A consortium of 27 former leaders of agricultural associations representing row crops, livestock, biofuels in addition to prominent farmers, retired academics and former USDA administrators combined to address a letter to the leadership of the House and Senate Agricultural Committees emphasizing the perilous state of farmers and agriculture in the U.S.

The collective experience of the signatories to the letter probably exceeds a thousand years.  They include CEOs of the American Soybean Association, National Corn Growers Association, US Grains Council, the Renewable Fuels Association, the National Pork Producers Council and Directors of State Departments of Agriculture and Administrators of Land-grant colleges.

The letter noted the alarming increase in bankruptcies among family farms and the growing agricultural trade deficit.  Soybean exports have fallen from 47 percent of the world market share in  2018 to 24 percent at present.  Producers in South America including Brazil have gained market share at the expense of U.S. farmers.

The major points of contention relating to Administration policy that impact farmers include: -

• Tariffs on imported fertilizers and machinery.
• Tariff policy that has eroded international trade partnerships coupled with bellicose rhetoric and threats.  Erratic decisions on tariffs have seriously degraded the image of the U.S. as a reliable supplier and trade partner.  The Administration has failed to negotiate meaningful trade agreements during the current term of office. Withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership in 2016, deprived farmers of export markets estimated at over $4 billion each year.  Concurrently the BRICS group of nations is competing against the U.S. The MERCOSUR countries have created free-trade agreements with the EU and Canada is establishing links with the People’s Republic of China.
• Cuts to domestic and foreign food assistance programs based on ideology have resulted in unintended consequences that have directly affected farmers who supplied commodities to foreign aid and SNAP programs.
• The Administration has not fully supported the biofuels program that is critical to the profitability of both corn and soybean farmers.  The Administration has granted refinery exemptions and has neglected to pressure Congress to allow year-round marketing of E15 blend.
• The Administration has neglected to reform and expand the H-2A visa program. This omission coupled with mass deportations of undocumented workers has reduced the labor pool available to dairy, produce and fruit farmers and to meat packers.
• Reduction in the USDA complement by forced attrition, unproductive reorganization and intended relocation of employees has weakened the capacity of the department to serve farmers.  Cuts in research grants to academia and cancellation of departmental programs not only affect current agriculture but will place the U.S. in a noncompetitive situation over years to come.

In an attempt to buttress eroding farmer support for the Administration, $11 billion has been made available for “Farmer Bridge Assistance” with a promise of an additional $15 billion.  The letter to Congressional committees clearly stated, “Farmers do not want government handouts – they want markets.”  The letter continued “They want world-class research so that they can compete.  They want their families and communities to have affordable healthcare services.”

The signatories recommended nine steps required to reverse the crisis in agriculture and place the farm economy on a dependable footing: -

• An immediate exemption from tariffs on all farm inputs
• Establishing a rational tariff structure with removal of impositions that disrupt traditional, existing and future markets for agricultural commodities.
• Extending Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) leading to free-trade agreements.
• Entering into meaningful negotiations and trade agreements with existing and prospective importers of U.S. commodities.
• Completing the review of the USMCA and extending the agreement for 16 years.
• Allowing nationwide E15 sales year-round.
• Finalizing and enacting the Farm Bill that expired in September 2025.
•  Reforming labor legislation including a new and extended H-2A program.
• Restoring funding for land-grant agriculture research and rehiring USDA scientists that were capriciously terminated by DOGE and by unstructured reorganization.
• Reestablishing domestic and international food aid programs.

The letter addressed to the House and Senate Agricultural Committees urged hearings to gather input that could lead to cancellation of deleterious programs based on political ideology and to establish realistic policies to address the farm crisis.  Hearings would be a necessary first step in attempting to restore the financial health of farms and to establish long-term competitiveness for U.S. commodities and to secure international markets.

It is considered significant that the expression of complaints and the list of required changes was signed by past presidents and CEOs of agricultural organizations. Is this attributed to the fact that current leaders cognizant of problems are restrained from expressing their views based on fear of retribution for expressing opinions or advancing suggestions that are considered critical to the Administration?  Due to the prevailing current of intimidation is it imprudent for seated presidents and CEOs of commodity groups and academics to express their views?

The USDA Cage-Free Report covering January 2026, was released on February 2^nd 2026.

The report documented the complement of hens producing under the Certified Organic Program to be 21.0 million (rounded to 0.1 million), up 70,000 hens or 0.3 percent from December 2025. The number of hens classified as cage-free (but excluding Certified Organic) and comprising aviary, barn and other systems of housing apparently increased by 2.2 million hens or 1.9 percent from December 2025 to 121.8 million, attributed to expansion, transition from conventional cages and repopulation of depleted flocks.

Extensive depopulation was carried out as a result of HPAI through January and February 2025 (31 million), but with lower intensity in March (0.2 million) and April (1.0 million) and a single large complex in Arizona during May (3.8 million). Losses reemerged during late September in a caged-bird complex in Wisconsin (3.1 million hens and 250,000 pullets). Additional depopulations occurred in October, (2.2 million); November, 0.5 million; December, (0.2 million); January (1.5 million) and February (1.4 million).

