The National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) Code development process was followed in the development of this Code of Practice. This Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle replaces its predecessor developed in 1991 and published by Agriculture Canada.
The NFACC Code development process aims to:
- link Codes with science
- ensure transparency in the process
- include broad representation from stakeholders
- contribute to improvements in farm animal care
- identify research priorities and encourage work in these priority areas
- write clearly to ensure ease of reading, understanding and implementation
- provide a document that is useful for all stakeholders.
The Codes of Practice are nationally developed guidelines for the care and handling of farm animals. They serve as our national understanding of animal care requirements and recommended practices. Codes promote sound management and welfare practices for housing, care, transportation and other animal husbandry practices.
Codes of Practice have been developed for virtually all farmed animal species in Canada. NFACC’s website provides access to all currently available Codes (www.nfacc.ca).
The Codes of Practice are the result of a rigourous Code development process, taking into account the best science available for each species, compiled through an independent peer-reviewed process, along with stakeholder input. The Code development process also takes into account the practical requirements for each species necessary to promote consistent application across Canada and ensure uptake by stakeholders resulting in beneficial animal outcomes. Given their broad use by numerous parties in Canada today, it is important for all to understand how they are intended to be interpreted.
Requirements – These refer to either a regulatory requirement, or an industry imposed expectation outlining acceptable and unacceptable practices and are fundamental obligations relating to the care of animals. Requirements represent a consensus position that these measures, at minimum, are to be implemented by all persons responsible for farm animal care. When included as part of an assessment program, those who fail to implement Requirements may be compelled by industry associations to undertake corrective measures, or risk a loss of market options. Requirements also may be enforceable under federal and provincial regulation.
Recommended Practices – Code Recommended Practices may complement a Code’s Requirements, promote producer education and can encourage adoption of practices for continuous improvement in animal welfare outcomes. Recommended Practices are those which are generally expected to enhance animal welfare outcomes, but failure to implement them does not imply that acceptable standards of animal care are not met.
Broad representation and expertise on each Code Development Committee ensures collaborative Code development. Stakeholder commitment is key to ensure quality animal care standards are established and implemented.
This Code represents a consensus amongst diverse stakeholder groups. Consensus results in a decision that everyone agrees advances animal welfare but does not imply unanimous endorsement of every aspect of the Code. Codes play a central role in Canada’s farm animal welfare system as part of a process of continuous improvement. As a result, they need to be reviewed and updated regularly. Codes should be reviewed at least every five years following publication and updated at least every ten years.
A key feature of NFACC’s Code development process is the Scientific Committee. It is widely accepted that animal welfare Codes, guidelines, standards or legislation should take advantage of the best available research.
A Scientific Committee review of priority animal welfare issues for the species being addressed provided valuable information to the Code Development Committee in developing this Code of Practice. The Scientific Committee report is peer reviewed and publicly available, enhancing the transparency and credibility of the Code.
The ‘Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle: Review of scientific research on priority issues’ developed by the beef cattle Code of Practice Scientific Committee is available on NFACC’s website (www.nfacc.ca).
In 1980, the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies began coordinating the process of developing Codes of Practice for all livestock species. In 1991, the Recommended Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Animals – Beef Cattle was developed from an original working draft contracted by the Ontario Cattlemen’s Association to Dr. Frank Hurnik, Professor, Poultry and Animal Science, University of Guelph, Ontario. This draft was then submitted to all of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association’s (CCA) provincial associations for review and input. Through agreement between the CCA and the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies and Agriculture Canada, a review committee chaired by Dr. Hurnik brought together individuals representing the industry, professional agricultural and veterinary associations, transporters, processors, and auction markets, research, Food Production and Inspection branches of Agriculture Canada, and animal care and welfare organizations.
Since 2005, the responsibility for developing and revising Canada’s Codes of Practice has fallen under the mandate of the National Farm Animal Care Council (www.nfacc.ca). This revised Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle was updated through a similar consultation and review process, by a committee representing a wide range of stakeholders (Appendix H), according to the Code development process developed by NFACC (www.nfacc.ca/code-development-process).
All herd sizes require adequate human resources to ensure proper care and well-being of the animals. Everyone handling cattle should be familiar with their normal behaviour and should use low stress, behaviour-based cattle handling techniques. The selection and training of personnel are the most important factors in ensuring that cattle will be managed humanely. All personnel working with cattle or managing cattle facilities should be experienced or properly trained regarding humane handling, equipment use, and livestock care. They should understand their responsibilities and ensure that routine cattle management practices promote animal well-being and avoid unnecessary suffering of cattle. Calm, healthy cattle have higher productivity and economic value than stressed or ill cattle. However, an equal standard of humane treatment must be provided to cattle that have less economic value (e.g. cull cows, downers and chronically ill cattle).
The Canadian beef industry involves seedstock and cow-calf producers, backgrounding and feedlot operations, transporters, sale yards and assembly stations, veterinarians and packing plants operating under diverse climatic and geographical conditions. Cattle care is practised all along the production chain and the well-being of beef cattle can be safeguarded under a variety of husbandry and management systems.
Most husbandry systems impose restrictions on some freedoms of cattle. However, producers should consider the following:
- shelter for protection and comfort
- feed and water to maintain optimal health
- freedom of movement, exercise, and opportunity to express most normal behaviours
- company of herd mates
- footing that reduces the risk of slipping
- disease prevention and control
- veterinary care, diagnosis, and treatment
- freedom from unnecessary pain and discomfort
- emergency preparedness for fire, mechanical breakdowns, and the disruption of feed supplies.
This Code focuses on the animal. Where possible, it is outcome-based, and is intended to achieve a workable balance between the best interests of the cattle, producers, and consumers. It recognizes the basic principle that the well-being of cattle is a prime consideration and that cattle treated well benefit producers. The Code aims to meet scientifically valid and feasible approaches to meeting cattle health and welfare needs throughout the production system contributing to a sustainable and internationally competitive Canadian beef industry.
This Code is not intended to describe all production and management practices relevant to each stage of beef production. Instead, principles applicable to all sectors of the industry are presented along with some sector-specific considerations.
Anyone building new, modifying or assuming management of existing cattle facilities will need to be familiar with local, provincial, and federal requirements for construction, environmental management, and other areas outside the scope of this document. Individuals requiring further details should refer to local sources of information such as universities, agricultural ministries, and industry resources (see Appendix G).
The Code is a guideline for the care and handling of beef cattle. All provincial and federal acts and regulations must always take precedence. Causing unnecessary pain or suffering or willful neglect is illegal under the Criminal Code of Canada and under most provincial statutes. It is of benefit to the whole Canadian cattle industry that anyone witnessing animal neglect or cruelty takes some action to remedy the situation, by helping to educate the producer, or by contacting the appropriate cattle producers’ organization or animal welfare authorities.
The beef cattle Code of Practice reflects current beef management practices. It identifies welfare hazards, opportunities and methods to assure well-being. The authors recognize producers have more than one way to ensure welfare of their livestock.
In 2012, the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) approved new production guidelines for beef cattle production, aimed at improving the health and welfare of beef cattle globally (Chapter 7.9 of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (1)). As a member of the OIE, Canada is committed to these guidelines, and the Code Development Committee has kept them in mind during the revision of this Code of Practice (1).
This Code pertains to cattle of all ages in beef production. Where special provisions for cattle under six months apply, the word calf has been used. This Code applies to male and female cattle being raised for their meat. It does not apply to associated industries (e.g. veal, dairy). However, cattle from other sectors, when brought into a beef production operation, are subject to this Code.
