This is a story that starts with a fundamental but divisive question. Who should make the rules about how farm animals can and can’t be raised, and how they should be handled and slaughtered in Canadian agriculture? Is it completely up to the farmers themselves?
Or is it up to consumers to choose how they want their food raised? After all, customers are always right, aren’t they?
These are difficult questions to answer. Yes, there has been a collective attempt across livestock sectors to come up with codes of practice that everyone appears ready and willing to agree on. For instance, no one wants to see animals die of thirst or hunger. No one wants to see them transported extremely long distances without some rest and access to water.
Read Also
Producers aren’t panicking over tariffs and trade threats
The Manitoba Canola Growers Association (MCGA) surveyed its members this spring to get a sense of how trade uncertainty was…
But not all questions are so easy. The intensification of animal agriculture over the past 40 to 50 years has brought with it practices where consensus is far more difficult to build, and where opinion varies widely on what constitutes cruelty and what is and isn’t ethical.
Two examples spring immediately to mind. One is gestation crates. The use of gestation crates in swine facilities has been targeted in many jurisdictions by animal welfare groups. The Winnipeg Humane Society, for instance, has long been running its “Quit Stalling” campaign.
The other example is battery cages for laying hens. “Battery cages” refers to how laying hens are currently
PHOTO CREDIT: MANITOBA EGG FARMERS
housed, at least in the vast majority of laying barns. The birds are kept in metal cages where each hen typically has a little less than 70 square inches of space. The birds have access to feed and water but within these cages, there is little opportunity for them to exhibit what might be called “normal behaviour.” They can’t perch, they can’t go to a nesting area to lay their eggs and they can’t scratch or peck for food.
Kurt Siemens is an egg producer just outside the town of Rosenort, 40 minutes south of Winnipeg in the Red River Valley. Siemens has been involved with the Manitoba Egg Farmers (MEF) since the mid-’90s, was chair of its board for several years and now represents Manitoba at the Egg Farmers of Canada.
Even if you don’t farm but you have passed through Manitoba lately, there’s a good chance you’ll recognize Kurt and his family from the MEF’s public relations campaign — “We’re egg farmers and we love what we do.”
That campaign, Siemens explains, came about as a result of MEF research indicating that the public trusts farmers. In that context, putting actual producers front and centre, making them the face of the industry, creating a direct link between them and the public makes a great deal of sense.
Public opinion, as it relates to a supply-managed food item like eggs, can have a huge impact on the sustainability of Manitoba’s egg and pullet farms. Everything from prices to environmental regulations and animal welfare standards has a public or societal aspect, so leveraging the trust that the public has for farmers is a key strategy for managing the risk associated with producing eggs now and in the future.
“But you need to show that you deserve that trust,” Siemens says. “A lot of consumers care about where their food comes from.”
That realization led the MEF to make an important decision last fall. There is a regulation in Manitoba that requires any new allocation of quota to be split 50:50 between new entrants and established producers. When the MEF received a fairly large allocation in the fall of 2009, it decided that the three 6,000-bird lots that were earmarked for new entrants would come with an extra stipulation, namely that the facilities built to house the birds needed to be outfitted with enhanced cages.
Enhanced (or enriched cages, as they are sometimes called) retain metal cages, like traditional barns, but let hens exhibit more of their natural instincts. The birds have more room, and there are perches, scratch pads and nesting areas where they can lay their eggs.
The enriched cage system has evolved in response to the “Five Freedoms,” a list of animal rights that was first developed in Europe in the mid-’60s and that was revised in 1993. These state that animals in production agriculture should enjoy:
1. Freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition
2. Freedom from discomfort
3. Freedom from pain, injury and disease
4. Freedom to express normal behaviour
5. Freedom from fear and distress “I have conventional cages in my own
barn,” Siemens says. “And I put a lot of pride and effort into ensuring that my
“ You Need To Show That You Deserve That Trust. A Lot Of Consumers Care About Where Their Food Comes From.”
— Kurt Siemens
chickens are well cared for. The one freedom that I am not meeting is the fourth.”
And neither are the majority of the egg producers in Manitoba and across Canada.
Requiring new entrants to use enriched cages was relatively easy. Getting the entire industry to move in that direction was a whole other matter. In the world of ag politics, leadership has a couple of different aspects. First of all, it means looking into the future and determining where the industry has to go. The MEF board of directors was convinced of the importance of recognizing the Five Freedoms but needed time to work through a definitive policy statement.
