This special edition of EGG-NEWS provides commentary on recent publications, reports and events relating to highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI).  As of mid-April, outbreaks have ceased among large egg production and pullet rearing complexes.  Notwithstanding this hiatus, evident since the beginning of March, incident cases are reported among backyard flocks, turkey growing facilities and at live bird markets suggesting extension from reservoirs of infection.  Cessation of new cases in large egg production complexes is attributed to the end of seasonal migration of waterfowl that have now settled into their annual breeding cycle.  Sporadic cases are probably due to shedding of H5N1 virus by non-migratory domestic birds.  Given experience in recent years we can anticipate a resurgence of infection in the fall as the southward migration commences impacting farms along the Pacific, Central and Mississippi flyways.  This period of low HPAI activity should be used to strengthen biosecurity and to initiate protective vaccination of rearing pullets in high-risk areas in order to develop an immune population that will be challenged during the third and fourth quarters of 2025.

Noteworthy publications and events over the past two weeks relating to HPAI are reviewed for the benefit of subscribers:-

HPAI Vaccination Work Group Submits Proposal

A working group comprising Drs. John Clifford, Craig Rowles, Travis Schaal and David Swayne distributed a proposed vaccination plan dated April 1, 2025, to respond to highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in the U.S. egg industry.  The Working Group was convened by the United Egg Producers and the American Egg Board representing U.S. egg producers. The document includes factual information on the availability and efficacy of vaccines and incorporates sections on monitoring for effective immunization and surveillance to facilitate certification for export.

Essentially the document confirms what many in the industry have recognized as the futility of the USDA-APHIS response of attempting to ‘stamp out” the endemic infection given the unprecedented depopulation of over 130 million egg laying hens on more than 130 farms since the onset of the current H5N1 epornitic that commenced in 2022.

The summary correctly maintains that “a new approach to reduce layer and pullet flock susceptibility to HPAI virus should be considered to increase resistance to infection, reduce viral shedding and importantly reduce the risk of a potential mutation event that may lead to further HPAI infection in human.”  The document suggests a program under which flocks could be vaccinated with a priority for replacement pullets.  The report correctly stresses the need for high levels of biosecurity, echoing the recommendations of the World Organization of Animal Health. 

Vecor vaccination  in ovo  or S.Cut to chicks with booster

Oil-emulsion vaccine im during rearing

The report failed to stress the impact of flock depletion on egg prices and the cost to consumers that exceeded $15 billion in 2022 and considerably more in 2024 with an additional escalation in prices peaking at $8.50 per dozen at retail in late February 2025, reflecting the loss of approximately 30 million hens over an eight-week period.

The zoonotic potential of H5N1, deserved more than seven lines in a text extending over 13 pages.  Virologists and epidemiologists involved in monitoring aspects of the molecular biology of influenza have constantly stressed the risk of emergence of a zoonotic strain of H5N1 with possible human-to-human transmission.

One of the authors of the report is a distinguished researcher and has extensive experience in international regulation of avian diseases.  A member of the committee authoring the document is a prior Chief Veterinary Officer of the USDA responsible for the response to the 2015 HPAI epornitic.  Following retirement, he has served as an advisor to the USA Poultry and Egg Export Council that has a single-purpose commitment to maintaining the export volume of broiler leg quarters.  It does not appear from the document that his affiliation in any way affected his scientific objectivity. It would have been possible to have made a more definitive and stronger case for vaccination with a broader representation from among the industry.

The return of incident cases during the fall migration of waterfowl is inevitable. The current ongoing outbreaks may be attributed to resident avian and mammalian carriers. Recognition that the infection can be transmitted by the aerogenous route invalidates even strict structural and operational biosecurity and places large complexes with power ventilation at risk. The need for vaccination especially in high-risk regions along the Mississippi and Pacific flyways is self-evident.  The proposal to vaccinate pullets is obvious but will delay creation of an immune population due to the biological time restraints associated with rearing. 

