In West Liberty, Iowa, Mike Deahr houses his 3,000 breeding pigs in small enclosures that keep them from turning around and interacting with others for the first 28 days of their 115-day pregnancy.
The state of California, animal-welfare groups like the Humane Society, and billionaire investor Carl Icahn are pressing fast-food giants like McDonald’s, meatpacking companies and hog farmers like Mike Deahr to provide pregnant hogs more space. They say the crates confine sows to the degree that they can barely turn around or walk.
Pork producers are resisting, saying such moves would raise meat prices by causing farmers to spend millions of dollars changing their operations, create supply-chain chaos and risk their pigs’ health.
“Sows are aggressive animals,” said one Iowa farmer. “The stalls prevent them from fighting each other and stop larger sows from stealing food from smaller ones. They can also prevent accidents if a worker gets between two fighting pigs.”
A 2018 California law (backed by the Humane Society) is prompting change among some farmers. The law requires breeding pigs to be able to lie down and turn around in spaces in which they are housed, essentially outlawing pork produced using small gestation stalls. Supermarkets and restaurants found in violation of the law could be punished with fines of up to $1,000 or as many as 180 days in jail. Only about 7% of U.S. sow housing meets California’s standard.
Getting rid of gestation stalls can make hog farmers less efficient. Farmers would have to house fewer hogs in their barns to comply with larger square-footage requirements.
This article complements our similar Ethical Dilemma on page 300 of the text and should generate a lively class discussion.
Classroom discussion questions:
- Make the case for and against the current system of breeding hogs.
- What OM tools might be helpful in analyzing the cost differences between the two processes? (Hint: see Chapter 10’s Methods Analysis).