Author: Chantelle Archambault

How does Canada stack up against other countries’ animal protection policies?

This month’s episode of the Informed Animal Ally welcomes Melissa Matlow of World Animal Protection to discuss the Animal Protection Index (API). The API ranks 50 countries around the globe based on their animal protection policies, giving them a letter grade from A to G.

Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.

Chantelle: This month we’re so excited to introduce Melissa Matlow, the campaign Director of World Animal Protection, to talk about her organization’s Animal Protection Index. Melissa, thank you so much for joining us.

To start off, I would love to hear more about your role at World Animal Protection and what led you to get involved in animal advocacy and your history in this work.

Melissa: Sure. So I’m the Campaign Director. I oversee our wildlife and farming campaigns in Canada. We’re an international organization, so our Canadian campaigns align with our international strategy.

What led me to animal advocacy was that I grew up in the Niagara region not far from a place called Marineland, and that was my first place that I picked up a placard and protested.

I met a local grassroots organization called Niagara Action for Animals. And I started volunteering with them. I invited them into my classroom in high school to start talking about animal welfare issues, and I thought they were gonna talk about circuses and zoos and all the issues I understood as a young, compassionate animal lover. They talked about farming and that transformed me. Everything that I did with them really led to where I am today.

Amy: I was expecting you to say they talked about like, cats and dogs or shelters. That’s pretty amazing that they did talk about farming and you got to learn about those issues at that time.

Melissa: It was quite interesting. I was not expecting it. I thought we’d talk about cosmetic testing. I remember not eating my lunch that day at school. I remember feeling very uncomfortable about what I was learning as well.

I should add that my parents came from farming backgrounds, so it was difficult in our home to talk about this. I think that’s how I started learning how to advocate and lobby is through my family, because it was a very uncomfortable conversation for all of us and I had to figure out how not to offend them, but to see it the way I did and they of course shared how they saw it.

And, you know, farming was very different when they were on the farm than it is today.

Amy: That resonates with me as well. My family’s not in farming, but the experience of learning to be an advocate at a young age through conversations and still loving your family. Thank you for sharing that.

Amy: So today we’re going to talk about the Animal Protection Index. I understand it to be an ambitious project that evaluates the laws and policy commitments of 50 different countries. Can you tell us more about this initiative and why it’s so important?

Melissa: Yeah, it ranked 50 countries, as you said, from A to G: A being the highest score to G being the weakest. It was on government policy and legislation that protects animals and improves their welfare.

There were a number of categories covered: farm animals, wildlife, companion animals, animals used for work and recreation, and scientific research.

The first ranking was done in 2014. We produced a second edition in 2020 with the methodology refined slightly. And it was really meant to be a tool to inspire conversations and influence countries to improve their animal protection legislation.

It is an ambitious project. It took a while just to do the report and to ensure that there was enough in-depth information about each country, but also consistent and fair for the ranking.

And we also sent the reports before we launched them to the Chief Veterinary Officers for all the countries to invite their feedback as well, which did help us tweak the methodology in the second edition. So it was meant as well to start a conversation with them about how we should be measuring progress on animal welfare.

Amy: That’s amazing. I’m curious how many different people ended up reviewing the laws.

Melissa: For the 50 countries, I do know that we actually had great legal support pro bono from DLA Piper. And then the country campaign teams would review and provide feedback and other information that they wouldn’t necessarily know. Because sometimes you don’t know about policy commitments from reading legislation as well, or the intention behind it. And there’s other things we wanted to raise.

I know there was one project manager for all 50 and then DLA Piper and then all our offices in 12 countries. And probably some consultants in other countries where we don’t have staff.

Amy: That’s an amazing undertaking.

Melissa: It was, and I should say while World Animal Protection led on this, there was a steering group of other animal protection organizations that helped. IFAW and HSI, which is now Humane World for Animals, Compassion in World Farming, and RSPCA were part of this advisory group that helped us with the methodology to begin with in 2014, and then we took it forward.

Chantelle: What an amazing project. I was going through this report and there’s so much incredible data to sift through and explore. I was thinking we could just go over some important highlights for people today.

Which countries scored the highest in terms of animal welfare?

Top countries for animal welfare: UK, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Netherlands, and Denmark

Melissa: No country received an A, but the UK, Switzerland, Austria, Sweden, Netherlands, and Denmark, all received a B. So they did the best.

I think A was given in 2014 to New Zealand. I’m not sure why their ranking dropped. But that might have been a refinement of the strategy as well.

And it just shows how difficult and complex it is. It is really a benchmark. There might be things that some countries find unfair. But I think that the increase in number of countries at the B level probably is a good sign of progress.

Animal protection laws aren’t always enforced

Amy: It’s so interesting that you bring up New Zealand because I went to New Zealand in 2016. I went there on purpose because I knew that their laws were quite good and I wanted to see firsthand what it looked like on the farms.

So I ended up doing kind of like workaway or WWOOFing type things, where you work in exchange for room and food.

I was on a number of different farms that were smaller scale. Some of them more commercial than others. And I witnessed harms to animals. Some more than others and varying in type and scale.

And it was really interesting and it stuck with me. I asked one farmer, are you aware of these codes of practice that exist? And, he was like, no, I don’t know what you’re talking about.

So it’s interesting because we have scale of laws, and then there’s also the whole side of implementation, which is a difficult to evaluate.

Melissa: Yeah, enforcement wasn’t ranked in terms of capabilities and implementation. We are ranking the legislation for how they look on paper and how they consider animal sentience, but there’s a whole other level of changing attitudes and enforcement that needs to go along with it.

Amy: What are the key lessons we can learn from the countries that do get high ratings in terms of their policies and best practices?

Canada doesn’t have national animal welfare legislation

Melissa: Well, Sweden I think ranked highly because they have a national animal welfare law, for instance. And I think many listeners might be shocked to know that Canada doesn’t have national animal welfare legislation. We have animal cruelty provisions under the Criminal Code to react to animal cruelty, but no proactive legislation to raise the standards for animal welfare for all animals nationally in a broad sense.

The UK has banned fur farming and has legislation that goes beyond EU requirements for banning sow stalls. And there has been progress a year after we launched the report in 2020, the UK passed legislation formally recognizing sentient beings in domestic law and an action plan for animal welfare.

So these are all types of legal progress that we wanted the Animal Protection Index (API) to inspire.

And then I would say Netherlands is a great example for wildlife because they take a very precautionary approach to mitigating the risk of keeping certain animals, particularly wild animals, as pets through the positive list approach versus a negative list.

So in different categories, different countries really are leading the way. I would say Netherlands and Belgium are leading on the positive list approach to try to phase out the exotic pet trade.

Amy: And for those who are listening who aren’t sure of what Canada has, we certainly do not have a national law declaring the sentience of animals.

And in fact, animals are not protected under our Constitution. They’re protected under other laws, but really there’s this sense that they’re only protected because they fall under the dominion of people and not protected in of their own rights.

And then when it comes to this positive list that the Netherlands has, this is something that we talk about all the time at VHS and we’re advocating at the provincial level because the animal laws are broken up into provinces and so it’s difficult to get this national approach, but it’s even more difficult to even get a provincial approach.

We haven’t made a lot of progress with it, but we keep at it.

Melissa: That’s right. There’s this patchwork of different legislations across municipal bylaws, provincial laws, and we really need the federal leadership to really harmonize and raise the bar.

Chantelle: Absolutely. So as you said, Melissa, there aren’t any countries that have an A score, but I was curious what a country would need to do if we were to work ambitiously to receive an A score on the index.

Melissa: A country would need to:

• Formally recognize animal sentience in national legislation;
• Have one sufficiently resourced, accountable government body leading on animal welfare;
• Have strong laws to prohibit animal suffering, including through neglect and abandonment;
• Have specific laws in animal welfare standards for the various ways animals are used—because those require different standards, whether animals are on farms or in captivity;
• Phase out inhumane and unnecessary industries;
• And be supportive of international animal welfare standards through the World Organization for Animal Health.

So to check off all those boxes would get a country an A. So it’s ambitious, but not impossible. As we see some countries are leading in some areas, showing that it can be done.

Amy: Also very reasonable. We’re not asking for the moon here. I think we’re asking for something that, with all of our technology and knowledge, could be put into place within one season of a political power essentially.

Chantelle: And there’s also organizations working towards all of these things in Canada.

Melissa: Absolutely. It’s a no-brainer that animals should be protected because they think and feel in love and are sentient, and it is a longstanding campaign of many animal organizations to get there.

I think the hardest part has been to get one ministry to lead on this.

And you know, we talked about it in the National Animal Protection debate that we co-hosted with Vancouver Humane Society and other organizations: how do we reconcile the conflict of interest where animal welfare is primarily under the Ministry of Agriculture’s domain federally? Getting that decision and having a different ministry lead on it is probably the hardest thing. And then once we have that, to me that’s a very important incremental step for Canada.

Amy: Absolutely, and I think that feeds into the next question; how does Canada compare to the other countries analyzed?

Melissa: This probably doesn’t surprise you both, but Canada received a D. We sit on the lower half of the ranking. We ranked below India, the Philippines, Brazil, Australia and most of Europe. And we ranked alongside countries like Kenya, South Africa, Columbia, Peru, countries with much lower GDPs. So it means there’s substantial room for improvement.

I think that might have been a surprise for many people who don’t follow animal welfare legislation. People tend to think of Canada as being more progressive on that, maybe because we have been progressive on other issues, but not necessarily on animal welfare.

Amy: And just for context, what does the scale go down to? What’s the lowest grade you can receive?

Melissa: The lowest grade was a G.

Amy: Thank you for sharing that. I certainly we’re lucky we’re not at a G, but that’s still good enough.

Chantelle: Canada has a great reputation for being polite and a kind country, but our laws are really not that kind to animals.

