Corporate Moves Create Tipping Point in Animal Welfare?

Carrie A. Scrufari, Esq.

“Look at the world around you. It may seem like an immovable, implacable place. It is not. With the slightest push – in just the right place – it can be tipped.”  -Malcolm Gladwell, The Tipping PointDay_old_chick_black_backgroundIn May, Walmart announced that its food suppliers should adhere to greater animal welfare standards.  This announcement received wide support from animal rights groups, and the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS) endorsed Walmart’s move.  Following suit, General Mills announced yesterday that it would commit to sourcing 100% of its eggs from cage-free facilities. General Mills released a statement proclaiming that it would “commit to working toward 100 percent cage free eggs for our U.S. operations.”  Although Walmart and General Mills’ announcements signal a significant turning of the tide with respect to animal welfare and a tipping point in terms of the market power that can be wielded to encourage stronger animal welfare standards, they fall short of what is necessary to implement timely, lasting, and meaningful reforms.

Walmart’s plan relies on voluntary compliance from its suppliers and does not contain any hard deadlines or timelines specifying when suppliers should meet these new animal welfare standards.  Walmart could – and likely will – receive positive press for its decision to prioritize animal welfare without actually ensuring its suppliers are complying with the new policy (which involve limiting prophylactic antibiotic use and eliminating the use of gestation crates for pigs and battery cages for egg-laying hens).  Similarly, General Mills has not committed to a time line for achieving its 100% cage free egg supply, stating instead that it “will work with suppliers to determine a path and reasonable timeline toward this commitment.”

Notably, Costco made a similar announcement with respect to battery cages seven years ago, and – as a recent HSUS undercover investigation has revealed – Costco is still sourcing from suppliers who raise animals in abhorrent conditions.  Walmart and General Mills could very easily follow Costco’s path to nowhere in the animal welfare realm.  Although Walmart and General Mills’ position on animal welfare is laudable, relegating animal welfare to the market under a voluntary compliance regime with no deadline in place is insufficient.  Nevertheless, such corporate moves likely remain this country’s best hope for improving the lives of agricultural animals.  In the face of an ineffective federal regulatory regime for animal welfare, Walmart and General Mills could succeed where Congress has not.

Congress passed the Animal Welfare Act of 1966 with the intention to provide “humane care and treatment” to animals in interstate commerce (7 U.S.C. §§ 2131 – 2159 [2008]).  Notably, the Act exempts all farm animals such as cows, pigs, and poultry raised for human consumption.  The Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) of 1906 – which regulates the production of livestock meat from cattle, sheep, pigs, goats, and horses – fares no better (21 U.S.C. §§ 601 – 625 [2014]).  Although the FMIA incorporated the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) (7 USC §§ 1901–07), which requires the slaughtering of livestock to “be carried out only by humane methods,” poultry are exempt from these requirements (7 U.S.C. § 1902 [a]).  Remarkably, the Poultry Products Inspection Act, which regulates the slaughter of chicken, ducks, geese, and turkey in interstate commerce, does not contain any provisions dictating the humane raising and slaughtering of these birds (21 U.S.C. § 451).  In a 2005 Notice to Poultry Processing, the Food Safety and Inspection Service conceded, “there is no specific federal humane handling and slaughter statute for poultry.”

The patchwork of federal law regulating animal welfare has been unable to adequately protect the animals raised for food in this country from a myriad of abuses.  Thus, it seems that major corporations – in response to consumer demand – are stepping up to fill in the gaps.  The companies with arguably the most capital and market power in America have taken a stance against agricultural animal cruelty.  Now they just need to devise a system of supervision and accountability for their suppliers, coupled with a deadline for compliance.  If our food system is to tip in favor of animal welfare and away from factory farming, now is the time.

2 Responses

  1. Respectfully, this is wrong.Corporate accountability is a feel-good public relations gloss which enables further abuse and prevents structural change. The previous post was much more on point concerning welfare v abolition although, despite Francione’s views, it is possible to engage with both albeit in an asymmetric manner.It is very naive to rely upon Wal*Mart or any other capital accumulator fleecing consumers as the future o animal welfare. Perhaps welfare is only possible when BigBox store collapse.

  2. […] Our thanks to Animal Blawg, where this post was originally published on July 9, […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: