Categories
News/Blog

New Canadian dairy industry standards released

Guidelines are not enough.

While the NFACC guidelines aim to address cruelty, the code’s reach is not absolute. Meaningful monitoring, enforcement, and penalties for industry stakeholders found guilty of animal abuse are still needed to ensure animals are protected.

Take action

More than 5,800 people commented on new dairy industry guidelines

Last year, the VHS and other animal organizations across Canada spoke out for animals during a consultation period on the National Farm Animal Care Council’s (NFACC) Dairy Cattle Code of Practice, which provides guidelines for the care of dairy cows on farms across Canada, and shared tips on how to call for much-needed improvements during the public comment period. Thousands of animal advocates and concerned consumers responded, and the Code received a record-setting 5,800+ comments! 

The NFACC has now released its updated Dairy Cattle Code of Practice. The strong public response during the public consultation prompted some positive changes, including stronger restrictions around abusive handling, changes to housing models, and a ban on branding. However, several areas of the Code still fall short of expectations. 

A veal calf from the dairy industry chained up during the Quebec winter. Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur \ We Animals Media.

Click or tap the headings below for more details on each section.

Calf housing – Pair/group housing to be required, but not until 2031 

A primary area of concern noted in the public consultation was around calf housing. Approximately 63% of farms currently keep dairy calves in individual housing. This lack of social and physical contact with other calves can cause significant stress for calves. Despite this, the new code continues to allow calves to be kept in individual housing until 2031, at which point they are to be housed in pairs or groups by 4 weeks old. The stressful industry practice of separating mothers and newly born calves was unaddressed in the new code.   

Cow housing – Continuous tethering to be phased out, but details needed around freedom of movement 

Currently, cows can be kept tethered in individual stalls and there has been no requirement for access to pasture, outdoors or a sheltered, bedded pen. Under the new code, continuous tethering will be prohibited by 2027, at which point cows must be provided “sufficient regular opportunity for freedom of movement”. What this means in practice is yet to be determined. 

No requirement for outdoor access 

The NFACC acknowledges that cows are “naturally motivated to access pasture and graze” and that “regular access to open outdoor areas or bedded packs improves hoof health, reduces the frequency and severity of injuries, and can reduce the occurrence of lameness”. Despite this, the new code does not require that cows be provided access to sheltered, bedded packs, exercise yards, or the outdoors.

No emergency plans required, despite recent disasters  

The public consultation period for the dairy code began just weeks after catastrophic flooding hit British Columbia in 2021. This emergency, along with the record-breaking heat waves from earlier that same year, claimed the lives of 1.3 million farmed animals and reiterated the need for emergency plans for farms. Shockingly, the new code fails to include any requirements around emergency planning.  

Compromised and lactating cows still allowed to be transported 

Transport is a particularly stressful process for farmed animals, especially for dairy cows who may be in poor condition after their milk production declines or who are ill or injured. Still, the new code allows compromised (e.g. mild lameness, not fully healed from a procedure) or still lactating cows to be transported, putting them at risk of further injury and suffering.  

Stronger language introduced around abusive handling 

The new code prohibits abusive handling, which it defines as including but not limited to “kicking, beating, striking, tail twisting, dragging, improper use of a prod, and forcefully pulling cattle by the tail, head, or neck.” 

The new Dairy Code of Practice can be read in full here (opens as a PDF).

Monitoring, enforcement and penalties needed 

To protect the well-being of dairy cows, the new Code of Practice must be paired with independent, proactive third-party oversight; enforcement; and effective penalties.

The 2021 undercover investigation of Cedar Valley Farms, a B.C.-based dairy farm, reiterates the importance of proactive monitoring to deter and catch cruelty violations. Footage from the farm revealed serious instances of illegal animal abuse. A former employee of Cedar Valley Farms, who worked there for four years, told media he’d repeatedly reported the abuse, but nothing changed.  

Take action

Update

This action has now ended. Thank you to the 4,381 advocates who used the quick action to call for meaningful changes for farmed animals. Please see the Current Campaigns page for more ways you can help farmed animals, including an action calling for widespread changes to protect animals raised and slaughtered for human use in the agriculture system.