Chantelle: Among the categories the index evaluates, where does Canada perform well? Where do we perform the best?

Melissa: This might surprise you, but in the provincial laws against animal suffering—and I know that’s not good enough and there’s so much room for improvement there—we have seen steady progress with provinces improving their animal cruelty laws.

And I suppose when you think of the public response to an egregious animal cruelty case, it’s understandable that governments would be persuaded to address that better with stronger enforcement and stronger tools to convict people. Again, we lack that forward thinking and raising the bar for animal welfare in the ways that society still finds it acceptable to use animals.

Progress in Canada on animal captivity

Melissa: We have made a lot of progress with the ban on keeping whales in captivity. So, we receive some good marks for that, but it’s only for whales, dolphins, and porpoises. Canada would need to extend that protection to other wildlife species to have a higher grade.

And fortunately we have seen progress in the last Parliament with the Jane Goodall Bill to increase protection for more species. That bill, of course, died when the parliament prorogued and then the election was called.

But we have seen a commitment under Prime Minister Carney and the Liberals to build on that progress, which is great.

Canada bans cosmetic animal testing

Melissa: While we received a failing grade of E in our 2020 report for not protecting animals in scientific research, I have to add that we’re going to have a better mark in the next edition (if there is one, and I hope there is) for banning cosmetic testing.

So a lot of progress actually came after our 2020 report was launched. That ban took effect December, 2023, so we probably will go from worst to first in that category. It just shows how quickly things can evolve.

I would say the strongest area was the animal cruelty laws in provinces. So we did look at provincial jurisdiction where provincial jurisdiction made sense. It wasn’t just federal laws, but of course we wanna see the federal government play a leadership role and strengthening laws where provinces are still falling behind.

Chantelle: Absolutely. That’s so important. And then we can have some consistency.

Amy: So on the flip side of all of that, where would you say Canada has the most room for improvement?

Melissa: I would say farm animal welfare. There’s still not enough legal protections for farm animals on the farm. There are the codes of practice that are voluntary.

There’s been some progress on strengthening transport regulations, but still not enough. Particularly for such a large country like Canada, our regulations still allow animals to be transported long distances before they are required to be fed and given water and rest.

I think there’s still so much more to do for animals caught up in the wildlife trade for exotic pets and zoos.

Canada did show leadership through the whale and dolphin ban through Bill S203, and so that’s a great opportunity for us to expand on that for other species.

Canada should have a Ministry of Animal Welfare

Melissa: Lastly, we need overarching national animal welfare legislation and one ministry to take the leadership role. Whether we can get that Minister of Animal Welfare, or at least make this under a ministry where there is no conflict of interest with objectives for growing the industry, like a Ministry of Agriculture has. And of course there’s so many other species to look at besides farm animals. So it doesn’t really make sense under agriculture either for that reason.

So those would be the biggest areas of improvement, I would say. But there’s plenty of room everywhere.

Amy: I appreciate you bringing that up—the idea that agriculture can’t police itself.

That’s something I’ve noticed at the provincial level. There are a number of bodies that do the work and then there are secondary bodies that observe the work that is done.

And that happens in child welfare; that happens in privacy. And there’s essentially this like intentional role of an ombuds person or ombuds ministry that is making sure that the ministry is accountable.

When I found that out that that was possible, I thought, what a lovely thing to have is checks and balances within a government. Because so often government is this end all be all. And the idea of having accountability built in builds so much more public trust.

Melissa: It’s so important. And also I think the beauty of animal welfare is it’s so intersectional. It’s a solution to so many other issues, whether it’s public health, disease spread, climate change, biodiversity loss, antimicrobial resistance. It deserves its own place because it can support other goals and other ministries related to those issues as well.

And you know, it’s for a long time been neglected in agriculture and really no home elsewhere. Even with the whale bill with that falling under the Ministry of Environment, there was a discomfort with staff because they didn’t see it as an environmental issue and they didn’t see animal welfare as part of their expertise or mandate.

It needs its own place really.

Chantelle: That’s a great point. We’re bringing up animal agriculture so much because that’s one of our main areas of focus as an organization and on this show. It’s got such massive suffering associated with it on an enormous, unimaginable scale of animal lives.

But I do know that now that Canada is moving away from the United States as a trade partner, we have trade opportunities with other countries and we do have trade of products that come from animal bodies. So there might be a natural evolution towards the standards that these other countries have.

Melissa: Yes, that would be a good thing out of all the tension and challenges we have in our country today. We see that from the political parties encouraging this shift towards finding new trading partners, and that could help us raise the bar for animal welfare in order to trade with them to get these markets.

Amy: It’s certainly how New Zealand has put as much attention as they have, is because their ministry related to animals falls within what’s called their Department of Primary Industries. There’s only a few things that fit within that department, and they’re essentially the things that have the most export and bring the country the most money. And then as a result they see the public risk.

They had a few high profile incidences of animals being transported to other countries and it not going well. And so that led to quite a few changes within their ministry.

Chantelle: Melissa, what changes would you like to see in Canada’s animal protection policies?

