Development process for Codes of Practice for the Care and Handling of Farm Animals

Table of Contents

• Glossary
• Introduction and Objectives
• Steps in the Code Development or Amendment Process
• Roles and Responsibilities
• NFACC's Responsibilities
• Responsibilities of the Code Committee
• Commodity or Specialized Industry Group responsibilities
• Code of Practice Format

CODE OF PRACTICE MAINTENANCE PROCESS

• Code Technical Panels
• Interpretation of a Code
• Amendments
• Errata
• Five-year Code Review

APPENDICES

1. Guiding Principles for Codes of Practice
2. Scientific Committee Terms of Reference
3. Terms of Reference for the Code Committee Chair
4. Guidance for Code Committee Liaisons
5. NFACC Code Manager – Role and Skill Set Required
6. Code Committee Member Code of Conduct
7. NFACC Code of Practice Development Process – Letter of Intent
8. NFACC Code of Practice Amendment Process – Letter of Intent
9. Code Committee Confidentiality Principles
10. Code Committee Communication Strategy Guidance
11. Guidance on Determining if a Topic or Practice Falls within the Purview of a Code
12. Guidelines for Granting Observer Status at Code Committee Meetings
13. NFACC Code Reporting Form
14. Process and Criteria for Removal or Suspension of a Code Committee Member
15. NFACC Research Writer –  Role and Qualifications

Glossary 

Introduction and Objectives

The Codes of Practice provide critical guidance 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. 

Initiating the development of a new Code, or an update or amendment to an existing Code, remains the responsibility of the national commodity or specialized industry group. The National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) will keep a record of Code reviews and revisions, encouraging commodities to keep their Code up-to-date and relevant. It is expected that Codes will be maintained such that they remain relevant (see Code of Practice Maintenance Process). Production practices, our body of animal welfare knowledge, societal expectations, changes in government policy and international agreements on animal welfare guidelines all have an impact on Code update schedules. 

Each Code of Practice is audience specific with the scope related to the particular industry and species involved. Codes of Practice serve multiple purposes including:

• providing information and education
• serving as the foundation for animal care assessment programs
• providing reference materials for regulations. 

Appendix A – Guiding Principles for Codes of Practice offers further information on how these objectives are to be met.  The development or update of a Code of Practice generally takes at least two years. Timelines for amendments will vary but are expected to take less than one year. 

The Code Manager, Code Committee Chair, Scientific Committee Chair, and Industry Liaisons each play pivotal roles in the Code development process. They must work closely together and are central to the success of the Code. Appendices B, C, D and E provide terms of reference for each. In addition, Appendix F provides a code of conduct for Code Committee members. 

The Codes of Practice are the result of a rigorous process that takes into account the best science available for each species, compiled through an independent peer-reviewed report, along with stakeholder input. The Code development process also takes into account the practical requirements for each species—factors that need to be considered to promote consistent application across Canada and ensure uptake by stakeholders resulting in beneficial animal welfare outcomes. Given their broad use by numerous parties in Canada today, it is important for all to understand how they are intended to be used. 

All elements of the Codes, from their development through to their implementation and ongoing review by a broad spectrum of stakeholders, are designed to bring about continual improvement in animal welfare outcomes. 

Requirements 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 to undertake corrective actions or risk a loss of market options. Requirements may also be enforceable under federal and provincial regulation. 

Recommended Practices may complement the Code’s requirements, promote producer education, and encourage adoption of practices for continual improvement in animal welfare outcomes. Recommended Practices are those that 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.

Steps in the Code Development or Amendment Process

The process, as outlined below, is the same for the development of new Codes, Code amendments, and Code updates.  Codes should be reviewed five years after publication, amended as necessary, and updated at least every ten years to ensure they are current with government policy/regulations, industry practices, societal expectations, and scientific research. Prior to initiating a request to develop, amend, or update the Code of Practice the submitter should contact NFACC to discuss feasibility, timelines, funding sources, and any other considerations.

Step One – Initiation, Forming the Code Committee, and Preliminary Survey

The national commodity or specialized industry group submits a request to NFACC to develop, update, or amend the Code of Practice.² Requests to update or develop a Code will be accompanied by a signed Code of Practice Development Process Letter of Intent (Appendix G). Code amendment requests will be accompanied by a signed Code of Practice Amendment Process Letter of Intent (Appendix H). 

The commodity or specialized industry group is responsible for assembling the Code Committee based on the guidance below and assigning a Chair (refer to Appendix C – Terms of Reference for the Code Committee Chair). A Vice-Chair may be named at the discretion of the commodity or specialized industry group. When acting as Chair, the Vice-Chair will follow Appendix C – Terms of Reference for the Code Committee Chair. 

There should be broad participation of people with knowledge of the industry on the Code Committee and the selection process should be transparent. Representatives from the following participant groups must be involved in the Code development process, where applicable:

• producer (representatives from different regions and production phases or types with a target of four producers)
• transporter (with expertise in the specific species)
• veterinarian (with expertise in the specific species)
• animal welfare advocacy association
• provincial animal protection enforcement authority
• retail, restaurant, or food service organization
• processor
• Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and/or CFIA with responsibilities in animal welfare or knowledge of trade or market signals as it relates to animal welfare
• animal welfare researcher/academic (Chair of the Scientific Committee)
• provincial government representative with responsibilities in animal welfare. 

This list is not exhaustive. Other industry or non-industry participants may be included if their input would particularly benefit the Code development process. Code Committees should include no more than 15 members. 

The commodity or specialized industry group will contact a recognized national organization affiliated with NFACC to nominate the Code Committee representative from the required representative groups. 

While the process for populating the Code Committee is led by the commodity or specialized industry group, the intent is that all organizations represented accept the Code Committee’s composition. A list of all participants on the Code Committee will be presented to Code Committee members in advance of their first meeting. A final list of Code Committee members will also be submitted to NFACC. If requested, NFACC will assist the commodity group in populating the Code Committee. 

The selection of Code Committee members is a critically important task. While representatives on the Code Committee are expected to consult with their constituents, they must also be empowered and entrusted to represent and negotiate in the best interests of their constituents. 

Prospective Code Committee members should be made fully aware of the Code development process, particularly their responsibilities to the process. Appendices F, I, and J provide additional guidance to committee members. 

Process for Identifying a Substitute Animal Welfare Advocacy Representative 

In the rare case that the animal welfare advocacy groups affiliated with NFACC decline to participate in an NFACC process due to their values not being aligned with the industry (as a whole), a process will automatically be undertaken to identify a substitute animal welfare advocacy representative. The Canadian Veterinary Medical Association’s (CVMA) Animal Welfare Committee will be asked to identify the substitute by first trying to identify a representative from within the CVMA’s ranks. If an appropriate representative cannot be identified from within the CVMA, the CVMA’s Animal Welfare Committee will identify an external representative to serve as the animal welfare advocate representing the CVMA’s Animal Welfare Committee. The substitute animal welfare advocacy representative will be distinct from the CVMA’s veterinary representative and may or may not be a veterinarian. This animal welfare representative will have a depth of knowledge of the species, be able to participate constructively and in good faith, and be an effective advocate for animals. 

