Interesting Article in Today's Chicago Tribune

[Guest guest]

<http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0206260202jun26.story?nu

ll>

Food retailers press for humane farming

Industry, animal activists reaching some suppliers

 

By John Keilman, Tribune staff reporter. Tribune staff reporter Tom McCann

contributed to this report

Published June 26, 2002

 

Largely out of sight of consumers, restaurant and grocery store chains are

putting new pressure on their food suppliers to treat livestock more

humanely, a snowballing campaign that could change the path of the American

meal from barn to slaughterhouse.

 

This week two Washington, D.C.-based trade groups representing more than 75

percent of retail food sales across the nation are adopting a sweeping set

of rules designed to improve treatment of chickens, turkeys, cattle and

hogs.

 

It will be up to each member grocery store chain or restaurant business to

decide whether to hold its suppliers to the new guidelines, the details of

which could be announced Thursday. But the Food Marketing Institute and the

National Council of Chain Restaurants plan to track which suppliers adhere

to the new rules, and organizers say their members appear ready to direct

their substantial buying power toward more humane food producers.

 

McDonald's, one of the nation's largest buyers of eggs, chicken and beef,

has put a number of new standards on its suppliers in recent years. Most

recently the fast-food giant prohibited its egg farmers from overcrowding

cages and periodically withholding food from hens to spur production.

 

Some farmers, while reluctantly changing their production methods, say the

changes have more to do with marketing and cosmetics than the actual welfare

of animals.

 

But animal rights activists, who had little legislative success in changing

farming practices, say the industry's new concern over humane treatment is a

welcome and direct response to their attempts to raise consumer awareness

and shame food purveyors.

 

Affecting prices

 

It remains unclear how far the industry's effort at quiet self-policing will

go. And some farmers wonder how consumers will react if the changes drive up

prices.

 

Egg farmer Dave Thompson of Kent, Ill., spent hundreds of thousands of

dollars last year on a new barn so he could give his hens more room,

reducing the number in each laundry basket-size enclosure from eight to

seven or six. He also expects he will have to abandon the practice of forced

molting, starving the birds for up to six days so they produce bigger,

stronger eggs when feeding resumes.

 

Thompson said egg prices have been so low the last two years that his farm

hasn't made any money. But the changes he made for his half-million chickens

could mean he would have to raise his prices by up to 30 cents a dozen, he

said. He's not at all sure consumers will be willing to pay.

 

" I'm taking a real big chance, " he said. " The public needs to support this.

If they don't, then I think the whole plan will fall apart. "

 

Many consumers, meanwhile, appear to know little about the details of food

production or the recent attempts to find more humane methods. Some seem

gratified to hear about the changes.

 

" I love pets and animals. It breaks my heart to see them being tortured and

starved, so this is just a wonderful thing, " said Lois Janson, 71, outside a

Dominick's grocery store in Schaumburg. " But I am a bit surprised they're

doing it. Usually people just don't care. "

 

Others said the new guidelines are a waste of effort and money.

 

" The activists are just making a lot of fuss about nothing, " said Jim

Storms, 35, a construction worker who stopped at the store. " These animals

were made for food. We're not raising pets here. "

 

PETA influence

 

The animal-rights movement in America, led by the People for the Ethical

Treatment of Animals, has long decried some of the methods used at large

factory-like farms.

 

To keep efficiency high, most pigs and chickens are kept in close

confinement, which critics say causes physical and behavioral problems.

Other concerns come at meatpacking plants, where critics claim assembly line

production leads to such brutal mistreatment as the dismemberment of live

animals.

 

Earlier this year, some Illinois legislators--prompted in part by a PETA

video purporting to show gruesome conditions at Ohio egg farms--tried to

outlaw forced molting, calling it cruel and citing research that linked it

to increased incidences of salmonella.

 

But agricultural groups argued against the bans, and the bills died in

committee. Similar measures have crumbled in other states and in Congress.

Bruce Friedrich, a top PETA official, calls that a sign of the power of the

agriculture lobby.

 

Finding scant reward in political appeals, groups such as PETA decided to

try to wring changes out of the private sector through demonstrations,

boycotts and bad publicity. The activists figured that showing consumers how

food is actually produced would shock them into demanding change.

 

The efforts had little discernible effect at first. But after years of

fundraising, growing membership rolls and increasing media sophistication,

the groups saw their efforts pay off with a campaign directed at McDonald's.

 

PETA approached the company in 1997 about making changes. When McDonald's

didn't move fast enough for its liking, the group began a widely publicized

campaign outside restaurants, giving out " Unhappy Meal " boxes emblazoned

with an ax-wielding Ronald McDonald.

 

Bob Langert, the company's senior director for social responsibility, said

changes were already in the works, sparked by research that showed stress on

animals harms meat quality.

 

McDonald's adopted strict slaughterhouse audits in 1999 and later imposed

other rules on its suppliers such as egg farmers. Those who violated the

regulations would be dropped, the company said.

 

PETA called off its campaign, declared victory and went on to target

restaurant chains such as Burger King and Wendy's and grocery giants such as

Safeway and Albertson's--owners of Dominick's and Jewel, respectively. All

committed to new standards.

 

Although many retailers and restaurateurs say PETA had nothing to do with

the changes, Safeway executives acknowledge activist pressure was the

driving force.

 

" PETA was showing up here and there [at stores], trying to get media

attention, " Safeway spokesman Brian Dowling said. " They indicated they'd

show up at a shareholders meeting. We made the business decision that we

would connect with [the Food Marketing Institute] to come up with some

standards. "

 

Setting guidelines

 

The Food Marketing Institute, which represents 26,000 retail food stores in

the U.S., and the National Council of Chain Restaurants, whose member

companies operate more than 120,000 restaurant and franchise facilities,

brought together top scientists and animal welfare experts beginning almost

two years ago to come up with the guidelines it has prepared, Food Marketing

Institute spokeswoman Karen Brown said.

 

Although the guidelines are voluntary, Brown said, " Many of our members want

to be on the cutting edge of this issue . . . Treating the animals that we

use humanely would be in everyone's best interests. "

 

The group is looking to develop an auditing and inspection process in the

next few months to determine whether suppliers are complying. Another report

with further guidelines will be released in October, Brown said.

 

Although the food industry is scrambling to make changes to protect its

image, some analysts say the issue isn't very important to customers.

 

Ron Paul, whose Chicago-based company, Technomic Inc., consults for the food

business, said restaurant customers are more concerned about parking,

portion size and dirty bathrooms than they are about the humane treatment of

animals.

 

Timothy Boyle, 27, a Hoffman Estates accountant who was going into a

McDonald's, said that knowing the chain restaurant's animals are being more

humanely treated makes him feel better about eating lunch.

 

" But I wouldn't leave if they weren't treating animals right. It's just not

that big a deal, " he said. " I hate to see the people in the Third World

working in horrible conditions. But these are animals, not people. "