“Producer perspectives from across the country help ensure the code reflects the diversity of Canadian beef production systems and remains practical for producers who raise cattle,” Canadian Cattle Association president Tyler Fulton said in a news release.

WHY IT MATTERS: The national code serves as a reference point for provincial animal enforcement officers and courts and sets a basic standard of care for beef cattle in Canada, the Canadian Cattle Association says.

The current code of practice was published in 2013. An update began in 2023 with a 15-person committee that includes representatives from the cattle, processor and transport sectors, veterinary and animal welfare experts, researchers, government representatives and others.

The process involves “respectful dialogue, evidence-based decision-making, and shared accountability,” the news release said.

The draft code of practices includes changes such as:

• Added requirements for monitoring cattle “more frequently” during heat waves and cold weather
• Added requirements for natural or man-made shelter from wind in cold weather
• Expanded guidlines around low-stress handling
• Added requirements around not branding cattle on the face or sensitive areas, and use of pain medication when branding cattle under six months old
• An added section on spaying of female cattle — a practice it says isn’t common in Canada
• Expanded requirements and information around euthanizing cattle, including acceptable methods

Public consultation is open until June 12.

The post Public consultation open on national beef code of practice appeared first on Farmtario.

Adam Moeser, a professor at the Michigan State Univerity College of Veterinary Medicine, said early weaning leads to persistent leaky gut, chronic low-grade inflammation and altered enteric nervous system function, which increases disease risk.

Sex differences can also play a role in the success of livestock growth and development, he said, noting females exhibit a stronger immune response but are more prone to chronic inflammatory disorders.

WHY IT MATTERS: Producers who manage these stressors may see healthier animals and more profitable operations.

Moeser’s research at East Lansing, Mich., revealed distinct gene expression profiles in males and females, suggesting that early-life androgens play a crucial role in shaping immune responses. These findings underscore the need for sex-specific interventions to improve animal health and productivity.

The gut plays a huge role in both animal and human health, and that’s why it’s a major focus of his research, said Moeser.

“One of the most important concepts … about the gut is its early life development,” he said. “It serves many important functions, not only the efficient digestion and absorption of nutrients, but it must also serve as a barrier between the animal … and the outside world. “

As the largest interface between the outside world and the animal, it also contains the most concentrated and largest immune system in the entire body, the enteric nervous system that independently controls digestion and excretion, and the nutrient transporters that take the vital nourishment from the digestive tract to the cells of the body.

Early development

Because the functions of the gut are so critical, Moeser said they need time to develop in the animal to ensure long-term health. There’s a steep development curve, beginning in the first few days of the pig’s life, and continuing through the first several months.

He said it takes that long until the gut stabilizes in the pig. During this time there are many influences on the normal development trajectory. The gut is responding to outside signals through development that will affect long-term function.

“If anything happens during this critical stage of life, it’s going to shape long-term development and function,” he said, noting that during this stage, there are pathogen challenges such as immune stimulation and vaccines.

“All of these are happening during the first several weeks to months of life, and it can shape a normal life trajectory of disease risk if there’s more stress,” he said.

Some of these stressors are unavoidable in a production agriculture environment and cannot be completely mitigated, he said.

He added, however, that it is important for farmers to understand these stresses. They will play a large role in the animal’s ability to defend itself against other stresses and challenges it will encounter during its life.

Battle of the sexes

One trend that’s shown strongly during Moeser’s research is the gender effect, one that was made clear because of new guidelines that encourage testing on groups that include both male and female animals.

Moeser added that sex is known to shape disease vulnerability and mortality across multiple species. He said research has shown that females typically have higher survivability rates than males, with males dying at a disproportionately higher rate from infection compared with females. That’s likely due to a more robust immune response in female pigs.

It’s not a clear win for the female pigs though, as there’s another area where they seem to be at a disadvantage. When there are chronic and unrelenting stressors, female pigs are more prone to chronic pain and inflammation disorders.

“That may give them a trade-off for survivability versus chronic disease,” Moeser said.

