Don't Fear Your Food: Agriculture and the Environment

I spent weeks trying to figure out a way to write this blog that will satisfy both me and my readers.  I want very much to thoroughly address every single aspect of agriculture's interaction with the environment.  However, I have discovered that to do so would be a huge job.  I also think that I would bore my readers by talking about minute details they may or may not fully understand.  So, I have decided that with this topic, and perhaps with others, I will speak in broad terms and talk about the motives behind actions, rather than talking about details.  I will, however, provide some links to further reading, should my readers want to know more about the topic.

A while ago, I watched a documentary called "Cowspiracy".  I had an inkling that this documentary would threaten the agriculture industry in some way, so I was wary about watching it.  However, I know that if I hide from the concerns that non-farmers have about agriculture, I will never be able to address those concerns.  I will not be an ostrich, hiding my head in the sand, so I watched the documentary.  There were several concerns brought up by the producer, but the over-arching issue that drove the film project was the impact of animal agriculture on the environment.  I can't respond to everything that was brought up unless I write a very thick book on the subject, but I would like to talk a bit about agriculture's impact on the environment.

There is no doubt that agriculture is deeply linked to the environment.  Every production activity performed by a farmer impacts the surrounding environment in some way, whether we are putting something into the environment, taking something out, or modifying the landscape for some project.  This is true for both crop production and animal agriculture.

Farmers' interactions with the environment are largely driven by economic benefit.  When farmers take care of the land that they farm, it is because they recognize that taking care of the land now will lead to increased or sustained economic benefits in the future.  When farmers don't take care of their land properly, it is because they cannot see the future benefits that will arise from the costs incurred today.  Allow me to illustrate this with two different (very simplified) scenarios.

Scenario 1: Crop Farming
In crop farming, soil health is a major factor in crop yield, and crop yield has a direct link to profits for the farmer.  A farmer who wants to take care of his soil in order to sustain a high crop yield in the future (or to increase crop yields) might test his soil, put nitrogen and other fertilizers into the soil to replace what the crop took out, chop the straw and leave it on the field as organic matter, use reduced tillage techniques, and use other practices to sustain or improve soil health.  Another farmer may look at his options and decide that a soil test is too expensive or takes too long to do properly.  He may decide that fertilizer is too expensive, or that he wants to bale his straw to sell as bedding.  The new equipment required for reduce tillage seeding may also seem like too much of an expense.  All of these expenses might become barriers to the farmer, so he will look like the one who cares less about the environment, even though both farmers were equally driven by economic benefits and costs.

Scenario 2: Cattle Ranching
In cattle ranching, access to good drinking water is key.  Studies are finding that cleaner drinking water causes increased gains in cattle and keeps them healthier.  A farmer who wants to take extra good care of his cows might fence off access to streams, lakes, and other water sources, and have the water pumped into tanks from which the cows can drink.  The water is clean because the cows aren't getting into their drinking water.  The riparian areas around the water sources get an added benefit, too, though.  The trees, shrubs, and other plants grow back along the banks of the streams (or lakes, etc.), which take pollutants out of the water, making it cleaner.  I could go on about the benefits of restoring riparian areas, but I'll just direct you to the "Further Reading" section.  A different farmer might look at the costs and time associated with fencing off potentially large areas, installing new watering systems, and (in some cases) training the cows to use the new watering system, and decide that the small gains aren't worth it right now.  As a result, the riparian area will continue to be knocked down by the cattle, the banks will erode into the stream, causing it to be shallower, and the cattle will be drinking dirtier water.