“We’re all farmers,” Siemens says. “We would have a discussion and talk about how we could get this done. Then we would go back to our own operations and think about it as we collected eggs and walked through our barns. We took close to seven months to get the wording on the policy to say exactly what we wanted.”
But leadership goes beyond the board table in an organization where most people know each other and are quite familiar with each others’ operations.
“When you take on a leadership role within a producers’ organization, you realize that people are watching you,” Siemens says. “When I recaged my facility in 2002, I went from a stacked system — which was the industry norm at the time — to a stair-step system. It was more expensive but I wanted to provide my birds with the best facilities that I could. People see this and they understand that you’re in it for the long haul.”
The other part of change management that Siemens clearly understands is accommodating people’s concerns and not losing their support by moving too fast.
Enriched cages are not cheap. Siemens estimates the added capital cost to be somewhere in the order of 25 to 30 per cent. Given the cost of production formula that is in place for setting the price of supply-managed commodities like eggs, these added costs will eventually be reflected in what farmers receive for a dozen eggs.
But forcing all producers to make the transition in a short time period would have inevitably pushed some of them out of the industry, hastening a trend to further consolidation in a sector where numbers are already small. (Manitoba has a total of 168 egg and pullet producers.)
Not surprisingly, a cautious approach was taken. Here is the carefully worded policy, as released at the MEF’s annual meeting in March 2010:
“MEF is committed to the care and well-being of our laying hens. As a result of advancements in behavioural and welfare research, it is recognized and accepted that husbandry systems for hens should provide for the Five Freedoms. After 2018, all new housing facilities for laying hens in Manitoba will be required to meet this policy.”
So yes, the policy statement is unequivocal in its support for the Five Freedoms and most notably, for the need to provide laying hens with the “freedom to express normal behaviour.” But, at the same time, it does not force immediate change on the industry. Eight years from now, there will still be conventional cages in laying hen barns in Manitoba. All new facilities, however — including those older barns that will have undergone major retrofits — will be required to have enriched cages.
Siemens believes that the right balance was struck. Producers expressed some reservations initially but were generally accepting of the policy once it was fully explained to them.
But has it succeeded it strengthening the relationship of trust that the MEF wants to maintain with the buying public?
That question was put to Bill McDonald, the executive director of the Winnipeg Humane Society (WHS). The WHS is an avid supporter of the Five Freedoms. McDonald is very pleased to see them recognized in the MEF’s policy. He believes it is an important step in demonstrating that egg producers are serious about animal welfare.
But it is only a first step. Enriched cages, McDonald says, are better than conventional ones. But they are not as good as the free-range types of facilities already mandated in various jurisdictions and that the WHS believes will eventually be the norm here as well.
WHS is networking with agencies that have been successful in getting laws passed banning battery cages and gestation crates, including the Humane Society of the United States. Several states, including very populous ones like California, Florida and Michigan, have set out aggressive time frames for their complete elimination.
The animal welfare movement has also been increasingly successful in convincing food giants like McDonald’s to only buy humanely raised products. The McDonald’s USA website, for example, boasts of “support(ing) suppliers who are phasing out sow gestation crates in our supply chain” and “continuously monitor(ing) research related to specific animal welfare practices (e. g. broiler stunning, layer hen housing, and sow housing).”
In 2007, Maple Leaf Foods here in Canada announced that it was following the lead of the U. S. industry and “respond(ing) to consumer opinion as well as the science… in phasing out the use of sow gestation stalls in favour of group housing… at all Company-owned hog production operations within the next 10 years.”
McDonald also points to public opinion research done by WHS showing 60 per cent of Manitobans feel that penning animals, if it prevents them from turning around or extending their wings or limbs, is a cruel practice that should be stopped. The percentage is higher among Winnipeg residents (68 per cent) and is as high as 70 per cent among women.
McDonald believes the days of confinement practices like battery cages and gestation crates are numbered. If the laws of the land don’t get them, he says, public pressure will. CG
“ You Need To Show That You Deserve That Trust. A Lot Of Consumers Care About Where Their Food Comes From.”
— Kurt Siemens
chickens are well cared for. The one freedom that I am not meeting is the fourth.”