- All cattle are kept under conditions conducive to their safety, health, comfort, nourishment, and humane handling.
- Cattle can express natural behaviour.
- Cattle are not adversely affected by extremes in weather, such as cold, floods, freezing rain, storms, and heat waves.
1.1 Protection from Extreme Weather
Beef cattle in Canada are housed in a variety of ways depending on age, size, and reproductive state. Systems may include range conditions, fields, corrals or yards, indoor pens or stalls. Treed areas or geographical features (such as coulees) can provide shelter from wind and sun (2).
Animals’ ability to cope with sudden changes in weather or adverse weather events varies with many factors, such as:
- age (especially newborn calves)
- body condition score
- access to feed, water, and shelter
- degree of acclimation (e.g. winter hair coat)
- health status
- stress (such as newly-arrived feedlot cattle).
Cattle must have access to areas, either natural or man-made, that provide relief from weather that is likely to create a serious risk to their welfare.
Promptly assist individual cattle showing signs of not coping with adverse weather (see Sections 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 for lists of signs).
1.1.1 High Temperature and Humidity
Cattle are generally able to tolerate low temperatures better than high temperatures. Humidity levels and ventilation affect an animal’s ability to cope with heat stress. Extreme heat is generally more stressful to cattle early in the summer season before they have had a chance to acclimate to the increased temperatures (3).
Signs of heat stress in cattle include (4-6):
- open-mouth panting with tongue protruding
- laboured breathing
- drooling or froth around the mouth.
Cattle are at risk of heat stress when combined temperature and humidity exceed a Humidex value of 40. However, factors such as shade, air movement and length of exposure all influence the impact of high Humidex values on cattle (3).
Heat stress can lead to reductions in feed intake, weight gain, reproductive efficiency and milk production. Severe heat stress may result in illness and death (7).
Water requirements are greater during hot weather.
- When cattle are showing signs of heat stress, consider the following strategies (3):
- provide shade
- avoid handling cattle
- feed cattle at dusk or dawn
- moisten the ground in part of the pen
- sprinkle cattle with water.
1.1.2 Extreme Cold
Although cattle can generally tolerate colder temperatures if acclimatized, wet cattle (especially newborn calves), cattle in poor body condition, and cattle fed inadequate energy are less able to cope with cold temperatures (3). Cattle require additional feed resources during cold weather (8).
Signs that cattle are not coping well with extreme cold (hypothermia) include:
- shivering (cattle may stop shivering if hypothermia worsens)
- low core body temperature (less than 35 °C or 96 °F)
- cold mouth
- inability to get up
- no suckling reflex (in calves)
- frostbite (especially newborn calves).
Provide additional feed to meet animals’ increased energy requirements when facing cold stress.
- provide bedding to insulate against bare ground and to reduce mud and manure build-up on hides, which can increase heat loss (3).
1.2 Facilities for All Cattle
The Canadian beef industry comprises the cow-calf, backgrounder and feedlot sectors. Production practices for all sectors have developed in response to Canada’s diverse climatic and geographical conditions. Even though the areas involved may be large, facilities for pastured or range cattle still require monitoring and maintenance. It is beyond the scope of this Code to describe all shelter and housing facilities used in beef cattle production. Individuals requiring further details should refer to local sources of information, such as universities, agricultural and environmental ministries, producer organizations, and experienced beef producers (9) (see Appendix G).
Outcome-based measures that the livestock producer can use for assessing the suitability of housing and stocking density include morbidity and mortality rates for lameness and injuries, changes in normal cattle behaviour, such as bulling/riding, poor performance (e.g. body weight, average daily gain, feed efficiency, daily dry matter intake), and abnormal physical appearance (1).
All beef operations must have access to equipment or facilities for the safe handling, restraint, treatment, segregation, loading, and unloading of cattle.
Design or manage indoor and outdoor cattle facilities to provide well-drained, comfortable resting areas.
Provide traction in handling areas to minimize cattle slips and falls.
All cattle in a group must have sufficient space to adopt normal resting postures at the same time.
Cattle kept in groups must be able to move freely around the pen and access feed and water.
Stocking density must be managed such that weight gain and duration of time spent lying is not adversely affected by crowding.
Maintain indoor air quality and ventilation at all times (ammonia levels < 25ppm).
Provide cattle housed indoors that do not have access to natural light with supplementary lighting to allow natural behaviour patterns and monitoring of the cattle.
- ensure that all cattle facilities and areas are safe and free of hazards that can cause injury
- provide a separate area with dry bedding for the recovery of severely sick or injured cattle
- consider biosecurity measures when designing and managing cattle facilities
- ensure restraint devices are used properly. Pressure that causes pain or discomfort can cause cattle to panic and should be avoided
- minimize noise from handling equipment to facilitate movement. High-pitched sounds are especially disturbing to cattle
- provide daily exercise for any cattle that are tethered. Tethering devices must be safe for the animals and should not interfere with the actions of standing up or lying down. Tethering devices should be regularly inspected for proper function and safety.
1.3 Additional Facilities for Calving Cows
Beef cows typically calve outside. If calving occurs during periods of extremely cold weather, sheltered, bedded calving areas (natural or constructed) can protect the cow and calf during this vulnerable time (3). Cows typically separate themselves from the rest of the herd as calving approaches. Isolating a calving cow or a cow-calf pair in an individual pen may benefit the cow and the calf if intervention is required.
Newborn calves are susceptible to disease, so calving facilities should be designed and maintained to minimize disease transmission. In particular, calf scours can be a problem, especially in confined calving areas, which can become progressively more contaminated as the calving season progresses. The risk of scours is reduced by maintaining dry conditions and preventing contact with infected cattle.
Provide an environment that is safe and clean for calving and that promotes calf survival.
- keep calving areas free of cattle until just prior to calving. This will minimize manure contamination and help reduce calf diseases
- if calving indoors, be prepared to separate calving cows and heifers into pens with adequate bedding
- maintain calving areas and areas housing cows with young calves in such a way as to reduce the contact of young calves with manure, noting that such areas become increasingly contaminated as the calving season progresses.
Desired Outcome: Cattle are in optimum health and body condition.
2.1 Nutrition and Feed Management
Cattle need to be monitored on an ongoing basis and feed resources must be well-managed and readily-available according to the animals’ changing needs and environmental conditions. Cattle that are not fed adequately will lose body condition, will not perform to their capacity, and are more likely to have reduced immune function (10-12). Signs that cattle are not able to access sufficient feed or water include increased vocalizing, roaming, and breaking through fences.
Body condition scoring (BCS) is an important tool for determining if an animal is too thin (BCS of less than 2 out of 5), too fat (BCS greater than 4 out of 5), or in ideal condition (Appendix A). Ideal body condition scores will vary depending upon stage of production (Table 2.1). Body condition scoring also allows producers to optimize the utilization of feed resources and animal productivity. Be aware that body condition scores are most applicable to mature cattle and may be of little use for cattle under one year of age. Note that the cause of poor body condition is not always nutritional.
Feeding space required depends on type of feed, feeding frequency, amount of feed, presence of horned cattle, animal size, and group size. Increased animal density in the pen increases competition among cattle for access to feed, water and resting areas. Reduced space per animal at the feed bunk also increases competitive interactions among cattle, reduces bunk attendance times, and increases the time spent waiting for access to feed. This might not cause problems for dominant cattle, but it does directly affect subordinate animals, and can result in uneven feed intakes and reduced growth.
