Harvard sophomore Marina Bolotnikova Credits: William Hodges
Harvard students push for all cage-free eggs By William Hodges, Boston Environmental News Examiner October 12, 2011
Pushing for a school food program to be more sustainable is nothing new. So why would Harvard University, one of the oldest and most respected universities in the country and even the world, not want to be on the forefront of providing food that is sourced from the most humane and environmentally friendly sources possible?
A group of undergraduates at Harvard are pushing the school Dining Services division to change to all-cage-free eggs. The campaign has achieved some notoriety through the website change.org where one of the organizers has collected more than 6900 signatures asking the school to go all cage-free.
In September, the Harvard campus paper, the Crimson, published an article that led: “Twenty-one Harvard donors have pledged to withhold further donations to the University until Harvard switches to providing exclusively cage-free eggs in its dining halls.”
The undergraduate student council even passed a resolution supporting the use of cage-free eggs.
Harvard has made some efforts to go cage-free. Almost half of the eggs that they use in their dining halls, their spokesperson claims, are sourced from vendors that sell cage-free shelled eggs. Harvard University Dining Services (HUDS) purchases the equivalent of approximately 1.15 million eggs per year, in different forms, from different vendors. 500,000 of those eggs are supposedly cage-free.
But the organizers of the petition and campaign don’t think that is enough. Marina Bolotnikova, who started the change.org petition, believes “that everyone should recognize the importance of the cage-free campaign because there is no party left unharmed by our current food system: not animals, nor the environment, nor consumers, nor producers. A full switch to cage-free eggs is one way in which we will at last begin to reform this system.”
Bolotnikova doesn’t really see the campaign as controversial. It is accepted and supported, she says, by the student body. But, she adds, “if the university continues to be unresponsive, we will be ramping up the campaign.”
Bolotnikova also questions the 500,000 eggs figure, sourcing a report that puts the percentage of cage-free eggs used at closer to 20%. That report, published on the website greenreportcard.org, is based on a survey the school submitted in July 2010. When asked about that report by this Examiner, a HUDS spokesperson claimed they were unaware of why that figure was calculated the way it was, and questions what it is inclusive of.
Harvard and the campaign organizers have their work cut out for them. HUDS claims that the cost of switching to exclusively cage-free eggs would be to high, and the campaign organizers and student body don’t think that is a good enough reason. The same Crimson article puts the cost at around $100,000.
Harvard would certainly not be the first campus to switch to all cage free eggs. Emerson, Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Brandeis, and many other schools across the country have already made the switch.
University of Pennsylvania contracted with the company Bon Appetit in 2009 to run their dining services. In 2005, Bon Appetit enacted a company-wide policy stating that all shell eggs would be cage-free. The company worked with the experts at the Humane Society of the United States to create a trustworthy program and decided that third party certification was important. In order to qualify for the Certified Humane® label, an egg farm must meet the animal welfare standards of an independent auditing organization called Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC). Battery cages are not permitted and the housing facilities must include areas for hens to nest, dust bathe, scratch, and perch.
Harvard’s consumption of eggs dwarfs that of UPenn and Emerson. Emerson uses 14,400 shelled eggs that are cage-free annually. UPenn is around 123,000. All of these schools also, though, use “liquid eggs,” eggs that are used for cooking foods like omelets or baked goods. UPenn, Emerson and other schools that are “exclusively” cage-free are also sourcing these “liquid eggs” from chickens that are cage-free. And that is what Harvard’s student body wants to see at their school as well.
Bolotnikova explained in an interview that there has already been local, state and federal legislation working to outlaw the use of “battery-cages.”
The Cambridge City Council actually passed a resolution in 2007 that states:
“That the Cambridge City Council opposes battery cage egg production, based on the inherent cruelty of confining egg-laying hens in battery cages; and be it further resolved that the Cambridge City Council encourages consumers of eggs not to purchase eggs produced by caged hens.”
An agreement made earlier this summer between the Humane Society of the United States and the United Egg Producers promotes legislation that would “prohibit the sale of eggs and egg products nationwide” that do not meet a new set of standards. Among these standards, according to a press release by the Humane Society, is a policy that would require conventional cages (currently used by more than 90 percent of the egg industry) to be replaced, through an ample phase-in period, with new, enriched housing systems that provide each hen nearly double the amount of space they’re currently allotted.
The proposed legislation would take effect in 2015, the same time an existing law in California that prohibits the confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs will take effect.
Similar legislation was crafted in the Massachusetts state legislature. But a component eliminating the use of battery-cages was removed, leaving the legislation to cover veal and gestation crates. That bill, introduced in January of this year, never left the Joint Committee on the Judiciary.
If the federal legislation passes, clearly Harvard will not have the option to purchase what is currently considered “conventional” eggs. For now, though, Bolotnikova and the other students working with her intend to continue pressuring the Harvard administrators to make the change.
