Subscribe to WLJ
Advertisement
News

US sheep producers press case against imports

Charles Wallace
Oct. 23, 2026 5 minutes read
US sheep producers press case against imports

Pictured here, a flock of Corriedale Merino crosses and Île-de-France Merino crosses.

Preston Keres/USDA

U.S. sheep producers told the International Trade Commission (ITC) during an Oct. 16 hearing that lower-priced lamb imports are driving domestic producers out of the market. Exporters countered that declining U.S. sheep numbers and changing consumer demand, not imports, are driving the industry’s struggles.

The hearing was part of a Section 201 safeguard investigation requested by U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer under the Trade Act of 1974. The commission must determine whether increased imports are a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat of serious injury, to the domestic lamb industry before considering possible trade remedies.

Domestic producers claim injury

The American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) and other supporters of import relief argued that foreign competition has steadily eroded the domestic industry’s market share, making it increasingly difficult for ranchers, feeders and processors to remain profitable.

Paul Rosenthal, an attorney representing ASI and other domestic industry members, told commissioners that U.S. producers supplied about 75% of the domestic market during the 1999 safeguard investigation. Today, he said, imports account for roughly three-quarters of U.S. lamb consumption.

Rosenthal challenged claims that imports merely fill a gap left by declining domestic production. Instead, he argued that lower-priced imports have displaced American lamb, contributing to shrinking sheep numbers, processing plant closures and lost sales. He pointed to findings showing that imported lamb undersold comparable domestic products in more than 93% of reported pricing comparisons.

Wyoming rancher Brad Boner described the difficulties producers face when lamb prices fall and buyers are hard to find. Although prices improved in late 2025, he said many ranchers remain hesitant to expand their flocks without some assurance that stronger markets will continue.

Carson Jorgensen, a sixth-generation Utah sheep rancher representing Protect American Lamb, said imports have steadily displaced domestic production. He urged commissioners to include growers and feeders in their injury analysis, arguing that the loss of a domestic meat sale ultimately affects the rancher who raised the animal.

Supporters also argued that the decline in domestic processing capacity has created a cycle in which ranchers have fewer places to market their animals, while processors struggle to secure enough American-raised lamb to operate efficiently.

Carlos Barba, vice president of sales for Superior Farms, testified that 2024 was the company’s most difficult financial year in more than six decades. He said the employee-owned processor faces delayed investments and the possibility of closing a plant.

Other processors described canceled investments, lost customers and pressure to match import prices even when domestic production costs are higher.

Commissioners question causes

Commissioners pressed witnesses on whether imports were the primary cause of the industry’s problems or whether other factors, including drought, labor shortages, predators and declining wool revenue, played a greater role.

Domestic producers acknowledged those challenges but maintained that import competition has made recovery harder.

Commissioners also examined whether American producers could rebuild their flocks quickly enough to replace imported supplies if trade restrictions were imposed. Boner estimated rebuilding could take six to eight years, depending on market conditions and producers’ willingness to retain breeding ewes.

Another question was whether imported and domestic lamb compete for the same customers. Supporters of import restrictions pointed to responses the ITC collected from companies that purchase lamb, including meat processors, retailers and foodservice suppliers. Those responses showed that domestic and imported lamb often compete for the same sales. Supporters argued that purchasers use lower-priced imports to negotiate discounts from American suppliers or choose imported lamb instead.

Exporters challenge claims

Representatives from Australia and New Zealand challenged claims that imports are responsible for declining U.S. lamb production, arguing that foreign supplies have helped keep lamb available to American consumers rather than taking sales away from domestic producers.

Australian Ambassador Greg Moriarty said U.S. sheep numbers have been declining for decades because of factors including drought, changing wool markets and higher production costs. He argued that imports have helped keep lamb available in supermarkets and restaurants despite reduced domestic supply.

Exporters also challenged the assumption that domestic and imported lamb are interchangeable.

Brian Holland of Greenstone Meats, which processes American lamb and imports product, explained that many retailers and restaurants require smaller, uniform cuts that domestic producers cannot consistently supply in sufficient quantities.

Kate Acland, chair of Beef + Lamb New Zealand, said differences in production systems also influence purchasing decisions. She said New Zealand’s pasture-raised lamb generally produces smaller, leaner carcasses, while many American lambs are grain-finished and marketed at heavier weights.

Economists opposing safeguards presented an analysis attributing much of the domestic industry’s performance to drought, labor costs and domestic supply constraints rather than imports. However, commissioners questioned aspects of that analysis, including the assumptions used in its economic modeling, and requested additional supporting information.

Decision expected in November

Ben Lehfeldt, president of ASI, told Western Ag Network that he believed the timing was right to bring the industry’s case before the commission and that the association felt confident in its position.

Next, the parties must submit post-hearing briefs to the ITC. Commissioners are expected to vote by Nov. 13. An affirmative determination would move the investigation into the remedy phase, where possible import restrictions or other relief measures would be considered. — Charles Wallace, WLJ contributing editor

Share this article

Join the Discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Keep reading

Related stories

From the byline

More from Anna Miller Fortozo, WLJ managing editor

View all by Anna Miller Fortozo, WLJ managing editor

E-Edition

This week’s WLJ

Latest issue

October 19, 2026

New this week

Read the current National Livestock Weekly online, or browse the full newspaper archive.

Print subscription

Get WLJ delivered every week

Markets, ranch news, and sale reports—in print and online for members.