Undercover audio from a Tyson employee reveals that "free-range chicken" is meaningless (2024)

Last fall, an undercover investigator worked for two months on a Virginia farm outside Richmond, where chickens are raised under contract for Tyson Foods, the American company.largest chicken company. During their brief stay on behalf of the Washington DC-based animal rights group Animal Outlook, the researcher wasdocumentedhours upon hours of the typical horrors found in chicken farms: tens of thousands of birds crammed into dark sheds the size of warehouses, many seriously injured with gruesome injuries, wounds and deformities. More than once, birds were given no food or water, there was also a rat plague and there were images of insects crawling through the chickens' food.

The conditions are visibly inconsistent with Tyson's advertising claims that it treats and raises animals humanely"happy and healthy"chickens.

“It's just a living nightmare,” the researcher, who requested anonymity due to the secretive nature of undercover investigations, told Vox. “A video just doesn't do it justice.”

In August, after this story was originally published, the owner and manager of the contract farm were each charged with multiple counts of animal cruelty under Virginia law. Neither Tyson nor its direct employees have been charged.

“We were disturbed by what we saw in the video,” Tyson Foods spokeswoman Kelsie Gibbs wrote to Vox via email in May. “As of January 2023, no Tyson Foods birds have been placed on this farm and the farmer no longer has a contract to grow Tyson Foods.” (In March, Tyson Foods publishedannouncedit was in the process of closing operations in the area.)

When farm owner Amir Saeed was contacted in May before charges were filed, he declined to comment on the Animal Outlook footage.

Despite the gruesome findings, they are not that different from the documented circ*mstancesother farmswho raises chickens for Tyson andTyson's competitors. But the study's most revealing finding had nothing to do with the conditions of the estimated 750,000 chickens raised annually at the Jetersville, Virginia, facility. Instead, it emerged from a surprisingly candid conversation the investigator secretly recorded between the farm manager and a Tyson Foods "broiler technical consultant" who worked with the Tyson chicken farms in the area. In the video recording, the technician openly acknowledged that the chicken industry's "free-range" labels were essentially meaningless — a rare instance in which an industry insider said the quiet part out loud.

The farm manager brings up a Tyson competitor and wonders how other poultry companies handle so-called free-range chickens. The short answer: they really don't.

“Those birds don't go outside, you know that,” answers the technician. "They're not all going out... Look it up online."

The manager intervenes: "It's not like they let everyone come out and enjoy the sun."

“It's purely for commercial [advertising] purposes,” says the engineer. “They pick the most beautiful birds [for advertising] and throw them in the grass.”

The technician adds that "breeding birds" — the breeding chickens and roosters that supply farms with the chicks known as "broilers," and which are then slaughtered for meat — "are much prettier than broiler chickens, so usually they are the ones the one for our advertising.”

To be clear, this wasn't some gotcha moment. Although this particular farm was not a free-range farm, the conversation reveals a dirty secret within the meat industry: the actual conditions of meat labeled "free-range," along with similar humanely advanced claims, are a far cry from Old MacDonald's view of the term. chickens on the grass and enjoying the sun. Such brands are equivalent to what animal rights activists call “human washing."

“Usually people in the technician position are very careful about what they say,” the researcher told Vox. “That she was so open and honest about this, I was really shocked.”

Tyson Foods did not respond to a question about its employees' outspoken comments.

Free-range labeling and 'people laundering', explained

The 'free-range' label – along with many other livestock farming claims on meat, dairy and egg packaging – is actually part of an honor system.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)participationchicken producers using the 'free-range' label must provide the birds with 'continuous, unobstructed access to the outdoors'51 percentof their6.5 weeks of life. But there are no USDA auditors who come to inspect the farm, nor are there any specific requirements for the time the birds stay outside or the quality and size of the outdoor space. In fact, having "access" to the outdoors does not guarantee that free-range chickens will go outdoors at all.

To qualify as free-range, a farm simply needs to fill out a USDA form explaining how it will ensure that the animals are “raised in a manner consistent with the meaning of the claim.” will track the product and distinguish it from other products. According to USDA regulations, a small opening in a barn longer than a football field holding 35,000 chickens would be sufficient.

