Union of B.C. Municipalities delegates vote in favour of pets for renters, and guidelines being changed by provincial government.
Union of BC Municipalities delegates voted yesterday, September 21st, that BC Housing should develop strategies in support of pet-friendly housing in the non-profit sector.
The vote recognized the important physical, emotional, and mental health benefits of pet guardianship, as well as the risk of loved animals being surrendered to the shelter and rescue system if their guardians could not access pet-freindly housing.
“The approved resolution asked that the provincial government direct BC Housing to develop strategies and guidance that support pet-friendly housing in the non-profit sector.”
“Further, it asked that the government update the BC Housing strategy and work with stakeholders such as landlords and tenant associations, animal welfare organizations, public health, mental health and seniors organizations, and poverty reduction and homelessness advocates to find cooperative solutions to increase the availability and affordability of pet-friendly housing.”
This is a positive step in recognizing companion animals as an important part of many families in B.C.
Another horse has died at the Hastings Racecourse, bringing the 2023 death toll to five.
Another horse has died at the Hastings Racecourse, confirmed the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch (GPEB), the regulatory body of B.C.’s horse racing industry.
“How many more incidents will it take for organizers to address the unnecessary risks posed to these sensitive and intelligent animals, who are forced into stressful and dangerous events week after week?” VHS Communications Director Chantelle Archambault responded.
She also argued officials should be more forthcoming with information about these incidents, noting that it took the GPEB eight days to respond to VHS’s September 18 inquiry about the latest death.
“The GPEB’s delayed response is concerning,” said Archambault. “The public should be asking themselves what is being done to keep these horses safe; and if they can’t be kept safe, how transparent will organizers and regulators be about the tragic consequences?”
Protesters at Valley West Stampede in Langley say they hope to bring awareness to what they claim are unethical animal practices in rodeos.
Advocates gathered outside the Valley West Stampede rodeo Saturday to protest the suffering of animals used in rodeo. VHS Campaign Director Emily Pickett appeared in an interview with City News to discuss welfare concerns.
“These types of events take advantage of these animals’ fight and flight response,” Pickett said. “What we saw was things such as roughhousing of the animals, agitating animals in the chutes so they flee and buck in response.
“We think that this is something that causes a lot of suffering for these animals.”
VANCOUVER, September 1, 2023 – The Vancouver Humane Society (VHS) is again raising concerns about the Valley West Stampede rodeo, which returns to Langley Township this long weekend despite opposition.
Polling shows 65% of B.C. residents are opposed to the use of animals in rodeo. Overall, 67% of Canadians are opposed to the practice, up six percentage points since a similar poll conducted in April 2022.
Footage from last year’s inaugural rodeo showed frightened and stressed animals being deliberately agitated into fleeing and bucking. In the videos, a bull has his tail pulled and is struck near the face prior to a bucking event; a sheep is pushed over onto their back; and horses thrash in chutes, appearing panicked.
“This event relies on causing animals to feel fear and stress to make them ‘perform’,” said VHS Campaign Director Emily Pickett. “Inhumane rodeo events have no place in a community that values compassion and kindness.”
Despite most British Columbians opposing rodeo, the VHS pointed out that $33,700 in provincial taxpayer dollars were given to the Valley West Stampede – a portion of almost $800,000 in funding allocated to events with rodeos across B.C. Earlier this year, the VHS and nearly 2,500 concerned residents called on B.C.’s Minister of Tourism to not provide funding to events that include rodeos, but those requests were ignored.
The VHS continues to call for an end to inhumane rodeo events, including roping, wrestling, bucking and mutton busting, and urges organizers and decision-makers to prioritize alternative events that can bring communities together without putting animals at unnecessary risk of injury and death.
Concerned Langley Township residents can call on the Mayor and Council to follow the lead of other municipalities that have passed bylaws prohibiting inhumane rodeo events, including City of Vancouver, the District of North Vancouver, and most recently, Port Moody, on the VHS website.
The Vancouver Humane Society (VHS) is again raising concerns of animal suffering at the annual Chilliwack Rodeo.
Footage from this year’s Chilliwack Rodeo shows animals being subjected to fear, discomfort and stress for sake of public entertainment.
This new footage, along with similar concerning footage from last year’s Chilliwack rodeo, reinforces that animal suffering is inherent to many rodeo events, including roping, bucking, wrestling and mutton busting (kids riding sheep).
The VHS is asking residents and tourists to call on Chilliwack City Council to pass a bylaw to prohibit inhumane rodeo events.
Footage from the recent Chilliwack rodeo shows stressed and agitated animals being roughly handled, thrashing around in the chutes, and being put at risk of injury and death. Obvious signs of stress are seen throughout the footage, including excessive salivation, defecation and resisting handlers.
The VHS also documented similar animal welfare issues during last year’s Chilliwack rodeo, reinforcing the reality that many rodeo events rely on the use of fear, discomfort and stress through rough handling and the use of aversive tools (e.g. flank straps and spurs) to make animals flee and buck in response.
Footage from the recent Chilliwack rodeo shows stressed and agitated animals being roughly handled, thrashing around in the chutes, and being put at risk of injury and death. Obvious signs of stress are seen throughout the footage, including excessive salivation, defecation and resisting handlers.
Calling for removal of inhumane rodeo events
The VHS continues to urge Chilliwack Fair organizers and local decision-makers to remove inhumane rodeo events, including roping, wrestling, bucking and mutton busting from the fair’s program.
Take the steps below to support this call to action in Chilliwack and beyond.
1) Send a message to Chilliwack City Council
Send an email or follow-up email to Chilliwack City Council, calling for an end to inhumane rodeo events at the Chilliwack Fair. Respectfully share your concerns as a tourist or resident about the treatment of animals and the footage from this year’s rodeo.
In your own words, consider highlighting the following key points:
There are ongoing issues with the treatment of animals at the Chilliwack Rodeo. Footage from this year’s rodeo again shows animals being roughly handled during events, agitated in the chutes beforehand, and ultimately being put at unnecessary risk of injury and death for the purpose of public entertainment.
Signs of fear and stress are evident, including excessive drooling, defecation and resisting handlers.
I am urging Chilliwack city council to take action to end inhumane rodeo events in Chilliwack. There are many other activities at the fair that can be enjoyed without putting animals at risk. Please work with fair organizers to remove inhumane rodeo events from the fair’s program and follow the lead of other municipalities by enacting a bylaw to prohibit such events in the community.
2) Call for a bylaw prohibiting inhumane rodeo events in your community
Use the VHS’s quick action tool to call for a bylaw prohibiting inhumane rodeo events in your community.
