The objectives of this study are to 1) estimate consumer willingness-to-pay for alternative pork production practice attributes including use of gestation crates; 2) examine if these preferences are related to preferences for farm size and country-of-origin attributes; 3) evaluate if banning use of gestation crates may be justified on grounds of economic welfare enhancement; and 4) identify the distribution of welfare impacts of gestation crate bans across consumers. Mixed logit and latent class models are employed to investigate the extent of consumer preference heterogeneity influencing conclusions to theses individual objectives. In our analysis, if a consumer is provided with adequate labeling of pork produced on farms certified to voluntarily not use gestation crates, we find no economic support justifying a ban on the use of gestation crates that impacts all consumers. The results of this analysis imply that the desires (and corresponding voting behavior) of these consumers have substantial impacts on the consumer welfare of all consumers whose food product choice set is impacted. Also, the swine industry may benefit by encouraging additional labeling of products originating from producers voluntarily choosing not to utilize gestation crates. If these products are currently not widely available to consumers, results of this study suggest that additional labeling may, in addition to seizing market opportunities, potentially help alleviate some of the increasing pressure for production practice changes associated with gestation crates.