Now is your chance to speak up for farmed animals! The B.C. government is currently conducting a review of the province’s farmed animal welfare framework. Use the quick action tool below to send a message to B.C.’s Minister of Agriculture. 

Help protect farmed animals

In December 2021, the VHS launched a campaign calling for greater protections for farmed animals in B.C. To date, more than 3,700 animal supporters have used the quick action tool to contact the Ministry of Agriculture calling for:

  • Government-mandated and proactively-enforced compliance with the National Farm Animal Care Council Codes of Practice
  • Publicly-available reports of independent, third party audits on farms
  • Consistent video surveillance monitoring on farms
  • Emergency planning to protect farmed animals in disasters
Back to original campaign

Please call on B.C.’s Premier and the Minister of Agriculture to take these important actions to better protect farmed animals from cruelty and suffering.

This action has now ended.

4,381 people used this tool to call for meaningful changes to protect farmed animals. Thank you for taking action.

See more campaigns
Categories
Opinion Editorial

Calves could be stuck in isolation until 2031 under new dairy industry guidelines

A version of this article was originally published in The Province.

Amid an onslaught of controversies surrounding the Canadian dairy industry, including a scandalous viral video of an Ontario farmer dumping milk down the drain, new guidelines for the care of dairy cows have been quietly released. 

Late last week, the National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) released its updated Dairy Cattle Code of Practice, which provides guidelines for the care of dairy cows on farms across Canada. The Code reportedly received a record-setting number of comments from more than 5,800 individuals. Although a strong public response prompted some positive changes, several areas of the Code still fall short of expectations. 

During the public comment period on the Code of Practice, one of the sections that received the strongest response was that on calf housing.  

It’s easy to see why; like other social animals, calves thrive with interaction and physical touch. Most human parents are familiar with the importance of cuddling to a baby’s development. Like human children, calves who are deprived of physical contact experience stress, slower growth, weakened immune systems, and lower welfare. Conversely, research shows that “pair or group housed calves show improved cognitive development, perform more play behaviours, and are less reactive to novelty”. 

A 2018 study found that 63% of farms in Canada reared dairy calves in individual housing. It is a promising step that the NFACC has acknowledged in the new Code of Practice the harms that this can cause, as well as the many benefits of social housing for calves.  

Unfortunately, the new regulations pave a long road to change. The updated Code of Practice will continue to permit the isolated housing of calves until 2031. This prolonged regulation shift will put millions of calves at risk of being housed individually over the next eight years, denying young calves the ability to engage in their natural herding instincts during their formative months.  

Perhaps most shocking is the continued absence of required emergency planning.  

The public comment period for the Dairy Cattle Code of Practice launched November 29, 2021, while rural communities in B.C. were still reeling from the impacts of disastrous flooding. The floods claimed the lives of approximately 640,000 farmed animals in B.C., including about 420 dairy cattle. Farmers, veterinarians, volunteers, and community members scrambled to evacuate and house thousands of animals, as many were trapped for days standing in deep, murky water.  

The Code recommends that farms develop a plan for evacuating cattle in the event of an emergency, but has no requirements around emergency planning. 

Other concerns that remain unresolved by the updated guidelines include the continued use of electric prods, the stressful separation of cows from their newly born calves, the lack of required outdoor access, and the transportation of cows who are compromised or lactating. 

There is some good news – the new Code explicitly prohibits abusive handling, which it defines as “kicking, beating, striking, tail twisting, dragging, improper use of a prod, and forcefully pulling cattle by the tail, head, or neck”. 

Avoiding many of these techniques was previously only considered a recommended best practice, but recent controversies have prompted a public cry for accountability. In 2021, the industry was subject to public scrutiny when news coverage revealed disturbing footage of dairy cows being violently beaten, kicked, and dragged at Cedar Valley Farms in Abbotsford. 

While the NFACC guidelines aim to address some of the systemic cruelty highlighted in undercover investigations like the one at Cedar Valley, the Code’s reach is not absolute. Meaningful monitoring, enforcement, and penalties for industry stakeholders found guilty of animal abuse are still needed to ensure animals are protected. 