In each of these scenarios, each farmer is motivated by financial cost or gain, not necessarily by the need to care for the environment.  Don't get me wrong; most farmers do care about the environment and enjoy spending time in nature (for example, I just saw a fisher in the bush when I was hauling bales this morning - it was SO cool!!).  However, farms are businesses - big businesses with tiny margins.  Farmers have to make decisions based on economics.  Fortunately, when we look towards the future to see what can be gained from decisions and practices that benefit the environment, we can usually see that those decisions and practices also benefit our bank accounts.  Yes, there are things that the farming community needs to work on in terms of how we care for the environment.  However, we need non-farmers to give us the chance to figure out how we can benefit both the individual farm and the environment.  Without our bank accounts, we farmers can't do anything to benefit the environment, because we wouldn't have our farms.  Please keep that in mind when you have questions about how agriculture impacts the environment.  No one has all of the answers, but we are working on finding the best way to produce different types of food on different types of land in ways that benefit both the food industry and the environment.

For Further Reading
Cattle Producer's Guide to Managing Riparian Zones
The Effect of Clean Drinking Water on Cattle
General Soil Health and Soil Testing Information
Video on the Economic Benefits of Soil Health
A Picture of What Happens When Farmers Don't Care for the Environment

Don't Fear Your Food: Decoding the Marketing Hype in the Grocery Store

The more I scroll through social media, listen to the radio, walk through the grocery store, and generally interact with the world and the people in it, the more I hear and see some key words and phrases.  Over time, I have discovered that consumers assume that certain phrases have meanings, but those assumed meanings are not accurate, and marketers take full advantage of the average consumer's lack of expertise.  To help you understand the marketing labels that are floating around, I've decided to write a brief guide to common marketing terms and what they really mean.  Since this is a brief guide, I will not have time to go into great detail.  If you have further questions about a certain term, please let me know in the comments section and I'll do my best to answer your questions.  I also hope to give a few of these terms their own blog post in the future.

Organic - This is the one label you can trust if you know what it means.  Anything that is labeled "organic" must comply with the Canadian Organic Standards.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I'm really not sure what most consumers think organic means.  It seems as though many people don't know what it means at all, but they assume it is a good thing.  Others seem to think that it means the food is raised exactly as it would have been a few hundred years ago.  
• What does it actually mean?
• Organic food is raised in accordance with the Canadian Organic Standards.  These standards differ depending on the type of food being raised (vegetables vs. grains vs. livestock, for example), but they generally limit the types of inputs that may be used in raising the food.  You can check out the standards online to find out exactly how the organic food you buy has been raised.

Natural - Consumers love this word.  I hate it.  It's incredibly ambiguous and not regulated.

• What do consumers think this means?
• Again, I'm not totally sure, but I think consumers generally assume that "natural" means that the food is raised as if it was just growing in the wild.
• What does it actually mean?
• This is why I hate this term.  "Natural" means absolutely nothing.  It could mean that your cows were raised with other cows, thus fulfilling their natural social inclinations, even if those cows are crammed into dirty, over-crowded pens and fed very unnatural diets.  This is just an example, but can you understand how "natural" just doesn't describe anything accurately?

Grass Fed - Again, this term is not federally regulated.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I think consumers think this means the animal ate grass for every meal of it's life.  Others understand that it might mean that the animal ate a diet of grass for some amount of time while it was alive.  They also generally assume that animals fed grass are healthier and give better meat than those that are fed grain.
• What does it actually mean?
• Think about it for a moment: grass fed beef (or lamb, bison, whatever you're eating) is beef that has been fed grass.  Since this term is not regulated on labeling, all we can safely assume is that the animal was fed grass at least once.  Many consumers seem to have caught on to this, which brings us to the next term.

Grass Finished - This term is not federally regulated, but it is more specific than the previous one.

• What do consumers think this means?
• Some consumers don't understand that grass-finished and grass-fed are not the same thing.  Others understand that this should be a guarantee that the animal was "finished" on a grass diet.  ("Finished" means that the animal reached it's slaughter, or finished, weight).
• What does it actually mean?
• In theory, this should mean that the animal was on a grass diet while it was being finished.  Many producers using this label use it to mean that the animal was fed a grass diet throughout its life.  In theory, someone could call an animal grass finished just by feeding it a last meal of grass, but I don't think that actually happens.  I would like to also note that grass finished or grass fed animals are not necessarily healthier than grain finished animals and the meat is not necessarily better either.