Guidance on minimizing diseases associated with high-energy feeding is provided in Section 3.3.3.
|Stage of Production||Target BCS (out of 5)|
|30 days before start of breeding||2.5 – cows
3.0 – heifers
3.0-3.5 – bulls
|Start of winter feeding program||3.0 – all females
3.0-3.5 – bulls
|Calving||2.5 – mature cows
3.0 – bred and first-calf heifers
Monitor cattle behaviour, performance, body condition score and health on an ongoing basis and adjust the feeding program accordingly.
Ensure cattle have access to feed of adequate quality and quantity to fulfill their nutritional needs at all times, and maintain proper body condition, taking into account factors such as: age, frame size, reproductive status, health status, level of production, competition and weather.
Take prompt corrective action to improve the body condition score of cattle with a score of 2 or less (out of 5).
Take steps to prevent exposure of cattle to toxins (such as lead batteries, fertilizer, treated seed, antifreeze, nitrates) and to avoid feed with adverse physical qualities that could cause injury or limit intake.
- test nutrient content of feed ingredients used and balance rations as necessary. Consult a nutritionist for advice
- become familiar with potential micronutrient deficiencies or excesses in your geographic area and use appropriately-formulated supplements
- manage feedstuffs in a way to maintain quality and minimize spoilage
- avoid sudden or extreme ration changes
- provide a less competitive feeding environment for sick, injured, weak or convalescing cattle.
Cattle need access to water of adequate quality and quantity to fulfill their physiological needs. Water availability and quality are extremely important for cattle health and productivity. Beef cattle will drink between 26-66L (5-14gal) per day (13). Water quality and palatability affect water consumption. Cattle may limit their water intake to the point of dehydration if the quality of drinking water is compromised (14).
Snow is used as a water source in some extensive western Canadian beef operations. There is scientific evidence that cattle can maintain body condition using loose snow for water under certain specific conditions (15). These conditions can be highly variable, and can result in risks to cattle welfare if they are not carefully monitored. These variables include snow conditions and quality, feed quality, cattle body condition and weather conditions.
It is extremely important to ensure there is a sufficient supply of loose, clean snow (15,16). Further, cattle with higher energy requirements (such as growing, lactating or in poor condition) risk losing excess energy when accessing and melting snow. It can take inexperienced cattle several days to learn to consume snow as a primary water source so they should be monitored during this acclimation period (17). Using snow as a sole winter water source is not appropriate in all geographic areas, even within the same province. Contact your local or regional beef cattle specialist or your veterinarian for advice (See Appendix G).
Ensure that cattle have access to palatable water of adequate quality and quantity to fulfill their physiological needs. Monitor water sources, feeding habits, behaviour, performance and health on an ongoing basis and be prepared to adjust the watering program accordingly.
Snow may only be used as a sole winter water source providing it is of sufficient quantity and quality to meet the animals’ physiological requirements.
Snow must not be used as a sole water source for the following cattle:
Only adequate quantities of clean, loose snow may serve as the sole water source. Monitor snow conditions on an ongoing basis.
Have a back-up water source in the event of insufficient loose snow or an interruption in water supply.
- ensure that water sources are easy for cattle to locate and access
- manage cattle and water sources to avoid competition that would limit access to water
- check automated water sources daily to ensure they are dispensing properly
- test water quality in the event of problems such as poor performance, reluctance to drink, or reduced feed consumption
- if utilizing natural water sources, provide water in troughs or bowls wherever possible to ensure cleanliness of water supply and safe animal access
- be aware of the signs of stray (tingle) voltage around water sources, such as reluctance to drink or reduced feed consumption
- if using a frozen-over natural water source in winter, provide an area of open water and restrict cattle from areas of thin ice.
Desired Outcome: Optimum health and welfare are maintained through a combination of appropriate disease prevention and control measures and prompt treatment of illness, injury and disease.
3.1 Herd Health Management
Pain and discomfort caused by health issues impact an animal’s well-being such that good animal welfare requires good animal health (14). Disease prevention is extremely important. Herd health management and biosecurity protocols can help prevent and contain diseases. Producers need to be able to promptly recognize and treat animal health issues in order to optimize animal welfare.
Veterinarians play a key role in helping producers meet these animal health obligations. Although the specific regulations vary among provinces, in order for veterinarians to prescribe some classes of medications and vaccines, they must have a valid Veterinarian/Client/Patient Relationship (VCPR).
A Veterinarian/Client/Patient Relationship exists when all of the following conditions have been met (18):
- the veterinarian has assumed the responsibility for making clinical judgments regarding the health of the cattle and the need for medical treatment, and the client has agreed to follow the veterinarian’s instructions
- the veterinarian has sufficient knowledge of the animal(s) to initiate at least a general or preliminary diagnosis of the medical condition of the animal(s). This means that the veterinarian has recently seen and is personally acquainted with the keeping and care of the animal(s) by virtue of an examination of the animal(s) or by medically appropriate and timely visits to the premises where the animal(s) are kept
- the veterinarian is readily available for follow-up evaluation, or has arranged for emergency coverage, in the event of adverse reactions or failure of the treatment regimen.
An effective Herd Health Management Program contributes to cattle well-being by providing a strategy for disease prevention, rapid diagnosis and effective treatment.
Establish an ongoing working relationship (VCPR) with a licensed practicing veterinarian and develop a strategy for disease prevention and herd health.
- maintain accurate animal management and health records.
3.2 Sick, Injured and Cull Cattle
More frequent monitoring of cattle may be necessary during weather that may compromise animal welfare, calving and post-weaning periods, and when multiple stressors occur simultaneously (e.g. weaning, transportation, commingling, etc.). Adequate monitoring ensures timely detection and treatment of sick or injured cattle. Treatment may vary from therapeutic interventions to convalescent care. Some examples of convalescent care may include (but are not limited to): segregation, easier access to feed and water, reduced competition and increased monitoring.
Be aware that cattle may hide their expression of pain or suffering, and that this may affect your assessment of their condition in making decisions about treatment or euthanasia (19).
Cattle owners, veterinarians, and laboratories are required to immediately report an animal that is infected or suspected of being infected with a reportable disease to a Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) District Veterinarian. Reportable diseases are listed in the Health of Animals Act (www.laws.justice.gc.ca./eng/acts/H%2D3.3) and are usually of significant importance to human or animal health or to the Canadian economy.
Monitor cattle health on an ongoing basis to ensure prompt treatment or care.
Provide appropriate care, convalescence or treatment for sick, injured or lame cattle without delay.
Monitor the animals’ response to therapy or care and, if the initial treatment protocol fails, then reassess treatment options or seek veterinary advice.
Euthanize (or cull*) without delay cattle that:
*If culling, Requirements for transporting compromised animals must be followed (refer to Section 5 – Transportation). Suspicion of a reportable disease as defined by the Health of Animals Act (www.laws.justice.gc.ca./eng/acts/H-3.3) and various provincial acts must be brought to the attention of a veterinarian.
- consult a veterinarian to address new, unknown, or suspicious illness or death losses
- consult a veterinarian if the incidence of a known illness suddenly increases
- consult a veterinarian for the most appropriate treatment options when an animal is sick
- monitor the progress of treated cattle
- dispose of dead cattle according to applicable provincial/municipal regulations.
3.3 Health Conditions Related to Feedlot Cattle
Feedlots are a site where cattle are frequently commingled. At certain times of the year, there is an increased risk of the transmission of disease due to multiple stressors, such as weaning and transportation. Feedlot managers need to be proactive in the prevention, early detection and treatment of illness.
3.3.1 Managing Risk of Bovine Respiratory Disease
Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is a leading cause of sickness and mortality in the beef feedlot industry (3). Feedlot operators take a variety of management steps, including daily monitoring, to minimize the risk of BRD.
