LINKEDIN 09/16/24
MEDIUM 09/16/24
By Dr. Michael Shank
With Florida and Alabama banning lab-grown meat, and new lawsuits in response, the burger wars in America are getting juicier and more creative by the day. Both sides of the political aisle appear to be coming for your burger now. Unfortunately, the burger wars—and the latest conflicts over what can be defined as “meat”—won’t help American farmers at the end of the day.
If we really wanted to protect American farmers—their health and their economic futures and freedoms—it’s going to take a lot more than product banning and word defending. And it’s a much more difficult row to hoe, because our current food system doesn’t prioritize farmers. In fact, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) – known as factory farms, which produce 99% of the animal products that Americans consume – are leading to the collapse of smallholder farms and farming communities.
In order to ensure the long-term health and economic wellbeing of our farmers and their communities, we need to transition away from industrial animal agriculture and reduce our overconsumption of animal products. Here’s why:
First, our farming communities’ health is at stake.
A farmer-forward approach would put the health of our farmers and their communities front and center. Industrial agriculture, however, does little to protect these communities, and instead fights regulation designed to ensure animal welfare and the public health of residents living near factory farms.
Take animal waste, as one example. Fecal matter from factory farmed pigs and cows collects in untreated cesspools and seeps into creeks and waterways downstream. In states where animal waste isn’t carefully regulated, like North Carolina, CAFOs spray the contents of these cesspools—manure and all—into the air and onto neighboring communities, increasing their risks of cancer, respiratory diseases, and death.
Take farm locations, as another example. Factory farms are disproportionately located in Black, Brown, and low-income communities already facing higher rates of chronic disease and inequitable health outcomes. These communities were hardest hit during the COVID-19 pandemic, when essential workers in slaughterhouses were given inadequate protective gear, forced to work in close quarters, and died at significantly higher rates than the rest of the U.S. population. And since factory farms are hotspots for the next bird flu, the next swine flu, or the next global pandemic, these communities will continue to be hardest hit.
Take working conditions, as a third example. Factory farm conditions are treacherous. Workers in meat slaughtering, processing, and packaging facilities face extremely high risks of debilitating physical injury and chronic pain, sexual assault and violent crime, exposure to toxic levels of particulate matter and fecal bacteria, drug and alcohol abuse, and post-traumatic stress disorder.
None of this is farmer friendly. Industrial animal agriculture is endangering the wellbeing of both farmers and their communities, and if we wanted to save lives, farmer health is where we’d start.
Second, our farming communities’ economic futures and freedoms are at stake.
A farmer-forward approach would raise wages and profits for farmers and farm workers. Highly consolidated industrial agriculture, however, depresses wages and overproduces crops and livestock, all to the detriment of small family farms. This agricultural consolidation has taken its toll, and U.S. farm income is headed for its biggest plunge in nearly two decades. Farm workers are making 40 percent less than comparable non-agricultural workers, and farm debt is now at an all-time high. That’s hardly farmer friendly.
Take dairy farmers, for example, in the Northeast where industrial-scale operations are dropping wholesale prices to below-profitable rates, squeezing smaller farm operations and independent producers out of markets. These dairy farmers are now being crowded out by their corporate counterparts. Take hog farmers in Iowa, which due to monopolization in the industry saw a decline over the last three decades in median household income and the number of total wage jobs. Farmers are now earning less and less per pound of pork and feed grain.
A farmer-forward approach would also let farmers decide which crops to grow and how to grow them—and support economically-viable agricultural systems for communities everywhere. In the current food system, nothing could be further from the truth for farmers, many of whom feel anything but free.
Take the majority of smallholders, for example, who face a limited set of choices: raise livestock or grow the feed for it. Yet these cash crops aren’t particularly profitable. They require billions of dollars in federal subsidies, which are open to fraud and misuse of funds and don’t always benefit recipients in a hypercompetitive industry. The marginal profits from these industries, furthermore, can’t keep pace with the skyrocketing production costs of fertilizer, pesticides, fuel, and seeds.
This status quo isn’t sustainable for anyone—least of all our farmers. The hard truth is that a factory farmed food system continues to put the majority of American farmers at risk of physical harm, economic devastation, and continued dependence on highly consolidated industry that doesn’t care about their survival.
Transforming our food system to prioritize farmers and their communities first requires a just transition away from industrial animal agriculture. The global shift towards plant-forward diets—with 70 percent of the world’s population ditching meat for personal health and planetary health reasons—is a huge boon for farmers, provided governments get out of the way and let farmers farm to meet this growing demand. That’s the future of farming.
The good news is that a plant-forward approach is a farmer-forward approach. And if federal and state governments truly cared about American farmers—their health, pocketbooks and freedom and independence—they’d do more than wage theatrical warfare with bills that prevent new market share opportunities for farmers. They’d lean into the growing consumer demand for plants, and lots of them. And that’s what being farmer friendly looks like.