GMO and non-GMO - Genetically modified organisms and labeling related to them are federally regulated.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I wish I knew what consumers think GMO food is.  From what I can gather, consumers seem to think that GMO food is created in a sketchy underground laboratory by mad scientists who work for companies owned by evil greedy corporations.  These GMO foods are then sold to stupid, backwoods farmers who naively obey whatever the corporation tells them to do.  Consumers know that GMO foods are incredibly unhealthy and cause all kinds of health problems.
• What does it actually mean?
• I will eventually devote a blog post to this, but briefly, genetically modified organisms are organisms (plants or animals - only GMO plants are currently grown and sold as food) that have been genetically modified to achieve certain characteristics that could be achieved by genetic selection (breeding) perhaps a few hundred years from now.  If they are sold as food in Canada, they are safe and have undergone rigorous testing to prove it.

Hormone/Steroid-Free - All food has hormones in it.  Labels should read, "Raised without added hormones," but some marketers get lazy and just say "Hormone free."  Unless the meat is raised under organic certification, this term is not federally regulated.

• What do consumers think this means?
• Consumers do seem to understand that conventionally raised animals are injected with hormones.  They don't seem to understand what type of hormones these are.  They also assume that the hormones appear in the meat in dangerous levels, causing their food to be unhealthy.
• What does it actually mean?
• Let me first say that steroids are hormones.  Any company that advertises food as hormone and steroid free is just cheating and trying to make themselves look doubly trustworthy.  Now that I've got that out of the way, I'll tell you what it means for meat to be raised without added hormones (I will devote a separate blog post to this later).  Conventionally raised animals have certain hormones injected into them, usually in the ear.  The hormones are released into the animal's bloodstream over time,  helping them to process their food in a more efficient manner (we call it being feed efficient), which makes them grow a bit faster and has a side benefit of causing them to release fewer harmful greenhouse gases into the atmosphere.  The hormones do not appear in the meat in harmful levels.

Antibiotic-Free - Again, the labels should read, "Raised without the use of antibiotics."  Also, just like with "hormone-free" meat, this term is not federally regulated unless the meat is raised under organic certification.  This topic will also get its own blog post in the future.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I think consumers fear that their food could be full of antibiotics.  They think if an animal is treated with antibiotics or fed antibiotics, the meat and milk is tainted.  The average consumer doesn't understand the complexities of antibiotic use in agriculture, so they assume that "antibiotic-free" food is just safer.
• What does it actually mean?
• There are never antibiotics in meat, milk, or other food products in Canada.  If you are eating it, there are not antibiotics in it.  However, antibiotics may be used to prevent or treat disease in living animals, and certain types are fed to animals to make them more feed efficient.  All antibiotics have a withdrawal period, so an animal cannot be slaughtered or milked until the antibiotic is out of its system.  Animals raised without the use of antibiotics are raised without being fed or treated with any antibiotics.  There are no antibiotics in their feed, and no antibiotics are given to them to prevent or treat disease.  I would like to point out that there are a few circumstances in which antibiotics may be used in organic programs.

Free Run - This term generally applies to poultry.  It is not federally regulated.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I haven't run into consumers talking about this term very much, so I'm not sure what consumers think it means.  I think they generally realise that it means that the birds are not kept in cages.  The may think it means the birds are running free around the farmyard, with no fences or restraints, happily scratching in the garden and pecking at stray insects.
• What does it actually mean?
• Free run birds are raised in an environment without cages.  They are not outside.  They live in a barn with perches and nesting areas.

Free Range - This term also applies to poultry.  It is not federally regulated, but has a specific definition.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I think consumers are generally unfamiliar with the difference between free run and free range birds.  They use the terms interchangeably and imagine free range birds to be running around outside without restraint, as they were in the free run imaginings.
• What does it actually mean?
• Free range birds are raised in barns similar to free run barns, but they are also allowed to "range" outside, likely (but not necessarily) in an enclosed area.

