THE DECISION by pork producers to retain the unlimited use of sow stalls until 2012 and then to allow their continued use for the first four weeks of a sow's pregnancy is "nothing short of a national disgrace", according to SPCA National President Peter Mason.

"The SPCA will fight the decision to the bitter end. We will soon launch a large public campaign to mobilise consumers to call for a ban on the use of sow stalls."

The last issue of Animals' Voice highlighted the SPCA's campaign to end the use of sow stalls and battery hen cages and, with a note of optimism, reported a change of heart by the New Zealand Pork Industry Board. The board had decided to recommend to producers a complete dry sow stall ban by 2012 and was confident this proposal would be agreed to at its July annual general meeting.

While the SPCA was pleased with the industry's realisation that sow stalls were unacceptable and had to go, the timeframe it proposed was too long for the Society to accept. As pork industry representatives gave some early indications that the 2012 deadline could be brought forward, the SPCA hoped an agreement could be reached with the industry before the Welfare Code for Pigs came under review by the National Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (NAWAC).

In the meantime, the European Union's Agriculture Council has agreed to ban sow stalls for the majority of a sow's pregnancy. Before this agreement could be reached, however, major compromises had to be made in order to bring on board those European countries that have traditionally shown a less-than-positive attitude toward animal welfare.

As a result, Europe agreed to a phase-out period to be completed by 2013, but to allow sows to be confined to stalls for the first four weeks of their pregnancy after that date. Animal welfare groups have vowed to continue to campaign for a total stall ban and are mobilising consumers to boycott all intensively farmed pork products.

In New Zealand, it became clear that a minority of pork producers were refusing to abandon the use of these cruel stalls. This put them at odds with their industry's leadership and with the 71 per cent of pork farmers who do not use the dry sow stall system.

It appears these "rebel" producers, although small in number, own the larger and more intensive operations.

SPCA Campaign Co-ordinator Hans Kriek says: "Their motivation as business people (it is hard to call them farmers) is simple. They want to make as much money as possible and have little interest in the welfare of the animals they exploit.

"That they destroy their industry's reputation is of no concern to them. In fact, it may even be to their benefit. As large producers, they will survive a temporary reduction in consumer support. It is the smaller producers who will lose out and disappear from the scene, enabling the larger producers to grow even bigger with fewer competitors."

With the July AGM looming, the pork industry came to a crossroads. A decision to phase out sow stalls in a reasonable timeframe would have enabled it to rebuild its reputation and move on. A decision to continue with the use of the stalls would set it on a collision course with the entire New Zealand animal welfare movement and all caring New Zealand consumers.

In the days before this crucial meeting, in an open letter to New Zealand pork producers, Peter Mason urged them to do the right thing and completely phase out sow stalls.

He was supported in his call for a quick phase-out by Agriculture Minister Jim Sutton. In his address to the AGM, the minister told delegates to take a long hard look at themselves and to "get real". He queried why a minority of farmers continued to use sow stalls, when the vast majority had shown they could operate without them. The minister said he could not believe that phasing out stalls by 2006 was an impossible target for the industry to achieve.

But despite the wishes of the minister, consumers, the animal welfare movement, the board and the majority of pig farmers, the industry decided not to phase out dry sow stalls. Delegates voted to allow unlimited use of stalls until 2012 and then to allow their continued use for the first four weeks of the sow's pregnancy.

The shock decision received huge media coverage, with calls for a national boycott of intensively farmed pork by Green MP Sue Kedgley and Hans Kriek.

In a TV debate with Hans Kriek, Pork Industry Board CEO Angus Davidson added insult to injury by making the outrageous claim that sows actually prefer to live in stalls. This demonstrated that the pork industry is out of touch with reality in believing that sows prefer to be confined in metal crates so small they can't walk or even turn around.

Following the widespread media coverage, the SPCA has received huge support from members of the public disgusted by the pork industry's callous attitude. The industry tried in vain to control the damage by claiming that delegates voted to phase out the use of dry sow stalls by 2012. This was clearly misleading as they did not vote to phase them out, but merely reduce their use to four weeks after 2012.

Sows already spend between 33 and 45 days in a farrowing crate (where they give birth and suckle their piglets) before they are impregnated again and confined to the dry sow stall. This means that even after 2012, the pork industry would allow a total confinement of nine to 10 weeks continuously, which is totally unacceptable on welfare grounds.

The SPCA is turning its attention to the NAWAC review of the Welfare Code for Pigs. This committee has the task of enacting minimum standards of farming that comply with the Animal Welfare Act. Given the widespread opposition to the sow stall, it is hard to see how NAWAC could sanction the ongoing use of these stalls.

Arguments by intensive producers that sow stalls are essential to the pig industry hold no water, says Hans Kriek. "The majority of New Zealand pig farmers do not use stalls and the UK, which completely phased out the use of sow stalls in 1998, offers compelling proof that stalls are unnecessary to the pig industry."

It is expected that NAWAC will be asking for public submissions later in the year and the SPCA is preparing a campaign to mobilise consumers to make submissions.

At this time the SPCA will be calling on all New Zealanders to respond. Supported by the Green Party and The Body Shop, this campaign will for the first time give the public a real opportunity to voice opposition to the sow stall to legislators.

The SPCA is convinced that its call for submissions against the sow stall will be supported by tens of thousands of caring New Zealanders.

In the meantime, consumers can send a strong message to the pork industry by refusing to buy pork products unless they are clearly labelled as free range or organic.

From Animals' Voice, Spring 2001, a publication of Auckland SPCA.