Pork Producers Unable to Defend Use of Stalls

It has become obvious that neither industry spokespeople or producers can articulate a convincing defense for the use of typical industry standard stalls in farrowing or gestation.  Because of this, and unless this changes, the industry can expect the geography over which they will not be allowed by law will expand until they are a thing of the past.

While those who hear the arguments against crates don't analyze it at the level of philosophy or academic ethics, the priniciple reasoning which is mounted to oppose crates comes from natural law and a kind of anthropomorphic appeal to the modern version of utilitarianism.  

The argument from natural law is that if a bird has wings, nature itself reveals that the bird should not be confined for life in such a way that it cannot use them.  If a pig has legs and musclature for standing and walking and a snout suitable for rooting etc. it is clear that confining it in such a way that it cannot use these muscles for standing or walking or rooting is not natural.

The argument from utilitarianism is one made to "pleasure".  Utilitarians hold that maximizing personal pleasure in a way which does not impede the pleasure of others (i.e., total utility or pleasure must be greater for all impacted by the action) to be ethical.  To cause animals to suffer (loss of utility or pleasure) to enhance human utility from their consumption is unethical because the utility of all (the animal included) is not maximized.  Many philosophers hold that no distinction can be made between human and animal pleasure or suffering at least in terms of which is more important.  While most modern philosophers that hold to this theory allow for the slaughter of animals if it is done quickly and without the animal's awareness that it is coming, they usually add that modern farming methods so diminish the utility of the animals during the production process that this suffering overwhelms the utility people get from consuming them.

There are certainly ethical arguments that can be made for the use of gestation and farrowing stalls which add to the economic argument.  But if the industry only provides ones that appeal primarily to economics, these arguments will fall flat in the face of an ethical challenge.  So far, no one has offered for, or from the industry, anything that remotely rises to a convincing ethical argument for their use.  If no one does, stalls are without question, on the way out.