Gert Jan Oplaat, president of the AVEC, the Association of European Poultry Producers (essentially the equivalent of USPOULTRY and the USAPEEC combined) recently called for international coordination on control of HPAI including vaccination in accordance with the recommendations and policies of the World Organization of Animal Health (WOAH).

Oplaat, a leader of his native Dutch poultry organization emphasized, “The pandemic status of HPAI with outbreaks of H5N1 clade 2.3.4.4.b has continued for over the past four years”.  He correctly drew attention to the financial impact of mass depopulation, escalation in the cost of products to consumers and the potential risk to public health following the possible emergence of a zoonotic strain.  Current stamping-out campaigns are regarded as a “waste of resources” and the approach is antithetical to sustainability, welfare and a favorable public perception of the poultry industry.

A number of nations have implemented vaccination as a prevention and control measure supplementing biosecurity and quarantine.  EGG-NEWS recently commented on the successful reduction in the incidence of outbreaks of HPAI within the foie gras industry of France.  Farmers operate in close proximity often with defective biosecurity, allow outside access of flocks creating susceptibility by exposure to HPAI infection from migratory birds and by wind-borne dissemination of virus.  Our southern neighbor has employed vaccination as a control strategy to reduce the spread and economic consequences of uncontrolled HPAI. China has deployed vaccination for over a decade to limit flock infection and to reduce exposure to consumers through wet markets.

The current restraints to deploying commercially available and effective vaccines relate not to efficacy but to the reality of trade sanctions. Effective vaccines to protect flocks against H5N1 HPAI include live vectored products for mass immunization and inactivated oil emulsion DIVA vaccines for parenteral administration.

Stamping-out has failed to eliminate the endemic status of HPAI in Europe and North America. The infection is introduced by migratory and marine waterfowl and disseminated by contact with free-living birds and the aerogenous route. This has raised questions as to the validity of current control measures. Regulators in importing nations have been slow to accept the benefits of vaccination, adhering to traditional pre-panornitic regulations. The representations by AVEC reflect the realities of trade restrictions that are now anachronistic and epidemiologically invalid given available programs of surveillance and certification.  Oplaat correctly states that “HPAI is not only a trade issue, it is a long-term structural challenge for animal health, sustainability and credibility.”

The EU will produce 11.970 million metric tons of RTC chicken in 2026.  Of this total, 1.720 million metric tons or 14 percent will be exported.  This figure is offset by imports of 0.8 million metric tons, principally from Brazil, Ukraine and Thailand.  Corresponding figures for the U.S. comprise 22.090 million metric tons of RTC broiler production in 2026 with 3.052 million metric tons exported representing 13.8 percent of production. 

AVEC recommends the following approach to vaccination: -

• Targeted application to high-risk species including ducks, turkeys and long-lived egg production and breeder flocks.
• Concentration on regions demonstrating a history of reoccurring seasonal outbreaks.
• Implementation of accepted epidemiologically sound surveillance protocols.
• Selection of vaccines based on efficacy and incorporating the DIVA principle.
• Transparent sharing of data.
• Conformity to WOAH standards regarding vaccine quality, monitoring of immunity and reporting outbreaks.
• Acceptance of vaccination with surveillance and certification by the World Trade Organization that should suppress unjustified import restrictions to protect domestic industries.

Ultimately vaccination will be accepted but to facilitate the process, AVEC recognizes the need for common standards supported and promoted by the International Poultry Council (IPC) and the World Egg Organization.  Setting aside competition among exporting nations, dialog is essential to establish uniform standards and regulations relating to vaccines, vaccination, surveillance, certification and reporting, all in conformity with WOAH directives.  It is evident that the IPC should serve as a coordinating body and establish leadership.  To date HPAI has not been a major problem in the broiler industries of the U.S. and Brazil, the world’s leading exporters.  Both nations have maintained production and trade despite heavy losses in the U.S. duck, turkey and egg production sectors.

Oplaat correctly states that a coordinated program of controlled vaccination would send a signal to manufacturers of biologics to invest in both research and production capacity to supply the resulting demand for avian influenza vaccines.  The biopharmaceutical industry has been constrained by a patchwork of regulations and evident hostility towards immunization based on scientifically unsubstantiated fears of obstruction to export of raw chicken and turkey products.

Until the emergence of genotype-VI avian paramyxovirus, clinical Newcastle disease was successfully prevented by application of a range of live and inactivated vaccines. Avian influenza is effectively the “Newcastle disease of the 2020s” since it represented as much of a challenge in the 1970s to production and trade as HPAI in the 2020s. 