Average weekly production for Certified Organic eggs in January 2026 was up 1.0 percent percent (rounded) compared to December 2025 with a high average weekly production of 83.9 percent. Average weekly flock production for cage-free flocks other than Certified Organic was up 2.5 percent in January 2026, with a high average hen-month production of 82.6 percent. Seasonally placed flocks in anticipation of periods of peak demand increase the availability of cage-free and organic eggs, reflecting pullet chick placements 20 weeks previously.

There is no adequate explanation for the elevated production rates recorded other than the high proportion of young hens reaching peak placed in anticipation of December demand. It is also assumed that almost all cage free flocks are in the first cycle of production with negligible molting contributing to the high average in hen-week values compared to caged hens.

The categorization of U.S. flocks according to housing system for January was unavailable among the assumed 295 million producing hens. The breakdown will be provided when data is released.

Losses attributed to HPAI in 2025 comprised:-

Caged flocks, 24.8 million representing 8.4 percent of a nominal 290 million producing hens

Cage-free flocks, 17.6 million representing 5.9 percent of the national flock

Organic flocks, negligible, >0.1 percent

 *October and November data was not released to compile Q4 average

On January 2^nd 2026 USDA recorded the following National inventory levels expressed in 30-dozen cases (rounded) with the change from December 2025 as a percentage of the total quantity of eggs:-

Commodity shell eggs of all sizes. 1,395,000. (-3.0%)

Commodity breaking stock. 360,800. (-0.4%)

Specialty eggs. 32,400. (+4.9%)

Certified organic eggs. 81,100. (-4.5%)

Cage-Free eggs 438,600. (-1.1%) equivalent to 1.6 days production

*Essentially a meaningless value

Negotiated nest-run grade-ready cage-free price for January 2026 averaged $0.43 per dozen, down $0.45 per dozen (-51.7 percent) from $0.88 per dozen in December 2025, reflecting a disturbance in balance between demand and supply.

The January 2026 advertised U.S. featured retail price for Large White cage-free eggs over 1,429 ‘Lower 48’ stores in five regions (NW, NE, SW, MW and SC.) was $2.54 per dozen. This compares with 1,657 stores featuring cage-free Large White in December and reflects fewer promotions as the year has progressed, consistent with lower demand and increased production. The January 2026 advertised U.S. featured retail price for Large Brown cage-free eggs over 957 stores in five regions was $3.45 per dozen with a range of $1.99 per dozen in the NW region to $4.08 per dozen in the MW region. The average promotional shelf price was only 2 cents per dozen above December 2025 for this category

The recorded average gradeable nest run price of $0.43 per dozen for brown and white cage-free combined plus a provision of $0.60 cents per dozen for packaging, packing and transport, resulted in a theoretical price of $1.03 per dozen delivered to CDs. The average advertised promotional retail prices of $3.45 per dozen for Brown and $1.46 per dozen for white represented retail margins of 235 percent for featured Brown and 146 percent for White respectively. Fewer promotions were offered for Brown compared to White-shelled cage-free by stores reflecting the balance between supply and demand for the two broad categories. Margins are presumed higher for non-featured eggs including pastured and other specialty eggs at shelf prices attaining in excess of $8.00 per dozen in high-end supermarket chains. Retailers are maximizing margins especially on Certified Organic, free-range and pastured categories restricting the volumes of sales, of all categories ultimately disadvantageous to producers and consumers.

The volume of exports of shell eggs and products is conditioned by the domestic needs of importers, price against competitors and regulatory disease and logistic restraints. Imports into the U.S. are determined by domestic needs with reduced supply due to flock depopulation as the principal driving factor during the first nine months of 2025.

USAPEEC data reflecting volume of exports for shell eggs and egg products are shown in the table below comparing 2024 with 2025:-

                           U.S. EXPORTS OF SHELL EGG AND EGG PRODUCTS DURING

                            JANUARY-NOVEMBER INCLUSIVE IN 2025 COMPARED WITH 2024

*The data published by USDA for shell eggs are slightly different from USAPEEC figures included in this table.

For the eleven-month period Canada was the export destination of 69.7 percent of U.S. shell eggs followed by the Caribbean at 19.9 percent. For egg products the four major importers collectively comprised 79.0 percent of volume with the relative proportions represented by Japan (29.4%); EU, (19.6%); Mexico, (16.1%) and Canada, (15.7%),  

According to the USDA Egg Markets Overview, February 6^th, shell eggs exported over 11 months attained 52.3 million dozen. This represents the average production of 2.6 million hens or 0.9 percent of the current population of producing hens. All egg products including liquid and dried, attained 66.7 million dozen shell equivalents for a total of 119.0 million dozen shell equivalents over eleven months. Imports over the same period comprised 71.9 million dozen shell eggs for breaking and 40.3 million dozen shell egg equivalents over all product forms for a total of 112.2 million dozen shell equivalents

Net positive trade was therefore 6.8 million dozen shell equivalents

The trade situation during 2026 will be influenced by the needs of importers as influenced by HPAI, an erratic tariff situation, landed price and availability. Since supply has increased in volume with a sharp decrease in domestic price, imports will be curtailed with an expectation of higher exports consistent with a more competitive situation.