He added that the agriculture industry knows a lot about sex differences, feed efficiency, carcass characteristics and reproduction, but that looking at sex as a biological factor for gut and immune development has been largely overlooked.

It is important to understand that this sex difference or disparity in mortality persists across stages of production, including pre-weaning, nursery and finished phases.

“These are sex differences that are emerging prior to sexual maturity, and that becomes important later,” he said.

Castration effect

One factor that may contribute to higher stress is castration, and that goes beyond the initial pain and trauma of the procedure itself.

“The fact that these differences persist long after the initial event of the castration procedure itself suggests that there’s also something more important underlying this biology,” Moeser said.

A conservative estimate suggests there’s a two to four per cent higher mortality rate in castrated males, which make up virtually the entire male pig population in commercial operations. Those numbers add up fast, and come with dollar signs attached.

“The numbers of pigs that are lost due to this sex difference alone actually become very significant,” Moeser said.

He said his team are continuing to explore what makes castrated males more vulnerable to disease and makes the female more resistant or have higher vulnerability.

“If we can understand the biology, what’s really different between a male and a female, maybe we can come up with some new interventions, or targeted strategies, or sex-specific strategies, that can put a dent in this health disparity,” he said.

His research team is analyzing the systemic response of pigs, tracking the numbers of peritoneal neutrophil (immmune cells that rush to the abdominal lining during infection), which are important to critical immune processes. The team’s research is also exploring a pig’s gene expression pattern, where they’re starting to understand some of the gender differences.

The female animals have very different genetic pathways that are regulated by something known as lipopolysaccharide signalling (or LPS) which regulate immune response. It preserves a higher energy demand, which is reflected in the gut by decreased metabolic processes.

Castrated males, on the other hand, have “unregulated” genetic pathways. They lack a “co-ordinated” defense response that’s seen in females and intact males.

Moeser says the difference between intact males and castrates shows the impact that castration alone can have.

“We know that males and females, they just don’t differ, but they operate different biological systems, and that both stress and immune challenge expose sex differences in the gut, meaning that sometimes, under non-stressful conditions, we may not see a sex difference, but under challenging conditions that sex difference is brought out,” he said.

Making changes

He challenged the industry to look at factors that can intervene and manipulate, from a management standpoint or from a therapeutic standpoint.

“If we learn more about why a male castrate can’t recruit different immune cells as efficiently as a female, if we can boost that, maybe we can improve survival,” he said. “Maybe we need to rethink about the impact of this castration on immune development and health? What are we losing by eliminating these androgens?”

Moeser questioned whether the industry could restore optimal immune function or better immune function in the male by manipulating practices or interventions. He said understanding the sex differences in biology opens new opportunities to better understand pig development.

“Maybe they need a boost. Maybe they need something that intervenes to lessen this mortality gap, which could have significant economic implications,” he said.

For female pigs, he said encouraging gut health, especially in early life, may “set their whole gut and inflammatory tone for life.”

“What is it about females that makes them have a higher, robust immune response? If we knew that, maybe we could optimize boosting immune potential in animals if we could understand the mechanisms of females.”

The post Early life can set health path for pigs appeared first on Farmtario.

In a ruling on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Steven Seeger in Chicago said the risk of unfair prejudice against the egg producers and marketers by showing the graphic videos was “extreme” and outweighed any minimal value in the antitrust litigation accusing them of curbing domestic supply in order to charge higher prices.

“After watching the videos, it would not take much for jurors to believe that the egg industry abuses chickens,” Seeger wrote.

Kraft and the other plaintiffs wanted to play the videos at the trial next month to bolster their claim that an industry-wide animal welfare initiative announced in 2002 was a “sham” and actually part of a broader scheme to restrain the supply of eggs.

Seeger’s ruling on the videos was among several orders he issued on Tuesday addressing the scope of what jurors will be allowed to see and hear at the five-week trial.

Kraft and the other plaintiffs, also including General Mills and Nestle, are seeking more than US$110 million in damages against United Egg Producers and other defendants, including two farms.