AVEC has taken the initiative to motivate a collective approach to regulating vaccination to prevent outbreaks of avian influenza in the interest of poultry producers, consumers and public health. The organization is actively advocating for the abolition of unjustified trade restrictions. It is now up to the IPC and IEC following the AVEC lead, to remove restrictions limiting tactical application of immunization of high-risk poultry segments in historically affected regions.

This Edition of EGG-NEWS is sponsored by Lubing Systems LP. The Company, located in Tennessee, traces its roots back 75 years to the founding organization in Germany. Lubing is a leader in the design and manufacture of equipment and installations for  intensive livestock production and horticulture. Products for U.S. egg producers include egg conveyors, evaporative cooling and watering systems. The feature article for March describes water flushing components with an emphasis on the Optima E-flush automated installation. The range of Lubing products can be accessed on < lubingusa.com> 

Lubing Systems LP, the long established U.S. subsidiary of parent company Lubing Maschinenfabrik GmbH&Co.KG of Germany, offers upgraded automatic flush systems for floor, aviary and cage housing.

The benefits of flushing water systems at periodic intervals include: -

• A supply of clean water to flocks that contributes to intestinal health and enhanced flock performance by reducing mortality and assisting flocks to reach genetic potential.
• Preventing accumulation of biofilm within drinker lines.
• Enhanced flock response from administration of vaccines, medication and water-soluble supplements.
• The ability to eliminate chemical water treatment reducing production cost and benefiting the environment.
• Under high temperature conditions, periodic flushing reduces the temperature of water, and stimulates intake to promote natural heat loss by evaporation and maintaining hydration.
• Frequent flushing of water lines stimulates water intake especially during brooding as droplets accumulate on drinker nipples. Pullet weight is improved through the growing period.

Lubing offers water regulators that allow manual initiation of flushing. Automatic systems are also available, designed for cage and aviary housing, floor housed flocks and multiple-house complexes.  The Lubing Optima E-Flush system is compatible with pullets, layers and breeders and can be supplied as an original installation or a retrofit to existing Lubing installations.

Components of the Lubing Flush System include: -

• The Lubing Touch Control LCW that can operate up to ten lines.  The system is programmable using a touch screen. Extension boxes are available that each operate eight drinker lines.
• A Lubing Optima E-Flush valve incorporated into the pressure regulator.  The Optima E-Flush Regulator is a drop-in replacement for the Optima Regulator and is compatible with all Lubing connectors, piping and accessories.
• An actuator that opens and closes the valve in the pressure regulator.
• The Flush Breather unit comprising a clear flexible standpipe with float ball and attachments for a drain kit.
• An optional temperature kit is available that activates the flush cycle at a preset water temperature.

The E-Flush Regulator allows manual flushing.  To save labor, the E-Flush Regulator equipped with an optional solenoid permits automatic flushing of drinker lines with the compatible LCW Touch Control.

For new installations with clean water lines, Lubing offers an ultrasonic cleaning module.  This option prevents the accumulation of biofilm.  The ultrasonic transducer is mounted in the incoming water line.  The transducer generates high frequency sound waves that generate a stream of bubbles. Resulting cavitation dislodges mineral and biologic deposits on the interior surface of water lines.  The system is both efficient and environmentally friendly since it obviates addition of chemicals.  The Lubing transducer can effectively operate up t0 1,000 feet of piping.

Lubing offers a slope reducer that adjusts water pressure along the drinking line in buildings with a gradient.  Slope reducers are available to compensate for 4 to 18 inches along lines.

Lubing offers a complete range of components to install and maintain watering systems for pullets, layers, turkeys, broilers and breeders.  Technical specialists can design installations and provide consultation. After-sales service is available from a dedicated team.

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 2025 due to the Federal shutdown. Subsequent 2026 data, now available is included in this edition.

FEBRUARY HIGHLIGHTS

o February 2026 USDA ex-farm blended USDA nest-run, benchmark price for conventional eggs from caged hens was 72 cents per dozen, up 23 cents per dozen or 46.9 percent from the January 2026 value of 49 cents per dozen. The corresponding February 2024 and 2025 values were respectively $2.52 and $7.40 cents per dozen. For annual comparison, average monthly USDA benchmark price over 2025 was 313 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.

o Imports of shell eggs continued during the first three quarters of 2025 with the cumulative negative trade balance attaining 19.6 million dozen shell-equivalents through November. For 2025 through November, U.S. liquid and dried products combined achieved a positive trade balance of 26.3 million case-equivalents.