“Under current law, the USDA does not have the authority to conduct on-farm inspections of label claims approved by the Food Safety and Inspection Service, including those for 'free range,'” a USDA spokesperson told Vox via email . “USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service, another agency charged with managing market facilitation activities, offers a voluntary audit program called the Process Verified Program that can verify these types of claims.”

A small part of Tyson's chicken offering is the free-range brand underneathSmart chicken label, a mark itpurchasedas part of the $382 million acquisition of Tec*mseh Poultry in 2018. Some Smart Chicken products are USDA Organic certified and audited byCertified human, a non-governmental animal welfare program withhigher standardsthan most programs.

Tyson did not respond to questions about what percentage of its chicken supply is classified as free-range or USDA Organic certified.

In fact,free-range farms can be very similarthe conventional Virginia farm examined by Animal Outlook – tens of thousands of chickens crammed into dimly lit warehouses. The main difference is that a free-range barn must have openings so that chickens can access grass. However, because there are so many chickens in each coop and there are no USDA requirements regarding openings, there is no guarantee that they will all be able to go outside regularly or how much time they will spend outside when they get there.

In 2017, the Intercept reported oneresearchNo signs of animals spending any time outdoors were found at a dozen California farms owned by free-range chicken companies. The head zookeeper at Perdue Farms, a major chicken producer, has even done sosaidthe vast majority of free-range chickens stay indoors.

Instant action everywhere

Many birds may not even be able to muster the strength to go outside and walk around: chickens bred for meat are bred forgrow so big, so fast,that their slender legs often collapse under the enormous weight of their bodies. The cruelty isbuilt into their genetics, leaving them to live with chronic pain and struggle to get up.

In another part of the Animal Outlook footage, when the researcher asked the farm manager why so many chickens couldn't move, he was blunt: "They're just f*cked." That may have been why the manager and the Tyson technician thought the idea of ​​chickens running free was so ridiculous.

The American Pastured Poultry Producers Association, a nonprofit organization that advocates raising pasture-raised chickens — that is, largely outdoors with some indoor access — characterizes the deception of free-range chickensthis way: “[USDA's free-range label] has a broad definition and is being abused by the major poultry integrators with a government-sanctioned loophole. Free-range implies a bird on range or in pasture, but pasture or outdoor is actually not required or enforced. This is a fundamental deception when it comes to organic free-range chickens, turkeys or eggs purchased from commercial poultry brands.”

Farms that actually provide the animals with adequate space and access to the outdoors, or that breed "heritage" chicken breeds that grow more slowly and have fewer health problems related to their genetics, are virtually rare.An estimate, from the animal welfare research and advocacy group Sentience Institute, concluded based on USDA data on farm size that99 percentof American chickens live on factory-like farms.

According to the National Chicken Council, a trade organization for the chicken meat industry,less than 1 percentof American chicken is classified as free-range.

Some livestock farming claims are more extensive or more strictly defined"biological"In"burfri"(for eggs), which essentially requires chickens to be cage-free. It's hardly a utopia for the animals, but it is an improvement over the appallingly low conditions in which they livestandard ægfarme- although 'organic' in particular has less to do with the living conditions of the animals than with what the animals are fed.

There is also rarely any difference in how birds raised in higher welfare environments are treated at slaughter, such as federal slaughter lawsdo not cover poultry. According to a 2021ProPublica investigation, humanely labeled chicken is often processed in the same slaughterhouses, owned by companies like Tyson, as conventional meat.

According toVox contributorJessica Scott-Reid, Many other labels – such as humanely raised, ethically raised, sustainable, humane, raised by family farmers – have no legal definition and are marketing terms that tell consumers nothing about how the animals or the environment are actually treated.

For example, one of Tyson's brands is called"Nature elevated",but many animals probably do not have access to nature. (Some few are brought up by their natureProductsis USDA Organic certified - which does thatrequires access to the outsideif not much different for animal welfare, but most don't, and Tyson did not respond to a question about what percentage of his chickens have access to the outdoors.)