Sustainable - This term is not federally regulated and is incredibly ambiguous.  There are currently programs in place to put a definition on this term.

• What do consumers think this means?
• Consumers don't seem to know exactly what this term means, since it is a very ambiguous term, even in general use.  However, the general idea seems to be that sustainable agricultural practices are those that ensure that food can continue to be produced for centuries to come, usually in an environmental sense.
• What does it actually mean?
• At the moment, sustainable doesn't mean a whole lot.  There are programs in the works to find a definition for sustainable agricultural practices.  When farmers talk about sustainability, we want to know if the practice is environmentally and economically sustainable.  Marketers push the environmental aspect, but those companies supporting the programs to define sustainability also support the economics side.

Humanely Raised - This term is not federally regulated, and raising livestock is incredibly complex, so it can be difficult to pin down if certain practices are more humane than others.

• What do consumers think this means?
• I'm not sure, but I think that consumers generally just want to know that the livestock producing their food are getting sufficient food, water, and shelter, and are not being cruelly beaten by irresponsible farm workers.
• What does it actually mean?
• Livestock that are humanely raised should go through programs on farms, in feedlots, and through slaughter in which they are handled using low-stress handling techniques, and in which they have their basic needs met.

Note: I have stated that certain terms are not federally regulated.  They may be regulated by independent programs, but these programs may or may not be enforced.  Federal regulations are strictly enforced.

More Helpful Resources:

• Free Run vs. Free Range
• Egg Labels and What They Mean for Chicken Health
• Canadian Organic Standard and Regulations 
• Information about Hormone Use in Beef
• Information about Antibiotic Use in Beef Cattle
• Accepted Animal Welfare Standards in Alberta (Alberta Farm Animal Care)
• Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef
• Verified Sustainable Beef Pilot Project

Meet Bandit, The Super Awesome Farm Dog

HELLO PEOPLE!!!!  I LOVE YOU!!!!  YOU'RE AMAZING!!!  Whew!  Now that we've got that out of the way, let me introduce myself (seriously, you're so cool).  My name is Bandit.

I'm the official super awesome farm dog here at Ehrenholz Farms.  My job is fantastic!  I get to chase cows, ride in the side-by-side, hang out with some terrific people, and train The Kid.

Let's take a moment to talk about The Kid before I go into detail about my other duties.  The Kid is a young pup that came to live on the farm earlier this year.  His name is Max, but I call him The Kid because he's my sidekick.  The Kid is a pretty great guy and we get along really well.  He's sort of like a little brother.  I do my best to bestow upon him all my wealth of knowledge, just as my mentor, the late, great Wolfie did for me.  Enough about him, though.

I love to chase the cows!  It's the most terrific part of my job!  Sometimes I'm allowed to chase them along with the humans, and other times I sneak a quick chase in when the humans aren't looking.  If I get caught, the the thrill is almost worth getting scolded.  Cows aren't the only thing I chase.  I'm also an expert in chasing birds, butterflies, and vehicles.  Chasing and running are my absolute FAVOURITE things to do!  And just to make sure everyone knows that, I try to chase anything I can when someone drives onto the yard.  Sometimes there's nothing to chase, so then I pounce on The Kid.  That's pretty fun, too.

Let's talk about the side-by-side now.  The side-by-side, also called Ranger by the humans, is the BEST THING EVER!  I can't even describe how amazing it is!  The humans get to ride in it all the time, but sometimes they let us dogs join them.  The best is when they let us sit up front on the seat!  I stick my face above the windshield and let the wind rush through my fur!  It's absolutely exhilarating!   The only bad part is that sometimes the humans have to hit the brakes extra fast and then I smack into the dashboard and fall on the floor.  It doesn't hurt much, though, and sometimes the humans even remember to catch me before I go flying forward!  My humans are AWESOME!  Other times the dogs get sent into the back box of the Ranger.  I suppose it's safer back there when they hit the brakes, but the wind doesn't rush through my fur in quite the same way.  Still, it's better than running alongside.  That can get a wee bit dangerous.  One time I got distracted and stopped right in front of the Ranger.  Getting run over sure did hurt!  Valerie let me ride in the front seat after that until I got my wind back and jumped out to chase some cows.  Now I have a pretty sweet limp.  The Kid thinks I'm even cooler now!

