A prominent animal safety group is calling on restaurants to do more to ban the use of animal gestation crates where livestock and poultry are grown for meat.

A new report from the group Animal Equality said some chains have made progress but many are lagging. Dozens of U.S. restaurant companies pledged to end the use of gestation crates for pregnant pigs in their supply chains back in 2008. Since then, 11 states, including Iowa and others in the Midwest, have either restricted their use or outlawed them.

Devon Dear, institutional outreach manager Animal Equality, said some restaurant chains still do not comply but she is encouraged others do.

"We've seen some really big players in this industry move away from crates," Dear acknowledged. "For example, McDonald's, Wendy's, Jack in the Box, Chipotle, Shake Shack, Panera Bread; these companies have all either significantly reduced or eliminated crates. We know that it can be done successfully."

Scientists said gestation crates, which amount to a space about the size of an airplane seat, are breeding grounds for disease. The report lists Denny's, Chick-fil-A, Dunkin, and KFC among 13 companies it contended have not been aggressive enough in reducing their use of the crates. Dear hopes the Farm Bill now being debated in Congress will put the issue in the spotlight.

In Iowa, the use of gestation crates grew along with the proliferation of large factory farms in the 1980s and 90s, where thousands of animals are confined in limited areas, creating health and environmental problems. Dear emphasized Animal Equality is concerned with the threats the conditions pose to animal welfare.

"When you have this many animals in one place, you're getting really high concentrations of feces, you're having all of the environmental impacts of this," Dear pointed out. "Pigs produce a ton of waste, and this has to be disposed of properly to not make nearby communities sick."

Dear argued the higher the pigs' stress levels, the higher the use of antibiotics, which often run off with manure into groundwater. Iowa's factory farmers have said they are responding to consumer demand for more consistently raised, high-quality pork and other products.


get more stories like this via email

Family farm advocates are calling for cuts in federal subsidies to large animal feeding operations - technically known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations - in the Farm Bill being debated in Congress.

Iowa family farmers want more support for conservation programs that benefit smaller agriculture operations.

Right now, CAFOs can qualify for as much as $100 million every year to reduce some of the environmental damage they can cause.

That's taxpayer money that Barb Kalbach - a fourth-generation family farmer in Adair County, Iowa - said could be put to much better use by small family farmers on their land.

"Things like filter strips along streams and rivers," said Kalbach, "which helps with erosion, and it also helps with nitrates and other pollutants entering the water."

CAFO operators contend they use the federal money to defend against environmental damage and that they're always looking for cleaner, safer ways to raise high-quality meats while responding to increased consumer demand.

As a board member for the Campaign for Family Farms and the Environment, Kalbach said she is calling for more support of conservation programs that would help family farmers. But she said she is just as adamant that the long-standing rules governing CAFOs are changed.

"Industrial-scale factory farms, even though they are industrial scale, they do not have to go by industrial standards," said Kalbach. "They go by ag standards. And that's why we have the problem with pollution that we have. That should be addressed in the Farm Bill."

The Farm Bill saw its first action in the House Agriculture Committee May 23.

The House version of the measure also proposes $30 billion in cuts to SNAP benefits over the next decade, including $170 million in Iowa.

For 15 years, U.S. restaurant chains have pledged to stop using gestation crates for pregnant pigs but a new report from an animal welfare group showed many are still dragging their feet.

Devon Dear, institutional outreach manager for the group Animal Equality, said too many restaurants still source their pork from suppliers who lock pregnant pigs in cages so small they cannot turn around. Eleven states, not including New Mexico, have already made the practice illegal, for good reason, Dear emphasized.

"Pigs are under lots of stress in crates," Dear explained. "More stress means more antibiotics; more and more antibiotics means higher chances of antibiotic resistance, and stressed animals are less healthy."

Hog production is not a major contributor to New Mexico's ag statistics, but the state does have its fair share of fast food restaurants. Dear pointed out some big chains have moved away from crates including McDonald's, Wendy's and Chipotle. The report lists Denny's, Chick-fil-A, Dunkin and KFC among 13 companies it contends have not been aggressive enough in reducing their use of crates.

The report comes as Congress is debating an update to the Farm Bill. As proposed, Animal Equality's analysis shows it would have negative effects for animals across the board. She hopes the report will put the inhumane treatment of pregnant pigs in the spotlight.

"One thing we do want to emphasize is that these corporate commitments predate any version of this Farm Bill," Dear noted. "Many are back from 2009, 2012, so irrespective of what happens with the Farm Bill, consumers expect companies to do better for animals."

U.S. pork production is highest in Iowa, while New Mexico is better known for crops such as chili peppers, corn, pecans and onions.

Wells in the Willcox Basin in southeastern Arizona are drying up, and many are pointing the finger at massive agriculture and cattle operations.

Kristine Uhlman is a retired University of Arizona hydrologist who says the Willcox Playa, a basin a few miles south of the city of Willcox, holds fresh water.

But it's also a place where there are no regulations to manage or control extraction.

She contends it caught the eye of the Minnesota-based dairy and beef conglomerate Riverview LLP that began setting up shop in the area in 2014.

Uhlman said, simply put, if you've had the money to drill deeper wells, you got the water.

"That is why those guys from Minnesota discovered they could drop a well and take as much water as they want," said Uhlman, "All the water they want, and nobody is going to stop it."

But the corporation has said the lack of regulation had nothing to do with its decision to move to the southwest, but more to do with the mild climate.

It is also a big economic driver in the region.

Combined, Riverview's Willcox dairy operations house tens of thousands of beef and dairy cows, with mature cattle consuming as many as 50 gallons of water a day.

Dairy and beef operations are expected to grow in the region, according to the Arizona Department of Water Resources.

Uhlman said water resources should be thought of as a savings or checking account.

She said a checking account is where most people have a paycheck deposited every other week, and know how much they have and what they can plan for.

That isn't the case for Arizona's water savings account. She said when water is taken out, there's nothing going back in. She added water regulation is a contentious issue for Cochise County, and encourages residents to do what they can to ensure they'll have enough until things change.

"There is no recharge approach that will recover any of the water that you've used," said Uhlman. "There are no underground rivers. I know there are people in Willcox who keep saying, 'But we have an underground river.' No, you do not."

Uhlman said private well owners are responsible for the upkeep of their wells and the quality of water produced, and that contaminants like bacteria and nitrates from ag operations and cattle can have serious health impacts.

Her Arizona Well Owner's Guide lays out educational information for well owners.