Reintroduce the Jane Goodall Bill on captivity

Melissa: So many changes, but if I were to think of where we are right now and where we could go next, I would like to see Canada reintroduce the Jane Goodall Bill and really work to end captive wildlife entertainment. There was strong support among animal protection organizations including the top zoos in Canada.

There is an opportunity to really phase out those roadside zoos and raise the bar for zoos to have a purpose.

We have collaborated with the Toronto Zoo. Some people might be surprised by that, because we don’t agree with captivity unless it’s a last resort that serves the animal’s best interest.

And we have to remind people, sanctuaries are still captivity. It’s not the best thing we can hope for for those animals, because they can’t be released in the wild. We support it if you’re rehabilitating and releasing an animal into the wild and it serves a conservation benefit.

That’s what the Jane Goodall Bill is meant to do, it’s meant to raise that bar and really restrict the breeding of these animals unless there is that purpose. And I think that’s really important and it’s really exciting to see Canada actually lead in this area.

If we could ban elephant and great ape captivity, we’d be the first country to do so.

Restrict the wildlife trade

Melissa: And I think we can also build on restrictions to the wildlife trade. We saw that in the Liberal platform that there is a commitment to address the illegal wildlife trade through modernizing our system at the border.

I think we can build on the data we collect at the border through a better system to show where the risks are because the legal trade is massive. It’s not sustainable and we just need to show where all these animals are coming from, what the purpose is.

Another benefit risk analysis, like whose livelihoods are benefiting from this? Where are these animals coming from? Are they at risk of becoming endangered?

We know their animal welfare would be poor in these systems, and there’s a lot of disease risk. So I think that’s another area I’d like to move on. Given the platform commitment, it’s a great opportunity.

Introduce minimum welfare standards in legislation

Melissa: And then definitely it’d be great to have minimal animal welfare standards in legislation. The codes of practice have moved the needle a bit on farm animal welfare, but we need legislation to protect these animals too.

Amy: Absolutely, and I think many of our listeners know, right now the way the codes of practice are incorporated into law actually serve as a protection for the farmers rather than a protection for the animals.

So even though we have these standards that are being developed collaboratively—and I would say they’re minimum standards—they still aren’t serving a purpose of protection at this point in time.

Amy: We like to leave our listeners with an action that they take. What can people do to help improve animal protection policies?

Melissa: You know, I think one of the most important things to do is to develop a relationship with your local MLA or Member of Parliament, your provincial or federal representative. Build a relationship, listen to them and their interests, share your interests, but really work together on where you can make a difference.

That is one of the most powerful places of influence we have, is through voting for our MP. And a lot of people don’t know that they’re open to these ideas.

Look at how big the Animal Protection Index is. It covers a range of issues. I would hope that any MP would find something in there they agree with, that they could work towards.

A member of Parliament can introduce a private member’s bill. They can introduce petitions in the House of Commons.That is not only a free PSA in the House of Commons to all MPs when they read it, but the highest performing petitions do stand out to the Ministers responsible and they can act on it.

So I would say that’s number one.

There’s many things you could do, but you really want to use your influence. And so if listeners have other areas of influence; maybe they’re involved in financial investments, they can work that way to change policy. But I think working with local elected officials is a great way to do it.

Chantelle: Absolutely. That’s vadvice. Thank you so for coming here and sharing all of your expertise on this topic. Is there anything else that you would like to share with our audience with regard to this or any of your other work?

Melissa: No, I think we covered so much. Thank you for all the questions that pulled out what I would want to share. Do you have anything that stood out in the Animal Protection Index?

Chantelle: I think it’s just very telling to see how far down on the list Canada really is. I think a lot of people see the laws as protections for animals that are strong enough. And they think, for instance, purchasing animal products doesn’t really make that big of an impact because there are protections in place for the animals that are farms or in slaughterhouses. And really what we end up seeing is that those protections are not really there for animals. One of the biggest impacts we can make is shifting away from purchasing those animal products and consuming them.

Melissa: Definitely.

Amy: I think the other thing is taking this guide and sharing it with your MLA or MP. I think many MLAs and MPs don’t know anything about animal protection laws. And so it can be an eye-opening experience to say, Hey, look, this guide exists and this is how we are ranked. To show that that is a little bit embarrassing for the country.

And I think shame can be a not great tool, but in this case, when you’re not directing it at a person, but you’re directing it at a country, it can be a motivator for politicians to go, we could do better.

I would just really recommend sharing this guide as much as possible with people that you want to influence.

Melissa: That’s a great idea. We’ve seen the Animal Protection Index referenced by MPs when they’ve introduced their own private members’ bills in Parliament. So that’s another thing to raise in your meeting with your MP and inspire them to consider doing a bill.

Even if it doesn’t pass, it still gets on the agenda and facilitates a debate, which is really important.

And the more these issues are discussed in Parliament, the more likely the ministers, the government of the day are likely to move on it with their own bill or regulations.

