Animal welfare label lawsuits: what they say about eggs and dog training collars

Animal welfare claims are statements that tell shoppers how animals were treated. On food, they often describe how hens or other animals were housed, such as how much room they had or whether they could go outside. On pet products, they often describe a product as safe, gentle or humane for the animal.

Companies use these claims because some shoppers choose, or pay more for, products that seem to treat animals better.

There is no single definition for every such phrase. For poultry sold as meat, the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service explains on its page on meat and poultry labeling terms that producers using outdoor-access claims must show the agency the birds were allowed access to the outside. More broadly, the Federal Trade Commission's advertising FAQs for small businesses say that ad claims must be truthful and that companies need evidence to back them up.

The lawsuits here make claims about specific products. The Alderfer non-organic eggs lawsuit says the eggs were labeled as if hens could roam, when, according to the lawsuit, hens had little space and limited outdoor access, which it says breaks New York false advertising law. The PetSafe dog training collar lawsuit concerns electronic training collars, which deliver a stimulation to a dog's neck. That lawsuit says PetSafe advertised the collars as safe and humane, while the lawsuit says they caused burns, injuries and stress to pets.