o February 2025 USDA ex-farm negotiated USDA nest-run, benchmark price for all categories of cage-free eggs was 57 cents per dozen. The January 2026 value was 63 cents per dozen. The corresponding February 2024 and 2025 values were respectively 266 and 916 cents per dozen.

o 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.

o 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 were depopulated among a few large farms followed by the depopulation of 9.5 million hens mainly in Pennsylvania and North Carolina during February.

o February 2026 USDA average nest-run production cost for conventional eggs from caged flocks over four regions (excluding SW and West), applying updated inputs was 76.8 cents per dozen, up 1.3 cents from January 2026 at 75.5 cents per dozen, influenced by feed cost. The February average nest run production cost for other than caged and certified organic hens was estimated by the EIC to be 96.7 cents per dozen up 0.7 cents per dozen from the previous month. 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.

o February 2026 USDA benchmark nest-run margin for conventional eggs attained a negative value of 4.8 cents per dozen compared to a negative margin of 27.2 cents per dozen in January 2026. The two-month 2026 cumulative average monthly margin was a negative 10 cents per dozen. 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.

o February 2026 USDA benchmark nest-run margin for all categories of cage-free eggs was a negative 38.1 cents per dozen compared to a negative margin of 33.0 cents per dozen in January 2026. The two-month 2026 cumulative average monthly margin was a negative 35.6 cents per dozen. 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.

o The January 2026 national flock (over 30,000 hens per farm) was estimated by the USDA to be up by 2.7 million hens (rounded, and a probable undercount) to 296.5 million compared to 293.8 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 March 4 ^th USDA estimated the total U.S table-egg production flock to be 304.9 million with 297.0 million hens actually in production.

o January 2026 pullet chick hatch of 26.7 million was up 0.4 million, (1.5 percent) from the previous month, inconsistent with an increased industry need to replace depopulated flocks.

o December 2025 export data is reviewed in a companion article in this edition. In December 2025 exports of shell-eggs and products combined were down 17.1 percent from November 2025 to 405,000 case equivalents representing the theoretical production of 6.0 million hens. Shell egg exports were up 19.1 percent from November totaling 94,000 cases. Exports were dominated by Canada (51 percent of volume) and the “Rest of Americas” including the Caribbean (43 percent) for a total of 94 percent. With respect to 311,000 case-equivalents of egg products, down 24.5 percent from the prior month, importers comprised the E.U (53 percent of volume), Japan, (14 percent), Canada (8 percent), “Rest of Americas (6 percent), Mexico, (6 percent) and S. Korea (4 percent), collectively representing 89 percent of shipments. Volumes exported are based on the needs of importers, competing suppliers, availability in the U.S. and FOB prices offered.

o 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 FEBRUARY 2026.

Summary tables for the latest USDA February 2026 costs and unit prices were made available by the EIC on March 9 ^h 2025. Data is arranged, summarized, tabulated and compared with values from the previous February10 ^th 2026 release reflecting January 2026 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 297 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%; MI, 4.7%; GA,3.3%; & NE, 2.8%

Rate of Lay, weighted hen-month (USDA)82.1% December 2025. 82.1% January 2026

*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 FEBRUARY 2026:

EGGS BROKEN UNDER FSIS INSPECTION (MILLION CASES)December 2025, 6.41 January 2026, 6.82

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

*Representing 1.9 percent of volume of National production in December 2025 comprising 35% shell, 75% products.

COSTS AND UNIT REVENUE VALUES ¹ 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 February 2026:-

72.0 cents per dozen¹- 76.8 cents per dozen = -4.8 cents per dozen(January 2026 comparison: 49.0 cents per dozen – 76.2 cents per dozen = 27.2 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 February 2026:-

Cage-Free brown 57.0 cents per dozen¹- 96.7 cents per dozen = -38.1 cents per dozen

January 2026:-63.0 cents perdozen¹- 96.0 cents per dozen = -33.0 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 $0.50 to $0.70 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 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 and extending into 2026.

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

                                                  2025 COMPARED WITH 2024

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

Over 2025 Canada was the export destination of 67.9 percent of U.S. shell eggs followed by the Caribbean at 20.9 percent. For egg products the four major importers collectively comprised 79.8 percent of volume with the relative proportions represented by Japan (29.1%); EU, (15.6%); Mexico, (16.1%) and Canada, (12.5%),  

According to the USDA Egg Markets Overview, February 20^th, shell eggs exported during 2025 attained 55.1 million dozen. This represents the average production of a constant 2.3 million hens or 0.8 percent of the current population of producing hens. All egg products including liquid and dried, attained 76.0 million dozen shell equivalents for a total of 131.0 million dozen shell equivalents over 2025. Imports over the same period comprised 72.5 million dozen shell eggs for breaking and 41.4 million dozen shell egg equivalents over all product forms for a total of 113.9 million dozen shell equivalents

Net positive trade was therefore 17.2 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.

