In late March, The Hill Times published an opinion piece by Senator Don Plett, an appointed leader who has vocally defended Canada’s controversial live horse export industry and delayed the passing of life-saving Bill C-355. The piece defended the shipping of live horses from Canada on long journeys overseas for slaughter.
Canada’s Politics and Government News Source Since 1989
Mitchell calls Senator Plett’s defence of the live horse export for slaughter industry “a bold move, given that the industry is seen as a national embarrassment to most, with nearly 80 per cent of Canadians of all political stripes supporting its timely end.”
The piece outlines several of Senator Plett’s misleading claims, including:
The claim that horses exported for slaughter have “ample room”. “This despite countless images captured at Canadian airports showing these horses crammed together in wooden crates as well as evidence given by the horse racing industry and others at parliamentary committee hearings on this issue last year.”
The claim that “qualified” attendants are present on flights. While sport horses often travel with multiple staff, Mitchell notes that “a single attendant on a flight of 100 or more horses packed into a cargo hold can do little to assist horses who may fall or become injured or stressed during transport.” Records show that these attendants routinely miss animal injuries, including a January 2024 incident involving four collapsed horses, one of whom was already dead and two of whom died after landing.
The claim that “virtually no deaths of horses during transport have been ‘reported to the CFIA'”. Mitchell outlines the underreporting of horse deaths: “Government of Japan data from June 2023-June 2024 alone shows that although no deaths or injuries were reported to the CFIA during this time, at least 22 horses died during or shortly after transport and more than 60 others suffered serious injuries and illness.”
“The ongoing spread of the highly pathogenic bird flu worldwide is reaching an “unprecedented” scale, a United Nations agency warned” earlier this month. The disease spreads easily on crowded poultry farms, which has led to 600 million farmed birds being killed.
Bird flu’s current spread is ‘unprecedented,’ UN agency warns
The ongoing spread of highly pathogenic bird flu worldwide is reaching an unprecedented scale, a United Nations agency warned Monday.
“Speaking at a conference in Rome, key members of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) met to discuss the global outbreak of avian influenza.”
“Once limited to a few continents, avian flu has spread across all five continents since 2021, affecting more than 528 species, the FAO warned.”
“The virus is now present in 124 countries, causing the deaths of 47 million wild birds, while more than 600 million domestic birds have been culled (killed)”.
An opinion piece by Eleanor Boyle, published in the Tyee earlier this year, suggests that scaling down the farming of birds for food will be necessary to control the spread of avian flu. Boyle notes that British Columbia, a hot spot for bird flu, is a great place to start shifting the food system.
“Though B.C. turns out less than 15 per cent of Canada’s chicken and eggs, the province accounts for more than 50 per cent of the nation’s recent avian flu-related bird kills and 81 per cent of the country’s now-infected barns.”
The high density of birds packed into barns and the close proximity of farm buildings are risk factors, the article notes. Research shows the disease spreads (and mutates) among crowded animals.
Although wild birds shed pathogens as they fly overhead, “historically, wild-bird pathogens were innocuous. Commercial poultry settings are where low-pathogenic strains tend to become high-pathogenic.”
“Compassion in World Farming says there’s such strong evidence that the poultry industry fuels avian flu that ‘only major farm reforms can end it.'”
Taking decisive action to shift toward more plant-based foods will mean less zoonotic disease risk and a brighter future for animal well-being and public health.
According to two papers recently published in the journals Environmental Research Letters and Climate Policy, the US beef industry knew of its role in climate change decades ago and “worked to obstruct efforts to encourage meat reduction for the sake of climate change”.
A beef industry document from 1989 laid out plans to influence public opinion and legislation in response to climate concerns.
The plan appears to be a blueprint for the industry’s actions to obstruct efforts that would reduce meat/beef consumption for the sake of climate protection.
Industry groups organized generously funded advertising campaigns to counter the messaging of environmental advocates.
The industry lobbied against sustainable diet change efforts including Meatless Mondays, official dietary guidelines, and the landmark EAT-Lancet report.
“The low-tech and immediately available option of halving US beef and veal consumption, resulting in a savings of 125–410 megatonnes (Mt) CO2eq per year over the 32 year period, could have been 24–80 times more effective in reducing GHG emissions in a single year than what was achieved cumulatively by reducing methane emissions (mainly in the oil and gas industries) over a similar timespan (1990–2022).”(Jennifer Jacquet et al 2025 Environ. Res. Lett. 20 031006)
According to reports, the beef industry’s lobbying and marketing efforts have silenced advocates, maintained a high public demand for meat, and slowed the development of sustainable food policies for decades; all while knowing the climate impacts of the industry.
What the beef industry knew about its environmental impact – and how it spent decades blocking climate action.
In February 1989, the Environmental Protection Agency held a workshop on how to reduce climate emissions. A representative from the nation’s largest and oldest beef industry group — the National Cattlemen’s Association (NCA) — attended the workshop. Soon after, the organization developed a report to keep beef on family tables despite the growing knowledge around its climate impacts.
“The Cattlemen’s plan — an internal 17-page memo titled “Strategic Plan on the Environment” — went unnoticed for decades until two University of Miami researchers, Jennifer Jacquet and Loredana Loy, recently unearthed the document in the NCA’s archives.”
“Notably, the beef industry plan had barely a mention about addressing cattle pollution. Instead, it centered around how the public and policymakers would perceive that pollution.”
Who is holding the Canadian food industry accountable for the welfare of farmed animals?
This month’s episode of the Informed Animal Ally welcomes Maha Bazzi to discuss the Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard from Mercy for Animals. The Scorecard is the leading annual report ranking major food companies operating in Canada on their animal welfare progress, aiming to improve transparency and accountability for Canada’s food system.
Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.
Featured Guest: Maha Bazzi
Director of Animal Welfare Initiatives, Mercy For Animals
Maha Bazzi is the Director of Animal Welfare Initiatives at Mercy For Animals, where she leads the organization’s corporate engagement and campaign efforts across Canada and the United States. With a deep passion for animal welfare, throughout her career, she has worked on international policy initiatives for animals and launched several impactful public awareness campaigns aimed at driving meaningful change in the food industry, particularly for farmed animals, across North America.
Chantelle: In this season of the show, we’ve been looking at a wider view of animal advocacy and where Canada stands on the world stage when it comes to animal protection.
This month, I am excited to continue this discussion with a look at Mercy for Animals’ Animal Welfare Scorecard.
So before we jump into that, Maha, I would love to hear about your role at Mercy for Animals and how you got involved in animal advocacy work.
Path to animal advocacy
Maha: Absolutely. So as you mentioned, I’m the Director of Animal Welfare Initiatives here at Mercy for Animals and I’m based in New York City.
Mercy for Animals is one of the world’s largest international farmed animal advocacy organizations. Our mission is to end industrial animal agriculture by constructing a just and sustainable food system.
In my role, I oversee our animal welfare efforts across corporate engagement and campaigns in the US and Canada in order to move companies across the food industry to adopt and implement policies that reduce the suffering of farmed animals in their operations.
How I got into the field; I actually went to school for graphic design and I worked in the marketing and design fields for a few years here in New York.
Four years into my career, I wanted to pursue a role that had a more tangible impact on people’s lives. So I became a teacher of English as a second language.
I loved the education field. I loved connecting with people from all over the world.
But as an animal lover and someone who’s followed a plant-based diet for a very long time, I realized my career shift needed to be dedicated to helping animals. So I went back to school and pursued a degree in animals and public policy, and after working on international policy initiatives, I found my way to Mercy for Animals’ campaigns team in 2025.
Years later, that was the best decision I ever made. My role allows me to merge my passion for helping animals, crafting compelling public narratives, and educating people to make a meaningful difference for farmed animals.
What is the Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard?
Mother pigs in gestation crates.
Amy: That’s so awesome.
I love the work that Mercy for Animals does, and I’m super grateful for it. The scorecard, I think, has always been really interesting and my understanding is this scorecard focuses on industry practices and corporate responsibility to incentivize businesses to do better. Can you tell us more about the scorecard?
Scorecard measures three key areas of welfare
Maha: Absolutely. So for the past four years, Mercy for Animals has published the Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard, the only report of its kind focused on ranking major food companies operating in Canada on their animal welfare performance as it relates to three key issue areas.
The first is laying hens confined in cages and companies moving toward cage-free systems that do not use any type of cage, allowing birds space, mobility, and the ability to express their natural behaviors.
The second issue is pigs confined in crates and companies moving toward crate free systems, which are referred to as group housing systems for mother pigs during their gestation periods that do not involve individually confining these mother pigs to any tight enclosures that would prevent them from turning around or lying down with their limbs fully extended.
The third issue is the breeding environment and slaughter method of chickens raised for meat and companies’ adoption and move toward a leading set of global standards called the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC).
That includes improved management practices such as lowering stocking densities, providing better litter, lighting, and enrichments for the birds, and very importantly, eliminating fast growing breeds of birds, as well as replacing live shackle slaughter (which is the predominant slaughter method for chickens raised for meat) with controlled atmosphere stunning (which is a less cruel slaughter method).
So these three policy areas for farmed animal welfare are key to reducing animal suffering and company supply chains.
Mercy for Animals’ benchmarking tool through the scorecard ranks companies based on:
whether they’ve adopted these meaningful animal welfare commitments,
if they’re being transparent about the progress they’ve made toward their policies, and
if they’ve published clear plans for fully implementing their commitments.
The initiative provides transparency on welfare commitments
Maha: To give you some background, from 2012 to 2018, Mercy for Animals released 12 animal cruelty investigations in Canada, after which many major food companies in Canada started adopting commitments to sourcing only cage-free eggs, crate-free pork, and chicken aligned with the Better Chicken Commitment.
So when the companies announced these public pledges, they signaled to the industry that they were ready to reform their supply chain practices and meet consumer demand for higher welfare products.
Mercy for Animals’ Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard is an important public accountability mechanism that tracks company and industry progress and transparency on these issues and helps keep the public informed about various brands’ performance. Our report provides transparency and accountability in an environment where some companies and industries simply refuse to do so.
The food industry’s role in animal welfare
Chantelle: It’s such an important project and I’m really glad it’s available.
As you mentioned, there’s so little transparency in the animal agriculture industry. I would love to know more about what role different parts of the food industry have in protecting animal welfare.
Canadian animal agriculture industry is self-regulated
Maha: So in Canada there are no federal laws to protect farmed animals; industrial animal agriculture is actually self-regulated.
The National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) is a body composed of industry stakeholders and associations. And NFACC develops codes of practice for each farmed animal industry by species.
But 49 out of 56 members, or 88% of NFACC members actually represent industry. They include trade groups like the Canadian Pork Council and big food companies like egg producers and grocery stores.
So most industries in Canada rely on the voluntary recommendations laid out in NFACC codes. These codes are unlegislated. They’re unenforceable in most provinces, and compliance with the codes is not evaluated.
Very importantly, standards on all critical animal welfare issues do not go nearly far enough to establish meaningful standards to protect farmed animals. These are bare minimum recommended standards and they fall short of leading global animal welfare standards.
Agriculture industry guidelines recommend keeping hens in cages
Maha: I’ll give you an example on cage-free. NFACC standards have failed to ban caged confinement for laying hens, and they allow conventional battery cage systems until 2036. Instead of recommending a ban on cages, the council encourages farmers to invest in a move toward “enriched cages”, which are cages that are only slightly larger, despite scientific evidence that all cages harm animal welfare.
In enriched cages, hens still spend their entire lives on wire flooring. They have space per bird that’s no larger than a standard sheet of printer paper. This move toward enriched cages has unfortunately become more entrenched in the Canadian industry year after year.
So basically, NFACC is mostly the industry creating its own guidelines.
Consumer demand and corporate commitments drive change
Maha: This is very different from corporate commitments, which are mostly driven by consumer and investor concern.
With no federal legislation protecting animals in Canadian farms, and these inadequate industry guidelines acting as a benchmark, the private sector is really instrumental in advancing animal welfare.
In Canada, restaurants, grocers, food service providers and other food companies play a critical role in moving the food industry toward more responsible sourcing standards.
Mercy for Animal emphasizes the importance of follow through and transparency from companies on their animal welfare commitments. Because without accountability, consumers will be left in the dark about company’s supply chain practices, and animals will continue to suffer from the worst factory farming conditions.
Progress in welfare reporting
Amy: Oh, there was so much good in everything you said there in terms of just like how lacking the system is in Canada and how lacking the standards are. It’s certainly something that needs a lot more attention and time and something that pushes the industry to make better commitments because it’s not happening through legislation. So having some other incentives is necessary.
Given that, what are some of the areas that you’ve seen progress on in this latest scorecard?
Increase in companies reporting progress
Maha: Since 2021, the first year of Mercy for Animals launched the Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard, the number of companies that have begun reporting progress each year has remained steady. So in 2024, for example, 10 companies reported for the first time on their policies.
This year’s report reported 15 policies as fulfilled, including cage-free policies from McDonald’s and Boston Pizza. 15% of companies featured in the report reported regional progress on all three animal welfare issues that I mentioned that we evaluate, which is a 5% increase from 2023.
We’ve also seen multiple companies this year report progress on their move toward controlled atmosphere stunning, which is the Better Chicken Commitment’s approved slaughter method for chickens raised for meat.
We saw more companies reporting progress as well toward transitioning to group housing for mother pigs.
So Mercy for Animals’ annual benchmarking shows a trend toward regional reporting on animal welfare in Canada, which is promising.
We’re seeing an increase in both the number of companies reporting progress and the number of policies companies are reporting on each year, which is a good indication that animal welfare is being integrated into food companies’ corporate responsibility programs.
For example, the number of companies reporting regionally has increased from 11 to 28 over the past four years. And the number of policies evaluated with reported progress has increased more dramatically from 13 to 48.
So we’re seeing that companies that integrate animal welfare into their sustainability work are developing more comprehensive policies and transparency practices over time, which is really encouraging.
Many companies not meeting commitments
A group of laying hens huddle together in an enriched battery cage at an egg farm in British Columbia, 2024. Abigail Messier / We Animals.
Chantelle: That’s really good to see that progress. I think it’s really a testament to how this advocacy and how consumer pressure can push companies to do better over time.