Other Details about Initial Code Process Steps 

The commodity or specialized industry group must also assign a liaison to work with NFACC’s Code Manager and the Code Committee Chair to maintain communications and act as a key industry point of contact. Other representative groups on the Code Committee may also identify liaisons who may attend committee meetings as observers with appropriate notice. Refer also to Appendix D – Guidance for Code Committee Liaisons for further information on liaison responsibilities. 

At least 30 days in advance of the first Code Committee meeting, NFACC will provide a notice on its website advising that the Code is to be developed, updated, or amended. In addition, a preliminary survey will be done for newly developed or updated Codes to gather top of mind issues, providing the public, producers, and all other stakeholders with an early opportunity for input.

Step Two – Forming the Scientific Committee and Establishing Priority Welfare Issues

NFACC will strike a Scientific Committee comprised of researchers with expertise in animal welfare science for the species under consideration. Targeting for a committee of six, NFACC will request two nominations from each of the CVMA, Canadian Society of Animal Science, and Canadian Chapter of the International Society for Applied Ethology. Other professional scientific bodies may be solicited as appropriate (e.g., World Poultry Science Association). This committee will elect its own chair. The Chair of the Code Committee (or alternate) will sit on the Scientific Committee as an observer. The Chair of the Scientific Committee will sit on the Code Committee.

Members of the Scientific committee will identify 3–6 priority welfare issues that they consider to be particularly important for animal welfare in the species being considered and that will particularly benefit from a review of the available scientific literature. The Code Committee will also identify a list of priority welfare issues. The two committees will come together to reach consensus on a final list of 3–6 priority welfare issues that are particularly important for the welfare of animals being considered and that will particularly benefit from a review of the available scientific literature. Some priority issues may not be addressed by the Scientific Committee for any number of reasons (e.g., insufficient research, existing protocols or other resources provide credible guidance). Welfare issues that are not addressed by the Scientific Committee will still be addressed in the Code.

Step Three – Drafting the Code of Practice and Scientific Committee’s Research Report     

In accordance with the Scientific Committee Terms of Reference (Appendix B), the Scientific Committee will write a review of the scientific literature for each priority welfare issue. The Code Committee will begin deliberating on the Code of Practice focusing first on topics not being examined by the Scientific Committee. 

Step Four – Peer Review of the Scientific Committee’s Report

After the Scientific Committee has finished its report, it will be made available to the Code Committee to ensure that the report answers the questions originally posed. The report will then be peer reviewed. NFACC will facilitate the peer review by identifying a researcher to serve as Peer Review Coordinator. Once the members of the Scientific Committee have addressed reviewers’ input to the satisfaction of the coordinator, the report will be considered finalized, and it will be made publicly available no later than when the Code is released for the public comment period. 

Step Five – Drafting the Code of Practice

The Code Committee is responsible for drafting the Code in accordance with Appendix A – Guiding Principles for Codes of Practice and using the Scientific Committee report. Appendix A includes a list of topics that should be included in each Code; if a Code Committee is considering inclusion of additional topics, it should do so in accordance with Appendix K – Guidance on Determining if a Topic or Practice Falls within the Purview of a Code. 

A central feature of the Code process is its reliance on consensus decision-making. Code Committees and Code Technical Panels collaborate during Code processes in order to reach consensus. Consensus is reached when each participant can live with the outcome or decision. Participants may not achieve all their goals, but they feel heard and can attest that a rigorous process was followed to try to find an optimal solution in everyone’s interests. Consensus is not about one side winning and the other side losing—it is about finding a solution that recognizes and integrates everyone’s interests. While it can be challenging to reach consensus, the advantage of this type of decision-making is that it ensures all interests (including minority voices and views) are represented and respected, gives all parties a say in the outcome, and promotes better understanding and respect for different viewpoints. Participants who feel that they cannot live with a proposal have a duty to help suggest solutions that would make the proposal more acceptable to them while still meeting the interests of others.³ 

The Code Committee should consult as required with their constituents to arrive at a final draft of the Code utilizing NFACC’s communications guidance (see Appendix I – Code Committee Confidentiality Principles and Appendix J – Code Committee Communication Strategy Guidance). 

Observers who attend Code Committee meetings can play an important role in building the necessary awareness and buy-in for the Code to secure its ultimate success. Approval of observers is at the discretion of the Code Committee (see Appendix L – Guidelines for Granting Observer Status at Code Committee Meetings). Observers are also subject to the guidance and principles outlined in Appendices I and J.

Step Six – Public Comment Period for the Code of Practice

The final draft Code of Practice will be submitted to NFACC. NFACC will make the draft available for a 60-day public comment period. A system for providing submissions will be made available for the comment period to facilitate the organization and consideration of feedback by the Code Committee.  

Step Seven – Consideration of Input from the Comment Period and Finalizing the Code of Practice

Following the 60-day public comment period, the Code Committee will consider the feedback within the context of improving the Code and submit a final Code (or Code amendment) to NFACC for formatting and publication. The Code Committee will also summarize the feedback received both on the draft Code from the public comment period and from the preliminary survey (see step one), noting how the Code Committee considered this feedback. The Code Committee Chair will complete and return the NFACC Code Reporting Form (Appendix M), which will provide NFACC with sufficient information to determine that the NFACC Code process was followed. If the process was appropriately followed, NFACC will support the Code or amendment. A motion to approve the Code by the national commodity or specialized industry group is common. This motion should be a formality and should not delay the Code’s publication (see Commodity or Specialized Industry Group Responsibilities). 

Upon completion of a new, updated, or amended Code, priority animal welfare research needs identified during the process will be compiled and posted to NFACC’s website. Progress in these areas will then be tracked and noted as part of the five-year Code review process (see Code of Practice Maintenance Process) and prior to the next update of the Code. 

In the event of contingencies causing delays in the Code development process, the Code Committee must notify NFACC as soon as possible. NFACC will work with the Code Committee to identify means of resolving any issues and address budgetary impacts.

Roles and Responsibilities 

NFACC's Responsibilities

NFACC will:

• provide secretariat support for the Scientific Committee and Code Committee
• provide a Manager for the Code Committee (see Appendix E – NFACC Code Manager Role and Skill Set Required)
• develop a project schedule with target dates for milestones, including completion of the Scientific Committee report, public comment period, final edits and preparation of the Code (e.g., translation), and publication
• host the public comment period
• coordinate the translation and publication of a new, updated, or amended Code of Practice
• make Codes of Practice and any amendments available on its website⁴
• work with the national commodity association or specialized industry group and other stakeholders to keep Codes relevant (see Code of Practice Maintenance Process).

