, during transport and at slaughter. Her design innovations, including chutes, ramps and curved corrals, have benefited billions of animals worldwide by reducing stress and fear during handling. Raised in the Boston suburbs, Dr. Grandin launched her professional career in the beef cattle industry in the 1970s, working on feed yards in rural Arizona. She has credited autism for providing her with a unique perspective in relating to nonhuman animals. Her ability to partner with the meat industry, including fast-food restaurant chains, to create good management practices for animal handling and stunning has resulted in meaningful reforms. Dr. Grandin was among the first scientists to call for the phasing out of gestation crates for pregnant sows, and she is a strong proponent of transparency and auditing of animal agriculture practices. In 2010 — the same year that the award-winning biographical film Temple Grandin was released — TIME magazine named Dr. Grandin one of the world’s 100 most influential people in the “heroes” category. She has authored hundreds of scientific articles and textbooks, and has served as a professor of animal science at Colorado State University for more than 30 years.

AWI Honors Prolific Animal Behaviorist Dr. Temple Grandin with Schweitzer Medal

Dr. Temple Grandin, a world-renowned proponent of the humane treatment of farmed animals, received the 2024 Schweitzer Medal from the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) in a ceremony Thursday.

For more than 60 years, the Schweitzer Medal has been a symbol of outstanding achievement in the advancement of animal welfare. Dr. Albert Schweitzer was a famed scientist and humanitarian internationally known for his philosophy focused on the value of all living things. In 1951, he gave permission to AWI to strike a medal in his honor, to be awarded to individuals in recognition of their exemplary efforts to prevent animal suffering. In December 1953, a gold replica of the medal was presented to Dr. Schweitzer by Dr. Charles Joy in Oslo, Norway, where Dr. Schweitzer had gone to accept the Nobel Peace Prize.

“This year, we present the Schweitzer Medal to Dr. Temple Grandin in recognition of her enduring advocacy for the humane treatment of farmed animals,” said Susan Millward, AWI’s executive director and chief executive officer.

Raised in the Boston suburbs, Dr. Grandin launched her professional career in the beef cattle industry in the 1970s, working on feed yards in rural Arizona. Her design innovations and her ability to convince key players within the meat industry, including fast-food restaurant chains, to support and implement better animal handling practices have resulted in meaningful reforms. Dr. Grandin was among the first scientists to call for the phasing out of gestation crates for pregnant sows, and she is a strong proponent of transparency and auditing in animal agriculture.

In 2010—the same year that the award-winning biographical film Temple Grandin was released—TIME magazine named Dr. Grandin one of the world’s 100 most influential people in the “heroes” category. She has authored hundreds of scientific articles and textbooks and has served as a professor of animal science at Colorado State University for more than 30 years.

In presenting the Schweitzer Medal to Dr. Grandin, US Rep. Don Beyer (D-VA) said: “Few people can be said to have more impact on the welfare of the animals that we slaughter, that we eat, than Dr. Grandin. Her passion for relating to nonhuman animals has benefited billions of animals worldwide, starting on farms, in transport and handling, and even in the process of slaughter.”

Dr. Grandin has credited autism for providing her with a unique perspective in relating to nonhuman animals. “One of the things that I think has helped me in my work with animals is that I am a totally visual thinker,” she said upon accepting the award. “So the very first work I ever did, I looked at what cattle were seeing when they were going through the chutes at the feedlots to get vaccinated. … I didn’t know at the time that other people didn’t think in pictures.”

Sandra Eskin, the US Department of Agriculture’s deputy under secretary for food safety, attended the ceremony and added her perspective on Dr. Grandin’s enormous influence: “In a world where the treatment of animals is often overlooked or undervalued, Dr. Grandin stands as a beacon of compassion, empathy, and innovation.”

Newborn Dairy Calves Endure Long, Grueling Journeys Across the United States

Every year, the dairy industry sends hundreds of thousands of calves—as young as 2 to 3 days old—on highly stressful journeys of a thousand miles or more, flouting international animal welfare standards and contributing to disease spread, according to a new analysis by the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI).

Nearly 9.5 million US dairy cows are involved in milk production at any given time. Instead of keeping young, unweaned female calves on the farms where they were born, large dairy consortiums in the Upper Midwest and other northern regions ship these “replacement heifers” to sprawling calf-rearing operations in the Southwest (where land is cheaper) until they are old enough to give birth and produce milk. Male calves and a majority of female calves deemed “surplus” are, if not immediately slaughtered for veal, similarly transported to calf ranches, where they are raised for several months before being slaughtered for beef.

