A group of restaurants and grocery stores in California has filed a lawsuit to block the implementation of ‘Proposition 12’ for fear it will cause shortages of pig products, proving that, in the end, profit matters more than the wellbeing of animals.

Considering the overwhelming public support for ‘Proposition 12’ - a law that raises the welfare standards for many farmed animals in California including chickens, calves and pigs - and the significant damage being caused to the reputation of the meat industry by campaigns from animal justice groups like DxE, one would be forgiven for thinking that restaurants and food retailers might welcome anything that improves public perception of its treatment of animals.

However, a lawsuit seeking to delay the implementation of Prop 12 by a full two years tells us that in the end, welfare means nothing. By trying to protect the supply of pig flesh being produced both within California and imported from other states, retailers have shown that profit matters more than the way animals are raised.

Among other measures concerning various farmed animals, when it comes to pigs, Proposition 12 requires farmers to give animals a minimum of 24 square feet of space each. This also effectively bans the use of narrow gestation (farrowing) crates for pregnant and nursing mother sows. 

According to ABC News, few pig farmers have made the necessary changes, required of any farms that supply pork to businesses in California, even those from other states. This means that Prop 12, a state law, can be imposed on farms from Iowa which provides more than 80 per cent of the 255 million pounds of pig flesh consumed by California’s restaurants and grocers every month.

Never miss an article

Stay up-to-date with the weekly Surge newsletter to never miss an article, media production or investigation. We respect your privacy.

California has already eased the transition to the new system by allowing pork processed under the old welfare standards and held in cold storage to be sold throughout 2022, preventing the much-feared shortages for several weeks. The pork industry infers that this is not enough, bandying about fear-mongering rhetoric about a coming “pork apocalypse”.

Pig farmers maintain that the changes necessary would be too expensive, with an estimate from North California State University putting the increase in costs at around 15 per cent per animal for a farm with 1,000 pigs. Any such cost increase would likely be passed onto customers, but the greater issue appears to be the lack of time farmers have between the finalising of new regulations and January 1 when Proposition 12 comes into effect.

Given that Proposition 12 only mandates for certain measures rather than outline them in detail, and that the various government agencies involved were still accepting public comments for revisions this month, it does seem likely that farms unable to make the necessary changes will receive penalties.

For critics of campaigns pushing for ‘higher welfare’ on the grounds that they simply enable farms to carry on but with a nicer public image, Proposition 12 is a case study in how the welfarist approach can bring about liberation by increasing the financial pressure placed on farms and in doing so, shut down those which are no longer viable.

The pork industry in California has been warning of disruptions of pig products as a result of Prop 12 for many months, heaven forbid citizens of the Golden State have to survive without their bacon for breakfast. Perhaps producers and retailers are actually more afraid of consumers turning to alternatives and finding that healthier, more sustainable and more ethical food choices are every bit as delicious.

Andrew Gough is Media and Investigations Manager for Surge.

Your support makes a huge difference to us. Supporting Surge with a monthly or one-off donation enables us to continue our work to end all animal oppression.

LATEST ARTICLES