Author: Peter Fricker

Categories
Media Release

Why is the veterinary profession silent about cruelty to rodeo animals?

VANCOUVER, July 4, 2019 /CNW/ – The Vancouver Humane Society (VHS) is calling on the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA) to speak out against cruel rodeo events at the Calgary Stampede and rodeos across Canada. More than 1400 people have emailed the CVMA about the issue, as part of a VHS campaign.

The society says the CVMA should act in accordance with its own position on the use of animals in entertainment by taking a public stand against inhumane rodeo events.

The CVMA’s position statement on animals being used in entertainment and recreation states that it “opposes activities, contests, or events that have a high probability of causing injury, distress, or illness.” It also states that: “Animals should not be forced to perform actions or tasks that result in physical or mental distress or discomfort.”

VHS says it is self-evident that animals in certain rodeo events are forced to perform actions that result in, at the very least, distress and discomfort. “So why is the CVMA silent on the abuse of these animals, which are subjected to fear, pain and stress for the sake of entertainment,” said VHS spokesperson Peter Fricker.

Fricker points out that the CVMA website says “Animal welfare advocacy is a priority of the CVMA and the Canadian Veterinary Oath requires CVMA members to “prevent and relieve animal suffering.”

“The CVMA needs to live up to its principles and take a public stand against rodeo cruelty,” said Fricker.

-ends-

Categories
animal welfare compassion cruelty Cruelty-free ethics News/Blog Promoted rodeo

Calgary Stampede vet says pressure from VHS affects “how seriously” it takes animal welfare

Calf-roping at the Calgary Stampede. Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur

First time a Stampede official has acknowledged campaign’s impact

The Calgary Stampede’s chief veterinarian has admitted that pressure from the Vancouver Humane Society affects how seriously the Stampede takes animal welfare.

The admission, buried in a news story in the Calgary Herald, was part of an interview with Greg Evans, a veterinarian employed by the Stampede.

The story states: “Evans said pressure from the Vancouver Humane Society, which openly calls for an end to all animal competition and entertainment at the Stampede, plays a role in how seriously both the Calgary Humane Society and the Stampede take animal welfare.”

This is the first time a Stampede official has acknowledged that Vancouver Humane’s anti-rodeo campaigns have had an impact on the Stampede’s sensitivity to animal welfare concerns.

Under this pressure, the Stampede made a number of rule changes in 2011 and 2016 to the rodeo and chuckwagon races. However, the changes do not affect the fundamental cruelty involved in the rodeo and horses have continued to die in the chuckwagon races. The Stampede needs to eliminate cruel rodeo events such as calf-roping and steer-wrestling and they should suspend the chuckwagon race until independent equine experts can determine whether it can be made safe for horses.

While the Stampede’s rule changes do not go far enough, the admission that it feels under pressure concerning animal welfare shows the importance of public opinion. We hope compassionate Canadians will continue to support our campaign against animal cruelty at the Stampede. We aim to draw attention to this issue at this year’s Stampede (July 5-14).

Let’s continue to hold the Stampede to account. Your support makes a difference and your donations will help us keep up the fight to end rodeo animal suffering.

Thank you!

Categories
animal welfare Captivity compassion cruelty Cruelty-free ethics News/Blog Promoted wildlife zoo

The Vancouver Aquarium needs a new vision

News that the Vancouver Aquarium is suing the City of Vancouver and the Vancouver Park Board over the 2017 cetacean ban is a sad reminder that the aquarium remains out of step with changes in public attitudes and has no vision for the future that could reflect those changes.

With federal legislation banning cetacean captivity now the law of the land, the aquariums’s lawsuit seems particularly ill-timed and contrary to the spirit of the times.  It’s even more peculiar given that the aquarium itself said in 2018 that it would no longer keep whales and dolphins.

Still in the business of cetacean captivity

While the issue of cetacean captivity is largely settled, there remains much to be concerned about regarding the aquarium and its future direction.

First, the revelation that Ontario’s controversial Marineland amusement park is transferring two beluga whales owned by the Vancouver Aquarium to a facility in Valencia, Spain (which the aquarium manages), clearly demonstrates that it is still in the businesses of cetacean captivity.  They’re just not doing it in Stanley Park. The aquarium is also believed to own belugas kept at other facilities in the U.S. (Two belugas owned by the aquarium died at the notorious SeaWorld in 2015.)

The Valencia facility, L’Oceanogràfic, is the largest complex of its type in Europe and reportedly keeps 45,000 animals of 500 different species including fish, mammals, birds, reptiles and invertebrates. Its dolphinarium features two shows a day, with trained dolphins performing tricks for a large crowd. It’s clearly a place of entertainment.  While L’Oceanogràfic is a popular attraction it is not hard to find visitor reviews that are critical of animal welfare at the complex.

Facilities like Marineland, SeaWorld and L’Oceanogràfic represent everything that the Vancouver Aquarium should be moving away from. While the aquarium has done some rebranding, calling itself part of Ocean Wise, a “worldwide conservation organization” it remains primarily a place of entertainment, not conservation.

Restraints on speaking out against threats to marine life 

One of the most pressing marine conservation issues in B.C. is the potential extinction of B.C.’s Southern Resident killer whales.  The National Energy Board has admitted that the proposed Trans Mountain pipeline project will likely “cause significant adverse environmental effects on the Southern resident killer whale and on Indigenous cultural use associated with the Southern Resident killer whale.”  Conservation groups like the Raincoast Conservation Foundation have opposed the pipeline for this reason.  Yet, the Vancouver Aquarium’s voice is rarely heard in the pipeline debate.

Some fear that the aquarium’s reticence on such issues may be due to its links to business, especially to resource extraction industries. Mining company Teck donated $12.5 million to the aquarium in 2012 and one of its galleries is named for the company.  The Vancouver Board of Trade supported the aquarium in its fight to keep cetaceans in captivity, obviously cognizant of the tourist dollars the aquarium brings in. There is clearly a potential for a conflict of interest that would keep the aquarium out of important debates that are relevant to a genuine conservation role.

A drift toward becoming a zoo?

Another concern is the aquarium’s apparent “mission creep” toward becoming a zoo. It’s collection of 58,000 animals includes sloths, penguins, monkeys, snakes and macaws, which are hardly aquatic species. It would be unfortunate if this trend continued and the menagerie grew just to provide an additional attraction.

The Vancouver Aquarium, like all zoos and aquariums, justifies putting animals on display by claiming that they serve to educate and inspire people to value wildlife.  Yet there is little evidence to show that is the case.  There is, however, research to the contrary, as Zoocheck executive director Rob Laidlaw has stated: “There have been a number of studies examining how long zoo visitors look at animals. The results show that for some animals, particularly if they are not active, observation times can vary from about eight seconds to 90 seconds. There’s not much that can be learned about an animal in that length of time.”

Need for transparency

There is also a need for the aquarium to show greater transparency in its operations if it seeks to build public trust, especially as a conservation organization.  Its website states:

“Aquarium animals come to us from many places and in many different ways. Many animals arrive at the Aquarium as part of an exchange program with other large aquariums, zoos and universities. Most of the tropical fish are flown to the Aquarium from dealers around the world. The Aquarium tries to buy fish from sustainable fisheries and conservation-based associations, and only purchases from dealers who collect fish with nets, and not chemicals or explosives.

“Aquarium divers have permits to collect marine invertebrates including octopuses, sea stars, sea anemones and species of fish. Other collectors walk out from the beach with seine nets to gather local invertebrates and fishes. Many animals are also born into our care. Once in the Aquarium, animals normally live for many years.”

Who are these “dealers”?  How reputable are they and are they also involved in the exotic pet trade, which has damaged wildlife populations.  And there is the basic ethical question about removing animals from their natural habitat just to put them on public display. Who benefits? Certainly not the animals.

The aquarium should be transparent about where all its animals come from and how they are obtained. It should also be open about what happens to them after they become part of the collection. How many die prematurely?  Does the aquarium keep data on survival rates?

Opportunity for genuine change and new vision

The Vancouver Aquarium has an opportunity to do more than rebrand itself with name changes and new websites. But it needs to resolve the conflict between being a tourist attraction and a genuine conservation organization. 

There are ways forward. Some aquariums are moving away from making captive wildlife their star attractions. The Aquarium of the Pacific in California is opening a multi-million dollar “immersive theatre” that features “wind, fog, scent and vibrating seats to storms playing out on a massive, two-story-tall screen.” The theatre is part of a new “Pacific Visions” wing designed to “explore pressing environmental issues and suggest alternative pathways to a sustainable future.”