This update of U.S egg-production costs and available prices is provided for the information of producers and stakeholders. Statistical data was unavailable for October and November due to the Federal shutdown. Most January figures are now available and included in this edition.

JANUARY HIGHLIGHTS

• January 2025 USDA ex-farm blended USDA nest-run, benchmark price for conventional eggs from caged hens was 52 cents per dozen, down 70 cents per dozen or 57.3 percent from the December 2025 value of 122 cents per dozen. The corresponding January2024 and 2025 values were respectively $1.72 and $5.82 cents per dozen. For annual comparison, average monthly USDA benchmark price over 2023 was 146 cents per dozen compared to 247 cents per dozen covering 2024. Stock levels and prices prior to the onset of flock depletions due to HPAI indicated a relative seasonal balance between supply and demand. Future nest-run and wholesale prices will be largely dependent on consumer demand for shell eggs and products, as determined by the economy, supply as influenced by flock placements, incidence of HPAI, net exports and the rate of replacement of depopulated pullets and hens and planned depletion. Other considerations include diversion to shell sales from the egg-breaking sector in an interconnected industry.
• Imports of shell eggs continued during the first three quarters of 2025 but with the cumulative negative trade balance attaining 19.9 million dozen shell-equivalents through October. During November the positive trade balance in shell-eggs amounted to 0.3 million dozen. For 2025 through November, U.S. liquid and dried products combined achieved a positive trade balance of 26.3 million case-equivalents with November rising to 10.5 million dozen shell-egg equivalents attributed to shipment of dried egg products mainly to the EU.
• January 2025 USDA ex-farm negotiated USDA nest-run, benchmark price for all categories of cage-free eggs was 63 cents per dozen. The December 2025 value was 110 cents per dozen. The corresponding January 2024 and 2025 values were respectively 380 and 809 cents per dozen.
• Fluctuation in wholesale price is attributed in part to the amplification of upward and downward swings associated with the commercial benchmark price-discovery system in use. An important factor influencing pricing is the proportion of shell eggs supplied under cost-plus contracts. A high proportion of available eggs in this category accentuates the upward and downward price trajectory of uncommitted eggs as determined by the price discovery system. Extreme fluctuation is exemplified by high prices prevailing during the 1^st quarter of 2025 and low values during December 2025 and 2026 to date. The magnitude of price fluctuation is inconsistent with relatively small changes in production as flocks are replaced or changes in demand.
• The response to highly pathogenic avian influenza as distorted by the price discovery system was the major driver of prices in 2024 and through 2025 due to the high seasonal incidence rates. Approximately 40 million hens and at least 2.0 million pullets were depleted in 2024 with close to an additional 45 million birds, (hens and pullets) in both large complexes and contract farms through 2025. The Fall 2025 losses involved complexes of 3.1 million hens in late September and 2.0 million in early October. During November 570,000 hens producing table eggs were depopulated on 22 farms in close geographic proximity with flock losses averaging 24,000 per event. This suggested the vulnerability of contract producers of cage free eggs with common risk factors including feed supply and egg collection. This situation is a departure from losses involving a few very large complexes evident in the wave of cases during early fall months. This said in January 2.8 million hens among a few large farms occurred followed by the depopulation of 2.2 million hens in Lancaster County, PA in early February.
• January 2025 USDA average nest-run production cost for conventional eggs from caged flocks over four regions (excluding SW and West), applying updated inputs was 75.5 cents per dozen, up 0.7 cents from December 2025 at 75.5 cents per dozen as influenced by feed cost. The December average nest run production cost for other than caged and certified organic hens was estimated by the EIC to be 96.0 cents per dozen up 0.9 cents per dozen from December. Approximately 60 cents per dozen should be added to the USDA benchmark nest-run costs to cover processing, packing material and transport to establish a realistic cost value as delivered to warehouses.
• January 2026 USDA benchmark nest-run margin for conventional eggs attained a negative value of 24.2 cents per dozen compared to a positive margin of 116.5 cents per dozen in December 2025. For 2025 the average monthly nest-run production margin attained 172 cents per dozen. Average nest-run monthly margin for 2024 was 170.8 cents per dozen compared to 64.2 cents per dozen in 2023 and 155 cents in 2022.
• January 2026 USDA benchmark nest-run margin for all categories of cage-free eggs was a negative 33.0 cents per dozen compared to a positive margin of 14.9 cents per dozen in December 2025. For 2025 the average monthly nest-run production margin attained 293 cents per dozen. Average nest-run monthly margin over 2024 was 440 cents per dozen compared with 100 cents per dozen in 2023, a year with a relatively low incidence rate of HPAI compared to the preceding and following years.
• The December 2025 national flock (over 30,000 hens per farm) was stated by the USDA to be up by 3.7 million hens (rounded, and a probable undercount) to 293.8 million compared to 290.1 in December. There were approximately 326 million hens before the advent of the H5N1 epornitic in 2022. Approximately 3.5 million hens returned to production from molt during the month together with projected maturation of 26 million pullets, with the total offset by depletion of an unknown number of spent hens. On February 4^th USDA estimated the total U.S table-egg production flock at 302.0 million with 296.2 million hens actually in production.
• December 2025 pullet chick hatch of 26.3 million was up 0.3 million, (0.3 percent) from November, inconsistent with an increased industry need to replace depopulated flocks.
• November export data is reviewed in a companion article in this edition. In November 2025 exports of shell-eggs and products combined were up 6.2 percent from October 2025 to 487,800 case equivalents representing the theoretical production of 7.2 million hens. Shell egg exports were down 53.1 percent from October totaling 76,000 cases. Exports were dominated by Canada (45 percent of volume) and the “Rest of Americas” including the Caribbean (46 percent). With respect to 411,000 case-equivalents of egg products, up 38.0 percent from the prior month, importers comprised the E.U (61 percent of volume), Canada (2 percent), “Rest of Americas and the EU (7 percent), Japan, (14 percent), Mexico, (4 percent) collectively representing 90 percent of shipments. Volumes exported are based on the needs of importers, competing suppliers, availability in the U.S. and FOB prices offered.
• For 2025 through November the positive trade balance in all shell and derived egg products attained 6.8 million dozen shell equivalents.