My final official duty is to be a guard dog.  The humans say I'm terrible at this job, but I think I'm a pretty amazing guard dog.  My mentor, Wolfie, taught me that guarding is a twofold job: firstly, it means keeping the coyotes away, and secondly, it means greeting absolutely EVERYONE who walks or drives onto the yard.  I take running coyotes off the yard very seriously.  It was those mangy beasts who killed Wolfie a couple of years back.  I was too young to help him fight, and he was too old to get away.  All I could do was save myself and show the humans where Wolfie was the next day.  I promised myself that when I got big enough, I would show those coyotes that they are not welcome on this farm.  I run and bark every night, scaring those creepy wimps right back into the bush!  The second part of guarding is far more pleasurable!  I LOVE people!  I would never want to scare anyone, so I run up to them without barking at all and wag my tail until they pet me.  It's so much fun!  

Well, that's about all I've got to say about myself right now.  If you ever make it out to the farm, I will be so EXCITED to meet you!  We can hang out and you can pet me and rub my tummy, and I'll lick your face and lean on you!

"I'm Gonna Ride the RED Tractor!"

I don't complain much about what I see on social media, even to myself.  The endless pictures of food and pets are mildly annoying at best.  Passionate political arguments are, at the very least, slightly informative.  Sure, I cringe at poor spelling and horrid grammar, but I can just skip past those posts.  Anyone who uses too much profanity or gets too annoying with promoting some fad is simply deleted from my social media feed.  But this latest thing I cannot ignore.  It's despicable.  I can't stand it!

"What has happened?" you ask.  I'll tell you.  I've got this friend who occasionally posts on social media.  He usually posts fun pictures, bits of news, and a few political things.  All interesting stuff.  But now he's started sharing promotions from his place of work.  He is using social media to promote John Deere!

Ok, so it's not that bad.  I just thought that would be a fun way to introduce how farmers feel about their equipment.  Most farmers are as passionate about the make of their equipment as sports fans are about their teams.  For example, there are farmers who like to only use John Deere equipment.  Then there are the sensible farmers who know that John Deere equipment breaks far too easily and won't go near it.  As you can tell, I am not a John Deere fan.  The equipment on our farm ranges from Massey-Ferguson to White to International to New Holland, and includes a few relics like Cockshutts, Olivers, and even a little old Ford tractor.  We aren't fanatically tied to any one make of equipment, although Dad does like to collect old Oliver tractors that don't actually run, but we generally avoid John Deere.  There are those who are fans of makes other than John Deere, of course.  Some farmers only drive the blue equipment of New Holland, or the red Massey-Ferguson equipment, for example.  No company builds perfect equipment, and each has its pros and cons, and all farmers know that.  However, I've become convinced that city folks are woefully uninformed about the variety of equipment.

If I can say anything good about John Deere, it's that they have consistently had an excellent marketing policy for many years.  Have you ever looked for material with tractors on it, or some farm toys that don't come directly from the equipment manufacturer?  Almost everything you find is John Deere, or has the green and yellow John Deere colours on it.  My city-dwelling relatives used to proudly point out the farm-related toys, etc. that they had bought for their children.  All of the stuff was John Deere.  I would sadly shake my head and do my best to find something with red tractors on it for the kids.  Why red tractors?  It was mainly because there are several different companies that make red equipment (Massey-Ferguson, White, International, even some New Holland stuff).  As a result, I have succeeded in the past few years in reversing the John Deere indoctrination and have taught my relatives and their children that red tractors are best.