In this month’s episode of The Informed Animal Ally, the Vancouver Humane Society’s Amy Morris and Chantelle Archambault are joined by guest Samantha Fuller to discuss how animals are impacted by rodeo, public response to rodeo events, and the future of rodeo.
Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.
Featured Guest: Samantha Fuller
Indigenous Biologist
Samantha graduated from the University of British Columbia last year where she studied and researched animal biology. Her research focused on improving the welfare of laboratory rodents, investigating attitudes toward rodeo events, and the use of animal welfare science in Indigenous wildlife stewardship. She is currently an Indigenous biologist, working with environmental science to and collaborating with Indigenous communities on their land stewardship program projects.
Calf roping event at The Calgary Stampede. Jo-Anne McArthur \ We Animals Media.
Rodeos are stressful for animals
Chantelle: Recently you conducted work researching animal welfare concerns around rodeos. The Vancouver Humane Society has also been advocating to end the inhumane use of animals and rodeos since the organization was founded in 1986. Could you speak a little bit to how rodeo events impact animals and why that issue is important?
Samantha: There’s some evidence that suggests that the methods used in rodeos can be a source of stress for the animals involved. There’s also some concerns with specific events around the safety for both the animals and the human participants.
Amy: Can you share a little bit more about those stressors in rodeo that have come up in your research and how they impact animals?
Samantha: Stress can be measured in animals using either behaviour or physiology.
In calf roping, stress hormones such as cortisol, epinephrine, norepinephrine have been seen to rise in the events. This will happen while being loading into chutes or during the roping event.
Bulls have shown escape and agnostic behaviours toward handlers, which can indicate fear distress.
Unfortunately, there’s few studies investigating specific rodeo events. But looking at other areas, we can assume there are other stressors based by the animals. For instance, transportation is a known stressor for beef and dairy cattle, and also different types of horse racing can be a source of physical stress for causing injury for the animals involved.
Training vs. provoking a fear response
Chantelle: Yeah, absolutely. You talked about fear responses in the bulls. We’ve spoken about that before on the show as well with fight, flight and freeze responses, and it’s something we can see when people use aversive training techniques.
Amy, this is something you spoke more in depth about when we did our animal training episode back in April. What would you say are some of the differences between the way that someone would train a dog and the way that animals are trained to “perform” in rodeo?
Amy: Yeah, it’s really interesting when we think about animals that are being trained with, let’s say, positive reinforcement. They’re provided an opportunity to offer the behavior that we want from them, and then they’re rewarded with something that they really like, something they love, something that makes them feel good, the moment that they show that behaviour.
For example, if a dog is walking and you make a loud noise, which let’s say is neutral stimuli that they haven’t been exposed to before, they turn their head because they heard the noise. Then they get that reward, that really good thing, and so then in the future, they’re more likely to turn their head when they hear that sound.
That’s kind of the basis of positive reinforcement. Horses can be trained this way too. Cows, even fish have been shown to be capable of learning using positive reinforcement.
But then we look at other training styles, and maybe not always training, but punishment can be used by people that add something unpleasant to decrease the behavior.
For example, a flank strap that’s really tight decreases an animal’s desire to stand still and makes them move in such a way is to try to remove that strap. One of the ways an observer can see that the strap is causing the animal to respond to it is that as soon as the time is up in rodeo, the people who are managing the rodeo animals remove the flank strap, which then leads the animal to calm down.
Much of what happens in rodeo has little to do with training. It has a lot more to do with triggering fear responses. Animals that are waiting to be released from the chute—so situations like steer wrestling and tie-down roping—may be hit or have their tails twisted while they’re in the chute. Something that makes them uncomfortable so that when the gate opens, they run out full speed.
It can also happen sometimes that animals will freeze in place and not want to leave the chute. That’s their response.
Animals used for rodeo are prey animals, so it isn’t common to see a fight response. You tend to see fleeing or freezing.
However, we know bulls can sometimes have a fight response as you would witness in bull fighting, and then sometimes you’ll see that with some of the bulls that are used for bucking, but they quickly move out of fight and into flight as soon as they’re given an opportunity to. So you can see that they still have that desire to respond to their fear by getting out of the situation.
Samantha: Yeah, I find based on the animal and the particular event, the response might be a little different. Like you said, for calf roping, there’s more of a promotion of that flight response. For bull riding, there’s more of that promotion for a fight response.
That’s kind of what they’re looking for in that instance because they’ll get scored based on how aggressive or how lively the bull is performing in that instance. The same with the horses in the bronc events. There’s definitely variations between the events of which response they’re trying to get.
Amy: Yeah, I find it really interesting. Certainly to get that difference of, okay, are these animals trained? And maybe yes, in some cases they’re trained or they’re made to grow accustomed to the way that they’re expected to perform. But it seems like often they’re motivated through fear.
Samantha: Yeah, and I think there’s a certain amount of genetic manipulation that goes on with rodeo stock as well, trying to achieve that higher scoring animal, which can obviously play in how they respond.
Amy: Right, like with the bucking behaviors.
Samantha: Primarily, I think those are the ones where there’s more genetic roles in how they select those animals.
Public attitudes to rodeo
Rodeo culture at the Calgary Stampede
Chantelle: It’s really brutal to think about what these animals are going through, but a lot of the culture around rodeo minimizes the individual experiences of animals.
And I know that part of your research was looking at attitudes toward rodeo. The VHS recently ran a campaign on ending animal suffering at the rodeo, and part of that was monitoring rodeo events.
Amy, I wanted to talk to you about that because you watched three days of the Calgary Stampede rodeo while that was underway. I was wondering what some of the things were that you observed about the rodeo culture in Calgary.
Amy: What I found most interesting was listening to the commentators as they observed the rodeo events.
There was a really big focus on money, who was going to take money away from the event, and what I understood from that is that performers depend on placing in a certain ranking to take an income from the event. So they’re incentivized to perform the way that the rodeo expects them to.
But even with that in place, there’s many situations where things go wrong, such as when calves are pulled off their feet by the rope that gets wrapped around their necks rather than put on the ground by the people who are handling them,often aggressively. In the rodeo, these instances are considered no time—their scores aren’t counted—but the animal still gets pulled off their feet.
There were quite a few of these during the Stampede. It seems like even if it potentially causes more harm in that the calves are getting pulled off their feet and maybe dragged by the horse, it seemed difficult for the person performing to manage that. Obviously they don’t want that to happen because they don’t get a score, but it was still happening quite a bit.
I also noticed there were a lot of interesting comments made about animals and their behaviour.