NFACC will also develop a budget for each Code and will pay approved expenses for:

• Scientific Committee meeting related expenses, including supplies, room rental, hospitality, and travel expenses, as per funding program guidelines
• remuneration and expenses for the Research Writer
• Code Committee meeting related expenses, including supplies, hospitality, and travel expenses (as per funding program guidelines)
• remuneration and expenses for the Code Manager
• translation of drafts and final Code
• printed copies (English and French) of a new, updated, or amended Code, as per project budget.

NFACC’s ability to cover these expenses is ultimately tied to available funding. NFACC reserves the right to further limit maximum expenses allowed as funding dictates. NFACC will advise the commodity or specialized industry group of any required adjustments to the budget.

Responsibilities of the Code Committee

The selection of Code Committee members is a critically important task. While representatives on the Code Committee are expected to consult with their constituents, they must also be empowered and entrusted to represent and negotiate in the best interests of their constituents.

Responsibilities include:

• represent the interests of their respective nominating organization, collaborate with other committee members, and contribute to the development of the Code of Practice (Appendix A provides more information on guiding principles)
• consult with their national constituent organization as needed to ensure acceptance and understanding of the Code. Where no national body exists, the Code Committee member should consult with appropriate provincial or regional constituent organization(s)
• attend all committee meetings
• inform NFACC personnel of the number of copies of the Code required for their respective organizations
• cooperate as required to meet the requirements of any contribution agreement that provides funds for the Code’s development, update, or amendment
• submit expense claims in accordance with stipulated project funding requirements and in a timely fashion
• respect confidentiality of information and adhere to the communications guidance provided in Appendices I and J
• adhere to Appendix F – Code Committee Member Code of Conduct.

A participant may be removed or suspended from the Code Committee as outlined in Appendix N – Process and Criteria for Removal or Suspension of a Code Committee Member.

Commodity or Specialized Industry Group Responsibilities

• ensure the NFACC Code process is followed and completed with the Code finalized in a timely fashion
• submit a completed Code Reporting Form to NFACC outlining that the Code process was followed
• assign an Industry Liaison to work with the Code Manager and Code Committee Chair as per Appendix D – Guidance for Code Committee Liaisons
• facilitate awareness and support of the Code’s development such that the final Code, as determined by the consensus of the Code Committee, is accepted by the commodity or specialized industry group’s board
• coordinate distribution of the Code across the country. Provincial commodity groups will ensure distribution to organizations within their respective provinces
• develop a communications/implementation plan for the Code to maximize awareness and uptake
• pay for any reprints of the Code
• make the Code available on its website
• work with NFACC and other stakeholders to keep the Code relevant (see Code of Practice Maintenance Process).

Codes of Practice Format

Codes of Practice are produced according to an established format to be instantly recognizable as a product of this development process. This is important in order that users of the Code will recognize the credibility of the information based on the process from which the Code was developed. 

Copyright for each Code will be jointly held by the applicable commodity association/industry group and NFACC. Each Code should also have an ISBN to ensure its availability through Library and Archives Canada. 

The template and process that all Codes follow will be determined by NFACC. Suggested changes can be brought forward to NFACC for consideration at any time.

Codes of Practice Maintenance Process⁵

Background 

The report, A National Farm Animal Welfare System for Canada (published in 2012; updated in 2019), made a number of recommendations related to NFACC and the Codes of Practice. One recommendation was for Codes of Practice to be reviewed every five years and updated at least every ten years. The Code maintenance process was developed to address this recommendation.

It is the responsibility of NFACC and the applicable commodity group to maintain Codes with the objective of keeping them relevant. This section describes the process for maintaining a Code of Practice, which includes five-year reviews and may involve amendments and publishing errata or an interpretation. 

Code Technical Panels 

Upon the publication of a Code, a Code Technical Panel will be established by the commodity group, made up of sufficient expertise (or access to sufficient expertise) from the original Code Committee and/or Scientific Committee. Ideally expertise from within the Code Committee should be engaged to ensure historical memory can be accessed. However, it is recognized that this may not always be possible. On occasion it may be preferable to include expertise from outside the Code Committee. The Code Manager may be engaged on the panel as needed. Representation must include the relevant commodity association or specialized industry group and:

• research or veterinary community
• national animal welfare advocacy association
• other expertise as needed.

The panel is responsible for completing Code reviews, considering requests for amendments to the Code, and providing an interpretation or clarification in the event of questions relating to the meaning of a provision of the Code. 

Interpretation of a Code

The goal is for Codes to be written clearly such that further explanations are unnecessary. However, occasionally questions arise regarding the meaning of specific Code sections that may require clarification or interpretation. An interpretation is a written clarification of the meaning of a section of a Code of Practice that is provided by the Code Technical Panel in response to a written request for interpretation.

Requests for interpretation of a Code will be submitted to NFACC personnel for formal action. NFACC personnel may respond to informal inquiries regarding a Code of Practice and may consult the panel. However, these responses will not be considered official interpretations.

Requests for interpretation will not be considered if:

• the matter is known to be before the courts or an administrative tribunal. This includes the time from which formal steps are taken to begin a proceeding to the expiry or disposition of all appeals
• the request refers to errata.

NFACC personnel will review the request in consultation with the panel or panel Chair to ensure that it is truly a matter for interpretation. 

If the request is truly a matter for interpretation, the issue will be referred to the panel or a subsidiary committee for consideration and response. An interpretation may address either the literal text or the intent of the text. It may invoke the collective memory of Code Committee participants or refer to committee records. If there is no agreement amongst the panel as to the intent, then the literal interpretation should take precedence. 

Following a decision on the interpretation, NFACC will send a copy of the interpretation to the requestor. The interpretation will also be published on NFACC’s website. 

Amendments

An amendment alters, adds to, and/or subtracts from a section or subsection in an existing Code of Practice.

Requests for amendments may be brought forward at any time by an NFACC member to NFACC personnel or by the Code Technical Panel during the five-year review process. NFACC personnel will submit amendment requests made outside of the five-year Code review process to the panel and facilitate their deliberations as needed. The requestor of an amendment will be prepared to assist with sourcing the necessary funds for a Code amendment. Resource availability shall be considered in the decision to develop and publish an amendment.

Amendments to any Code shall be developed in accordance with the Code development process (steps 1–7). Steps 2–4 (related to the Scientific Committee) may be omitted or modified as recommended by the panel depending on the nature of the amendment and whether there is sufficient research on the topics for amendment. Amendments should be developed when:

• a conflict with another Code has been identified
• obstacles to trade and markets have been identified
• requirements are deemed to be impracticable and efforts outside the Code process to address the issue have been unsuccessful
• updates are necessary to be in respect of current practices, scientific advances, market requirements, or legislation.

In addition, the panel will ensure the following have been met before recommending the approval of an amendment request:

• there is industry support for the amendment
• resources (human and funding) are available to support the amendment process
• a clear scope/project charter has been developed by the requestor
• panel members are in support of initiating the amendment.