TABLES SHOWING KEY PARAMETERS FOR JANUARY 2026.

Summary tables for the latest USDA January 2026 costs and unit prices were made available by the EIC on February 10^th 2025. Data is arranged, summarized, tabulated and compared with values from the previous January 16^th 2025 release reflecting December 2025 costs and production data, as revised and applicable. Monthly comparisons of production data and costs are based on revised USDA and EIC releases.

VOLUMES OF PRODUCTION REFLECTING THE ENTIRE INDUSTRY

*Source USDA/EIC Note 1. Texas excluded to maintain confidentiality 

PROPORTION OF U.S. TOTAL HENS BY STATE, 2025

Based on a nominal denominator of 295 million hens in flocks over 30,000 covering 95 percent of the U.S complement.

USDA has amended inclusion of specific states in regions and eliminated Texas data to protect confidentiality relating to sizes of Company flocks

1. Values rounded to 0.1%
2. MO, 4.7%; CA , 2.2%; CO, 2.2%; CO, 1%.

Rate of Lay, weighted hen-month (USDA)  82.2% December 2025. 81.8 % November 2025

*Revised USDA

*Revised, using data from USDA Livestock, Dairy and Poultry Outlook January 16^th 2026 taking into account demand from the food service sector and presumably including the effect of HPAI depopulation and net importation.

EGG INVENTORIES AT BEGINNING OF JANUARY 2026:

EGGS BROKEN UNDER FSIS INSPECTION (MILLION CASES) December 2025, 6.50 November 2025, 6.61

EXPORTS NOVEMBER 2025: (Expressed as shell-equivalent cases of 360 eggs).

*Representing 2.0 percent of National production in November 2025 comprising 16% shell, 84% products.

COSTS AND UNIT REVENUE VALUES¹ FOR CONVENTIONAL EGGS FROM CAGED HENS

Notes: 1. Excludes SW and West representing an important deficiency 

Components of Production cost per dozen:-

Ex Farm Margin (rounded to nearest cent) according to USDA values reflecting January 2026:-

52.0 cents per dozen¹- 76.2 cents per dozen = -24.2 cents per dozen (December 2025 comparison: 122.0 cents per dozen – 75.5 cents per dozen = 46.5 cents per dozen.

Note 1: USDA Blended nest-run egg price

1. Unrealistic USDA values based on advertised promotional prices with few participating stores, non-representative of shelf prices!

AVERAGE COSTS AND UNIT REVENUE FOR EGGS FROM CAGE-FREE HENS

Components of Production cost for cage-free eggs, per dozen:-

Ex Farm Margin (rounded to cent) according to USDA values reflecting negotiated price for January 2026:-

Cage-Free brown 63.0 cents per dozen¹- 96.0 cents per dozen =-33.0 cents per dozen

December 2025:-110.0 cents per dozen¹- 95.1 cents per dozen = +14.9 cents per dozen

1. 
   Contract price, nest-run loose. Range 155 to 210 c/doz. Negligible change since July 2024 and totally unrealistic.
2. Negotiated price, loose. Range $0.34 to $1.10 per dozen
3. Estimate based on prevailing costs
4. Unrealistic USDA values based on promotional prices with few participating stores and non-representative of shelf prices

* Conventional (non-organic) feed

Feed prices used are the average national and regional values for caged flocks. Excludes organic feeds with prices substantially higher than conventional.

The following were elected to executive positions on the Board of Directors of USPOULTRY during the 2026 IPPE:

• Bill Griffth, Chief Operations Officer for Peco Foods was selected as the Chairman

• Dr. Alice Johnson of Butterball LLC was elected Vice-chair

• Kevin McDaniel of Wayne-Sanderson Farms as named Treasurer

• John Wright of Fieldale Farms was elected Secretary

• Jonathan Cade of Hy-Line International will serve as the Immediate-past Chairman

In commenting on the slate of officers, Nath Morris president of USPOULTRY stated, “With the
experience and guidance these officers bring to our organization, the future of USPOULTRY is in excellent hands and I look forward to their leadership in helping to shape our organization over the next year.”