There’s a lot of sociology of how people describe other people or other animals, and I noticed people commenting on whether the animals are nice or not, whether they comply or behave or not. There’s also a lot of commentary about the calves straining and struggling with this expectation that they should be submitting; where we know it makes sense that an animal that’s wanting to be free and being contained is going to struggle and try to get free.
I also noticed a big emphasis on the event as being part of the circuit to qualify on a world scale. It’s a reminder that even though the event only happens once a year, the animals performing in the rodeo are often traveling frequently and long distances. Especially the different horses are going to different events throughout the season and practice sessions through the year.
Travel is stressful on everyone, humans and animals, but particularly these animals aren’t being given a choice as to whether they want to opt into that travel. Horses and cows are herd animals and they’d rather be with a group of horses and cows over being put in a trailer on their own and traveling to a loud and stressful arena.
Responses to advocacy
Amy: We shared some of the photos and videos from this event on social media, and I’m curious, Chantelle, being the person who saw all the social media comments, what are some of the ways that people respond to posts from VHS’s website, RodeoTruth.com?
Chantelle: There’s a very strong response. One thing that’s really clear is this is an issue that people feel very strongly about either way. There are people who would love to see rodeos cancelled for good, but the rodeo supporters feel just as strongly that they should be kept around forever.
I’ve noticed that people on the side of rodeo kind of move the goalposts when you’re talking about rodeo, every time you point out an issue.
So if we say that animals aren’t given choice whether to participate, people will say that, actually, animals love being in the events, so they would choose to.
But we know for a fact that animals aren’t given a choice because we see what happens to them if they try to opt out of the behaviors. For instance, we shared a video of a horse during a bucking event who instead of having the flight and fight response, had a freeze response and just stood still in the chute. That horse was just repeatedly smacked in the face. They kept opening the gate and trying to hit and push the horse out.
We shared that video and the response to that video was, well, the horse wasn’t being hit that hard; the person just slapped or pushed the horse; they weren’t punching them, and the handlers wouldn’t actually hurt the horse. The video shows that horses aren’t given a choice, but we do know that horses are hurt in these events also.
Animals are catastrophically injured and die at the Stampede quite frequently. The VHS started tracking fatalities in 1986, and since then, 105 animals have died at the Calgary Stampede. Those deaths are happening almost every year. But on the other hand, when we shared those numbers that animals actually are in fact injured and killed by these events, people will just say, those deaths just happen sometimes, or it’s not enough deaths to really worry about. But those individual animals’ lives matter and we as humans don’t need to be putting them in those situations where they’re at risk for our entertainment.
Another response we hear a lot is deflection. People will say that advocates shouldn’t be looking at this issue at all because there are all these other issues happening in the world.
That’s a technique known as whataboutism. It basically aims to distract from the topic at hand. Of course, it’s possible to care about this issue of animal suffering in rodeo and work to address other different issues at the same time. And if everyone really believed that we shouldn’t be looking at one issue because there’s another one, nothing would ever improve. There’s always going be other issues.
So in general, there’s a lot of denial, moving the goalposts, and deflections to avoid discussing the very real fear and stress and pain and risk that animals face in rodeos so that humans can carry on hosting these events and participating in them and watching them.
At the same time, it’s clear that public opinion is increasingly critical of how animals are treated in rodeos. So I think that the fact that there is such strong pushback to criticism of these events shows that the industry is concerned about how the future of rodeo is going. Maybe this is not something that is sustainable to continue.
Amy: I think some of those observations apply to any type of advocacy or change.
Polling results on rodeo attitudes
Amy: Samantha, you recently collected some data about people’s perceptions of rodeo events and their responses to rodeo footage. What did you learn from that?
Samantha: People’s attitudes seem to be guided by a couple things, including:
the perceived cultural value of the event;
how the animals are treated; and
the risk and safety of the event.
And these are most influenced by like that person’s attitudes towards animal use in general.
There’s kind of these two ends of the spectrum.
On one side, somebody will think all animal use is okay, so all of these events are okay. And then on the other side, there’s no animal use is okay, so no event is okay. And these are kinda like hypothetical endpoints. Most people fall within kind of this gradient of how they view the use of animals.
Public perceptions of 4 rodeo events
And in this study in particular, it seemed to also be influenced by the species in the particular event and the age of the animal. For this study, we looked at four events:
Barrel racing;
Chuckwagon racing;
Bull riding; and
Calf roping.
In general, most people approve of the events using horses. I think there’s this relationship or perceived relationship between horses and riders, so most people think that horseback riding is okay. As a result, most people approved of barrel racing. For this event in particular, people recognize the importance of the place of women in rodeos.
There was a slight decrease in the approval of chuckwagon races, and this was due to the fact that a lot of people thought there was more risk involved in the event because of the number of horses and the proximity of the wagons.
More people disapproved a bull riding and felt like the animal was being exploited and angered for the sake of entertainment. Bull riding was most polarized in terms of the cultural significance. Some people in the U.S. in particular said it was in our all-American sport, it needs to be conserved; while others thought the event was barbaric and outdated.
It’s important to note for chuckwagon racing and bull riding, there was a lot of uncertainty in whether people approved or disapproved. And this might be due to like a lack of information or they’re kind of unable to pick which value is more important to them, the cultural aspect or the potential of harm to animals.
Finally, people most disapproved the calf roping event. People identified the age of the animal as a concern, referring to the calf a lot of the time as a small baby, which in turn may have led to them to perceive more stress and injury involved in the event. Some participants who approved of calf roping thought it showcased a vital skill for the meat industry in general.
Amy: What were you surprised by with all of these research findings?
Samantha: I thought it was interesting how much cognitive dissonance was present regarding animal use and entertainment.
Cognitive dissonance is a stress response when people have information that doesn’t align with their beliefs. And like you said, it can result in people either, discounting information or they’ll provide some sort of explanation to justify their beliefs.
In this study, the contradicting information was the safety and animal treatment versus this cultural value and historical value of the event.
People who approve of high levels of animal use don’t necessarily associate negative states to the animals, or they’ll even say the animal is enjoying the event. They are also more likely to say that training of participants and the rules in place or government rules protect the animals and the people from getting hurt, as another justification to those perceived risks.
And then on the other side, people who disapprove of all animal use were more likely to associate these negative animal welfare and risks, but they’re also more likely to disvalue any cultural significance. They would say things like, rodeos are like a Greek Colosseum and the viewers are violence seeking.
So there’s definitely this divide and this polarization.
Amy: Yeah, it’s really interesting because I think about just the ways that the animals experience the event, and then the ways that people think that they’re experiencing the event.