Hawaii’s Maui Ocean Centre, which has no captive cetaceans recently launched a digital “Humpbacks of Hawaii” exhibit using the integration of 4k imagery, 3D active glasses and a 7.1 surround sound system. The centre says the exhibit “transports guests deep into the ocean, giving them an inside look into the complex and vibrant lives of Maui’s humpback whales, and allowing them to forge new connections with one of nature’s greatest marvels.”

The aquarium could develop a vision for the future that is based on genuine education and conservation. It could employ the latest technology to make learning about marine life exciting and compelling.  It could use its voice to contribute to debates about real threats to B.C.’s coastal waters.

It could also invest in research about some of the big questions surrounding marine life. One of most recent and most profound of these has been the question of fish sentience.  The latest research shows that, contrary to previous perceptions, fish feel pain.  What are the implications of this?  The Vancouver Aquarium could be at the forefront of discussions about such big issues.

And why doesn’t the aquarium explore cooperation with the U.S.-based Whale Sanctuary Project, which has considered the B.C. coast as a possible a site for a sanctuary? There would be huge public support for the aquarium’s involvement.

It’s time the Vancouver Aquarium left the entertainment industry behind and became something much more valuable: A beacon to help guide us through the challenges that face our seas and a champion of the precious marine life they contain.  That is what Vancouver – and the world – needs, not just another place to see captive animals living out their lives in tanks.

Categories
animal welfare compassion cruelty Cruelty-free Dairy ethics Food and Drink News/Blog plant-based diet Promoted vegan vegetarianism

Thinking about going plant-based?

Navigating through the all the advice and information about plant-based diets can be confusing.  Arguments rage in the news media and online about the ethical, health and environmental considerations involved in moving away from animal-based foods.

Ethical arguments

The ethical case for switching to a plant-based diet is strong.  Science has shown that most animals are sentient. That is, they have the capacity to feel pain, pleasure, suffering or comfort. There is no doubt that the billions of animals raised for food suffer, mainly because of industrialized agriculture, which deprives them of the ability to engage in natural behaviours, forces them to live in confined spaces, subjects them to painful procedures, transports them in stressful conditions, and ends their lives prematurely in a slaughterhouse. 

Many people who have researched and thought about the sentience of animals and about the nature of modern animal agriculture have given up meat. For example, famed anthropologist and conservationist Jane Goodall has written that she stopped eating meat some 50 years ago “when I looked at the pork chop on my plate and thought: this represents fear, pain, death.”

Dr. Lori Marino, a renowned neuroscientist, recently wrote: “…the scientific literature on everyone from pigs to chickens points to one conclusion: farmed animals are someone, not something. They share many of the same mental and emotional characteristics that we recognize in ourselves and acknowledge in the animals closest to us – dogs and cats. To continue our self-indulgence, we resist the evidence and reinforce the status of farmed animals as objects, as commodities, as food.”

If you accept the ethical arguments against raising animals for food, the question then becomes: Okay, now what?  For a growing number of people, the answer is to simply stop consuming animal products. The good news is that it’s never been easier to do so, but there are still practical matters to consider.

What do I eat?

The first big one is: What do I eat?  This is where the debates over dietary health begin. It’s important to know that there is plenty of scientific evidence to show that a plant-based diet can be healthy. The Dietitians of Canada have stated that: “A healthy vegan diet has many health benefits including lower rates of obesity, heart disease, high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, type 2 diabetes and certain types of cancer.”

However, if you’re concerned about health, you can’t just switch to a diet of veggie burgers, fries and vegan donuts. That’s why nutrition experts recommend a “whole foods” plant-based diet that focuses on including vegetables, fruits, whole grains, legumes, seeds and nuts.  It can take a little time and effort to learn how to plan, shop for and prepare whole-food meals, but fortunately there are boundless resources online and in print to help you. (One of our favourites is Easy Animal-Free. You can also sign our Meatless Monday Pledge and receive weekly plant-based recipes.)  In Vancouver, there are also plenty of plant-based restaurants to choose from, so going out to eat isn’t a problem.