The panel will provide its recommendation to NFACC, which will follow up with the national commodity or specialized industry group to confirm their support through a signed Code of Practice Amendment Process Letter of Intent (Appendix H). The amendment request will then be submitted to NFACC’s board for a final decision.

An amendment may involve a single topic or several topics packaged under one amendment. No more than three separate amendments shall be published. The development of a fourth amendment or an amendment modifying more than one-third of the Code’s pages⁶ shall trigger a full Code update. Amendments should not be initiated for a Code that has existed for six or more years.

A record of requests for amendments will be tracked and documented.

Errata

Errata may be issued to correct errors after a Code has been published. Examples include typographical errors, misprints, and omissions of approved text. Errata should only be published where the errors may cause confusion or misuse of the Code. Errata are issued on the joint authorization of NFACC and the national commodity or specialized industry group and do not require approval by a Code Committee or Code Technical Panel. 

Five-year Code Review

Codes of Practice will be reviewed five years after publication. A review may result in:

• reaffirmation of the Code
• recommendation to initiate a full Code update with proposed timelines
• recommendation to initiate Code amendments.

A review is intended to provide an opportunity to reflect upon the overall progress made since a Code’s publication, identify challenges, and determine the relative priority level for that Code’s next full update. Prioritization allows for the staggering of Code updates and avoids a glut that will overburden the limited resources of NFACC and its partners. Prioritization also ensures that resources are directed where needed.

The five-year review process entails a summary report prepared by the Code Technical Panel and provided to NFACC such that it can be circulated to NFACC members 60 days in advance of an NFACC meeting (a report template will be provided). The report should include:

• progress on research priorities identified through the Code development process
• information on Code awareness and implementation
• information pertaining to the value demonstrated from the current Code and its continued relevance
• any challenges identified with the current Code (industry should track areas needing attention for their next Code update) and their degree of relevance in terms of prioritizing a Code update⁷
• the panel’s recommendation for the review outcome.

NFACC will issue a reminder notice to the appropriate national commodity or specialized industry group when a Code has been in place for four years to allow time to prepare for the five-year review. Irrespective of whether a Code has undergone amendments, it shall follow the five-year review process. The panel should use the preparation time allowed to ensure all points that need to be covered within the summary report are addressed and vetted with the appropriate allied groups. This will enable a seamless review process with satisfactory outcomes for all. The panel will designate a person to deliver a presentation to NFACC on its summary report.

The five-year review process presentation will take place during regular NFACC meetings. However, if agreement on the outcome of the review is not forthcoming, future deliberations should be done outside of the NFACC table and amongst the relevant stakeholders.⁸ NFACC can assist if requested (e.g., organize and/or facilitate the discussion). Once agreement has been reached, the final recommendation will be brought forward to NFACC’s board for a formal motion to approve.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

Funding for the Codes of Practice is provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) through the Agricultural Flexibility Fund, as part of Canada’s Economic Action Plan.

 APPENDIX A 

Guiding Principles for Codes of Practice

All participating commodity groups agree to develop or revise their Codes in accordance with these guiding principles.  NFACC will support Codes of Practice that follow these guidelines and the NFACC Code development process. 

Guiding Principles 

1. Codes should be based on the best available peer reviewed science and other credible knowledge sources (industry publications/experience, expert opinion, anecdotal evidence, etc.), referencing those sources wherever possible and providing a rationale for requirements and recommendations.  Requirements and recommended practices should be defensible and changed as new information is brought forward. In addition, requirements and recommended practices should be practical, manageable and consider economic implications. 
2. Codes should be clearly articulated to ensure easy understanding by all users. The layout and design of Codes should facilitate an understanding of fundamental obligations/requirements (musts) and recommendations that promote a higher level of care (shoulds).
3. Codes should primarily deal with the criteria that need to be met in order to achieve an acceptable level of animal husbandry. Requirements should be clearly worded (i.e., using the term “must”) and have measurable components, recognizing that they may be used in an assessment process. 
4. Codes should also strive for continual improvement in animal care through recommendations that promote best practices.
5. Codes should be regularly reviewed (five years after publication), and updated at least every ten years, to ensure they are current with government policy/regulations, industry practices, and animal welfare research.  
6. Code updates or amendments should begin with a review of comments from the previous public comment period to identify comments that continue to be relevant.
7. Codes should take into consideration other standards or Codes that may have implications for Canadian producers. The Codes should meet or exceed World Organisation for Animal Health standards as a demonstration of Canada’s implementation of those standards.
8. Codes should have a clear scope and aim for seamlessness such that there are no gaps with adjacent sectors.
9. All Codes must be publicly available.
10. The following topics should be included in each species-specific Code:

• housing and handling facilities
• feed and water
• health management (e.g., record keeping, care of sick or injured animals)
• husbandry/stockmanship (e.g., handling, care of young and cull animals/poultry)
• emergency management and preparedness (e.g., for barn fires, power outages) and resources for further information
• pre-transport considerations
• euthanasia.

Guidance on Animal Welfare Criteria

The Codes of Practice need to contain requirements and recommendations that can be implemented, and criteria that can be used to tell whether a given practice or facility is compliant with the Code. 

Outcome-based or animal-based criteria should be used where possible because they are generally related most directly to animal welfare, and because they can be applied to a wide range of production systems. Such criteria can be qualitative (all animals should be able to lie down in normal resting postures at the same time) or quantitative (no more than 1% of animals should slip during handling). Where possible, quantitative criteria should be used. 

For certain measures, it is possible to identify critical levels beyond which welfare is expected to be adversely affected. Such levels are normally determined by scientific research. For example, welfare in some species is noticeably affected if ammonia concentrations in the air exceed 25 ppm. For other measures, it may be more appropriate to set or recommend performance targets (e.g., that no more than 10% of animals should have an injury).

In some cases, conditional criteria can be used. These generally specify what actions should be taken under certain conditions. These can include both qualitative and quantitative elements. As examples, if more than 2% of birds arrive at the slaughter plant with broken wings, catching crews should be re-trained to catch birds in ways that are less likely to cause injuries. Or in months where hot weather is expected, stocking density should be reduced so that birds have enough space to perform wing-stretching unimpeded.  

APPENDIX B

Scientific Committee Terms of Reference

Background

It is widely accepted that animal welfare codes, guidelines, standards or legislation should take advantage of the best available knowledge. This knowledge is often generated from scientific literature.  

In re-establishing the Code of Practice development process, NFACC recognized the need for a more formal means of integrating scientific input into the Code of Practice process. A Scientific Committee review of priority animal welfare issues for the species being addressed provides valuable information to the Code Committee in developing or revising a Code of Practice. As the Scientific Committee report is publicly available, the transparency and credibility of the Code is enhanced. 