Based on the scientific evidence we have of animal behaviour, it can be drastically different.
We had one email from someone who said basically that they thought that the wild pony racing (a children’s event at the Calgary Stampede where the kids try to mount a pony that’s trying to get away and doesn’t want to be mounted) was important because the ponies almost always “win”. And winning means getting away, not getting mounted by the children. I thought that was really interesting because animals don’t have a concept of winning and losing; of competing against each other or competing against the children.
They aren’t winning exactly, but maybe they’re getting away or avoiding the stimuli that they find aversive. But the idea that we put that label on them gave me a real insight into how people shape their ideas about animal behavior.
How will survey data be used?
Chantelle: Samantha, this is really fascinating data. How do you think this could be used in the future?
Samantha: Survey data can help researchers identify the areas the public’s concerned about, and inform possible areas of future studies.
For example, providing more information about chuckwagon racing and bull riding—the events that there is a little bit more uncertainty about—could impact the approval of these events or clarify some of the perceptions around these events. Or, adding safety precautions to events that people are perceiving the safety risks such as chuckwagon races could also improve the acceptance and in turn the welfare of these events.
Amy: Is there anything you didn’t ask in the survey that now that you’ve gone through that process, that you’d want to study or ask in the future?
Samantha: Yeah, with these fairly strong opinions about culture and animal use, I think it would be interesting to investigate this a little further by providing potential changes or refinements that could happen in events and see if there’s still that cultural and entertainment value to it, as well as maybe a lower perceived risk.
For an example, if in calf roping you use the mechanical calf or breakaway ropes, which are ropes that once the animal’s caught it kind of releases the tension and breaks away, would they still find this event entertaining?
Amy: I’d be curious about that as well. Certainly I’ve seen people ride on mechanical bulls and have a great time. There’s so much scoring that goes down to the animals that I’m so curious if you took away the scoring of the animals and just had people be scored, it would be a little bit more consistent and maybe make it more of a sport.
So curious to see where the future takes us with rodeo.
Dropping animal events would not impact Stampede attendance
Amy: VHS actually gathered some polling data about opinions towards rodeos. Chantelle, I was wondering if you could talk about the findings from that poll.
Chantelle: Certainly. During last year’s stampede, the Vancouver Humane Society commissioned a Research Co. poll of Calgary residents to ask about their current plans to attend the Stampede; so if they were going to attend that year or if they had already attended that year, and also if they would attend in a future year if the rodeo and chuckwagon events were removed.
The poll found that there was virtually no change in attendance if those the rodeo and chuckwagons were dropped. 64% of people said they had attended that year or were likely to attend, and 63% said they would be likely to attend without the chucks and rodeo.
So although we’ve assumed the Stampede has continued hosting those inhumane animal events out of financial motivation, we can see that dropping them really wouldn’t have much impact on attendance at all.
The poll also showed that removing those events would draw in new crowds. 24% of people who didn’t attend last year expressed an interest in attending the Stampede if it didn’t have rodeo and chuck wagon racing.
Of the people who hadn’t attended and would change their behaviour, the biggest change was in the youngest group of people, where about two out of five non-attendees from last year (aged 18-34) would be likely to attend if the rodeo and chuckwagon races were removed.
That makes sense; we’ve heard from many people who won’t attend because of the animal suffering.
Beyond the animal events, there is another draw: the Stampede is a major arts and culture event. The concerts alone draw in hundreds of thousands of people every year. Coverage in the news of this year’s event pointed out that the events that do cause animal deaths almost every year don’t really resonate with the crowds coming for the concerts.
As there’s more information available and people are becoming more aware of what animals go through and how they experience the world, it would make sense for the Stampede to lean more into the concerts and the arts and the midway elements and start moving toward a rodeo-free future that’s more in line with the public’s values.
What’s next?
Amy: Thinking about what impacts that we can have, what can the people listening to this podcast do to support individual animals’ needs being met and their wants and desires being cared for, and put an end to some of these inhumane practices?
Chantelle: So there are really two major factors that are going to help end inhumane rodeo practices, and those are public opinion and policy change.
The first step is fewer people buying tickets and attending rodeos. The industry’s main motivation is profit, of course. So if people aren’t spending their money supporting those events, there’s really no financial motivation to continue them.
You can help with this by sharing the posts from the Rodeo Truth page on social media to show the realities of what animals experience in rodeo and encourage other people to boycott rodeo events.
The City of Port Moody in B.C. recently passed a bylaw unanimously to prohibit inhuman rodeo events. The City of Vancouver and the District of North Vancouver also have bylaws in place.
This is a really impactful step, whether you live somewhere that hosts rodeos or not. If you live somewhere that doesn’t host rodeos currently, a proactive ban can be really important because it prevents new rodeos from being introduced, and it helps to grow the precedent for other municipalities to follow suit.
You can also take the Say No to Rodeo Pledge on the Rodeo Truth website, which we’ll share with Stampede organizers and Calgary decision-makers to show them that the public opposes those events.
This weekend’s Chilliwack Fair will feature controversial rodeo events including roping, wrestling, bucking and mutton busting (children riding sheep).
Last year, the VHS documented numerous animal welfare issues during the Chilliwack Rodeo, including animals being roughly handled; stressed animals thrashing in the chutes in attempts to escape; and animals being put at risk of injury for the sake of public entertainment.
Two actions to help animals used in cruel rodeo events
1) Send a message to Chilliwack City Council
Email Chilliwack decision-makers calling for an end to inhumane rodeo events at the Chilliwack Fair. Respectfully share your concerns as a tourist or Chilliwack resident about the treatment of animals in rodeo events and that you’d like to see the Fair continue without the rodeo.
In your own words, consider highlighting the following key points:
Public polling shows a majority of British Columbians oppose the use of animals in rodeo.
The handling and treatment of animals during rodeo events puts them at unnecessary risk of injury and death.
Signs of stress and fear are clearly visible in photos and videos of animals during rodeo events.
There are no shortage of other events and activities that can bring the community together at the Chilliwack Fair without putting animals in harm’s way.
It’s time for the Chilliwack Fair to drop inhumane rodeo events including roping, wrestling, bucking and mutton busting.
2) Call for a bylaw prohibiting inhumane rodeo events in your community
Use the VHS’s quick action tool to call for a bylaw prohibiting inhumane rodeo events in your community.
Last year, the Vancouver Humane Society documented numerous animal welfare issues during the Chilliwack Rodeo, including animals being roughly handled; stressed animals thrashing in the chutes in attempts to escape; and animals being put at risk of injury for the sake of public entertainment.
