National Pork Producers Council - NPPC

Rooted in Resilience: The Non-Traditional Journey of Swine Veterinarian Dr. Anna Forseth

Fri, 24 Apr 2026 20:27:35 GMT

Dr. Anna Forseth didn’t just follow a path; she carved one. While many people associate Montana with Yellowstone and cattle, Forseth grew up with a much different perspective.

The daughter of two successful pork producers, Bruce and Marie Samson, her family operated Samson Family Farm, a 300-sow, farrow-to-finish confinement hog farm in the southwest part of the state. They marketed about 5,500 pigs a year to packing plants in Twin Falls, Idaho, and Modesto, Calif.

She and her five siblings grew up with a deep appreciation for the family farm, 4-H and the great outdoors. So, how did this Montana native find herself serving 60,000 U.S. pork producers as the director of animal health for the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC)?

A Non-Traditional Journey to National Policy

“Nothing about my path is traditional,” Forseth points out.

While attending Montana State University, she interned with the National Pork Board. During that time, she worked with the science and technology team where she was exposed to a unique way of serving the industry as a veterinarian. She then went to Colorado State University for veterinary school.

“My husband Rocky and I got married during my fourth year of vet school, or should I say ‘our’ fourth year of vet school,” Forseth laughs. “That’s not because he is a vet, but because it’s hard to leave vet school at school. I brought a lot of it home and he was right there in the trenches with me. In fact, my parents gave me a beautiful saddle when I graduated from vet school, but they also gave him one because they thought he deserved one, too.”

Anna Forseth met her husband, Rocky, in an undergrad beef management class. He came from a long line of cattlemen and cattlewomen, and she hailed from Gallatin County, drove a Subaru, and much preferred the pig barn at the county fair over the steer barn. “How this worked is still a mystery to some, but it created quite a team,” she says.

(Anna Forseth)

As a new veterinarian, she went to work for the Swine Medicine Education Center at Iowa State University. She also spent some time working with Smithfield before being hired by the Montana State Veterinarian’s Office in 2018.

Heading back west was important to the young couple who wanted to be closer to family. In 2022, the opportunity to work for NPPC allowed her a unique opportunity as the director of animal health for America’s pig farmers.

Although her roles have changed over the years, her focus has remained the same.

“When I thought about visiting a farm, it was about helping the pigs so that I could help the producer,” Forseth says. “What could I do for the producer that they couldn’t do for themselves? I would often, by default, be helping the pigs, but my focus is always on the producer.”

A Voice for the Producer

Although she no longer sees pigs on a daily basis, she talks to farmers often about their pigs. She points out that her role allows her to help farmers in a way that they can’t do for themselves because they are busy caring for their pigs and raising a protein that so many people in the world rely on.

“I am the bridge between policy and the producer,” Forseth says. “I’m not necropsying pigs and submitting samples to the diagnostic lab anymore, but I’m representing the industry domestically and internationally. I’m so proud to be doing that on their behalf.”

When she started in 2022, almost all of her time was spent on preparedness and response planning for African swine fever, post detection of ASF in the Dominican Republic. She continues to spend time on ASF response planning, though the diseases of focus have expanded since she began working for NPPC. Lately, she’s been engaged in foot-and-mouth disease, highly pathogenic avian influenza and New World screwworm planning.

“I think foot-and-mouth disease scares me the most because of its potential impact on multiple species,” she says. “Even if the swine industry were to manage the disease, we would be dependent on other domestic species’ ability to manage it. Remember that particular virus affects cloven-hooved animals, to include wild cervids and feral swine.”

During Forseth’s time at NPPC, annual funding for the National Animal Disease Preparedness and Response Plan (NADPRP) has surged from $18 million to $70 million. She currently serves on the NADPRP advisory board, ensuring these historic resources are strategically deployed to protect producers through enhanced state engagement and emergency readiness.

NPPC has also secured other legislative and funding victories, including the passage of the Beagle Brigade Act and the transition of the US SHIP program to the USDA. Central to these efforts is the “three-legged stool” of animal health—funding the national laboratory network, the vaccine bank, and the veterinary stockpile.

Rooted in Resilience

When she’s not working on behalf of pig farmers, Forseth keeps busy supporting her husband on their registered SimAngus cattle ranch and caring for their two young kids.

“It’s one big, but fun, balancing act,” she says. “I enjoy everything I’m doing, from being a mom to being a rancher’s wife to being a veterinarian for NPPC. I’m thankful for the example I had with my mom, who raised six kids and supported the farm. When work needed to be done and someone needed to step up, that someone was always her. While she was balancing all of our lives, I was watching and learning.”