Purpose and Goals

The Scientific Committee will develop a report synthesizing the results of research relating to priority animal welfare issues, jointly agreed to by the Scientific Committee and the Code Committee. The report is co-authored by all members of the Scientific Committee; therefore, all members must be willing to stand by the content. The report will be used by the Code Committee in drafting the Code of Practice for the species in question. The Scientific Committee’s report will not contain recommendations following from any research results. Its purpose is to present an objective, unbiased compilation of the scientific findings. 

Timeframe

The Scientific Committee should expedite the completion of their report to the best of their ability. The report is expected to take one year to complete. Resource availability may limit the scope and breadth of the report so the identification of a select number of clear priority issues that can be examined within a one-year timeframe is key. 

Accountability

The Scientific Committee is accountable to NFACC in ensuring that they meet the requirements of these Terms of Reference. 

Communication

The Scientific Committee, through its Chair, is expected to have an open line of communication with:

• NFACC, through the NFACC Division Director
• the Code Manager
• the Code Committee. 

Implementation Framework

The Scientific Committee will elect its own chair. The Code Committee Chair (or alternate) will sit as an observer on the Scientific Committee. 

The committee will identify a priority list of 3–6 issues that they consider to be particularly important for animal welfare in the species being considered and that will particularly benefit from a review of the available scientific literature. 

The Code Committee will follow the same process. The two committees will meet to collectively identify a list of issues for the Code being addressed. Some priority issues may not be addressed by the Scientific Committee for any number of reasons (e.g., insufficient research, existing reports or protocols provide credible guidance). Welfare issues that are not addressed by the Scientific Committee may still be addressed in the Code. 

Once the list of priority welfare issues is finalized, the Scientific Committee will develop reviews of the scientific literature for each of these issues. If necessary, the Scientific Committee may identify additional research expertise to address priority issues and facilitate the timely completion of their mandate. NFACC will contract a Research Writer with the appropriate academic background to assist the Scientific Committee (see Appendix O – NFACC Research Writer Role and Qualifications). 

In developing the report, the Scientific Committee should consider that evaluations of animal welfare can be based on three general overlapping types of concern: biological functioning (including health and productivity), how the animal feels (including measures of pain and preferences), and the naturalness (including the animal’s ability to perform behaviours that are important to it). The weighting or degree of importance attributed to each of these concepts can vary between individuals and is impacted by culture, educational focus, personal values and experiences, and practical realities. Much previous confusion has resulted from these different concerns being poorly articulated, and in some cases different conclusions can be derived from the same scientific findings if different types of welfare concern are considered most important. 

The Scientific Committee should focus on peer-reviewed literature in its report, including recent literature reviews when appropriate. 

The Scientific Committee report should be based on a broad view of welfare that encompasses all aspects of animal welfare and explicitly describes the link between the literature, the type of welfare concern, and the conclusion. After the Scientific Committee has completed its report, the report will be made available to the Code Committee to ensure that it answers the questions originally posed. 

It is not the task of the Code Committee to evaluate the scientific merit of the report—this task falls to the peer reviewers when the document is submitted for peer review.  

NFACC will identify a Peer Review Coordinator whose role is to:

• identify and secure peer reviewers with the appropriate expertise
• present the Scientific Committee’s report and the Scientific Committee’s terms of reference to the peer reviewers, with guidance relative to timelines for completion of their task
• compile the peer reviewers’ comments for the Scientific Committee
• review the Scientific Committee’s response to peer reviewer comments and determine if the report satisfactorily addresses concerns raised or provides a reasonable rationale for not addressing a concern. 

The peer review should be as broad as is practicable within the timelines allowed and should aim at achieving a scientific consensus. The Scientific Committee will undertake to reconcile issues raised during the peer review process to the satisfaction of the peer review coordinator. The Scientific Committee report will only be finalized after it has gone through a peer review process and is accepted by the Peer Review Coordinator. 

Once finalized, NFACC personnel, in consultation with the Chairs of the Scientific Committee and Code Committee, will agree on a release date. The Scientific Committee’s report will be publicly available no later than when the Code of Practice is released for a 60-day comment period. A communication package will accompany the release if it is in advance of the public comment period to avoid misunderstandings around what might be in the Code itself. 

The Chair of the Scientific Committee will sit on the Code Committee as a full participant. The Scientific Committee will be available if questions or issues arise in the Code development process that require expert scientific opinion or guidance. 

Deliverables

A Scientific Committee report on identified animal welfare priority issues within the noted species that incorporates:

• a synthesis of research related to each priority issue
• some discussion of the methodology and quality of specific studies if this is relevant to the conclusions
• summary of any consensus of the scientific body of knowledge for each priority issue, taking into consideration the different perspectives for measuring animal welfare (e.g., biological functioning, affective states, and the ability to express normal or natural behaviours). In some cases, there may not be a consensus. This should be noted too, with possible explanations offered.
• identify gaps in knowledge and areas for further research
• other information relating to the priority issues that is deemed important in the development of the Code of Practice. 

Cost/Budget

Travel and meeting expenses will be covered by NFACC according to project guidelines. NFACC will also cover remuneration for a Research Writer (Appendix O). Additional limitations may be implemented to ensure that the report is completed on time and within budget. NFACC’s ability to cover these expenses is ultimately tied to available funding. NFACC reserves the right to further limit allowable expenses as funding dictates.   

APPENDIX C

 Terms of Reference for the Code Committee Chair

The Code Committee Chair is typically appointed by the national commodity or specialized industry group. The Chair is a full member of the Code Committee and has observer status on the Scientific Committee (unless an alternate is chosen). The Chair plays a critical role within the Code development process and is important to the success of the Code being developed. This individual must work collaboratively with all participants in the Code process, have strong chairperson skills, and maintain a commitment to the consensus mindset. The consensus mindset is not simply a process or a series of checkboxes, but rather it embodies a way of thinking that actively embraces the opportunities the diverse members of the Code Committee have to interact such that they advance shared goals and interests. 

1.  General Responsibilities 

The Chair works closely with the Code Manager and Industry Liaison, as required. The Chair's primary roles are to:

• act as the Chairperson at Code Committee meetings
• ensure the Code Committee functions effectively and meets its obligations and responsibilities
• provide leadership to enable the Code Committee to act as an effective team in carrying out its responsibilities
• in collaboration with the Code Manager and Industry Liaison, ensure the Code process is followed, and make NFACC aware of any issues
• participate on the Scientific Committee as an observer (unless an alternate is chosen). 

2.  Working with the Code Manager and Industry Liaison 

The Code Committee Chair has the responsibility to:

• act as an advisor to the Code Manager
• ensure the Code Manager and Industry Liaison are aware of concerns of the Code Committee
• work with the Code Manager and Industry Liaison to ensure the Code Committee is meeting its obligations and responsibilities. 