What would you do if you saw someone yanking an animal’s ear, twisting their tail, shaking them by the head until they’re thrashing about in stress? Would you turn away? Speak up in protest of the cruel treatment? Call in a report?
Or would you open your wallet?
Most British Columbians would say the unnecessary, cruel treatment of animals, like the aforementioned practices, which are commonly used to make rodeo animals “perform,” should be stopped immediately. In fact, only one-quarter of British Columbians agree with the use of animals in rodeo. Most would never hand over money to see this cruelty in person.
The catch? If you pay taxes in British Columbia, you’re paying for it anyway.
The BC Ministry of Tourism, Arts, Culture, and Sport announced in February that it would provide $30 million in provincial funding to support BC-based events, including rodeos.
More than 2,000 British Columbians emailed Tourism Minister Lana Popham asking that this public funding not be used to subsidize an inhumane private industry. Their calls for justice were ignored – to the tune of nearly $800,000 given to events that include rodeos.
Meanwhile, the provincial government provides no funding for animal cruelty law enforcement. This means that no proactive monitoring is being done at BC rodeos to prevent the improper handling of animals.
The fast-paced nature of the events and aversive tools used to provoke fleeing and bucking behaviours in rodeo animals are contrary to the quiet handling techniques outlined in current standards for these same species on farms.
Now, with BC in the last stretch of its dreaded annual rodeo season, many organizers are opening the gates to animal suffering with taxpayer dollars in their pockets. Significantly, an incident earlier this year suggests that organizers are well aware of the welfare issues inherent in the sport.
Over the May long weekend, the Falkland Stampede held a number of bucking, roping, and wrestling events, which notoriously subject animals to fear, stress, and discomfort. Later, rodeo manager Melissa Seaman requested that an image of a calf being roped tightly around the neck be removed from Facebook, stating that “it doesn’t cast rodeo in the best light.”
Though organizers wished to censor publicly available images of a practice integral to their calf roping event, the Falkland Stampede was happy to accept $24,900 in public funding. The move should raise eyebrows: why is the Province giving funds to an entertainment event that only seems acceptable from carefully selected angles?
The Chilliwack Rodeo, which received $7,500 in funding and will be held August 11 to 13, previously came under fire for its apparent use of electric prods at a 2018 event. It was again the subject of media scrutiny when the Vancouver Humane Society released disturbing footage from last year’s event of animals being roughly handled and deliberately agitated.
The return of the Chilliwack rodeo this year, along with a controversial new rodeo held in Langley Township, has raised concerns about the well-being and welfare of animals made to perform in rodeo events. Video footage taken at both rodeos this summer shows stressed and frightened animals being roughly handled and deliberately agitated into fleeing and bucking.
In one video clip, a bull falls on his horn and is seemingly injured. In another clip, a calf runs into the arena fence while fleeing from a rider who is chasing them on horseback. Research has found that calves showed signs of distress across all the phases of calf roping, from being chased, lassoed, and caught to when they were released.
The Chilliwack Fair, which hosts the rodeo, received an additional $31,500.
The marketing of these events as “family-friendly” has drawn criticism for the behaviours they teach children. Many children are naturally drawn to animals, and studies show that children who are empowered to form positive emotional bonds with animals develop greater compassion. Conversely, a strong correlation exists between cruelty to animals and violence toward humans.
Rather than nurturing children’s empathy toward animals, rodeos teach children that animals are here for our entertainment. They demonstrate that animals should be treated with force rather than building trust.
But it’s not just the moral lesson that should give pause; several of the rodeos that received funding feature dangerous events specific to children and minors, such as mutton busting (children riding sheep), barrel racing, steer riding, and breakaway roping of calves.
Events that feature children’s rodeo activities include Valley West Stampede in Langley (which received $33,700), Lakes District Fall Fair, Children’s & Music Festival ($12,300), and the 74th Annual North Thompson Fall Fair and Rodeo ($26,200).
Rodeo events are inherently risky to both humans and animals and can end in devastating consequences. A University of Calgary study found it to be one of the most dangerous sports in the world, with a catastrophic injury rate about 20 times higher than football. Tragically, children and adolescents have lost their lives in rodeo events as recently as this year.
From a government that recommends children avoid “high-risk” activities for their safety, the dissonance is astounding.
The public funding of these dangerous, inhumane, and outdated events shows a concerning lack of judgement on the part of provincial decision-makers, who could instead direct this funding to events like music festivals, fairs, and arts and cultural events that bring communities together and that don’t put animals in high-stress, high-risk situations.
On July 20, 2023, the Union of BC Indian Chiefs (UBCIC) issued an open letter to both the provincial and federal Minister’s of Agriculture calling for government action to address the animal welfare, climate and environmental impacts of factory farming.
The Resolution highlights “our spiritual and ethical responsibility to treat our animal relations with respect, reciprocity, and dignity” and that “poor treatment of animals in factory farming practices contravenes the customs, laws, traditions and values of First Nations in BC who maintain deep spiritual connections to all living things, including new animal kin that were brought over by colonization and European settlement.”
It goes on to note that:
“Animals on factory farms are one of the most unregulated and unprotected groups of animals in BC and Canada, and their mistreatment during raising, transport and unethical slaughtering practices is a punishable act under the Criminal Code, but the lack of regulation and oversight bodies prevents it from occurring.”
The Resolution also highlights the intersection between factory farming, climate change, habitat and biodiversity loss “that have resulted in the displacement of Indigenous peoples and our animal kin to make room for mass and over-producing factory farms…”
The UBCIC Chiefs Council issues a powerful call to action for the B.C. and federal governments, urging both to “work with First Nations to co-develop legislation and regulations in alignment with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that reduce the impacts of climate change and habitat loss due to factory farming, and reduce the risk of disease and suffering of animals on factory farms, and that provide funding to communities in order to support the transition to better animal welfare practices more aligned with a cruelty-free stance toward animals.”
65% of people are eating fewer animal-based products.
In this month’s episode of The Informed Animal Ally, the Vancouver Humane Society’s Amy Morris and Chantelle Archambault delve into a recent project from the VHS to determine what people in British Columbia’s Lower Mainland think of plant-based eating and to share the benefits.
Chantelle: As we’ve mentioned before on this podcast, industrial animal agriculture is arguably the biggest animal welfare crisis in the world. We’ve also mentioned that eating a plant-based diet is the most impactful way to decrease the demand for animal products, which drives farmed animal suffering. Another important piece of that puzzle is advocating for plant-based foods to be more accessible for everyone. But what does that advocacy look like in practice?