The recently released Dietary Guidelines for Americans for 2025-2030 discourages consumption of “processed foods”.  The emphasis on protein including eggs is a vindication for our industry that has undergone unjustified criticism over cholesterol content in past decades.

The question now arises as to what constitutes “processed foods.”  Various definitions have been applied but without consideration of the implications for the manufacturers of packaged products.  Applying the broadest descriptor, “processing” includes any alteration of a food from the natural state through heating, pasteurizing, mixing, milling, freezing or canning.  Within reason, these processes are essential to manufacture food products, preserve nutrient quality or to make them available to consumers.  With respect to additives, some preservatives have been shown to be both beneficial and innocuous.  Many ‘unpronounceable additives’ disfavored by purists are in fact nutrients and contribute to or are essential to health.

In a move to reject all additives in pursuit of a clean label, activists motivated by either naïve sincerity or outright mendacity risk throwing out the baby with the bath water.

According to a report sponsored by the Private Label Manufacturers Association by market research company Circana, dollar sales for private label products attained $282 billion in calendar 2025.  This was a 3.3 percent increase over the previous year and compares to the growth in national brands of 1.2 percent.

Unit sales of private label brands grew 0.6 percent. In contrast, national brand unit sales fell by an equivalent amount.  The segment with the highest dollar sales among private label products comprised refrigerated items with a 6.1 percent increase followed by beverages at 4.8 percent, frozen items that increased by 2.4 percent and general foods at 1.6 percent.

Peggy Davies, president of the Private Label Manufacturers Association noted a shift in consumer priorities primary based on cost and availability with an appreciation by consumers that private label products offer equivalent quality and health properties compared to national brands.

Notwithstanding the growth in private brands, Eggland’s Best continues to grow in both sales volume and maintains price in a fluctuating market for generic eggs. This is based on substantiated nutritional claims, with health implications and supported by a marketing program incorporating mainstream and social media.

Funeral services for the late Dr. Stanley Herbert Kleven were held on Friday January 23^rd.  Dr. Kleven, born June 24, 1940 was associated throughout his career with the University of Georgia Poultry Disease Research Center. 

He was recognized as an international expert in avian mycoplasmosis including detection and control of Mg and Ms.  He was the co-author of over 200 peer-reviewed articles and served as a major professor for 17 doctoral-level graduates and a larger number of students earning the Masters degree. 

Over his distinguished career Dr. Kleven provided leadership in the American Veterinary Medical Association, the American Association of Avian Pathologists, the World Veterinary Poultry Association and the National Poultry Improvement Association.  He received the AAAP Special Service Award in 2002 and was inaugural inductee in the Hall of Honor in 2016.

He will be sadly missed for his scientific acumen, collegiality, mentorship and contributions to the industry.

Costco Wholesale Corporation (COST) is a bellwether on consumer spending and the willingness of customers to purchase food and household items in bulk and splurge on big-ticket items including appliances, electronics and furniture. On February 4^th Costco reported sales for January 2026 covering the four-week period ending February 1^st. Sales attained $21.33 billion, up 9.3 percent from the value of $18.51 billion during the corresponding month in 2026.

Same store sales (excluding fuel and foreign exchange) increased 6.8 percent for the U.S.; 8.2 percent for Canada and 2.7 percent for the International warehouse segment.  Overall, same-stores sales advanced by 6.4 percent and E-commerce was 33.1 percent higher. International sales were impacted by the advent of the Lunar New Year that was 19 days later than in 2025, beyond the January cut-off. Sales in this segment were depressed by an estimated 4 percent.

Costco advanced in after-hours trading on February 4^th after release of the data to $988.50. COST intraday market capitalization was $434.5 billion on February 4^th. The share has traded over a 52-week range of $844.06 to $1078.23.

Costco Wholesale Corporation operates 924 warehouses with 634 in the U.S.; 114 in Canada; 42 in Mexico with the remainder in nine other nations.

New World Screwworm (NWS Cochliomyia hominivorax) has seriously disrupted importation of livestock from Mexico to the U.S., directly impacting the cost of beef to consumers.  The infestation that emerged in Guatemala and spread to and then within Mexico imposes a threat to livestock producers in the U.S. states bordering our southern neighbor. On recognition of the problem surveillance and control measures were initiated emphasizing the need for cooperation among USMCA regulators.

Decades ago, the problem of NWS was resolved by releasing irradiated sterile male flies that effectively suppressed and then eliminated populations of the parasite.  Applying a “mission accomplished” approach without the necessary surveillance by our southern neighbors resulted in an inevitable reoccurrence of infection.  To address the current situation, USDA has reactivated irradiation facilities to produce and distribute sterile male flies that will be effective but over time. 

The USDA has issued a request for proposals to upgrade surveillance and control measures. Projects, even if funded and implemented will not have any immediate impact on the current emergency.  Secretary Rollins is justified in her comment, “We know we have tried-and-true tools and methods that defeat this pest, but we must constantly look for new and better methods and innovate our way to success”.