“Hundreds of thousands of calves are regularly shipped long distances despite being at high risk of injury, infection, and death,” said Dena Jones, director of AWI’s Farmed Animal Program. “No federal regulation prohibits the long-distance transport of neonatal calves, and the main statute providing minimal protections for animals during transport—known as the Twenty-Eight Hour Law—is not actively enforced.”

To document one such journey, AWI partnered with the nonprofit organization, Animals’ Angels, to monitor an August 2023 shipment of 200 newborn calves on a 1,113-mile, 19-hour transport from a mega-dairy in Hancock, Minnesota, to a calf ranch in Texico, New Mexico. Animals’ Angels investigators trailing the shipment observed that the calves wore ear tags confirming they were around a week old. Most had their shriveled umbilical cords still attached, increasing the risk of infection.

Within the crowded trailer, prone calves were observed being stepped on by others. Eleven hours into the trip, as the outside temperature climbed to 100 degrees, the investigators observed that all the calves were standing, with many bellowing—a sign of distress. Typically, these calves would nurse every two to four hours if left with their mothers, but they did not receive any milk or water during the journey. Nineteen hours after leaving the Minnesota dairy, the calves arrived in New Mexico, where they were unloaded out of sight of the investigators.

In a rulemaking petition filed today with the US Department of Agriculture, AWI requested that the department prohibit the interstate shipment of newborn calves and other animals who are sick, injured, or disabled; require veterinary inspection certificates for interstate travel of these vulnerable animals; and establish penalties for violating the rules.

Neonatal calves, like most animals, experience significant stress during transport. In addition to dealing with vibrations, noise, fumes, and unfamiliar environments, they experience prolonged food and water deprivation, intense crowding, extreme heat and cold, and injuries from rough handling.

The USDA itself has confirmed the negative impacts of transport on animal health and welfare: In a 2010 fact sheet, the department noted that “the handling, loading, transporting, and unloading of animals can have substantial detrimental efforts on their well-being by causing stress,” which “reduces the fitness of an animal.”

Since these stressors lower an animal’s resistance to infection, transporting young calves with immature immune function can contribute to the spread of disease, the development of antibiotic-resistant bacterial pathogens, and meat contamination.

Forcing newborn calves to endure long-distance journeys, such as the one documented in the AWI/Animals’ Angels investigation, violates the standards of the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), as well as regulations of Canada, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. WOAH considers animals with unhealed navels, as well as those who are sick, injured, or disabled, to be unfit for transport.

In the United States, however, there are no fitness requirements for domestic animal transport. The Twenty-Eight Hour Law, first passed in 1873, provides that transported animals can go a maximum of 28 hours before they must be unloaded for feed, water, and rest. Even then, the law states that the animals can remain on the transport vehicle as long as these needs are met.

AWI requested transport records under public disclosure laws from seven of the country’s top 10 dairy producing states: California, Wisconsin, Idaho, New York, Minnesota, Michigan, and Texas. (Heavy redactions prevented AWI from including Texas in its analysis, however.) AWI also requested import records from New Mexico and California, both home to dozens of calf ranches.

Of these states, Wisconsin exported the highest number of calves under 1 month old in 2022 (nearly 235,793), followed by Minnesota (142,795). New Mexico received a higher number of calves (191,008) than California (139,422).

“In 2016, AWI was instrumental in encouraging the USDA to adopt WOAH criteria for the export of US farmed animals by sea,” Jones said. “We are now simply asking that those same standards be applied to farmed animals who spend many hours on the road within the United States.”

AWI previously requested that the National Milk Producers Federation, the largest US dairy farmer organization, amend its standards to include WOAH fitness requirements, but the group failed to do so.

Three federal departments—the USDA, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Transportation—have a potential role in enforcing the Twenty-Eight Hour Law. Nevertheless, AWI’s research found that the law is not actively enforced by any of these departments, despite evidence that it is regularly violated.

In the past 15 years, the USDA has investigated 12 possible violations of the law, only one of which was referred to the DOJ.

House Farm Bill Draft Helps Domestic Violence Survivors and Their Pets, But Rewards Industries That Abuse Animals

The US House Committee on Agriculture will weigh in Thursday on the long-awaited, 942-page Farm Bill, a massive legislative package—reauthorized every five years or so—that serves as a key driver of food and agriculture policy in the United States and touches on a number of other policy areas affecting animal welfare.

The House version of the Farm Bill, released last week, includes one of the highest priorities of the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI)—reauthorizing the Emergency and Transitional Pet Shelter and Housing Assistance Grant Program so that domestic violence service providers can better assist survivors who have companion animals.