And neither are the majority of the egg producers in Manitoba and across Canada.
Requiring new entrants to use enriched cages was relatively easy. Getting the entire industry to move in that direction was a whole other matter. In the world of ag politics, leadership has a couple of different aspects. First of all, it means looking into the future and determining where the industry has to go. The MEF board of directors was convinced of the importance of recognizing the Five Freedoms but needed time to work through a definitive policy statement.
“We’re all farmers,” Siemens says. “We would have a discussion and talk about how we could get this done. Then we would go back to our own operations and think about it as we collected eggs and walked through our barns. We took close to seven months to get the wording on the policy to say exactly what we wanted.”
But leadership goes beyond the board table in an organization where most people know each other and are quite familiar with each others’ operations.
“When you take on a leadership role within a producers’ organization, you realize that people are watching you,” Siemens says. “When I recaged my facility in 2002, I went from a stacked system — which was the industry norm at the time — to a stair-step system. It was more expensive but I wanted to provide my birds with the best facilities that I could. People see this and they understand that you’re in it for the long haul.”
The other part of change management that Siemens clearly understands is accommodating people’s concerns and not losing their support by moving too fast.
Enriched cages are not cheap. Siemens estimates the added capital cost to be somewhere in the order of 25 to 30 per cent. Given the cost of production formula that is in place for setting the price of supply-managed commodities like eggs, these added costs will eventually be reflected in what farmers receive for a dozen eggs.
But forcing all producers to make the transition in a short time period would have inevitably pushed some of them out of the industry, hastening a trend to further consolidation in a sector where numbers are already small. (Manitoba has a total of 168 egg and pullet producers.)
Not surprisingly, a cautious approach was taken. Here is the carefully worded policy, as released at the MEF’s annual meeting in March 2010:
“MEF is committed to the care and well-being of our laying hens. As a result of advancements in behavioural and welfare research, it is recognized and accepted that husbandry systems for hens should provide for the Five Freedoms. After 2018, all new housing facilities for laying hens in Manitoba will be required to meet this policy.”
So yes, the policy statement is unequivocal in its support for the Five Freedoms and most notably, for the need to provide laying hens with the “freedom to express normal behaviour.” But, at the same time, it does not force immediate change on the industry. Eight years from now, there will still be conventional cages in laying hen barns in Manitoba. All new facilities, however — including those older barns that will have undergone major retrofits — will be required to have enriched cages.
Siemens believes that the right balance was struck. Producers expressed some reservations initially but were generally accepting of the policy once it was fully explained to them.
But has it succeeded it strengthening the relationship of trust that the MEF wants to maintain with the buying public?
That question was put to Bill McDonald, the executive director of the Winnipeg Humane Society (WHS). The WHS is an avid supporter of the Five Freedoms. McDonald is very pleased to see them recognized in the MEF’s policy. He believes it is an important step in demonstrating that egg producers are serious about animal welfare.
But it is only a first step. Enriched cages, McDonald says, are better than conventional ones. But they are not as good as the free-range types of facilities already mandated in various jurisdictions and that the WHS believes will eventually be the norm here as well.
WHS is networking with agencies that have been successful in getting laws passed banning battery cages and gestation crates, including the Humane Society of the United States. Several states, including very populous ones like California, Florida and Michigan, have set out aggressive time frames for their complete elimination.
The animal welfare movement has also been increasingly successful in convincing food giants like McDonald’s to only buy humanely raised products. The McDonald’s USA website, for example, boasts of “support(ing) suppliers who are phasing out sow gestation crates in our supply chain” and “continuously monitor(ing) research related to specific animal welfare practices (e. g. broiler stunning, layer hen housing, and sow housing).”
In 2007, Maple Leaf Foods here in Canada announced that it was following the lead of the U. S. industry and “respond(ing) to consumer opinion as well as the science… in phasing out the use of sow gestation stalls in favour of group housing… at all Company-owned hog production operations within the next 10 years.”
McDonald also points to public opinion research done by WHS showing 60 per cent of Manitobans feel that penning animals, if it prevents them from turning around or extending their wings or limbs, is a cruel practice that should be stopped. The percentage is higher among Winnipeg residents (68 per cent) and is as high as 70 per cent among women.
McDonald believes the days of confinement practices like battery cages and gestation crates are numbered. If the laws of the land don’t get them, he says, public pressure will. CG