This month we’ll be delving into a recent project from the Vancouver Humane Society to determine what people in British Columbia’s Lower Mainland think of plant-based eating and to share the benefits of eating a plant-based diet.
Report prepared for the City of Vancouver: Increasing Plant-Based Purchasing at the Municipal Level
Amy: Yeah, and to share a little bit of what’s kind of behind this: In 2021, the City of Vancouver made a commitment for their staff to look into the city shifting 20% of their animal-based purchasing to plant-based foods, following the release of a report that our organization commissioned on what the city could save in greenhouse gas emissions, cost, and animal lives.
So after the success of that report, we were supported by a funder to develop and promote a cost-benefit analysis demonstrating what an individual could save if shifting towards a more plant-based diet.
Poll of plant-based habits and attitudes in the Lower Mainland
Amy: That involved observing the quantity of animal products consumed by B.C. residents. Since we were already gathering that polling data, we recognized it would be worthwhile to gather meaningful data about BC residents, plant-based eating habits and attitudes as a whole.
We used a recent poll from VegTO as a starting point, and then we gathered data that we could use to further the plant-based movement in B.C. In the next little while, we’ll take you through some of the findings from both the survey and the cost benefit analysis. You can find this data linked in the blog post associated with this podcast.
There are lots of visuals there to make the data come alive. And really to give a broad overview of what the survey entails, it included results from just over 800 residents of the Lower Mainland to ensure that the data could be statistically significant.
Chantelle: Right. And those respondents were also balanced for demographics like age to be as accurate as possible.
How different generations feel about plant-based eating
Chantelle: Let’s talk about age. People have been avoiding animal products like meat, eggs, and dairy in some cultures for thousands of years, plant-based eating has deep roots in a lot of cultures, including ancient Indian cultures and Eastern Mediterranean societies. But the idea of plant-based eating in most of the Western world is pretty new.
The word vegan is less than a hundred years old. It was coined in 1944 by the founder of the Vegan Society named Donald Watson, and the concept has been growing very gradually since then and has recently bloomed.
If you were to look for a vegan-friendly meal at your average food court just 40 years ago, you wouldn’t have had a lot of options. I’ve heard so many stories from early vegans who had to get by on french fries and ketchup any time they were outl. Because those early adopters persevered and advocated, the movement has spread and now you can find something plant-based to eat almost anywhere. We’re so fortunate to have this amazing selection of veggie burgers and wraps and curries, and almost anything else you can think of.
And now that we have all these delicious options available, there’s so many more people who are open to eating plant-based foods.
Which generations are eating more plants?
Chantelle: In the survey that we did in the Lower Mainland, we found that younger generations are more likely to decrease or eliminate animal products from their diets. 69% of people aged 18 to 34 had reduced their consumption of animal products, compared to 66% of people aged 35 to 54, and 60% of people aged 55 and over.
In both the younger age groups, 3% of people identified themselves as being vegan, compared to in the 55+ age group, which rounded to 0% of people who identified as vegan.
Why people are eating more plants, by age
Chantelle: Another interesting finding that came out of the survey is that the motivations for eating more plant-based foods differed by generation.
People aged 18 to 34 were most likely to eat more plant-based foods to save money or to help the environment, while the other age groups were like ust to eat more plants for their personal health.
When it comes to choosing what to eat, all the age groups consider taste to be a priority, with price and availability coming close behind. Younger people are also more likely to consider convenience and the influence of friends, family, and their community.
It’s really great news that people are beginning to consider convenience a priority just as plant-based convenience foods are becoming more widely available. Those are things like packaged meals or plant-based lunch meat.
As companies keep developing those products and they keep evolving to have prices and flavors that rival their animal-based counterparts, it’s going to become easier and easier for someone to pick up something like a $2 package of veggie bologna over a $4 package of meat bologna that tastes essentially the same. That’s when it’s likely that we’ll see a wider shift toward a society that eats more sustainably.
Amy: Yeah, I’m really looking forward to that. Certainly I think it makes sense that eventually those products are going to become more affordable.
Do people with pets eat more plant-based foods?
Amy: We were also really curious. If people who have pets make any different decisions when it comes to plant-based eating than people without pets.
Pet guardians more likely to consider farmed animal welfare
Amy: So current pet guardians and non-pet guardians were asked how much they agreed with the statement, “I think about the treatment of farmed animals when I’m deciding what food to buy”.
I found it interesting that 59% of people who currently have pets agreed or strongly agreed with that statement compared to 47% of people who don’t currently have a pet.
Chantelle: I think that’s very interesting. I can see where that number is coming from because people who share their lives with animals can see how complex they are and how much they feel, and how strong their relationships can be.
Amy: I think it lines up with what I would expect too. Although, of course I’d love to see more connection between pets and farmed animals, considering we know they’re all sentient, they can feel pain and suffering.
Having a pet doesn’t make people value plant-based eating more
Amy: With another question on the survey, when asked how much they agreed with the statement, “Eating more plant-based foods can have a significant impact on reducing harm to animals”, there was really no discernible difference between pet guardians and non-pet guardians.
70% of people who currently have a pet agreed or strongly agreed with that statement, compared to about 68% of people who don’t currently have a pet.
Do you feel that seeing your pets’ unique personalities, intelligence, and capacity for love, joy, fear, and pain has made you more compassionate towards other animals?
Chantelle: I mean, for myself personally, sharing my life with animals has definitely made an impact on the way I see things.
Content warning: pet loss. Losing my first cat was actually what convinced me to start phasing out animal products from my diet years ago because it didn’t make sense to me to make animals die for the food I ate when I was so devastated by the death of an animal that I loved and farmed animals have the same complex internal lives that our companion animals have.
Pigs can reason just like dogs, cows form friendships and emotional bonds with their calves. Chickens can solve problems. They all dream, they think they feel and they want to have a good life.
Do men eat more meat?
Chantelle: Another interesting distinction in the survey data was about gender identity. You may have seen the stat that most vegans identify as women. Looking at the survey gives us some more insight into what the gender gap really looks like when it comes to plant-based food habits and attitudes here in the Lower Mainland.
Men are less likely to reduce animal product consumption, identify as vegan or vegetarian
In the survey, women and those who prefer to self-describe were significantly more likely at 71% to have reduced their animal product consumption than men at 58%.
Of the survey respondents who identified as vegan or vegetarian, 70% identified as women or preferred to self-describe and 30% identified as men.
That could partly be because animal products, especially meat, have historically been heavily marketed to men and associated with masculinity. If you think of something like ads for barbecue equipment that show a full tray of steaks, those are really featured around things like Father’s Day, and they almost always show men in the ads.