The lessons that should be heeded include:

• Constant surveillance is necessary for early detection of the parasite
• Irradiation facilities should be maintained with availability of trained personnel to rapidly respond to outbreaks.
• Cooperation with neighboring nations coupled with financial support will ensure that effective surveillance and control measures are maintained.  This is difficult to achieve in an atmosphere of hostility generated by U.S. policies relating to tariffs and immigration that detract from mutual understanding and collaboration.

At the end of the day nature ignores national boundaries and has an immense capacity to adapt to changes in the environment. These include socio-economic factors and global warming that facilitate the northward movement of pests and vectors of pathogens affecting human, animal and avian populations.

Barnwell Bio has justifiably acquired venture capital funding to detect a range of human and avian pathogens in effluent.  The company presented their ability to conduct metagenomic bio-surveillance at the 2026 IPPE. Effluent assay technology has acquired enhanced sensitivity and specificity over the past decade and especially since the advent of COVID, representing an important adjunct to public health. In our industry there are obvious beneficial applications arising from early detection of poultry diseases to enable rapid imposition of quarantines or to initiate therapy if available. 

Barnwell Bio surveillance has been used successfully to detect cases of bacterial infections that can be treated expeditiously to reduce losses.  The question arises whether the time interval between detection of a pathogen in effluent as compared to conventional diagnostic procedures provides a demonstrable and quantifiable benefit.

It is of concern that the company is promoting the concept of their early detection system to detect and hence control highly pathogenic avian influenza.  Since diagnosis of this infection results in mandatory depopulation with appropriate WOAH procedures including quarantine and area surveillance, the justification for application of this technology is questioned. The critical 24 hours between early recognition using “microbiome fingerprinting” and widely applied PCR assay motivated by flock records, clinical evaluation and rapid immunoassay may or may not provide any practical or financial benefit.  It is highly probable that a presumptive HPAI positive on an effluent assay would require confirmation by PCR before official federal and state action is taken.  As yet Barnwell has not quantified the lead time to diagnose HPAI in large egg production complexes or turkey growing farms, so the claims for benefits are theoretical and as yet unsubstantiated. Even with a 24-to-48-hour lead time, the end result will inevitably be depopulation in the event of HPAI.  The only advantage with respect to early recognition of HPAI could be prevention of inter-farm infection within companies operating multiple complexes with biological interconnection.

Obvious benefits are evident with regard to some bacterial diseases that can be treated applying approved antibiotic therapy or even in cases of viral erosive diseases to anticipate secondary bacterial infection. Claims covering HPAI appear speculative at this time.

The Federal government has filed a lawsuit against the Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the State Attorney General over restrictions relating to cage-free housing.  In 2019 the legislature of the state revised the Animal Industry Act to ban the sale of eggs from hens confined to conventional cages.  The law, duly enacted went into effect at the beginning of 2025 following a six-year transition during which producers invested capital in alternatives systems of housing. 

Nancy Barr Executive Director of Michigan Allied Poultry Industries commented, “Our producers are ready, they have spent a lot of time and money getting there but they are committed to cage-free housing.”

The legal action by the Administration would appear to be moot since conversion is a reality and the lawsuit would appear to be a

Previously EGG-NEWS reported on restatement of segment earnings by Archer-Daniels Midland Company (ADM) dating back to 2014.  Sales and contribution by the Nutrition Segment apparently were misstated by applying creative bookkeeping.  When discrepancies were disclosed, the CFO Vikram Luthar was suspended and subsequently resigned. With realization of the implications of the deviation from accepted accounting practice, ADM cooperated with the SEC and implemented “significant remedial measures”.

The SEC alleged that adjustments between the Nutrition segment and other business units of ADM were made including retroactive rebates and use of unrealistic intersegment costs to allow the Nutrition segment to meet targets for fiscal 2021 and 2022. Following extensive investigations by the company, forensic auditors and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the Company agreed to a settlement of $40 million but did not admit to any wrongdoing.  Concurrently the U.S. Department of Justice has closed its investigation.  In addition to Luthar his predecessor Ray G. Young previous CFO and Vince Macciocchi president of the Nutrition Segment and chief Sales and Marketing officer were cited by the SEC.

Juan Luciano Chair of the Board and CEO of ADM noted, “We are pleased to put these matters behind the company.  These past couple of years have underscored what is core to ADM -incorporating learnings to future strengthen our business.”

At the end of the day Luciano was responsible for the irregularities and was aware if not complicit in the financial manipulation. The incident demonstrates the downside of incentive bonuses and may well denote a corporate culture inconsistent with shareholder and stakeholder interests and conformity to standard accounting practices and business ethics.  As the Brits would say ADM “has form”.

Luthar still faces SEC accusations of violating antifraud provisions of securities legislation and involvement in “abetting ADM’s violation relating to internal accounting control.”  Luthar denies the SEC allegations and has not settled as have Macciocchi and Young who paid civil and disgorgement penalties.

In the weeks following the September 2024 disclosures of irregularities, ADM stock fell 30 percent from $72 to $51subsequently closing on January 29, 2026 at $67 compared to a November 2025 high of $98.  Over the past 52 weeks, ADM has traded in a range of $41 to $70 with a 50-day moving average of $61.  Operating margin is razor thin at 2.0 percent with a profit margin of 1.4 percent.  On a 12-month trailing basis, the return on assets is 1.8 percent and 5.2 percent on equity.