Those kids still have their John Deere toys, though.  So how do I know that I succeeded?  Well, in the summer of 2015 some of my cousins came to the farm for a visit.  I went to help one of my cousins unload her children from the minivan and opened the door to be greeted by a very excited preschooler who exclaimed, "Valerie, I'm gonna ride the RED tractor!" as soon as he saw me.  I was so proud!  His mom scolded him and told him to ask, instead of tell.  Even so, I gladly honoured his wish and took him and the rest of the kids for a ride on the Massey-Ferguson tractor.  This summer he was just as excited about riding in a red tractor, but the battery died, so we took the faded red Cockshutt out for a spin.  I think I may have done too good of a job.  Now I have to teach them that grey, blue, and some green tractors are also cool.

I should also mention, for the sake of fairness, that I have used John Deere equipment before.  I have driven a couple of John Deere tractors at school, I regularly use a John Deere lawn mower (which has the clutch on the wrong side) to mow the church lawn, and I used a small square baler to bale some hay this summer.  I have to admit, I liked the baler.  But, just as I will always look sideways at Calgray Flames fans and staunchly support the Olds College Broncos, I think I will always have fun teasing farmers who are John Deere fans and I will judge equipment at farm auctions by condition and colour.

One of my dad's old Oliver tractors.  The green and yellow on this tractor has nothing to do with John Deere.

Don't Fear Your Food: Animal Welfare on the Farm

There are few food-related issues that get consumers so riled up as reported cases of animal abuse on farms.  I have so many topics I want to cover in this blog series, some dealing with crops, and others with livestock, but I feel as if I will be stuck trying to deal with any of those topics without dealing with the topics that touch so many of the other issues.  Animal welfare is one of those topics that will continue to pop up as this blog series progresses.  Today, I am going to give you an overview of how farmers tend to view their livestock and of how animal welfare issues affect the production of your food.

From what I have observed (and know to be true in myself), farmers are often less attached to animals in general than others who own animals.  Pet owners often see their dogs, cats, etc. as a part of the family.  Farm kids grow up surrounded by animals, but they learn early not to get too attached to those animals because they will die.  Cattle, pigs and chickens are butchered for meat; kittens get killed by foxes, coyotes, or the farm dogs; and the farm dogs get run over or killed by coyotes or other predators.  You may tell me that death is a part of life and that we should not hold back from loving people and animals because of that.  Well, you try eating your beloved pet steer for supper.  Besides that, animals on the farm have a purpose.  Livestock produce food and fibre products, dogs keep predators away and help move the cattle, and cats keep rodents to a minimum.  I personally can't understand house pets.  Why would I spend a whole bunch of money to keep a cat, dog, fish, etc. alive if I'm not going to get anything out of it?  And no, I don't think companionship is adequate reimbursement when the animal can't even talk to me.

I know a lot of farmers who feel the same way as I do.  We would never cause an animal harm or distress, but we also refuse to own an animal that is useless to us.  Of course, we all have our soft spots.  My dad has rescued several kittens from the side of the road over the years.  We fight to save every calf that turns up with a broken leg from being stepped on or laid on by an inattentive cow.  I'll even admit that I cried a bit when my first dog was killed by coyotes a few years ago.  Farmers do their best to treat their animals right, but we just don't have the emotional energy to get attached to every one of them.  No one does.  So we put up a harsh front, which makes us seem uncaring at times, even though we will do all we can to save an animal and make sure it is well-cared for.  The vast majority of farmers take good care of their livestock.  Unfortunately, there will always be a few irresponsible, even cruel, people who make us all look bad.

Many of us have seen at least one horrifying video of animal abuse on the farm, whether it has popped up on a social media site, or been played on a local news stations.  I despise every aspect of those videos.  I am sickened by the farm workers who could treat the animals in such a fashion.  I am disgusted by the person taking the video for standing by and doing nothing to stop the abuse.  I am frustrated to the point of wanting to shut my eyes and ears to the entire thing by the uninformed masses who comment and protest and demand that the agriculture industry change when they see just a tiny percentage of what goes on.  Yes, the incident is horrible and clearly something needs to be done on that farm, but that doesn't mean an entire industry needs to change!

