Standards for the Humane Handling & Care of Animals An Overview of Four Certification Programs

Ruth H. Woiwode, Graduate Research Assistant Department of Animal Sciences College of Agricultural Sciences Certification Programs

Included in this Comparison: •American Humane Association •Animal Welfare Institute •Global Animal Partnership •Humane Farm Animal Care

•All standards compared were accessed on each company’s website in September 2011.

•Only AHA had audit documents online American Humane Association American Humane® Certified 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation that traces its roots to the formation of AHA in 1877.

AHA (formerly known as the Free Farmed program) created the first certification program in the United States to ensure the humane treatment of farm animals. Science-based animal welfare standards, based on the Five Freedoms, as created by the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, as well as input from animal science experts, veterinarians and other animal husbandry specialists. American Humane Association

American Humane® Certified Science Advisory Fellows Keith Belk, PhD Scientific Advisors Colorado State University Candace Croney, PhD Nigel Cook, PhD Ohio State University University of Wisconsin Inmaculada Estevez Chet Crum Basque Institute for Agricultural Research and Springer Mountain/Fieldale Farms Development, Bill Locatis, PhD Temple Grandin, PhD Food Safety Integrators Colorado State University & Grandin Livestock John McGlone, PhD Handling Services Texas Tech University Ann C. Wilkinson Julian (Skip) Olson, DVM Associate Director, Global Alliances Pfizer AHG American Humane Assessor Joy Mench, PhD Mike Simpson University of California, Davis PAACO (Professional Animal Auditor Certification Sally Noll, PhD Organization) University of Minnesota Wendy Weirich, DVM Thomas Parsons, PhD American Humane Assessor University of Pennsylvania Jim Reynolds, DVM Audit Service Providers University of California, Davis Matt Jones Yvonne Vizzier Thaxton, PhD John McGlone, Ph.D. Mississippi State University Wendy Weirich, DVM

Certification of Auditors Mike Simpson Animal Welfare Institute Animal Welfare Approved Founded in 2006. Endorsed by World Society for the Protection of Animals. —Requires animals to be raised on pasture or range —Prohibits dual production (simultaneously kept in systems that do and don’t meet AWA standards) —Awards approval only to family farmers —Charges no fees to participating farmers —Incorporates the most comprehensive standards for high welfare farming Animal Welfare Institute Brigid Sweeney, Farmer and Market Outreach Animal Welfare Approved Coordinator, recruiting and compliance. Program Director Kenneth Smith, Slaughter Specialist. Andrew Gunther, joined the Animal Welfare Approved program in April 2008. Previously, he Auditors was the senior product procurement and Tim Holmes, Lead Auditor development specialist for Whole Foods Market, Karen Anderson, DVM leading the team that designed and launched the David Bane, DVM, Ph.D. company’s five-step welfare program in the Dr. Jennifer Burton, DVM United Kingdom. Dr. Jan Busboom Beth Hauptle, Director of Marketing and Public Lance Gegner Relations. Karen Haverinen Lehto Christine Peckham, Corrective Action Plan Charlie Hester Coordinator. Tim Linquist Wendy Swann, Educational Outreach Richard Long Coordinator. Frank Moriso Julie Suarez, Program Coordinator; coordinates Stan Pace applications, farm audits, and the approval Rob Stokes process. Wendy Weirich Amanda Kisner, Program Assistant. Emily Lancaster, Farmer and Market Outreach Erika Voogd, Consultant. Evaluates and Coordinator. advises plants that are visited as part of the Animal Welfare Approved program. Global Animal Partnership 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating Nonprofit charitable organization founded in 2008, when GAP took on the challenge of revising and expanding Whole Foods Market’s draft standards.