The draft bill as a whole, however, represents a huge missed opportunity for improving animal welfare and, in some cases, significantly undermines animal protection goals. Among the most damaging provisions:

    • Overturning the will of millions of voters in order to block state laws such as California’s Proposition 12 and Massachusetts’ Question 3, which prohibit the sale of animal products produced from animals subjected to extreme confinement, such as gestation crates or veal crates. Last year, in a significant and historic victory for animal welfare, the US Supreme Court upheld Prop 12, but the House version of the Farm Bill threatens to nullify this victory and harm millions of animals by preventing states from setting higher welfare standards for products sold within their borders.
    • Permitting the sale of uninspected meat from custom slaughterhouses, based on controversial language in the Processing Revival and Intrastate Meat Exemption (PRIME) Act. Custom slaughter refers to facilities that are not subject to continuous federal or state inspection; they typically serve hunters seeking to process carcasses or others who want meat for personal (i.e., noncommercial) use. According to AWI’s research, these facilities are among the worst slaughter plants for humane handling violations.
    • Expanding the US Department of Agriculture’s Livestock Indemnity Program—which compensates livestock producers for animal injuries and deaths that occur during natural disasters and extreme weather events—without mandating that operations have disaster preparedness plans. This requirement was included in the Emergency Disaster Preparedness for Farm Animals Act, which was introduced earlier this year in the House.
    • Changing the law governing live dog imports into the United States, hindering rescue organizations’ efforts to save dogs from horrible conditions in other countries (due to natural disasters, war, or overall poor standards of care), and provide them with necessary medical care and the chance to find their forever homes.
    • Providing subsidies for the mink fur industry, a sector that has been in steep decline for years and poses a severe threat to public health. The draft bill would earmark taxpayer dollars for the mink industry to develop and expand into international markets, even though mink on fur farms incubate diseases such as COVID-19 and avian influenza, creating the perfect conditions for new variants to jump to humans—with potentially devastating results.
    • Undermining two bedrock conservation laws—the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Endangered Species Act (ESA)—by curtailing environmental reviews, public input, and expert consultations on certain forest management projects. Such a move would allow these projects to move forward before their negative impacts on imperiled species and habitat are known.
    • Codifying the USDA’s reliance on “unrelieved suffering” as the standard that dogs must endure before the department even considers immediately confiscating them from substandard dealer facilities. This unreasonable and inhumane level of suffering is at odds with the definition of suffering in the Animal Welfare Act and suggests that immediate confiscation would not even be considered for other AWA-protected animals in similarly dire situations.
  • Failing to include a prohibition on the slaughter of horses for human consumption, despite overwhelming bipartisan support for the Save America’s Forgotten Equines (SAFE) Act. The SAFE Act, which currently has 223 cosponsors in the House, directly builds on language included in the last Farm Bill, which prohibited the slaughter and trade of dogs and cats in the United States. The current version of the Farm Bill does not extend these same protections to equines.

“The Farm Bill presents an important opportunity to eliminate severe public health threats, cut tax dollar waste, and seek redress for unimaginable animal suffering,” said Nancy Blaney, AWI’s director of Government Affairs. “Sadly, much of this draft language rewards the biggest industry offenders; it should be called the Harm Bill, not the Farm Bill.”

Bill Introduced to Prohibit Interstate Transport of Vulnerable Livestock and Improve Travel Conditions for Others

Today, US Rep. Dina Titus (D-NV) introduced the Humane Transport of Farmed Animals Act to improve conditions for livestock transported across the United States. The bill would require federal officials to develop a process to enforce the Twenty-Eight Hour Law, which stipulates that animals traveling at least 28 hours be offloaded for food, water, and rest. Importantly, this legislation also would prohibit interstate transport of livestock considered unfit for travel.

“Inadequate enforcement of the Twenty-Eight Hour Law, coupled with the continued interstate transport of animals unfit to travel, is contributing to needless animal suffering and endangering the health and safety of millions of animals—and humans,” said Susan Millward, executive director and chief executive officer at the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI). “Passing the Humane Transport of Farmed Animals Act is the bare minimum Congress can do to help ensure that animals healthy enough to travel are not deprived of basic protections, and that ill or otherwise impaired animals are not forced to endure grueling journeys that further compromise their health and welfare.”

Currently, the Twenty-Eight Hour Law is the only source of protection—albeit minimal—for animals transported long distances. However, the statute is not actively enforced. In fact, from 2006 to 2021, the USDA made only 12 inquiries into possible violations of the law, only one of which was referred to the Department of Justice, according to an AWI analysis of public records. This blatant lack of oversight is alarming, given that millions of animals are transported around the country each year.

