According to this 2008 University of Michigan survey, nearly 70% of respondents in Michigan would vote in favor of a ban on gestation stalls used to confine sows. Moreover, 60% or more of residents in 34 states would support a ban on gestation stalls.

Interestingly, the amount of time producers would be given to comply with new laws prohibiting the use of gestation stalls appears to be largely irrelevant to consumers. Most say they are just as likely to support a ballot measure that gives producers 2 years to comply with the ban as one that gives them 12 years.

“Intelligent ballot language” is used by the supporters of sow stall bans and makes it difficult to see any reason for people not to support a proposed ban. In addition, this survey found that the public associates the use of gestation stalls with lower food safety, larger farm size, and corporate ownership, despite the actual relationship of these factors.

The study’s author suggests that the survey provides evidence that producers should stop fighting such bans on gestation stalls and instead be more proactive in phasing them out. The author, who is affiliated with Michigan State’s department of agricultural, food, and resource economics, says that “the industry needs to accept that change regarding gestation housing is here to stay.”