Some risk factors for bovine respiratory diseases are:
- non-vaccinated cattle
- recent weaning
- transportation and handling
- sudden or extreme changes in weather
- commingling of cattle from various sources.
Early detection and prompt treatment decrease chronicity and mortality due to BRD and other diseases (3).
Monitor the behaviour of newly-arrived feedlot cattle to facilitate the early detection of illness.
Have a disease prevention strategy for new arrivals into a feedlot.
- categorize newly-arrived cattle according to risk for BRD and other illness and apply appropriate receiving protocols (3)
- whenever possible, buy calves of known source, vaccination history, and health status (3).
There are multiple causes of lameness in cattle, including injury, nutrition and infection. An increased incidence of footrot is often associated with chronic wet conditions. A common cause of infectious arthritis is the bacterium Mycoplasma bovis which is also associated with bovine respiratory disease. Therefore, preventive measures for bovine respiratory disease may also help to reduce lameness caused by arthritis (3). Lameness due to injury can be reduced through good facility design and low-stress handling techniques, both of which help reduce slips and falls (refer to Section 1 – Animal Environment and Section 4 – Animal Husbandry).
Provide appropriate care, convalescence or treatment for lame cattle without delay.
Monitor the animals’ response to therapy or care and, if the initial treatment protocol fails, then reassess treatment options or seek veterinary advice.
Promptly cull or euthanize lame cattle that have a poor prognosis for recovery, or that do not respond to therapy or care (See Appendix E).
- see Appendices D, E and F to assist in decision-making around culling and euthanasia
- manage pen conditions to minimize mud and standing water
- work with your veterinarian to identify and resolve sudden increases in the incidence of lameness.
3.3.3 Nutritional Disorders Associated with High Energy Feeding
Nutritional disorders associated with high energy feeding include acidosis (grain overload), liver abscesses, and laminitis. In most cases, acidosis is the predisposing factor to liver abscesses and laminitis (20-22).
Acidosis is the result of a complex interaction among meal patterns and quantity, diet fermentability, ruminal microorganisms, and mechanisms of acid removal by the animal (23,24). Acute acidosis causes overt illness and is potentially fatal in cattle, whereas cattle with sub-acute acidosis may not appear sick but have reduced or variable feed intake and weight gain (25).
Design, implement, evaluate and adjust your feeding program to reduce the risk of nutrition-induced disorders, and consult your veterinarian or a nutritionist when needed.
Transition cattle from high-forage to high-energy rations gradually to avoid abrupt dietary changes.
- monitor feed bunks to assess prior consumption and adjust feeding accordingly (3)
- include forage of effective particle length in all diets to reduce sub-acute ruminal acidosis (3)
- consider adjusting rations to prevent digestive disorders when cattle feed intake is interrupted (due to storm, power outage, machinery breakdown, etc.) (3).
3.3.4 Buller-Steer Syndrome
Buller-steer syndrome is an occasional behavioural problem among feedlot steers, where one steer (buller) is repeatedly mounted by a group of other steers (riders). If not promptly removed from the pen, the buller steer can become exhausted, have reduced feed and water intake, and develop traumatic injuries (3).
Bullers must be promptly removed from their pen.
- monitor closely for relapse if bullers are re-introduced to their home pen (26).
3.3.5 Managing Pregnant Heifers in the Feedlot
On occasion, pregnant heifers may end up in the feedlot. The feedlot environment and management is not always well-suited to deal with calving heifers. This may result in significant animal welfare problems for the heifers themselves and the resulting calves. Some feedlot operators may choose, in consultation with their veterinarian, to implement a strategy to terminate unwanted pregnancies in feedlot heifers. Other operators may elect to calve them out or to remove them from their operation.
Consult with your veterinarian to develop a program for managing pregnant heifers in a feedlot.
- prevent pregnancy in heifers destined for feedlots. If possible, inform feedlot buyers if there is a chance that heifers have been exposed to a bull
- consult a veterinarian if considering spaying to prevent pregnancy in heifers destined for the feedlot. Spaying is a very infrequent practice; however, if done, it should be carried out by a veterinarian using appropriate pain management.
3.4 Safety and Emergencies
Emergencies may arise, and can compromise cattle welfare. Some pre-planning will assist producers in responding to such events in a timely and effective manner.
Have a current emergency response plan to provide feed, water and care for cattle in case of emergencies. Review this plan with all responsible personnel so it can be implemented. Ensure emergency contact numbers are readily accessible and current.
Desired Outcome: Cattle experience minimal stress and discomfort, while necessary husbandry tasks are carried out properly, safely and in a timely fashion.
4.1 Handling and Moving Cattle
There is less risk of injury to both animals and handlers when cattle are handled quietly and calmly. Experienced handlers who are aware of cattle behaviour, including herd instinct, flight zone and point of balance, reaction to wind, noise, sudden movements, light contrast or shadows etc. will be able to move cattle more smoothly. This will minimize stress and promote cattle welfare.
Animal handlers must be familiar with cattle behaviour (through training, experience or mentorship) and use quiet handling techniques.
Electric prods must only be used to assist movement of cattle when animal or human safety is at risk or as a last resort when all other humane alternatives have failed and only when cattle have a clear path to move.
Do not use electric prods repeatedly on the same animal.
Do not use electric prods on the genitals, face, udder or anal areas.
Do not use electric prods on calves less than three months of age that can be moved manually.
Willful mistreatment or intentional harm of cattle is unacceptable. This includes but is not limited to: beating an animal; slamming gates on animals; allowing herd dogs to continue pushing cattle with nowhere to move; dragging or pushing cattle with machinery (unless to protect animal or human safety).
- adjust your handling techniques and positioning according to the response of the animals and the situation
- take a course in cattle handling techniques
- use handling tools, such as flags, plastic paddles or rattles, to direct animal movement
- evaluate your cattle handling techniques regularly, and make improvements to them as needed (27). Factors to consider include the percentage of cattle:
- falling (belly or torso touches the ground) during handling
- stumbling or tripping (knee contacts ground) after being released from the chute
- requiring the use of electric prods to move
- running or jumping when leaving the chute
- vocalizing as a result of restraint.
Increasing levels of the above handling events may indicate a need for changes in lighting, noise levels, equipment, handling methods, or environment.
4.2 Reproduction and Calving Management
The majority of beef cows calve without assistance. However, careful monitoring of calving cows ensures that assistance, when needed, can be provided in a timely fashion. Knowing when and how to provide calving assistance is an important management skill that will protect both the cow and calf in the event of problems.
Calving is divided into three stages of labour:
1st Stage of Labour
- lasts 3-72 hours
- pelvic ligaments relax
- cervical mucous plug released
- cow is restless and may separate from herd
- tail elevated
- sniffs ground, may turn head toward flank
- may begin straining.
2nd Stage of Labour
- begins with appearance of “water bag”
- ends with expulsion of calf
- should last 0.5-3 hours.
3rd Stage of Labour
- expulsion of placenta
- usually expelled by 8-12 hours after birth.
To learn more about how a normal calving should proceed and how to assist the calving cow, including common post-calving complications, see Appendix C.
Calving cattle must be monitored to identify calving difficulties and ensure prompt assistance when required.
Monitor and promptly assist calves and recently-calved cows showing signs of distress.
Caesarean sections must be conducted by a veterinarian or qualified trained personnel using accepted surgical techniques and appropriate local anesthesia and post-operative pain control.
Spaying must be carried out by a veterinarian or qualified trained personnel. Consult your veterinarian on pain control when spaying heifers.