The report notes, “Vaccination of caged in-lay hens is challenging and potentially unachievable in cage-free operations.” This appears to be a questionable assertion.  When the industry was confronted with severe coryza in 2023, egg producers effectively administered oil emulsion vaccines by the intramuscular route to hens in both cages and aviaries in the face of infection.

This commentator strongly supports the recommendation contained in the summary, “The industry believes that it time to enhance our overall strategy to control the virus through implementing vaccination in egg laying flocks.”  In contradistinction he final paragraph relating to “acceptability to the federal government, state animal health officials” is the major defect of the report inducing a wishy-washy, non-definitive approach ending with “We look forward to further discussion with USDA about the proposal.” 

Effectively if the broiler segment of the poultry industry is still opposed to vaccination of egg production flocks and possibly growing turkeys in high-risk regions, despite appropriate monitoring and surveillance, all we will have is more discussion and temporizing without action.  The so-called four-pronged program advocated by the newly appointed Secretary of Agriculture is effectively smoke-and-mirror, more of the same widow dressing.  It appears that USDA-APHIS either through disinclination to accept realities or acting under the duress of exporters will continue to discuss, research, evaluate, and consider vaccination while continuing to implement whack-a-mole flock depopulation at the expense of taxpayers, producers and consumers. The essence of the report is reminiscent of the sentiments attributed to St. Jerome who prayed for chastity-- but not right away.

Prominent Health Advocate Comments on the Need for Vaccination Against HPAI

Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a physician, investor in medical companies and a director of pharmaceutical enterprises previously served as the 23^rd Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration in the first administration of President Trump.  He recently authored a commentary pointing to the need for vaccination of poultry flocks using currently available commercial off-the-shelf products.  In his commentary he justifiably castigated Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, who advanced the inane suggestion that HPAI should be allowed to spread unchecked through flocks in the hope that a few survivors would express genes for resistance to avian influenza.

Dr. Gottlieb correctly maintains that the egg industry must use the current seasonal quiescent stage of the epornitic before resumption of migration in the fall to establish immunity among flocks at risk.  He expresses this sentiment as, “We have vaccines for bird flu made by American companies and used overseas but so far federal officials don’t seem poised to use them here.”  He points to the deployment of vaccines in France, China and Mexico among other nations and cast doubt on the various distortions of science advanced by opponents of vaccination to support ongoing exports of broiler leg quarters.

Applying logic and common sense, Dr. Gottlieb notes that, “The avian influenza strains now in circulation have persisted continuously among birds and mammals for nearly two years and there’s growing evidence that it could become a permanent feature of North America – part of a the new normal to which the poultry industry must inevitably adjust for both the physical and economic health of Americans.”

Influenza H5N1 is clearly endemic in the U.S. and in the poultry industries of many nations. The incidence rate can be suppressed to some extent by strict structural and operational biosecurity involving investment and management.  Notwithstanding the stringency of biosecurity, there is little that can be done to prevent aerogenous transmission especially into power-ventilated houses located on multi-aged egg production complexes.

Avian influenza is effectively The Newcastle Disease of the 2020s. During the 1970s Velogenic viscerotropic  Newcastle disease (VVND=END) in Europe, Asia and Africa was in every way as catastrophic as avian influenza but was effectively controlled principally by vaccination supported by biosecurity.

It is questioned why a clear thinking and well-connected physician should have a greater appreciation of the risks, consequences and potential control measures to reduce the economic and potential zoonotic impact of avian influenza compared to the administrators of USDA-APHIS. Is the firm recommendation for vaccination advanced by Dr. Gottlieb an expression of epidemiologic reality or is it that Dr. Gottlieb is an independent scientific voice unfettered by conflicts of interest? 

Introduction of the SAVE Our Poultry Act

U.S. Representatives Sarah McBride, (D-DE) and Mike Lawler, (R-NY) introduced the Supporting Avian Virus Eradication (SAVE) Our Poultry Act that is intended to elevate the standard of biosecurity and to encourage research into protection including immunization.