The new meat alternatives

But what about all the new meat substitutes people are talking about, such as the Beyond Burger and the Impossible Burger?  These products are sometimes criticized for being processed foods or for being high in calories.  However, many also contain important nutrients such as protein and vitamin B12, which are important to a meatless diet. In many cases, the products have similar or better nutritional profiles than the meat products they’re replacing. The best approach to these foods is to eat them as occasional treats rather than as a staple of your diet. You can also check labels for nutritional information if you have specific concerns about ingredients. 

Vancouver Humane is very supportive of the rise of the plant-based food industry. If all the world’s burgers, sausages and chicken nuggets were replaced with plant-based alternatives it would likely mean the end of factory farming, which exists only to mass produce cheap meat. It would also mean the end of suffering and slaughter for billions of animals. That’s a prize worth striving for.

It’s also essential to know that eating the new plant-based meat substitutes is far better for the environment than eating meat. The global meat and livestock industry is a major contributor to climate change and causes considerable environmental damage and harm to wildlife.

Take a step in the right direction

So, for a variety of important reasons, it’s a good idea to transition to a plant-based diet. Not everyone can make that change overnight, so go at your own pace. Even just reducing your meat consumption helps and is a step in the right direction.  At Vancouver Humane, we recognize that change can be difficult and we don’t condemn people for their food choices. Instead we believe in providing helpful and reliable information, giving encouragement and being supportive.

If you’re ready to join the plant-based movement, please support our Go Veg campaign. You can help by eating more compassionately and by encouraging others to do the same.

Remember, every time you sit down to eat you can stand up for animals.

 

 

 

 

Categories
Opinion Editorial

Go vegan to end animal suffering and help the planet

Sow confined to a gestation crate.

Article originally published in the Vancouver Sun.

Once again, the veil has been lifted on a B.C. farm to expose sickening cruelty being inflicted on animals. And once again, animal agriculture representatives say it’s not the norm — it’s just a few bad apples.

But last week’s release of an undercover video taken by animal activists at an Abbotsford hog farm, that allegedly shows sick and dying pigs living in filthy conditions alongside dead and decomposing animals, graphically illustrates why the livestock industry cannot be trusted to care for animals humanely.

The farm is owned by a director of the B.C. Pork Producers Association, whose spokesman told media: “I think it’s important to know when people see this footage this isn’t all completely normal on most farms.” Yet, the ease with which undercover investigators find and reveal abuse suggests that animal cruelty in intensive farming is not the rare occurrence that operators claim.

In 2014, activists released video that exposed horrific cruelty inflicted on cows at Chilliwack Cattle Sales, Canada’s largest dairy farm. At the time, Jeff Kooyman, one of the owners of the farm, said he was “shocked” and claimed he had no idea his staff were abusing the cows. In 2016, Kooyman and five members of his family were charged with causing or permitting animals to be in distress.

In June 2017, video footage released by animal activists showed chickens at a Chilliwack poultry operation being mangled, stomped on and thrown against a wall. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency laid charges under federal regulations against Elite Farm Services and its president, Dwayne Dueck, for allegedly beating chickens and loading them in a way “likely to cause injury or undue suffering.” When the video first appeared in the media, Dueck said he was “sickened” by the footage.

In 2018, the B.C. SPCA announced it was again investigating Elite Farm Services in what it said was “another situation where chickens have allegedly suffered as a result of what appears to be a blatant disregard to adherence of the industry’s own agreed-upon standards of care…”

These undercover animal cruelty cases, and many others that have exposed similar abuse across Canada, show that industrial agriculture cannot provide humane conditions for animals. The system is designed to mass produce cheap meat, eggs and dairy, not to provide good lives for animals.

Working with large numbers of animals on an intensive farm must be desensitizing. Each animal, as science has shown, is sentient and has its own individual personality yet on the factory farm they are by definition a commodity. This contradiction cannot be squared. Cruelty occurs when there is no empathy and factory farm workers cannot empathize with animals as individuals. If they did, how could they keep on working?

Many Canadians do not realize that animal farmers in Canada largely police themselves. There are codes of practice for the care and handling of farm animals, the creation of which are largely industry-led, but there are no on-farm government inspections to ensure they are enforced.