The NFACC’s codes of practice are typically only updated every ten years, meaning that for better or worse, dairy cows will likely be stuck under these insufficient guidelines for the next decade. Meanwhile, consumers can find a growing selection of plant-based alternatives that increasingly rival the taste, texture, and price of dairy – without the suffering. 

Categories
News/Blog

Public feedback needed on dairy farm practices

Update

The comment period for the “Dairy Cattle Code of Practice” has now ended. The updated code is set to be released in 2023. Thank you for helping to ensure animals’ well-being is considered in this consultation.

The National Farm Animal Care Council’s (NFACC) “Codes of Practice” serve as guidelines for the care and handling of animals in Canada’s animal agriculture industry. The “Dairy Cattle Code of Practice” was last updated in 2009 and since that time cruelty cases, as recently as late last year at a B.C.-based dairy farm, have demonstrated serious systemic non-compliance in the dairy industry. 

NFACC is considering changes to the Code of Practice and is asking for public feedback. Your input is needed prior to the January 27th deadline to help advocate for stronger protections for cows on dairy farms.

We’ve compiled a summary of 13 key points below – please be sure to submit constructive comments in your own words. Do not copy and paste the key points below, as duplicate comments will not be considered.  

Participate in the “Dairy Cattle Code of Practice” public comment period before the January 27th deadline.

Note: If you don’t have time to comment on the specific sections, you can choose to leave general comments by clicking on the “general comments on the code” section, at the end of the survey

13 key points:

  • Section 1: Training – Consider sharing about how previous cruel handling of cows on Canadian dairy farms (e.g. such as kicking, punching, and beating animals, as seen in the following cases: Chilliwack Cattle Sales in 2014, Cedar Valley Farms in 2021) reflects a need for stronger requirements around supervision of staff, animal welfare training, and a process for staff to report concerns that ensures accountability.
A veal calf from the dairy industry chained up during the Quebec winter. Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur \ We Animals Media.
  • Section 2.2.1: Calves (Pre-Weaning) – Currently, calves are commonly kept in individual housing and are only required to be housed in a way that allows them to easily stand up, lie down, turn around and adopt a normal resting posture, with visual contact with other calves. In your comments, ask for a requirement for a full, immediate ban on tethering of calves. There should also be an immediate requirement that calves have access to an area outside of a hutch and are housed in social groups with other calves as young as possible and not later than 3 weeks of age. 
  • Section 2.2.3: Lactating and Dry Cows – Currently, cows can be kept tied in individual stalls and there is no requirement for access to pasture, outdoors or a covered, bedded pen. Share in your own words that tie-stall housing prevents freedom of movement and that a deadline should be set to phase out tie stalls as soon as possible for lactating and dry cows, as well as for heifers. Ask that housing be required to allow daily freedom of movement, exercise and social interactions year-round. Ask that pasture or outdoor access, as weather permits, and daily access to a large, covered bedded pen that allows for exercise, rest, and socialization also be a requirement. 
A calf and mother dairy cow.
A calf and mother at Sanctuaire pour animaux de ferme de l’Estrie in Quebec. Photo: Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur We Animals Media.
  • Section 2.3.1: Calving Areas – Currently, cows can be kept in stalls (including in tie stalls) while giving birth. In your comments, ask that a quicker deadline for calving in loose housed pens or pastures be required. The separation of cows and their calves soon after birth is also not addressed in this section. Separation is distressing for both the cow and calf and research shows health and social benefits when kept together. Research shows that there are active, modern farms using cow-calf systems that allow mothers and young to be together. Share in your own words why the separation of cows and their young is a concern for you as a consumer and that the industry needs to address this issue and move away from this practice.   
  • Section 2.5.1: Electric Trainers – Ask for a requirement that prohibits electric trainers, as using an electric shock device to “train” cows to urinate and defecate outside of the stall bed poses welfare issues.
  • Section 2.8: Bedding Management – In your own words, express your support for the requirement that cattle must have a resting surface with bedding, as research shows that large amounts of bedding is a crucial welfare improvement. Ask that specific bedding depth requirements be added. 
  • Section 2.10: Pasture and Exercise Yards – Currently, there is no requirement that cows have access to pasture or outdoors. Ask that pasture or outdoor access, as weather permits, and daily access to a large, covered bedded pen that allows for exercise, rest, and socialization be a requirement. In your own words, highlight one of more of the following benefits: more freedom of movement; exercise opportunities; ability to socialize and engage in more natural behaviours; reduced risk of lameness and other health problems.  
A flooded dairy farm in Abbotsford BC.
A dairy farm sits just above the floodwaters in Abbotsford, BC. Photo: Nick Schafer \ We Animals Media.
  • Section 2.11: Emergencies and Safety – In 2021, approximately 1.3 million farmed animals in B.C. died during record-breaking heat waves and flooding. This reflects the need for stronger emergency preparedness and plans for farms. Ask for required emergency planning that includes a realistic and achievable strategy to ensure animals can safely be evacuated from farms in an emergency.
  • Section 4.1 Handling, Moving and Restraining Cattle – In your own words, express your support for the requirement that prohibits the use of electric prods.  
  • Section 4.1.1: Additional Considerations when moving or handling down cattle Ask for a requirement that electric prods also be banned for use on “down” cows who appear unable to get up. Instead, assisting a down animal should include the use of more humane tools when appropriate, such as full body slings and transport mats. Express your support for the requirement that prohibits down cattle from being moved by hoisting by chain, dragging or lifting without adequate support. Again, here you can highlight how previous cruelty cases have showcased mistreatment and mishandling of animals and that this requires stronger staff training and supervision related to moving and handling animals. 
  • Section 5.3: Caring for Sick, Injured or Compromised Animals – Express your support for the requirement that cattle in pain (from a condition or procedure) must be provided prompt pain control. Ask that this requirement be elaborated on to include the use of local anesthesia (to prevent acute pain) and a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (to reduce longer lasting pain)
A close-up of a dairy cow's eye in a transport truck.
A dairy cow is transported. Photo: Louise Jorgensen / We Animals Media.
  • Section 6.1.1: Fitness for transport – Currently, compromised animals (e.g. those with mild lameness, those who have not fully healed after a procedure) can still be transported. Dairy cows sent to auction or slaughter after their milk production declines are particularly vulnerable during transport. Ask that it be required that unfit and compromised animals are not allowed to be transported, as it poses a serious welfare concern.  
  • 6.1.3: Preparing Cattle for Transportation – Currently, cows are commonly transported while still lactating, putting them at risk for udder issues, including mastitis, due to a change in their milking routine. Ask for a requirement that cows are not lactating at the time of transport.  