In announcing the proposed legislation, Rep. McBride stated, “The SAVE Our Poultry Act is about supporting our farmers and their efforts to protect their animals, their markets and their future.”  According to an April 10^th release by Rep. McBride, the intended legislation would:

• Authorize USDA research grants to study highly pathogenic avian influenza
• Analyze the impact of poultry vaccination on international trade and market access
• Fund enhanced biosecurity practices and disinfection methods for poultry producers

The press release justifiably notes the high prices for eggs as a result of depopulation of flocks and pointed to the support by the National Chicken Council (NCC) representing broiler producers, the United Egg Producers and regional poultry associations with members at risk of or having experienced losses as result of HPAI. Specifics of the Bill that would amend the Food, Agriculture, Conservation and Trade Act of 1990 emphasizes HPAI as a “high priority research and extension area”.

Among other components the bill makes provision for grants to colleges and universities to “research the effectiveness of vaccines across poultry species, improve formulations of vaccines and improve the delivery mechanisms for vaccines.  This is in itself commendable but ignores the reality that both subunit vector vaccines are available off-the-shelf together with inactivated oil emulsion products that could be deployed immediately following approval and authorization for use by USDA-APHIS.  Ongoing research is obviously beneficial, but the infection is expected to return within months and research envisaged in the SAVE Our Poultry Act would do nothing to reduce losses in 2025 through 2026.

A provision of the bill goes to the core of the disinclination by USDA to allow vaccination.  The SAVE Our Poultry Act would involve “assessing the potential implications of vaccination on domestic and international poultry markets including trade and market access considerations.”  It is evident that the broiler segment of the U.S. poultry industry through its lobbying and the influential Broiler Caucus has effectively prevented the application of vaccination to the detriment of the turkey and egg production segments irrespective of sentiments expressed by the NCC. 

Congressional Response to the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services

The poultry industry and human epidemiologists should be alarmed by the misinformed, and incendiary statements by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services as reported in the New York Times on March 18^th, relating to “letting avian flu run through flocks so we can identify the birds and preserve those that are immune to it.”  This appalling approach to end the bird flu epidemic is unworthy of even cursory consideration.

Five members of the House of Representatives addressed a letter to the Secretary on April 1^st condemning his statement and demanding reports and copies of communications among the Department of Health and Human Services, the USDA, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health regarding mitigation of avian influenza.

In the first instance it is noted that avian influenza will ultimately kill in excess of 98 percent of an infected flock.  During the clinical phase, vast quantities of virus are generated resulting in the potential for inter-farm spread especially where complexes are located in close proximity.  Even if a small proportion of a flock were to survive an outbreak of avian influenza their value for breeding would be negligible given that the commercial generation of broiler, turkey and egg-production flocks are hybrids. The program of “stamping-out” has in all probability reduced farm-to-farm spread notwithstanding the depopulation of 170 million commercial poultry since the onset of the 2022 epornitic.

To add insult to injury, the Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins apparently embraced the distorted logic expressed by Secretary Kennedy despite confusingly advancing a “four-pronged strategy” incorporating nothing new and funded by  a proposed $1 billion in an attempt to suppress HPAI.

The five members of the House, including Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL), Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Healthcare and Financial Services and Rep. Gerald E. Connoly (D-VA), Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform requested a list of non-governmental experts consulted by HHS relating to any federal response to avian influenza.  The Representatives also requested “a full and complete list of individuals who recommended that the federal government would allow avian flu to run through the flock in an effort to build immunity” together with their credentials and past involvement with the federal government.  The letter to Secretary Kennedy raised the justifiable issue of a potential zoonotic infection and stressed the need to “combat, contain and eliminate avian influenza, requiring a concerted and coordinated effort across all relevant federal agencies.”

