Avian Flu: How bird disease is driving up US egg prices
Avian flu outbreaks have been blamed for soaring egg prices in the US thanks to an ongoing epidemic that has killed upwards of 150 million birds and wreaked havoc on the American poultry industry.
However, the virus may not be the only factor that has driven egg prices to new records, with the potential for prices expected to climb by another 41 per cent this year.
According to the US Bureau of Labour Statistics, the cost of a dozen eggs hit a new record high of $4.95 in January, nearly doubling in price in the space of a year and surpassing the previous high of $4.82 set in January 2023.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) said prices had hit a whopping $8.05 by the end of February, before falling to $6.85 in the first week of March.
The current outbreak of the flu began in 2022.
The USDA said that so far just this year, 30.3 million egg-laying hens have been killed due to highly pathogenic avian influenza outbreaks. The majority of those birds, 22.4 million, were from conventional cage farm systems.
To date, the department has confirmed 40 outbreaks across nine states with officials maintaining that infection rates are slowing and are localized.
During the election campaign, President Donald Trump vowed to bring down the price of eggs on the first day of his second term.
Trump claimed during his recent address to a joint session of Congress that his predecessor was responsible for the 'out of control' pricing. He maintained that he was 'working hard to get it back down.'
The issue is something that doesn't appear to be the most pressing on Trump's agenda. Over the weekend, Trump shared an article on his Truth Social platform titled 'Shut up about egg prices – Trump is saving consumers millions.' The piece alleged that the egg price crisis 'in no way President Trump's fault.'
Meanwhile, the Department of Justice has launched an investigation into egg prices and competition in the egg market amid suspicions that some producers may be overly inflating their prices.
The investigation also focuses on whether producers were being transparent about their costs and whether the large producers colluded in any way over price setting.
A report from Food and Water Watch pointed out that 'just a handful of companies' produce the majority of America's eggs, 'giving them outsized control over the prices paid by retailers'.
In late February, the Trump administration announced an investment of up to $1 billion to halt the crisis and 'make eggs affordable again.' Half of the investment was set to go to producers to help with biosecurity measures, according to the Wall Street Journal.
In that announcement, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins also suggested Americans start raising their own chickens in their backyards.
Rent-a-chicken services have risen in popularity, with companies offering to rent two-to-four hens, a portable coop, food and care instructions for those who want to produce their own eggs but aren't sure where to start.
One company, Rent the Chicken, said the chickens should lay a dozen to two dozen eggs a week, depending on the rental package, which starts at about $600.
The company's co-owner Jenn Tompkins said that business has been booming this year, after steadily rising in popularity since the start of the pandemic.
'Our renters don't have to be concerned about egg shortages or store prices. They can just walk out to their backyard coop and find their eggs right there, ready for them,' she told CTV News.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
25 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain will need Trump's permission to use new nuclear bombs
Britain will need permission from Donald Trump to deploy any tactical nuclear weapons from its new fighter jets. The Government has agreed to purchase 12 F-35A fighter jets from the US, meaning British aircraft will carry nuclear warheads for the first time since the Cold War. The Telegraph, however, understands that there is no intention for the UK to develop its own sovereign nuclear bomb capability and they will therefore have to purchase the B61-12 thermo bombs that the planes carry from the US. Under Nato's nuclear sharing arrangements any of the US's B-61 weapons carried by Nato allies remain under US custody. For a nuclear mission to be conducted by a Nato country approval must be granted by the alliance's Nuclear Planning Group (NPG) with final sign off from both the US president and British Prime Minister. An RAF source asked why the UK could not have negotiated a deal which did not leave it so reliant on the US for permission to protect itself. 'This is good we are talking to Nato, but there is a question over whether the UK would like its own sovereign airborne capability,' he said. 