For a growing number of people, the real answer is to turn away from animal-based food products. As more plant-based alternatives to animal products emerge, the easier it is to transition to a plant-based diet. In the short-term, even just reducing meat consumption sends a market signal to livestock producers that factory farming is becoming unacceptable, thus forcing reforms.

In the longer term, bolstered by the need to end the environmental damage and poor health outcomes of a food system based on animal consumption, the plant-based diet may finally bring an end to factory farming and all the animal suffering it causes.

Categories
animal welfare compassion cruelty Cruelty-free ethics Food and Drink News/Blog Promoted vegan vegetarianism

Why are some animals celebrated as individuals while millions more are treated as commodities?

Most pigs are confined on factory farms and sent to slaughter

 

On a recent Saturday in Cloverdale, B.C., an Alzheimer centre held a birthday party.  The party was not for one of the residents, but for a one-year-old “therapy pig” called Rosie. 

Local press covered the celebration, quoting centre staff on the effect Rosie has on residents and their relatives who come to visit. “Not only has Rosie been hugely beneficial to the residents, but our staff, volunteers, families, they’ve all blended together to become a part of her life as well,” the centre’s program coordinator told the reporter.

The next day, local and national media were reporting on another story just a few miles away in Abbotsford. Animal activists were protesting at a hog farm in response to an undercover video allegedly showing neglected, sick and suffering pigs kept in filthy conditions. 

The contrasting stories, one about a pig bringing joy to humans, the other about humans bringing misery to pigs, could not illustrate our collective cognitive dissonance about pigs more clearly. Are they just meat (cue the “Mmm, bacon” trolls) or are they more akin to our fabled best friend, the dog?

Scientific studies have suggested that pigs are as intelligent as dogs, although it has been argued that such comparisons are not very meaningful, especially in determining how an animal should be treated. If  my border collie is smarter than your bulldog is he entitled to be treated with more kindness?

What really matters is sentience – the ability to experience sensations such as pain, pleasure or comfort. Neuroscientist Lori Marino, who appeared as an expert witness at the 2017 trial of an animal activist charged with mischief for giving water to pigs in transport trucks, testified that pigs are sentient beings and that “They have self-awareness, self-agency and have a sense of themselves within the social community… Each one is a unique individual.”

The suggestion that pigs feel emotion and have unique personalities would come as no surprise to anyone visiting a farm animal sanctuary. Diane Marsh, a co-founder of the Happy Herd Farm Sanctuary in B.C. tells the story of Betty the pig, who befriended a donkey who had mourned the loss of his horse buddy for two years, rejecting the company of other animals.  She says they had an “instantaneous friendship” and now share food, graze together and sleep next to each other. 

Imagine getting to know Rosie at the Alzheimer centre or Betty at the sanctuary.  It would be heartbreaking for most people if the two were trucked away to a factory farm and sent for slaughter. Yet that is what happens to millions of pigs, each with a unique personality, every day. The only difference is that those nameless millions are unknown to us.

As people become more ethically uncomfortable with industrialized animal agriculture, some have sought so-called “happy meat” from more traditional farms offering better conditions for animals.  Others, recognizing that this still leaves animals facing an unwanted, premature death, are turning away from meat altogether.  And, as most meat in Canada comes from industrialized farms, this is the only realistic ethical choice.

The phenomenal rise of plant-based alternatives to meat has made it easier than ever to avoid animal consumption.  The new products, competing on taste, price and convenience, are attracting considerable investment and proving popular with consumers around the world.

The environmental and health benefits of a plant-based diet have been major drivers of the demand for meat alternatives, boosting the efforts of animal advocates and bolstering their ethical arguments against animal consumption. 

But for those who see pigs and other animals as fellow sentient beings and not mere commodities, the ethical arguments are enough. For them, a simple question provides its own answer: If one can eat well without the need for suffering and slaughter, why not?  For them, every pig is a Rosie or a Betty – someone, not something.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categories
animal welfare compassion cruelty Dairy ethics Food and Drink News/Blog plant-based diet Promoted vegan vegetarianism

Abbotsford pig farm cruelty: Another example of why animal agriculture can’t be trusted

Photo: PETA

 

Yesterday’s release of an undercover video showing sick and dying pigs living in filthy conditions at the Excelsior Hog Farm in Abbotsford is just the latest example of why the animal agriculture industry cannot be trusted to raise animals humanely.