But as we all know, there’s a long way to go still. So could you speak to any ways that companies are not meeting their commitments?
Are Canadian eggs cage-free?
Maha: I think when it comes to companies not meeting their commitments, it’s really important to highlight the lack of cage-free progress in the retail sector in Canada.
This sector is the largest purchaser of eggs and could carry the greatest impact on laying hens if retailers were to transition to fully cage-free sourcing.
But retailers are failing to publish plans toward transitioning to fully cage-free systems. And most retailers, including Walmart, Loblaws, Sobeys, Longos, have even walked back their commitments by removing or postponing their commitment deadlines, which were meant to be 2025 this year.
To make things worse, the country’s major egg producers, Burnbrae Farms and Gray Ridge Eggs, are not being transparent about their use of cages or their plans to eliminate them.
Retailers’ lack of firm deadlines and measurable goals makes it harder to track progress, and it also undermines consumer trust. Without these specific deadlines in place, retailers are showing no urgency in addressing this key animal welfare concern. They’re weakening accountability and they’re slowing industry-wide change.
It’s really important for these companies to set clear goals with annual targets to drive real progress. Because this continued delay is keeping hens in cages, which is completely unacceptable.
How industry practices compare to public trust
A pig chewing on the bars of a transport truck on the way to a slaughterhouse. Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals Media.
Amy: Absolutely. We’ve heard a lot about public trust from the government, from industry.
There’s sort of this idea that if the public is trusting then everything’s fine. And I’m curious if you can speak more to that, how industry practices stack up against their public messaging and consumer expectations.
Canadians want more transparency in animal farming
Maha: Yeah, absolutely. This is a very important topic because studies consistently show that actually Canadians want farmed animals to have higher welfare conditions, and they want companies to share information about how animals are treated in their operations.
In fact:
More than 8 out of 10 Canadians say that stores and restaurants should be transparent about the types of eggs they source.
More than 7 out of 10 Canadians support a national ban on caged confinement.
Humane washing organizations invest in marketing over living conditions
Maha: But industry marketing associations are growing in size, and they’re receiving millions of taxpayer dollars to support advertising under the appearance of building “public trust”.
In Canada’s food system, these organizations are humane washing outdated and harmful practices. Groups like Chicken Farmers of Canada, the Egg Farmers of Canada are investing millions to influence public opinion about animal welfare rather than improving how animals are actually treated.
Does Canada have factory farms?
Maha: For example, one common myth is that Canada does not have factory farms, which is only bolstered by industry advertising. Chicken Farmers of of Canada runs paid advertisements that claim that the country does not have factory farms because Canadian chicken farms are family farms.
Meanwhile, an average chicken farm in Canada houses a staggering 36,000 chickens, which rivals any other industrialized farming production model. A family farm designation has no connection whatsoever to farm size or production method. It simply means a farm that is not corporate owned.
Another association, the Egg Farmers of Canada conveniently omits the term cages in most of their public messaging. Instead, they refer to enriched cages as “enriched colony housing” or “alternative housing”, which helps create this public framing that these types of systems are acceptable when in reality they’re still systems where birds are caged.
Another example is Canada’s largest egg producer Burnbrae farms. Their labeling on cartons of eggs misleads the public into believing that they’re purchasing cage-free eggs when they’re actually purchasing eggs from hens who spend their lives in cages. One survey showed that nearly half of Loblaws customers said they believed that Burnbrae’s “Nestlaid” label means that hens live in open barns with no cages.
Screenshot: Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard, Mercy for Animals
This isn’t surprising given Burnbrae’s Naturegg Nestlaid labels have images of green open pastures and happy cartoon eggs. But in reality, eggs in those cartons come from caged birds kept “enriched cages”.
In reality, Canada is falling behind on welfare
So the industry self-regulates and in its communications positions itself as a leader. While in reality, Canada is falling behind other countries and is failing to deliver on consumer expectations for higher welfare products.
Polls show that Canadians care about animal welfare and they want companies to do the right thing and the industry should deliver. But the lack of legislation and this rise in humane washing shows the importance of bringing greater transparency to animal agriculture in Canada, which is what Mercy for Animals is trying to do through our public reporting and campaigning.
How can consumers push for better practices?
Chantelle: A lot of what we have talked about as well on the show is how these terms like family farms and free run are not regulated terms, so they can be really misleading for the public. And of course there’s the imagery of happy cows on packaging and smiling eggs and smiling chickens and green pastures.
And it’s really disappointing to hear that companies are often misleading consumers and not providing the conditions that people in the general public expect and want. So given that, what are ways that consumers could help push for better animal welfare practices?
Show companies you care
Maha: That’s a great question. You know, one impactful way consumers can push for better animal welfare is to demand better from companies and industry and really show them that they actually care about animal welfare.
The more people we have putting pressure on companies, the better it will be. The louder our message will be.
The Canadian industry is increasingly resistant to change and it justifies its lack of progress by touting a lack of consumer demand for higher welfare products. The truth is Canadians want animals to be treated better, and companies and industry are just failing to make the necessary investment and plans to reduce animal suffering.
Consumers have the power to change that by raising their voices against companies’ inaction.
One tangible step is consumers can visit CanadaScorecard.ca to sign up to learn more about how to take action and make a difference for animals in Canada, which includes joining a community of change makers, organizing local on the ground efforts, taking impactful online action and driving this vital mission forward.
Amy: It’s so important to have things that we can do at a grassroots level because it’s easy to feel hopeless. Making change is a process and it takes time. One of those things that we can do is kind of choose what companies to support or not support.
And I think even as a person who, myself, I eat plant-based, there are some parent companies that own plant-based and meat or plant-based and egg, and so it’s helpful to kind of have a sense of what are the companies that are doing their best and what are the ones that are just not putting effort in.
What have you learned in terms of welfare practices and transparency?
Companies performing well on cage-free egg commitments
Maha: It’s important to note that while some companies may be doing well on certain issue areas, they’re not always performing as well across all animal welfare issues, but I can give you some examples.
When it comes to cage-free policies. In our most recent report, we celebrated McDonald’s Canada, Boston Pizza and Eggsmart for fulfilling their cage-free egg policies one year ahead of their deadlines.
And then Aramark, which is a major food service provider, more than doubled their cage-free egg progress in Canada, which is amazing.
Companies performing poorly on cage-free egg commitments
Maha: Meanwhile, Walmart is now the only top five retailer in Canada not publishing progress toward fulfilling their cage-free policy, which originally had a 2025 deadline before they retracted it. Walmart’s low ranking hasn’t changed in the scorecard for four consecutive years.
Sobeys is another retailer and they’re owned by Empire, which is the second largest retail conglomerate in Canada. And Sobeys is reporting cage-free broad progress, but has failed to publish any targets outlining how they intend to fulfill their cage-free commitment. And the company has stagnated at about 17% progress for the third year in a row.
Another one is MTY group. They own brands like Mr. Sub, Thai Express, Papa Murphy’s. And they reported in 2023 that only 2% of the eggs they sourced were cage-free, despite having adopted their cage-free policy seven years before and being just two years away from their fulfillment deadline of 2025. MTY Group also diminished their commitments and misrepresented the welfare implication of cage systems in their recent sustainability report.