Under current US live animal export regulations, animals intended for export to other countries must pass an inspection demonstrating that they are sound, healthy, and fit to travel. These regulations were adopted in 2016, after AWI petitioned the USDA to stop allowing exports of animals who were too young, weak, or sick to travel. Unfortunately, no such requirements exist for farmed animals transported long distances across the United States.

The Humane Transport of Farmed Animals Act would amend the federal Animal Health Protection Act to mirror fitness criteria governing US live animal exports, and those of the World Organisation for Animal Health—the leading international authority on the health and welfare of animals.

Under these criteria, animals unfit for travel include livestock who are sick, injured, disabled, or unable to stand; newborns with unhealed navels; and mature females close to giving birth or who recently gave birth.

Transport is extremely stressful for livestock. In addition to the vibrations, noise, fumes, and unfamiliar environment, transported animals often experience prolonged food and water deprivation, intense crowding, exposure to extreme heat and cold, and physical strain and injuries from rough handling and having to balance in a moving truck. These stressors also lower an animal’s resistance to infection; consequently, transport stress also contributes to the spread of disease (including zoonotic diseases that can jump to humans), and meat contamination.

Very young animals and cull animals (those removed from a herd and sent to slaughter due to age, illness, or other infirmity affecting productivity) are at particularly high risk of infection, injury, and death from long-distance transport. Yet the dairy industry regularly sends hundreds of thousands of calves under 3 weeks of age on journeys of 1,000 miles or more.

“Not only do lax federal regulations on farm animal transportation create inhumane and cruel conditions, but these inefficiencies in the law are also causing many animals to succumb to disease and injury during these long journeys which can be passed on to humans,” Titus said. “By raising fit-for-travel standards in addition to creating mechanisms to actively enforce the Twenty-Eight Hour Law, we can tackle this persistent issue in our food chain while protecting the lives of these animals.”

Last month, AWI petitioned the USDA to prohibit the interstate shipment of newborn calves and other animals who are sick, injured, or disabled; to require veterinary inspection certificates for interstate travel of these vulnerable animals; and to establish penalties for violating the rules. In the petition, AWI cited its analysis of transport records from seven of the country’s top 10 dairy producing states, and results from an investigation last year that tracked a shipment of 200 newborn calves on a 1,113-mile transport from a mega-dairy in Minnesota to a calf ranch in New Mexico.

Eleven hours into the trip, investigators observed calves—many with their shriveled umbilical cords still attached—bellowing and stepping on one another in the crowded trailer as the outside temperature climbed to 100 degrees. By the end of the 19-hour journey, the calves still had not received any milk or water.

New Research: Weak Enforcement of State Farmed Animal Welfare Laws Continues

The Animal Welfare Institute (AWI) released a new report today that documents how state-level farmed animal welfare laws continue to be minimally enforced, even though such laws could substantially improve the lives of many of the 9 billion farmed animals raised and killed in this country each year.

No federal law explicitly regulates the on-farm treatment of animals (except the small percentage raised organically). Due to growing public concern, often reflected in citizen-initiated ballot measures, a number of states have enacted measures over the past 25 years to improve the welfare of these animals.

Across 18 states, a total of 44 on-farm animal protection measures are currently in place. AWI surveyed each of these states to determine whether the provisions of those laws and/or regulations are being enforced and, if so, to what degree. To conduct this research, AWI submitted public records requests for documents related to all enforcement activity occurring between September 2019 and February 2023. In response, AWI received records indicating some level of enforcement relating to only 12 of the laws in 10 of the states.

“Our analysis shows that state laws enacted to improve farmed animal welfare are not being diligently enforced,” said Adrienne Craig, senior policy associate and staff attorney for AWI’s Farmed Animal Program. “How these laws are drafted — including the specific powers given to a state agency and the instructions for that agency to carry out investigations and prosecutions — have an enormous impact on their efficacy. We need to ensure that these hard-won protections are not undermined during implementation.”

State laws protecting farmed animals fall into three main categories: (1) on-farm minimum animal care standards, (2) bans on the sale of products from facilities that do not meet certain animal care standards, and (3) laws prohibiting specific conventional industry practices, such as tail docking and intensive confinement in gestation crates for pregnant sows or battery cages for egg-laying hens. Animal care standards provide minimum guidance for the care and treatment of farmed animals, including access to adequate food, water, shelter, and veterinary care. Generally, such laws authorize state governments to investigate complaints from citizens or agencies; these provisions are separate from state cruelty statutes (which may provide little or no protection for farmed animals).

