The FDA Policy that Kills Animals

And we all pay the price.

The idea of relocating to a particular state for homesteading once made perfect sense. Florida, Idaho, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia were, and perhaps still are, considered strongholds for freedom-minded families who wanted land, livestock, and breathing room.

But in 2026, some of those same states have begun tightening the very freedoms that once drew people in. Stricter homeschooling rules. Expanding health regulations. “Biohazard” classifications and increasingly complex livestock requirements, particularly for poultry. In Virginia, Second Amendment rights face steady pressure. And beyond state policy, federal action has made livestock care more difficult than at any point in modern history.

In 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration implemented Guidance #213, eliminating the use of antibiotics for growth promotion and requiring veterinary oversight for feed and water uses. That marked the first major regulatory step. This closed off antibiotics from entering our food supply.

Then, on June 11, 2023, the FDA implemented Guidance for Industry #263. This rule requires that all medically important antibiotics used in livestock, including products such as Terramycin eye ointment, be obtained only with a prescription from a licensed veterinarian.

This newer regulation was not intended to close a loophole in the policy banning the indiscriminate use of antibiotics for growth promotion. The 2017 regulations had already addressed that issue. The 2023 rule reflects broader international pressure to standardize antibiotic “stewardship.” The European Union had already imposed stricter limits on agricultural antibiotic use, and the mainstream story is that U.S. regulators argued that export competitiveness and global alignment required similar tightening. Now, why would “regulators” at the FDA care about export competitiveness and global alignment? Because under various “international harmonization” agreements, the FDA does consider the political and economic objective of import/export sales.

Note that the 2023 action changed access, not approved uses. Farmers, homesteaders, and pet owners are still allowed to use antibiotics to treat their animals - they just have to find tricky ways to get the medications. For example, a mild eye infection in an animal can be easily treated with a simple ointment, which used to be much cheaper than ten dollars a tube. Yet visiting the veterinarian to get the same antibiotic now costs hundreds of dollars, not to mention that many animal vets will insist on a new round of vaccines and probably a fecal test. That can add up to $500 or more. For many, such costs are not only unacceptable but also unaffordable.

The reality in rural America, where poverty is widespread and frugality is key, is that a simple eye infection or wound might go untreated because of the costs. Costs that just two years ago would have been a small expense could now be half of someone’s paycheck. Now, the risk of that infection becoming life-threatening has risen significantly.

Yet this policy shift occurred against a stark reality.

THE USA has a severe shortage of large-animal veterinarians.

Since the end of World War II, the United States has lost roughly 90 percent of its large-animal and livestock veterinarians, according to a 2023 Johns Hopkins study. Today, only about 1.3 to 5 percent of registered veterinarians specialize in food-animal or mixed-animal practice, with just over 8,000 serving nationwide. More than 500 counties across 46 states are federally designated veterinary shortage areas. In many rural regions, farmers must drive hours to find a practitioner willing and able to treat cattle, sheep, goats, or poultry.

The practical realities are obvious. One cannot load a sick herd of sheep or a dangerous mature bull into a stock trailer and haul them to a clinic half a day away without risking severe stress or death. Furthermore, most large-animal veterinarians do not have on-site facilities to treat livestock, which are extremely expensive. They work out of their trucks.

Farmers cannot simply abandon their farms for a full day to chase down a prescription. Over the past decade alone, mixed and food-animal veterinarians have declined by 15 percent, while small-animal practitioners now outnumber them by more than 8,000. The imbalance is not theoretical. It is structural and growing.

Against this backdrop, eliminating over-the-counter access to all livestock antibiotics, which treat injuries and infections, appears profoundly short-sighted. On paper, requiring veterinary oversight may sound prudent. In practice, it assumes veterinarians are readily available to examine animals and issue prescriptions. That assumption is naive.

When a calf develops pneumonia, when a ewe suffers a uterine infection, or when poultry show early signs of respiratory illness, treatment depends on rapid intervention. Delays can mean animal suffering, herd loss, or the spread of disease. By restricting access without first rebuilding rural veterinary infrastructure, policymakers have placed farmers in an impossible position. Many are now forced to perform medical procedures themselves - without antibiotics or with over-the-counter antibiotics meant for human use, navigate complex regulations, or forgo timely treatment altogether. Rather than strengthening animal health and biosecurity, the policy risks increasing improper use, preventable losses, and the very outbreaks it was meant to prevent.

It has become easier to buy over-the-counter human-use products than veterinary-use labeled products. Which is what we do on our horse farm all the time to treat cuts and scrapes.

Small farmers are adapting because they must. Some turn to non-allopathic remedies. Others rely on existing veterinary relationships, if they are fortunate enough to have one. In our case, we do have a veterinarian willing to work with us for our horses and cattle. But for exotic poultry such as emus and peacocks, or even for chickens, we have no avian veterinarian available, not even for consultation. Avian veterinarians are exceedingly rare. If birds become ill, people have no option but to treat them themselves. And yes, that means using human products, which must be dosed correctly according to instructions found online.

This leaves many livestock owners facing uncomfortable choices. Attempt to stockpile prescription medications in anticipation of emergencies. Rely on informal advice networks. Hope nothing serious happens. These are not theoretical dilemmas. They are daily realities.

Communities have again become essential. Friends, neighbors, and online groups offer guidance when professional help is unavailable. When euthanasia becomes necessary, some farmers have returned to performing it themselves, carefully and humanely. When a baby bird develops an infected eye, and no eye antibiotic ointment is available, it becomes a life-or-death situation. When critical illness strikes and neither a veterinarian nor medicine is available, culling may be the only option, even when timely treatment might have saved the animal. But for many animals, they will die a slow death because neither proper treatment nor veterinary care is available.

When regulations limit a farmer’s ability to provide basic medical care, animals bear the cost. That is the practical consequence. Policies built on global alignment and regulatory theory collide with rural scarcity and biological urgency.

The lesson is clear. Be prepared. Develop the skills necessary to care for your animals. Rural infrastructure has not kept pace with regulatory expansion. In many places, responsibility for animal health now rests more heavily than ever on the farmer.

What we have all had to learn is this: you cannot depend solely on state or federal laws to safeguard your rights. Laws change. Leadership changes. Political winds shift. As you consider where to live, consider local rules and regulations, as well as federal policy, which shapes how we live, work, and care for our animals.

Equally important is community. In difficult times, land alone is not enough. It is neighbors, friends, church families, and like-minded people who will stand with you when things get complicated. We are entering an era in which real community matters more than a perfect legislative environment.

Owning livestock requires self-sufficiency practiced to whatever degree your circumstances allow. It requires preparation. Preparation for the possibility that one day, large-scale self-reliance may be necessary.

And let’s face it, that possibility is now.

---

---

---