On March 16^th 2026 the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) issued actual values for egg production during 2024 with an updated projection for 2025 and a forecast for 2026. Production, consumption and prices were revised from the previous February 2026 report.

Projected egg production for 2025 was adjusted downward from 7,797 million dozen in 2024 by 3.8 percent to 7,497 million dozen due to progressive depletion of hen flocks as a result of HPAI. Heavy losses occurred during Q1 2025 with incident cases extending through December totaling 46 million hens for the year. The per capita consumption of shell eggs and liquids combined for 2025 will be 263.8 eggs, down 9.0 egg equivalents (-3.3 percent) from 2024. The projected average 2025 benchmark New York bulk unit price was raised 70.6 cents per dozen (23.3 percent) over 2024 to 373.7cents per dozen. On March 13^th the NYC price was 186 cents per dozen reflecting both increased supply and pre-Easter demand in that market up 45 percent in a week. Subsequent USDA projections will provide greater clarity on the recovery in consumption in an economy that is undergoing stable inflation in all food categories with the outstanding exception of lower prices for eggs compared to Q1 of 2025, even with retailers maintaining high margins and failing to pass on savings to consumers.

Restoration in flock size after HPAI depletion commenced in 2022 progressed at a net rate of approximately 1.0 million per week offset by losses due to depopulation. Placements were limited by the availability of pullet chicks and for some producers, by the rate of conversion to alternative housing systems. Restoration of the national flock was compromised by a resurgence of HPAI with 40 million layers depleted during 2024, 46 million in 2025 and 17 million year-to-date, but with replacement averaging 24 million pullets per month. Effective March 11^th the total national flock attained 305.0 million, approximately 21 million (-6.4 percent) below the pre-HPAI level. The productive flock was estimated by the USDA to be 297.0 million on March 11^th. All cage-free and organic flocks during February 2026 attained 146.7 million or 48.1 percent of the total. In their March report the Egg Industry Center projected an optimistic total flock of 322.0 million at the end of December 2026. Unpredictable factors affecting flock size and hence price will include consumer demand as influenced by recently lower shelf prices for generic eggs and the extent of possible losses during the spring and fall months of the current year.

Exports of both shell eggs and products at approximately 2.0 percent of total production over 2025 attained 131.1 million dozen shell-egg equivalents. This was offset by imports of 114.1 shell egg-equivalents. Exports did not materially affect the domestic price. The U.S. has once again become a net exporter of egg products and shell eggs amounting to 17.3 million shell-egg equivalents in 2025. Future export volume will be encouraged by low domestic prices and by the needs of importing nations but will be constrained by international competition and disease-related embargos.

The USDA forecast for 2026 includes production of 7,855 million dozen, up an optimistic 4.8 percent from 2025. Projected consumption will be 271.6 eggs per capita. This forecast presumes substantial control of HPAI and an adequate supply of replacement chicks and pullets. These are both speculative assumptions in the absence of approved vaccination in high-risk areas. The increase, if it were to become reality would depress the NY Large benchmark price to an average of $1.18 per dozen compared to the 2025 value of $3.74 per dozen for conventional Large white-shelled product in cartons.

Updated March 2026 USDA data is shown in the table below:-

*Data influenced by HPAI losses.

Source:   Livestock, Dairy and Poultry Outlook released March 16^th 2026

In a March 2^nd release, Cal-Maine Foods (CALM) announced acquisition of the assets of Creighton Brothers LLC, for $129 million.

Creighton Brothers was established in 1925 and operates egg production facilities including pullet and layer housing, egg packing installations. A subsidiary, Crystal Lake LLC, manufactures and distributes further-processed egg products.

Creighton Brothers houses 3.2 million hens of which 14 percent are cage-free in addition to 900,000 pullets, with a feed mill, egg packing and processing facilities and 1,000 acres of land near Warsaw, IN.

The acquisition represents a unit price of $36 per hen although it is noted that additional capital will be required to increase the proportion of hens in other than conventional cages, should this be required.

Sherman Miller, CEO of Cal-Maine Foods noted, “The acquisition of Creighton Brothers and Crystal Lake advances our strategy by expanding the scale and geographic reach of our shell egg platform across both specialty eggs and conventional eggs adding meaningful growth to our portfolio.”  He added, “Importantly, we further our internal sourcing strategy for key egg-based ingredients for our prepared foods business-strengthening supply security, improving margins and driving greater operational efficiency.”