We are getting to the point where industry standards are being shaped by consumer demands, even when those new standards fly in the face of what science and experience tell us is best for the animals and the environment.  I willingly admit that there are a few issues that need to be addressed in the livestock sector of the agriculture industry.  The good news is that these issues are, for the most part, being addressed.  We are learning new animal handling techniques, investing in low-stress handling systems and methods of dealing with various issues our livestock may have.  Research is showing us what works best for our animals and what they need in terms of physical needs, as well as social and behavioural needs.  Each passing year brings new discoveries regarding what animals need and how they behave and thrive and the agriculture industry is trying to keep up.  Give us a little credit and a little time and we will get caught up once we figure out the best way to provide what our animals need without breaking the bank.  If it's too expensive for us to raise animals humanely, we will either neglect or abuse them, or we will sell out to someone who will ignore what is best for the animals.  Give us time to adjust economically and we will do what is best for the animals.

If you take just one thing away from this blog, let it be this: Farmers do nothing without a reason.  We are incredibly busy and work in a high-risk, low-pay industry.  If we do anything, it is to increase the productivity of our animals.  Research is now showing us what many of us have learned from experience: animals are more productive when all of their needs are met and they are happy.  So when we do things for the purpose of making our animals more productive, we are doing what is good for our livestock.

Before I end this post, I'd like to answer a few questions I couldn't figure out to answer in the main part of the post:

• Some folks aren't comfortable with how farmers "put animals out of their suffering".  How would you answer those who compare putting down an animal to euthanasia for humans?
• What I am about to say are my own personal beliefs and should not be attributed to anyone else.  I am not in favour of euthanasia for humans under any circumstances.  However, I will not allow an animal to suffer.  If I (or the vet) can't reasonably prevent the suffering, I will have the animal put down.  I believe that humans were put on earth to serve God.  Suffering cannot stop us from doing that.  Indeed, suffering can help us to grow closer to God.  I can justify suffering to a human (and yes, I have had to justify my own suffering to myself).  I cannot justify suffering to an animal.  An animal cannot grow from suffering.  Animals who suffer in the wild are killed by predators and thereby released from their suffering.  We do so much to protect animals from predators that we keep them alive beyond what nature would allow that we have lost sight of how much suffering might be too much.
• If someone suspects there is a case of animal abuse occurring at a farm, what can they do?
• The best thing to do is to notify the authorities.  Don't try to deal with it yourself.  A farmer won't take you seriously if he thinks you are just a busy body who doesn't know what you are talking about.  In Alberta you can call the Alberta Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) or Alberta Farm Animal Care (AFAC) to report neglect or abuse.  You can find the websites for these organisations in the resources below.
• What exactly are the needs that an animal should have met?
• Alberta Farm Animal Care identifies "Five Freedoms" that should be met for animals.  They are:
• Freedom from Hunger and Thirst
• Freedom from Discomfort
• Freedom from Pain, Injury and Disease
• Freedom to Express Normal Behaviour
• Freedom from Fear and Distress

You may look at this and see the cow locked up, unable to move while the farmer stands by and watches.  I look at this and see my dad resting after a struggle to get a very hungry calf to suck without its mother walking away or trying to kill my dad for getting close.

Resources:

• Alberta SPCA - contact this organisation if you suspect neglect or abuse of animals
• Alberta Farm Animal Care - this organisation works with farmers to improve animal welfare on the farm level
• Codes of Practice for the Care and Handling of Livestock - the National Farm Animal Care Council sets out recommendations and requirements for the care and handling of various types of livestock
• Animal Use Spectrum - this is a great graphic to help one understand the various philosophies that guide how people view animals
• Articles Concerning Animal Welfare from the Western Producer:
• Animal welfare improving by 'light years'
• Does 'cage-free' really lead to better animal welfare?
• Supply management and animal welfare
• Animal welfare added to quality assurance
• Fragile contents: handle with care
• Student seeks producers for animal welfare research
• Feedlots adjusting to new animal-care program