- plan a breeding period to assist in implementing other herd management practices, such as vaccination and nutrition programs
- select sires carefully on the basis of predicted calving ease or the bull’s birth weight to reduce the likelihood of calving difficulties. Sire selection should also take into account the breed, size, age, and previous calving record of the females
- time the first breeding of heifers according to their overall physical development in order to prevent calving difficulties (dystocia) and other health problems. It is recommended that heifers be at least two-thirds of estimated mature body weight at first breeding, and 85% of mature body weight by calving (28)
- ensure that cows and heifers are in suitable body condition at the time of calving (suggested targets: heifers 3; cows 2.5)
- ensure proper use of equipment designed for pulling calves
- observe young calves regularly (preferably daily) to ensure that they are adequately nourished and are healthy.
4.2.1 Colostrum Management
Colostrum has an important influence on the health and welfare of calves. The newborn calf is born with no maternal antibodies and must rely on intake of colostrum to receive passive immunity. The timing of first colostrum is particularly important since calves’ ability to absorb colostrum is substantially reduced six to eight hours after birth. The ability of the calf to defend itself against infectious diseases is directly related to the amount (litres), quality (immunoglobulin level), and timing of colostrum intake. The result of inadequate colostrum intake is a low concentration of circulating immunoglobulin in the blood of the calf, a condition known as “failure of passive transfer”. Calves with failure of passive transfer are 1.6 times more likely to become sick and 2.7 times more likely to die before weaning than calves with adequate serum immunoglobulin levels (29).
Certain cases require special attention, as calves are at a greater risk of not receiving adequate colostrum by suckling. These include: difficult calvings, mis-motherings, calves with hypothermia, or dams with udder conformation that complicates nursing. Assume all abandoned or mis-mothered calves have not suckled.
Signs that a calf may not have received adequate colostrum may include:
- weak or lethargic
- lack of suckling reflex
- cold mouth
- gaunt appearance
- dam has a full udder.
Monitor that newborn calves suckle their dams paying special attention to high risk cases.
Administer colostrum or a commercial colostrum substitute to any newborn calf showing signs of not having received it by suckling.
- administer two litres (1.8qt) of colostrum to calves that have not suckled within six hours of birth. In cold weather, intervene earlier to supplement calves
- learn how to safely use an esophageal (tube) feeder, as it may assist in administering colostrum to calves that will not suckle
- obtain supplemental colostrum from any of these sources: milked from the calf’s dam; pooled colostrum from other cows in the herd; commercial colostrum substitute. For biosecurity reasons, avoid using dairy cow colostrum.
In Canada, all cattle must be identified by an approved radio frequency identification (RFID) ear tag when they leave the farm of origin (or earlier in some provinces).
Nationally, the incidence of branding (hot iron or freeze) has decreased significantly in the last decade. According to the 2010-2011 National Beef Quality Audit (30), fewer than 10% of Canadian cattle were branded, compared to 25% in 1999. However, branding remains a necessary form of permanent identification in some parts of Canada. Brands provide proof of ownership and easy identification of cattle at a distance, and may be required in some situations (e.g. some community pastures, in remote locations, for export, and by some lending institutions). Face branding is not legal in Canada.
Freeze branding is an alternative to hot branding on dark-coloured cattle. However, it is more difficult to do properly.
Scientific evidence indicates branding by any method causes short-term acute pain and stress (31-38). Practical methods of local anesthesia during branding are lacking (3).
Until practical alternatives to branding are available, producers can minimize the impact of branding on the animal by using correct techniques.
All cattle must be identified using an approved ear tag as stipulated by applicable regulations.
When branding is required for export, by policy, or as permanent proof of ownership, it must be performed with the proper equipment, restraint and by personnel with training or sufficient combination of knowledge and experience to minimize pain to the animal.
Do not brand wet cattle due to risk of scalding.
- brand size must be appropriate to the size of the animal
- avoid re-branding cattle
- replace surgical alterations of cattle for identification purposes (such as wattling, ear-splitting) with less invasive practices. Note that these are very rare practices
- consult your veterinarian for advice on the availability and feasibility of controlling pain associated with branding
- maintain all cattle identification equipment in good working order.
4.4 Disbudding and Dehorning
The horns of beef cattle are routinely removed to decrease the risk of injuries to workers and other animals, and to minimize economic losses due to carcass bruising. The proportion of beef cattle with horns has been steadily decreasing in recent years, as the availability and adoption of polled (hornless) genetics has increased (39). Most common breeds of beef cattle have polled lines available, and the use of homozygous polled genetics eliminates the need for disbudding or dehorning without affecting productivity (3,40-42).
Disbudding refers to the removal of the horn bud before attachment to the skull. The age of horn attachment varies, but occurs at approximately 2-3 months of age. Techniques for removing horn buds include removing the horn buds with a knife, thermal cautery of the horn buds with an electric or butane-powered disbudding iron, or the application of chemical paste to cauterize the horn buds (1). Horn removal after bud attachment is referred to as dehorning. Methods of dehorning involve cutting or sawing the horn close to the skull, sometimes followed by cautery to stop bleeding. Disbudding involves less tissue trauma when horn development is still at the horn bud stage and there is no attachment of horn to the skull of the animal (1). Disbudding and dehorning cause pain and distress for all cattle (3). Your herd veterinarian is a good resource for information on possible methods of pain mitigation during and after horn removal (43).
Dehorning must be performed only by competent personnel using proper, well-maintained tools and accepted techniques.
Seek guidance from your veterinarian on the availability and advisability of pain control for disbudding or dehorning beef cattle.
Disbud calves as early as practically possible, while horn development is still at the horn bud stage (typically 2-3 months).
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2016:
- use homozygous polled bulls where practical to eliminate the need for disbudding or dehorning (3)
- avoid dehorning at the time of weaning to reduce stress (3).
Castration prevents unwanted reproduction, reduces aggression towards humans and other cattle, and improves meat quality. Castration is performed using either the surgical method (knife) or non-surgical methods (burdizzo, elastrators/banding).
All methods of castration cause pain and distress, which can be minimized by castrating as early as possible, preferably within the first week of life. Early castration also facilitates restraint of the (smaller) calves, reduces the duration of the procedure and increases operator safety (3). Current techniques for local anesthesia during castration are not practical at a herd level. Research is currently underway in Canada to seek practical solutions to these challenges.
For individual animals castrated at older ages, there is a variety of pain control methods available from your veterinarian (3).
Only personnel skilled or trained in the particular method used should be allowed to castrate cattle as improper castration is unacceptable. Improper castration can cause a number of complications, including infection. “Belly bulls” (having one or both testicles trapped against the abdomen) are caused when young calves are improperly castrated with bands and only one (or neither) testicle is captured below the band. These cattle will still exhibit bull characteristics, and the testicles will require more complicated surgical removal at a later date.
Castration must be performed by competent personnel using proper, clean, well-maintained instruments and accepted techniques.
Seek guidance from your veterinarian on the optimum method and timing of castration, as well as the availability and advisability of pain control for castrating beef cattle.
Castrate calves as young as practically possible.
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2016:
EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2018:
- consult your veterinarian about pain mitigation strategies for castration (3)
- avoid castrating at the time of weaning to reduce stress (3)
- when castrating weaned cattle, use banding to reduce the risk of excessive bleeding, and for operator safety (3)
- ensure that tetanus vaccinations are current when applying bands to castrate bulls over 180kg
- monitor calves after castration (3). Check calves frequently to ensure that they are nursing or eating, and that there are no signs of infection and/or abnormal post-surgical bleeding
- identify and record improperly castrated cattle or those with undescended testicles for appropriate further management (3).