Mindy Truex, president of Creighton Brothers and Crystal Lake, stated, “With mixed personal emotions and great pride, I am excited to see the legacy of Hobart and Russell Creighton and their families continue and grow with the new family at Cal-Maine.”  

According to a report in Poultry Med, the Ministry of Agriculture in France has modified mandatory surveillance for Salmonella to recognize the protection afforded by vaccination.

Producers applying a comprehensive Salmonella vaccination program will be monitored by fecal swabbing, eliminating environmental testing. Non-vaccinated flocks will be subjected to current surveillance including environmental sampling.

The amended regulations were developed in collaboration with the statutory scientific authority-ANSES and with industry representation (CNPO).

It is noted that the 2010 FDA Final Rule on Salmonella ignored vaccination partly due to inherent ignorance among the framers of the regulation and exacerbated by their reluctance to consult with industry and state agencies. Effective EQAP programs antedated the FDA Final Rule by a few years and contributed to a sharp reduction in the incidence rate of Salmonella Enteritidis infection among consumers.

If at any time in the future FDA amends the Final Rule, vaccination should be an important consideration since virtually the entire industry adopted this modality since the availability of the gene-deleted Salmonella Typhinurium vaccine.

As a further consideration, FDA should consider swabbing the fan blades in power-ventilated houses since this is a more sensitive and less intrusive and laborious method of detecting SE than traditional drag swabs that were appropriate for high-rise houses in the 2000s but are less effective for manure belt batteries and litter housing.

Direct Action Everywhere (DXE) recently released an interactive online map of California  indicating the location of animal production facilities they characterized as “factory farms and slaughterhouses”.  This action may be a precursor of activities similar to the 2020 “Project Counterglow” that encouraged protesters to gather at farms and plants. 

By identifying production facilities, their vulnerability to intrusion and protests has increased. It is possible that there are relatively fewer DXE activists willing to risk arrest and legal action following the Sonoma County conviction of Zoe Rosenberg. Unless the organization focuses on specific segments of the industry or designated locations, the mapmaking initiative has probably been a make-work exercise that will have little actual impact on production. 

Notwithstanding the anticipated response to the interactive map, producers and processors should review the security of their flocks, herds, facilities and employees. Close communication should be maintained with local law enforcement agencies. Appropriate contingency plans and legal counter-measures should be developed in advance of any possible DXE action.

In a February 26^th release, Vital Farms Inc. (VITL), a Certified B Corporation posted financial results for the 4^th quarter and FY 2025. This specialty egg producer competes directly with Eggland’s Best and other brands of USDA Certified Organic and pasture-raised products including Pete and Gerry’s, Hidden Valley and the combination of the Happy Egg with Egg Innovations. The Company experiences the same pressures of increased cost of feed, contractor remuneration, labor and transport as competitors in a specialty market environment restrained by a limited clientele for higher priced eggs.

For the 4^th Quarter of FY 2025 ending December 28^th 2025, net income was $16.3 million on revenue of $213.6 million with a diluted EPS of $0.35.  Comparable figures for the 4^th quarter of fiscal 2025 ending December 29^th were net income of $10.6 million on revenue of $166.0 million with a diluted EPS of $0.24.

For FY 2025, net income was $66.3 million on revenue of $759.4 million with a diluted EPS of $1.49.  Comparable figures for FY 2024 were net income of $53.4 million on revenue of $606.3 million with a diluted EPS of $1.25.

Sales increased 28.6 percent over the 4^th quarter of 2025. Gross margin was 35.8 percent for the most recent quarter compared to 36.0 percent Q4 2024. Operating margin was 10.0 percent compared to 7.8 percent for the corresponding quarter in 2024.   

In commenting on results, Russell Diez-Canseco, President and CEO of Vital Farms stated 2025 was the year we scaled our supply chain to meet demand. By expanding Egg Central Station and growing our farmer network to over 600 small farms, we’ve meaningfully reduced the supply constraints that previously capped our growth,” said Russell Diez-Canseco, Vital Farms’ President and CEO.

“As we enter 2026, we’re transitioning from capacity building to market expansion – capitalizing on our strengthened operations to grow our customer base and increase household penetration and buy rate as we progress toward our $2 billion revenue target by 2030. We remain committed to a disciplined capital allocation strategy that reinvests in our future while returning value to our shareholders, all while staying true to our purpose of improving the lives of people, animals, and the planet through food.”