There is a clear commercial purpose behind many of these humane claims. For example, a director of poultry giant Mountaire Farms had thatto say thison animal welfare rating program One Health Certified during an industry webinar: “All you want a brand to do is reduce consumer concerns about purchasing your product.”Here isas Brian Ronholm, director of food policy at Consumer Reports, characterized the program in a column in Food Safety News: “This mark is essentially meaningless and should be ignored by consumers. In addition to being confusing and misleading, the mark represents the equivalent of a participation trophy for normal business operations.”

Tyson and many of its competitors have been the subject of lawsuits and regulatory complaints alleging that their advertising and packaging misleads consumers. Richman Law and Policy, a law firm specializing in animal welfare and environmental law, has submitted an applicationcourt casei Washington, DC's Superior Court ogUnpleasant complaintswith the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleging that Tyson misled consumers about the treatment of animals, the environment, slaughter and farming personnel, and the naturalness of its products.

“This is not simply a matter of hurting the feelings of conscious animal advocates,” Chris Green, executive director of Harvard Law School's Animal Law & Policy Program, told Vox via email. “A number of successful lawsuits have shown that humanwashing is quite widespread in the meat, egg and dairy industries and often crosses the line into misleading, false advertising.”

In a 2020 motion to dismiss Richman Law's lawsuit, Tyson said that animal welfare and environmental claims made in its marketing were "aspirational in nature and discuss goals and commitments rather than guarantees" and that they would not mislead any "reasonable consumers".

The meat industry's advertising vs. the reality

The Animal Outlook study documented conditions at the contract farm in Virginia during one growing cycle: from the time Tyson delivered a flock of 150,000 newborn chicks to the facility until they reached slaughter weight at six weeks of age. The researcher found chickens deprived of food and water after Tyson delivered the food late, causing some to die, chickens to struggle to get up and many chickens to be seriously injured. Workers threw chickens and twisted their necks to knock them down.

When it was time to transport the birds to slaughter, they were videotaped as they were thrown into metal crates to be loaded onto trucks "in a manner that causes bone fractures and major internal organ damage," said veterinarian Sherstin Rosenberg, who treated thousands of chickens in her cage. work as executive director of the Happy Hen Animal Sanctuary in California, Vox said after viewing the footage.

“I have watched images of sick, injured birds being denied food, water and veterinary care on dozens of poultry farms, but the images I have just seen are by far the worst neglect and abuse of farm animals I have ever seen,” he says. Rosenberg. “You could hardly design a more torturous environment,” she said, adding that the video shows dying and dead chickens in “advanced states of decomposition” with the potential to spread “infectious diseases to the other birds, human workers and unsuspecting Tyson -customers. " "

Animal Outlook

Animal Outlook

The Animal Outlook researcher also documented insects crawling into the chickens' feed and rat infestations – problems the Tyson technician repeated in the undercover video.

“The little chicks peck at those bugs, eat them and then die,” the Tyson technician told the farm manager in a conversation recorded by the researcher. “You have rats there, you have new rat activity in all your houses.” Despite these known issues, Animal Outlook claims that Tyson delivered fresh chickens to the farm.

IOf video, the technician also appears to argue to the manager that Tyson does not feel the need to improve conditions at the facility due to a lack of competing chicken companies in the area. “Tyson doesn't want to pay for anything – at least not here,” she said. "We don't have any competition here, so they don't have to do extra things here. They do extra things at other complexes where they have other manufacturers."

In response to these comments, Tyson Foods' Gibbs told Vox via email: "We rely on thousands of independent farmers to raise birds for our business, and we want them to succeed because if they are successful, we are also." Farmers who contract with Tyson Foods are responsible for meeting all contract requirements, including performing routine and preventative maintenance.”

The investigator also documented alleged violations of Virginia's biosecurity laws on the farm, intended to combat the spread of diseases such as bird flu, which have ravaged the poultry industry and resulted in the culling of nearly60 million chickensand turkeys in the United States since early 2022. Farm staff often failed to disinfect their boots (which Virginia regulations specifically require) before entering the chicken houses, the researcher documented, and the Tyson technician said that third-party vendors do not wear personal protective equipment in the stables. “They don't carry anything that goes into the chicken coops,” she said. "It is what it is."

