February, 15 2017, 09:00am EDT
Fighting Among Corporate Organic Factions Places Organic Animal Welfare in Limbo / Trump Administration to Decide the Fate
Dueling Corporate Interests Wait to See What the New Trump/Perdue Administration Will Do with the Pending Updates to Organic Animal Welfare Standards
CORNUCOPIA, WI.
One of the pending regulations released in the final days of the Obama administration, and put on hold by the Trump White House, was an already controversial rule that pits legitimate family-scale organic farmers against the operators of "factory farms" that had already been accused of violating existing organic animal welfare standards. A newly released analysis by a prominent organic industry watchdog, The Cornucopia Institute, explains what is at stake and why economically powerful forces in organics are squawking, principally, over new space requirements proposed for chickens.
The Organic Livestock and Poultry Practices Rule was published in the Federal Register on January 19, 2017, and amends current organic livestock and poultry production requirements. The new rule adds provisions for livestock handling, avian living conditions, and transport for slaughter, and expands and clarifies existing requirements covering livestock care and production practices. It includes mandates for the care of cattle, hogs, and poultry.
"The new rulemaking was in response to a more than decade-long controversy about concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), or factory farms, confining as many as two million laying hens on a single 'farm' without the legally mandated access to the outdoors," said Mark A. Kastel, Senior Farm Policy Analyst at The Cornucopia Institute. "This rule neither solves the problem nor makes any faction in the industry happy," Kastel added.
Farmers who produce eggs or raise chickens for meat, and abide by the requirements for outdoor access, or go even further and rotate their animals on high quality pasture, felt betrayed by weak recommendations to the USDA that came out of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), a congressionally mandated USDA advisory panel. At the time, the recommendations were shepherded through by the employee of one of the major organic egg producers, Organic Valley.
The NOSB recommendations, which were incorporated into the pending rule, call for approximately 2 ft2 per bird outdoors. In addition, although cages remain banned, multi-level "aviary systems" are allowed, and they are not required to provide more than approximately 1 ft2 per bird indoors. For comparison, Organic Valley requires 5 ft2 per bird of outdoor access for their farmers producing eggs, and European Union organic regulations require 43 ft2 per bird.
"Our analysis indicates that the inadequacy of these rules puts them in direct conflict with existing regulatory language that requires farmers to establish and maintain year-round livestock living conditions which accommodate the health and natural behavior of the animals," said Marie Burcham, a Cornucopia researcher and an attorney with training in environmental and animal law.
For poultry, to avoid undue stress that can cause aggressive behavior and injuries to flock mates, birds need adequate space to engage in "foraging behavior." This includes scratching and pecking at the ground for seeds, invertebrates, grass, and weeds.
"When deprived access to adequate, high-quality outdoor space, birds can become aggressive, which leads confinement-based egg producers to trim the animals' beaks. This practice makes it more difficult for birds to forage, and isn't needed on pasture-based farms. Unfortunately, it's still viewed as necessary and allowed under the new regulations," said Burcham.
The USDA announced last Wednesday that the new rule would be delayed for 60 days, until May 19.
Industrial egg lobby groups are happy to see this rule tabled. The conventional egg industry, which has invested in "organic" confinement egg production, is calling on the USDA to rescind the rule for good.
"After making campaign contributions to key members of Congress, and lobbying for the rule's demise, there is a chance these big-industry groups will get their wish. With the extensive new requirements for poultry, including laying hens, conventional egg producers who dip their toe into 'organic' agriculture will find it more costly to operate," Burcham added.
The controversy came to a head after the USDA failed to enforce regulations requiring 'all organic livestock to have access to the outdoors. The agency was allowing major egg producers a loophole by recognizing small porches with concrete floors and ceilings as satisfying the required "outdoor" space.
"In most instances, even if a court would accept that an enclosed structure was 'outdoors,' these minute porches typically only hold 1-3% of the birds," said Cornucopia's Kastel. "Thus, 97% of the birds are being illegally confined and the USDA has refused to take action. Their failure to do so is economically injuring the majority of law-abiding and ethical organic farmers."
While the largest conventional egg industry players are fighting the new rule because it will disallow porches, more moderate-sized operators who typically keep around 20,000 birds to a building and the Organic Trade Association are delighted and pushing for implementation.
"Two square feet of space, without adequate doors, and accompanying regulations that would actually encourage the birds to go outside, will do nothing to change current industry practices that result in the confinement of the vast majority of organic chickens," stated Burcham. "The proposal for 2 ft2 outdoors and 1-1.5 ft2 indoors, depending on the building design, will encourage business as usual for moderate-sized operations while seriously disrupting their factory farm competitors."