'Can't they negotiate a new deal with the Americans which explores this?' It has not been decided where the B-61 weapons purchased from the US would be based once on British soil. The US is already planning to station nuclear weapons at its US air base, RAF Lakenheath, according to Pentagon documents. Another possibility would be to house them at the neighbouring British base RAF Marham. An RAF source added that from a UK perspective it made sense to store the weapons at a British base, as they will be British owned. The last UK warplanes capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons were Tornados, which deployed the British-made WE177 nuclear bomb. This was retired in 1998 after the Iron Curtain had fallen and it was widely felt that Russia was no longer a threat. Other sovereign bombs included the Blue Danube, the first UK-built nuclear deterrent, which was carried by V-bombers. In 1956 a Vickers Valiant became the first RAF aircraft to drop the British atomic bomb during a test at the Maralinga range in Australia. However, as a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which strives for a world without nuclear weapons, the UK has not invested in its own tactical nuclear weapon arsenal since 1998. Trident, the continuous at-sea deterrent, is the only nuclear weapon system operated by the UK that has a day-to-day operation independent of the US. It consists of four Vanguard-class submarines which can carry up to 16 warheads each. France's nuclear deterrent, which is believed to contain an estimated 300 nuclear weapons, under its 'force de dissuasion' programme, with sea and air-based launch capabilities, is also currently independent from Nato. The US has long guaranteed Europe's safety with an arsenal of around 100 nuclear missiles, many of them stationed in a US military base in Germany.
Spectator
26 minutes ago
- Spectator
Starmer may regret bringing forward Trump's state visit
One of the most notable features of Keir Starmer's otherwise undistinguished premiership is the bromance that he seems to have formed with King Charles. Both men seem to have a shared sense of moral values and a reticence of character that appears to have served them well in what, up until now, has been a harmonious working relationship. However, the first serious cracks in their partnership might be about to appear, and they come courtesy of none other than Donald Trump. It was announced earlier this year that the President would be hosted in Britain on a state visit, as he had been in 2019. The major reason for this unprecedented boon being offered was to obtain preferential treatment when it came to trade deals and tariffs, and it appears that playing on both Trump's Anglophilia and sincere love of the royal family has been successful. Charles is said to be appalled by Trump's musings that Canada should be turned into America's 51st state However, a difficulty has now ensued. It has been reported – not least by Trump, who has gleefully called it a 'fest' – that the state visit will be taking place relatively soon, in September. This is against the wishes of the King, who would have preferred that if such a visitation needed to take place at all, it would have been a relatively quiet and informal occasion, rather than the full bells-and-whistles pageantry that such a state visit demands. There are several reasons for this, but the main one is that Charles, who recently conducted a successful trip to Canada, is said to be appalled by Trump's musings that the country – which still honours the King as its sovereign – should be turned into America's 51st state. In the pointed and decidedly political address that he made when he opened Ottawa's parliament last month, Charles declared that the country should stay 'strong and free'. He said Today, Canada faces another critical moment. Democracy, pluralism, the rule of law, self-determination, and freedom are values which Canadians hold dear, and ones which the government is determined to protect. This has been echoed in typically wishy-washy fashion by Starmer, who said last week that 'Canada is an independent, sovereign nation, and quite right too'. Yet there are murmurings from Buckingham Palace that hosting Trump goes against this rhetoric and that a state visit should have been delayed in order to allow the President to tone down some of his more inflammatory remarks. This has not happened, and the formal document that allows for the state visit to take place, the 'manu regia', was delivered to the White House last week after being signed by the King. The King had supposedly wished to meet Trump informally first, with the sop that this encounter would allow the two to plan the most successful state visit together. In his invitation to Trump in February, he supposedly wrote, 'that is why I would find it helpful for us to be able to discuss, together, a range of options'. These desires, however, appear to have been steamrollered so that Trump can visit the country once again in a few months and so that Starmer can have his photo opportunities, playing the international statesman once more. If this comes at the expense of what has been, up until now, a warm and fruitful partnership with the King, then he should reflect on the wisdom – or otherwise – of jeopardising a very different kind of special relationship. As the likes of Blair, Johnson and Truss all learnt, an aggrieved monarch is not a happy one, and the consequences can be regrettable indeed.
