94% of Americans Agree Animals Raised for Food Should Be Treated Cruelty Free

By Daisy Freund

Wandering the meat and dairy aisles of most grocery stores is a bit like sitting down to read a children's storybook. Gleaming red barns jut out of green rolling hills. Cartoon cows and chickens graze in the shade of a tree or eat feed from the hand of a farmer. Add a few well-placed words like "all-natural" or "farm fresh" to this bucolic scene and the average harried grocery shopper is probably going to buy into this pleasant story of animals living the good life.

It's a story we want to believe. Ninety-four percent of Americans agree that animals raised for food deserve to be free from abuse and cruelty. But most farm animals' lives are about as far from the scenes on those packages as one can imagine.

Here's the real story: In 1955, the U.S. raised about 100 million cattle, pigs and birds for food. Through industrialization of our farming system we now raise more than nine billion. Efficient? Yes. Humane? Not even close. Most of the animals raised on modern industrial farms are either confined in cages, crates, pens or on the floors of giant warehouses. They are packed cheek to jowl, so tightly they cannot engage in basic, natural behaviors like perching, dust bathing or even stretching their limbs. They defecate where they live and sleep, filling the air with ammonia that burns and infects their skin, eyes and respiratory systems. Because these conditions are breeding grounds for the spread of diseases, industry has taken to routinely dosing animals with preventive antibiotics, putting human health at risk as antibiotic resistant diseases spread among humans.

Through investigations and educational efforts, there's a growing awareness that all is not as idyllic on the farm as it seems on the packages. More and more consumers are keeping the images they've seen of suffering farm animals in mind as they shop. A recent national survey, commissioned by the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), found that 74 percent of consumers are paying more attention to the labels that indicate how farm animals were treated than they were just five years ago.

Unfortunately, these labels are often confusing and misleading and don't always provide much guidance. As a result, there are widespread misconceptions about what common labels actually mean for animal welfare. For example, 65 percent of consumers surveyed believe the term "free-range" ensures that the animal spent most of its time in a pasture. But in reality, there is no legal definition of "free-range" for pork, beef or dairy products. On poultry products, birds must have access to the outdoors, but the size, duration and quality of that outdoor experience is not defined. More than two thirds of those surveyed think that claims like "natural," "hormone-free" and "humane" guarantee better animal welfare, when they actually require minimal improvements, if any.

Nearly half of all consumers also assume that when they pick up a carton of eggs, an independent inspector verified the health and welfare of the chickens who laid them. Sadly, they couldn't be more mistaken. Most farms are never visited by anyone except employees working for companies that are primarily looking out for the bottom line, not animals' welfare. The consequences of this lack of oversight have been dire for farm animals and sparked concern in three quarters of survey respondents.

It might seem overwhelming at times, but as consumers, we have the power to demand better conditions for farm animals and I've seen for myself that better conditions are possible. I've visited farms across this country that are raising animals in ways that better respect their needs and natures. Like the pasture-based farm in upstate New York where mother pigs are raised in groups and have an environment that lets them fulfill their basic maternal instinct to build a nest of twigs and soft vegetation before they have their piglets. Or even the large-scale egg farm in Indiana where hens popped in and out of their long house to dust bathe in the shade. When I visited, they ran toward the farmer, showing curiosity and comfort, rather than the fear and stress seen in battery caged facilities. These are meaningful differences from conventional facilities.

So how can a concerned consumer tell if the eggs, meat or dairy they are about to buy came from a farm that genuinely gave animals better lives or if they are just being tricked by claims that sound great but mean nothing? Welfare certifications exist that take the guessing and hoping out of shopping and actually represent better animal welfare: specifically, Animal Welfare Approved, Certified Humane and Global Animal Partnership (Steps 2 and above).

While these certifications represent a spectrum of ways to raise animals, from pasture-based farming to enriched indoor environments, all employ independent auditing systems to check on farms and require 100 percent compliance with standards that account for animals' physical, natural and emotional needs. Crafted by welfare specialists, these standards ban cages, crates and extreme confinement and set definitions for adequate space, indoors and outdoors. They require enrichments like hay bales and perches that allow natural behaviors and have standards guiding air and light quality to support animals' health. They also require responsible use of antibiotics and address animals' lives on farm, in transport and at slaughter.

Certified products might cost a little more, but consumers have overwhelmingly stated they are willing to pay more for better welfare. Sixty-seven percent of consumers stated that they would purchase meat, eggs and dairy products with trustworthy welfare certifications even when it means a higher price. In addition, 75 percent of consumers would like stores to carry a greater variety of welfare-certified meat, eggs and dairy. Once demand grows, supply follows along and prices will level off.