Secretary Kennedy is devoid of scientific credentials. He has surrounded himself with sophists and charlatans expressing unconventional policies to prevent human infections. He has embraced conspiracy theories on disease and related topics that have been debunked by both U.S. and international scientist and agencies. As a Secretary of the HHS he is entitled to his personal opinions but not a selective or distorted expression of facts

Zoonotic Implications of HPAI

The zoonotic aspect of HPAI was reviewed in a published interview prepared by Dr. Eric Rubin Editor-in-Chief and Dr. Lindsey Baden, Deputy Editor of the New England Journal of Medicine who discussed infectivity of HPAI with virologist Dr. Yoshihiro Kawaoka.  Of concern is the circulation of H5N1 genotype D.11 and B3.13 in avian species and dairy herds respectively.  Although the incidence rate of bovine influenza H5N1 is declining more than 1,000 herds have been diagnosed with possibly many more infected. Both structural deficiencies and a lack of effective biosecurity within the U.S. dairy industry have contributed to dissemination of the virus.  It does not help that the Administration has terminated personnel involved in response to COVID and have effectively disbanded the group of scientists including epidemiologists, virologists and logisticians concerned with preparedness for a future pandemic.  Signing a Presidential Executive Order has transitory political effect but does not necessarily prevent the inevitable emergence of an infection with epidemic or pandemic potential at some time in the future.

Rubin, E. et al outbreak update-H5N1 New England Journal of Medicine 2025 doi.org/10.1056/nejme 2502267

Aerogenous Transmission of H5N1 Confirmed

EGG-NEWS has consistently maintained that highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) can be transmitted by the aerogenous route either as a bioaerosol or entrained on excreta and dust to be moved by wind.  A comprehensive epidemiologic investigation involving field observations, meteorology and molecular studies confirmed the spread of an outbreak of H5N1 from a commercial duck farm to unrelated egg production farms over a distance of five miles.  The case report with appropriate documentation involved an outbreak in the Czech Republic.  The authors note that their findings “underscore the importance of considering windborne spread in future outbreak mitigation strategies.”  Anecdotal and experimental data confirm the possibility of airborne infection extending from waterfowl excreting virus.

The USDA-APHIS has long held that “biosecurity of an acceptable standard will provide protection against HPAI.”  This is a false presumption given the ability of the virus to be transmitted over relatively long distances by the aerogenous route.  As noted by the authors of the Czech paper, power-ventilated egg production housing is extremely vulnerable given the volume of air displaced by fans. Exhaust rates may range from 200,000 to 600,000 cfm per 100,000 hens depending on climatic conditions.  Among the many failures of USDA-APHIS to address appropriate preventive measures has been a neglect of field epidemiology.  The only conclusions that can be drawn from superficial telephone-administered surveys is that proximity to waterfowl preceding an outbreak was a significant risk factor.  This would indirectly correspond with the observations in this significant publication.

Nagy, A. et al bioRxiv doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.12.637829

Editorial Comment

The Economic Impact of HPAI

There is no purpose in tiptoeing around the failure to adopt vaccination against HPAI in high-risk areas.  The broiler industry may or may not lose a part of their market for leg quarters that represent over 97 percent of shipments of USDA-inspected broiler products valued at $4.5 billion in 2024.  Although this restraint is significant in terms of volume and monetary value, the ban on vaccination requires a broader perspective.  The USDA-APHIS has expended over $2 billion in indemnity payments and logistics from the Commodity Credit Corporation.  Individual egg producers have experienced disproportionately higher losses as a result of their inability to supply markets during the period required to repopulate their complexes.  Consumers have been forced to pay high prices for eggs, far exceeding the potential loss that may be experienced through export markets.  In 2022, the average price of eggs was conservatively $2 per dozen higher than it would have been in the absence of HPAI, costing consumers an incremental $15 billion on their grocery expenditures.  In 2024 the cost to consumers as a result of HPAI was infinitely higher given the differential between average shelf price and values that would otherwise have prevailed.  The loss of 30 million hens during the first two months of 2025 was reflected in an escalation in egg prices peaking at $8.58 per dozen at wholesale on February 28^th but declining thereafter to $3.27 per dozen by the end of March. Notwithstanding this decline, the escalation in egg prices attained 60.4 percent in March 2025 compared to twelve months previously.  The disproportionate escalation in the price of eggs should be compared to an increase of 0.5 percent for food-at-home during March.  Within this category, dairy items increased by 2.2 percent, poultry meat by 0.9 percent, cereal and bakery products by 1.1 percent. Fruit and vegetables declined by 0.7 percent. and the fish and seafood category was down by 1.5 percent.