3.  Managing the Code Committee 

The Chair has the responsibility to:

• in collaboration with the Code Manager and Staff Liaison, ensure that issues are addressed at and between Code Committee meetings as required
• ensure all Code Committee members have the opportunity to be heard at Code Committee meetings, and that interactions between Code Committee members are respectful and civil
• encourage dialogue that builds consensus and develops teamwork within the Code Committee
• receive and respond to requests for observer status at Code Committee meetings as per Appendix L – Guidelines for Granting Observer Status at Code Committee Meetings
• ensure observers respect Code Committee meeting protocols. This can be facilitated by setting up meeting rooms such that Code Committee members sit at a main table, with observers positioned peripheral to the main table
• facilitate and resolve conflicts that may arise. Contentious topics require an approach that allows each member of the Code Committee to communicate respectfully and be heard. Resolving disagreements in a mutually acceptable manner ultimately determines whether the Code is successful or not. Any substantial issues should be brought to the attention of NFACC’s Division Director. 

These terms of reference apply to the Code Committee Vice-Chair that is acting as Chair.

APPENDIX D

Guidance for Code Committee Liaisons

Code Committee Liaisons play a pivotal role within the Code development process. The national commodity or specialized industry group must name an industry liaison who will work closely with the Chair of the Code Committee and Code Manager. Each primary member of NFACC that has a representative on the Code Committee may also designate a liaison person at their own expense. Code Committee Liaisons must be identified at the outset of the Code process. All liaisons play a critical intermediary role informing communications between their representative and constituent organization. Their participation secures buy-in for the Code as it moves through the development process and is ultimately finalized. 

Liaisons are not members of the Code Committee unless otherwise named to the Code Committee. Therefore, their role at Code Committee meetings is one of standing observer (see Appendix L – Guidelines for Granting Observer Status at Code Committee Meetings). 

Responsibilities may include:

• present a final list of Code Committee members to NFACC to initiate the Code development process (applies to industry liaison only)
• assist with sourcing appropriate meeting rooms for the Code Committee to meet face-to-face (applies to industry liaison only)
• act as the key industry point of contact for the Code Manager (applies to industry liaison only)
• work with the Code Manager in facilitating the Code Committee in meeting its objective of finalizing the Code of Practice
• track in kind contributions from industry participants involved in Code development (applies to industry liaison as needed)
• work with the Code Manager to ensure timelines are met relative to the Code’s development and finalization (applies to industry liaison only)
• assist the Code Manager in compiling feedback from the Code Committee or Scientific Committee on the Code process
• work with NFACC to ensure all public communications issued by the commodity group (i.e., press releases, website notices, presentations, newsletter articles) relative to the Code being developed or Code process have AAFC approval as per the project contribution agreement (applies to industry liaison only)
• ensure communication messages of the respective organization are consistent and based on key messages as developed through the project
• work with NFACC to inform communications and promote buy-in for the Codes
• work with their commodity group to develop and implement a plan for promoting the Code of Practice and communicate that plan as appropriate to NFACC for its reporting to funders (applies to industry liaisons only)
• follow Code Committee Member Code of Conduct (Appendix F), Code Committee Confidentiality Principles (Appendix I), and Code Committee Communication Strategy Guidance (Appendix J). 

In some cases, the industry liaison may also be responsible for managing the expenses of industry Code Committee members. This may include tracking and acquiring all original receipts for eligible project expenses incurred and submitting them for reimbursement. 

APPENDIX E 

NFACC Code Manager –

Role and Skill Set Required  

APPENDIX F

Code Committee Member Code of Conduct 

This Code of Conduct guides Code Committee members in their approach to Code of Practice deliberations and interactions with other members of the Code Committee. Code Committee members hold themselves accountable to these principles:

TRUST – I will undertake and encourage actions that build trust and credibility amongst participants in the Code development process.

RESPECT – I will respect not only the views and values of other Code Committee members, but also their areas of expertise and authorities. Respect guides my interactions with fellow Code Committee members.

COMMUNICATION – I will strive for open communication that builds relationships and mitigates challenges that may stand in the way of achieving our common interest in promoting farm animal welfare.

CONSENSUS – I will operate through a consensus-based model of decision making in the development of this Code.

COLLABORATION – I will strive to share information and work with other committee members in advancing farm animal welfare through the Codes of Practice.

COMMITMENT – I will follow all applicable regulatory requirements, along with the applicable Code of Practice for animals under my care. Where a Code of Practice does not exist I will provide all animals under my care with an appropriate balance of the 5 freedoms, i.e.

• Freedom from hunger and thirst
• Freedom from discomfort
• Freedom from pain, injury or disease
• Freedom to express normal behaviour
• Freedom from fear and distress.  

APPENDIX G 

NFACC Code of Practice Development Process – Letter of Intent

This letter of intent confirms that <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> understands the process and responsibilities with regard to the update, development and completion of the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species>. 

<Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> has received and is fully aware of:

• the NFACC Code of Practice development process
• respective financial and other responsibilities as outlined in the above-mentioned document or as provided by NFACC
• requirements of any funding contribution agreement that will impact project activities, resource availability, and information management. 

Further <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> agree to work with NFACC to:

• identify appropriate representatives for the Code Committee as required, including consideration of Appendix F – Code Committee Member Code of Conduct
• ensure that NFACC’s Code of Practice development process is followed and completed for the development of the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species>
• submit a completed Reporting Form to NFACC (template to be provided) outlining how the Code process was followed
• cooperate as required to meet the requirements of any contribution agreement that provides funding for the Code’s update and completion
• designate a <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> liaison that will assist NFACC in industry communications
• promote the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species> within the industry and allied groups
• make the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species> available on <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> website
• coordinate distribution of the Code of Practice amongst producers across the country
• pay for any reprints of the Code of Practice.

APPENDIX H 

NFACC Code of Practice Amendment Process – Letter of Intent 

This letter of intent confirms that <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> understands the process and responsibilities with regard to the amendment of the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species>. 

<Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> has received and is fully aware of:

• the NFACC Code of Practice amendment process
• respective financial and other responsibilities as outlined in the above-mentioned document or as provided by NFACC
• requirements of any funding contribution agreement that will impact project activities, resource availability and information management. 

Further <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> agree to work with NFACC to:

• identify appropriate representatives for the Code Committee as required, including consideration of Appendix F – Code Committee Member Code of Conduct
• ensure that NFACC’s Code of Practice process is followed and completed for the amendment of the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species>
• submit a completed Reporting Form to NFACC (template to be provided) outlining how the Code process was followed
• cooperate as required to meet the requirements of any contribution agreement that provides funding for the Codes amendment
• designate a <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> liaison person that will assist NFACC in industry communications
• promote the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species>within the industry and allied groups
• make the Code of Practice for the care and handling of <species> available on <Commodity organization or specialized industry group name> website
• coordinate distribution of the Code of Practice amongst producers across the country
• pay for any reprints of the Code of Practice. 

