“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 Canadian Cattlemen.

Public consultations on a draft Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Equines opened on Jan. 12.

The National Farm Animal Care Council launched an update to the equine code in 2023. The revision involves consultaton with veterinary and scientific experts, producer and animal welfare representatives, and provincial and federal officials.

Changes in the draft code include:

• New rules around housing, such as a requirement for a mud management plan during wet periods and mandatory bedding depth.
• An amendment to air quality requirements by reducing the acceptable concentration of ammonia to 15 parts per million (ppm) from 25 ppm.
• Elevating the need for a working relationship with a veterinarian to requirement from a recommendation — an exception is made for areas where vets are not available, in which case a health care plan is acceptable.
• Added rules that say punishment is not acceptable in handling of horses and prohibits the use of pain and fear as training methods.
• A prohibition on selling horses for slaughter, if unfit for transportation, as an alternative to euthanasia.

The public comment period ends on March 12. The revised code is projected to be released in 2027.

The post Public opinion wanted on draft equine code of practice appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The National Farm Animal Care Council is involved, and the update will be in line with the National Farm Animal Care Council’s Code Development practice.

The Code Development process will begin with a survey to capture welfare concerns from all stakeholders. Results from the surveys will help the Code Committee understand the issues stakeholders want to see in the update. Everyone can participate in the survey.

The Code update will bring the industry into alignment with responsible practices, many of which have already been implemented by producers, said Nathan Phinney, President of the Canadian Cattle Association.

Canada’s Codes of Practice provide guidance for the care and handling of farm animals. They serve as educational tools, reference materials for regulations, and the foundation for farm animal care assessment programs. Five Codes of Practice are being updated. They include beef cattle, equine, pig, sheep, and poultry. The Code for pullet and layer Codes are also being amended.

The post Beef stakeholders invited to weigh in on code of practice appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

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 Canadian Cattlemen.

Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau, speaking Wednesday at the CropConnect conference in Winnipeg, announced over $430,000 for the Canada Grains Council to develop a pilot insurance product for grain exporters.

Such an insurance plan would go to “address the risks they face of having their shipments rejected at the border of the importing country,” the government said.

Ottawa “wants to insure that grain farmers are protected against the unpredictability of the international market and the risks of regulatory trade barriers, particularly around the input residues on seeds,” the government said in a release.

The council will also get $789,558 toward developing a voluntary “code of practice for farm production of Canadian grains.”

The guidelines to be developed “will help farmers encode the best practices to follow to be considered sustainable, for both market and public trust purposes,” the government said.

The codes for crops would “cover a range of topics, including fertilizer management, pesticide use, soil management, farm workers and protection of wildlife habitat, as well as food safety and work safety.”

‘Market readiness’

The Canada Grains Council, in operation since 1969, represents the crops value chain nationwide and is tasked with spearheading efforts to boost sales and use of Canadian grain in domestic and international markets.

Public money for the CGC’s insurance project will flow through AgriRisk Initiatives (ARI), a five-year, $55 million program to support development of new risk management tools through the federal/provincial; Canadian Agricultural Partnership funding framework.

The code of practice project will be backed via the federal AgriAssurance program, budgeted for up to $74 million over five years to help ag sector groups develop “systems, standards and tools that enable them to make credible, meaningful and verifiable claims about the health and safety of Canadian agricultural and agri-food products, and the manner in which they are produced.”

Codes of practice for production aren’t new to Canada’s ag sector; similar codes for care and handling of various types and breeds of livestock are today being developed and updated by the National Farm Animal Care Council, which was set up in 2005.

The $1.2 million total funding envelope announced Wednesday for the grains council is expected to help address “two key issues facing the sector: better risk management tools and market readiness,” Bibeau said in the government’s release.

“Despite Canada’s solid reputation worldwide as a high-quality and trustworthy provider of grain and oilseed products, we cannot take this for granted,” CGC president Tyler Bjornson said in the same release.

“Exploring new ways to help producers and industry address market access risks, as well as maintain consumer confidence that we are doing the right things to produce sustainable and safe food, are an essential part of our long-term strategy as a sector.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Grains sector backed to develop export rejection insurance appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

While many may consider this a victory, the question I pose in this article is did we win the war or just the battle? I suggest that we won the battle, and that it is just a matter of time before another Earls or A&W comes along and questions through its marketing practices how Canadian beef producers conduct business. The elephant in the room is how will beef producers react the next time and the time after that, particularly if the next company is a really big player like Walmart or McDonald’s?

To look at this issue more closely, let’s look at the decision by Earls’ executives. While not privy to corporate thinking, it appears to me that this business saw an opportunity to fill a niche that it felt consumers were demanding, specifically for beef that is certified humane. Emphasis on the word certified! They were right in stating that they would have to look long and hard in Canada to find a consistent source of certified humanely produced beef. Not to say we do not humanely treat our animals; anyone who knows anything about the industry knows that such a claim would be totally removed from the truth! Unfortunately most consumers are not as well tied into agricultural practices and increasingly are looking for more than verbal assurances that their food is safe, that animals are treated humanely and raised in an environmentally sustainable manner!

When I look at the website of the American company that Earls’ beef was to be sourced from, it offers a high-quality product that among its long list of brand requirements is a statement on humane treatment of animals. This company goes the additional step of having its production practices certified under standards of Humane Farm Animal Care (HFAC,) which is a non-profit charity. This organization has created a long list of standards that producers must adhere to in order to quality for certification. While one may not agree with everything listed, for the most part they reflect the common-sense values that the vast majority of Canadian beef producers uses when raising beef cattle and reflect many of the values that leaders of various beef organizations are trying to instil in Canada.