Due to lack of enforcement by the USDA, Cornucopia has produced research reports and associated brand scorecards, including one for organic eggs. The scorecards help eaters identify farms and companies that are adhering to both the spirit and the letter of the law. Many of the identified operations go well beyond the regulations.
"Whether this rule is implemented or not, we will not be changing our practices at World's Best Eggs," said Cameron Molberg, an organic egg producer from Elgin, Texas who has earned one of the top ratings on Cornucopia's organic egg scorecard. World's Best Eggs rotationally pastures 30,000 chickens in multiple mobile coops that are frequently moved to fresh grass.
"We are already selling a product that is produced to standards far above what is currently required or proposed by the USDA," Molberg added. "But if these rules go into effect, and/or the USDA continues to fail to enforce the organic law, the real losers are the consumers who are hungry for authenticity and a better egg."
MORE:
For a detailed analysis and notes on the complete new rule, including the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service's responses to public comments, please visit Cornucopia's Organic Livestock notes and analysis document. This white paper includes a legal analysis of the inconsistencies found throughout the new rule, especially in relation to animal wellbeing.
An additional source of quotes critiquing the pending organic animal husbandry rule can be found at Cornucopia.org.
Texas farmer Cameron Molberg is a former board member of the Texas Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association and was one of the country's top rated egg farmers, on The Cornucopia Institute's scorecard, prior to his election to serve on the nonprofit's board of directors.
The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based nonprofit farm policy research group, is dedicated to the fight for economic justice for the family-scale farming community. Their Organic Integrity Project acts as a corporate and governmental watchdog assuring that no compromises to the credibility of organic farming methods and the food it produces are made in the pursuit of profit.
LATEST NEWS
Israeli Officials Hiding Data About Forced Starvation of Gaza Prisoners: Report
Former detainees say the Israel Prison Service "has significantly reduced their food rations, to the point of starvation, causing them to shed dozens of kilograms."
Jun 27, 2024
Israeli prison officials are concealing information about reductions in food rations for Palestinians held in the Gaza Strip, where detainees—who have also reported horrific abuse including alleged rape and deadly torture—have been deliberately driven "to the point of starvation," according to a report published Thursday.
Security sources
told the Israeli newspaper Haaretz that the Israel Prison Service (IPS) is intentionally cutting Palestinian prisoners' caloric intake, a move confirmed by Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, who called the policy a "deterrent."
"The Palestinian detainees will receive the minimum rights and the minimum food, and I will ensure that this policy is implemented," Ben-Gvir, who leads the far-right Otzma Yehudit (Jewish Power) party,
said Thursday in response to a query from Israel's Supreme Court.
"There is no starvation, but my policy does call for reducing conditions, including food and calories," Ben-Gvir added.
"The IPS has been deploying a policy of starvation towards Palestinian prisoners and detainees."
However, dozens of Palestinians held by Israel, including so-called security prisoners and detainees unaffiliated with Hamas, have testified that the IPS "has significantly reduced their food rations, to the point of starvation, causing them to shed dozens of kilograms."
One unidentified security source told Haaretz: "Since the start of the war, there's been a deliberate policy of indiscriminate reduction of food. To put it mildly, this policy has raised factual questions about the figures provided by the prison service, to such an extent that it is impossible to get the full picture and to determine whether what is going on is legal at all."
"This is not just a legal question, it can cause security issues with serious implications," the source added.
According to the Association for Civil Rights in Israel, which, along with the Israeli human rights group Gisha, filed a petition in the High Court of Justice earlier this year:
Since October 7, 2023, the IPS has been deploying a policy of starvation towards Palestinian prisoners and detainees. Recently released prisoners testified that they suffered from constant and extreme hunger and very poor quality of food. Among the testimonies presented in the petition were those of a diabetic prisoner who ate toothpaste to raise blood sugar, and of prisoners who lost tens of kilograms in weight in recent months.
The petition argued that the food reduction policy amounts to starvation and torture, and contravenes Israeli and international law. It violates the constitutional right of security prisoners to dignity and health, constitutes a policy of collective punishment, and violates the IPS' obligation to provide detainees in its custody with appropriate prison conditions.
At a hearing on Wednesday, the High Court of Justice slammed the reduction of Palestinian prisoners' food rations as "unacceptable."
Appalling conditions have been widely reported in Israeli military lockups since the start of Israel's bombardment and invasion of Gaza in retaliation for the Hamas-led attacks that left more than 1,100 Israelis and others dead—at least some of whom were killed by so-called "friendly fire"—and over 240 others kidnapped on October 7.