I am encouraged by how much Canada has done since we launched the Animal Protection Index:

• Banned whale and dolphin captivity;
• Banned the elephant ivory and rhino horn trade;
• Banned cosmetic testing.

I know sometimes we take a few steps forward and then there’s a few steps backward with the ag gag bills and certain provinces. So it’s always a shift forward and a shift backward.

But we are inching forward and I think we can do so much more. I think that comment you made, Chantelle, about farm animals and how many there are and how it’s a focus for Vancouver Humane Society. What if the next Animal Protection Index was ranked according to laws based on the number of animals impacted?

Because where we have seen progress, let’s face it, it is smaller number of animals impacted. And it’s been very hard to move the needle in the industries where massive number of animals are impacted. It’s really systemic cruelty to animals, isn’t it?

Or, you know, it goes under the radar because it’s just seen as generally accepted practices. Business as usual.

Chantelle: Absolutely. Yeah. the hardest places to make changes are where the most people are impacted and the most people, and that is also where the most animal lives are affected.

Please join us again next month as we break down the legislative process in Canada and how you can advocate at each stage.

Animals dying in transport, bred without oversight, and sold in deli containers. What is happening in Canada’s exotic pet trade?

In this month’s episode of the Informed Animal Ally, the Vancouver Humane Society’s Chantelle Archambault and Amy Morris discuss Canada’s exotic pet trade, from breeding or capture to selling and keeping, as well as the laws and loopholes failing to protect animals.

Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.

Chantelle: Today we’re going to continue looking at Canada’s place on the world stage of animal protection by delving into a topic that impacts animals, both at home in Canada and around the world: the wildlife trade.

While this term “wildlife trade” can be used to discuss the buying and selling of both live animals and products made from their body parts like elephant ivory, rhino horn, and animal skins, in this episode, we’ll specifically look at the transport, keeping, and breeding of live non-domestic animals for uses like the exotic pet trade and display in events like mobile petting zoos.

Captive non-domestic animals have complex needs like wild animals

Amy: Before we get into what the wildlife trade looks like in Canada, I’d like to give some brief context about why this is such an important topic.

The wildlife trade or exotic pet trade involves animals that are not native to Canada. They’ve not been domesticated, which means they have their wild instincts, including a fear of humans.

They have really big behavioural needs. Those include:

• exploring large spaces,
• climbing,
• accessing the right temperature environments,
• being able to stretch their bodies out in such a way that feels good for them.

That happens even if they’ve been bred in captivity.

Exotic pets are not “beginner pets”

Amy: A lot of exotic animals like turtles and lizards and snakes are often marketed as beginner pets; and so people aren’t really being told how difficult it is to provide care for these animals.

More than two in five people with exotic pets say that they bought them on impulse, and almost half are saying that they did less than a few hours of research on how to care for the animal that they’re buying (Stratcom, 2018, Exotic Pet Ownership Qualitative Research).

So what that means is they’re essentially being sold to families with young children and people with limited time and resources who don’t really know that these animals have complex needs and typically need much more space than people are providing them.

In reality, animal care ranking systems that actually look at what an animal needs to thrive (we use something called the Emode Pet Score), rate the most commonly kept reptiles like crested geckos, corn snakes, ball pythons, and bearded dragons as difficult or extreme to care for. That means it’s unrealistic or almost impossible to provide appropriate care that meets their needs in captivity. And yet these animals are being kept as pets.

Animals suffer when their complex needs aren’t met

Amy: So because so many animals are being sold to people who can’t adequately care for them, we now have hundreds of thousands of wild animals who are suffering as pets.

According to World Animal Protection, there were about 1.4 million exotic pets being kept in Canada in 2019.

75% of pet snakes, lizards, and tortoises die within their first year in a new home. We know they experience a lot of suffering before they actually die.

Releasing unwanted exotic animals is a welfare and conservation issue

Amy: Some people who can’t care for their exotic pets even release them into the wild, which is harmful for that individual animal’s wellbeing.

And also, released animals become invasive species that are dangerous for our local wildlife populations and for our environment, such as red eared slider turtles.

So it’s really important that people learn about what exotic animals really need so that we can stop the flow of wildlife into homes where their needs can’t be met; move away from breeding exotic animals; and make sure we’re keeping wild animals in the wild.

Chantelle: Now that we have an idea of why this issue is so important, I’d like to share an overview of what this industry actually looks like in Canada.

When we’re looking at exotic pets, there are two ways that animals are being brought into the market to be sold:

1. The first is they are captured from the wild and imported.
2. The second is that they’re bred in captivity.

About half of reptiles in the wildlife trade are wild caught according to World Animal Protection. Those figures may be higher for certain species of other types of animals that are difficult to breed in captivity

There are welfare issues for both of these methods.

Problems with capturing animals for the exotic pet trade

Chantelle: More than half of captured wild animals don’t survive transport. They’re being kept in these very small cages to be brought over and it’s really difficult to check on them during transport. Two thirds of African grey parrots that have been poached from the wild die in transit

Taking animals from their homes also threatens wild populations of those species. As many as 21% of endangered wild African grey parrots are taken from the wild each year for the pet trade. Those are already an endangered species in the wild.