Which companies are adopting the Better Chicken Commitment?
Maha: When it comes to the welfare of chickens raised for meat, food service providers were some of the first adopters of the Better Chicken Commitment, which as I mentioned, are a set of standards stressing of the treatment of chickens raised for meat.
However, two of the largest food service providers, Compass Group and Sodexo have time bound plans for implementing their policies in the United States, but they haven’t extended these roadmaps to their Canadian operations.
Which companies are falling behind for chickens raised for meat?
In contrast, Aramark has published clear milestones and plans that include Canada making them the first multinational company to do so in Canada.
This year we also saw progress on the transition to controlled atmosphere stunning from the industry, which is the slaughter method aligned with the Better Chicken Commitment.
So we saw Maple Leaf Foods and restaurant chain A&W announced having completed their transition to controlled atmosphere stunning.
More companies reported progress toward transitioning their chicken supply to controlled atmosphere stunning for the first time: big retailers like Loblaws, Save On Foods, the pizza chain Boston Pizza, and fast food giant Restaurant Brands International. If you’re not familiar, they own Tim Horton’s, Burger King and Popeye’s.
Which companies are making progress for pigs?
Maha: When it comes to crate free policies, we’ve seen a lot of progress where companies have fulfilled their crate free policies likeA&W, Campbell’s, Chipotle, Costco, Wendy’s.
Starbucks Canada tripled their progress in North America toward transitioning to group housing for mother pigs; and Costco Wholesale Canada reported transitioning to group housing for most of their private label pork retailers. Save On Foods reported progress on their transition to group housing for the first time.
Which companies have not made progress for pigs?
Maha: There are also companies that still either have no crate-free policies or have reported no progress toward them. And these include Aramark—which as I mentioned before, had made progress for chickens raised for meat—and also Calgary Co-op; Chairman’s Brands, which owns 241 Pizza, Coffee Time, and Eggsmart; Compass Group; Foodtastic; Sodexo Canada; and Subway.
So as you can see, some companies may be progressing on one issue, not on the other. There are some promising developments that we’ve seen over the years.
How Canada stacks up against other countries
Chantelle: It’s really good to see those developments, and I really appreciate how in-depth the scorecard is when it comes to looking at those companies.
Looking at a Canadian context, I know a lot of people right now are shopping Canadian companies specifically, so it’s really important that Canadian companies are living up to those animal welfare commitments so that people can shop in a way that’s aligned with all their values.
So looking at that, how do Canadian companies stack up compared to other countries?
Canadian egg-laying hens stuck in cages
Maha: Canada is making almost no progress on eliminating cages and has fallen far behind the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union on cage-free egg production.
Many European countries and US states have enacted laws banning cages for laying hens.
And to put this into perspective, 82% of hens in Canada’s egg farms still spend nearly their entire lives in confinement. Meanwhile, the numbers in the UK are 23%, 39% in the European Union, and 61% in the United States.
The Canadian egg industry has no public plan to end the confinement of laying hens, and is simply replacing conventional cages with enriched cages.
Since 2019, cage-free egg production in Canada has increased by a mere two percentage points, while production in enriched cage systems has nearly doubled, accounting for about 34% of all egg production in Canada.
The Canadian egg industry continues to fall further behind each year, which puts companies at risk of defaulting on their public commitments.
And this is reflected in seeing multinational companies like Costco and Kraft Heinz that have fulfilled or almost fulfilled their cage-free policies in other countries and regions. But they’ve progressed very little on cage cage-free sourcing in Canada, which really shows that companies are underperforming in Canada and failing to use their resources and power to help catalyze a cage-free transition in the country.
Canadian companies lack comprehensive policies on the Better Chicken Commitment
Maha: I could also speak about broiler welfare. The industry refers chickens raised for meat as broilers.
Many large retailers in the US and Europe have policies aligned with the Better Chicken Commitment and are even reporting progress toward fulfilling these commitments. But not one major retailer in Canada has a comprehensive public policy aligned with the BCC.
NFACC codes, which are used as industry guidelines in Canada, as I previously mentioned, are pretty weak when it comes to chickens raised for meat.
When we’re evaluating companies on chicken welfare, we’re looking at how well they’re advancing towards these leading standards. NFACC guidelines fall way short of aligning with these more stringent standards. They have no provisions for transitioning from fast-growing breeds or the typical slaughter method.
It’s encouraging to see that in Canada, some producers are, however, helping move the industry forward on chicken welfare. Canada’s largest chicken producers, Maple Leaf and Cargill, have reported progress on reduced stocking density and the use of enrichments, and they have fully transitioned to controlled atmosphere stunning, the BCC-aligned processing method.
But these producers are still failing to address the serious welfare concerns of ultra fast-growing breeds, which remain the norm in the Canadian chicken industry. And these breeds are one of the root causes of suffering for chickens raised for meat.
Vision for the future
Amy: I really appreciate you highlighting some of these.
For a while I was working on farms, both in New Zealand and in Canada. Sort of not just working, but also doing tours, checking them out for different reasons.
And one of the farms that I was on was an egg-laying hens farm. It was interesting talking to the farmer, because he sort of felt that the enriched cages were better for the welfare of the hens, and he couldn’t himself figure out how to do the free range in a way that he felt good about.
And so it was sort of this like, well, from my observations, this one system works better than this other one. So rather than working towards making the free range system better, there is this sense of like, there’s more control with the enriched cages, so it’s “easier” to go to that.
I found that really disappointing that rather than innovating in ways that would give hens the chance to scratch in the dirt and dust bathe, there was this sense that, enriched cages are “good enough”.
I’m curious to hear what you think are changes that you’re hoping to see in the food and animal agriculture industry.
Maha: Absolutely, and that’s such a good point. At the end of the day, enriched cages may give a farmer more control or a sense of control, but it doesn’t give a bird more control over their freedom to move, their freedom to flap their wings, their freedom to forage, their freedom to roam within a larger space.
A future without industrial animal agriculture, a present with less suffering
Maha: Ultimately, Mercy for Animals wants to see a massive transformation within the food system—one where industrialized animal agriculture no longer exists.
We recognize that this type of systemic change will take time, but in the meantime, we want to see a significant reduction in animal suffering within the current system.
We need animal protection legislation that’s enforceable, and also to turn what are current voluntary codes of practice for industry into mandated, enforcable regulations. This would mean raising animal welfare standards to ensure better living conditions and more ethical practices, which could stand to impact millions, if not billions of animals every year.
In the immediate future, we want to see corporations, which have immense power to influence their supply chains, take responsibility by adopting and implementing policies that genuinely improve animal welfare.
By doing so, these companies can lead the way in driving more humane and sustainable practices in the industry, making a tangible difference for animals and meeting consumer expectations for better animal welfare.
Save lives by eating more plants
Chantelle: Thank you so much for sharing that. As you said, there’s billions of lives being affected by this, so it’s going to be really important for companies to be shifting from the thing that is easier to the thing that is right for these animals.
Before you go, is there anything else you would like to share with our listeners?
Maha: I’d like to share that while Mercy for Animals’ Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard advocates for better animal welfare standards within the industry, one of the most powerful choices compassionate consumers can make to protect animals from horrific cruelty is to incorporate more plant-based foods into their diet and support companies that are prioritizing animal welfare.