GAP’s leadership came to realize that a multi-tiered standards program would be able to engage a broad spectrum of producers, expand markets for farmers committed to providing higher welfare for animals, and more effectively advance the singular aim of promoting continuous improvement in animal agriculture. Global Animal Partnership 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating Board of Directors Joyce D’Silva, Compassion in World Farming George Siemon, CROPP Cooperative and brands Organic Valley and Organic Prairie Mike Baker, World Society for the Protection of Animals Steven Gross, Ph.D., Farm Forward; Corporate Consultant to PETA John Mackey, Co-Founder and CEO, Whole Foods Market Wayne Pacelle, President and CEO, The Humane Society of the United States Dan Probert, Executive Director, Country Natural Beef; owner, Probert Ranch Bernard Rollin, Ph.D., Colorado State University, Distinguished Professor, University Bioethicist, and Professor of Philosophy, Biomedical Sciences, and Animal; Commissioner, Pew Commission on Industrial Farm Animal Production Paul Willis, Manager, Niman Ranch Pork Company; owner/operator of Willis Free Range Pig Farm

Staff and Consultants Miyun Park, Executive Director Ian Duncan, Ph.D., Chair, Welfare and Farming Advisory Committee Professor Emeritus and Chair in Animal Welfare, University of Guelph Global Animal Partnership 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating Step 1: No cages, no crowding Step 2: Enriched environment Step 3: Enhanced outdoor access Step 4: Pasture centered Step 5: Animal centered: Bred for outdoors Step 5+: Animal Centered: Entire life on same farm

Step 5+ Requires animals be harvested on the farm Table available at www.globalanimalpartnership.com/ Accessed 9/21/11 Humane Farm Animal Care Certified Humane® Raised & Handled 501(c)(3) non-profit charity supported by a consortium of animal protection organizations, individuals, and foundations, including ASPCA and HSUS. Participation in program is not conditional upon operation size or membership in any association’s group. Voluntary, user-fee based service for producers, processors, and haulers of animals raised for food. Humane Farm Animal Care

Certified Humane® Raised & Handled Brenda Coe, PhD, Pennsylvania State University Anne Fanatico, PhD, Appalachian State University THE STAFF Temple Grandin, PhD, Colorado State University Adele Douglass, Chief Executive Officer Thomas Hartsock, PhD, University of Maryland Jackie Sleeper, Director of Certification Patricia Hester, PhD, Purdue University Sequoia Ireland, Certification Program Coordinator Pam Hullinger, DVM, MPVM, University of California Monica Cochran, Staff Associate Joy Mench, PhD, University of California-Davis Marge Moran, Computer Services Suzanne Millman, PhD, Iowa State University College of Veterinary Medicine BOARD OF DIRECTORS Ruth Newberry, PhD, Washington State University Karen Brown, Ed Pajor, PhD, Professor Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Adele Douglass, HFAC University of Calgary, Canada Jim Emerman, Civic Ventures Jose Peralta, PhD, DVM, College of Veterinary Medicine, Patricia A. Forkan, Senior Envoy/Executive Branch, HSUS Western University of Health Sciences Carol Jenkins, President of The Women's Media Center Rosangela Poletto, PhD, DVM, Purdue University Barbara Rady Kazdan, Founder/Principal, Achieving Change Martin Potter, PhD, Consultant in Animal Welfare, Member of Together FAWC, UK Andrew Kimbrell, Public interest attorney, activist, and author Mohan Raj, PhD, Bristol University, UK Mae Mendelson, MSW, PhD, Travel & Learn Company Carolyn Stull, PhD, School of Veterinary Medicine, University Eric Rardin, Director of nonprofit services at Care2.com of California-Davis Andrew Rowan, PhD, Chief-of-staff, HSUS J.K. Shearer, DVM, MS, Iowa State University Ed Sayres, President, ASPCA Janice Swanson, PhD, Director of Animal Welfare, Michigan Helene York, Bon Appétit Management Company Foundation State University William VanDresser, DVM, Retired Extension Veterinarian SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE Julia Wrathall, PhD, Director, Farm Animals Division, RSPCA, Ken Anderson, PhD, North Carolina State University West Sussex, UK Michael Appleby, PhD, Chief Scientific Advisor, World Society Adroaldo Zanella, PhD, Professor & Chair of Animal Health for the Protection of Animals, London, England and Welfare, Scottish Agricultural College Brittany Bock, PhD, Fort Hays State University Definitions