Problems with breeding exotic pets in captivity

Chantelle: Meanwhile, animals that are bred in captivity are often housed in small, basic enclosures because people who are really engaging in captive breeding to make a profit are breeding a lot of animals at once. That simple kind of housing makes it a lot easier to feed the animals, clean their cages, and monitor how they are doing.

Breeders will often keep animals in their home without a storefront, so the public has no way of really seeing what’s happening with those animals.

In B.C., as long as a species of animal isn’t prohibited under the Controlled Alien Species list and is under a certain size (snakes under three metres or lizards under two metres), basically anyone can breed those animals without a permit.

Two major problems with that model are:

1. A lack of transparency. The public has very little way of knowing what’s going on and what the conditions are for the animals.
2. A lack of regulation. Breeders aren’t being monitored, and there’s not really enforcement happening because someone would need to make a complaint; and who is there to see what’s going on to make a complaint?

Some breeders will also selectively breed for certain traits, like more unique colours and patterns, and that selective breeding can lead to neurological disorders that can have an impact on the animal’s wellbeing.

One example is ball pythons. Ball pythons with the spider gene, which is a genetic mutation that causes a spider web or a splatter pattern on the back of the snake, which some people consider a desirable trait, have the same mutation that causes a condition called wobble head syndrome.

That can make it hard for the snakes to move or feed properly. So depending on the severity of the condition, a snake might have a slight head tilt or they might flip their head upside down and not really realize and just kind of leave it there. They might not be able to move in a straight line. They might not be able to do things that they need to do to hunt and feed on their own, like strike and constrict.

Amy: And you know, this is a very specific thing that happens, but when we think of it on a broad scale, we’re also just facing breeders who breed animals just for volume and they’re not keeping animals in the space that they deserve.

So while we may have some of these cases that are problematic of these kind of genetic abnormalities, when exotic animals are being bred, they generally do not have housing that meets their needs.

Chantelle: After animals are either bred or imported, they’re sold through a variety of methods.

Selling exotic animals in pet stores

Chantelle: First there are pet stores. If you’ve been into a pet store that sells exotic pets, you’ve likely seen them stacked in a section in quite small cages. They may have spaces to hide, but they’re generally in full view of humans and other animals, which can be very stressful for them, especially for solitary species.

The stores are typically fairly bright during the day when they’re open, and a lot of these animals are nocturnal so their sleeping patterns can be disrupted.

There might be someone on staff who has knowledge about the needs of different exotic animals, but when a store sells such a wide variety of species, it’s unlikely that they have someone on shift who’s knowledgeable about every species all of the time.

Exotic pet fairs and expos

Chantelle: There are also exotic pet expos. These are generally people selling animals with more specialized knowledge, but there are still pets that are difficult to care for being sold as beginner pets with misleading information.

For instance, one of our colleagues was told by a seller at a pet show that a snake could be kept in an opaque container, when we know that they need specialized terrariums with temperature control, they need space to fully stretch out. They need enrichment items and substrate.

Also at these shows, pets are transported around during the day. They’re sold in very small containers, even takeout containers.

Even though there are rules that are supposed to limit how many people can handle the animals, it doesn’t appear those rules are strictly enforced. There have been children handling reptiles in these crowded rooms.

Imagine if a child were to drop, say, a small lizard at an expo when there’s a bunch of people walking around; that could very quickly become a dangerous situation for the animal.

Selling exotic animals online

Chantelle: There’s also animals that are sold online. That involves shipping the animals from a seller’s location, usually also in small containers with temperature packs.

It’s more difficult to tell how an animal is being kept and transported this way. Not all sellers have the same level of care in keeping animals safe during transport. Even though even the best ways of transporting them are not ideal conditions for the animal, there are ones that are significantly worse.

Amy: We think about transport and the animals who die in transport, and these are animals that have been purchased that have kind of like a value assigned to them; they’re still not being transported in ways that are good for the animal.

And we think about the animals that are at a breeder’s house that have not been purchased yet and don’t have the same kind of value attributed to them, you kind of wonder like how many animals are dying in care. We just don’t have any data or numbers on that.

There’s no requirements on registering. For the majority of these animals, there’s no reason for a breeder to disclose anything that’s happening in their home.

We’ve heard from breeders about some of their housing situations and they do not sound like a situation I would want to be in as an animal, that’s for sure.

Chantelle: And regardless of the level of care that the breeder takes, the animals are still typically shipped in a way that it would be either difficult or impossible to monitor how they’re doing while they’re in transit.

They’re put in a box and they’re shipped, and you see how they’re doing when they’re at their original locationand you see how they’re doing at the end destination, but you can’t see how they’re doing in transit.

Animals surviving doesn’t mean they are thriving

There are about 1.4 million exotic pets being kept in Canada as of the most recent count we could find, and again, it’s very difficult to meet the needs of these animals in captivity. Most of them do sadly die far before the end of their natural lifespan.