Note: clicking the button below will open the link in a new tab. You can still return to this tab to review the key points.

Categories
News/Blog

Speak up for better protections for farmed animals

Please ask the B.C. government to introduce third party auditing; video monitoring systems; and emergency plans to better protect farmed animals!  

Email the B.C. government now

Recent news coverage shares disturbing footage from an Abbotsford-based dairy, Cedar Valley Farms, showing dairy cows being violently beaten, kicked and dragged. This case is a recent example of long-standing issues within Canada’s animal agriculture system. In the last few years, there have been several high-profile undercover investigations in B.C. alone that have documented egregious animal cruelty. 

Concerningly, rather than addressing the cruelty issues taking place within the industry, governments have begun introducing anti-whistleblower legislation (commonly referred to as ‘ag-gag’ laws) which effectively deters undercover investigations from taking place.

The VHS and other animal protection groups are calling for transparency and accountability within the animal agriculture industry. Specifically, change is needed to have government-mandated and proactively-enforced compliance with the National Farm Animal Care Council Codes of Practice, as well as third party auditing and video surveillance systems on farms across B.C.

In addition, the recent floods, along with the 2021 heat dome and wildfires, reiterate the importance of protections for farmed animals during disasters and emergencies. More than 651,000 farmed animals perished in the heat dome and more than 640,000 more are reported to have died in the recent floods. Emergency planning must include a feasible strategy for urgent animal evacuations to prevent the kind of mass suffering we have seen.

Take action

  1. Please join us in calling on B.C.’s Premier and the Minister of Agriculture to take these important actions to better protect farmed animals from cruelty and suffering.

2. You can raise awareness of this issue by sharing this recent op-ed featured in the Daily Hive.

Content warning: the op-ed contains photos and descriptions of animal cruelty in the dairy industry.