Forseth is quick to point out that she learned a lot from her dad, too. He passed away in 2023 after a courageous battle with multiple myeloma.

“I will always remember him as a fighter, even before his cancer diagnosis, but certainly after,” Forseth says. “Despite pain and his prognosis, he stayed optimistic and focused on others.”

She vividly remembers the day she found out that he had cancer during a routine morning drive to a histology lab in vet school.

“I cried so hard on my way to school that I gave myself a bloody nose,” she says. “I got myself into class and sat down in front of the microscope. I hadn’t looked at the schedule for the day. To my surprise, we were looking at cancer cells – that was salt in the wound for me that morning. After class, I asked the professor to tell me what she knew about multiple myeloma.”

When she got back to her car, she called her dad and told him she was going to take the rest of the day off because she didn’t feel like sitting in a lecture hall in light of the news he just shared.

“He asked, ‘Why in the world would you do that?’” Forseth says. “He tried to perk me up by telling me about all the great advances. He just kept talking about the science and how cool it was. I loved that so much – it was never about him, even on his hardest days, it was always about somebody else.”

Unique Times Call for Unique Leadership

Forseth gets her passion for putting others first from her dad. It fuels her decisions every day as she strives to represent U.S. pig farmers from coast to coast.

Whether she’s navigating global meetings with the World Organization for Animal Health or tackling feral swine management with her trademark “Montana grit,” Forseth’s unique perspective is an invaluable asset. She is a reminder of how agriculture can be strengthened by those who take non-conventional paths.

“We can’t sustain this industry on a ‘how it has been done’ mentality,” she says. “Today’s consumer is different. The industry structure is different. The workforce is different. The policy pressures are very different. It’s going to take new and unique ideas to address new and sometimes unique challenges.”

Discover more about Forseth’s journey by watching “The PORK Podcast” on YouTube or by listening to it anywhere podcasts are found.

No One is 'Winning' in a Prop 12 World: 6 Witnesses Testify Before House Ag Committee

Thu, 31 Jul 2025 16:44:46 GMT

U.S. pork producers and American consumers are facing significant cost increases due to Proposition 12. And the data keeps proving it. In a House Committee on Agriculture hearing, “An Examination of the Implications of Proposition 12,” Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) said Congress must provide a fix for Prop12.

“It begs the question – if producers are paying more, and consumers are paying more, who is winning?” Thompson said during the hearing on July 23. “Thankfully, the complexity and unfairness of Prop 12 has been realized by both sides of the aisle.”

Six witnesses testified before the full House Agriculture Committee on the implications of California’s Proposition 12 for farmers and food prices.

Overregulation Hurts Farmers
Pat Hord, an Ohio pork producer and vice president of the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC), shared his family farm’s story with the Committee. He said, “Despite producing Prop 12-compliant pork, I am here to say Prop 12, and an unmitigated regulatory patchwork, threatens our farm.”

Prop 12, a California ballot initiative, bans the sale of pork that does not comply with the state’s prescriptive and arbitrary production standards. Though enacted in a single state, Prop 12 has created sweeping consequences nationwide by fueling market volatility, imposing costly new mandates on producers, and paving the way for a patchwork of inconsistent state regulations.

“Spending my entire life raising pigs in a variety of ways, I’m convinced it’s best to allow production methods and consumption demands to take shape in the open market, as opposed to arbitrarily shaping them through poorly worded and short-sighted ballot initiatives,” testified Matt Schuiteman, a farmer and Iowa Farm Bureau board member.

The data shows Prop 12 is creating economic hardship. As of the first quarter of 2025, 12% of small pork operations have exited the market or shifted production away from breeding, citing regulatory uncertainty and high transition costs.

“Prop 12 opens a Pandora’s box of state regulatory overreach that threatens family farms across the country,” NPPC shared in a statement. “This overregulation hurts farmers, increases prices for consumers, and compromises our nation’s food security.”

Unjustified Price Increases
But it wasn’t just pork producers voicing their concern at the hearing over the obstacles caused by Prop 12.

“Harm is what Prop 12 has caused, smashing like a wrecking ball the livelihoods of small restaurants and the communities we serve by disrupting supply chains and dragging up the cost of culturally vital foods like pork,” said Lily Rocha, executive director for the Latino Restaurant Association. “It’s brought economic devastation to families already stretched thin.”