Even if their basic needs to survive are being met, that doesn’t necessarily mean that they’re getting what they need to thrive.

Rescues struggling to keep up

Amy: We have rescues in Canada and one rescue shares on their website that they have 350 animals in their care. You think about cat or dog rescues, and if you heard the number 350, you would not think that someone could adequately care for all of those cats and dogs.

And when we’re thinking about exotic species, each individual species needs different care and different food and different housing and warmth. And so even thinking about any kind of operation that’s housing this volume of animals is likely going to be challenged to be able to do that.

I personally just feel really frustrated when I’m hearing about these things because it’s hard to imagine a rescue is trying to do their best because these are unwanted animals. They’re sort of like the disposal of an exotic pet industry.

But meanwhile, some organizations are bringing them into classrooms and having people handle them and inviting kids in to handle them as well. And in a way that’s sort of instilling an interest in keeping these animals as pets, even if unintentionally.

And realistically, a rescue does not want to house so many animals. They do want individuals caring for them. And so you end up in this really weird place where just by the exotic pet industry existing, there’s a whole series of ethical dilemmas that come out of it, and in every case, the animals lose.

Amy: The next thing I’m hoping to cover is the laws around keeping, breeding, and importing exotic animals.

We’ve spoken in depth about captivity laws in Canada. You can find a longer discussion about this topic if you go back to our episode called Animal captivity laws with Rob Laidlaw, the founder of the organization Zoocheck.

To give a brief overview, the laws in this area are a lot like the other laws we’ve talked about on our show. There’s a patchwork of federal and province-specific laws that differ across the country, and then municipal bylaws that branch out even further.

Federal laws around the wildlife trade

Amy: The main thing we look at when we’re talking about federal laws around exotic animals is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES).

That’s an international agreement that Canada is a signatory to.

CITES is designed to protect endangered species by banning or limiting the international trade of plants and animals and their parts that are endangered. There’s different levels of protection depending on how at risk the species is. That’s fairly limited.

Canada delivers on our commitments to the CITES agreement through something called the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA).

That act controls the import of CITES listed species, plus other species whose trade is banned under other laws like the country of origin or provincial laws.

And really there’s so many exemptions to that, that it’s not a super helpful law when it comes to people keeping wild animals as pets. It really is more around protecting animals in other countries and their parts.

Provincial laws around exotic animals in captivity

Amy: Most of the responsibility for captive wildlife is dedicated to the provinces, and the laws really vary from province to province.

Here in B.C., the keeping breeding transport and release of exotic animals are regulated under the Controlled Alien Species regulation (CAS), and that’s part of the Wildlife Act.

More broadly, under this regulation, we have a list of specific animals that are considered not native to the province, and that pose a risk to the health or safety of people, property, wildlife, or wildlife habitat.

However, once again, this is a short list. And it’s mostly focused on risk to the public and native ecosystems, and it’s not really thinking about the exotic animals and the risks they face.

The CAS tries to list all of the animals that are not allowed. We have so many species in the world, and new species that are being discovered all the time, so this kind of list leaves many gaps.

For instance, kangaroos aren’t listed even though they’re not native to B.C. and they’re considered an invasive species in other places such as New Zealand.

What we know is more effective and what VHS and other organizations have been advocating for is a positive list approach, where only the animals that are allowed to be kept are listed based on knowledge about what species are suitable and can actually thrive under human care in B.C.

Unfortunately, while we know that this would be really effective in improving animal welfare, it’s been very difficult to get the ear of the government to have any kind of weight put towards this policy option.

It’s one of those situations where best practice and good policy is kind of put aside because it involves bureaucracy and it impacts people. And if something impacts people, they have to do an assessment. And so sometimes it’s easier to just leave things as they are.

Municipal laws around exotic animals

Amy: There’s so many gaps and inconsistencies at the federal and provincial level, so municipal or regional bylaws try to fill the gaps with their own rules.

While this is nice on a small scale and we really support and encourage those municipalities, there are also some big challenges because it’s such a small scale.

Some of those challenges is that city or town councils don’t have as many resources to find and hire people with expertise to develop these laws.

There’s 161 municipalities in B.C. That’s 161 local governments trying to find experts who understand what reptiles need and putting their limited time and budget toward developing bylaws that meet those needs.

Whereas at the provincial or federal government level, they have much more resources and experts who could develop a comprehensive legislation that would just cover a large land area.

Also, when the bylaws cover a small area, individuals will just move a couple towns over and continue what they’re doing. We’ve seen that happen with breeders quite often, where they’ll just move to an unincorporated area.

So as much as we can appreciate bylaws, things really do need to be done at the provincial and federal level.

Chantelle: Because the legislation around transporting exotic animals is so complicated, there are a lot of problems with enforcement, even when there are laws.

You have these laws with long lists of species that aren’t allowed into the country or into the province, and they’re coming through border checkpoints where the staff at these checkpoints are not animal experts. It’s almost an impossible ask to have these enforcement agents be able to identify each species that’s coming in and whether or not they’re allowed.

