eggs

Showing posts with label eggs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eggs. Show all posts
Sunday, 9 November 2014

Eggcellent Organic Eggs Banned (from saying they are free range)


Question: When is a very free range egg not allowed to be called a free range egg?

Answer: when it’s an organic egg!

From Spring 2012 until very recently, organic eggs producers could also label their eggs free range. The logic of this was that as free range rules are an essential part of the organic standards, organic eggs could be labelled as both organic and free range. Simple and easy.

In fact, organic rules are more free range than the free range rules.

Maximum unit size is half in organic what it is in free range. Organic housing units can be no bigger than 4800 birds, whereas in free range there can be up to 10000 birds.

In practice, many certified organic producers supplying local/regional markets having nothing like 4800 birds, but rather have a couple of hundred. However the rules on housing limits for both systems mean that the biggest organic houses are less than half the size of the biggest free range houses. In supermarket terms this is an important difference.

Not only that, the stocking rate differs too. Guess what? There are fewer organic birds per square metre than free range birds per square metre. This is the core of what it means to be free range – more room to roam.


In organic the rate is a maximum of 21 kg per sq mt, in free range it 27.5 per sq mt.


This has been incorrectly written about as the difference between 6 birds and 7 birds per square metre in other Irish media recently. This would presume a bird of 6.5kg, - a fairly hefty creature, even by organic standards.


So more room to roam, better even than standard free range, surely means that you can at least call it free range? 

Not so, according to the Department of Agriculture. The Department decided to seek clarification from the European Commission, and it turns out that products cannot carry the label of two farming systems.

The fact that many consumers may think organic is only about the feed is, it seems, irrelevant. That free range is a far more familiar and used term is irrelevant too.

Both terms could be used by organic egg producers from 2012 up until recently. Organic Certification bodies had sought and received clarification in 2012, from both the Department and the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, on the use of both terms.

Now it seems further clarification by the Department at EU level has knocked this back for the three dozen or so organic egg producers in Ireland.

Just to be clear, there are of course many other differences between conventional/free range and organic eggs and poultry.

Beak trimming and claw clipping are not allowed in organic. While not strictly an issue for free range, consumers of free range eggs could be said to be interested in this.



The lifespan of organic broilers (i.e. table birds)? Why that’s longer too. In free range, the bird typically lives to 56 days. In organic, the bird lives considerably longer, more usually 81 days.

Routine or preventative use of antibiotic is also prohibited in organic: if an organic bird is healthy, it simply cannot get antibiotics. Withdrawal periods are also twice as long for organic birds that do receive antibiotics.

According to Professor Dame Sally Davies, Chief Medical Officer for England, antibiotic resistance (which she add travels from animals to humans) causes 25,000 deaths each year in the EU. 

The feed for organic birds is always at least 95% organic and always GM free.

Eventually, this 95% will move to 97.5% and then 100%. Change is behind schedule, an Achilles Heel in the overall organic system.

Despite this one last minor blip, very strong differences are certainly there when comparing organic and free range eggs.

And organic birds certainly have the good life, when compared to birds from other systems.

Just don’t call them free range.

Note: The above facts on differences primarily comes from the organic standards of both main certification bodies, IOFGA and Organic Trust and from this publication by the Organic Trust.
Friday, 20 January 2012

NEW RULES FOR CONVENTIONAL LAYING HENS

Is it fair on organic egg producers that their conventional counterparts have just been given E16 million by the State? The E16 million was given to conventional poultry farmers to help them adjust their laying hen housing regime. Is this a trade distortion?

(pic: not a conventional laying hen ,even with the new regulations...)

According to the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine “Council Directive 1999/74/EC on minimum standards for the protection of laying hens states that, from 1 January 2012, the rearing of laying hens in conventional (known as 'unenriched') cages will be prohibited in the EU. From 1 January 2012, laying hens are only allowed to be reared in enriched cages or using alternative systems such as barn or free range”.

“The Poultry Welfare Scheme was introduced on 16 June 2010...and provided grant-aid at a rate of 40 % for the conversion to enriched cages, free range or barn systems”.

So the supports for conversion to a new animal management regime have been significant. And in general, anyone who favours higher animal welfare standards will welcome this change, a change spearheaded by a slow but steady shift towards ethical consumption.

The 1999 element of the EU regulation refers to the year the regulation was passed. The regulation, as the name suggests, was passed to improve the welfare standards of laying hens. So since then, the only egg producers who were actually compliant with the regulation have been some barn and all free range and organic producers. Because these producers had these higher animal welfare standards, their costs were also higher. And because of this, consumers who wanted to support these higher standards had to pay more for their eggs.

The Department has decided to give specific supports including a once off payment of E16 million, to the farmers who were not compliant with the regulation. Producers who were compliant with this regulation have received no special funds.

All this time, organic producers have had tiny markets, partly because it cost so much more for organic eggs, but also because of higher feed costs. A half dozen organic eggs retail for between E2 and E2.50.

When queried about the long timeframe, the Department responded: “The Directive provided that farmers and operators be given a long transitional period to adjust to this measure.”

They also said: “The awarding of support for the expansion of existing compliant production systems would not be permitted under State Aid rules/Directives and may in fact be seen as a trade distorting subsidy.”

But is this actually the case? Surely trade is distorted by the granting of extra supports to one category over another, as has happened? This situation is compounded by the fact that the ones who did not receive the supports were actually compliant with the higher standards all along. It thus acts like a penalty for good behaviour.

More and more of this legislation is coming down stream from the EU: on pesticides, on biodiversity, on water quality and more. In most if not all cases, organic farmers and growers are already compliant. Yet there is no specific reward for this. Consumers are asked to self-tax, to charge themselves more of their ever dwindling cash to do the right thing. Organic farmers are accused of being overly expensive, elitist and out of touch.

States have a choice: support the best practices or support the bulk of the existing producers. The French state has recently decided to put much of its resources into supporting organic, especially in the area of public procurement, Will the Irish state do anything similar? While there is always hope, it is highly unlikely.

Next post, we will take a closer look at the specifics of organic egg production, and why, even with these new, higher animal welfare standards for all laying hens, it still makes sense to choose organic eggs.