APPENDIX I 

Code Committee Confidentiality Principles

It is the intent of the National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) that Code Committees operate in a transparent, inclusive manner.  The complexity of issues being addressed by the Code Committees is such that it will likely be necessary to seek advice from individuals or groups that are outside of the Code Committee process on occasion. However, confidentiality of Code Committee deliberations must also be respected in order to ensure participants can share their views freely and openly. 

Code Committee participants acknowledge the importance of confidentiality and agree to the following principles:

1. Documentation provided to the Code Committee must be used by members only for the purpose for which it is being shared (i.e., consideration of issues, development of the Code of Practice, stakeholder consultation).
2. Proprietary, sensitive, or confidential business information will only be shared with permission from the owner/steward, and the information will be labelled to identify its security level.
3. Code Committee meetings should be considered “Social Media Free Zones” due to the nature of content discussed and the importance of confidentiality during discussions.
4. Documents marked “confidential” will not be shared outside of Code Committee meetings. The Code of Practice under development by the Code Committee will be clearly marked “confidential” until it is published (i.e., for the public comment period and final publication).
5. Code Committee deliberations are confidential; specific comments, attributed to individuals, must not be discussed or disclosed.
6. There will be no audio or video recordings at any Code meetings or teleconferences, except by the Code Manager who will seek permission from committee members before recording a meeting.
7. If information is disclosed contrary to this understanding, the Code Committee Chair, Code Manager and NFACC Division Director are to be promptly notified. 

Refer also to Appendix J for further guidance on confidentiality as it relates to overall communication strategies during the Code process.  

 APPENDIX J 

Code Committee Communication Strategy Guidance

This guidance is for the use of Code Committee members during the Code development process. 

The ultimate success of the Code process will depend on the involvement and buy-in of the various stakeholders around the table. To ensure support for the Code once released, an effective communication strategy is needed throughout the Code development process. The following types of communications during the Code’s development are envisioned: general/public, stakeholder/internal, and individual communications. 

All communications during the Code’s development must also abide by Appendix I – Code Committee Confidentiality Principles. 

General/Public Communications 

Principles for general/public communications:

• only individuals identified as spokespersons for their organization should do media interviews or presentations where media may be present
• prior to any media interview or public or semi-public presentation, spokespersons should familiarize themselves with any speaking points and/or media messages provided by NFACC and the organization they represent
• specific information on draft Code content or other confidential Code related information must not be shared publicly prior to the public release of the Code
• Code Committee deliberations are confidential; specific comments, attributed to individuals, must not be discussed or disclosed
• social media postings (e.g., Facebook, Twitter, Instagram) are restricted to information that has been approved and released for public distribution by NFACC. 

Internal to Stakeholders 

This section addresses the need for more detailed communications (i.e., consultations on Code topics, briefings of finalized content) that may be needed to reach specific audiences and help ensure their commitment to the process and the direction being taken by the Code Committee. These communications pieces would be considered restricted to the audience identified (i.e., boards, designated committees). A balance is required between the need for transparency while ensuring that the Code Committee remains in charge of the Code’s development. Each Code participant has the responsibility to ensure its membership is up to date on the Code process and direction.  

Detailed information about Code content must not be shared beyond the Code Committee until and unless the Code Committee has defined a broader group that should be privy to such information prior to the public release of the Code. 

The target audiences include:

• constituent groups represented on the Code Committee
• retail/foodservice companies or organizations
• government. 

Materials, including key messages, should be developed by the Code Manager (in consultation with Code Committee Liaisons) and reviewed by the Code Committee and other NFACC personnel if needed. Code Committee members and liaisons should be responsible for conducting internal consultations and briefings. The Code Manager will orient any Code Committee member in advance of an internal consultation or briefing to ensure consistent use of the materials.

Guidelines for ongoing, internal consultations about Code topics, along with briefings on finalized Code content (in advance of the comment period or final publication):

• for ongoing, internal consultations on Code topics, concepts being considered rather than the actual proposed text should be shared
• materials for consultations or briefings must be marked “confidential” and must not be circulated beyond the intended audience; materials for ongoing, internal consultations must also include a date or version number along with the caveat that information is still under discussion and subject to change
• the details of Code Committee deliberations are strictly confidential; specific comments, attributed to individuals, must not be discussed or disclosed
• Code Committee members should advise the Code Manager of confirmed consultations so that consultations efforts can be compiled.

NFACC will help coordinate communications planning among stakeholder groups that are privy to a confidential briefing so that common or key messaging can be developed. 

Individual Communications 

There will be situations where individuals not involved in the Code process, or not party to internal communications, need information (e.g., for the purpose of planning, building, etc.). It is preferable to keep as much detail confidential until the public comment period or final publication of the Code. However, it may be important to provide the best information possible with the caveat that information is still under discussion and subject to change. The “need to know” nature of these discussions will primarily reside within the agriculture community. Code Committee representatives can, at their discretion, have private conversations about the Code where those conversations are deemed vital. These kinds of conversations are strictly on a “need to know” basis meant to inform important decisions. Any private conversation where details of the current draft of the Code are revealed need to include a caveat that the information provided is preliminary and not final, so while decisions may be informed by the discussion, they should not be determined by the discussion. Conversations should start and end with the caveat.

APPENDIX K

Guidance on Determining if a Topic or Practice Falls within the Purview of a Code

Some key questions should be asked before a Code Development Committee proposes to include additional topics areas in a Code of Practice:

1. Is the practice considered legal/allowable in some provinces? Practices must be legal/allowable to be included in a Code.

If a practice is legal/allowable:

2. Is the practice performed by or under a reasonable degree of control of the primary user of the Code (i.e., farmer, transporter)? A practice should not be included in a Code if it is not performed by or under the reasonable control of the primary user of the Code.

If a practice is performed by or under the control of the primary user of the Code:

3. What is the animal welfare implication of not including guidance in the Code?
1. Low risk to animal welfare (e.g., biosecurity, as appropriate guidance is provided directly to farmers by other means; providing guidance would not have a significant impact on animal welfare)
2. Moderate risk to animal welfare (e.g., guidance is only needed for a small subset of farmers)
3. High risk to animal welfare (e.g., the majority or high numbers of farmers are undertaking a practice for which the risk to animal welfare is significant).

If a Code Committee is able to demonstrate that a practice is legal/allowable in at least some provinces, under the control of primary users of the Code, and has a moderate to high risk for the welfare of animals, then they are empowered to decide to include useful guidance within the Code on that practice. Code Managers should make NFACC’s Division Director aware if additional topic areas are being considered. In turn, NFACC’s Division Director will bring it to the attention of NFACC’s Executive Committee.

Code Managers should bring to the attention of NFACC’s Division Director and executive any situations where there may be concerns in applying the guidance. The executive will then deliberate next steps.

Some topics or practices may be unpalatable to many and have a high risk relative to public acceptance. Public perception cannot be the determining factor for deciding what is included/excluded from a Code of Practice. 