3. You can make personal changes to take a stand against dairy cruelty. The blog linked below highlights a few staff favourite dairy-free tips and products!

4. This t-shirt, which features a half cow and half dog face, reminds us to be kind to every kind. All proceeds go toward creating a kinder world for animals.

With your help, we can see a change for the better for dairy cows and other farmed animals.

Categories
Opinion Editorial

It’s time to boycott the dairy industry

Article originally published on Daily Hive.

The clock has been ticking in the dairy industry for a while, and a recent public scandal may be the time bomb that draws the dairy milk era to a close.

Footage leaked by Animal Justice shows cows being ruthlessly beaten and tormented allegedly at Cedar Valley Farms, a dairy farm in Abbotsford.

In the heartbreaking video, workers hit cornered cows in the face with canes; mother cows wail hauntingly and are kicked in the face by employees as their babies are roughly grabbed by their fragile legs, tossed into wheelbarrows, and rolled away to the slaughterhouse or to be raised for the same cruel fate.

While this blatant cruelty is the worst I have seen, it’s unfortunately nothing new. Animal abuse and suffering are endemic in the dairy industry. To fully understand why that is, we need to go back to the last headline-making video leak from a BC dairy farm.

In 2014, hidden cameras at Canada’s largest dairy farm in Chilliwack revealed horrific abuses. Video footage showed cows being punched, kicked, and beaten with chains and rakes; left to suffer with open wounds and without desperately needed veterinary care; and lifted up by their necks using chains and tractors.

In the ensuing public outcry, the eight employees involved were fired and many faced animal cruelty charges.

The incident prompted a more in-depth look into the dairy industry as a whole. Soon after, the National Farm Animal Care Council’s (NFACC) Code of Practice, which outlines appropriate treatment of the animals used on farms, was incorporated into legislation in BC. The industry also implemented a system of inspections to ensure farmers were complying with the regulations.

In droves, they weren’t.

Within the first 18 months of the new system being implemented, 27 percent of farms failed the inspections and required corrective action; 10 percent were still deemed non-compliant upon their follow-up inspection. Findings described farms with inadequate space for cows, including during the stressful birthing process; extremely limited access to feed troughs; wet and dirty pens; and cows showing such severe signs of lameness that they had to be euthanized.

At the time, industry leaders placated questioning consumers with supposed reasons for the non-compliance: farm owners simply didn’t know about the regulations or new methods. They floated goals of improved education, spot checks, and the ever-effective “peer pressure” to improve conditions.

It has been seven years since the dairy industry began conducting inspections with the goal of improving consumers’ confidence in the food they purchase. By now, the typical dairy buyer would expect the industry to have ironed out any kinks in their system. The most recent video leak has thrown a wrench directly into that carefully curated trust.

This year’s footage from Cedar Valley Farms is yet another reminder of what happens when sentient animals are treated as commodities for profit – “cash cows” in the most literal sense of the word.

It has revealed to consumers that cruelty is still rampant, that an organic label on an animal-based product doesn’t necessarily indicate an ethical purchase, and that ultimately the dairy industry cannot be trusted to self-regulate.

Consumer trust is hard to build when you can’t know if the animals whose bodies produced the milk were treated with respect. The milk used for commercial dairy products is typically “pooled” in BC, meaning if you purchase products like cheese, yogurt, ice cream, sour cream, or butter from the grocery store, it’s virtually impossible to tell which farm they came from.

There is also increasing awareness about the suffering inherent in the production of dairy. Cows don’t produce milk all the time; they produce it for their young, like humans and any other mammal. In order to ensure a consistent milk supply, the dairy industry repeatedly impregnates cows and removes their calves as early as just after birth. Calves reared without their mothers experience unnatural behavioural changes and drink far less milk from a bottle than they would otherwise. Their mothers experience an increased risk of mastitis when suckling is not allowed. Then, when the cows are no longer productive, they are typically sent to be slaughtered for meat between two and six years old. Their life expectancy outside of the industry is 15 to 20 years.

The dairy industry has been given endless chances to change for the better, and they have failed to do so again and again. Of course they have – there is money to be made in the status quo.