Lawyers for the defendants on Wednesday did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Representatives for Kraft and the other companies either declined to comment or did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Seeger is presiding over a case that was previously in Philadelphia federal court as part of a multidistrict litigation proceeding. Kraft’s case returned to the Northern District of Illinois in 2019.

Lawyers for Kraft and co-plaintiffs said they obtained the videos from the Humane Society of the United States. They purport to show “day-to-day operations within defendants’ facilities.”

In a court filing, attorneys for United Egg Producers and the other defendants said the videos were “surreptitiously” recorded by animal rights activists and include “highly edited footage.”

The attorneys also said the recordings were irrelevant to the plaintiffs’ claims.

Seeger said the plaintiffs’ lawyers do not need the videos to argue that the egg industry’s promotion of animal welfare was not genuine.

“After personally watching all of the videos, the court is convinced that the videos would undermine the truth-seeking function of the trial,” Seeger wrote.

— Mike Scarcella is a Reuters legal affairs reporter in Washington, D.C.

The post ‘Shocking’ farm videos barred at egg-price antitrust trial in Chicago appeared first on Farmtario.

In an information update dated May 1, NFACC said its board has now decided “no further action will be taken” by the council to update the 2001 Transport Code.

NFACC, a division of Animal Health Canada, in December 2018 had started work to update the Transport Code — which meant setting up a new multi-species code covering animals from 14 of its separate national on-farm codes of practice.

Since then, however, the Lacombe, Alta.-based organization said, it has had to take into consideration the February 2019 update to federal regulations governing transportation of animals in Canada.

The federal regulations having been “materially and significantly amended,” and “evergreen interpretive guidance” added, made it “difficult to envision the role and purpose of an updated Code,” the council said.

After that came the COVID-19 pandemic, which NFACC said halted all in-person meetings and required its working groups and code development committee to meet exclusively online, which “impeded the relationship-building opportunities and open dialogue that in-person meetings offer.”

On top of that, the Transport Code was the first to be set up using NFACC’s code development process (CDP) but not intended for on-farm use. It included care of animals during transportation as well as when offloaded at certain intermediary sites.

Furthermore, NFACC said, the plan to update the Transport Code had been initiated by the council itself, rather than by any national stakeholder group or other primary stakeholders — “which has led to additional challenges” in following the council’s usual CDP.

And since there’s no one national organization devoted to livestock and poultry transport, there would be no lead body to take up the roles and responsibilities needed to shepherd a new code to its conclusion.

‘Disappointed’

The update process for a new Transport Code was funded by the AgriAssurance program via the former federal-provincial Canadian Agricultural Partnership (CAP) policy framework, and NFACC said development of the new Transport Code was always expected to take as long as that program allowed.

But by August last year, NFACC said, it had “become apparent” that a finalized transportation code wouldn’t be achievable by the time CAP expired at the end of March this year.

NFACC in August called a pause in the code development process, and it said with the remaining time and funding under CAP, it would instead pursue a risk assessment and “collaboration planning exercise.”

That two-phase data collection process ran from last November to February this year, NFACC said. The risk assessment looked at “potential options and the inherent risks” with different courses of action, while the planning exercise looked at the “top priorities” of the council and of project stakeholders in weighing the next steps.

Taken together, NFACC said May 1, a “careful review” of the data “supported the conclusion that the Code update could not proceed.”

“We recognize that many of you are disappointed in this development, and we understand and share in that disappointment,” NFACC said.

“While the destination wasn’t what we envisioned when we started down this road in 2018, nevertheless, there were many positive aspects that emerged from the project,” the council said, noting the new alignment of the transportation sections of 11 on-farm codes of practice with the updated federal Health of Animals Regulations.

The work toward a new Transport Code also provided “opportunity for stakeholders to participate and collaborate” and the top-of-mind survey and report at the outset have “helped NFACC in gaining greater awareness of current evolving concerns of stakeholders and interested parties.”