Animal Outlook hoped that criminal charges would be filed against Tyson, in addition to contract workers at the farm. In a 95-page legal complaint sent to Amelia County Animal Control on January 25, Animal Outlook alleged that Tyson (along with the contract farm and individuals associated with it) violated state animal cruelty and biosecurity laws because it claims the employee of Tyson was aware of this. the investigator documented on tape the poor conditions on the farm, but the company continued to work with them. Animal Control took it to the Commonwealth's Attorney's office, which then forwarded the complaint to the Virginia Attorney General's office, said attorney Jareb Gleckel of Animal Outlook.

The Amelia County Commonwealth's Attorney did not return a request for comment in May before the charges were filed. The Virginia attorney general's office declined to comment. Attorney General of Virginia in 2017continuedemployees for cruelty to chickens at another Tyson contract grower.

Animal rights organizations have been confronted with thiscriticism, including within the animal rights movement, to pursue criminal charges against mid- and low-level employees. Many of these workers are socio-economically vulnerable – often low-income and/or undocumented immigrants – and are not responsible for creating relationships between factories and farms.

The structure of the chicken farm also makes it difficult for workers to do their jobswithoutinvolved in animal abuse.Manmeat companiesbrandlow levelemployeesor cutting ties with contract farms after investigations emerge, but ignoring the systemic welfare problems in meat production. As journalist Eyal Press, author ofDirty work, a book about jobs in morally troubling industries like poultry,put itin a Vox podcast interview: "On the rare occasions when the curtain is pulled back and we see this dirty work happening, the blame falls on the lowest-ranking people at the bottom, and that's very convenient for society."

Cheryl Leahy, executive director of Animal Outlook, said the organization focuses on systems change and holding companies accountable.writtenabout the 'downward scapegoating' that meat companies engage in by placing the blame on low-level employees. But she believes animal cruelty laws should be enforced regardless of the perpetrator's level of activity.

“I don't believe that people who commit gross atrocities should not be held accountable just because they do it in the course of their work,” she said. “The bigger point, though, is that on a systematic level you go after the people who are really responsible for it, and you can do things that are going to make it expensive for them. to deter them in the future. That is actually what the Criminal Code is intended for."

But it is extremely difficult to hold meat companies legally responsible for the way they treat animalsno federal lawsthat protect animals while they are on the farm, and birds are exempt from federal slaughter and transportation laws. State laws are primarily enforced against those who abuse cats and dogs, not farm animals. Undercover investigations have proven to be an effective way to expose common practices in the meat industry, although they have only led to wider changesof a toe.

The structure of the industry also hinders accountability because chicken farmers are contractors to meat companies, not employees. Therefore, they are set up as separate legal entities.providinga legal shield for the Tysons of the world. Also many contract farmerscomplainof exploitative practices by the meat companies they contract for, saying the relationship is more akin to serfdom than independent farming.

Contract farmers can investmillions of dollarsto build farms to raise birds for companies like Tyson, but those investments could collapse in an instant if meat companies close the nearby slaughterhouses that farmers supply birds to. Citing an "inability to improve operations financially" last week,Tyson closedthe slaughterhouse in Glen Allen, Virginia, which employed 692 people. The closure will also affect farmers who raised birds for the slaughterhouse, including Saeed, the owner of the farm Animal Outlook investigated.

“The closure affected 73 broiler contracts (55 growers),” Tyson Foods' Gibbs told Vox via email. “On March 14, we offered independent growers the opportunity to voluntarily terminate contracts early. If they choose this option, they can receive a one-time incentive payment or overtime based on individual past earnings. If they choose not to terminate early terminate, they were paid for the term of their remaining contract, provided they continued to meet contract requirements.'

Tyson recently received6 million dollarsin state grants to open a new slaughterhouse in Virginia near the North Carolina border.

While Tyson is shirking responsibility, this Virginia farm study is yet another example that underlines an important fact: consumers should be highly skeptical of meat labels and advertising. Tyson's employee seemed to understand this intuitively. Her light-hearted comment may not in itself lead to many changes in the industry, but it at least offers a rare moment of casual honesty in a sea of ​​industry deceit.

Update, August 2 at 14 EN:This story was originally published on May 17 and has been updated with details of the criminal charges filed in August against the owner and manager of the contract farm.