Gaps in documents around animals imported to Canada

Chantelle: World Animal Protection looked at 1.8 million wild animals that were imported into Canada from 2014 to 2020. About half of those animals were imported for the pet trade.

They found that the records around the animals that were coming in had huge data gaps. 84% of animals didn’t have their species named. Rhere was no information available about the animal’s background if they were caught in the wild or bred in captivity.

It’s very difficult to even know if these laws were being followed at the time.

Their organization also noted that since there’s such a convoluted list of which department is responsible for which animals, that almost all species imported for the pet trade aren’t really being looked at.

Amy: The first step to solving a problem is to know what the problem is and to have all the information on it, and then we can start to take action.

Make exotic animals a part of your conversations

Amy: The most important thing that you can do as an individual is really encourage the people around you not to buy exotic animals from sellers or breeders.

That’s easy to say, but hard to do because you don’t even know someone’s considering buying an exotic animal until they get one, and then you’re surprised by it.

So it’s also just finding opportunities in conversation to highlight some of these challenges and have it be a whole mindset where animals are not being brought or traded in private operations.

Encourage adopting, not shopping

Amy: Also, if you know someone who has the time, resources, capacity, and desire to take in an exotic animal, encourage them to adopt a rescue animal.

As I was mentioning earlier, one impact of so many animals being sold to people who don’t have the resources is that when people go to surrender their animals, there’s just so little capacity at legitimate rescue organizations to take those animals in.

And when we’re saying legitimate rescues, we mean organizations that are making decisions based on what’s in the best interest of the animals in their care.

Share information about the exotic pet trade

Amy: You can also share information about this on social media and in local community groups. The VHS has been working on an educational campaign on social media the past few months that you can share the realities of keeping exotic pets, what their needs are, the welfare concerns, and what the impacts are on conservation, the animals’ health, and public health risks.

You can find a carousel of posts to share on Instagram and Facebook, and a link to our Blue Sky account.

Speak with pet store managers

Amy: One other way that you can kind of think about taking action is talking to pet stores.

One thing I did when I moved to a new town: I was checking out different pets stores where I would trying to find a place to buy food for my dog.

One of the pet stores was selling betta fishes. And I shared some concerns around that and they shared with me that there’s demand in the town for it. They felt that it was an appropriate animal to keep in captivity.

We kind of went back and forth on it and I said, I would love to buy pet food from here, but I am not comfortable doing so with you selling betta fishes.

I gave them my info and said like, get in touch if you ever decide to stop selling exotic animals and I’d be happy to make your store my primary pet store.

So this is something you can definitely do with smaller scale stores. It is harder with stores that are chains because they may not have as much decision making power.

But you can always ask to speak to a manager and understand what their discretion is and what their choices are.

Approach with curiosity and compassion

Amy: Most of all, you can have some grace when you do encounter people who have exotic animals as pets. Shame and guilt are never the way to change someone’s mind or change someone’s behaviour. They just don’t work and they kind of do the opposite. People dig in their heels and say, no, I’m not changing, I’m not doing anything different. I’m right.

When having conversations about exotic pets or with people who have different thoughts than you on it, it’s so important to genuinely be curious, to be kind, to ask questions, to share your own gaps in knowledge and to really share from a place of care and love and concern.

And I think you can go a long way in the long term of shifting someone’s mindset if you come from that perspective. And also gently say, you know, “I’d love to research this more together. I don’t know a lot about this animal. You seem to know a lot, but I’m really keen to get a sense of what they need and what their environment is like.”

And if you do the research together, maybe there’s a chance that they’ll appreciate your interest and curiosity. And if they find out information about like, oh, they should have a much bigger tank or something like that, then they’ll be more likely to adopt that practice.

Certainly, I would say you can always have a bigger tank than what you have and always have more spaces to hide. Always have, more ability to stretch out, move around.

Work toward a common goal

Chantelle: Especially for something like this, the people who are interested in taking animals into their home are generally people who have like an interest and a love for animals. So we all are coming at this from the same place where we want what’s best for animals. And some people just don’t have the knowledge and the resources to know what is best.

We had a quote on our social media recently, which is from an exotic animal vet named Dr. Alix Wilson, who had said, “Every day I see birds whose owners love them dearly, but aren’t taking proper care of them. They simply don’t know what they’re taking on.” And that was regarding treating grey parrots.

There’s so many people who are taking these animals into their homes and they don’t know what they’re getting into. The length of the life that the animal has naturally, it’s a enormous commitment of time, of resources, of money to be able to take these animals.

Especially buying them from a breeder or a seller. These animals don’t need to be taken out of the wild or bred in captivity.

Please join us again next month as World Animal Protection joins us to discuss their Animal Protection Index and how Canada’s federal animal laws and regulations stack up against other countries on the world stage..

Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals Media

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Please join us again next month as we discuss the wildlife trade and exotic pets in Canada!