|
Organic industry groups are urging USDA to maintain animal-welfare requirements for organic livestock as the department reviews whether to scale back the standards.
In an April 29 letter to Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, the Organic Trade Association and companies including Perdue Farms, Whole Foods Market and Danone US said rescinding the Organic Livestock and Poultry Standards would be seen as “a retreat from a core expectation tied to organic livestock products.”
The groups say their concern has grown amid signs that USDA is reassessing the standards in the National Organic Program. The comments also follow discussions at a Small Business Administration roundtable last December, where the rule was identified as a potential target for regulatory rollback.
A USDA spokesperson noted to Agri-Pulse that President Donald Trump issued Executive Order 14192 directing agencies to review their regulations and modify or rescind rules that are found to “impose undue burdens” on businesses.
“We continue to review rules, including the Organic Livestock and Poultry Standards rule, to assess their impact,” the spokesperson noted. “The review is still ongoing at this time, and no decision concerning any potential changes has been made.” The person also noted that National Organic Program staff did not attend the SBA’s USDA roundtable.
The organic animal welfare standards took effect in January 2024, with most producers expected to comply by 2025. Poultry operations already certified organic have until 2029 to meet outdoor access and stocking density requirements — a transition period USDA said reflects the scale of changes needed in poultry housing and management.
Concerns about the requirements are driving a renewed push from the National Chicken Council. After attending the SBA roundtable, the council earlier this year submitted its request to rescind parts of the rule, arguing the standards impose costly and risky facility upgrades on organic broiler operations. These concerns were also outlined in comments to the Office of Management and Budget last year.
It’s easy to be “in the know” about what’s happening in Washington, D.C. Sign up for a FREE month of Agri-Pulse news! Simply click here
“The regulations that affect chicken production have substantial direct and indirect effects on small businesses across the country, and in particular on small businesses in rural areas,” NCC wrote. “Every dollar saved through reduced regulatory burdens goes directly into these communities.”
NCC says the rule goes beyond "traditional" organic requirements by dictating “substantial restrictions on animal welfare and enrichment practices, not just the types of substances that may be administered or fed to the birds.”
The group is asking USDA to repeal mandates requiring at least one linear foot of exit area for every 360 birds to ensure outdoor access; to eliminate the 5-pounds-per-square-foot indoor stocking density limit; and to raise the temperature threshold for confining birds from 32 degrees Fahrenheit to 40 degrees.
“This rule requires birds to have access to the outside when temperatures are as low as 32 degrees, necessitates the installation of more doors to the outside, and reduces the maximum flock density by 16%,” NCC said. “These changes present significant animal welfare and flock health risks and impose significant costs on farmers and chicken companies of all sizes.”
NCC said outdoor exposure and additional entryways increase biosecurity risks, “including potential exposure to highly pathogenic avian influenza.”
Ashley Peterson, NCC’s senior vice president of scientific and regulatory affairs, told Agri-Pulse the council has raised concerns consistently over the past decade. “In 2016, we asked for specific parameters to be amended or clarified. In a subsequent publication by USDA in 2017, we asked USDA to suspend the rule indefinitely. ... And in our comments to OMB and SBA in 2025, we asked for specific parameters to be rescinded, amended and/or clarified.”
She added that, regardless of production method — conventional, organic, no antibiotics ever or free range — “our members treat the welfare of the birds as a top priority, adhere to the highest standards, and regularly undergo audits both internally and by various third-party organizations.”
OTA co-CEO Tom Chapman said his group is open to discussing targeted adjustments to the standards but is concerned USDA may be weighing a broader rollback.
“We’re always open to conversations around continuous improvement of the organic standards and ensuring that what gets set is both realistic for producers and meeting those consumer expectations,” Chapman said. “But we heard that there was this push coming to potentially fully rescind the organic standards. We wanted to make it clear that we see this as a risk.”
Chapman added: “We have a long-term record defending animal welfare as part of the organic standards … because consumers associate and think it’s there, and we want to make sure the organic seal is delivering what consumers expect.”
According to OTA’s 2026 Organic Market Report, 51% of U.S. consumers say organic products “protect animal welfare.” That association is strongest among the heaviest buyers. Among “committed” organic consumers — those who purchased five or more organic categories in the past year — 67% say the organic label protects animal welfare. They are far more likely than “aspirational” organic shoppers to link the label with animal welfare protections. Among Millennials, the demographic most willing to pay premiums for organic, nearly 61% associate organic with protecting animal welfare.
For non-organic consumers, the gap is larger: 61% of those who bought no organic categories in the past year say they’re unsure what the organic label guarantees.
Producers who support the OLPS rule say weakening it would undermine the integrity of the organic label. “I think that these practices that are in place currently are extremely reasonable and appropriate for the animals,” said Heidi Diestel, who runs Diestel Family Ranch in Sonora, California. “If anything, we can work on improving them. I don’t think that any rollback or rescinding is necessary here. We should be in the pursuit of optimal nutrient density, and nutrient density in meat is directly correlated to the animals’ health.”
Her brother, Jason Diestel, said the OLPS rule “brings clarity and consistency to standards that should have always ensured a higher prioritization of animal husbandry.”
The debate comes after years of legal and regulatory back‑and‑forth over whether USDA has authority to set animal‑welfare requirements under the organic statute. The Trump administration withdrew an earlier version of the rule in 2018, arguing USDA lacked that authority.
Following litigation brought by OTA and the Center for Food Safety, among others, the Biden administration reversed that position and finalized the OLPS rule, which was supported by consumer groups and many organic farmers but opposed by several livestock industry groups and then-Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan.
Future changes to the standards typically would require USDA to reopen the federal rulemaking process, which includes proposing revisions, taking public comments and determining whether to finalize them.
OTA also points to growth in the organic poultry sector as evidence that the standards are not hindering expansion. OTA’s analysis of USDA’s Organic Integrity Database shows certified organic layer operations increased 17% from 2023 to 2025, and organic broiler operations grew 12% over the same period.