And then we see so many people who are changing their narrative on this, which is great news. The Game Changers is a really great documentary from filmmakers including Arnold Schwarzenegger. It follows a number of plant-based athletes to bust the myth that you need to eat animals to be strong, and it shows that anyone can be just as if not more strong eating plant-based.
What does the plant-based gender gap mean for food access?
Chantelle: I think that gender gap is probably making a really big impact when we consider that there’s a lot of men in high power positions in the companies that decide what food is available.
Men are 83% of the 533 named executive officers in S&P 100 companies, which is what many people consider to be the a hundred most major companies in the United States.That means that a lot of decisions about what food is offered and what food is marketed are ultimately being motivated by male leadership.
What do people think of plant-forward policies?
Amy: Speaking of male leaders being prominent in the corporate sector, we were really curious about what people, both those who eat plant-based primarily and those who do not, think about change at that institutional level.
Most people support plant-forward government policies
Amy: The survey showed that three in five consumers (60%) would support including animal product reduction efforts into local, provincial, and federal climate, health, and animal welfare strategies.
The results also showed that a majority (58%) would support shifting government subsidies from animal-based food production to plant-based food production.
Most people believe menus with plant-based options are more inclusive
Amy: When it came to restaurants, hospitals, schools, and public institutions like parks food service, the survey showed that 89% of consumers would either not change their opinion or value them more highly if they offered more plant-based food options.
Looking at this in more detail, the survey data indicated that 73% of consumers would view food services that offered greater variety of plant-based options as more inclusive to all.
So that’s nearly three quarters of the population that see this change as meaningful and want the kind of leadership who are making decisions about this to make more plant-based options available.
Most people would eat more plant-based foods if there were more tasty options on menus
Amy: 65% of respondents strongly or somewhat agreed that they would eat more plant-based meals if there are more tasty options available when going out to eat.
So big changes can be made at the institution level to increase the prevalence of plant-based foods.
How to advocate for more vegan-friendly options
Amy: Really the best thing we can do as individuals to support these changes is to encourage restaurants, schools, park concessions, and government to adapt familiar and popular menu items to be plant-based.
We can also ask them to prioritize the marketing of plant-based items; place them front and centre on the main menu, rather than having them be something on the side.
If you’re keen to get involved with that kind of advocacy, there’s resources PlantUniversity.ca or through our farmed animal advocacy team at the Vancouver Humane Society who can provide personalized support to help you get involved in your community to ask for more kind of prominent plant-based options.
Chantelle: Yeah, those are all great points. It makes such a big difference for individuals choosing what to eat when institutions have made those plant-based foods straightforward and accessible.
Is a plant-based diet nutritious?
Amy: We also wanted to get an idea of what the major barriers were to switching to a plant-based diet.
Survey results indicated that nutrition was the main barrier. 88% agreed or somewhat agreed that they think about nutrition when deciding what food to buy, and 28% of respondents said that they were concerned they wouldn’t get enough protein in their diet if they ate more plant-based foods.
To share a little bit of a personal story, I grew up as a gymnast eating an animal-based diet. Today, I’m a rock climber and a runner, and I have genetic blood sugar issues and I eat a fully plant-based diet.
There are some strategies I’ve found to help me keep up the energy I need for the activities I’m doing. I make sure that I eat a protein with every carb. That’s either nuts, soy products, or a good volume of lentils and beans.
I also avoid really carb intensive foods like white rice or potatoes unless it’s an activity day, because my body can’t process those types of sugars very well. So I opt for sweet potatoes and brown rice instead.
My body really craves fats and protein after a big day in the mountains, so I’ll often eat a spoonful or more of peanut butter before bed to ensure my body’s getting what it needs to stay active. Avocados are really great too, and they’re great insulin regulators.
When I take slower days where I’m not moving a lot, I eat the same ratios of food, but I stick to smaller meal sizes. The reason I eat smaller meals more frequently is to manage my blood sugar, essentially to ensure my body always has the fuel that it needs without a big sugar spike and a consequent dip.
I make sure to take my B12 and eat foods rich in magnesium, calcium, iron, and also make sure to intake lots of electrolytes.
While being active feels good, it feels even better knowing that I’m fueled by plants. I’m grateful that I don’t feel pressure to harm animals while being active. And many of my high intensity athletic friends also eat a plant-based diet.
And this is a personal experience. Certainly everyone has a different dietary need, a different kind of lifestyle, and figuring out what the best foods are for your life is what’s most important. Some of this comes lots of research, going to nutritionist, going to naturopath, and learning about food, and so I really recommend just going to many sources as you can to gather information to understand what your body needs and how to take care of yourself.
Chantelle: Yeah, absolutely. We’re really just sharing our personal experiences about what works for us, but it’s really great that you found something that works for you, Amy.
There’s so much information on nutrition out there that it can at times be hard to sort it all out. I really personally like the recipes on PlantUniversity.ca because they’re focused on good nutrition while also being really tasty. The website also has great videos from nutritionists breaking down the important things to make sure you are considering for your body to thrive on a plant-based diet.
I have also found that since going vegan and eating a plant-based diet, I’m more mindful about making sure I get the nutrients I need, so I’m eating meals that are more balanced to help me get through the day.
I used to struggle with low iron when I was an omnivore and later a vegetarian. I would experience some symptoms of that, like weakness and fatigue even when I was getting enough calories for the energy I was using. Now I’m eating more foods that are rich in that nutrient, like dark leafy greens and tofu, and I’ve found it easier to keep my nutrient levels where they need to be.
Is a plant-based diet tasty?
Chantelle: You might not be surprised to hear that the top concern people identified in the survey was taste. 73% of respondents said taste influences their food choices the most, and 37% said that they worried they wouldn’t enjoy their meals as much if they switched to more plant-based foods.
Amy: Yeah, this is a really interesting one. This is something that I’ve thought about a lot because growing up my favorite meal was macaroni and cheese and I just loved cheese in general. So when I transitioned to a plant-based diet, I was worried about having to give up my favorites.
I found a really good mac and cheese recipe using vegetables and seasoning to make up the cheese sauce. Just the other day I had a mac and cheese meal that reminded me so much of my childhood and no animals were harmed for me to be able to eat that meal. I know nostalgia is really powerful and I did miss cow’s dairy cheese for a little while. But I’ve gotten to the point now where I’ve created new memories about the food that I like to eat, and I don’t crave things like dairy cheese anymore.
There are more resources than ever to help you find options for things that you have as a go-to that provide the nutrients and the taste that you’re looking for.
I found checking out the aisle at the grocery store that has plant-based alternatives. Sometimes there’s many aisles or it’s kind of strewn around the grocery store in a lot of different spots.