According to Israeli whistleblowers who worked at the notorious Sde Teiman prison camp in the Negev Desert, Palestinian detainees there are tortured not to "gather intelligence," but "out of revenge" for October 7.
Often referred to as "Israel's Abu Ghraib"—the infamous U.S. military prison in Iraq where dozens of detainees died, some of them tortured to death—Sde Teiman has been described by former detainees as hell on Earth. Palestinians held there and at other detention sites described being electrocuted, mauled and even raped by dogs, and starved, among other abuses.
One Sde Teiman physician said that all patients at the camp's field hospital are handcuffed by all four limbs, 24 hours a day, regardless of how dangerous they are deemed. The doctor said that more than half of his patients at the camp have suffered cuffing injuries, including some that have required "repeated surgical interventions."
"Two prisoners had their legs amputated due to handcuff injuries, which unfortunately is a routine event," he toldHaaretz.
Last month, Haaretzrevealed that 27 detainees have died in custody at the Sde Teiman and Anatot camps or during interrogation by Israeli forces since October 7. While some were Hamas or other militants captured or wounded while fighting IDF troops, others were civilians, including some with preexisting health conditions like the diabetic laborer who was not suspected of any offense when he was arrested and sent to his death at Anatot.
One former Sde Teiman detainee also claimed that he personally witnessed Israeli troops execute five prisoners in separate incidents.
Photos and videos of Israeli troops abusing Palestinians—both alive and dead—have been published by perpetrators on social media. According to testimonies collected by the Geneva-based Euro-Mediterranean Human Rights Monitor, Israeli officers brought Israeli civilians into detention centers and allowed them to witness Palestinian prisoners being tortured.
Former detainees said groups of 10-20 Israeli civilians were allowed to record torture sessions in which the men, stripped nearly naked, were beaten with metal batons, electrocuted, and had hot water poured over their heads. The ex-prisoners said some of the Israelis laughed while filming their torture.
The new Haaretz report comes as the International Court of Justice is weighing whether Israel is committing genocide, in part by blocking food aid from reaching starving Gazans, dozens of whom have died of malnutrition.
International Criminal Court Prosecutor Karim Khan is also seeking to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his defense minister, Yoav Gallant, for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity including forced starvation of Gazans and extermination. Khan is also pursuing warrants to arrest three Hamas leaders.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Big Win in California as Big Oil Drops Effort to Drill Near Schools and Homes
"Big Oil spent tens of millions of dollars trying to fool voters," said one campaigner, "but it was no match for the groundswell of people power and community support."
Jun 27, 2024
Environmental, climate, and public health advocates on Thursday cheered what one green group called a "historic win" as a Big Oil industry group dropped a California ballot measure challenging a law banning oil drilling near homes, schools, and businesses.
The Sacramento Beereported that the California Independent Petroleum Association (CIPA) will withdraw its ballot measure seeking to overturn the state's ban on drilling for oil within 3,200 feet of residential, educational, and commercial buildings.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed the bill—introduced by then-state Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez (D-80)—in September 2022.
"We just won our David vs. Goliath battle," the Protect California Communities campaign said on social media. "Big Oil officially withdrew their deceitful initiative!"
"Our law is safe and will finally take effect," the group added. "We just protected California neighborhoods from toxic oil drilling!"
CIPA chairman Jonathan Gregory issued a salty statement following the ballot measure's withdrawal.
"Supporters of the energy shutdown can make unfounded claims in the press and in paid advertisements, but they can't make those claims in court without evidence," he said, according to the Bee. "That's why we are pivoting from the referendum to a legal strategy."
However, Newsom said CIPA's move "ends harmful drilling in our communities and enforces common-sense pollution controls."
"Big Oil saw what they were up against—and they folded, again," the governor said on Thursday. "No parent in their right mind would vote to allow drilling next to daycares and playgrounds. This is a huge win for all Californians, especially the two million living within a half-mile of these operations."
Food & Water Watch California director Chirag Bhakta said in a statement that "while this is a moment to celebrate the power of people coming together to take on Big Oil, we must continue to get toxic oil drilling out of neighborhoods, as well as all fossil fuel infrastructure, which also poses a huge risk to public health and causes pollution to our water and air."
Bhakta added that Newsom must now "immediately shut down the dangerous Aliso Canyon gas storage facility which was the site of the biggest methane blowout in U.S. history almost a decade ago and is an ongoing threat to nearby residents."