Weaning is the process of eliminating milk from the calf’s diet (44). Under natural conditions, a cow’s milk output decreases gradually over several months. Under conventional beef production, calves are typically weaned at 5-8 months of age.
The loss of contact between cow and calf is stressful for both and the loss of milk is additionally stressful for the calf (3). Newly weaned calves are at an increased risk for getting sick, in particular when other stressors are added, such as transportation and commingling with unfamiliar calves (45).
Most weaning methods use some form of separation of the cow and calf. Weaning is usually accomplished by abruptly removing the calf from physical and visual contact with the dam. Fence-line weaning is a variation of abrupt weaning where calves are separated from their dams and placed in an adjacent pen or pasture so that auditory and visual contact is maintained. Two-stage weaning first prevents nursing by placing a nose-flap on the calf while still with the cow. In the second stage, the nose-flap is removed and the cow and calf are separated (3).
- develop a weaning strategy that minimizes stress (3)
- consider preconditioning or pre-vaccinating calves as part of your weaning strategy (3)
- consider a low-stress weaning strategy, such as two-stage or fenceline weaning (3)
- be prepared to wean earlier if pasture resources are limited and cow body condition scores are below target levels (Table 2.1) (3).
4.7 Predator Control
Predation of livestock by wild or feral animals can have a serious impact on cattle welfare, causing undue stress, injury or death.
- producers should be aware of predation risks in their area so that they may better design and implement predator control measures. Check with local or provincial authorities for regulations or programs regarding predator control
- predator control measures should not bring additional risk to the livestock being protected, such as potential exposure to poisons or traps.
4.8 Tail Docking
Tail docking is not a common practice in the beef industry, though it is occasionally done to prevent injury to and infection of the tail of cattle housed in high-density slatted-floor barns.
Beef cattle must not be tail docked unless on the advice of a veterinarian.
- when new facilities are being built, design them to prevent tail injury and subsequent infection
- reduce stocking density in slatted-floor facilities to reduce tail injuries.
Desired outcome: Cattle arrive at their destination in good condition.
Each person involved in various stages of cattle transportation in Canada has a role in ensuring that the transportation process (including loading, transport and unloading) does not cause injury, undue suffering, or death of the animals.
If you are responsible for transporting cattle, or arranging for cattle to be transported, you must follow the most current national and provincial animal transport requirements (46-48). The federal requirements for animal transport are covered under the Health of Animals Regulations, Part XII (48). They are enforced by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) with the assistance of other federal, provincial and territorial authorities. Some provinces also have additional regulations related to animal transport. If you do not comply with the regulations, you could be fined or prosecuted. If your actions or neglect are considered animal abuse, you could also be charged and convicted under the Criminal Code of Canada and/or provincial regulations.
The scope of the beef Code of Practice ends at the farm gate, but includes requirements and considerations that affect the transportation process. To avoid duplication, the Code of Practice – Transportation should be used as a reference document for the actual transportation process (49).
5.1 Pre-Transport Decision Making and Preparation for Transport
It is the responsibility of the party that is shipping (or causing to be loaded) the cattle to ensure that all animals are fit for the intended journey. Fit cattle are those in good physical condition and health that are expected to reach their destination in the same condition. Refer to Appendices D and E to determine if an animal is fit for transport and whether any special conditions apply. Note that the terms unfit and compromised are not interchangeable. Cattle that are unfit may not be transported under any conditions unless for veterinary diagnosis or treatment; whereas those that are compromised may only be transported with special provisions (refer to Appendices D and E). If you are unsure as to an animal’s fitness for transport, consult your veterinarian.
Those responsible for arranging transportation services need to know how long the cattle will be expected to be in transit, including intermediate stops, such as auction markets, and whether the transporter needs to provide additional services (e.g. feed, water, rest, etc.) during transit. When in doubt, assume the longest possibly trip.
The following are all requirements under the Health of Animals Regulations Part XII (48):
5.2 Arranging Transport
Transporters must follow the most current federal and provincial animal transport regulatory requirements (46,47,48).
Cattle must be transported by competent personnel (through training, experience, or mentorship) using safe, well-maintained equipment.
The right of the transporter to refuse to load cattle that s/he deems unfit for transport must be respected. The reason for refusal must be addressed.
Cattle producers and transporters must immediately report instances of inhumane handling to proper authorities.
- be familiar with the appropriate regulations and the Code of Practice – Transportation (49), even if you are not the one actually transporting cattle
- respect the recommendation of an experienced transporter to adjust loading densities to current weather conditions and weight restrictions
- ensure that all required documentation is completed to avoid unnecessary delays at inspection stations, borders, or other checkpoints
- provide cattle transporter(s) with the telephone number of the home or office of the shipper and receiver to immediately report an emergency situation (appropriate numbers should be furnished by shippers). Avoid long distance transport in extremely hot, humid temperatures to prevent animal suffering
- consider evening loading to avoid transport during the hottest hours of the day.
5.3 Loading and Receiving
When loading cattle, shippers should defer to the expertise of the transporter who has a general understanding of allowable weight and loading density allowable on each part of the trailer. Transporters are also aware of variations between provincial/state requirements.
General principles of good cattle handling apply to the loading and unloading of cattle (refer to Section 4.1 – Handling and Moving Cattle), and their use will reduce stress and injury for both handlers and cattle.
All Requirements under Section 4.1 – Handling and Moving Cattle apply here.
The following are all requirements under the Health of Animals Regulations, Part XII (48):
- avoid loading cattle at densities greater than recommended in the current Code of Practice – Transportation (49). Appropriate loading densities will depend on a number of factors including, but not limited to, animal size and body condition, presence of horns, and weather conditions. Cattle should be provided with enough floor space in a vehicle to maintain their balance and change position within the compartment
- eliminate gaps between the end of the loading ramp and the vehicle (49)
- ensure that the loading area promotes smooth flow of cattle on or off the vehicle. Avoid significant changes in floor height or distractions. If a difference in height between the loading surface and the vehicle floor is significant enough to cause balking, a ramp should be used
- during extreme weather, cattle waiting for loading or waiting for further actions after unloading should be able to access well drained, sheltered areas with access to water
- schedule loading and transport to try to avoid long delays in transit (e.g. borders) or at the destination (e.g. packing plants)
- locations receiving cattle should be equipped with personnel or facilities to meet the animals’ needs upon arrival, such as water or feed.
Desired Outcome: Cattle are euthanized when necessary in a timely and effective manner.
Euthanasia is the humane termination of an animal’s life. This may be necessary when a sick or injured animal is not responding favourably to treatment or has a poor prognosis. Euthanasia of an animal may also be necessary to ensure human safety, or for regulatory requirements associated with disease control. Be aware that cattle may hide signs of pain or suffering, and that this may affect your assessment of their condition in making a decision about euthanasia (19).
Having a euthanasia decision-making process and providing training in the techniques of euthanasia can help ensure that euthanasia is carried out in a timely manner. Cattle must be rendered unconscious with minimal pain or distress prior to the cessation of vital life functions. Depending on the method used, this may result from a single action (e.g. gunshot). In all cases, however, operators should be prepared to apply a second gunshot, or a secondary kill step (bleeding out or pithing) if the first application does not result in immediate unconsciousness and prompt death. This requires that all personnel involved in euthanasia be knowledgeable and competent in the techniques and equipment being used.
6.1 Euthanasia and Culling Decisions
Being prepared for on-farm euthanasia includes (50):
- competent personnel (through training, experience, or mentorship)
- access to proper equipment
- clear decision points for euthanasia (see Requirements below).
