Labeling Misleading in Animal Derived Foods, Australia

Consumer watchdog CHOICE is also calling for a national definition of “free-range,” saying that there is too much variation in the labeling.
Labeling Misleading in Animal Derived Foods, Australia
A bomb disposal officer walks down Wilson Street in Green Valley Nov. 8, 2005, in Sydney, Australia. (Ian Waldie/Getty Images)
2/23/2010
Updated:
10/1/2015

<a><img src="https://www.theepochtimes.com/assets/uploads/2015/09/AUSTRALIA-C.jpg" alt="In Australia, a leading animal rights group says food labeling standards are misleading consumers about the conditions of local farm animals. (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)" title="In Australia, a leading animal rights group says food labeling standards are misleading consumers about the conditions of local farm animals. (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)" width="320" class="size-medium wp-image-1822740"/></a>
In Australia, a leading animal rights group says food labeling standards are misleading consumers about the conditions of local farm animals. (Daniel Berehulak/Getty Images)
SYDNEY—Food labeling standards in Australia are misleading consumers about the conditions of local farm animals, says a leading animal rights group.

The Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), Australia’s largest animal welfare organization, says terms like “free-range”, “corn-fed” and even “organic” are used inconsistently across a range of animal-derived products, and they are calling for mandatory national standards.

The misleading labeling of eggs is of particular concern, says the RSPCA, noting that just because a carton shows a happy chicken on the cover and says “fresh farm” or “free-range,” does not mean that the eggs were produced with high standards of animal welfare.

“We believe they need to have all information about how food is produced. There are no nationally consistent or legally enforced terms like ‘free-range’,” says Lisa Chalk, Communications Manager for RSPCA.

Consumer watchdog CHOICE is also calling for a national definition of “free-range,” saying that there is too much variation in the labeling, which misleads the consumer to think that a product is ethical.

“While there are some certifying bodies, there seem to be a lot more free-range eggs on the market than could possibly be produced,” says Christopher Zinn, CHOICE’s media spokesperson.

In 2006, concerns were raised about an egg scam after an analysis of data provided by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, the Australian Egg Corporation and the Free-Range Egg and Poultry Association suggested that farmers were incapable of producing 364.8 million “free-range” eggs.


The data led to assertions that as many as 200,000 factory-farmed eggs were being called “free-range,” while still being produced in caged environments. The analysis noted that consumers had been ripped off by around $13 million (US$11.6 million) annually in overpayment for the costlier free-range products.

Battery Hens

In Australia, approximately two billion eggs are produced annually, according to a 2006 Food Standards Australia and New Zealand (FSANZ) review. Over two-thirds of those continue to come from factory farms, which are known as battery hens.

Depending on the size, cages may be arranged in multiply layers and housed in sheds of over 30,000 birds. Unable to move freely, the birds are constantly drained of calcium to form egg shells, leaving them vulnerable to severe osteoporosis, known as “caged layer fatigue.” Calcium depleted, millions of hens become paralyzed and die of hunger and thirst.

The RSPCA believes that all hens in Australia should be out of cages in order to allow better animal welfare procedures and also to follow international trends.

“We see battery hens as a form of legalized cruelty. Hens are the most compromised among all farm animals. We want all hens out of cages,” says Ms. Chalk.

Pork Labeling Misleading

Hens are not the only farm animals compromised by labeling, however. There are also concerns about describing pork as “eco farmed” or “bred free-range.”

In 2009, Humane Society International conducted a survey of over 3,000 Australians. More than 93 percent of those questioned did not know that the label “bred free-range” meant the meat came from an animal that had access to the outdoors only in the first few weeks of its life, before being transferred into a factory-farming operation.

Ms. Chalk says regions like the U.K. and the European Union (E.U.) are well ahead of Australia when it comes to food manufacturing and product labeling.

The E.U. introduced mandatory labeling of egg production systems in 2004 and is presently contemplating the introduction of an “EU Animal Welfare Label.”

The U.K. is planning to ban all battery hen farming by 2012, while Switzerland has already banned the domestic production of battery eggs and will only import them when marked with the words “Produced in battery cages.”

Ms. Chalk says, “One of the problems we are facing is that there is no consistent or enforceable use of terms like free-range.”

She is hoping that the issue will be addressed through an independent review into food labeling, which is presently underway. Headed by the Department of Health and Ageing, the inquiry looks to assess labeling of alcohol, as well as animal-derived products, and the use of terms like “free-range.”