In reviewing the export market for broiler leg quarters, it is noted that volumes are declining but unit prices are moving in the opposite direction although with a net decline in total annual value.  The question arises as to whether importing nations would continue to purchase leg quarters if preventive vaccination were to be permitted for egg-production flocks in high-risk areas. Vaccination would be subject to appropriate monitoring and surveillance in accordance with World Organization of Animal Health (WOAH) or negotiated standards. It is envisaged that USDA-APHIS could certify that broiler flocks of origin contributing to exports were free of HPAI at the time of slaughter.  It is also important to note that many of the nations importing U.S. leg quarters do so on the basis of low cost with an average unit price of $1,424 prevailing over the first two months of 2025 covering 479,000 metric tons.  Many importing nations are endemic with respect to HPAI and in some cases deploy vaccines against the infection. This would facilitate exports in accordance with the rules of the WOAH. 

The USDA-APHIS has been stubbornly remiss in their failure to negotiate terms under which U.S. producers could justifiably export broiler leg quarters from non-infected flocks.  For more than three years the Agency has labored under the misplaced presumption that HPAI is exotic in the U.S. and that the disease could be eradicated following an anachronistic “stamping-out” program.  The fallacy in the APHIS playbook is the failure to accept that infection is disseminated by millions of wild bird reservoirs on a seasonal basis together with introduction by migratory marine birds cohabitating with waterfowl in the Canadian Maritime provinces and in Alaska with extension down into British Colombia.

For the edification of APHIS there is adequate anecdotal and scientific evidence of introduction of infection on to farms by the aerogenous route. This reality means that even the strictest biosecurity does not provide absolute protection against H5N1 and other highly pathogenic avian influenza viruses suggesting a phased shift in the approach to vaccination.

Reducing the Capacity of the U.S to Respond to Zoonotic HPAI

The ongoing mass dismissals in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration will have an adverse effect on testing consumer dairy products although it is generally accepted that pasteurization inactivates bovine influenza H5N1 strain B3-13 virus.  Similar reductions in staffing at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will compromise detection of possible zoonotic infection that appears to be increasing in complexity and significance.  Mass layoffs have affected 40 cooperating laboratories within the FDA Veterinary, Laboratory Investigation and Response Network and also the USDA National Animal Health Laboratory Network responsible for aspects of routine and diagnostic activities.  Critical reductions have occurred among the personnel of the National Animal Health Laboratory Network that coordinates activities between the USDA National Veterinary Services Laboratory and the approximately 60 state and university laboratories throughout the U.S. This commentator gives little credence to a USDA spokesperson that averred that job reduction “will not compromise the critical work of the department including its ongoing response to avian influenza.”

Stop Press: 60-Minutes Segment on HPAI

The 60-Minutes airing on April 20^th focused on bovine influenza H5N1 with little coverage of HPAI in poultry other than the obvious impact on egg prices. The greatest deficiency was a lack of ‘assurance’ that avian influenza is not transmissible to consumers through eggs.  APHIS was disinclined either through governmental restraint or lack of photogenic administrators, from participation in the program.

The Bottom Line

It is hoped that well-intended Congressional action, comments by informed commentators and scientific publications will break the de facto veto exercised by the broiler sector over vaccination as a modality to suppress outbreaks of HPAI in turkey and egg-producing flocks. Further temporizing proposed in the form of additional “discussion” and “research” is disingenuous. Delay will be both costly and represent a risk of emergence of a potentially zoonotic strain. The Administration should sincerely work towards reducing the price of eggs over the long term, limit public sector expenditures on control and avoid even the smallest risk of a catastrophic pandemic. Those in authority in the  USDA and DHHS would be well advised to heed the advice of epidemiologists, avian health practitioners, the WOAH and informed observers regarding the efficacy and desirability of vaccination to establish immune populations with appropriate surveillance in high-risk areas.