Euthanize (or cull*) without delay cattle that:
6.2 Methods of On-Farm Euthanasia
When choosing a method of euthanasia, consider the following (19):
- animal welfare
- skill level of the person performing euthanasia
- human safety
- carcass disposal
- potential need for brain tissue for diagnostic purposes.
An acceptable method for euthanizing cattle must be used (see Table 6.1).
Euthanasia must be performed by competent personnel (through training, experience, or mentorship).
Equipment used for euthanasia, such as guns or captive bolt devices, must be maintained according to manufacturers’ instructions to ensure proper function.
Non-ambulatory cattle may not be dragged or forced to move prior to euthanasia.
|Method||Suitable for||Procedure and Equipment|
(under 181kg [400lbs])
|Requires a minimum of 407 joules (300ft-lb) muzzle energy (52).
Examples of appropriate firearms include: centrefire high powered rifle or shotgun (20 gauge or greater, from no more than 10m [32ft]) (see Figure 6.2).
Note: A standard .22 calibre long rifle only produces 119-138 joules (116-135 ft-lb) of muzzle energy and is not sufficient to humanely kill cattle.
|Yearlings, Cows and Mature Bulls||Requires a minimum of 1356 joules (1000ft-lb) muzzle energy (52).
Examples of appropriate firearms include: centrefire high powered rifle or shotgun (20 gauge or greater, from no more than 10m [32ft]) (see Figure 6.2).
Note: A standard .22 calibre long rifle only produces 135 joules (100ft-lb) of muzzle energy and is not sufficient to humanely kill cattle.
Device + Secondary Kill Step
|All weight and age classes||Choose appropriate calibre, charge, and bolt length for animal size.
Restraint if needed.
A secondary method (bleeding out or pithing) may be required if the penetrating bolt device is designed only to stun the animal (see Appendix F).
|Non-penetrating Captive Bolt Device + Bleeding Out||Young calves only||Restraint if needed.
Bleeding out step required (see Appendix F).
|Approved Euthanasia Drugs||All cattle||Must be administered by a veterinarian.
Restraint if needed.
Safe disposal of carcass when barbiturates are used.
Important – The following are some examples of methods that are unacceptable because they cause suffering (50):
- manually-applied blunt trauma to the head – does not consistently cause immediate loss of consciousness
- injection of chemical agents not approved for euthanasia into conscious cattle – does not cause immediate loss of consciousness
- air embolism – causes pain associated with cardiac arrest
- electrocution – causes pain associated with cardiac arrest after ineffective stunning
- exsanguination (bleeding out) without proper stunning first – causes pain and distress prior to loss of consciousness.
Figure 6.1 Location of the brain within the skull of a mature bovine and the correct placement and direction of shot or captive bolt penetration. Proper positioning of the firearm or penetrating captive bolt is necessary to achieve the desired results. The frontal target area is high up on the head of the animal, NOT BETWEEN THE EYES. An X can be made on the animals head by drawing imaginary lines between the outside corner of the eye to the horn (or where a horn would be for polled or dehorned cattle) on the opposite side. The firearm should be positioned so that the muzzle is perpendicular to the skull. There may be some differences in location of the shot based on the skull shape and horn mass of an animal (such as for bulls).
Reprinted with permission: J.K. Shearer and A. Ramirez, College of Veterinary Medicine, Iowa State University www.vetmed.iastate.edu/HumaneEuthanasia (53).
Figure 6.2 Calves’ brains are larger relative to their body size than those of adult cattle. However, the forebrain of calves is also comparatively underdeveloped. Therefore the correct placement of the captive bolt or the aiming point of the firearm is lower as well. Tilt the gun back slightly to ensure destruction of the brainstem.
Adapted with permission from: www.facs.sk.ca/welfare_bovine_cf_euthanasia.htm.
- avoid moving or handling cattle more than necessary prior to euthanasia
- restrain cattle as necessary for euthanasia, choosing the safest and least stressful method of restraint possible
- consider, in consultation with your veterinarian, using sedation to facilitate the euthanasia of unmanageable or aggressive cattle (54)
- consider pithing as an alternative secondary kill step where aesthetic or sanitary concerns make bleeding out unfeasible (54) (see Appendix F).
6.3 Confirmation of Insensibility and Death
Death does not occur immediately but is the result of respiratory and cardiac failure, which can take several minutes (52,54). It is therefore essential that animals be swiftly rendered insensible, and remain insensible until death has occurred. For this reason, euthanasia methods that affect the brain first (shooting or captive bolt) are usually preferred (54).
An animal has not been successfully rendered insensible if it shows any of the following signs (19):
- attempts to rise or right itself
- lifts its head
- shows eye movements or blinks.
Evaluate the animal’s consciousness immediately after the application of the appropriate euthanasia method by checking for a corneal reflex (see below).
Be prepared to immediately deliver a second application should the first attempt not render the animal immediately insensible.
Confirm death before moving or leaving the animal (see below).
Confirm death: A lack of heartbeat and respiration should be used to confirm death (50):
- World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) (2012) Terrestrial Animal Health Code, Section 7 – Animal Welfare, Chapter 7.9 Animal welfare and beef cattle productions systems. Available at: www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/Internationa_Standard_Setting/docs/pdf/A_Update_2012_Chapter_7.9._Beef_cattle.pdf Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Saskatchewan Agriculture (2012) Beef Cattle Housing and Feedlot Facilities. Available at: www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/Beef_Cattle_Housing Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Beef Code of Practice Scientists’ Committee (2013) Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle: Review of Scientific Research on Priority Issues. Lacombe AB: National Farm Animal Care Council. Available at: www.nfacc.ca
- Gaughan J.B., Holt S.M., Hahn G.L., Mader T.L. & Eigenberg R.A. (2000) Respiration Rate – Is it a good measure of heat stress in cattle? Journal of Animal Science 13:329-332.
- Mader T.L., Davis M.S. & Brown-Brandl T.M. (2006) Environmental factors influencing heat stress in feedlot cattle. Journal of Animal Science 84:712-719.
- Silanikove N. (2000) Effects of heat stress on the welfare of extensively managed domestic ruminants. Livestock Production Science 67:1-18.
- Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (2010) Minimizing Heat Stress in Beef Cattle. Available at: www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/beef5157 Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- OMAFRA (2007) Cold Stress in Cows. Agdex 420/51. Available at: www.omafra.gov.on.ca/english/livestock/beef/facts/07-001.htm Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Canada Plan Service (2010) Beef Cattle Housing and Equipment, Plan M-1000. Available at: www.cps.gov.on.ca/english/bc1000/bc1000.htm Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Alberta Agriculture and Food (2008) The Beef Cow-Calf Manual. Agdex 420/10. Edmonton AB: Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development.
- Alberta Agriculture and Food (1998) Body Condition: Implications for Managing Beef Cows. Agdex 420/40-1. Available at: www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/agdex9622/$FILE/body-condition-implications-for-managing-beef-cows.pdf Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Alberta Agriculture and Food (2010) Winter Feeding of Bulls. Available at: www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/beef4881 Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Olkowski A.A. (2009) Livestock Water Quality – A Field Guide for Cattle, Horses, Poultry, and Swine. Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada. Available at: www.agriculture.gov.sk.ca/Livestock_Water_Quality_Guide Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Rushen J., de Passille A.M., von Keyserlingk M.A.G. & Weary D.M. (2008) The Welfare of Cattle. Dordrecht NL: Springer.
- Degen A.A. & Young B.A. (1990) The performance of pregnant beef cows relying on snow as a water source. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 70:507-515.
