Walmart to Meat Producers – Act Nicer to Animals, Please

walmartThe headline at Huffington Post read – Walmart Asks Meat Producers To Treat Their Animals Better. Is this, in the words of Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society of the United States:

Walmart’s animal welfare announcement is game-changing progress and signals to agribusiness that the era of confining farm animals is ending

Or is it just another marketing gimmick?

Walmart’s Position on Farm Animal Welfare focuses on sustainability and states:

There is growing public interest in how food is produced and consumers have questions about whether current practices match their values and expectations about the well-being of farm animals.

Values? Gene Baur of the Farm Sanctuary asks people to eat in harmony with their values. What’s humane about slaughtering animals?

Expectations? Do consumers understand that marketing words like – Humanely-raised, Natural, Free-range, Cage-free and Sustainability – are meaningless?

The guidelines Walmart announced are not mandatory and there are no timelines for compliance. This is what Walmart is ASKING the meat, dairy and egg producers to do.

  • Report to authorities and take appropriate disciplinary and corrective action in any cases of animal abuse.
  • Adopt and implement the principles of the Five Freedoms in their own operations and industry producer programs, and publish a corporate policy on animal welfare.
  • Find and implement solutions to address animal welfare concerns including, but not limited to:
    • Housing systems that lack sufficient space, enrichment or socialization (for example, sow gestation crates, hen battery cages and veal crates);
    • Painful procedures where avoidable or without pain management (for example, tail docking, de-horning and castration);
    • Euthanasia or slaughter without rendering an animal insensible to pain.
  • Promote transparency by providing an animal welfare report to Walmart and publicly reporting against their animal welfare policy on an annual basis.

To keep this post from getting any longer than it’s going to be, you can read the Five Freedoms in the Position paper or at, where else, Wikipedia. These Freedoms were originally developed 50 years ago in the UK. What impact have they had on the industrial agriculture system in the US? Not much that I can tell. A Google search found one reference to it in relation to animal agriculture.

It’s probably too early to tell how the animal agriculture industry will respond, but I did find one article written by JoAnn Alumbaugh, Editor and Brand Champion at PorkNetwork. She believes the first point above – related to animal welfare – was:

directed more toward activists than producers/suppliers. The undercover videos that activist groups stage in livestock facilities are edited and modified to expose alleged abuse over several months.

Yes, those nasty activists. If only they would mind their own business and let us get on with making money raising economic units animals. (PorkNetwork provides business information to stakeholders in the pork food system while enhancing the industry’s profitability, viability and tradition.)

Painful procedures? Here is what JoAnn has to say:

at the present time, no approved products are available for certain management practices, but the producers, veterinarians and animal health companies continue to work toward development and approval of products that can assist in pain management.

In other words – we know how to run our business and we know this is just a game we are all playing.

rather than dictating a timeline and requiring immediate changes based on the input of activist sources, it (Walmart) respects the knowledge and experience of its suppliers, and is moving forward to meet the needs of both consumers and suppliers.

In one of the many articles I read related to the Walmart announcement, it mentioned how Walmart’s push for sustainable practices led companies to reduce packaging or develop concentrated detergents. These changes were good for the environment, but even better, they were good for the bottom line of these companies. Reduce packaging costs, but don’t reduce prices. Win-Win for them.

The changes Walmart is asking of the animal agriculture business will cost them money – lots of money and will impact their “profitability, viability and tradition.” They will not make these changes willingly without pressure from consumers.

And, Walmart is asking for these changes in order to enhance their bottom line – to make consumers feel better about shopping there.

But these consumers need to wake up to the lies and distortions fed them by industry, academia and government. There is no humane meat when animals are raised as inexpensively as possible for one purpose – to be slaughtered.

No amount of “freedoms” will change that.

Advertisements

NY Times – Farming Science, Without the Conscience

Michael Moss/The New York Times

Michael Moss/The New York Times

Last week I wrote about the Jan. 19 article in the New York Times about the the experiments done on cows, pigs and sheep at a USDA research facility in rural Nebraska.

Yesterday the Times followed up with an editorial asking Congress to “oversee it and reform it — or shut it down.”

Here is some of what the Times wrote, you can read the whole editorial online.

You don’t have to be a vegan to be repulsed by an account in The Times revealing the moral depths to which the federal government — working as a handmaiden to industrial agriculture — has sunk in pursuit of cheaper meat and fatter corporate profits.

American consumers have steadily grown more aware of the ruthless excesses of industrial agriculture. Animal-rights advocates have toiled for years exposing things the industry does not want customers to know. Some reforms have taken hold; federal laws have improved the treatment of livestock since Upton Sinclair wrote of the horrors done to animals in “The Jungle.”

But the conditions of industrial feedlots and factory farms — the confinement of animals, the rampant use of antibiotics, the manure lagoons — would shock anyone who naïvely imagines farms as bucolic places out of children’s books.

The humans who work at the center are not necessarily oblivious to its failings. Some veterinarians and researchers told The Times they were appalled by the suffering and abuse. They should not have their consciences degraded by what is supposed to be beneficial work. Congress founded the center 50 years ago. It should oversee it and reform it — or shut it down.