BBC News
28 minutes ago
- BBC News
Trump pushes back after leaked report suggests Iran strikes had limited impact
Donald Trump and his top officials have pushed back on a leaked intelligence report that said US strikes on Iran only set its nuclear programme back by a few at a Nato summit in The Hague on Wednesday, Trump said the strikes led to the "virtual obliteration" of Iran's nuclear capabilities and set its atomic programme back "by decades".Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth, who was also at the summit, said the preliminary Pentagon assessment was made with "low confidence" and the FBI was investigating the Tuesday, sources familiar with the initial report into Saturday's bombings told the BBC's US partner CBS that Iran's stockpile of enriched uranium was not eliminated. They added that the strikes had only set the country's nuclear programme back by a few months - an assessment the White House swiftly described as "flat-out wrong".According to the report, strikes on the heavily fortified enrichment facilities at Fordo and Natanz had sealed off entrances but failed to destroy underground familiar with the leaked Defense Intelligence Agency evaluation warned it was an early assessment that could change as more information becomes available about the sites. Live: Follow latest updatesBBC Verify Live: Analysing new satellite images of nuclear sitesWatch: How successful have the US strikes on Iran been? The Defense Intelligence Agency is the Pentagon's own agency which specialises in military intelligence to support operations. It collects large amounts of technical intelligence, but is distinct from other agencies like the US has 18 intelligence agencies, which sometimes produce conflicting reports based on their mission and area of expertise. For example, the American intelligence community is still not in agreement over the origins of Wednesday, while sitting alongside Nato Chief Mark Rutte, Trump initially acknowledged some uncertainty, saying the intelligence on the attack was "very inconclusive".But he then went further in his assessment, saying "it was very severe, it was [an] obliteration".When asked if the US would strike again should Iran resume its nuclear activities, Trump said: "Sure, but I'm not going to have to worry about that. It's gone for years."Trump later likened the strikes to America's atomic bombing of Hiroshima at the end of World War Two."I don't want to use an example of Hiroshima, I don't want to use an example of Nagasaki, but that was essentially the same thing - that ended a war," he US president was flanked by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defence Pete Hegseth, who both echoed his scepticism about the leaked said the leak was politically motivated and insisted the bombs landed "precisely where they were supposed to".He added: "Any assessment that tells you it was something otherwise is speculating with other motives." He characterised the leak as "completely false".Rubio also cast doubt on the leaked report's credibility, suggesting the contents had been distorted in the media and labelling the leakers as "professional stabbers". The preliminary assessment also indicated that some of Iran's enriched uranium stockpile had been moved prior to the to sources familiar with it, Iran's centrifuges remain largely "intact" with the destruction limited to aboveground buildings. Entrances to two nuclear facilities were blocked and some infrastructure was damaged, they said, but much of the deeper installations survived the US intelligence terminology, "low confidence" typically indicates that the information is either poorly sourced, fragmented, or uncertain - making it less reliable than assessments graded with "moderate" or "high confidence". Hegseth's reference to the report being "low confidence" suggest it is tentative and its findings may change as more detail US struck three nuclear sites in Iran on Saturday - Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan - using "bunker buster" bombs designed to penetrate hardened underground targets. While the specific munitions used in the attack have not been confirmed, the 30,000lb (14,000kg) Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), was thought to be the only weapon capable of destroying Iran's underground enrichment has always said its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes. In the hours that followed Saturday's strikes, Gen Dan Caine, chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, told reporters that it would take time to assess the damage to the he added that "all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction". Satellite images showed six fresh craters clustered around two entry points at the Fordo nuclear sites, as well as grey dust and is unclear from the latest satellite images, however, how much damage the sites sustained below the Abedini, the deputy political director of Iran's state broadcaster, said the three sites targeted by the US had been evacuated a "while ago", and that Iran "didn't suffer a major blow because the materials had already been taken out".Both US and Israeli officials, meanwhile, have hailed the mission as a success.
