- English
- Français
Accessibility and Access Keys [4]
Canada’s “codes of practice” for the care and handling of farm animals have set minimum standards for farm animal welfare across the country for over two decades. Each code, developed by a committee of industry, government and animal welfare representatives, lays out the minimum standards of animal care that producers or transporters are expected (but not required) to adhere to in their particular industry.
The development of the codes is currently directed by the federally funded National Farm Animal Care Council, of which the CFHS is a founding member.
Adherence to the codes is entirely voluntary, except in Manitoba and Nova Scotia, where the codes are referenced in provincial animal protection legislation. In these provinces, the codes set out minimum standards for what constitutes reasonable and generally accepted practices of farm animal management under law.
Codes have been developed for farmed deer, sheep, beef, pigs, poultry, veal calves, horses, dairy cattle, bison, ranched mink, ranched fox and the transportation of livestock. Some have not been revised since the 1980s or early 90s.
The CFHS has been an active participant in the development of these codes of practice since their inception. We do not believe the codes currently represent best practices; they lay out minimum standards only. We believe it is important that we continue to participate in the process so we can push for higher standards in the codes, as well as a transition from voluntary compliance to mandatory compliance.
In the early 1980’s, the CFHS pushed for regulations for the on-farm care of animals. At the time there were laws covering the transport and slaughter of animals, but nothing covering the treatment of animals on the farm.
After considerable consultation, the federal government proposed, as a compromise, the development of national codes of practice. These codes would be established as voluntary guidelines to encourage producers and transporters to adhere to a minimum standard of treatment for the animals in their care. Codes were chosen over legislation because they could be developed and revised more quickly and cost-effectively. They were established with the expectation that they would be reviewed every 5 years and revised according to new scientific knowledge and technological advances.
With funding from the federal government, the CFHS coordinated the development of the codes during the 1980’s, using a committee that included representatives from each specific producer group, veterinarians, scientists and government. The codes focused specifically on the need for adequate air, water and feed; safe housing and sufficient space; regular supervision and effective health care; and sensible handling.
The CFHS was the only animal welfare organization involved in the development of the codes of practice. From the beginning, we voiced our concerns that the codes merely outlined standard practices, rather than best practices, and that adherence to them by producers was completely voluntary. Nonetheless, as the only animal welfare organization involved, we felt it was important to continue to be there at the table to push for higher standards and better implementation.
In 2002, the government put a hold on code development and launched a consultation that resulted in the formation of a new organization, the National Farm Animal Care Committee (NFACC), of which the CFHS is a founding member. One of the specific objectives for NFACC was to propose a new process for developing codes. The CFHS was instrumental in pushing for a more stringent and transparent process for code development and review.
The CFHS has some concerns that NFACC is dominated by producer organizations, but we feel it is a worthwhile collaboration and it is important for the CFHS to be involved.
The new code development process was finalized by NFACC in 2009 and is a substantial improvement over the old process. The new process requires the involvement of an independent scientists committee at the beginning stage and stipulates that codes must include items worded as firm requirements in addition to those worded as recommended practices. It also includes more transparency and an opportunity for public comment. A revision of the Code for Dairy Cattle was completed in 2009 under the new process, setting out 30 new requirements for the welfare of dairy cattle.
In April 2010, the government announced the approval of $3.4 million dollars in funding to the NFACC over the next three years. The bulk of the funding will go towards updating the codes of practice for five farm industries and initiating new codes in three additional industries. Four industry groups have already stepped up and are ready to update their codes: they are beef, pork, equine and mink producers. The revision of these codes should get underway in 2010.
This new three-year funding will also support two national conferences, a stakeholder workshop on market issues that may call for mass euthanasia of farm animals and the completion of an “on-farm animal care assessment model” by the NFACC. The model is intended to be used by industry associations that opt to develop programs to assess whether the codes of practice are being followed by producers.
The CFHS believes that regular on-farm audits are necessary to ensure the effectiveness of the codes. Without objective, third-party audits, how will the public – or the industry itself – know if producers are following their code? Under a third-party system, an independent, non-industry body would inspect farms to ensure that codes are being consistently followed across the country.
Some industry associations have voluntarily developed their own programs to assess animal care among producers. For instance, the Canadian Pork Council released its “Animal Care Assessment Tool” in 2005 with a revised version in 2010. The CFHS commends the council for initiating an assessment program, though we have concerns about the continued acceptance of sow stalls and the high stocking density for hogs.
The Chicken Farmers of Canada has also developed an “Animal Care Assessment Program”, which the CFHS was invited to review in 2008. Based on considerable review and input, the CFHS agreed to support the implementation of this program. The Chicken Farmers of Canada are to be commended for introducing a program that seeks to address the question of verification.
The CFHS continues to push for a system of independent, third-party assessment of all farms across the country and mandatory adherence to the codes.
