Eliminating gestation crates will not only ease the suffering of mother pigs – it may also put some money back in the pockets of Iowa farmers.
The USDA funded a two-and-a-half year …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you had a login with the previous version of our e-edition, then you already have a login here. You just need to reset your password by clicking here.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
|
Eliminating gestation crates will not only ease the suffering of mother pigs – it may also put some money back in the pockets of Iowa farmers.
The USDA funded a two-and-a-half year economic comparison at Iowa State University and found that eliminating gestation crates (as Prop 12 does) may reduce costs by 11% per weaned sow because the number of live pigs produced per sow may increase in higher welfare systems.
With companies such as Hormel, Perdue, Clemens and Tyson Foods all publicly stating they can meet the demand for crate-free pork, the passing of Prop 12 should be cause for celebration among farmers and California consumers alike.
Regardless of your own dietary choices, we can all agree that farm animals shouldn’t be locked in crates barely larger than the width and length of their bodies, where they’re unable to even turn around.