NFACC said the process also led to “greater sharing of inter-industry information and enhanced communication” and “affirmation of NFACC’s role and the guardrails in place to support CDP work.”

NFACC’s work schedule over the next five years includes updates of its code of practice for beef cattle, code for sheep, and code for hatching eggs, breeders, chickens and turkeys. — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Animal care council won’t update livestock transport code of practice appeared first on Farmtario.

“I think that we’ve come to a very solid revised code,” David Wiens, DFC’s vice-president, said in an interview.

The National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) on Thursday released its revised Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Dairy Cattle, to take effect on April 1, 2024.

The code forms the backbone of DFC’s proAction quality assurance program, to which all dairy farms must adhere.

Key changes to the code involve a timeline to eliminate tie-stall housing for cows, a system in which the animals are tethered continuously or for long periods. Effective April 2027, cows may not be tethered continuously. New barns will be required to allow “daily, untethered freedom of movement and social interactions year-round,” the code says.

By 2031, calves will be required to be housed in groups or pairs by four weeks of age. If they’re housed outdoors or in hutches, they may only be tethered if they can move in and out of the hutch. They must also be able to have physical contact with another calf, unless they need to be separated for health and safety reasons.

“Both of these changes are supported by science in terms of promoting good overall animal welfare,” Wiens said.

Both changes garnered praise from Humane Canada, a federation of humane societies and societies for the prevention of cruelty to animals (SPCAs). Humane Canada is one of the founding members of the NFACC and sat on the committee that oversaw the code’s revision.

“Overall we feel positive about the improvements in the code,” said Kathy Duncan, director of national programs with Humane Canada.

Nearly two thirds of Canadian dairy farms use tie-stall housing, Duncan said, and the previous code of contact took no steps toward eliminating the practice. Though Humane Canada is disappointed in the length of the phase-out periods for the changes, she said they are steps in the right direction.

“There are a number of areas of improvement,” Duncan said.

She highlighted added requirements that are intended to address animal abuse and work to ensure low-stress handling.

“We’ve seen some pretty horrific video of different types of handling on-farm and in slaughter,” Duncan said.

There are also stronger requirements and recommendations for oversight of farm workers.

Allowed stocking density will also decrease to 1.1 cows per stall in a free stall system from 1.2 cows per stall, effective April 2027. As of April 2031, that will be reduced to one cow per stall.

Wiens said he already stocks below the allowed rate.

“We find that cows are actually more productive at a slightly lower stocking rate,” he said.

The 2023 code notes that with lower stocking rates, cows have more access to feed bunks and can spend more time lying down — particularly for less dominant cows.

The code doesn’t include requirements for emergency preparedness planning, which is a disappointment, said Duncan. She pointed to the 2021 floods in B.C., which inundated many farms, including dairy farms. Many animals died, and other were left stranded and in dire need of food and water, according to one CBC report from November 2021.

The code contains many recommendations for emergencies, including the suggestion to develop a plan for evacuating cattle. It references “comprehensive resources to support emergency planning” that are separate from the code.

The code attracted “overwhelming interest” from Canadians, Duncan said.

Nearly 6,000 individuals or groups responded during the public consultation for the code, NFACC documents show. Forty per cent identified as dairy producers, just over 31 per cent were concerned citizens or animal welfare advocates, and just over 17 per cent identified as consumers.

— Geralyn Wichers is a reporter for the Manitoba Co-operator.

CLARIFICATION, April 4, 2023: A previous version of this article stated the updated code would require the elimination of tie stalls as of April 2027. Specifically, the code calls for elimination of tie stall housing, meaning the continuous or lengthy tethering of dairy cows in their stalls. The article has been edited to further clarify.

The post Continuous tie-stall housing to be phased out in new dairy code of practice appeared first on Farmtario.

The Canadian Cattle Association reported Schellenberg’s death in a release Saturday, adding that the association’s current vice-president, rancher Nathan Phinney of Sackville, N.B., will now become CCA president.

