Charlie Arnot, CFI, 2012 Pork Management Conference, June 19-22 in Savannah, Ga.

1. Animal Care Review Panel

2. Hidden Camera Investigations
• Nov. 2006 – Wiles Hog Farm, Ohio (HBO)
• Nov. 2007 – Tyson Chicken, Alabama
• Feb. 2008 – Hallmark/Westland Beef
• Sept. 2008 – MowMar Hog Farm, Iowa
• Nov. 2008 – Aviagen turkey WV
• Sept. 2009 – Dietz Dairy, PA
• Sept. 2009 – Hy-Line Hatchery, Iowa
• Nov. 2009 – Hatfield Hog Farm, PA
• Nov. 2009 – Bushway Veal, Vermont

3. • Jan. 2010 – Willet Dairy, New York
• May 2010 – Conklin Dairy, Ohio
• Nov. 2010 – Cal-Maine Egg, Texas
• Dec. 2010 – Smithfield hog farm, Virginia
• April 2011 – Dairy heifer ranch, Texas
• June 2011 – Iowa Select Farms
• Nov. 2011 – Sparboe Egg Iowa
• Jan. 2012 – Prestage/Seaboard, OK
• Feb. 2012 – Hawkeye Sow, Iowa
• Mar. 2012 – Agri-Mark Dairy, NY
Hidden Camera Investigations

4. Successful Tactic

5. Targeting the Customer

6. Iowa Select, June 2011
Online Petition targets
Food companies

7. Prestage/Seaboard, Jan. 2012
Hawkeye Sow Centers, Feb. 2012
Focus on Customer – not the farm

8. “We are seeing condemnation of
what are considered normally
accepted production practices.”
- Tom Burkgren, AASV

9. Hidden Camera Investigations
• Food companies need
reliable mechanism to
objectively evaluate
video probes.
• Process needed to
provide retailers
accurate, independent,
balanced info to
support informed
decisions

10. Hidden Camera Investigations
• Process needed to test
veracity of investigations
• 3rd party review by
credible experts
provides opportunity to
demonstrate
commitment to “do
what’s right” – reclaim
lost ground

11. Animal Care Review Panel
• Panel includes animal scientists, veterinarians,
ethicists
• Videos evaluated against published scientific
literature
• References could include but not limited to:
– Published text books
– Published research papers
– AVMA policy statements
– State/federal legislation & regulation
– FASS handbook
– Industry codes of practice

12. When a Video Probe Occurs
• NPPC/NPB notifies CFI
• Potential panel experts contacted
• Group that obtained video asked to provide unedited
footage
• If group declines, panel examines clips released to
public
• Alert issued to the industry and media
• Opportunity for industry stakeholders to inform
constituents they will consider panel findings in
discussion or decisions

13. Experts Provided Video Links
• Each panelist formulates evaluation based on
expertise (ethics, animal care, veterinary medicine)
• Panel comes together on conference call to discuss
findings
• Experts not asked to come to agreement – dissenting
opinions possible
• CFI facilitates call and documents discussion

14. CFI Completes the Process
• Panelists’ insight synthesized into a report
• Draft circulated to experts for review and approval
• CFI issues report to industry, retailers, media
• Report provided to NPPC and NPB to share with
targeted farm
• Overall goal – complete the process within 48 hours

15. Panel Operates Independently
• Process must operate independently to assure
credibility
• CFI’s role – facilitate only, no influence on panel
• Reviews, assessments, recommendations, reports
are not subject to industry approval before going to
public

16. Veterinarians Animal Scientists Ethicists
Tom Burkgren, AASV Temple Grandin,
Colorado State
University
Candace Croney,
Purdue University
John Deen, University of
Minnesota
Janice Swanson,
Michigan State
University
Ray Anthony,
University of Alaska,
Anchorage
Jim McKean, Iowa State
University
Anna Johnson, Iowa
State University
Lisa Tokach, DVM Janeen Johnson,
University of Illinois
Rexanne Struve, DVM
Animal Care Review Panel

17. • Temple Grandin, Colorado State
• Candace Croney, Purdue
• Tom Burkgren, AVMA
First Test – Hawkeye Sow Centers
February 2012

18. Panel Report
• “ … normally accepted production practices … nothing that
could be considered abusive … employees appeared
competent and well-trained … barn floors and pigs were
clean.”
• “ … employee shown processing piglet in close proximity to
the mother causing maternal distress … it’s likely sow
would experiences similar or greater stress if piglet was
taken elsewhere.”
• “… tape used on piglet’s incisions following castration is
considered more welfare friendly than stitches.”
• “… assertion that herniated piglet was caused by faulty
castration not correct … likely related to genetics.”
• “… flies in a farrowing room was a point of concern and
something the experts felt should be corrected.”

19. Animal Care Review Panel