Consider for example the Canadian Code of Practice for Care and Handling of Beef Cattle released in 2013 through the National Farm Animal Care Council and the Verified Beef Production Program offered across the country through various provincial and national cattle organizations. Both lay out guiding principles for producing beef in a safe and humane fashion. They cover virtually the same areas of animal care and production that the American HFAC standards cover. The difference is that those American producers enrolled under HFAC are “certified,” while in Canada participation to a large extent is voluntary. Producers in VBP are verified and audited, however, the number of participating producers at this point is limited and sourcing a consistent supply of beef under this program from birth to slaughter would be challenging.

So how big an issue are we facing? Are calls for beef to be raised in a humane, environmentally sustainable manner a passing fad or the new reality? Will we see increasing demand by consumers (backed up through their spending practices) for certified food production practices? My gut feeling is that we are at just at the tip of the iceberg in this regard and that these programs will become increasingly prevalent with time. Accepting the status quo with regards to food production will no longer cut it with a large segment of society, particularly young people.

That is why initiatives such as the Canadian Round­table on Sustainable Beef are so important to the future of this industry. This multi-stakeholder initiative is working to develop a framework that will allow all players in the beef value chain (i.e. producers, processors, retailers) to produce and source beef that is verified as “sustainable.” Not only will this initiative define sustainable beef production with input from all stakeholders, it will develop for each sector of industry, sustainability production indicators that can be audited and verified. This vision which is available on the roundtable’s website is to have Canadian beef recognized globally as economically viable, environmentally sound and socially responsible. Attaining this vision will require widespread industry buy-in! The question is — are you up for the challenge?

Of course the alternative the next time a major chain questions how Canadian beef is produced is to respond, “I am not eating there anymore!” However, in the big picture, I am not sure such a response does much to help the future of the industry.

The post Is ‘I am not eating there anymore!’ the best response? appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Mo Jessa, president of Vancouver-based Earls, said Wednesday the company will instead begin to “work with local ranchers to build our supply of Alberta beef that meets our criteria” for animal care and treatment.

The company faced widespread criticism after announcing April 26 it would switch the beef supplier for all its 59 Canadian and seven U.S. restaurants to Kansas-based Creekstone Farms, a standard-bearer for the U.S.-based Certified Humane Beef certification program.

“We moved to a U.S. supplier as we thought they could supply all of our needs,” Jessa said in a release Wednesday. “It was a mistake not to include Canadian beef.”

Jessa noted the company has “deep roots” in the province with “many operations and employees here. Alberta has supported us. We need to support Alberta, especially in tough times.”

The company opened its first Earls restaurant in Edmonton in 1982 and now has over two dozen locations across the province.

Earls said Wednesday it is now “committed to sourcing as much beef as we can from Alberta and will work with cattle ranchers to build supply.”

In a notice to customers on its website, Earls emphasized it “stands by” its decision to offer its customers beef that has “never been treated with antibiotics or growth hormones and that meets specific, audited standards for animal care.”

The company said that when it set out to find a beef source with the quantity of cattle it needed, it had found one in Alberta, “but the supply was limited, so we found a supplier in the U.S. who could supply what we needed.”

Since then, Earls said Wednesday, customers have “told us that sourcing locally is very important” and the company has had ranchers “reach out to us to help supply us with product from Alberta.”

On its website, the company said it’s “had a lot of dialogue” with consumers and stakeholders over the past week and now wants to “make things right.”

The Canadian Cattlemen’s Association on Wednesday said it “will watch with interest as Earls reintroduces Canadian beef to its supply chain.”

The association said it “supports market differentiation for beef, provided marketing claims follow Canadian food labelling guidelines. These guidelines require that claims do not mislead or create an erroneous impression, including about the quality, healthfulness or safety of a product.”

Earls’ original decision last week had quickly come under fire across social media, where the #BoycottEarls hashtag circulated widely among farmers and others on Twitter.

Without naming the restaurant, the CCA on Sunday had issued a statement that Canadian animal care regulations and standards, including the national Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle, “can stand up to, and perhaps even exceed, any worldwide certifications or standards.”

Regulations and standards, the association said, “differ from certifications, which are simply a record of the production practices the majority of Canadian cattle producers are already doing.”

The national Code of Practice “covers everything from proper nutrition (and) treatments when cattle are sick, to proper handling and transport. It encourages the use of low-stress handling techniques, as well as pain mitigation and medication for stressful procedures.”

Methods developed by low-stress cattle handling experts “are used extensively in Canada,” the association said, citing experts such as Bud Williams and Dylan Biggs — as well as Temple Grandin, the famed U.S. expert with whom Earls’ management met ahead of its decision last week.

Also without naming the restaurant, the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef on Friday issued a statement that its stakeholder members are “working hard to set the framework for sustainable beef in Canada and welcome others to join us.”

The organization, set up in 2014 with the aim of defining and advancing sustainability in Canadian beef, said Friday it “encourages all retail and food service companies, supply chain stakeholders and other interested individuals and organizations to join this effort and support the production of homegrown Canadian beef that is continuously improving for the planet, people, animals and progress.”

Toronto-based group Animal Justice on Wednesday said the chain’s decision and subsequent retreat serves to highlight what the group alleged to be a lack of government oversight, standards and enforcement on animal welfare in the livestock sector.

“Earls’ public relations disaster makes it clear that consumers want standards, transparency and accountability right here in Canada,” lawyer Anna Pippus, the group’s director for farmed animal advocacy, said in a release. –– AGCanada.com Network

The post Earls retreats from U.S. beef sourcing appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.