In an accusatory article dated May 1^st, (below), Joel Dodge implicated price gouging by egg producers and advocated for government intervention in terms of the Defense Production Act.  Dodge is Director of Industrial Policy and Economic Security at the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator and is a contributor to The Hill.

The article implicates Cal-Maine Foods as a major beneficiary of fluctuating and recently high egg prices. This situation can be attributed in large measure to a disequilibrium between supply and demand caused by mandatory flock depopulation following infection with highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) strain H5N1.

To the uninitiated and uninformed, the article makes a strong case for government intervention to prevent egg farmers from profiting from reduction in supply. The article, cites egg prices and comparisons obviously subject to cherry picking and with inadequate evaluation of the mechanism determining wholesale prices.

For the record, the claimed “five-fold increase” in price from 2020 to the high point in retail price during February 2025 was derived from selective comparisons. Dodge quoted a current “average” retail price of $6.23 per dozen without reference to the price in 2020 or indicating his source. It is difficult to establish “average retail” price, especially with a wide range of egg types available and with retail promotions by chains and stores. Accordingly the table below shows high and low wholesale prices for the years 2020 through 2024 and over the first two months of 2025.

It is noted that nest-run (ungraded at farm gate) cost for the past two years averaged $0.75 per dozen for eggs from caged hens and $0.95 per dozen for eggs from hens housed under alternative systems. Given the proportion of cage-free to caged eggs of 40:60 the weighted average nest-run cost over the past two years is approximately $0.85 per dozen. To this figure a provision of $0.65 per dozen should be added to cover packaging, packing and distribution, resulting in a cost of $1.50 as delivered to warehouses. Over periods of high production and with freedom from avian influenza, especially during 2020 through 2022, producers experienced losses against the prevailing prices designated by an industry benchmarking system. Traditionally increases in seasonal demand during the two to four weeks preceding Easter and Christmas was associated with higher prices contributing to positive annual returns.

The Dodge article concentrates on Cal-Maine Foods as being responsible for price increases at retail. This company is the only public quoted, essentially pure-play shell egg producer that publishes quarterly reports. These contain detailed production data in addition to the statutory financial disclosures.

For the period Fiscal 2020 through 2024, Cal Maine Foods (CALM) posted net income and diluted earnings per share values as indicated:-

The magnitude of net earnings by Cal-Maine Foods, probably reflecting the industry as a whole, is directly related to the flock losses experienced by the industry as a result of HPAI. These were, respectively:

Over the 38-month period of the ongoing HPAI epornitic, 129 million hens were depopulated in comparison to an average of 285 million hens in production. This compares with approximately 302 million in 2020 prior to the onset of HPAI or a deficit of 5.6 percent.

Aerogenous transmission of HPAI from free-living and migratory birds to commercial flocks an epidemiologic reality

Although Dodge concentrates on Cal-Maine Foods, this company, notwithstanding its dominant position with approximately 42 million hens, represents only 14 percent of U.S. production capacity.  The second and third-ranked producers each contributed 7 percent to national production of 7.74 million dozen for both table consumption and breaking in 2024. The top five producers collectively operated 37 percent of the National flock.  There is less consolidation in the egg industry and hence greater competition, compared to broiler production with the top five producers responsible for 64 percent of market share by annual volume during 2024 (46.99 million pounds ready-to-cook product).

HPAI is a world panornitic in free-living snd migratory birds and marine mammals

It is noted that the highest wholesale prices through the first two months of 2025 coincided with significant depopulation as a result of HPAI.  Through January and February 2025, 31 million producing hens were depopulated, representing 10.8 percent of the nominal 285 million population in lay.  Of this quantity, 19.6 million or 6.9 percent were in cages and 11.0 million were in alternative systems including aviaries, barns and free-range, representing 3.9 percent of the domestic commercial hen population.