Consumers hold tremendous power, and with that power, they can urge decision-makers, corporations, and producers to end their reliance on some of these horrific practices, such as extreme confinement and breeding for rapid growth, and help reduce the suffering of millions of animals in the process.
I encourage listeners to visit our website, mercyforanimals.org to learn more about our work and ways to get involved to drive meaningful change for animals in Canada.
Recently, the Vancouver Humane Society sent a letter to the B.C. Minister of Agriculture calling for urgent changes for farmed animals in response to shocking footage reportedly taken at a B.C. slaughterhouse. The Ministry has since responded to the VHS and not acknowledged the urgency to protect farmed animals in the wake of this horrific footage. Instead, the government continues to delay action on moving forward with recommendations on B.C.’s Farmed Animal Framework. Can you send a message urging the Minister to prioritize stronger protections for farmed animals?
In January, Chilliwack-based pig slaughterhouse Johnston’s Meats was ordered to take “corrective actions” after shocking footage released by Animal Justice showed horrific suffering.
The disturbing footage shows frightened and panicked pigs being inhumanely handled, including:
Animals being improperly stunned before having their throats cut, being hung upside down to bleed out while conscious, and then placed into a scalding tank of boiling water.
Multiple animals appear to show signs of consciousness after being electrocuted, which is required to render them fully unconscious for the rest of the slaughter process.
In some clips, workers are seen slitting still-conscious pigs’ throats and electrocuting them multiple times.
Despite this, the Ministry of Agriculture said no illegal behaviour was found, and that the footage depicted “standard practices in a busy hog processing facility.”
Calling for action from the B.C. government
The investigation and the Ministry’s response raised serious concerns, leading the VHS to send a letter to Premier David Eby and Agriculture Minister Lana Popham.
The letter:
Detailed the shocking suffering of pigs seen in the footage released by Animal Justice and the history of near-annual investigations at B.C. farms and slaughterhouses over the past decade.
Highlighted “that slaughterhouse inspectors, who are required to be on-site daily, failed to identify and report the issues captured in the footage … This raises serious questions about the effectiveness of current oversight and enforcement activities.”
Urged the Premier and Agriculture Minister to prioritize next steps following the province’s recent review of its farmed animal welfare framework, including government-mandated and proactively enforced regulations based on the best available animal welfare science; proactive oversight including “consistent video surveillance”; and appropriate penalties to prevent cruelty and ensure accountability.
The Ministry of Agriculture has refused to acknowledge the urgency of this situation as farmed animals continue to suffer.
Could you please take the action below and tell the Ministry animal protection should be a priority?
Note: A valid Canadian postal code is required to send messages to Canadian decision-makers. If you do not have a postal code, you can reach Premier David Eby by email at Premier@gov.bc.ca and Agriculture Minister Lana Popham at AF.Minister@gov.bc.ca.
Late last year, the death of Jenga, a male giraffe at the Greater Vancouver Zoo, reignited calls to better protect animals in captivity. Jenga was only eight years old when he was found deceased in his barn on October 23, while giraffes typically live up to 25 years in the wild. He lived with only two other giraffes in a small and barren enclosure, offering little enrichment or opportunities to engage in natural behaviours essential for giraffes’ well-being.
The Vancouver Humane Society (VHS) has called on the zoo for many years to address persistent animal welfare concerns and transition away from keeping animals in permanent captivity. In recent years, a VHS campaign has called on provincial decision-makers to take action and update outdated regulations on the keeping, breeding, and transportation of wild and exotic animals.
Emily Pickett from the Vancouver Humane Society discusses the tragic life and death of Jenga the giraffe, who died at the Greater Vancouver Zoo on October 23rd, as well as ongoing welfare concerns at the zoo. Originally aired on The Early Edition from CBC News; shared on The Informed Animal Ally podcast.
Jenga’s death gained significant media attention, with coverage from major news outlets and discussions on CBC’s The Early Edition. VHS representatives expressed concerns to news outlets about Jenga’s quality of life prior to his passing, highlighting the challenges of keeping wild, exotic animals in captivity and the stressors they may endure. The zoo has yet to publicly provide a full explanation of the cause of death, prompting calls for an independent investigation.
Jenga’s death is not an isolated incident. His death adds to a concerning history of animal fatalities at the facility. Between 2003 and 2015, reports indicate that four giraffes, four zebras, two hippos, and two Siberian tigers died at the zoo.
Recent reports have also revealed a troubling pattern of animal fatalities in zoos across Canada. In Calgary, the deaths of several animals at the Calgary Zoo have raised similar concerns. Over the past year, multiple animals have died under the zoo’s care, including a western lowland gorilla named Eyare who was injured moving between back-of-house spaces. A polar bear named Baffin drowned after sustaining a bite to the throat. Conservationists have called for a systemic review of the facility’s practices, emphasizing the need for increased oversight and transparency.
The sudden death of a two-year-old gorilla at the Wilder Institute/Calgary Zoo has prompted some conservation experts to push for change.
This past year, multiple animals have died globally as well, including Roxie the red panda who died due to noise stress from fireworks in Edinburgh, and twelve monkeys who died from a bacterial outbreak in a zoo in Hong Kong.
These incidents fuel ongoing debates about the ethics of keeping wild animals in captive environments that may not adequately meet their needs. The recent deaths of Jenga and other captive animals are a sad reminder that although zoo visitors may leave at the end of the day, animals cannot.
For more information on how you can support efforts to protect captive animals, visit this blog post.
The VHS has continued to encourage restaurants and other local small businesses to make plant-based eating more accessible.
Right now, 65% of Lower Mainland adults are reducing their meat and dairy intake, giving businesses a great opportunity to meet the growing demand for animal-free meals.
65%
of Lower Mainland adults are reducing their meat and dairy intake
Free plant-based toolkit for restaurants
To support restaurants in making these changes, the VHS implemented a new Restaurant Toolkit initiative, which provides a free step-by-step guide with dos and don’ts, tips for recipe and menu development, marketing ideas, and more.
The VHS also launched the new Dairy-Free for No Fee program to support cafés in removing the extra charge for plant-based milk. This initiative is backed by a research study of 813 participants in B.C., which found that:
62% of B.C. customers see surcharge-free options as an inclusive choice, feeling it adds to a welcoming environment. This rises to 73% among those aged 18-34, and 68% among Metro Vancouverites.
More than 1 in 3 British Columbians aged 18-34 would make surcharge-free cafés their go-to spot, underscoring the strong customer loyalty potential.
About 1 in 4 (24%) British Columbians say they’d choose plant-based milk more often if there was no surcharge. This rises to 34% among those aged 18-34.
32% of British Columbians aged 18-34—a key café demographic—prefer plant-based milk regularly.
Following Port Moody City Council’s vote to ban mobile live animal programs last month, Councillor Kyla Knowles is asking for the province to introduce stronger regulations to protect animals.
Mobile petting zoos pose many animal welfare concerns:
Transportation to different locations can be an inherently stressful process for many species.
The animals used in these zoos are typically transported and kept in undersized cages or units that may also lack other elements they need to engage in important natural behaviours, like appropriate substrate and enrichment items.