The Company increased guidance for FY 2026 with midpoint of the range revenue of $910 million, adjusted EBITDA of $110 million and capital expenditure of $145 million. Analysts noted that the Adjusted EBITDA was below an anticipated $134 million.

On December 28^th 2025, VITL posted assets of $518.8 million of which $15.2 million comprised intangibles against long-term debt and lease obligations of $44.8 million. The Company had an intraday market capitalization of $897 million on March 4^th. VITL trades with a forward P/E of 31.1 and has ranged over a 52-week period from $19.75 to $53.10 with a 50-day moving average of $28.03.  Twelve-month trailing operating margin was 10.0 percent and profit margin 7.8 percent.  Return on assets over the past twelve months was 12.6 percent with a 21.4 percent return on equity. At close of trading on March 2^nd pre-release, VITL was priced at $21.15. At market open, post-release on March 3^rd VITL moved up to $20.32.

Approximately 17 percent of VITL equity is held by insiders with 109 percent by institutions. As of February 13^th, 33 percent of the float was short.

Benchmark recently downgraded VITL from a Buy to a Hold rating. This is based on the volatile outlook and insipid guidance. As a mature Company Vital Farms is facing competition from both established and emerging producers and lacks pricing power despite  packing from 10 million hens.

On March 3^rd Target Corporation (TGT) the Nation’s 6^th-ranked retailer, posted results for Q4 and FY 2025 ending February 1^st, beating the earnings estimate of $2.16 and conforming to the sales estimate.  For the quarter, the Company earned $1,046 million on sales of $30,453 million with a diluted EPS of $2.30. For the corresponding Q4 FY 2024 ending February 1^st, Target earned $1,103 million on sales of $30,915 million with a diluted EPS of $2.41. Revenue was down by 1.5 percent and net earnings were down 5.2 percent compared to Q4 FY 2024. Gross margin increased from 26.2 percent in Q4 FY2024 to 26.6 percent for the most recent quarter due to lower inventory shrinkage. Operating margin fell from 4.7 percent to 4.5 percent.

For FY 2025, the Company earned $3,705 million on sales of $104,780 million with a diluted EPS of $8.13. For the previous FY 2024 Target earned $4,091 million on sales of $106,566 million with a diluted EPS of $8.86

For Q4 FY 2025, comparable same-store sales declined by 2.5 percent compared to a positive 1.5 percent in Q4 FY 2024. The company recorded a 2.9 percent decline in transactions (‘traffic’) partly offset by a 0.4 percent increase in the value of each transaction (‘ticket’). Digital sales were up 23.7 percent during Q4 FY 2025.

The Company continued with the Target Circle a free loyalty benefits program replacing the previous paid membership alternative with an increase in membership of 30 percent.

In commenting on results Michael Fiddelke, CEO stated, “I'm incredibly proud of how our team navigated through a challenging year in 2025, as they focused on serving our guests while positioning our business for profitable growth in 2026 and beyond," He added "Our team is firmly focused on writing Target's next chapter of growth, rooted in strengthening our merchandising authority, delivering an elevated and differentiated shopping experience, advancing our use of technology, and continuing to serve and invest in our team and communities”.  Fiddelke concluded “Target saw a healthy, positive sales increase in February, serving as an important milestone on our path back to growth this year, and reinforcing my confidence in the momentum we're building and the future we're creating together."

The Company raised guidance for fiscal 2026. Target expects a two percent increase in same-store sales growth and an adjusted EPS ranging from $7.50 to $8.50

At the Analysts’ meeting Target unveiled its multi-year strategy under CEO Michael Fiddelke intended to accelerate return to growth. This will include upgrading the ‘store experience’ across the chain, investing in store payroll and training and improving service and consumer satisfaction.

Michael Fiddelke stated "This new chapter of growth at Target is defined by clear choices and rooted in a deeper understanding of our unique lane in retail, the guests we serve and the areas where we're distinctly positioned to win," He added, "This work is underway, and by putting style, design and value at the center of every decision, we're making big changes to lead with a trend-forward assortment, elevate the guest experience, accelerate with technology and equip our teams to deliver the most delightful experience in retail, for today and over the long term."

The four growth priorities that will guide decisions and investments in 2026 and beyond will involve:-

• Merchandizing to set trends with differentiated, culturally relevant assortments offering style, design and value.
• Improving the in-store experience through strengthening loyalty and engagement.
• Accelerating technology to help teams become more efficient and to create more personalized experiences for guests.
• Strengthening teams and communities by investing in training and career growth and building on Target's long-standing commitment to communities.

Target intends to invest $2 billion out of a $5 billion capital budget on upgrades to stores including featuring Target brands and upscale cosmetics counters

On January 31^st 2025 Target posted total assets of $59,490 million, up 3.0 percent from February 1^st 2024. Long-term debt and lease obligations attained $19,830 million. Target Corporation had an intraday market capitalization of $54,700 million on March 4^th. The Company has traded over the past fifty-two weeks over a range of $83.46 to $126.00 with a 50-day moving average of $107.98.  TGT trades with a forward P/E of 15.5. On March 3^rd pre-release the share priced at  $111.00 but after the morning release opened at $118.30 and closed at $119.60

Twelve-month trailing operating margin was 4.5 percent and profit margin 3.5 percent.  The Company generated a return on assets of 5.8 percent and 24.0 percent on equity.

In a March 2^nd release, Warburg Pincus announced an investment of up to $1 billion in Global Eggs.  This company that produces eggs in the U.S., Latin America and in Europe is now valued at $8 billion.

Global Eggs was founded in 2018 by Ricardo Castellar de Faria in Matto Grosso State, Brazil and the enterprise now operates 50 farms with 45 million hens in production.  Operations include Hillandale Farms acquired in 2025, Granja Faria in Brazil and other South American nations and the Hevo Group in the EU.  Facilities are vertically integrated from feed through distribution of packaged eggs and products.

In commenting on the transaction, Faria stated, “In under a decade we have scaled Global Eggs to become the largest multinational producer and distributor of table eggs. Warburg Pincus Investment, support will accelerate our next chapter of growth in both new and existing markets.”  Faria concluded, “We have proven our ability to execute in the United States, South America and Europe and given the Warburg Pincus global reach, we believe they are the right partner to advance our long-term ambitions.”

Warburg Pincus Capital Solutions Founders’ Fund has over $4 billion invested.  The flexible mandate facilitates partnering with founders and existing shareholders to provide solutions through optimized balance sheets and growth.

Allison Ross will join the Board of Directors of Global Eggs.

Commercial certifying company NSF has launched a new program for cage-free and free-range eggs intended for further-processed products.  The Company has established a protocol including standards and procedures to verify the authenticity of label claims.  Auditing will be based on technical documentation, a review of production facilities and an assurance of compliance with standards. Carey Allen, Director of Food Claims at NSF stated, “This new certification sets rigorous requirements for both cage-free and free-range claims including “Made with cage-free or free-range eggs”.

It is questioned whether this additional certification is necessary or has any promotional benefit for further-processed egg items among consumers. The egg industry is subject to numerous welfare certifications involving housing and are exemplified by numerous seals on cartons and containers.  The question arises as to whether the cost of conforming to standards including audits actually influences purchase decisions especially when dealing with derived egg products.

The press release claimed that the “cage-free egg market is expected to double by 2035”.  Currently 60 percent of the nation’s producing flock is housed in conventional cages and the rate of conversion to alternative systems is demonstrating a plateau. The contention that the U.S. would have 292 million hens out of a total flock of 375 hens or 78 percent (allowing two percent compound annual growth) under cage-free housing within a decade appears questionable.  This is especially the case given the federal challenge to California Proposition #12 and Massachusetts Question 2 and provisions in the House version of the 2026 Farm Bill (H.R. 7567: Food, Farm and National Security Act). 

Numerous retailers are reneging on their commitments to cage-free eggs, and the economic realities of alternate housing systems are evidenced by continuing demand for less expensive eggs from caged flocks in the prevailing cost-conscious environment. 

The proposed certification will be financially beneficial to NSF but the commercial advantages for egg producers and processors is questioned.

The Organic Trade Association (OTA) documented sales of certified organic products at $76.6 billion in 2025 representing an annual growth rate of seven percent.  The March 4^th, 2026, market report specified a $70.1 billion value for organic food sales conforming to a seven percent increase compared with 2.3 percent for the overall food market. The OTA forecasts an annual growth rate for organic sales (value) of six percent, increasing by $24 billion over the next five years to attain $100 billion in 2030.

The report notes that organic egg sales rose 22 percent in value during 2025.  This increase is consistent with the unprecedent rise in price of all shell eggs during the year and especially during the first quarter. Purchases of organic eggs increased 3.0 percent in 2025 based on the 0.6 million annual increase in the number of organic hens from 20.3 million. 

As a matter of record organic hens in all housing systems increased from 19.4 million in 2019 to the current level of 21.0 million, an 8.2 percent increase over seven years. This compares with the 100.5 percent increase in non-organic, cage-free hens from 60.3 million to 125.7 million over the same period.