“With heavy hearts, CCA’s board and staff will continue to push forward on the priorities that were important to Reg, as well as cattle producers across Canada,” the association said Saturday.

“Reg’s legacy and impact on the Canadian cattle industry will be felt for years to come. His gentle demeanour and strong character are qualities that many of us in the industry looked up to,” Phinney said in the same release.

“He will be fondly remembered for being a tireless advocate for cattle producers, taking a particular interest in advancing the priorities related to animal health and care, as well as protecting and preserving our industry for the next generation.”

Schellenberg had worked at Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Swift Current Research and Development Centre in southwestern Saskatchewan before going to work with Perrin Ranching, near Beechy, about 110 km northeast of Swift Current, in 1978.

Schellenberg married Ted and Olive Perrin’s daughter Shannon in 1980 and by 1983 the Schellenbergs were active shareholders in the ranch. The Schellenbergs’ son Coy and his wife Laura-Lie more recently became their partners in the 14,000-acre ranch, now known as Perrin Ranching 1990 Ltd.

The elder Schellenberg served with the Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association as a director and zone chair and later as a member of its executive, and was first elected to the CCA board as a Saskatchewan representative in 2010. He served stints as chair of CCA’s animal care committee, then as co-chair of its animal health and care committee (2016-20) and, later, of its foreign trade committee (2020-22), and as the association’s representative to the Canadian Cattle Identification Agency.

Schellenberg also served as CCA vice-president from 2020 up until March 25, when he was elected by acclamation to replace Bob Lowe as president.

In an interview with Canadian Cattlemen earlier this year, Schellenberg said animal health and care had always been an important focus for him throughout his involvement in CCA, and that the creation of a foot-and-mouth disease vaccine bank in Canada was a priority for him as president.

Highlighting the beef industry’s positive environmental impact and building public trust were also important roles for the organization, he said at the time, “to make it very clear that cattle and rangeland are part of the solution, not the problem.

“That’s the key message we have to really focus on and emphasize and gain as much support and traction as we can because we know the livestock sector tends to get blamed for some of these things. Our alternative is bringing awareness that rangeland management and grazing of livestock is actually a benefit rather than a liability.”

Melanie Wowk, chair of Alberta Beef Producers, on Saturday expressed “overwhelming sadness” over Schellenberg’s sudden passing, hailing him as “a true cowboy, rancher and gentleman.”

The Livestock Marketing Association of Canada, in a statement on Facebook Friday evening, described Schellenberg as a “great friend of LMAC and a tireless leader of the Canadian cattle industry.”

Alberta’s Agriculture Minister Nate Horner, on Twitter Saturday, praised Schellenberg as “a tremendous advocate for Canadian ranchers, producers and rural communities.”

Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, in a separate tweet Saturday, also said she was saddened to hear of Schellenberg’s sudden passing. “Reg was a strong advocate for the cattle sector and we will truly miss him.”

Details weren’t yet available on what led to Schellenberg’s sudden death, although LMAC said in its Facebook statement Friday night that he had died of “an apparent heart attack.”

A service is scheduled for Dec. 16 in Swift Current and is expected to be livestreamed. In lieu of flowers, donations can be made to the Canadian Cattle Foundation in support of the Canadian Cattle Young Leaders program.

— Article updated Dec. 7 to include memorial information. Updated Aug. 28, 2024. Corrects spelling of Laura-Lie Schellenburg’s name.

The post Canadian Cattle Association president Reg Schellenberg dies appeared first on Farmtario.

“We have boot washes and other biosecurity measures in the barn. We need to take these measures in order to minimize the damage,” said Herrema, who farms near Uxbridge, Ont.

Why it matters: The dairy sector has regular visits from off-farm suppliers, so steps have had to be taken to maintain distance and reduce risk from the COVID-19 coronavirus.

Building a tank room encompassing only the front of the milk tank, the lid and valve has helped to limit the Herrema farm’s contact with the truck driver.

“When we built the barn we decided to have that room so it can be that the milk trucker is the only one to use it.”

Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) has suspended proAction validations until April 30 and has asked producers to limit contact with milk truck drivers.

Holstein Canada has suspended all on-farm services, including classifications, proAction animal care assessments and any regular field services.

“The organization is moving quickly to respond and adapt to the current situation. We are committed to the continued delivery of high-quality milk and the health and safety of our employees, dairy producers and their families, and milk truck drivers,” DFO chair Murray Sherk said in a statement.

Holstein Canada’s decision, made March 17, has affected producers in every province.

“We have staff in British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Atlantic Canada, Ontario and Quebec all having to go home,” said Brad Eggink, manager of classification and field services for Holstein Canada.

Holstein Canada is hoping to have the suspension lifted April 3, with field staff heading back to work on April 6.

The Ontario and Quebec governments “have ordered that all non-essential businesses remain closed for the next two weeks,” Eggink said Tuesday in an interview.

Of course, this may change as Holstein Canada is basing the decision on government rules, which change on a daily basis.

Dairy producers across the country have been appreciative of Holstein Canada’s leadership in decision making during this uncertain time, Eggink said.

Lactanet — formed last summer as a new entity encompassing CanWestDHI, Valacta and the Canadian Dairy Network — announced as of Wednesday it would not be offering any on-farm services, including sample pick up or data collection, for two weeks. Its Guelph laboratory and offices are also closed.

Customer services desk and DairyComp support will be available from employees working from home, CEO Neil Petreny said in a letter.

Feed blends

The Herrema farm, meanwhile, has also provided soap for the truck driver to use if needed — but Herrema has noticed drivers wearing disposable gloves and doing their part to minimize contact.

It’s important for producers to respect the request of DFO to maintain distance from the drivers, he said.

“These guys are shipping our product, we need to respect that in order to maintain safe quality milk. To ensure the driver safety is of utmost importance (and) we need to take every precaution we can.”

When completing day-to-day tasks, Herrema said, he doesn’t feel affected by changes imposed by the government to limit the COVID-19 coronavirus’ spread — but he’s being cautious on the feed aspect of the business.

“There are ethanol plants that have decided to potentially shut down because of the low price of gasoline. It’s going to change our feed blends a little bit.”

As well, feed test lab shutdowns can have a negative affect on his business.

“In case we get a problem on the farm and need to find out whether it is because of the feed, or if we change rations and need to adjust our ingredient list (a lab shutdown) would be an impact on us for sure.”

Currently there are no supplier visits to farms, so all consulting has been done over the phone — and Herrema said all suppliers have been great through this period.

— Jennifer Glenney is a reporter for Farmtario.

The post Dairy sector shuts down most visits from off-farm providers appeared first on Farmtario.

The COVID-19 pandemic is a very different type of emergency, said Rebecca Husted, a teacher of technical large animal emergency rescue.

“Most disasters like fires and floods have people moving around, but in COVID-19, people are not supposed to move around,” Husted said Thursday at Alberta Farm Animal Care’s Livestock Care Conference.

(The conference was to be held in Olds, Alta. on Wednesday and Thursday but was changed to an online event, with social distancing in mind.)

But planning ahead — even in a fast-changing situation — remains key. This should involve being in touch with government or agencies (such as ag services boards or farm groups) and making them aware of your situation.

“It comes down to us, in our communities, raising the flag and going to those folks ahead of time and saying, ‘Hey, you have to come up with some plans because it makes your job as an emergency manager a lot easier if you already have a plan with your livestock producers or (agriculture) industry in the area,'” she said.

Canada and the U.S. use “all-hazards disaster plans,” which include plans for evacuation as well as plans for sheltering in place, said Husted.

“This is a shelter-in-place disaster as much as possible, but there’s some things we need to be able to move,” she said. “We need to be able to move our animals and products.”

Disaster managers in your community will be overtaxed and likely won’t have any plans for livestock.

“They have no idea what to do when it comes to transportation of ag products, and you may want to give them some expertise in your local community,” she said.