Pigs at the farm, which is owned by a director of the BC Pork Producers Association, are shown in the video unable to stand, some with large untreated growths on their bodies. Dead piglets and an adult dead pig can also be seen.

In 2014, animal activists released video that exposed horrific cruelty inflicted on cows at Chilliwack Cattle Sales, Canada’s largest dairy farm.  At the time, Jeff Kooyman, one of the owners of the farm, said he was “shocked” and claimed he had no idea his staff were allegedly abusing the cows. In 2016, Kooyman and five members of his family were charged with causing or permitting animals to be, or to continue to be, in distress – a violation of B.C.’s Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act. Several company employees were also charged under the act and later jailed.  The company was fined $300,000.

In June 2017, video footage released by animal activists showed chickens at a Chilliwack poultry operation being mangled, stomped on, thrown against a wall, and smashed into transport crates. The BC SPCA, which described the abuse as “absolutely sickening,” recommended charges, but nearly two years later Crown Counsel has still not prosecuted anyone. (In December 2018, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) laid charges under federal Health of Animals Regulation against Sofina Foods, Elite Farm Services and Elite’s president, Dwayne Dueck, for allegedly beating chickens and loading them in a way “likely to cause injury or undue suffering.”)

In 2018, the BC SPCA announced it was again investigating Elite Farm Services and a chicken farm called Jaedel Enterprises in what it said was “another situation where chickens have allegedly suffered as a result of what appears to be a blatant disregard to adherence of the industry’s own agreed-upon standards of care and a failure to either comply with or put in place processes to ensure this type of suffering does not occur.”

The poultry, dairy and pork industries responsible for the care of these animals routinely deny that these horrific cases of abuse are “the norm.” It’s always just a few “bad apples” they say, while expecting the public to believe that all the other animals on Canadian farms are living happy lives in wonderful conditions. 

But these undercover animal cruelty cases, and the many others that have exposed similar abuse across Canada, the United States and elsewhere, should make clear that modern industrial agriculture can never provide humane conditions for animals.

Many Canadians do not realize that animal farmers in Canada largely police themselves. There are Codes of Practice to protect animal welfare on Canadian farms but there are no government inspections to enforce the codes in terms of conditions on farms. Government oversight only extends to animal transportation and slaughter practices, not the living conditions or overall well-being of animals farmed for food.

Vancouver Humane believes that it is impossible to give animals a good life on modern, industrialized farms. The system is designed to provide cheap meat, dairy and eggs, not to ensure good animal welfare.

Animals are sentient beings that deserve to be treated with respect and kindness. That’s not going to happen on factory farms, where more than 90 per cent of Canada’s farm animals are raised.

That’s why we encourage people to switch to a plant-based diet and refrain from consuming animal-based products. That’s why we support the rise of plant-based businesses and call on governments at all levels to do the same. 

Modern animal agriculture will never be good for animals and it has been shown to be bad for the environment and for our health.  It’s time to build a food system that is healthy, sustainable and compassionate.

 

 

 

 

Categories
Opinion Editorial

A grim future for the global livestock industry and its investors

Beyond Meat burger.

Article originally published in the Georgia Straight.

The global livestock industry—already under attack for damaging the environment, causing mass animal suffering, and exacerbating climate change—now faces a calamity that should have us asking: isn’t there a better way to feed the world?

Fortunately, there is.

The spread of African swine fever has forced China to cull 200 million pigs, a loss of 30 percent of the country’s pork production—the equivalent of the entire annual pork supply of the European Union. The mass slaughter is expected to cause a protein shortage, rising meat prices, and investment losses.

The devastating impact of the worldwide spread of the virus perfectly illustrates one of the many economic risks inherent in the meat and livestock industry. Livestock-disease outbreaks are a constant threat—think of mad-cow disease, avian flu, or hoof-and-mouth disease—and they are economically damaging.

They are also costly to taxpayers. Federal and provincial governments paid $4.3 billion in compensation to Canada’s cattle industry for losses stemming from the 2003 BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) outbreak. Governments around the world pick up the bill for the consequences of animal-disease outbreaks and for trying to prevent them. This year’s federal budget included $31 million for more sniffer dogs to detect African swine fever entering the country. (Although vegetables are also subject to contamination and disease, the causes are often traced to livestock.)