Similar to what AWI documented in its 2019 report — the first-ever comprehensive analysis of state enforcement of farmed animal protections — minimum animal care standards overall had the most evidence of consistent enforcement during the recent survey period. Ohio, New Jersey, and Indiana supplied the most extensive evidence of enforcement.

In Ohio, for instance, the state Department of Agriculture is tasked with investigating complaints and enforcing the rules, including levying fines or seeking injunctions through the court. State records show that, from September 2019 through February 2023, the department conducted more than 100 investigations — the most of any state — and fined multiple producers, including one penalty totaling $15,000.

Kentucky, by contrast, passed animal care standards and banned veal calf crates in 2014 and 2018, respectively, yet the state’s Department of Agriculture provided AWI with no enforcement records. In Nevada, the legislature passed a law (effective July 2022) requiring that eggs produced or sold in the state come from hens with at least one square foot of space each. Yet a records officer from the Nevada Department of Agriculture informed AWI that contrary to a legislative directive, the department leaves it up to retailers to ensure compliance.

Of the 30 state laws or regulations that ban a specific industry practice, AWI received enforcement records for only two: Ohio’s tail docking ban (incorporated within its minimum animal care standards) and Colorado’s hen housing standards. One possible reason for this lack of enforcement is that most of these laws do not assign an official agency to proactively confirm compliance.

Since AWI’s last survey, new farmed animal protection laws and regulations have taken effect in six states, but there has not been a dramatic increase in the overall enforcement of such laws. The most significant changes included sales bans in California and Massachusetts on animal products derived from animals subjected to extreme confinement. These laws have faced long legal battles, delaying implementation and enforcement.

AWI’s report lists several recommendations for drafting the most effective farmed animal protection laws. Among them:

  • For livestock care standards
    • Include clear language establishing a mechanism for complaints and an obligation for the appropriate state agency to investigate complaints and follow up. Severe violations, such as failure to seek veterinary care for animal injuries or causing an animal to become emaciated, must be enforced and not left to the discretion of the agency.
    • Periodically review minimum care standards to ensure they reflect the latest animal welfare science. Establishing minimum standards should not preclude state legislatures from adopting additional, stricter standards.
  • For sales bans
    • Direct a single responsible agency to require producers and distributors to prove compliance through on-farm inspections, which can be performed by a competent third-party certifier.
    • Establish fines for noncompliance that are high enough to discourage violations instead of allowing producers and retailers to treat them merely as the cost of doing business.

Congress Urged Not to Use Taxpayer Money to Prop Up Dangerous Mink Farms

Today, the Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), joined by 46 public health scientists, veterinarians, animal welfare and conservation organizations, and other experts in their respective fields, delivered a letter to leaders of the Agriculture Committees in the US House of Representatives and Senate expressing strong opposition to a provision in the House Farm Bill (H.R. 8467) that would earmark taxpayer dollars for the mink industry to develop and expand into international markets. Section 3201(d) of the bill seeks to repeal existing law and direct federal dollars to an overwhelmingly unpopular industry that poses a severe risk to public health.

“The intent of the 2024 Farm Bill is to achieve both fiscal responsibility and a commitment to improving the health and wellbeing of Americans—and Section 3201(d) is entirely counterproductive to these objectives,” the letter states. It was signed by organizations and experts in the fields of epidemiology, virology, medicine, veterinary science, fashion, wildlife conservation, and public policy, among others.

A growing body of science shows that mink are particularly high-risk “mixing vessels,” producing dangerous variants of respiratory diseases that are potentially transmissible to humans—including COVID-19 and H5N1, a deadly strain of avian influenza that is currently sweeping through US poultry flocks and dairy herds and has infected a number of humans. Leading scientists have thus concluded that mink fur farms—where mink are kept in close quarters and often unsanitary conditions—threaten to usher in the next pandemic.

“Congress is throwing good money at bad policy by proposing to further subsidize operations that are responsible for incubating diseases such as COVID-19 and avian influenza, creating the perfect conditions for new variants to jump to humans,” said Kate Dylewsky, AWI’s assistant director of government affairs. “This wasteful and shortsighted provision must be removed from the Farm Bill.”

Moreover, mink farming is an unpopular and dying industry, with sales nosediving even before the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the US Department of Agriculture, in 2017 there were 236 mink operations in the United States. Five years later, the number of US mink farms had dropped to 110. This decline is a direct result of shrinking consumer demand for real fur, and a commitment by major fashion brands and retailers to go fur-free, including Nordstrom, Macy’s, Bloomingdale’s, Saks Fifth Avenue, Gucci, Versace, and Giorgio Armani.