Abbreviations: AHA refers to the American Humane® Certified label AWI refers to the Animal Welfare Approved label GAP refers to the 5-Step™ Animal Welfare Rating label HFAC refers to the Certified Humane® label Species by Program AHA AWI GAP HFAC Cattle Beef Beef Beef Beef Dairy Dairy Dairy Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Pigs Poultry Broilers Broilers Broilers Broilers Layers Layers Turkeys Layers Turkeys Turkeys Turkeys Ducks Geese Veal Veal Young Dairy Beef Small Ruminants Dairy Goats & Sheep Dairy Goats & Sheep Dairy Goats Meat Goats & Sheep Meat Goats & Sheep Meat Goats Sheep/Lamb Others Bison Bison Rabbits Standards for all Species COMPARISON OF AHA, AWI GAP & HFAC GENERAL REQUIREMENTS BY ALL PROGRAMS •Continuous access to water •Access to balanced diet NOTABLE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PROGRAMS •AHA Options: –Enriched colony (indoor systems) –Outside organic run (flooring that permits cleaning) –Free range (access to ground with living cover) •AWI Requires access to pasture or range at all times •GAP: All Steps are cumulative ‒Step 4 Pasture Centered: application varies by species ‒Step 5 Animal Centered: No physical alterations ‒Step 5+ Animal Centered: Entire life on same farm Standards: Laying Hens SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI & HFAC* BANNED SUBSTANCES •Growth promotants •Sub‐therapeutic antibiotic use •Meat or animal by‐products in feed EXCEPTIONS •AHA permits coccidiostats •Therapeutic antibiotic use allowed (veterinary direction) Other Notable Differences •AWI limits flock size to 500 birds •AWI prohibits the use of A.I.

*No current 5‐Step standards for layers (being developed) Standards: Laying Hens SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI & HFAC* GENERAL REQUIREMENTS BY ALL PROGRAMS

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Traceability •Birth to harvest •Birth to harvest •N/A •Birth to harvest Euthanasia •Yes •Yes •N/A •Yes (on farm; •Approved method •Approved method •Cervical dislocation, CO2 required to documented in SOPs documented in AHP and Electrical Stun prevent suffering) Harvest •Adhere to AMI •Harvest plants are •N/A •Harvest plants are audited Guidelines audited by AWI to by HFAC to ensure ensure compliance compliance with AMI with AMI Guidelines Guidelines

*No current 5‐Step standards for layers (being developed) Standards: Laying Hens SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI & HFAC* AHA AWI GAP HFAC Nests •Single: 1/5‐7 birds •Single : 1/5 birds •N/A •Single: 1/5 birds •Group: 10.72ft2/120 birds •Group : 20in2/bird •Group: 9ft2/100 birds •Group: dividers •No perches in nest area •Substrate encourages nesting Perches •Space to perch quietly •7 aerial in/bird •N/A •6 in/bird Space •Brown egg‐layers: 1.2ft2/bird •Pullet: .67ft2/bird •N/A •1.5ft2/bird Allowance •White Leghorns 1.0ft2/bird •Hen: 1.8ft2/bird & Density •Max slope 14% or 8˚ •Forage: 4ft2/bird Rates •Dry area Litter & •Litter Management Program •Litter must be •N/A •Litter Management Management Required provided Program Required *Single: dedicated, one bird nest boxes *Group: (Communal, colony) an area that allows several birds to enter and lay at once

*No current 5‐Step standards for layers (being developed) Standards: Laying Hens SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI & HFAC*

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Molt •Withdrawal of feed to •Forced molt prohibited •N/A •Withdrawal of feed to induce molt prohibited induce molt prohibited Lighting •Intensity: 10 lux •Intensity: 15 lux •N/A •Intensity: 20 lux (24 •8 hours light •Maximum 16 hours •8 hours light hour •6 hours dark •6 hours dark period) •Intensity decrease allowed to reduce cannibalism Air •Ammonia: <25 ppm •Ammonia: <5 ppm •N/A •Ammonia <25 ppm Quality detectable level •CO2 <5000 ppm •Hydrogen Sulfide <2.5 ppm •CO <50 ppm •Dust: 15 mg/m3 averaged over 8hrs

*No current 5‐Step standards for layers (being developed) Standards: Laying Hens SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI & HFAC* PHYSICAL ALTERATIONS PROHIBITED •De‐beaking (clipping/tipping) • De‐clawing •De‐spurring • De‐toeing •Hole punching (between toes) • Pinioning (partial wing removal) •Notching • Wattle trimming •Comb trimming • Skin or flesh cut EXCEPTIONS •AHA permits beak trimming <10 days •HFAC permits beak trimming •AWI prohibits castration and all other physical alterations Summary: Consistent, strong position on routine alterations *No current 5‐Step standards for layers (being developed) Standards: Broilers SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC BANNED SUBSTANCES •Growth promotants •Sub‐therapeutic antibiotic use •Meat or animal by‐products in feed EXCEPTIONS •AHA permits coccidiostats •Therapeutic antibiotic use allowed (veterinary direction) •GAP: birds treated with antibiotics removed from flock Other Notable Differences •AWI limits flock size to 500 birds •AWI prohibits the use of A.I. •GAP prohibits cloned or genetically modified birds Standards: Broilers SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Traceability •Birth to •Birth to harvest Steps 1‐5 •Birth to harvest harvest •Grow out to harvest Euthanasia •Yes •Yes All Steps •Yes (on farm; •Approved •Approved method •Yes •Hand held electrical stunning, required to method documented in AHP •Approved immediately followed by neck prevent documented in method cutting suffering) SOPs documented in •Cervical dislocation (for very AHP small number of birds) •Carbon dioxide or a mixture of carbon dioxide or argon Harvest •Plants audited •Plants audited by Step 5+ •Plants audited by HFAC to by AHA to AWI to ensure •Must be ensure compliance with AMI ensure compliance with conducted on Guidelines compliance AMI Guidelines farm, under USDA with AMI inspection Guidelines Standards: Broilers SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Perches •No standard •7 aerial in/bird Step 5 •Recommended as •Non‐slip •Birds able to perch an enrichment •No sharp edges simultaneously Space •7.0 lbs/ft2 •Shelter: 2ft2/bird All Steps •6 lbs/ft2 Allowance •Birds must be able to & Density express natural behavior Rates without touching another bird Step 3 •Continuous outdoor access Litter & •Litter •Litter must be All Steps •Floors of all Management Management provided •Base of all housing houses completely Program must be covered with covered Required friable litter Standards: Broilers SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Lighting •Intensity: 20 lux •Intensity: 15 lux All Steps •Intensity: 20 lux (24 hr •8 hours light •Maximum 16 hrs •Intensity: 20 lux •8 hours light period) •6 hours dark •Maximum 16 hrs •6 hours dark Air •Ammonia: <25 •Ammonia: <5 ppm Steps 1‐3 •Ammonia <25 ppm Quality ppm detectable level •Ammonia <25 ppm •CO2 <5000 ppm •Dust 10 mg/m3 •Hydrogen Sulfide <2.5 suggested; monitoring ppm device not required •CO <50 ppm •Dust: 15 mg/m3 Thermal •Housing must •Housing must All Steps •Birds must have access Control provide thermally protect birds from •Brooders must to a thermally comfortable thermal challenge accommodate all comfortable environment for with natural or chicks’ thermal environment at all times age according to mechanical needs to avoid heat/cold stress breeder guidelines temperature and humidity controls

*Certified Humane has the most extensive air quality standard Standards: Broilers SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Lameness •Management plan •Management plan All Steps •Cull birds ≥4 Scoring required required •Scored 0‐5 •Scored 0‐5 (Garner •No score provided •No score provided •≥4 culled et al) Catching •Caught by both legs •Caught by both legs Step 5 •Caught by both legs •3 birds per hand •2 legs or upright •2 birds per hand •3 birds per hand Step 5+ •Must be caught by body with both hands and carried upright Transport •12 hours •4 hours Steps 1‐3 •10 hours •8 hours

*GAP Doesn’t address catching method until Step 5 Standards: Turkeys SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC BANNED SUBSTANCES •Growth promotants •Sub‐therapeutic antibiotic use •Meat or animal by‐products in feed EXCEPTIONS •AHA permits coccidiostats •Therapeutic antibiotic use allowed (veterinary direction) •GAP: birds treated with antibiotics removed from flock Other Notable Differences •AWI limits flock size to 500 birds •AWI prohibits the use of A.I. •GAP prohibits cloned or genetically modified birds Standards: Turkeys SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Traceability •House recording •Not addressed All Steps •Birth to harvest sheets used as •Birth to harvest source records Euthanasia •Yes •Yes All steps: •Yes (on farm; •Approved •Approved •Captive bolt •Electrical stunning, required to method method •Gunshot to the head immediately prevent documented in documented in •Cervical dislocation (≤ 14 d) followed by neck suffering) SOPs AHP •Mechanical stunning cutting immediately followed by •Cervical dislocation cervical dislocation (≤ 5 wks ) (for very small •Barbiturates number of birds) •Carbon dioxide or a mixture •Carbon dioxide or a of carbon dioxide , nitrogen mixture of carbon and argon dioxide or argon Harvest •Plants audited by •Plants audited by Step 5+ •Plants audited by AHA to ensure AWI to ensure •Must be conducted on farm HFAC to ensure compliance with compliance with under USDA inspection compliance with AMI Guidelines AMI Guidelines AMI Guidelines Standards: Turkeys SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Perches •No standard •Provided for Steps 5 –5+ •Recommended as breeding birds •Turkeys must be able an enrichment to perch simultaneously Space •13‐17 lbs/2ft2 •Pen: 90X50 ft Step 3 •19 lbs/2ft2 Allowance •Shelter: 5ft2/bird •Continuous outdoor & Density •Forage: 11ft2/bird access Rates •13 lbs/2ft2 Litter •Good quality •Must be provided Step 4 •Floors of all houses •30‐35% •At least 50% of floor completely covered moisture covered with fibrous •Optimum moisture •>2 inches deep liitter level Standards: Turkeys SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Lighting •8 hours light •Intensity: 15 lux All Steps •8 hours light (24 hr •6 hours dark •Maximum 16 hrs •Intensity: 20 lux •8 hours dark period) •Intensity: 20 lux Steps 1‐2 •Intensity: 20 lux •6 hours dark Air Quality •Ammonia <25 •Ammonia: <5 ppm All Steps •Ammonia <25 ppm ppm detectable level •Ammonia <15 ppm •CO2 <5000 ppm •Dust 10 mg/m3 •Hydrogen Sulfide <10 ppm •CO <50 ppm •Dust: <15 mg/m3 Thermal •Comfortable •Housing must be All Steps •Access to thermally Conditions environment at capable of •Thermal comfort of comfortable all times protecting the bird turkeys must be environment at all (According to breeder from thermal maintained at all times so that heat/cold guidelines for the age) challenge times stress does not occur Standards: Turkeys SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Handling •Best method is •Abuse or •All Steps •Practices developed to secure both maltreatment of •Lights must be to ensure that turkeys legs with one birds prohibited dimmed are not frightened in hand and the far •Routine catching •Turkeys must be avoidable ways. wing with the must be in dusk or herded calmly, and in •Movement should other hand darkness small groups be deliberate to avoid •Carried individually •Flags permitted fear and injury with two hands and •Kicking, striking, lifted with support to punching, hitting, or the breast and with otherwise causing the head upward injury is prohibited

Transport •12 hours •4 hours All Steps •10 hours •2 hours Standards: Pigs SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC BANNED SUBSTANCES •Growth promotants •Sub‐therapeutic antibiotic use •Meat or animal by‐products in feed EXCEPTIONS •Therapeutic antibiotic use allowed (veterinary direction) •GAP: pigs treated with antibiotics removed from program Other Notable Differences •AWI prohibits the use of embryo transfer (E.T.) •AWI prohibits non‐therapeutic use of substances to induce estrus •GAP prohibits cloned or genetically modified pigs Standards: Pigs SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Diet •NRC •Interval or skip‐a‐day All Steps •Diet designed to requirements feeding prohibited •Diet designed to maintain full health maintain full health Body •All pigs ≥ 2 •All pigs ≥ 2 All Steps •All pigs ≥ 2 Condition •Scored 1, 2, •≤ 4 Breeding stock •All pigs ≥ 2 •≤ 4 Breeding stock 2.5, 3, 3.5 4, 5 •No scale provided •< 2 euthanized •At least 3 by day 70 •No scale provided •No scale provided Sow •Age at first •First farrow ≥10 months •Age at first •Age at first Management farrowing not •Grouped by age, size and farrowing not farrowing not addressed behavior addressed addressed A.I. •Allowed •Allowed All Steps •Allowed •Allowed E.T. •Not addressed •Prohibited •Prohibited •Not addressed Weaning •21 days •42 days Steps •28 days •Littermates kept together •1: 28 days •2: 35 days •3‐4: 42 days Standards: Pigs AHA HOUSING STANDARDS Live Wt Lying Area Total Area Space & Thermal Environment (lbs) (ft2) (ft2) AHA 22 1.1 1.6 Grower Density •See Table Rates 44 1.6 2.4 Breeding pens •Used <35 days •Permit turning and lying 66 2.2 3.2 Gestation space •20 ft2/sow 88 2.8 4.3 Farrowing •5x7 ft 110 3.3 5.0 132 3.9 5.9 154 4.4 6.6 176 4.8 7.2 198 5. 07.6 220 5.4 8.1 Standards: Pigs AWI HOUSING STANDARDS Space & Thermal Environment

Live Wt (lbs) Total Area (ft2) 2 •Farrowing huts: 48 ft /sow ≤66 (over 40 days) 3.0 •Return to range in 21 days ≤110 4.5 •Heat must be provided as necessary to keep animals ≤187 7.0 comfortable ≤242 8.5

Sows 16

Boars 16 Standards: Pigs GAP HOUSING STANDARDS Space & Thermal Environment

All Steps Live Wt (lbs) Total Area (ft2) •Pigs must be protected ≤66 (over 40 days) 3.0 from heat/cold stress, ≤110 4.5 sunburn, and extreme weather ≤187 7.0 Producer Guidance: Wallows, ≤242 8.5 sprinklers, or misters are good methods of heat relief, providing Sows 16 there is also protection from direct sun. Plenty of bedding into which Boars 16 they can burrow provides warmth in cold weather. Farrowing Sows 42 Standards: Pigs HFAC HOUSING STANDARDS Live Wt Lying Area Total Area (lbs) (ft2) (ft2) Space & Thermal Environment 22 1.1 1.6 Pigs must always be provided 44 1.6 2.4 with a total floor space no less 66 2.2 3.2 than 1.5 times their minimum 88 2.8 4.3 110 3.3 5.0 lying area. 132 3.9 5.9 154 4.4 6.6 176 4.8 7.2 198 5. 07.6 220 5.4 8.1 242 5.7 8.5 264 6.1 9.1 Standards: Pigs SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Lighting •Artificial light •Shelters must Steps 1‐4 •Must permit inspection (*a person of allowed allow natural light •Artificial light allowed at any time normal eyesight can read standard •Must permit to enter •Must follow seasonal •Must follow seasonal newsprint inspection at •Permanent patterns patterns without difficulty) any time darkness prohibited •May not exceed 16 •50 lux •50 lux* •Artificial light hours allowed •50 lux •May not exceed 16 hours Air Quality •Ammonia <25 •Ammonia: <5 ppm Steps 1‐3 •Ammonia <25 ppm ppm detectable level •Ammonia <25 ppm •Dust 5 mg/m3 •Dust 10 mg/m3 •Dust 10 mg/m3 Enrichment •Required to •Not addressed Steps 2 –4 •Must allow expression of mitigate (continuous •Enrichments provided normal behaviors aggression and outdoor access that encourage •Straw, sawdust or wood stereotypies required) foraging behavior and chips •No specific manipulation of •Additional stimuli standard objects required when aggressive •Straw bales or barrels behaviors occur Standards: Pigs SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Needle teeth •Allowed <3 days •Prohibited All Steps •Allowed <3 (clipping, filing, •Prohibited days trimming) Tail docking •Allowed •Prohibited All Steps •Prohibited •Prohibited •Exceptions for •Exceptions for tail biting tail biting Nose rings •Septum rings •Prohibited Steps 1‐3 •Prohibited allowed in sows •Septum rings allowed Steps 1‐4 •Disk ring prohibited Tusk •Trimming allowed •Prohibited All Steps •Trimming removal •Prohibited (tipping) allowed Castration •Allowed < 7 days •Allowed <7 days Steps 1‐4 •Allowed < 7 •Spaying prohibited •Allowed <7 days days Standards: Pigs SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Identification •Eartag •RFID All Steps •Eartag methods •Tattoo •Eartag •Eartag •Slapmarking allowed •Ear notching <5 days •Tattoo •Tattooing not •Slap marking •Slap marking addressed Euthanasia •Yes •Yes All Steps •Yes (on farm; •Approved method •Approved •Yes •NPB Euthanasia required to documented in SOPs method •Approved method Guide prevent documented in documented in AHP suffering) AHP Harvest •Plants audited by •Plants audited by Step 5+ •Plants audited by AHA to ensure AWI to ensure •Must be HFAC to ensure compliance with AMI compliance with conducted on farm compliance with Guidelines AMI Guidelines under USDA AMI Guidelines inspection Standards: Pigs SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Lameness •AHP must address •AHP must address •Step 1 •AHP must address Scoring foot care plan if foot care plan if •< 5% of herd lameness and foot problems develop problems develop •Not scoring tool problems •No scoring tool •No scoring tool provided •No scoring tool provided provided provided Catching & •Dragging •Abuse prohibited All Steps •Paddles allowed Handling prohibited •Electric prods •Abuse prohibited •Boards allowed •Electric prods prohibited •No high‐pitched •Electric prods as prohibited noises last resort •Paddles allowed •Dragging prohibited •Boards allowed •Electric prods prohibited Transport •No time specified •8 hours Steps 2‐5 •No time specified •8 hours Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC BANNED SUBSTANCES •Growth promotants •Sub‐therapeutic antibiotic use •Meat or animal by‐products in feed EXCEPTIONS •Therapeutic antibiotic use allowed (veterinary direction) •GAP: animals treated with antibiotics removed from program Other Notable Differences •AWI prohibits the use of cloned animals •GAP prohibits the use of cloned animals •GAP prohibits spaying of heifers Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC Traceability •Not addressed •Records must be All Steps •Not addressed kept of source of •Sourcing animals breeding animals from market auctions prohibited Euthanasia •Yes •Yes All Steps •Yes (on farm; •Approved method •Approved method •Yes •Approved method required to documented in documented in AHP •Approved method documented in AHP prevent SOPs documented in AHP suffering) Harvest •Plants audited by •Plants audited by •Step 5+ •Plants audited by AHA to ensure AHA to ensure •Must be conducted HFAC to ensure compliance with compliance with on farm under USDA compliance with AMI Guidelines AMI Guidelines inspection AMI Guidelines

* GAP: Routine use of auction markets and video auctions is prohibited Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC BCS • All cattle ≥ 3 •All cattle ≥ 2 All Steps •All cattle ≥ 2 (Scored 1‐9) •Breeding animals ≤ 7 •All cattle ≥ 4 •Corrective action • ≤ 2 Euthanized required ≤ 2 Leg Condition •98% 0 or 1 •No score provided •No score •No score provided •Scored 0‐3 provided Hygiene •90% ≤ 2 •Not addressed •Not addressed •Not addressed •Scored 1‐4 Locomotion •90% ≤ 2 •Action must be •All Steps •Score provided •Scored 1‐5 taken to treat •≤ 2% lame •AHP must address foot lameness and to •No score care plan if problems remove any causes of provided develop lameness •No score provided Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Branding •Allowed •Prohibited Steps 5 ‐5+ •Not addressed •Jaw brand •Prohibited prohibited All Steps •Face brand prohibited Castration •Rubber rings 1‐7 •Allowed Steps 2‐4 •<7 days days •Rubber rings 1‐7 days •>2 mos w/anesthesia •>2 mos •>3 mos w/anesthesia w/anesthesia Dehorning •Allowed •Prohibited All Steps •Only performed under •Prohibited anesthesia by a vet Disbudding •Allowed •Allowed Steps 1‐4 •Allowed •>4 mos •Only <2 months •Hot iron w/anesthesia •>4 mos w/anesthesia w/anesthesia w/anesthetic paste Ear •Allowed •Prohibited •Prohibited •Not addressed Notching Tail •Not addressed •Prohibited •Prohibited •Not addressed Docking Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC

Heifers •Not addressed •1st calf ≥2 years •Not addressed •Not addressed

Colostrum •8 hours •6 hours •Not addressed •8 hours •6 L first 24 hours

Minimum •Not addressed •8 months Steps 1‐4 •Not addressed Weaning •6 months Age Step 5 •8 months Housing •Allow unrestricted •Isolation prohibited Step 4 •Not addressed (calves) movement •Kept in familiar groups •Pasture based •3x5ft up to 220 lbs •14x18ft up to 600 lbs •90% BCS ≥ 2 Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC AHA AWI GAP HFAC Air Quality •Ammonia <25 ppm •Ammonia: <5 •Not addressed •Ammonia <25 ppm •Dust 10 mg/m3 ppm detectable •Dust 5 mg/m3 level Thermal •Buildings must •Heat must be All Steps •Buildings must Conditions provide relief from provided as •Stock must be provide relief from thermal stress necessary protected from heat thermal stress •Range must allow or cold stress •Range must allow access to features access to features that allow relief that allow relief during extreme during extreme temperatures temperatures Shade •Recommended •Not addressed Step 2, 5 –5+ 7.5 –13 ft2/calf 7.5 –13 ft2/calf •Shade must be 19.4 – 27.2 ft2/cow 19.4 – 27.2 ft2/cow provided for all animals in all outdoor areas Standards: Cattle HOUSING STANDARDS FOR AHA Standards: Cattle HOUSING STANDARDS FOR AWI Bulls •Kept with the main herd •With at least one other compatible animal •Have nose to nose contact with other animals of the same species •If temporarily off pasture, housing must meet the space requirements in standard Standards: Cattle HOUSING STANDARDS FOR GAP Steps 1 –4 Adequate space to: •Lie down and get up simultaneously •Move about freely •Exercise •Sleep •Rest •Ruminate undisturbed •Groom •Play •Perform normal social behavior Standards: Cattle HOUSING STANDARDS FOR HFAC •Environment within buildings where cattle are housed must not be so hot or so cold as to cause distress •Pasture or range conditions must allow cattle access to features that allow relief during severe thermal swings Standards: Cattle SIMILARITIES BETWEEN AHA, AWI, GAP & HFAC

AHA AWI GAP HFAC

Handling •Excess force •Abuse prohibited All Steps •Abuse prohibited prohibited •Electric prods •Mistreatment •Electric prods •Sticks or prods prohibited prohibited prohibited allowed •Dragging prohibited •Flags or sticks ok •Dragging prohibited

Transport •Not addressed •8 hours Step 5 •Not addressed •8 hours Conclusions • For an audit to be effective, it must score measurable factors. • Room for improvement in each program. Grey areas in standards should be addressed. Operational definitions should be included, to reduce subjectivity, leaving less room for individual interpretation. • Public awareness and perception of practices in agriculture creates a driving force that necessitates the transparency and comprehensive nature of these standards. Conclusions

• A strong program focuses on the standards first and foremost. The standards will determine the demographics. • Production agriculture will be driven by increasing public concerns for animal welfare, and regardless of what agriculture looks like in the years to come, it will be shaped by standards for animal welfare. References

1. “Scientific Advisors.” Accessed 9/20/11. http://thehumanetouch.org/scientific-advisors 2. “Staff, Board, and Scientific Committee.” Accessed 9/20/11. http://www.certifiedhumane.org/index.php?page=staff-board-and-scientific-committee 3. “Staff and Consultants.” Accessed 9/20/11. http://www.animalwelfareapproved.org/about/staff/ 4. “Who We Are.” Accessed 9/20/11. http://www.globalanimalpartnership.org/about-us/who-we-are/ 5. “The 5-Step Program.” Accessed 9/201/11. http://www.globalanimalpartnership.org/the-5-step- program/ 6. GAP Board of Directors: “Who We Are.” Accessed 9/26/11. http://www.globalanimalpartnership.org/about-us/who-we-are/ 7. GAP 5-Step program participation. Accessed 9/26/11. http://www.globalanimalpartnership.org/the-5-step-program/