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Examiner.com
Posted: October 12, 2011 by Certified Humane
Harvard sophomore Marina Bolotnikova
Credits: William Hodges
Harvard students push for all cage-free eggs
By William Hodges, Boston Environmental News Examiner
October 12, 2011
Pushing for a school food program to be more sustainable is nothing new. So why would Harvard University, one of the oldest and most respected universities in the country and even the world, not want to be on the forefront of providing food that is sourced from the most humane and environmentally friendly sources possible?
A group of undergraduates at Harvard are pushing the school Dining Services division to change to all-cage-free eggs. The campaign has achieved some notoriety through the website change.org where one of the organizers has collected more than 6900 signatures asking the school to go all cage-free.
In September, the Harvard campus paper, the Crimson, published an article that led: “Twenty-one Harvard donors have pledged to withhold further donations to the University until Harvard switches to providing exclusively cage-free eggs in its dining halls.”
The undergraduate student council even passed a resolution supporting the use of cage-free eggs.
Harvard has made some efforts to go cage-free. Almost half of the eggs that they use in their dining halls, their spokesperson claims, are sourced from vendors that sell cage-free shelled eggs. Harvard University Dining Services (HUDS) purchases the equivalent of approximately 1.15 million eggs per year, in different forms, from different vendors. 500,000 of those eggs are supposedly cage-free.
But the organizers of the petition and campaign don’t think that is enough. Marina Bolotnikova, who started the change.org petition, believes “that everyone should recognize the importance of the cage-free campaign because there is no party left unharmed by our current food system: not animals, nor the environment, nor consumers, nor producers. A full switch to cage-free eggs is one way in which we will at last begin to reform this system.”
Bolotnikova doesn’t really see the campaign as controversial. It is accepted and supported, she says, by the student body. But, she adds, “if the university continues to be unresponsive, we will be ramping up the campaign.”
Bolotnikova also questions the 500,000 eggs figure, sourcing a report that puts the percentage of cage-free eggs used at closer to 20%. That report, published on the website greenreportcard.org, is based on a survey the school submitted in July 2010. When asked about that report by this Examiner, a HUDS spokesperson claimed they were unaware of why that figure was calculated the way it was, and questions what it is inclusive of.
Harvard and the campaign organizers have their work cut out for them. HUDS claims that the cost of switching to exclusively cage-free eggs would be to high, and the campaign organizers and student body don’t think that is a good enough reason. The same Crimson article puts the cost at around $100,000.
Harvard would certainly not be the first campus to switch to all cage free eggs. Emerson, Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Brandeis, and many other schools across the country have already made the switch.
University of Pennsylvania contracted with the company Bon Appetit in 2009 to run their dining services. In 2005, Bon Appetit enacted a company-wide policy stating that all shell eggs would be cage-free. The company worked with the experts at the Humane Society of the United States to create a trustworthy program and decided that third party certification was important. In order to qualify for the Certified Humane® label, an egg farm must meet the animal welfare standards of an independent auditing organization called Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC). Battery cages are not permitted and the housing facilities must include areas for hens to nest, dust bathe, scratch, and perch.
Harvard’s consumption of eggs dwarfs that of UPenn and Emerson. Emerson uses 14,400 shelled eggs that are cage-free annually. UPenn is around 123,000. All of these schools also, though, use “liquid eggs,” eggs that are used for cooking foods like omelets or baked goods. UPenn, Emerson and other schools that are “exclusively” cage-free are also sourcing these “liquid eggs” from chickens that are cage-free. And that is what Harvard’s student body wants to see at their school as well.
Bolotnikova explained in an interview that there has already been local, state and federal legislation working to outlaw the use of “battery-cages.”
The Cambridge City Council actually passed a resolution in 2007 that states:
“That the Cambridge City Council opposes battery cage egg production, based on the inherent cruelty of confining egg-laying hens in battery cages; and be it further resolved that the Cambridge City Council encourages consumers of eggs not to purchase eggs produced by caged hens.”
An agreement made earlier this summer between the Humane Society of the United States and the United Egg Producers promotes legislation that would “prohibit the sale of eggs and egg products nationwide” that do not meet a new set of standards. Among these standards, according to a press release by the Humane Society, is a policy that would require conventional cages (currently used by more than 90 percent of the egg industry) to be replaced, through an ample phase-in period, with new, enriched housing systems that provide each hen nearly double the amount of space they’re currently allotted.
The proposed legislation would take effect in 2015, the same time an existing law in California that prohibits the confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up, and fully extend their limbs will take effect.
Similar legislation was crafted in the Massachusetts state legislature. But a component eliminating the use of battery-cages was removed, leaving the legislation to cover veal and gestation crates. That bill, introduced in January of this year, never left the Joint Committee on the Judiciary.
If the federal legislation passes, clearly Harvard will not have the option to purchase what is currently considered “conventional” eggs. For now, though, Bolotnikova and the other students working with her intend to continue pressuring the Harvard administrators to make the change.
Read Full Article on Examiner.com
http://www.examiner.com/environmental-news-in-boston/harvard-students-push-for-all-cage-free-eggs
Category: news