I find also learning how to better flavour foods that are made with things like walnuts, beans, and lentils is the best way to address nostalgia for meat-based recipes.
Chantelle: For sure, and your taste buds definitely change as your diet does. One of my favorite things about switching to a plant-based diet has been all the new foods I’m getting to try.
When I expanded my view of food from meat being the centre of a dish to considering the dish as a whole and having all these different protein options like beans, mushrooms, lentils, tofu, seitan, and I also do enjoy plant-based convenience foods like mock meats, this whole culinary world opened up to me.
I find that I have a lot more variety in my diet now, but that’s not to say I don’t still enjoy my classic comfort foods like your mac and cheese. There are so many resources out there to adapt your favorite dishes by swapping out ingredients, but the easiest thing that I’ve found to do is if I’m craving something like Alfredo, I’ll just look up vegan Alfredo and the work of figuring out ingredient swaps is already done for me.
Amy: Yeah, I love that.
How plant-based food can lower your grocery bill
Amy: We spoke quite a bit about the survey, but the main reason we did this survey was to do a cost benefit analysis and have that be available for individuals to see the kind of financial and environmental and animal welfare benefits to switching to more plant-based diet. So what’s that all about?
Chantelle: In a brief summary, we know that one thing that’s really deeply impacting people right now is rising food costs with the price of groceries going up. We thought many people might be looking for ways to reduce the cost of their cart and the food that they’re buying.
The poll validated what we suspected and found that the vast majority of people are concerned about rising costs and are looking for ways to cut back at the grocery store.
92% of people are concerned about the rising cost of living.
87% of people are looking for ways to cut back at the grocery store, and most people are not just looking for sales and deals, they’re also looking to change the way they eat.
75% of people are trying to eat more affordably.
66% of people shared that they would be open to exploring more plant-based food options to save money.
When we look at the youngest group surveyed, all those numbers are even higher.
96% of people aged 18 to 34 are concerned about rising cost of livings.
91% are looking for ways to cut back at the grocery store.
82% are trying to eat more affordably.
77%, so more than three quarters are open to exploring more plant-based food options to save money.
While most people were open to eating more plant-based foods to save money, some people do express concerns that plant-based eating is just too expensive; maybe imagining a scenario where people are eating the highest cost mock meats every day.
But we know that practically, that’s generally not what’s happening. Most people who eat plant-based are eating a balance of a lot of different foods, including whole foods like tofu and legumes.
The cost benefit analysis essentially lays out the actual financial savings of swapping out animal products for plant-based products.
If you consider the cost savings of swapping ground beef in your chili for red lentils, a hundred grams of ground beef is $1.54. A hundred grams of lentils is less than a third of that at 48 cents. Or if you have a bean burrito instead of chicken, a hundred grams of chicken breast is $2.42, whereas the same amount of black beans is just 42 cents.
So those savings are significant and they do stack up over time significantly, which means that rising food costs in general could be a factor that push plant-based eating to become more of the norm.
How plant-based food can cut your emissions
Chantelle: The other thing the report looks at is the impact of our food choices on greenhouse gas emissions and what making those same swaps could mean in terms of emission savings.
We found that eating plant-based for a year can save as much carbon dioxide as the emissions used to power an entire home for six months.
Or if you just switch 25% of your diet from animal-based foods to plant-based foods, that could save enough carbon dioxide each month to charge a cell phone 2068 times.
Impact of swapping beef for lentils
Swapping beef for lentils has the biggest impact in terms of emissions, and the second biggest impact in terms of cost. That’s because beef is so resource intensive to produce. Cows need a lot of space; they eat a lot of food; they produce a lot of methane. If all beef products in someone’s diet were replaced with lentils for one year, it would be the equivalent to the carbon sequestered by 18 tree seedlings over 10 years.
Depending on how much beef and what kind of beef a person eats, they could also save up to $60 a month by making that swap.
Impact of swapping seafood for mushrooms
The next most impactful change in terms of emissions and the biggest impact in terms of cost is swapping seafood for mushrooms. Mushrooms have a really similar texture to seafood and they can be used as a substitute and a lot of recipes.
If a person eating the average Lower Mainland diet ate mushrooms instead of seafood for a year, they would save enough emissions to drive about 1600 kilometers in a gas powered vehicle.
Depending on the amount of seafood a person is eating, the cost savings are up to $64 a month.
How plant-based eating helps animals
Amy: Yeah, those are all really significant impacts that one person can make by changing just one thing, the way they eat.
Of course, eating plant-based also has a major impact on reducing animal suffering because there’s less demand for animal products so fewer animals will be raised and killed in the conditions we’ve spoken about that are pretty horrific.
If you’re aiming to reduce your consumption of animal products to reduce animal suffering, it’s really important to consider the number of animal lives used to supply consumption habits, as well as the amount of hardship a particular animal will face in their short lifetime.
So for instance, chickens are quite small, so a very large number of them are killed to supply the demand for chicken meat. Dairy cows are typically given very little freedom and are forced to endure births and heartbreaking separation from their calves about once per year. They also live longer, more long suffering lives.
So just really thinking about each product that you consume, what’s its origin? Who is it coming from? What is that individual’s life like? I found that really helpful when I was moving towards a plant-based diet; to not see this packaged product as just plastic and marketing, but seeing the animal behind it and thinking about the animal behind it. That really helped me stick to my motivation to create a full shift and to go a hundred percent plant-based.
What’s next?
Amy: So what’s next?
Chantelle: Great question. So there are a lot of ways we’re planning to use the data from the survey, including for the cost benefit analysis.
We’re raising awareness in the community through things like infographics and ad campaigns.
We’ll also be engaging with government policy makers and institutional decision makers to talk about ways that the public supports these more institutional shifts towards plant-based foods and plant-based policies.
We’ll use it to inform the content we create moving forward for Plant University, which is a resource that helps individuals and institutions shift their diet and the foods that they offer to more plant-based foods.
You can also use some of the stats we’ve discussed today to engage with your favorite restaurant or grocery store or at your school or workplace if food is purchased and provided.
Amy: I’m looking forward to seeing the ways that people choose to change their diet. I think there’s a lot of great ways to start and to shift kind of one little bit at a time and certainly the resources are there to make that happen.
Chantelle: Absolutely. And we are also available as a resource so you can comment on the posts associated with this episode or reach out to us on social media.
Next episode
A bull in the chutes at The Calgary Stampede rodeo. Jo-Anne McArthur \ We Animals Media.
Please join us next month as we discuss animals used in rodeo.