A collaboration among industry associations representing broilers, eggs, turkeys and ducks has resulted in establishing the Poultry Industry Food Safety Council (PIFSCo) to serve as a central clearinghouse for research and dissemination of data relating to food safety and related issues.

The Chair of PIFSCo, Kevin Atkins noted, “Food safety is the foundation of consumer trust and the key to the long-term successful industry.”  He added, “Through PIFSCo we are bringing together the best science expertise and industry collaboration to rise the standard of food safety from farm to fork.”  A new website www.pifsco.org will incorporate:-

• Educational resources

• Updates on Research

• Sharing of best practices for food safety

• Membership and participation information

Kim Rice vice-chairman of PIFSCo stated that “By uniting stakeholders across the poultry industry sectors we will help ensure consistent standards, rapid knowledge-sharing and a stronger foundation for continuous improvement.”

PIFSCo is supported by the American Egg Board, National Chicken Council, National Turkey Federation, United Egg Producers and USPOULTRY and includes representation by 50 companies and allied industry partners.

In a January 29th release, USPOULTRY the co-sponsor of the 2026 International Production and Processing Expo (IPPE) noted 33,000 registered attendees, 663,000 square feet of exhibit space and 1,385 exhibitors representing records in all three categories. The co-organizers noted, “despite the weather-related challenges we are really excited about the efforts attendees and exhibitors made to attend IPPE this week.”

In addition to the show floor, there were more than 80 hours of education sessions dealing with sustainability, food safety, industry trends, the International Poultry Scientific Forum, the Latin American Poultry Summit and TECHTalk Program and the new-product showcase. 

In 2027 the IPPE will take place from January 26 to 28 in the Georgia World Conference Center.
 

The FDA categorizes egg production farms as “small” with 3,000 to 50,000 hens or “large” with more than 50,000 hens. Using this broad but uninformative classification there were 749 new registrations with 634 small farms and 115 large farms in 2025. Although small farms are increasing in number there is proportionality with respect to large farm registrations.  In 2021 the ratio of small to large farms was 5.8: 1 with 183 registrations. For the most recent year the ratio was 5.5: 1 with 749 registrations.

The data presented by FDA at the United Egg Producers’ Food Safety Committee on January 26^th may be important with respect to assessing demand for inspection services, but the figures are totally meaningless in the context of industry trends and expansion.  The classifications of “small” and “large” are far too narrow and should be expanded in relation to hen numbers within each of the existing two categories.  A second question relates to the number of total registrations that have increased since 2021 representing a three-fold expansion, without corresponding to the total number of hens.  Of particular interest is the increase in small farms from 2024 with a total of 329 units representing five million hens at a hypothetical 15,000 birds per registrant.  It is also noted that large farms increased by 115 registrations. Assuming a minimum of 50,000 hens per farm this would represent 5.58 million additional birds. 

FDA data confirmed that as of January 2026 there were 4,605 registered farms located in the United States with 3,612 or 78.4 percent classified as small producers. The figures presented do not apparently distinguish between pullet farms and egg production units. Data is, however, consistent with the increase in farms ranging from 10,000 to 20,000 hens established by contract farmers supplying egg packing plants with cage-free, free-range and pasture-housed flocks.

During Calendar 2025, the FDA in collaboration with state agencies conducted 244 inspections or 5.3 percent of all farms to determine compliance with federal standards for food safety.  Of the 244 inspections ten required official action with six warning letters.  If this proportion reflects the entire U.S. industry there are theoretically 120 farms that would have qualified for an official warning.

There is no indication of the number of farms with less than 3,000 hens that fly under FDA radar.  A unit with of 3,000 hens producing at 75 percent hen-day, could theoretically market 68,000 dozen, representing a potential risk for up to 3,000 consumers or more if restaurants are recipients of contaminated eggs.

Fortunately, epidemiologic data confirms a low incidence rate of Salmonella Enteritidis infection from eggs in the U.S.  This is attributed in part to widespread adoption of vaccination, an effective modality not considered by the FDA in framing the Final Rule on Salmonella in Eggs.  Thorough cooking to 165 F for 30 seconds to the center of the yolk effectively destroys vertically transmitted Salmonella Enteritidis. Mandatory washing of eggs with approved detergent-disinfectant combinations at an appropriate pH and temperature to destroy shell contamination and the post-packing cold chain are modalities contributing to the low incidence rate of egg-borne salmonellosis.

Peter McGuinness has departed from Impossible Foods after a four-year tenure.  He has accepted a position as CEO of Bel North America, the U.S. subsidiary of the Bel Group of France a major manufacturer of dairy and vegetable-based snacks and RTE foods. McGuinness will be replaced by a troika comprising Jason Gao, Chief Legal and Operating Officer, Meredith Madden, Chief Demand Officer and Robert Haas, Chief Supply Officer. 

Impossible Foods is a private company and does not publish financial data.  Given the declining sales and growing losses posted by competitor, Beyond Meat (BYND), it is presumed that Impossible Foods is experiencing similar headwinds including shrinking demand and slim margins. Despite eight infusions of venture capital, Impossible Foods Tape D® price declined from approximately $15 in January 2024 to approximately $2 at the beginning of January 2026.