The risks of catastrophic disease outbreaks in the livestock sector are in addition to the environmental costs, public health risks, and animal-welfare concerns that come with industrialized animal agriculture. While animal advocates and environmentalists have raised these issues for decades, some in the investment community have woken up to the industry’s risks.

The FAIRR Initiative, a consortium of investors representing more than $12 trillion in assets, is drawing attention to the negative impacts of factory farming and, according to its website, “believes that intensive livestock production poses material risks to the global financial system and hinders sustainable development”.

FAIRR has highlighted the livestock sector’s role in issues such as climate change and the overuse of antibiotics, and it has urged food companies to diversify their protein-sourcing away from a reliance on animal proteins. It is perhaps not entirely coincidental that some companies are doing exactly that.

Maple Leaf Foods, Canada’s largest pork processer, recently announced plans to build the largest plant in North America for plant-based protein (sadly, in Indiana, not Canada). The company, which previously acquired two plant-based food businesses, is not alone in its interest in nonanimal proteins: major meat companies such as Cargill and Tyson Foods have also invested in meat alternatives.

At the retail level, chains such as A&W and White Spot have jumped on the plant-based bandwagon, and consumers have welcomed their new meat-free offerings.

Ultimately, the success of new plant-based foods will depend on consumer demand and their capacity to compete on price, taste, and convenience. But as the meat industry and its investors confront the disastrous consequences of yet another global animal-disease outbreak, perhaps more sustainable and less risky food products will have greater appeal.

As for China’s shortage of pork (a traditional staple of the national diet), there may already be a plant-based product ready to help fill the gap. A Hong Kong-based company called Right Treat produces a meatless pork alternative called Omnipork that is proving popular. Developed by food scientists based in Vancouver, Omnipork is made from peas, soy, shiitake mushrooms, and rice.

When contrasted with the need to slaughter millions of pigs, dispose of their carcasses, and guard against the next animal-disease outbreak, such products seem to offer a more benign alternative to what is, quite literally, a bloody mess.

Categories
animal welfare compassion cruelty Cruelty-free Dairy Donate ethics News/Blog plant-based diet Promoted vegan vegetarianism wildlife

Why is a humane society talking about plant-based diets?

“Put simply, when we eat animal products we hurt both farmed and wild animals”

 

Anyone who is familiar with Vancouver Humane’s work or follows our social media channels will notice that we encourage people to try a plant-based diet. Some people, especially those who see a humane society’s work as limited to helping companion animals, might wonder why we put such emphasis on changing diets.

The most obvious reason is that the fewer meat and dairy products we consume, the fewer animals need to be slaughtered. Another reason is that reducing animal-based food consumption negates the case made by industry for factory farming, which exists because of the demand for intensively-produced, cheap meat and dairy.  In short, eating fewer animal products means less slaughter and suffering. It’s also worth noting that 60 per cent of all mammals on earth are livestock, so addressing factory farming means helping large numbers of animals.

“There is substantial evidence that meat consumption contributes to global warming” 

But cutting meat consumption benefits animals in other important ways. Most people are now aware of the threat of climate change to the planet – and that means a threat to animals as well as humans. There is substantial evidence that meat consumption contributes to global warming. (The United Nations says that the livestock sector produces 14.5 per cent of human-generated global greenhouse gas emissions.) And there is no doubt climate change is having an impact on wildlife. As the WWF says, “From polar bears in the Arctic to marine turtles off the coast of Africa, our planet’s diversity of life is at risk from the changing climate.”

Aside from contributing to the harm to wildlife through global warming, meat consumption is having a negative impact on animals by causing other environmental damage. A 2017 WWF study found that excessive animal product consumption is responsible for 60 per cent of all biodiversity loss, due to the massive amount of land being used to grow feed for livestock. A previous study on biodiversity loss concluded that: “The consumption of animal-sourced food products by humans is one of the most powerful negative forces affecting the conservation of terrestrial ecosystems and biological diversity. Livestock production is the single largest driver of habitat loss, and both livestock and feedstock production are increasing in developing tropical countries where the majority of biological diversity resides.”  Put simply, when we eat animal products we hurt both farmed and wild animals.

