Canadian Wildlife Directors Committee

Record of Decision
Meeting of Members of CWDC NAHS Working Group

August 31, 2007 (12:30 – 1:30pm Ottawa-time)

Participants:

Ron Bjorge (Alberta)
Margo Pybus (Alberta)
Helen Schwantje (British Columbia)
Julie Towers (Nova Scotia)
Carla Baker (Nunavut)
Brent Elkin (NWT)
John Dungavell (Ontario)
Hugh Hunt (Saskatchen)

Paul Johanson (CWDC Secretariat)
Arnold Boer (CWDC Coordinator)

Stephen Woodley (Parks Canada)
Emily Jenkins (Environment Canada)
Sarwar Alvi (National Animal Health Strategy Team)
Manjit Kerr-Upal (National Animal Health Strategy Team)

Materials for Discussion/Information:

1. Presentation – "CWDC – NAHS Working Group, August 31, 2007"
2. CCAC Guidelines on: The Care and Use of Wildlife (2003)
3. DRAFT Record of Discussion (July 2007)
4. Survey and DRAFT response: Questions to be answered before September 18-19, 2007 multi-partner workshop
5. DRAFT NAHS Guiding Principles

Record of Discussion:

Agenda (in bold)

Administrative Housekeeping

• July 31th, 2007 Record of Discussion was approved.
• A few modifications were suggested by one participant. These modifications will be circulated for review and approval (attached).

Definition of Animal Health:

• “The state of a living organism, species, or population which can sustain biological functions to preserve its own integrity.”
  • The definition of “animal health” includes “animal welfare”

• The term “living organism” should be replaced with “living animal”

Definition of Animal Welfare:

• The state of an animal when it is in harmony with its environment and its physical health, and behavioural needs are fulfilled in accordance with expert opinion and scientific knowledge.
  • In terms of wildlife, welfare extends to individual wild animals only when humans interact with wild populations (i.e. hunting/trapping, research, population management, habitat change)
• General consensus that welfare should be considered by the NAHS, within a wildlife context.
• Animal welfare issues are very contentious. Need to be cautious to ensure animal welfare is not confused with animal rights or animal cruelty.
  • The underlying concern is where the definition may lead to (i.e. hunting, trapping, and population management populations).
  • Need to define where and when welfare applies to wildlife.
• Proposed definition does not work within a wildlife context.
  • It is not measurable. For example, how does one measure if an animal is in harmony with their environment, from a wildlife perspective?
• Alternative animal welfare definition proposed (source: Wikipedia)
  • Animal welfare is the viewpoint that animals, especially those under human care, should not suffer unnecessarily, including where the animals are used for food, work, companionship, or research. This position usually focuses on the morality of human action (or inaction), as opposed to making deeper political or philosophical claims about the status of animals, as is the case for an animal rights viewpoint.
    • General consensus that this definition is a more suitable definition and warrants further consideration.
• International Perspective (Sarwar Alvi, NAHS Team)
  • Australia, UK, EU and Ireland have developed their own animal health strategies
  • Most of these strategies focus on farm animals, some consider wildlife if it comes into contact with other animals.

Action: NAHS will analyze how welfare issues, particularly those related to wildlife, are handled in the animal health strategies of other countries (i.e. UK, Ireland, Australia). NAHS to distribute findings to CWDC-WG before next teleconference (Friday September 7, 2007).

NAHS will summarize major concerns voiced in the teleconference, include new definition (Wikipedia) and distribute on Tuesday September 4th.

Possible Limitations of the NWDS (that should be considered within the scope of the NAHS)

• Feral animals
  • Feral animals are not included within the definition of wildlife.
  • A major issue that needs to be addressed, currently no sector or agency is taking responsibility.
• Country/wild foods
  • Country/wild foods should be covered by the NAHS
  • It would be more appropriately covered by a food quality strategy, but according in conversations Beth MacNeil had with PHAC, this will not be the case.
• Animals raised in captivity for introduction/stocking
  • Included in the definition of the NWD
• Marine mammals
  • Non-farmed species are not considered in NAAHP
  • Can be considered in the NWDS, but are not.
• Farmed invertebrates ( i.e. geoduck)
  • Like animals raised in captivity for introduction/stocking
  • Covered by the NWDS

NAHS Guiding Principles:

‑ Collaborative approach that balances the interests of all partners
‑ Accountability and transparency
‑ Inclusion of evolving science in decision‑making
‑ Inclusion of approaches allowing to be responsive, adaptive, flexible and to continually improve
‑ Ethically driven and sustainable decision‑making and actions
‑ Respect for regional initiatives, priorities and perspectives

• No comment
• This list raises concerns about the engagement process as it comes with no context or explanation of terms (i.e. “sustainable decisions”)

Next teleconference

Friday, August 31st, 12:30pm – 1:30pm (Ottawa time)