And prepare for the worst.

“Think about what you have to do if you can’t move your animals,” she said. “For some producers, you have to think about what your euthanasia plan is. If you can’t get the veterinarian there to deal with your horse with a broken leg, what are you going to do? If you, for whatever reason, can’t sell your pigs and they get too old and they aren’t marketable, what are you going to do with them?”

Anyone who is taking care of someone else’s animals might want to get a waiver that says that they can make decisions on the owner’s behalf.

Be prepared for some bottlenecks and slowdowns in the supply chain.

“Supply chains are going to be affected,” said Husted. “Veterinary associations are suggesting that some pharmaceutical products could be in short supply. It may be that some of that stuff is produced in China.”

Think about staffing requirements, and steps will need to be taken if staff get sick or need to take time off to deal with sick relatives or take care of children. As well, many people in the agricultural community are older, and therefore more likely to be seriously ill.

Also make a list of contacts — including “all those folks who are essential to your business, from your employees to your suppliers.”

Many people in the agricultural community are older, and therefore more likely to be seriously ill. It’s also important to make sure the business can run if people get sick or injured — including yourself.

“You need to think, ‘If I wasn’t coming back, what would people need to know so they could run the farm?'”

The thought of planning for so many dire possibilities can be disheartening, but Husted urged her audience to persevere.

“There are people who are very successful going through a disaster, but they have a plan, and they are prepared and as soon as the market is ready, they are going to move on that.”

— Alexis Kienlen reports for Alberta Farmer from Edmonton.

The post Ahead of any emergency, plan for the worst appeared first on Farmtario.

“What are we afraid of?” asked Chan, speaking at the annual Dairy Farmers of Manitoba conference in Winnipeg. “Why don’t people speak up when someone in your family or a friend says something wrong about agriculture?”

No one wants a family gathering to dissolve into a shouting match over animal welfare or biotechnology, Chan said, but she stressed that, at the end of the day, speaking louder isn’t going to change anyone’s mind.

“You want to meet these consumers where they stand, we don’t want to get up on our soapbox,” she said.

Too often, producers fall into the mindset that if they can just hammer home enough facts or if they can just convince a consumer to think like they do, all their problems will disappear, Chan said.

Not so, according to the senior manager of veterinary services at Zoetis.

“Take a step back and ask them what their concerns are,” she said. “When they raise these issues and instead of going straight into educating them about what it is that actually happens… pause for a moment.”

Asking follow-up questions about why they are concerned and where they got their information from is also important, said Chan, adding if producers listen and understand consumer concerns they’ll be able to move forward constructively.

“Get them to expand,” she said. “Just say, ‘Hmm, that’s interesting, I certainly don’t want antibiotics in my food either; what is it that worries you?’ ”

Once common ground is established, farmers can begin introducing the information they want consumers to hear.

“That next piece is we talk about a safe and wholesome product,” she said, adding the vast array of choice in grocery story does beg certain questions — questions to which consumers don’t often have reliable answers.

For example, with some products labeled as “antibiotic free,” consumers are left wondering if other products have antibiotics in them, or are unclear on how products are produced, Chan said.

“The inference is that maybe there are products that have antibiotics in it, so should I be worried?”

But slamming organic products or denigrating certain production methods isn’t helpful either. Instead, Chan said producers should talk about how they do things on their own operations, the care and attention they give to animals and explain what labels represent in terms of on-farm practices.

“We are all in this together,” she said.

Sharing the kind of research being done on animal welfare is also an important way to demonstrate the level of care provided. She referenced current dairy research that looks at neuroplasticity in calves as an example of the lengths researchers go to increase cow comfort.

“So these are things that we’re engaging in on the dairy side that really make me proud to be doing what we are doing,” Chan said. “I don’t think people understand how important it is to us that we are producing a safe and nutritious food product and that means that we have to be caring for our cows and providing them with a good quality of life.”

Producers also can’t expect that consumers will learn about food production and animal care if they stay silent.