Rocha said Prop 12 is a death sentence for small businesses operating on razor-thin margins.

NPPC economist Holly Cook testified that USDA research and recent scanner data confirm the impact on consumer costs.

“A study released in 2024 by economists at USDA’s Office of the Chief Economist compared retail pork prices and volumes in California and the rest of the U.S. for a period preceding Proposition 12 (October 2019-June 2023) and for 8 months after its partial implementation date (July 2023-February 2024),” Cook said. “After subtracting any price increases that were also observed in the rest of the U.S., the study attributed the following prices increases in California to the impact of Prop 12: 41% increase in pork loin prices, 17% increase in pork rib prices, 17% increase in pork shoulder prices, 16% in bacon prices, and 20% increase in fresh ham prices. Overall, the report suggests a 20% average increase in the sales prices for pork products covered by Proposition 12 and minimal impacts on products not covered by the law, such as sausage.”

Recent retail data also revealed a decline in pork volume sales in California and a 2% to 3% decline in California’s share of national fresh pork sales. Retail scanner data compiled by Circana confirms that these trends have held up over subsequent periods, Cook added.

“From July 2024 to June 2025, the second year of Proposition 12’s partial implementation, prices for popular covered pork products in California were 24% higher on average, with a range of 12% to 33% higher across covered products, than they were in the year leading up to implementation (July 2022 to June 2023),” Cook said. “This compares to an average 3.6% increase for the entire U.S. over the same period.”

In short, Californians are spending more but consuming less pork than they were before Prop 12.

A Contentious Issue
Tiffany Dowell Lashmet, professor and Extension specialist at Texas A&M AgriLife Extension, noted the importance of recognizing that there are agricultural interests on all sides of the Prop 12 debate.

“Certainly, there are agricultural producers, groups and businesses in favor of congressional action to overturn Prop 12,” she said. “Similarly, there are agricultural producers, groups and businesses strongly against Congress taking such action, many of whom have already gone to the expense to comply after Prop 12 was passed and upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Ranking Member Angie Craig (MN-02) pointed out during her comments that Prop 12 is clearly a contentious issue, and merits thoughtful, bipartisan discussion.

“We cannot ignore the questions and challenges Prop 12 raises,” Craig said. “Even the Biden administration’s ag secretary said we need to treat this issue seriously to ensure stability in the marketplace. I agree that we cannot have 50 states with 50 different regulatory frameworks because of the significant challenges it would present to producers, but I believe that there are ways to avoid that situation.”

She also shared that many pork producers have made significant financial investments to make their operations Prop 12-compliant and that Congress needs to be mindful of the voters in California who exercised their rights under their state constitution to adopt this policy.

Thompson reminded the room that Justice Gorsuch noted several times in the majority opinion that Congress would be well within its power to act. Although Thompson doesn’t agree with the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Prop 12, he agrees that Congress can and must act to rectify the burdens Prop 12 has imposed on interstate commerce.

Travis Cushman, deputy general counsel, litigation and public policy for the American Farm Bureau Federation, said in his testimony, “When a single state can condition access to its market on compliance with production mandates that override the judgment of veterinarians, farmers and experts nationwide, Congress must act. This is not a theoretical concern. It is already harming farmers, confusing the courts and threatening the viability of a national food system.”

Cushman believes the language that the Committee passed in the 2024 Farm Bill restores clarity, restores congressional authority and interstate commerce, and protects both producers and consumers from a patchwork of conflicting amenities.

The Patchwork Problem
“When we talk about any premiums that do exist in the market today, the prospect of a patchwork threatens the certainty and the sufficiency of those premiums in the long run,” Cook said following the hearing. “NPPC is seeking to provide certainty to all producers about the environment in which we’re going to be making these decisions and investing in the future of the industry.”

Cook said it was a long day on Capitol Hill, but it was encouraging to hear producers share just how much they care about the animals they raise.

In fact, Hord spoke to misconceptions that Prop 12 enhances animal welfare, citing American Veterinary Medical Association and American Association of Swine Veterinarians opposition to the law and how those pen requirements can “unintentionally cause harm” to animal welfare.

“There were some good discussions around producers caring for their animals and maximizing animal welfare, not only because it’s the right thing to do, but because they have every economic incentive to do everything they can to maximize animal welfare,” Cook reflected.

She noted there were productive discussions on the impacts of Prop 12 from the farm level through the supply chain and all the way to the consumer.