The House Agriculture Committee has forwarded H.R.7567, The Food, Farm and Nation

al Security Act by a 34 -17 vote to the entire House.  The legislation colloquially termed “Farm Bill 2.0” includes commodity price supports supplementing the 2025 ‘One Big Beautiful Bill’ in addition to designated programs.

Non-contentious items in the Bill included permanent funding for the feral swine eradication program, supporting the USMCA and launching an Agricultural Trade Enforcement Task Force to oppose trade barriers.

An important component of the Bill is inclusion of a provision setting aside California Proposition #12 (and Massachusetts Question #2) relating to housing of livestock and poultry. States would be permanently enjoined from applying housing and production standards applicable to other states. This provision was incorporated in response to aggressive lobbying by the National Pork Producers’ Council that has long supported the retention of gestation crates for pregnant sows.  This is notwithstanding, the extent of conversions to group housing that has engendered overwhelming retailer and consumer support. 

The Bill will now have to be approved by the House.  It is understood that the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Food and Forestry has yet to mark-up parallel legislation.  Senator John Boozman (R-AR) Chair of the Senate Committee characterized the House legislation as “advancing the remaining components of the traditional Farm Bill” and he is on record as being committed to the legislative process to reach enactment”.

Angie Craig (D-MN), Ranking Member of the House Agriculture Committee, voted “No” asserting that her Republican co-members “refuse to invest new money in many farm programs that have stagnated after nearly a decade of inflation”. 

The American Meat Producers Association condemned the inclusion of provisions setting aside California Proposition #12, stating that the Bill “pulls the rug out from under farmers who already have made significant investments to meet consumer demand”.

The Farm Bill would not have any direct impact on egg production since forty percent of hens are now housed in various alternatives to cages. The relative proportions of current housing systems are consistent with consumer demand. This situation reflects the pre-California Proposition #2 and subsequent Proposition #12 ballot legislation in which the industry supported a range of alternative systems with free-choice by consumers based on price and personal evaluation of attributes.

EGG-NEWS is indebted to Dr. Nati Elkin, Editor of Poultry Med for a report on the risk factors associated with Salmonella Enteritidis (SE) infection in egg producing flocks in Israel*.

Between 2018 and 2023, 25,000 samples were assayed from 6,076 flocks for the presence of Salmonella.  For all serovars, 43 percent of flocks yielded any Salmonella isolate.  The respective isolation rates for Salmonella Enteritidis (181/6,076) and Salmonella Typhimurim (127/6,076) were 3 percent and 2 percent respectively.  As a result of outbreaks of SE among consumers, over two million hens were depopulated.  This would have been unnecessary had eggs from these flocks been diverted from the shell egg stream to pasteurization.

The risk factors were: -

• Hens older than 85 weeks of age.
• Flock sizes in excess of 10,000 hens.
• Cage housing.
• Close -proximity to dairy farms.
• Higher isolation rates during fall months consistent with EU observations.

The project demonstrated that vertical transmission of SE infection from breeders was nonexistent with horizontal transmission due to defects in biosecurity, maintaining infection in the industry.

It is a matter of record that all pullets are vaccinated against SE.  There is no mandatory stamping of eggs as in the EU to establish traceability.  There are no regulations relating to washing of eggs.  The absence of a cold chain may contribute to proliferation of SE within the shell during prolonged storage. Deficiencies were identified in the education of consumers and food workers on correct handling and preparation of eggs and recipes containing eggs and egg products.

*Shachaf, B. et al. Prevalence and risk factors for Salmonella infection in layer flocks in Israel between 2018 and 2023. Poultry Science. Doi.org.10.1016/j.psj 2026.10686.             

According to Dr. Christine Middlemiss, Chief Veterinary Officer for the UK, a trial will be initiated to evaluate commercially available vaccines administered to turkeys under field conditions.  Concurrently, the Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (analogous to the USDA) will evaluate surveillance, and other control measures.  The vaccine trial will also serve as a measure of the resistance imposed by importing nations to a controlled vaccination program carried out in accordance with the World Organization of Animal Health recommendations. 

Dr. Middlemiss stated, “This targeted trial is going to be really key for our understanding of how HPAI vaccines can be effectively used for disease control in the U.K.”  She added, “Vaccines have the potential to be a really valuable additional tool in helping us protect birds from infection.”

The UK trial that will be implemented over a six-month period, follows similar successful testing of vaccination against HPAI in the Netherlands and extensive administration of vaccines for ducks in France.

Unlike segments of the U.S. poultry industry, the British Poultry Council is enthusiastically supporting the UK initiative.