APPENDIX L

Guidelines for Granting Observer Status at
Code Committee Meetings

1. Observers may be accepted at Code Committee meetings at the discretion of the Code Committee once committee members are fully oriented to the Code development process and have an opportunity to discuss the role and value of observers. This means that requests for observer status will generally not be accepted until after the first meeting of Code Committee.
2. All requests for observer status at Code Committee meetings shall be channeled to the Code Committee via the Code Manager and Code Committee Chair.
3. Requests for observer status must be made at least one week in advance of any Code Committee meeting.
4. Observers shall provide a short and current biography with their request such that the Code Committee can assess the reason for, and value of, them observing the meeting.
5. Observers at the Code Committee meeting will not participate in the discussions of the Code Committee, unless invited by the Chair, and will not be involved in Code Committee decision making.
6. Observers may be granted “special advisor” status to allow them to contribute relative to their specific expertise.  However, special advisors will limit themselves to relaying information in their area of expertise and will not be involved in Code Committee decision making.
7. There are benefits to identifying “standing observers”. Standing observers may be utilized as Code champions down the road given their in-depth awareness of the process behind Code decisions. The expectation is that standing observers will attend all meetings once approved.
8. Observers will respect the confidentiality of information distributed or discussed at the Code Committee meeting in accordance with Appendices F and G. 

APPENDIX M

NFACC Code Reporting Form

The aim of this reporting form is to provide sufficient information to NFACC to determine that the NFACC Code process was appropriately followed. NFACC will support all Codes that follow its development or amendment process for Codes of Practice for the care and handling of farm animals. Check all boxes that apply. 

• The Letter of Intent has been signed identifying that the national commodity or specialized industry group understands the process and responsibilities with regard to the update, development and completion of its Code.
• The Code Committee was formed as per NFACC’s Guiding Principles for Codes of Practice.
• A Scientific Committee was formed as per NFACC Code development process and priority welfare issues were agreed upon between the Scientific Committee and the Code Committee.
• The Scientific Committee finalized a priority welfare issues report as per the Scientific Committee Terms of Reference, which has undergone a peer review process.
• The Code Committee has utilized the Scientific Committee report in drafting the Code of Practice.
• The principles outlined within the Guiding Principles for Codes of Practice have been followed in developing the Code.

• The format template provided by NFACC for Codes has been followed. 

APPENDIX N

Process and Criteria for Removal or Suspension of a Code Committee Member 

Removal of a Code Committee member 

Code Committee members may be removed from the committee for any of the following reasons:

1. the organization that the member represents notifies NFACC’s Division Director in writing (email notices are acceptable)
2. if by notice in writing (email is acceptable) to NFACC’s Division Director he or she resigns and such resignation, if not effective immediately, becomes effective in accordance with its terms
3. if an order is made declaring him or her to be a mentally incompetent person or incapable of managing his or her own affairs
4. if he or she is convicted of any criminal animal abuse, or other contraventions of animal welfare legislation, either as an individual or as a director of a company that is convicted of animal abuse
5. if, he or she is not actively contributing to the development of the Code
6. if he or she is found to be acting in contravention of the Code Committee Member Code of Conduct (Appendix F). 

For clauses a) and b) the decision rests with the organization and/or the individual Code committee member. 

For clauses c) and d) NFACC’s Board is responsible for determining whether the Code Committee member should be removed. In the event of a decision to remove the Code Committee member under clauses c) or d), the NFACC Board will direct the Division Director, or such other officer as may be designated by the Board, to provide 20 days of notice of removal to the member and shall provide reasons for the removal.The Board’s decision shall be final and binding without any further right of appeal. NFACC’s Division Director will keep a record of any decisions made by the Board. 

For clauses e) and f) the Code Committee is responsible for determining whether the Code Committee member should be removed by referring to Responsibilities of the Code Committee and Appendix F – Code Committee Member Code of Conduct. The Code Committee must arrive at a consensus that the Code Committee member should be removed and make NFACC’s Division Director aware of that decision. In the event of a decision to remove the Code Committee member under clauses e) or f), the Code Committee Chair will direct the Code Manager to provide 20 days of notice of removal to the Code Committee member and shall provide the reasons for the removal. NFACC’s Division Director should be copied on the notice. 

Also, for e) and f) the Code Committee member being removed may make written objections to the NFACC Executive through the Division Director in response to the notice received within the 20-day period. If no written submissions are received, the Code Committee member will be considered removed from the Code Committee. If a written submission is received in accordance with this section, the NFACC Executive will consider such submissions in arriving at a final decision and shall notify the member concerning such final decision within a further 20 days from the date of receipt of the submissions. The Executive’s decision shall be final and binding, without any further right of appeal. 

Suspension of a Code Committee member

NFACC expects that Code Committee members have a true passion for animal welfare and abide by Appendix F – Code Committee Member Code of Conduct. If the Code Committee member is accused of animal neglect, abuse, or other regulatory contravention related to animal welfare he or she will be immediately suspended from the Code Committee pending further information. 

This may be a temporary measure, but it is critical that NFACC takes animal neglect and abuse seriously. 

The NFACC Executive committee is responsible for determining if the Code Committee member should be suspended and the criteria for lifting the suspension. The NFACC Executive will direct the Division Director, or such other officer as may be designated, to provide immediate notice (via email or letter) of the suspension. 

APPENDIX O

NFACC Research Writer –
Role and Qualifications

Reporting Structure 

Research Writers take direction from Scientific Committee members in the development of the Scientific Committee’s research report, working closely with the Chair of the Scientific Committee. Ultimately, research writers are accountable to NFACC’s Division Director. Research Writers also need to work closely with the respective Code Manager and be capable of working independently.  

Qualifications:

• Post graduate education in animal welfare science including the completion and defense of a graduate thesis.
• Literature review capabilities and access to on-line and print research books and scientific journals (e.g., Scopus, PubMed, ScienceDirect, major scientific journals), including the ability to contrast and compare study methods and results in a meaningful way.
• Capable of writing concisely and synthesizing technical information into coherent, accurate, and precise summaries that are understandable by a layperson. While the primary language used will be English, French language skills are an asset.
• Strong organizational and teamwork skills.
• Knowledgeable in the use of various software programs (e.g., Word, Excel, Outlook, Endnote). 

Responsibilities include providing overall support to the Scientific Committee:

• Organize and attend meetings/teleconferences.
• Drafting sections of the report as needed and directed by the Scientific Committee.
• Conducting literature searches and compiling and citing report references.
• Literature reviews and preparing summaries of the key points of research.
• Proof reading and ensuring alignment with NFACC’s report template, including reference style.
• Guide and support as needed to keep the report’s completion on track and on time ensuring the report is consistent with the Scientific Committee’s Terms of Reference.
• Compile the Scientific Committee’s response to peer reviewers for consideration by the Peer Review Coordinator.
• Compile gaps in knowledge and priority areas for further research.
• Provide a print-ready copy of the finalized priority welfare issues report once complete.