“Livestock production is the single largest driver of habitat loss”

Our focus on reducing the consumption of animal products doesn’t mean we don’t also work to improve the lives of animals currently suffering on factory farms.  We publicly demand accountability for incidents of deliberate animal cruelty on farms and we routinely push for better conditions for farmed animals through, for example, government consultations.

We also make time to address other issues such as rodeos, animals in captivity and the plight of animals whose welfare is often overlooked.

And we haven’t forgotten our precious companion animals, who we help through our McVitie Fund when they are sick and injured.

It’s your donations that make all this work possible. Whether you want to make a better future for animals or help them right here and now, your support will make a real difference.

Take action: Our Go Veg campaign
News: Our latest article on the Daily Hive 

Categories
Opinion Editorial

Politicians lagging behind soaring public interest in plant-based diets

Article originally published on Daily Hive.

Are politicians getting behind the plant-based food revolution?  Despite some promising actions, governments and political parties are lagging behind public and business interest in the shift away from an animal-based diet.

It was a welcome surprise when Health Canada, for the first time, ensured the meat and dairy industry’s lobbyists did not interfere in the creation of the new Canada Food Guide. The result was an evidence-based guide that focuses more on a plant-based diet at the expense of one centred on meat and dairy products.

Also welcome, but less well-known, is the federal government’s support for the emerging plant-based protein industry in Western Canada. Ottawa is contributing $150 million to create a plant protein “supercluster” in the Prairie provinces, aiming to take advantage of Canada’s pulse crops (lentils, beans, peas) and their potential use in products such as meat alternatives. The initiative, focusing on value-added processing, is expected to create an estimated 4,700 jobs over the next 10 years and $700 million in new commercial activity.

Such developments make sense, as study after study provides sound evidence that a food system based on the overconsumption of cheap meat is environmentally unsustainable, unhealthy and, in terms of animal welfare, unethical. Most recently, a report by respected U.K. think-tank Chatham House, called on the European Union to invest in meat alternatives because “a radical shift away from excessive meat-eating patterns is urgently needed to tackle the un-sustainability of the livestock sector.” The United Nations Environment Agency has said “meat production is known to be a major contributor to climate change and environmental destruction…” and last year honoured two plant-based meat companies with its Champions of the Earth award.

Yet Canadian taxpayers’ support for the meat and dairy sectors is massive and dwarves public funding for the budding plant-based food industry. The recently tabled federal budget promised $3.9 billion to the egg, poultry, and dairy industries as compensation for trade concessions. Last year, the federal government announced $250 million for the dairy industry to “increase productivity and competitiveness.” How many established Canadian businesses enjoy such support?

Here in B.C., the provincial government recently committed $450,000 toward the development of a slaughterhouse in Prince George. Similar grants are routinely doled out to the meat industry across Canada. In 2017, the federal and Manitoba governments gave $500,000 to Maple Leaf Foods to increase bacon production – the same year the company had net earnings of $164.1 million. In 2015, the World Health Organization declared processed meats carcinogenic to humans.

The provincial government’s Clean B.C. initiative makes no mention of reducing meat consumption. Yet a major Oxford University study last year found that avoiding meat and dairy products is the single biggest way to reduce your environmental impact on the planet.

Even the Green Party of B.C. has not addressed the negative environmental impacts of the meat and livestock industries in its policy platform. In the U.K., the Green Party has pledged “to support a progressive change from diets dominated by meat, dairy and other animal products to healthier diets based mainly on plant foods…”

Local government in the province has also done little to address the issue. Several Metro Vancouver municipalities have made “Meatless Monday” proclamations but none actively promote healthy, low-carbon, plant-based diets. A number of Lower Mainland schools have individually partnered with the Vancouver Humane Society to establish Meatless Monday initiatives but no school boards have yet to make it district policy. Compare this to New York, which recently announced ALL public schools in the city will introduce Meatless Monday programs.

It’s understandable that politicians may be timid about recommending plant-based diets or calling for lower meat consumption. American congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, while promoting her Green New Deal, recently suggested, “Maybe we shouldn’t be eating a hamburger for breakfast, lunch and dinner” and was accused by her political opponents of coming to take Americans’ hamburgers away.

But Ocasio-Cortez has not backed down. Instead, she has patiently explained why reducing meat consumption will benefit our environment and our health. Canadian leaders at all levels of government need to show the same vision and boldness. The evidence for change is there. All that’s missing is the political courage.