National Pork Producers Council

The National Pork Producers Council, headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa, conducts public policy outreach on behalf of its 43 affiliated state associations, supporting nearly 69,000 U.S. pork producers and other industry stakeholders by working to establish the U.S. pork industry as a consistent and responsible supplier. This has been called into question by the NPPC's defense of the industry's standard practice of housing pregnant pigs in gestation crates, a practice which is criticized by The Humane Society and other animal welfare groups.^[1] The NPPC supports a variety of housing systems (including gestation crates as well as open pen housing), each of which has advantages and disadvantages concerning animal welfare according to the American Veterinary Medical Association.^[2]

Political Involvement

According to NPPC's website, their mission is to "fight for legislation and regulations, develop revenue and market opportunities and protect the livelihoods of America’s 67,000 pork producers. Public policy issues on which it focuses are in the areas of agriculture and industry, animal health and food safety, environment and energy, and international trade." ^[3]

Beyond legislation and regulation, NPPC is involved in the political process through a political action committee, PorkPAC. The PAC seeks to educate the public and support candidates at the state and federal levels who support the industry.^[4]

Organization

NPPC is governed by Board of Directors, composed of 15 members, and pork producer delegates from the states. Recommendations for new policies and for changes to existing policies are considered annually, in March, at the National Pork Industry Forum.

NPPC also creates ad hoc task forces to study or provide guidance on industry issues. NPPC receives advice and works closely with the meat packing industry and animal health and feed companies, as well as the National Pork Board. Together the NPPC and NPB have formed joint task forces on certain issues.^[5]

Ethical Principles

The pig farmers represented by NPPC adhere to a set of We Care^[6] guidelines, including:

Produce safe food
Promote and protect animal well-being
Ensure practices to ensure public health
Safeguard natural resources in all our practices
Provide a work environment that is safe and consistent with our other ethical principles
Contribute to a better quality of life in our communities

Criticism

NPPC has received significant criticism from animal-rights groups for its support for housing pregnant pigs in gestation stalls. (NPPC supports the rights of farmers to use housing systems that work best for the well-being of their animals.) One advantage of gestation stalls is that they allow farmers to provide individualized care for each animal. If a farmer notices that one sow is underweight, for example, he or she can increase that sow's feed rations without affecting another's. Farmers and their veterinarians can also easily check each pig for any signs of sickness. Gestation stalls also allow each sow protection from other pregnant sows, who tend to be aggressive and establish a "pecking order" similar to chickens. Pregnant sows can often fight to the death if left in open-pen housing systems.

Livestock industry consultant and animal welfare activist Dr. Temple Grandin has been quoted as saying, "We've got to treat animals right, and gestation stalls have got to go." She continues, "Confining an animal for most of its life in a box in which it is not able to turn around does not provide a decent life." While Grandin, an expert mostly on beef cattle, opposes the use of gestation stalls, many other animal-care experts believe they are the best system for housing pregnant sows. The American Veterinary Medical Association and the Association of Swine Veterinarians both recognize gestation stalls as providing for the well-being of pregnant sows.

In July 2012, the National Journal took out of context separate quotes on gestation stalls from NPPC's communications director.^[7] A discussion with then-Journal reporter Ben Terris included a description of gestation stalls: "So, our animals can't turn around for the 2 and a half years they're having piglets. They are moved to bigger farrowing, or birthing, pens for about a month each time they have a litter of piglets. Gestation stalls allow farmers to give sows individual care and feed rations and prevent aggression among sows, and animal scientists recognize these individual pens as the best system for housing pregnant sows. While the real motivation of animal-rights groups such as HSUS to banning gestation stalls is to raise the cost of producing pork as a way of reducing the consumption of meat, they claim they don't like gestation stalls because they're inhumane. I don't know who at HSUS asked the sow." Terris used only the first and last sentences, juxtaposing them in a way that forced Neil Dierks, NPPC CEO, to issue the following: “On behalf of the National Pork Producers Council, I sincerely regret the recent comments in a news article that were attributed to an employee of the National Pork Producers Council. The comments were inappropriate and do not represent the views of our organization nor do they reflect the values of the hardworking American farmers who produce safe and nutritious pork for consumers around the world. Our nation’s pork producers take great pride in their long-standing commitment to the highest standards of humane care for animals. They are good people with good values. They care deeply for the animals they raise and make their health and well-being a top priority.”^[8] Despite knowing that the quote is out of context, HSUS continues to misuse it on its Facebook page and in ads.

References

This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Monday, August 24, 2015. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.