The Agriculture Department carried out its plan, announced in the early months of the Trump administration, to kill a 2017 regulation that would have given livestock on organic farms more elbow room than factory farms routinely allow for chickens, hogs, and cattle. The organic industry said it would use the USDA action as another element in its lawsuit to force the government to implement the rule on the humane treatment of farm animals.
Agriculture Undersecretary Greg Ibach defended the action, saying the explosive growth of the organic food sector showed that the USDA’s existing rules were sufficient. About 5 percent of U.S. food sales are organic, chiefly dairy, fruit, and vegetables. The organic industry said the livestock rule, developed over 10 years under Republican and Democratic administrations, would provide uniform standards nationwide.
Issued in the final days of the Obama administration, the organic livestock rule said farmers must provide outdoor access for their livestock and poultry on all but the coldest or hottest days. It would have effectively ended the practice of confining egg-laying hens in small “battery cages” and would have required group housing of hogs. The standards drew a sharp contrast with large-scale conventional livestock farms, which use battery cages, so-called sow crates, and veal-calf stalls that closely confine animals in the name of efficiency and labor savings, but which are viewed as inhumane by animal rights groups and supportive consumers.
The Organic Trade Association said the USDA “irresponsibly thwarted a fully vetted regulation overwhelmingly supported by the organic industry and the public.” Some 72,000 comments were submitted on the USDA’s proposal to withdraw the rule. About 63,000 supported the rule; only 50 favored withdrawal. Last week, the OTA asked a federal judge to schedule oral arguments in its lawsuit against the USDA. The suit charges that the agency failed to follow the rules for changing its mind on a regulation and unlawfully delayed implementation of the livestock rule.
In its announcement, the USDA said it “decides not to impose additional regulatory requirements for organic producers and handlers.” It also said the rule exceeded its statutory authority. Senate Agriculture chairman Pat Roberts echoed that theme, saying organic farmers “can maintain the health of their flocks and herds the best way they see fit” without onerous regulation. The largest U.S. farm group, the American Farm Bureau Federation, said the organic rule would have driven many farmers out of business. “The rule did not promote food safety or animal welfare,” said the Farm Bureau.
“The rule would have also vilified conventionally raised livestock without recognizing our commitment to raise all cattle responsibly, regardless of the marketing program they’re in,” said the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. “Secretary Sonny Perdue deserves a lot of credit for yet another commonsense decision that will benefit America’s cattle producers.”
Proponents said the livestock rule was essential to prevent sham operations that claimed to be organic but kept their animals indoors most of the time. The dispute is particularly bitter among poultry producers, some of whom say small enclosed porches provide sufficient access to the outdoors for thousands of birds. The livestock rule would have eliminated the use of porches as a way of meeting that standard for organic poultry.
“Without clear standards from the USDA, we are worried that businesses in our districts will suffer as consumers lose confidence in the organic label,” said Reps. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, and Chellie Pingree of Maine. “The final rule would have strengthened — not hurt — participation in the National Organic Program by ensuring a level playing field in the industry.”
The National Farmers Union agreed, saying, “USDA’s action to withdraw the [livestock] rule is a mistake that will cost the family producers who already adhere to strict standards in order to meet ‘organic’ standards. It puts them on an uneven playing field with the types of operations who skirt the rules, yet also benefit from the same USDA organic label.”
After the change in administration in January 2017, the USDA delayed action on the organic rule three times. In the Federal Register, it said the withdrawal would be effective May 13, the day the rule would have taken effect.
The Federal Register notice of withdrawal is available here.