Communities for a Better Environment Darryl Molina Sarmiento said that "Big Oil spent tens of millions of dollars trying to fool voters, using the profits made at the expense of community health, but it was no match for the groundswell of people power and community support we were able to unite all across California."
Food & Water Watch's Bhakta said that public opposition to repealing the law "proves once again that Californians do not want dangerous and polluting oil rigs in their backyards, near where their children go to school and play or near hospitals."
"We will not sacrifice our communities anymore," he vowed. "This victory is due to the dedication of so many, and particularly frontline communities who are experiencing the brunt of the oil industry's pollution and have been advocating for years to get dirty oil drilling out of their backyards."
Nalleli Cobo is one of those people. The 22-year-old activist—who helped found the grassroots group People Not Pozos (Spanish for wells)—is recovering from illness related to growing up alonside an oil well and has been tirelessly fighting against Big Oil's plans to drill near residential communities.
"When I was about 11, I was diagnosed with asthma. By the time I turned 19, we had shut down the drilling in our South L.A. neighborhood, but not before I was diagnosed with stage 2 reproductive cancer," Cobo explained. "I lost my ability to bear children as a result. After three surgeries, eight minor procedures, three rounds of chemotherapy, and six weeks of radiation, I was cancer-free as of two years ago, at 20."
"My experience, like that of others who live in neighborhoods polluted by oil drilling, is a constant reminder that those in power do not value our health and wellbeing," she added. "It's a signal that some communities are expendable, that our lives don't matter as much as the fossil fuel industry's profits."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Key Senate Panel Launches Probe of Big Oil-OPEC Collusion
Illegal coordination between oil companies and OPEC may have cost U.S. families thousands of dollars in higher costs for gas and other necessities.
Jun 27, 2024
Announcing a probe into potential efforts by fossil fuel companies to illegally coordinate with international oil producers in order to fix prices, U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse on Wednesday wrote to 18 oil giants demanding that they turn over communications with the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, commonly known as OPEC.
Whitehouse (D-R.I.) wrote to companies including ExxonMobil, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips in his capacity as chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, weeks after the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) accused the former CEO of Pioneer Natural Resources Company of attempting to collude with OPEC.
Text messages, WhatsApp communications, and records from in-person meetings showed that Scott Sheffield tried to collude with representatives of OPEC countries to manipulate oil and gas production worldwide and raise oil and gas prices.
The commission made its discovery while reviewing a plan by ExxonMobil to acquire Pioneer in a $64.5 billion deal.
"The FTC's findings indicate that Sheffield and Pioneer may not have been the only individual or entity engaging in such collusive activities," wrote Whitehouse to the 18 oil giants, citing numerous examples.
"We're talking $500-1000 dollars of extra cost per year to Americans through direct and indirect effects of this conspiracy."
"In view of the findings against Sheffield, I seek to understand whether other oil producers operating in the United States may also have been coordinating with OPEC and OPEC+ representatives concerning oil production output, crude oil prices, and the relationship between the production and pricing of oil products," said Whitehouse.
Whitehouse called on the companies to provide communications between and among companies' corporate and affiliate officers and members of the OPEC Secretariat and OPEC+ concerning oil production output, crude oil prices, and the relationship between the production and pricing of oil products, dating from January 1, 2020 through the present.
The companies have until July 12 to provide the materials, the senator said.
Whitehouse noted that efforts by Sheffield and, potentially, other oil executives, to illegally coordinate oil production and prices with OPEC, may have had major, tangible effects on American families. He cited an analysis by the American Economic Liberties Project which found that "crude oil price-fixing schemes may have caused over 25% of the increase in inflation that hurt so many American families throughout 2021 in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic."
"Since the U.S. consumes 7 billion barrels of oil annually, the amount saved by shale oil drillers during their price war with OPEC was $140 billion to $210 billion a year," wrote Matt Stoller, the group's research director.
"Once that price war ended, presumably so did the savings," Stoller continued. "The cost itself is likely a lot higher because pulling shale off the market when demand spiked probably caused prices to increase by much more than $20-30 a barrel. Anyway, we're talking $500-1000 dollars of extra cost per year to Americans through direct and indirect effects of this conspiracy. This cost shows up most obviously in the form of more expensive gas, but higher oil prices increase the price of everything right down to potato chips because of gas being a primary cost in distribution of goods and services. For a family of four, that's two to four thousand dollars a year in higher costs."
Whitehouse wrote in his letter to the oil company that he was "concerned about the possibility that oil and gas companies could be engaging in collusive, anti-competitive activities with OPEC+ that would raise crude oil prices, resulting in higher costs not only for American families, but also for the U.S. government when it acquires crude oil for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular