Page 137 - The Welfare of Cattle

114 the WeLfare of CattLe

table 11.1 approaches to auditing—audits can be Conducted by First, Second, or third Parties
Internal auditing external auditing
“first-party audit” “second-party audit” “third-party auditing”
Conducted by the organization itself Conducted by parties having for legal, regulatory, verification,
for management to review and an interest in the organization or certification purposes
inform the need for improvement such as customers or by conducted by independent
(e.g., any audit conducted by the persons on behalf of auditing organizations.
herd’s veterinarian or an employee customers (i.e., suppliers).
of the company/farm)
Industry Programs
beef Quality assurance (bQa) naMI––slaughter audit* naMI––slaughter audit*
Pork Quality assurance (PQa-Plus) f.a.r.M.—When conducted on Common swine Industry audit*
national american Meat Institute behalf of the milk processor Canadian feedlot*
(naMI)-slaughter audit* animal Care module of Various Proprietary audits used
national Milk Producers federation Pro-action (Canada) for consumer facing label
(nMPf) farmers for the Canadian feed-Lot audit* claims*
assurance of responsible
management (f.a.r.M.)—when
conducted by employees of the
farmer Cooperative
Canadian feedlot* when done by
an employee of the farm
Principles of auditing Met
Integrity Integrity Integrity
fair fair fair
Professionalism Professionalism Professionalism
Confidentiality Confidentiality Confidentiality
evidence based* evidence based* evidence based*
Independence
Programs highlighted by an * indicate audits that are written in such a way that reported outcomes are verifiable
and use appropriate sample size and methodology (see Iso 19011 for more details).

the six key principles and identifying when they are not met allows us to understand the roles, the
advantages and the limitations of some of the industry-led programs. As outlined previously, we see
roles for first-, second-, and third-party audits in improving animal welfare and assuring that farm
animals under our care are provided a reasonably good life.

What Makes a Good audit? a Case Study: Development of
the North american Meat Institute (NaMI) audit

It was not until after McDonalds Inc. voiced concerns regarding the potential tarnishing of their
“brand” and in turn their profitability if their customers were made aware of what appeared to be
systemic failures in regulatory oversight within the supply chain that, at the request of McDonalds
in 1991, Dr. Temple Grandin developed what we believe became the first North American focused
third-party audit. This audit focused on assessing if individual slaughter houses met the minimum
standards set out in the 1978 Humane Methods of Livestock Slaughter Act (HMSA). Approximately
5 years later this third-party audit was applied to the 800 USDA inspected slaughter facilities that
collectively slaughter approximately 95% of the 140 million head of livestock slaughtered each year
(Grandin, 1977). To the shock of the numerous stakeholders working in the beef cattle industry
64% of cattle facilities failed to meet the requirements set out in the HMSA legislation regarding
effective stunning of cattle (Grandin, 1997). It became clear that legislation, at least in terms of the
slaughter process, presumably reflective of our social consensus ethic, was not enough to protect