The Hill article notes that Cal-Maine received $22 million in indemnity and other payments in compensation for their two complexes that were subject to mandatory depopulation and decontamination.  Dodge notes that compensation is provided for “farms that destroy animals in response to disease outbreaks”.  As a matter of record, any infected flock is depopulated with the owners having no option since “stamping out” is the current mandatory control method. The USDA APHIS has adopted this policy to reduce farm-to-farm dissemination of avian influenza virus.  In 2024 and 2025, the principal route of introduction of virus was in aerosols and entrained on windborne dust. Virus is shed by migratory birds, placing complexes with power-ventilated housing in the four U.S. flyways at high risk. If in the future the USDA wishes to reduce expenditure on depopulation and decontamination then vaccination should be introduced as an additional preventive modality.  Even the most stringent structural and operational biosecurity is inadequate to provide absolute prevention from an infection that is responsible for the death of up to 97 percent of a flock following exposure.

In addition to the loss of birds for which federal indemnity has historically been inadequate, all affected producers loose considerable  income since repopulation of farms must be scheduled in accordance with the availability of started pullets and the biological restraints of the production cycle. This is especially the case for large multi-house, in-line complexes with more than a million hens.

Dodge claims that the Department of Justice is now “investigating Cal-Maine for alleged price fixing”.  This is a potentially defamatory statement and is inaccurate.  The Department of Justice is investigating the circumstances under which prices of eggs have risen at retail disproportionately to the expected reduction in supply, confirming extreme price elasticity of shell eggs.

The wholesale price of eggs in the U.S. is established using a benchmark system operated by a commercial entity, Urner Barry.  Since as much as 60 percent of shell eggs sold are subject to contracts based on feed and variable costs, the Urner Barry quotation reflects only a proportion of available eggs.  This situation results in the amplification of the upward and downward trajectory in price. It is an ironic reality that consumer groups do not complain to the Department of Justice urging investigation of the egg industry when wholesale prices are below cost of production for protracted periods.

The Hill article fails to consider expenditure on conversion to cage-free systems mandated by welfare advocates who have advocated against caged housing. These organizations have coerced retailers, food service suppliers and restaurants to cease purchases of eggs from caged hens. The HSUS and kindred groups have misled citizens in states with ballot initiatives to mandate alternative systems without disclosing the cost implications of affirmative votes.  It is estimated that the industry has spent $1.7 to $2.0 billion to convert housing for 50 million hens over the past four years, resulting in higher fixed and variable costs of production.  Cal-Maine has expended $293 million in organic growth with the bulk assigned to conversion to cage-free systems.  In addition, the company has spent $70 million on improving structural and operational biosecurity in accordance with established principles of disease prevention that were unnecessary before the advent of HPAI.

The inherent distortion associated with the Urner Barry price discovery system has resulted in a recent sharp decline in prices.  From a peak of $8.11 on March 4^th, wholesale prices declined to $3.27 per dozen on April 30^th as the level of depopulation during January and February transited to repopulation in the relative absence of infections among large complexes in March and April  The 97 percent increase in wholesale price from $2.77 on December 12^th 2024 to a peak of $8.11 on March 4^th was followed by a 60 percent decline to April 30^th. This confirms the distorting effect of the Urner Barry quotation that is independent of manipulation by producers who are in no way in a position to collude or fix prices.

The Department of Justice would be well advised to examine retail margins. There is a considerable lag between a reduction in wholesale price and adjustment of shelf prices, especially with a downward trend in the Urner Barry benchmark quotation.

Dodge advocates government intervention in pricing, even suggesting that indemnity and other compensation as a result of depopulation should in some way be linked to annual profit.  Government control of prices is contrary to a free-market economy and is invariably detrimental to producers and consumers. 

It is hoped that this commentary with appropriate price and production data and with explanations relating to the price structure of eggs dispels the misinformation and bias expressed by Joel Dodge in the May 1^st article in The Hill.