“Producer voices are so strong,” Cook said. “Being able to deliver their stories to their representatives and members of Congress on the impact these issues are having on their farms is always the strongest message lawmakers can receive.”

What The Trump Administration's Mass Deportation Plans Could Mean for Agriculture

Mon, 23 Dec 2024 16:47:42 GMT

Farmers and food industry leaders are warning that President-elect Donad Trump’s plans to deport millions of immigrants could devastate agriculture — an industry in which immigrants make up a good chunk of the workforce.

Nearly half of all farmworkers are undocumented, and industries such as dairy and meatpacking plants are especially vulnerable to labor shortages.

“Admittedly, there are some people who slip through,” says Scott VanderWal, vice president of the American Farm Bureau Federation. “Perspective employers are required to take documentation that appears to be legal and valid. There are times when that’s not the case and then ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] comes in and cleans house, the workers disappear and go wherever they take them and the employers are left without help.”

While the H-2A visa program has grown, it only covers seasonal work and cannot replace year-round jobs at meat processing plants and on dairy and pork farms.

“Our packing plants need labor. Many of our farms use temporary visa labor — educated, skilled individuals work on our sow farms,” says Lori Stevemer, president of the National Pork Producers Council. “We have been experiencing an increased number of denials over the past year, which really makes it a challenge to find workers. The H-2A visa doesn’t work well when we have animals that need care 24/7, year-round.”

Experts say mass deportations would disrupt food production, raise prices and jeopardize the stability of U.S. agriculture.

Deportation falls under the Department of Homeland Security. President-elect Trump has selected South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem to lead that agency.

“With Governor Noem at the helm, she’s going to bring common sense to that discussion and make sure we don’t close businesses, make sure we get everyone in line, get the workforce in line and then make sure we’re following our country’s rules,” says Hunter Roberts, secretary of South Dakota’s Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

Meanwhile, farm groups continue to urge for reforms to immigration policies or a guest worker program to secure a stable workforce.

“At the same time as controlling the border, we need to overhaul our labor system,” VanderWal says. “We need to make H-2A apply to your own workers or come up with a decent program that will help.”

We need some type of H-2A visa reform to allow those workers to stay year-round, Stevemer adds.

Even then immigration is likely to continue to be a political hot potato in 2025, and labor shortages will continue to top the list of challenges for agriculture.

Denver Voters Reject Slaughterhouse Ban: Win for Animal Ag

Thu, 07 Nov 2024 14:38:59 GMT

Denver residents rejected Ordinance 309 to ban slaughterhouses in the city. Denver, a hub of lamb processing for the state and nation, represents 15% to 20% of U.S. lamb harvest capacity. It also provides many jobs in one of the city’s poorest neighborhoods.

“Activists from New Orleans and California used dark money from out of state to try and shut down this local company, but they lost to Colorado workers, farmers, ranchers and restaurateurs,” Ian Silverii, campaign spokesperson for “Stop the Ban. Protect Jobs,” said in a statement. “We have one message for those who tried to cone to our city and our state to run their experiment to upend the lives of so many hardworking people: it was a baaaaaaaad idea.”

According to the Denver Post , at 11:30 pm, 64.6% opposed the slaughterhouse ban, with very little change in the split for and against throughout the evening.

Opponents of the ban declared victory Tuesday night and Pro-Animal Future, which put the question on the ballot, issued a statement appearing to concede on both measures, the article said.

“This was a bold campaign, and no one said changing the status quo was going to be easy,” Pro-Animal Future spokesperson Olivia Hammond said in a statement. “Over a hundred thousand meat eaters voted for a world without slaughterhouses, and that’s a foundation we’ll continue building on. Voters aren’t used to seeing animal rights on the ballot, and we are paving the way with this campaign.”

The measure titled “Prohibition of Slaughterhouses” tried to outlaw “the construction, maintenance, or use of” any meat processing facilities in Denver beginning Jan. 1, 2026, as well as “require the city to prioritize residents whose employment is affected by the ordinance in workforce training or employment assistance programs.”

This ban put 160 jobs at stake and according to one study, at least $215 million in economic benefits, which could be as high as $860 million, counting indirect factors. In addition, the ban also threatened more than 2,700 jobs including independent ranchers, truckers, distributors, retailers, butchers and restaurant owners and employees, according to a Colorado State University study .

“Stop the Ban, Protect Jobs” raised money from an array of donors including Superior Farms, the American Sheep Industry Association, the National Pork Producers Council, the National Cattleman’s Beef Association, Visit Denver, the Colorado Livestock Association, United Food & Commercial Workers International, Concience Bay Research, LLC, Political Action Trust, and the Colorado Livestock Association.