Ten financing rounds from September 6, 2011, to November 23^rd, 2021, raised close to $1.7 billion.  Investors include Horizons, Khosla, UVS, Temasek, Viking Global and XN Capital, among others. These companies now have little opportunity to recoup their investments given the limited prospects for the company to launch a successful initial public offering.

Both Impossible Foods and Beyond Meat have experienced declining sales both among retail stores and institutions.  Tapering demand is due to noncompetitive cost, inferior organoleptic qualities compared to real meat and poultry, the realization that plant-protein products are ultra- processed. These factors are in addition to reduced concern over livestock welfare, sustainability and the environment and an indifference to industry generated hype.

A recent article surveyed immunity to N1 neuraminidase in a population in British Columbia, Canada^*.  Sera was obtained during August 2024 from 575 participants classified among ten age groups from one to 80 years of age.  Neuraminidase inhibition antibody titers were assessed by ELISA assay against H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4b.  In assessing N1 titers, 70 percent had detectable antibodies with half of the total yielding a low to moderate value, 32 percent at an intermediate threshold and 17 percent with a high concentration of antibody.  The level of antibody was consistent with previous exposure to H1N1 influenza pandemics in cohorts born from 1997 to 2003, many children exposed during the 2009 H1N1 outbreak and among those born before 1947.

The authors concluded that “a substantial proportion of the population has pre-existing anti-N1 against H5N1 with age-related variation”.

It is difficult to reconcile the low rate of infection attributed to H5N1 among workers with intensive exposure during depopulation and decontamination of infected poultry farms. A comprehensive epidemiologic survey of dairy and poultry workers has yet to be published.

It is generally conceded that workers at risk of exposure to H5N1 should be vaccinated against the prevailing seasonal influenza quadrivalent product to minimize the risk, albeit slight, of a recombinant event.  It is also suggested that dairy and poultry farm and processing workers should be vaccinated using an available H5N1 vaccine as deployed in Scandinavia for poultry and fur-farm workers.

^*Skowronski, D. M., Cross-Reactive H5N1 Neuraminidase Antibodies by Agent Influenza Imprinting Cohorts of the Past Century: Population-Based Sero Survey, British Columbia, Canada J. Infectious Diseases.  doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiag 030 (2026)

Recently, Stephen Vaden, USDA Deputy Secretary, condemned California Proposition #12 as “internal protectionism” and committed to oppose the law established by public ballot.  Proposition #12 and Massachusetts Question 3 effectively covering New England states, places restrictions on confinement of poultry and livestock and the sale of products from non-approved facilities.  At issue is the use of gestation crates for sows, albeit declining in the proportion of production.  This is not a table-egg issue since the industry has successfully transitioned to alternatives to conventional cage housing to supply U.S. demand and specifically for California and states with restrictions on confinement.

The National Pork Producers Council challenged Proposition #12 in a series of actions that terminated in SCOTUS letting stand lower-court support for the legislation. Pork producers through their associations have lobbied strongly for a national housing standard including proposed H.R.4673 (Save Our Bacon law) without success.

It is ironic that pork producers opposed and managed to scuttle the proposed “Egg Bill” that would have established a national standard since they were concerned over a potential “slippery slope” of a federal standard extending from hens to sows.  Notwithstanding this disappointment, the egg industry collectively invested in transition to alternative systems including aviaries in addition to contractor and corporate-owned and operated barn-housing to produce cage-free eggs.  Over the past three years, the proportion of cage-free hens in the national flock appears to be reaching a plateau at approximately 47 percent of producing hens. Recent data confirms a markedly lower upward trajectory in conversion. A rapid increase from approximately 20 million hens in 2008 to 140 million at the beginning of 2026 occurred with a concurrent decline in caged flocks to 160 million.

Continued opposition to Proposition #12 with respect to restrictions on sows may be moot.  Retailers and consumer groups are discriminating against pork products derived from piglets farrowed by sows held in gestation crates on a national basis.  Accordingly, many of the large pork producers have converted to group housing for sows. With experience they have overcome management problems albeit requiring investment in new or expanded facilities. This is in common with progressive egg producers responding to market realities.  The figurative group housing of sows train left the station over a decade ago and will not return. Producers who retain gestation crates will be forced to sell at a discount or their packers will rely on the export market.

The International Poultry Welfare Alliance (IPWA) established a partnership with the International Egg Foundation (IEF) at the 2026 International Production and Processing Expo (IPPE).  The objective is to intensify training and support for poultry welfare. The Memorandum of Understanding allows for IPWA to assist the IEF with standards and guides. 

Bruce Dooyema, Chairman of the IEF stated, “Through our partnership with IPWA we can apply proven welfare tools in the field while contributing farmer-led insights that help ensure guidance reflecting real-world conditions.”

Dr. Katy Tarrant, Chair of IPWA stated, “We are honored to support the IEF mission and to learn from the regions where these solutions matter most.”

The Memorandum of Agreement presumes coordination between the organizations to assist field outcomes and identify opportunities to modify training in welfare and application of science to improve the standards of housing and management on a global basis.