Egg prices reached another record high last month. It now costs American shoppers an average of $6.23 for a dozen eggs — nearly a five-fold increase since 2020. 

Yet while families have been squeezed by grocery sticker shock, agriculture corporations have been raking in record profits. Cal-Maine, the country’s largest egg producer, took in $509 million this quarter alone, tripling its profits from a year ago.

Gouging consumers is bad enough. But it gets worse: Cal-Maine and other ag companies were breaking the bank at the same time they were also quietly getting millions in taxpayer-funded relief payments from the federal government. Congress and the Trump administration must put a stop to this: No company that is getting corporate subsidies should be allowed to hike prices and extract windfall profits from American consumers.

Exorbitant egg prices have ostensibly been caused by repeated avian flu outbreaks in recent years. Or at least that’s the industry’s story. As the advocacy organization Farm Action explained in a letter to the Federal Trade Commission, over the last two years, some 115 million egg-laying chickens have been culled in response to avian flu outbreaks — a tragically large loss of animal life, but a relative drop in the bucket in the grand scheme of the country’s poultry industry. Even after this reduction in the country’s chicken supply, monthly egg production only dipped about 4 percent.

This relatively modest decrease in egg supply shouldn’t have led to the exorbitant prices confronting consumers at the supermarket. Yet egg producers have used avian flu as an opportunity to massively pad their profit margins. As Farm Action’s letter put it, “dominant egg producers — particularly Cal-Maine Foods — have leveraged the crisis to raise prices, amass record profits, and consolidate market power.” The Department of Justice is now investigating Cal-Maine for alleged price fixing. 

While big agricultural companies are ripping off consumers with one hand, they are taking taxpayer-funded bailouts with the other. The U.S. Department of Agriculture gave Cal-Maine $22 million in avian flu relief last year, and gave millions more to other major egg producers. Under an indemnity program, the department provides monetary relief to compensate farms that destroy animals in response to disease outbreaks like avian flu. USDA has made around $1 billion in such payments to agricultural producers since 2022.

If taxpayers are going to subsidize egg producers contending with avian flu, then the least those companies could do in exchange is adhere to normal pricing. But if producers can’t be trusted to abstain from profiteering, then the government should mandate fair prices in exchange for federal relief money. 

Indemnity payments should be conditioned on recipient producers charging prices equal to their actual costs, plus a profit margin based on the industry’s typical historical levels before the onset of avian flu. 

The Trump administration could unilaterally adopt this policy to protect consumers. Under current law, Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins may adopt any regulation she deems necessary to carry out the Department’s avian flu compensation program. Secretary Rollins could accordingly add mandatory fair pricing as a condition of payment for producers receiving indemnity funds.

This would be particularly appropriate given that the Secretary recently made the program even more generous by more than doubling the rate of payment to producers under the program. Moreover, no-strings-attached federal bailouts may even be propagating avian flu by diminishing the incentives companies have to adopt safer, more biosecure production practices. 

Alternatively, Congress could force the administration to guarantee a fair deal for consumers and taxpayers. Whether in standalone legislation or this year’s farm bill, Congress could require fair pricing as a condition for payments to producers under the law. 

More generally, Congress should enact a national prohibition on price-gouging. As I explain in a recent report, there is currently a limited federal price-gouging ban under the Defense Production Act of 1950, which both presidents Trump and Biden used to prosecute retailers who hoarded and overcharged for masks and other personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic. 

With the Defense Production Act up for reauthorization this year, Congress should strengthen this price-gouging ban to prohibit companies from profiteering by charging unfairly excessive prices for products affected by pathogenic disease like avian flu or other similar supply constraints.

For much of the twentieth century, the government routinely intervened to protect consumers from high prices and inflation. When inflation largely abated from the 1980s through 2020, we lost that policy muscle. However, now that we have returned to an era of affordability crises, supply shocks, and sellers’ pricing power, policymakers must relearn how to combat unfair pricing. Cracking down on overcharging by agricultural giants taking taxpayer handouts would be a good place to start.