Animals can develop chronic stress and health issues as a result of disrupted eating, sleeping, and drinking patterns, and from being exposed to unfamiliar sights, sounds, smells and human handling and interactions.
Port Moody City Council voted to ban mobile live animal programs, such as mobile petting zoos, on January 21st following a presentation by the BC SPCA and statements from the Vancouver Humane Society and several Port Moody residents.
Council Kyla Knowles, who championed last month’s motion, has introduced a new motion to ask for stronger protections across the province.
Florida Fish and Wildlife flickr image / Lisa Thompson photo Port Moody council is now urging the province to step in with stricter regulations on Fresh off of approving a municipal ban of mobile petting zoos, Port Moody council is now urging the province to step in with stricter regulations on related practices.
“On Feb. 25, Coun. Kyla Knowles, who spearheaded the city’s move towards banning mobile petting zoos, introduced an advocacy motion to the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) calling on the province to strengthen the rules around mobile live-animal programs. “
“‘Whenever animals are on display or made to perform for recreation, sport or entertainment, they face risks to their physical and psychological well-being,’ Knowles’ motion stated. ‘Meeting an animal’s welfare needs during (the programs) is very difficult, if not impossible, particularly if operators are not trained to recognize and alleviate animal distress or suffering.'”
Port Moody council tasked staff in January to create a corporate policy banning mobile live animal programs from operating anywhere in the city.
“Coun. Kyla Knowles said animals on display or made to perform face risks to their physical and psychological well-being.”
“She’s calling upon her fellow councillors to support a resolution to the Union of BC Municipalities calling for provincial regulations as well as updates to current regulations that will give animal welfare equal priority to public safety, along with a prohibition on the import, keeping, breeding and transport of exotic species.”
What happened in the world of animal protection last year?
Welcome to a new season of The Informed Animal Ally! Previous seasons have delved into the state of animal protection laws in Canada and B.C.; what a good life looks like for animals; specific areas that the Vancouver Humane Society works in; and foundational knowledge for animal advocates. This season will look at a macro view of the state of animal protection nationally and globally:
What are trends across the animal protection sector?
What is working?
Where are we seeing challenges?
Where does Canada stand on the international stage when it comes to animal well-being?
In this episode, the VHS’s Chantelle Archambault and Amy Morris discuss trends in the animal advocacy movement, as well as successes, opportunities, and challenges in Canada and around the world in 2024.
Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.
Chantelle: When it comes to public responses and policy change, we’re increasingly seeing a polarization of opinions. On one hand, people are more aware of animal sentience and care deeply about improving animal well-being, leading to progress and policies that protect animals.
But at the same time, this progress and shifting public opinion is leading to really strong pushback from people who benefit from the status quo. There are some areas where we’re seeing a step backwards. You can see that in things like strong marketing by the dairy industry against plant-based milk.
It seems the more progress we see, the more pushback there is. People feel very strongly about their convictions on both sides of any issue.
Everything from public discourse in the comment section of social media posts to the tailored search results people see when they look up an issue on Google tends to push people further toward confirming their own biases and existing beliefs.
Amy: It’s very frustrating and we see it across the board in all areas of ways people think about the world. At the same time, we can celebrate some wins.
Animal protection progress in Canada in 2024
B.C. family law recognizes pets as more than property in divorce and separation
Amy: We have wins in Canada worth talking about. The first is B.C. family law recognizing that companion animals are more than property when they’re doing divorce proceedings.
What’s really great about this is decisions are being made that take into account the nuances of what a family structure is and the relationships that happen between an animal and their caregivers.
Chantelle: It’s great that the courts are recognizing that animals are beings who have thoughts and preferences and bonds and not equivalent to divvying up something like family jewelry.
Canada bans import and export of elephant ivory, rhino horn, and hunting trophies
Amy: Absolutely. Another really great one is that it is now illegal to import or export elephant ivory, rhino horn, and hunting trophies.
This change demonstrates the impact of a large scale sustained campaign, and it is what keeps us campaigning on different animal topics knowing these changes are possible.
Companion animals included in coercive control legislation
Content warning: This section discusses domestic abuse and animal harm.
Amy: The next one is having companion animals included in coercive control legislation in Canada. Coercive control often involves abusers threatening, manipulating, or harming companion animals to control their human victims.
The new bill would criminalize these behaviours, including:
Attempted and threatened violence towards an intimate partner’s animal
Controlling or attempting to control the manner in which an intimate partner cares for their companion animal
This is important because there are times where an animal is in distress and a person’s ability to get help for that animal is limited by transport or by financial means and when it is an abusive situation, it’s not that person’s fault that they don’t have the financial means or the transport.
It’s something that’s being impacted by another individual and they’re the ones that really need to be held responsible.
Chantelle: We’ve spoken before about the violence link, about how violence toward animals is linked very closely with violence towards humans. And people who are violent toward animals tend to also be violent towards humans.
It’s really important that Canadian legislation is recognizing this.
PUPS Act in Ontario prohibits puppy mills and introduces stronger protections for dogs
Amy: Ontario introduced the Preventing Unethical Puppy Sales Act to prohibit puppy mills and introduce stronger protections for dogs. A number of provinces have put something like this into place and Ontario is the most recent.
It shows that the provinces do have authority to make rules and laws that better protect animals, and that they have the responsibility to as well.
Opportunities for better animal protection in Canada
Farmed animal Codes of Practice came under review
Amy: We also have some opportunities in Canada. First, we have the Codes of Practices for farmed animals.
The Codes of Practices provide written recommendations and requirements for the care and handling of farmed animals in Canada. They’re adopted as generally accepted practices of animal management under most legislation, which means they can be used as a defense for farmers, rather than farmers having a proactive duty to comply with these codes of practice.
Even though that’s the case, they’re also used by veterinarians and by practitioners to really show what’s acceptable and what’s not. It’s a standardized document.
They have discussions about pain control, what kind of housing and bedding is appropriate, what’s important to know when moving and restraining animals, providing care, preparing animals for transport, and their euthanasia.
Written into these codes is a number of standards that tell you what’s truly not acceptable in the treatment of farmed animals.
Three codes of practice for care and handling recently came under revision and had their initial public feedback periods for 2024. Those are for horses on farms, cattle used for meat, and chickens and turkeys used for meat.
The organization that manages these processes is a non profit, but they’re funded fully by the government, and these serve as national standards.
Chantelle: The National Farm Animal Care Council, which manages these codes of practice, takes into consideration feedback from a variety of people, including animal advocates and the animal agriculture industry.
The VHS shared ways that people can provide feedback to advocate for better welfare in the codes last year. We’ve seen positive results from this in the past. It’s so important that people are advocating for the welfare of animals to be strongly considered when these codes are under review.
Official parliamentary petition asks that Canada legally recognize animal sentience
Amy: Absolutely. The final opportunity is a petition to recognize animal sentience on a national level.
Right now, the Canadian constitution doesn’t say anything about animals. It’s this general understanding that animals are under our care because we’ve domesticated them, without protection that really acknowledges their individual value and worth.
And so having animal sentience recognized at a national level would be a massive, massive impact.
It might take a while, but it’s on the discussion docket and a step forward.