“We should be shouting that from the rooftops and if we’re not comfortable doing that, we definitely need to be supporting those who are,” Chan said. “Because we need to be engaged and we need to make sure we are a part of that story.”

— Shannon VanRaes is a reporter for the Manitoba Co-operator and Country Guide in Winnipeg. Follow her at @ShannonVanRaes on Twitter.

The post Talk to family, friends about farming appeared first on Farmtario.

The animal rights and vegan advocacy group responsible for capturing the video says that’s not enough, and is pursuing legal action.

Employees at a Vancouver-area chicken farm were caught in hidden camera footage filmed by a volunteer for Toronto-based Mercy for Animals. The footage was broadcast on CTV News on Monday and posted on YouTube Tuesday.

The video, featured prominently on Mercy for Animals’ website, shows workers throwing birds against crates, slamming them on the ground, slapping and stomping on birds and using them to simulate sexual acts. At one point, an employee attempts to rip a live bird in half.

The video shows some of the abuse happening in front of one of the organization’s supervisors.

Five employees, including one supervisor, have since been laid off.

“We are sickened with the footage and want to ensure all our suppliers and producers that this is not reflective of who we are, our fundamental beliefs or behaviour we accept from our employees. We do not condone or tolerate animal abuse,” Dwayne Dueck, president at Elite Farm Services, said in a statement.

Elite is the poultry services company that staffed the chicken catchers in question.

Krista Hiddema, managing director at Mercy for Animals, called the statement and action from Elite Farm Services “disingenuous.”

“Elite Services supervisors were involved in the abuse, and were supervising the abuse,” she said.

Mercy for Animals has since filed legal complaints with the RCMP, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and the British Columbia Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (BC SPCA), Hiddema said.

Elite Farm Services said it is also in the process of establishing an advisory committee to review animal care guidelines and to create clear policies and procedures in line with industry standards and practices.

Poultry processor Sofina Foods, for whom the company catches birds, said late Monday it’s “appalled and extremely shocked by the video footage we saw of a few of our supplier’s employees displaying disturbing and unacceptable behaviours that (Sofina) does not in any way tolerate or condone.”

Sofina said Monday it had already asked that the employees involved be “dismissed immediately,” and that other staff be “requalified on the importance of animal care and fully understand the consequences of not following protocols.”

Mercy for Animals also alleged some of the abused chickens at the operation in question can be traced to Loblaws-owned grocery locations.

Loblaws released its own statement regarding the abuse allegations, noting it’s “investigating” the activities.

“We have zero tolerance for any animal abuse and have made it very clear to the supplier that this behaviour has absolutely no place in our food supply chain,” the company said.

Loblaws said it stands behind standards set by the National Farm Animal Care Council, the policies outlined by the Chicken Farmers of Canada, and its own commitment to animal welfare.

Chicken Farmers of Canada, in a separate statement late Monday, said there is “no defense for the mistreatment of birds.”

CFC noted its animal care program is “mandatory, third-party audited, and enforced on every farm,” and if a farm is found not complying with program standards, or is “causing undue suffering” to birds, the farmer is “subject to penalties and the proper authorities will be contacted.”

It can be problematic to use industry groups to regulate how animals are treated, Hiddema said. “This is like the fox guarding the hen house.”

The industry “is incapable of governing themselves,” she said, pointing to Mercy for Animals’ multiple undercover exposes in Canada.

The group has an online petition, calling for Loblaws to adopt meaningful animal welfare policies for its supply chains.

“We know that Canadians are compassionate people; they do not want animals tortured, and we’re asking for Canadians to use their buying power to speak up. And it is only through consumers that we’ll change what will happen in Canada,” Hiddema said.

CFC reiterated Monday that “this kind of animal abuse is not and will not be tolerated. It is not representative of how the industry works as a whole.”

— Jade Markus writes for Commodity News Service Canada, a Winnipeg company specializing in grain and commodity market reporting. Includes files from AGCanada.com Network staff.

The post Workers fired following chicken abuse video appeared first on Farmtario.