Voters also rejected Ordinance 308, which would ban the manufacture, distribution, display, sale or trade of certain animal products within Denver city limits, with limited exceptions, such as for Native American cultural uses or for cow leather. Had the ordinance passed it could have affected sales of cowboy and other hats made of beaver, rabbit or hare hides, as well as fly-fishing lures that include animal fibers. The Denver Post reported the ordinance reported nearly 58% of voters opposed the fur ban.

Your Next Read: Buoyed by Stronger Support from Rural America than 2016, Trump Wins Second Term as President

The ‘Beagle Brigade’ Receives Industry-Wide Support in Protection of U.S. Agriculture

Thu, 22 Sep 2022 05:28:31 GMT

Today, over 116 agricultural canine teams provide screening at border crossings, airports, cruise terminals, cargo warehouses and mail facilities, according to the U.S. Bureau of Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

To protect the U.S. agriculture industry, natural resources and food supply, canines are used at U.S. ports of entry to detect and prevent foreign animal diseases, such as foot and mouth disease and African swine fever, as well as invasive species, plant diseases and pests from entering the U.S.

Industry groups, including the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Pork Producers Council, have submitted a letter to U.S. Congress leaders in favor of passing the Beagle Brigade Act of 2022 (S. 3678/H.R. 8432), congressionally authorizing and funding the National Detector Dog Training Center.

The Center in Newnan, Ga., is the primary training facility for the so-called “Beagle Brigade,” where canines and the Agriculture Canine Teams of the CBP handlers are trained to sniff out contraband fruits, vegetables and meat products in international passenger baggage, mailed packages and vehicles entering the U.S.

“Healthy animals ensure consumers have safe food and allow American producers, their communities and the U.S. economy to thrive. That is why NPPC joined over 50 organizations spanning the entire agriculture sector in support of the Beagle Brigade Act of 2022,” says Terry Wolters, NPPC president and owner of Stoney Creek Farms in Pipestone, Minn.

See the full letter and list of supporting groups here .

Canines have been successful at several border detections in 2022, including:

• 230 pounds of prohibited pork bologna seized at Bridge of the Americas and Santa Teresa border crossings

• 120 pounds of prohibited fresh pork and poultry meat at the Laredo Port of Entry

CBP seizes more than 4,600 plants, meat and animal byproducts per day on average , NPPC reported in its Capital Update.

Do Imported Rescue Dogs Pose Threat to Livestock Industry?

Wed, 31 Mar 2021 21:12:48 GMT

Each year, several thousand dogs enter the U.S. for resale or adoption. In a recent Hogs on the Hill article, National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) chief veterinarian Liz Wagstrom wrote that it’s time to sound the alarm on importing rescue dogs.

Why? Increasingly rescue dogs are being imported from countries where foreign animal diseases (FADs) such as African swine fever (ASF) are present. As the U.S. devotes funding and increases efforts to protect U.S. borders from possible threats that could harm our country, she explained this largely unknown FAD risk must be addressed to protect U.S. livestock and agriculture from FADs.

“While the dogs are not known to be susceptible to or carry FADs, there is the potential for bedding, crates or contamination of the dogs’ coats to serve as disease carriers. As a veterinarian, and a dog owner, this potential is alarming,” Wagstrom wrote.

Some of these dogs entering the U.S. may have been rescued from wet markets, while others from operations which raise dogs expressly for export. All it takes is one of these animals carrying an FAD into the country to put the U.S. swine herd and other livestock in jeopardy. Wagstrom wrote this could have disastrous consequences for our nation’s agriculture sector.

This risk is compounded because although both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the USDA have separate and distinct responsibilities over the importation of dogs, there is no single federal agency with comprehensive oversight of the issue, she added. There is also not a central federal website to apply for an import permit to bring dogs for sale or adoption into the country.

“A solution is within our grasp,” Wagstrom wrote. “USDA, under the Animal Health Protection Act, has the authority to develop rules for the safe importation of dogs from FAD-positive countries to protect the livestock industry. NPPC looks forward to continuing to work with the agency to ensure U.S. pork producers and our nation remains safe and protected from devastating FAD outbreaks.”

More from Farm Journal’s PORK:

It’s Time for a Better Approach for Disease Surveillance

African Swine Fever in China: A Truth Somewhere in Between, Vilsack Says

Will TADD Process Inactivate ASF Virus in Transport Trailers?