With a little knowledge of the labels to look for, consumers who purchase animal products can have a radical impact on the farming industry. That means ignoring the cartoonish marketing and looking instead for those welfare certifications—and opting for more plant-based alternatives—whenever we can. It means asking store managers and restaurants to carry more of these better products. Each purchase, each request, each inquiry adds up. Together, we can create a less cruel, less confusing and more compassionate farming system based on facts—not fiction.

Take the pledge to Shop With Your Heart. If you purchase meat, eggs or dairy, you have more power than you know. By buying welfare-certified animal products or more plant-based products, you send a strong message to food companies that you care about the treatment of farm animals.

This article was reposted with permission from our media associate AlterNet.

Show Comments ()
Statoil / YouTube

Early April Fool's Joke? Statoil Rebrands Itself as Equinor

By Andy Rowell

First came BP, which went from British Petroleum to Beyond Petroleum. Then Denmark's Dong Energy changed its name to Orsted, to mark its departure from oil and gas. Then earlier this year Shell announced it was morphing from an oil company into an integrated energy company.

And now, the Norwegian company Statoil is proposing to change its name to "Equinor." The rebranding exercise—or what some may call greenwashing exercise—will cost as much as 250 million kroner or $32 million.

Keep reading... Show less

World's First Mass-Market 3D-Printed Electric Car Costs Less Than $10K

The world's first mass-produced 3D-printed electric vehicle could hit the roads by 2019.

Italian startup X Electrical Vehicle (XEV) and Shanghai-based Polymaker, a 3D-printing filament manufacturer, are behind the LSEV—a $9,500 two-seater with a top speed of 42 miles per hour and a range of 93 miles.

Keep reading... Show less
Gage Skidmore / Flickr

Pruitt Sees EPA As Political Stepping Stone

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Chief Scott Pruitt was already voted "worst Trump minion," but, according to reports published last week, Pruitt has his eye on more illustrious titles.

Vanity Fair reported on Wednesday that President Trump was thinking of firing Attorney General Jeff Sessions and replacing him with Pruitt.

Keep reading... Show less
Gogama oil train derailment. CBC / YouTube

Risky Move: Canada Shipping More Tar Sands Oil by Rail

By Justin Mikulka

The Motley Fool has been advising investors on "How to Profit From the Re-Emergence of Canada's Crude-by-Rail Strategy." But what makes transporting Canadian crude oil by rail attractive to investors?

According to the Motley Fool, the reason is "… right now, there is so much excess oil being pumped out of Canada's oil sands that the pipelines simply don't have the capacity to handle it all."

Keep reading... Show less

What Standing Rock Gave the World

By Jenni Monet

At the height of the movement at Standing Rock, Indigenous teens half a world away in Norway were tattooing their young bodies with an image of a black snake. Derived from Lakota prophecy, the creature had come to represent the controversial Dakota Access pipeline for the thousands of water protectors determined to try to stop it.

Keep reading... Show less
Zero Point Zero

Netflix’s 'Rotten' Reveals the Perils of Global Food Production

By Katherine Wei

We all love to eat. And increasingly, our cultural conversation centers around food—the cultivation of refined taste buds, the methods of concocting the most delectable blends of flavors, the ways in which it can influence our health and longevity, and the countless TV shows and books that are borne of people's foodie fascinations. However, there's one aspect we as consumers pay perhaps too little heed: the production of food before it reaches markets and grocery store shelves. We don't directly experience this aspect of food, and as a result, it's shrouded in mystery, and often, confusion.

Keep reading... Show less
About 2,700 square miles of Amazonia's forest is destroyed annually. Dallas Krentzel / Flickr

Earth's Intact Forests Are Invaluable, and in Danger

By Tim Radford

The world's unregarded forests are at risk. Intact forest is now being destroyed at an annual rate that threatens to cancel out any attempts to contain global warming by controlling greenhouse gas emissions, according to a new study.

A second study finds that trees in the tropical regions are dying twice as fast as they did 35 years ago—and human-induced climate change is a factor.

Keep reading... Show less
Modern Event Preparedness / Flickr

5 Billion People Could Have Poor Access to Water by 2050, UN Warns

As the world's population grows and the planet warms, demand for water will rise but the quality and reliability of the supply is expected to deteriorate, the United Nations said Monday in this year's World Water Development Report.

"We need new solutions in managing water resources so as to meet emerging challenges to water security caused by population growth and climate change," said Audrey Azoulay, director-general of the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), in a statement. "If we do nothing, some five billion people will be living in areas with poor access to water by 2050."

Keep reading... Show less


The best of EcoWatch, right in your inbox. Sign up for our email newsletter!