NAEF Contacts Each of the 37 Senators in Rhode Island on Cage Ban

On June 12th the NAEF wrote to each of the 37 individual Senators in the state of Rhode Island alerting them to a forthcoming companion bill to H6023 calling for the elimination of cages for chickens producing table eggs and urging a “no” vote.  The RI House is expected to pass a revised version of H6023 June 15th after testimony by NAEF and 3 others including the sole cage-layer farmer spoke against the original bill on April 6th showing the misinformation being put forward by HSUS. 

 

NAEF explained that the basis for this current legislation is not what’s best for the chicken or the consumer in Rhode Island as demonstrated by these three lines of evidence 1) will not improve welfare, 2) food safety concerns, 3) cost-benefit and the elimination of choices for the consumers.  This email will outline why the last remaining Rhode Island egg farmer who produces eggs from caged chickens along with the National Association of Egg Farmers opposes a legislative mandate that all eggs sold in Rhode Island must be from cage-free chickens.

1. Cage-Free Will Not Improve Welfare

Chickens establish a pecking order among a population of birds. Farmers learned decades ago that chickens loose on the ground were injuring themselves from pecking. By reducing the colony size in a cage to 6-8 birds, establishing the pecking order is minimized instead of a pecking order being established among thousands of chickens.

New Research Shows More Bone Breakage in Cage-Free

A new research study shows the majority of breast bone damage originates from collisions with perches in cage-free environments. Dr. Maja Makagon, assistant professor of applied animal behavior at University of California, Davis’ Department of Animal Science, noted the increased bone breakage and reported it at the Egg Industry Issues Forum in Columbus, Ohio in April 2017. Dr. Makagon noted the breast bone integrity is increasingly seen as an indicator of animal welfare, those broken bones are associated with increased mortality, reduced egg production and egg quality, and pain for the animal.

 
2. Food Safety. Penn State researchers have found that eggs from small flocks of chickens (typically cage-free) are more likely to be contaminated with Salmonella enteritidis as eggs sold in grocery stores, which typically come from larger flocks. The results were published in the September 16, 2016 issue of PSU News: http://news.psu.edu/story/425880/2016/09/14/research/eggs-small-flocks-just-likely-contain-salmonella-enteritidis&;source=gmail&ust=1497475722212000&usg=AFQjCNFb0SSR6CU_rWclch_mDq0L-UapTw”>http://news.psu.edu/story/425880/2016/09/14/research/eggs-small-flocks-just-likely-contain-salmonella-enteritidis

 That conclusion was drawn from a six-month study done last year in Pennsylvania. Researchers from Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences collected and tested more than 6,000 eggs from more than 200 selling points across the state for the study.

 

3. The Cost Benefit Analysis

 

H6023 and its companion bill in the Senate will also be harmful to consumers and eliminate consumer choice. The costs to produce cage-free would increase the price of eggs more than 90 percent. This is borne out by the document (attached ) comparing egg prices in California (which established a cage density for layers at 116 square inches in implementing its egg production guidelines on January 1, 2015).  This data was reported by the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service, Livestock, Poultry & Grain Market News National Shell Egg Index Price Report (National prices FOB and California delivered). The daily spreads after California enacted their new law were 90 percent higher than the rest of the nation.

 

 Conclusions. For the reasons established cage-free chickens will not improve the welfare of the chicken, small backyard flocks are more likely to be contaminated with Salmonella, and the increased cost to the consumer, the National Association of Egg Farmers is opposed to H6023 and its companion bill in the Senate.

Des Moines Register Prints NAEF Rebuttal Over Iowa Egg Safety

Concerning your article on the suspension of government inspections of Iowa egg farms [Production sites for Iowa’s eggs unsuspected for 1 year, March 20], FDA inspections were suspended as a prudent biosecurity measure against Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI). Producers continued to comply, including testing for salmonella, with the FDA Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) rule by purchasing SE clean day-old pullet chicks that originated from USDA, National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP) egg-type breeding flocks participating in the U.S. SE Clean program. These were hatched in NPIP U.S. SE Clean Hatcheries. Most egg producers also test chick papers for SE. Producers continue to test for SE environmentally in pullets at 14-16 weeks of age and in table-egg layers at 40-45 weeks of age. All of this testing is conducted in USDA- and FDA-approved laboratories.

Egg producers continue to comply with the FDA SE Egg Rule biosecurity requirements, which involve many critical control risk management points that can be invaluable risk management tools against HPAI. In 2015 HPAI resulted in unprecedented losses to the egg industry in Iowa estimated at more than $1 billion. This economic threat is reason enough to eliminate SE inspections.

The Des Moines Register quoted Marion Nestle, a nutritionist at New York State University and author of books on food safety, saying this suspension is “jaw-dropping.” Her reference is often made relative to USDA’s nutrition recommendations. What does Nestle know about poultry diseases such as avian influenza? Does she understand that avian influenza could also be a human health concern?

We hope the Register will let its readers know that food safety continues to be of paramount concern to Iowa egg farmers and the federal government.


http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/investigations/2016/03/19/iowa-egg-oversight-ended-last-year/81811058/

Minneapolis Star Tribune Prints NAEF Rebuttal to Humane Economy

On April 30, 2016, The Minneapolis Star Tribune published the following rebuttal to HSUS’s article on The Humane Economy.
 
Dear Editor,
This is in response to Op-Ed “The Humane Economy Goes Cage-Free Chic” submitted by Wayne Pacelle, Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS), appearing in the April 25th Minneapolis Star Tribune. It’s partly true that HSUS has been successful in turning some adversaries into allies who go along with the cage-free rhetoric.  This has convinced a great many retailers to transition to cage-free eggs, but that’s only part of the story.  But many egg farmers, especially those in the National Association of Egg Farmers including many from Minnesota, disagree as experience has taught them that cage free often results in more chicken deaths, and lower quality of eggs from manure contamination.
 

Removing chickens from cages, where they have been for decades, will lead to issues with chickens dying. Imagine a flock of thousands of chickens establishing a pecking order among themselves.  Those lower on the pecking order are pecked more often.  This is minimized in a cage environment where only a few birds are placed.

Additionally, the cage-free eggs are more likely to be contaminated with bacteria due to prolonged exposure from litter and manure in the nest boxes or on the ground.

As for the workers in cage-free barns, the amount of dust, which can transmit pathogens, inside the barn represents a health risk to farm workers, and the need for workers to collect floor eggs creates ergonomic challenges, too.

The most recent Salmonella enteritidis (a foodborne pathogen) outbreak linked to eggs comes from a cage-free farm in Lebanon, Ohio.  A recent Food and Drug Administration warning letter was issued to a cage-free egg farmer in Missouri.  Yet the narrative that cage-free chickens is more humane and produces a better quality egg is gaining traction from advocates such as HSUS.

Farmers want to please their customers and so there will be more cage-free farms built, but the smaller farmer will struggle with the estimated costs of $40 per bird for the labor, building, feeders, waters, and nests in their cage-free barns.  The larger egg farmers will build these structures and increase their market share as the smaller farms cannot compete.  Welcome to “Humane Economy.”  We only hope your readers will realize that cage-free eggs are already available along with organic eggs and conventional eggs, all at prices that fit the customers’ needs.

Dear Editor,
This is in response to Op-Ed “The Humane Economy Goes Cage-Free Chic” submitted by Wayne Pacelle, Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS), appearing in the April 25th Minneapolis Star Tribune. It’s partly true that HSUS has been successful in turning some adversaries into allies who go along with the cage-free rhetoric.  This has convinced a great many retailers to transition to cage-free eggs, but that’s only part of the story.  But many egg farmers, especially those in the National Association of Egg Farmers including many from Minnesota, disagree as experience has taught them that cage free often results in more chicken deaths, and lower quality of eggs from manure contamination.
 

Removing chickens from cages, where they have been for decades, will lead to issues with chickens dying. Imagine a flock of thousands of chickens establishing a pecking order among themselves.  Those lower on the pecking order are pecked more often.  This is minimized in a cage environment where only a few birds are placed.

Additionally, the cage-free eggs are more likely to be contaminated with bacteria due to prolonged exposure from litter and manure in the nest boxes or on the ground.

As for the workers in cage-free barns, the amount of dust, which can transmit pathogens, inside the barn represents a health risk to farm workers, and the need for workers to collect floor eggs creates ergonomic challenges, too.

The most recent Salmonella enteritidis (a foodborne pathogen) outbreak linked to eggs comes from a cage-free farm in Lebanon, Ohio.  A recent Food and Drug Administration warning letter was issued to a cage-free egg farmer in Missouri.  Yet the narrative that cage-free chickens is more humane and produces a better quality egg is gaining traction from advocates such as HSUS.

Farmers want to please their customers and so there will be more cage-free farms built, but the smaller farmer will struggle with the estimated costs of $40 per bird for the labor, building, feeders, waters, and nests in their cage-free barns.  The larger egg farmers will build these structures and increase their market share as the smaller farms cannot compete.  Welcome to “Humane Economy.”  We only hope your readers will realize that cage-free eggs are already available along with organic eggs and conventional eggs, all at prices that fit the customers’ needs.

Blog Posts

© 2024 Egg Farmers of America, All Rights Reserved.

SIte Designed and Created by Graphic Revolutions, LLC.