What this industry fails to realize is that humans do not need animal-based dairy. It is not a necessary part of the human diet, and all the nutrients it provides are found in other foods. With the increasing shift toward plant-based eating, there is a wider variety of delicious animal-free alternatives than ever.

Time is up for the dairy industry’s endless journey of supposed self-improvement. In a consumer society, only consumer action will spark a change. Only when people start reaching for oat milk instead of 2% or canola oil instead of butter will we see a breakthrough in the treatment of farmed animals. It’s time to vote with our wallets. It’s time to boycott animal-based dairy products.

Categories
animal welfare Dairy News/Blog Promoted

Still no charges in dairy cruelty case

It has now been one year since the BC SPCA recommended criminal animal cruelty charges against eight employees at Chilliwack Cattle Sales, Canada’s largest dairy producer, and many months since provincial animal cruelty charges were recommended against the company itself. Yet, Crown prosecutors have still yet to come to a decision about laying charges.

For its part, the BC SPCA responded quickly, conducting a raid on the facility and recommending animal cruelty charges within days of receiving video and written evidence covertly obtained by an employee over the course of four weeks last spring.

The delay is unusual and concerning. Prosecutors have been presented with incontrovertible evidence of animals being routinely whipped, kicked, and punched in their faces, bodies, and testicles. Still more animals were documented on video suffering from untreated gruesome injuries and infections.

Internationally respected bovine expert and veterinarian Dr. James Reynolds commented that the video depicted “the most severe cases of animal abuse I have ever seen in 32 years.”

Worse, the company itself appears to have been complicit in the abuse and neglect, despite attempting to distance itself from the employees during the public outcry that followed the footage’s release. The whistleblower stated that he repeatedly brought his concerns to management, which failed to act; several more fired employees came forward to say that they were unfairly taking the fall for a company that created and condoned the apparent widespread culture of cruelty.

Yet, Chilliwack Cattle Sales continues to operate with impunity, milking a staggering 3500 cows three times each day.

It did not take long for the BC Milk Marketing Board to act. By last September, the regulator had made the standards in the national dairy code of practice mandatory, effective virtually immediately. Such actions by provincial regulators are all the more important in Canada’s supply-managed dairy industry, where milk is pooled and dairy processors cannot set animal welfare standards for their suppliers—a tactic commonly used in other countries.

This case presented a unique opportunity for prosecutors to take farmed animal cruelty as seriously as it ought to be. We killed 740 million animals for food in 2014, making farmed animals by far the largest population of animals under human care (by contrast, there are about 15 million pets in Canada). However, these pigs, chickens, turkeys, and cows are kept largely in windowless sheds on private property, entirely shielded from the scrutiny of law enforcement, which is unable to inspect farms without first receiving a complaint from the public.

Unsurprisingly, on the rare occasion that complaints about farmed animal cruelty are received, they come from neighbours concerned about neglect on small operations, where animals may be visible. Employees at factory farms are unlikely to report abuse when their livelihood is at stake, or when they may be reporting on their friends—or themselves.

In the case of Chilliwack Cattle Sales, however, not only was an employee able to obtain evidence of illegal animal cruelty, he was able to actually document malicious abuses while they were being committed, rather than simply after-the-fact conditions of neglect.

Although animal cruelty laws in this country are regularly criticized for being weak, the reality is that provincial and federal law are clear that animal abuse and neglect are illegal. National codes of practice, created with government funding, set standards of care that arguably form a part of the law.

However, these laws are meaningless without adequate enforcement. Barriers to enforcement admittedly do exist—farmed animals are out of sight, law enforcement only acts in response to public complaints, and cruelty laws are mostly enforced by private bodies that are underfunded (the BC SPCA, for example, receives no government funding and must fundraise for all of its operating expenses, from sheltering animals to investigating cruelty).

But when a robust file of evidence virtually falls into prosecutors’ laps along with charge recommendations from law enforcement, farmed animals at last have an opportunity for swift justice.

Let’s hope the concerning one-year delay ultimately results in meaningful prosecutorial action against Chilliwack Cattle Sales. Anything less sends the message that illegal animal cruelty is a permitted ingredient in Canada’s food supply.