- Young, B.A. & Degen, A.A. 1991. Effect of snow as a water source on beef cows and their calf production. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 71, 585-588.
- Young B.A. & Degen A.A. (1980) Ingestion of snow by cattle. Journal of Animal Science 51:811-815.
- Health Canada (2008) Policy on Extra-Label Drug Use (ELDU) in Food-Producing Animals – Section 4.0. Available at: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/vet/label-etiquet/pol_eldu-umdde-eng.php Accessed: July 10, 2013
- Woods J., Shearer J.K. & Hill J. (2010) Recommended on-farm euthanasia practices. In: Improving Animal Welfare: A Practical Approach. (T. Grandin, ed.). Oxfordshire UK: CAB International.
- Galyean M.L. & Rivera J.D. (2003) Nutritionally related disorders affecting feedlot cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 83:13-20.
- Nagaraja T.G. & Lechtenberg K.F. (2007) Liver abscesses in feedlot cattle. Veterinary Clinics Food Animal Practice 23:351-369.
- Nocek J.E. (1997) Bovine acidosis: implications on laminitis. Journal of Dairy Science 80:1005-1028.
- Penner G.B., Yu P. & Christensen D.A. (2009) Effect of replacing forage or concentrate with wet or dry distillers’ grains on the productivity and chewing activity of dairy cattle. Animal Feed Science and Technology 153:10-10.
- Schwartzkopf-Genswein K.S., Beauchemin K.A., Gibb D.J., Crews Jr. D.H., Hickman D.D., Streeter M. & McAllister T.A. (2003) Effect of bunk management on feeding behavior, ruminal acidosis and performance of feedlot cattle: A review. Journal of Animal Science 81(E. Suppl. 2):E149-E158.
- Owens F.N., Secrist D.S., Hill W.J. & Gill D.R. (1998) Acidosis in cattle: A review. Journal of Animal Science 76:275-286.
- Feeder Associations of Alberta (FAA) and Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development (AAFRD). (2000) Alberta Feedlot Management Guide, 2nd edition (CD-ROM).
- Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) (2010) The Cattle Industry’s Guidelines for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle. Available at: www.bqa.org/CMDocs/bqa/GuidelinesfortheCareandHandlingofCattle.pdf Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Zollinger W.A. & Carr J. (1993) How to Select, Grow and Manage Replacement Heifers. EC951. Oregon State University. Available at: www.ir.library.oregonstate.edu/xmlui/bitstream/handle/1957/25171/ECNO951.pdf?sequence=1 Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Dewell R.D., Hungerford L.L., Keen J.E., Laegreid W.W., Griffin D.D., Rupp G.P. & Grotelueschen D.M. (2006) Association of neonatal serum immunoglobulin G1 concentration with health and performance in beef calves. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 228:914-21.
- Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC) (2012) National Beef Quality Audit – 2010/11 Beef Carcass Audit Fact Sheet. Available at: www.beefresearch.ca/files/pdf/fact-sheets/1181_CCA_NBQA_Factsheet_June_15_F.pdf Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Lay D.C. Jr., Friend T.H., Grissom K.K., Bowers C.L. & Mal M.E. (1992) Effects of freeze or hot-iron branding of Angus calves on some physiological and behavioural indicators of stress. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 33:137-147.
- Lay D.C. Jr, Friend T.H., Randel R.D., Bowers C.L., Grissom K.K. & Jenkins O.C. (1992) Behavioral and physiological effects of freeze or hot-iron branding on crossbred cattle. Journal of Animal Science 70:330-336.
- Lay D.C., Friend T.H., Bowers C.L., Grissom K.K. & Jenkins O.C. (1992). A comparative physiological and behavioral study of freeze and hot-iron branding using dairy cows. Journal of Animal Science 70:1121-1125.
- Schwartzkopf-Genswein K.S. & Stookey J.M. (1997). The use of infrared thermography to assess inflammation associated with hot-iron and freeze branding in cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 77:577-583.
- Schwartzkopf-Genswein K.S., Stookey J.M., de Passillé A.M. & Rushen J. (1997) Comparison of hot-iron and freeze branding on cortisol levels and pain sensitivity in beef cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 77:369-374.
- Schwartzkopf-Genswein, K.S., Stookey J.M. & Welford R. (1997) Behavior of cattle during hot-iron and freeze branding and the effects on subsequent handling ease. Journal of Animal Science 75:2064-2072.
- Schwartzkopf-Genswein K.S., Stookey J.M., Janzen E.D. & McKinnon J. (1997) Effects of branding on weight gain, antibiotic treatment rates and subsequent handling ease in feedlot cattle. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 77:361-367.
- Watts J.M. & Stookey J.M. (1999) Effects of restraint and branding on rates and acoustic parameters of vocalization in beef cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 62:125-135.
- Goonewardene L.A., Pang H., Berg R.T. & Price M.A. (1999) A comparison of reproductive and growth traits of horned and polled cattle in three synthetic beef lines. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 79:123-127.
- Goonewardene L.A., Price M.A., Liu M.F., Berg R.T. & Erichsen C.M. (1999) A study of growth and carcass traits in dehorned and polled composite bulls. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 79:383-385.
- Prayaga K.C. (2007) Genetic options to replace dehorning in beef cattle – A review. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 58:1-8.
- Stookey J.M. & Goonewardene L.A. (1996) A comparison of production traits and welfare implications between horned and polled beef bulls. Canadian Journal of Animal Science 76:1-5.
- Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (2007) Position statement: Pain Control in Animals. Available at: www.canadianveterinarians.net/documents/pain-control-in-animals Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Weary D.M., Jasper J. & Hötzel M.J. (2008) Understanding weaning distress. Applied Animal Behaviour Science 110:24-41.
- Edwards T.A. (2010) Control methods for bovine respiratory disease for feedlot cattle. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Food Animal Practice 26:273-284.
- Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) (2008) Transportation of Animals Program: Compromised Animal Policy. Available at: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/trans/polie.shtml Date modified: 2012-02-08. Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) (2008) Livestock Transport Requirements in Canada. Available at: www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/trans/transpoe.shtml Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Government or Canada (1990) Health of Animals Regulations C.R.C. c. 296. Available at: www.laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.%2C_c._296/index.html#docCont Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Canadian Agri-Food Research Council (CARC) (2001) Recommended Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Farm Animals – Transportation. Available at: www.nfacc.ca/codes-of-practice/transport Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- American Association of Bovine Practitioners (AABP) (1999) Practical Euthanasia of Cattle: Considerations for the Producer, Livestock Operator, Livestock Transporter, and Veterinarian. Available at: www.aabp.org/resources/euth.pdf Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) (2010) Glossary. Terrestrial Animal Health Code 1 (section 7.6). Available at: www.oie.int/index.php?id=169&L=0&htmfile=chapitre_1.7.6.htm Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2004) National Animal Health Emergency Management System Guidelines. Washington DC: USDA. Available at: www.dem.ri.gov/topics/erp/nahems_euthanasia.pdf Accessed: July 8, 2013.
- Shearer J.K. & Nicoletti P. (2012) Procedures for Humane Euthanasia, Humane Euthanasia of Sick, Injured, and or Debilitated Livestock. Available at: www.vetmed.iastate.edu/vdpam/extension/dairy/programs/humane-euthanasia Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) (2011) Position Statement – Euthanasia. Available at: www.canadianveterinarians.net/documents/euthanasia Accessed: July 10, 2013.
- Appelt M. & Sperry J. (2007) Stunning and killing cattle humanely and reliably in emergency situations – A comparison between a stunning-only and a stunning and pithing protocol. Canadian Veterinary Journal 48:529-534.