Chantelle: I would be very excited to see this passed into legislation. There are lots of countries that already recognize animal sentience and it is a crucial part of having better policies passed for protecting animals.
Challenges around animal protection in Canada in 2024
Photo: Canadian Horse Defence Coalition
Ban on horse exports for slaughter delayed, in limbo
Amy: Passing any federal legislation takes time and requires cooperation from multiple levels of government across parties. Bills need to be passed through three readings at both the House of Commons and the Senate, and then receive Royal Assent to become law.
One of the challenges that we’ve seen is with Bill C-355, which aimed to ban the export of live horses for slaughter.
This bill has been in discussion for quite a long time, and there was even a letter to the Minister of Agriculture from the Prime Minister to direct them to take action on this item. It was part of a campaign promise.
The bill to ban the export of horses for slaughter passed the House of Commons, but then it stalled for months at the Senate. It’s now in this sort of legislative limbo while Parliament is paused.
There were so many reasons to move forward with passing this bill. One is that it was a campaign promise and there was a mandate letter more than three years ago to put this into place.
Within the past year, new exposes showed horses suffer more than previously reported. Shipments are regularly exceeding the legal limit of 28 hours without food, water, and rest. More horses are dying in transit than reported by the government.
The majority of Canadians support banning horse exports for slaughter.
What it came down to was certain senators were dragging their feet and bringing up unrelated issues, rather than working together to prioritize the lives of horses and the values held by many Canadians.
If an election is called, which appears imminent, the bill will die and be forced to start the process again.
Right now, the best thing you can do is contact the Minister of Agriculture to stop the export of horses for slaughter and keep this moving through the next season of legislation.
Similarly, Ontario had a ban on penned dog hunting, and that was also lifted the year prior.
Some of these laws have been in place for a long time for good reason, and those changes have to do with special interest groups having their voices heard, even when it isn’t necessarily in the public interest.
It’s unfortunate that special interest groups are being heard in a way that’s against animal welfare. We’re not seeing special interest groups that are pro animal welfare being heard in the same way.
Animal protection wins around the world in 2024
Olympics remove show jumping from modern pentathlon event
Chantelle: Now that we’ve talked about some challenges in Canada, I would like to talk about some more wins that we’ve seen further out around the world.
We had the Summer Olympics in 2024. Following the Olympics, the modern pentathlon removed show jumping.
Horses are still used elsewhere in the Olympics, but the modern pentathlon has been a major area for concern. That sport involves the use of aversive tools like whips, bits, and spurs to control horses movements.
In this event, horses are randomly paired with riders who are participating. There have been concerns about riders not having a chance to develop a bond with the horse that they’re riding and to understand them on an individual level, which can lead to a lack of focus on the horse’s well-being and can lead to the horse experiencing stress, fear, and pain.
Advocates have also noted that riders and handlers have been seen directing their frustrations at horses during the competitions.
You may have heard the story of a coach punching a horse named Saint Boy in 2021 with her fist and encouraging the rider to use greater force on him.
The move away from show jumping for this sport and instead of replacing it with an obstacle course is a great example of how we can enjoy these showcases of human athlete skills and have our entertainment, but we don’t need to use animals to do that.
Amy: It’s great to see this, and this is so hard to overcome. Certainly there’s lots of sports using animals still. Big kudos to the Olympics for removing this use of horses.
UK bans farmed animal export for slaughter and fattening
Chantelle: In the UK in 2023, animal sentience was legally recognized at a federal level.
Last year it was decided that farmed animals would no longer be exported for slaughter or fattening abroad. That eliminates a really significant welfare concern for farmed animals. It’s similar to what we’re trying to achieve with the ban of horses for slaughter.
Transporting animals on long journeys is a big concern.
Farmed animals who are being transported go through a lot of suffering. They often endure extreme weather conditions like extreme heat and cold. They can go a very long time without food, water, and rest. They are shipped in overcrowded conditions to maximize how many animals can be sent to be killed at one time.
All of those conditions together can lead to animals becoming injured, sick, or even dying in transport. Depending on how they’re being shipped, it can be a really long time until there’s someone who even can reach them to attend to them.
The Animal Welfare Livestock Exports Act in the UK was met with cross party support, which shows that animal wellbeing is not a partisan issue and that reducing the suffering of our fellow beings that we share the planet with is something we really should all care about.
Amy: This is pretty amazing. I’m surprised they’re willing to make these kinds of changes, certainly, I think there’s a number of things at play. Them being an island helps as well as having that sentience law passed.
Pet Abduction Act protect pets and guardians in the UK
Chantelle: Another thing that came out of sentience law is the UK introduced the Pet Abduction Act in 2024. That made the abduction of companion animals like cats and dogs a specific criminal offense. Convictions can result in a fine or up to five years in prison, or both.
The theft of animals was previously covered by the Theft Act of 1968; these laws were put in place a very long time ago and they were due for an update. The former law considered pets to be property, like if someone stole a car.
This is another one of the great strides in protections for animals and their guardians since animal sentience was recognized.
We have consistently seen better protections for animals and the people who care for them when animal sentience legislation is introduced. But still, when we were sharing the federal petition to recognize animal sentience in Canada, there was a lot of misunderstanding around this.
We had people commenting with concerns that there wouldn’t be any protections for pet guardians if pets were no longer considered property, which we know based on the many countries that have passed this legislation is not true. I think there’s some anxiety around animal advocacy that people want to take your pets away.
But progress like this means pets are more part of the family. Greater care goes into keeping them safe because the law recognizes that they have an inherent value and an emotional value, not just a monetary value.
Amy: The challenge is convincing lawmakers that’s the case and that there’s public value in that.
New laws on wildlife killing contests, animal testing, and pet sales in the United States
Chantelle: New York’s ban on wildlife killing contests came into effect last year. New York is the 10th state to outlaw events like this, where the goal is to kill wild animals for cash and prizes.
There are also new laws around animal testing testing in Oregon, where there can no longer be the sale of cosmetics tested on animals; in California, where non animal alternatives are required for testing on certain products; and in Maryland, where animal research facilities are now required to pay into a fund that goes toward developing non animal methods and hopefully lead to less animal testing in the future.
New York pet stores can no longer sell cats, dogs, or rabbits, while pet stores in Pennsylvania must post health and breeder information for puppies as part of the state’s puppy mill law. The goal of these changes is to make people more aware of where animals are coming from and to encourage people to adopt animals who are in need of homes rather than buying from places like puppy mills, where the animal’s health and well being aren’t adequately considered.
Amy: Certainly this area, while these are some specific wins, there’s been states that have had laws around this for a long time. Some even have mandatory spay/neuter rules and things like that. It is a state by state reality, just like in Canada. That can be really frustrating, but it also helps us to model policies when the U.S. has similar requirements that laws be passed on a sort of state by state, province by province basis.
Chantelle: It’s very impactful when we see that there’s a precedent for things like this, where this is working to help animals elsewhere. It is slow going when it’s state by state and province by province, but we are seeing progress slowly, but surely.
South Korea outlaws the use of dogs for meat
Chantelle: I have so many more wins, but a couple more to highlight. South Korea passed a law banning the use of dogs for meat, and that will be in effect as of 2027. A lot of countries have already banned the slaughter or sale of dogs for meat. Surprisingly, Canada is not one of them, although meat that’s sold in Canada has to be inspected, and there’s no licensed slaughterhouses that kill dogs in Canada.
Mexico’s constitution includes animal protection as a fundamental value
Chantelle: Mexico’s constitution now includes animal protection as a fundamental value. Nine other countries include animals in their constitution, but this new inclusion in Mexico appears to be the most specific.
For instance, humane education is a mandatory guideline in all educational institutions nationwide.
Amy: Wow, that’s huge. Imagine if we had that around the world.
New Zealand bans greyhound racing
Chantelle: In New Zealand, the government announced that it will ban greyhound racing as of 2026.
That ban comes as a result of very high rates of injuries for dogs used in racing. In 2021, there were more than 200 greyhounds who died and 900 suffered injuries due to racing, according to local media reports.
The law recognizes this level of suffering for entertainment is not acceptable.
Opportunities for animal protection around the world
Research reinforces benefits of plant-based food
Chantelle: There are also some more opportunities around the world. There’s a lot of new research coming out around plant-based foods and the availability of nutrients in plant-based foods.
That study didn’t receive a lot of media attention, presumably because the funders wanted it to prove meat is better than plant-based foods. But it didn’t, despite using less protein-dense sources like black beans and whole wheat.
Despite the study seeming to skew towards a bias for the result they wanted, it still found that if you’re getting enough protein throughout the day, plants are just as effective.
Amy: I love that. Eating lots of nuts, seeds, lentils and beans has given me so much protein. The nice thing is, there are diverse forms of protein to choose from if people struggle with some types that their bodies don’t accept.
I’m grateful there’s so many different types that we have access to, so if we need to cut one out, we can.
Chantelle: And you can get protein from plant-based foods in some ways that I wasn’t even considering. I just switched to a bread that has 10 grams of protein in two slices. You could be getting more protein than you’re even counting.
South African collaboration releases manifesto on animal protection framework
Chantelle: And in South Africa, the Animal Law Project (ALP), which is a collaboration of animal protection organizations, consulted with the sector and with experts to develop and release a manifesto that recommends an overhaul of the legal framework for animals.
In 2016, South African courts recognized animal sentience and decided animal welfare was included in the constitution, which was great.
But very few changes have been made to effectively protect animals since then. This is a great example of collaboration within and between sectors to develop recommendations for animal protection.
Amy: We need to develop useful and clear paths forward that can be applied around the globe.
Trends in animal advocacy: What’s next?
Intersectionality with other advocacy movements
Amy: This concept of One Health, One Welfare is sort of a modern name for connecting the environment, animals, and people. This has existed for so long within Indigenous cultures, where there’s this recognition that we’re all interrelated.
You can relate this to intersectionality, recognizing that we have environmental protections that interact with animal protections. Animal farming impacts the environment and habitat destruction harms wild animals.
There is also overlap with the labour sector, where vulnerable workers who are often marginalized are working in industries that exploit animals. because industries that exploit animals are the lowest paying.
There is overlap with income inequality. Having a lack of resources for low income pet guardians can lead to animals being surrendered to shelters or suffering and people being separated from their animals.
The more we recognize that interplay, we can work with different movements to advocate for people and animals, or advocate for the environment and animals, or all three, in a way that has more power than acting in silos.
Addressing an issue through a variety of methods
Amy: When it comes to farmed animals, advocates across the sector are taking a three pronged approach.
Advocacy to reduce harm to farmed animals through welfare regulations and government policy change that can be really slow and incremental, but it does have an impact. And at the very least, you have to stop it from going backwards, because what we’ll see is that things go backwards if you don’t stay with them.
And then there’s also plant-based advocacy to decrease the demand for animals being raised and killed for food. The more plant-based demand there is, the better likelihood that fewer animals are suffering.
Finally, there’s a push for corporations to adopt higher welfare standards. In the next we’re going to discuss the Canada Animal Welfare Scorecard from Mercy for Animals, tracking which companies are following through with welfare commitments, like sourcing cage-free eggs.
Making the movement more accessible and welcoming
Amy: Another trend that is so important around the globe is making the movement for animals more accessible and welcoming. Moving away from judgment and supporting people to make gradual changes, from talking about a meal you enjoyed to changes like people working within their institutions or their places of work to make change.
There’s also new ways all the time to share information through digital platforms, through one on one conversations, changing media landscapes.
Staying on top of that and reflecting on how we can continue effective advocacy despite a changing environment of how information gets disseminated.
Chantelle: Yeah, that’s so important to consider when we’re talking about how to make animal advocacy more accessible to more people and share these really important messages with as many people as possible.
Taking a community-centered approach
Amy: One final trend is taking a community centered approach. An example is supporting people in caring for their animals rather than pushing for strict regulations, such as bans on pet ownership in low income housing.
As well, working with farmers and workers to create more ethical food systems.
The more we collaborate, the more we can see that everybody does want to work towards some of the same goals, and we can feel connected to those we’re collaborating with and come up with better solutions.
How you can help
Amy: Sharing about the legal changes with friends and family can make a big impact. The more people think about sentience and the constitution, these are abstract concepts, but they mean so much.
It does take this sort of flow from early adopters (people who care deeply about issues and take initiative to make changes) to the mushy middle (people who don’t have strong opinions about an issue but may be swayed to action). And then you get those forced with legislation to change as the final step.
All of you listening are early adopters. Take the time to think about what does it take to get those mushy middle folk a little bit closer to being early adopters, or considering changes in their lives that can influence legislation.
The more public opinion changes, the better odds we have at changing laws.
Next episode
Please join us again next month as we’ll be speaking with Mercy for Animals about Canada’s Animal Welfare Scorecard.
Animal welfare group calls for more oversight after province sanctions B.C. slaughterhouse.
The investigation was launched after Animal Justice released shocking video footage revealing horrific animal suffering and apparent violations of slaughter regulations, allegedly filmed by a whistleblower at Johnston’s Meats.
The disturbing footage shows frightened and panicked pigs being inhumanely handled, including:
Animals being improperly stunned before having their throats cut, being hung upside down to bleed out while conscious, and then placed into a scalding tank of boiling water.
Multiple animals appear to show signs of consciousness after being electrocuted, which is required to render them fully unconscious for the rest of the slaughter process.
In some clips, workers are seen slitting still-conscious pigs’ throats and electrocuting them multiple times.
Following the video release and a legal complaint filed by Animal Justice, the Ministry of Agriculture issued a prohibition notice to the slaughterhouse regarding its use of electric prods and handling of animals, along with a warning letter citing humane treatment violations under B.C.’s Meat Inspection Regulation.
The ministry ordered “corrective actions”, including improved training, and said inspectors would be “increasing oversight”.
Though provincial inspectors are required to be present at slaughterhouses every day of the slaughtering process, inspectors at Johnston’s Meats claimed they never witnessed abuse. No action was taken until Animal Justice filed a complaint, which the organization says “represents a failure to catch bad practices”.
This incident is renewing calls for public transparency, consistent oversight, and proactive enforcement of animal welfare regulations, highlighting that animal suffering may continue until a report is made.
Can you take the quick action below to tell the B.C. government that urgent changes are needed to protect farmed animals from suffering?
