Mette Frederiksen’s new government promises overhaul for people – and animals – in home of ultra-intensive farming
Progress for animals often moves slowly. This can be disheartening. As an animal ally, it can feel as though others don’t care enough to make change. But how much is that feeling based in reality?
When asked about animal issues, most Canadians express care and concern. Most people with companion animals consider those animals to be part of the family. Canadians are also largely opposed to activities that pose animal welfare concerns, such as trophy hunting (83% opposed), killing animals for their fur (78% opposed), rodeos (65% opposed), and zoos and aquariums (58% opposed).
Animal welfare is typically a bipartisan issue in Canada, resonating with people regardless of which political party they vote for. Still, animal welfare alone is rarely a motivator for change from decision-makers.
What happens when animal allies unite with other changemakers?
A recent election in Denmark answered that question, as advocates for animal welfare, the environment, and residents made pig farming a major election issue through two years of focused campaigning.
Citizens used their votes to show they care about the animal welfare, land use, environmental, and human impacts of pig farming, a main industry in Denmark.
Collaboration with other sectors has helped make progress for animals in Canada.
Animal advocates in Canada have teamed up with advocates on other issues and highlighted the overlap between the health of animals, humans, and our shared environment.
Here in British Columbia, a permanent ban on the farming of mink for fur was announced in 2021 due to public health risks.
In 2023, a phase-out of toxicity testing on animals was included in an update to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
The Protecting Victims Act passed this summer, criminalizing the distribution of animal sexual abuse material while recognizing harm and threats against animals as part of coercive control and criminal harassment.
Collaboration paints a promising path forward.
These stories paint a promising path forward in animal advocacy; one where collaboration with other advocates and intersections with other important issues create real opportunities for meaningful change.
A bull in the chutes at The Calgary Stampede rodeo. Jo-Anne McArthur \ We Animals Media.
Animal advocates around the world are celebrating a step forward, as Tripadvisor has strengthened their animal welfare policy! The new policy evaluates activities involving animals “informed by the Five Domains of Animal Welfare, a globally recognised framework that assesses an animal’s quality of life”:
Source: Tripadvisor.ca
The new policy “does not enable booking for experiences that involve animal racing, such as most dog, horse and camel racing or for rodeo-style events”. It also forbids sales of tickets for attractions including elephant riding and those involving captive whales and dolphins.
This important step forward involves a major company acknowledging that many animal entertainment events cause unnecessary risk and stress to animals. It also helps travellers to make more compassionate choices about the events and attractions they attend.
“The study … shows how limited the evidence is, and how much more research is needed … before people can confidently claim that common captive care practices protect reptile welfare.”
In summary:
Reptiles are readily available through pet stores and hobbyist sellers, where they are often marketed as “easy” or “low-maintenance” pets. A new scientific review suggests a much more complicated reality.
The paper reviewed decades of research on captive reptile welfare and found that the evidence base for reptile care is still surprisingly small.
The authors identified just 72 papers, representing 75 studies, that tested achange to captive reptile care and measured its effect using at least one welfare-related indicator.
Reptiles are commonly kept in a wide range of captive settings, including zoos, laboratories, farms, classrooms, rehabilitation centres, and private homes, using practices that historically relied on tradition, assumptions, or anecdotal advice, often called ‘folklore husbandry’, rather than strong scientific evidence.
Reptile welfare research is growing, but major gaps remain
The review found that reptile welfare research has increased over time, which is encouraging, but the available studies are not evenly distributed across species or settings.
Species: Most studies focused on squamates, the group that includes snakes and lizards, while other reptiles were less represented.
Settings: Much of the research also took place in controlled environments such as laboratories and zoos. Laboratory settings alone made up about 43 per cent of studies, while research in the companion animal industry represented only about 1 per cent.
This is a serious gap.
Many reptiles are kept in private homes, where care can vary widely and oversight is limited. Without research that reflects the conditions animals actually experience in homes, expos, breeding operations, and other commercial settings, it is difficult to know whether common care recommendations truly support good welfare.
Most studies looked at enclosures, not the full picture
Nearly half of the studies focused on changes to the physical environment, such as enclosure size, furnishings (such as climbing structures, hides, caves, or ledges), lighting, or substrate (e.g. bedding, flooring, litter, etc.). The most common changes noted by the researchers involved adding or changing enclosure furnishings.
These factors are especially important for reptiles because their bodies and behaviour are closely tied to their surroundings. Temperature, light, humidity, shelter, substrate, and opportunities to climb, burrow, bask, hide, or explore can all shape their well-being.
But the review also found that fewer studies examined other important areas, including human interaction, enrichment, or social contact with other members of the same species.
Measuring welfare in reptiles is challenging
The paper also highlights a major challenge in animal welfare science: how to tell whether a reptile is doing well.
Behaviour was the most commonly used welfare measure, appearing in more than half of the studies. Behaviour can offer important clues, such as how animals use their space, whether they hide, explore, bask, or show signs of stress.
But behaviour alone may not tell the whole story, especially for reptiles, who may mask signs of illness or distress.
Physical measures, such as body condition and growth, and physiological measures, such as stress hormones, were used less often. The authors note that only three studies included all three types of welfare indicators: behavioural, physical, and physiological.
For animals with complex and species-specific needs, relying on one type of measurement can leave important welfare concerns hidden.
What does this mean for exotic animals kept as pets?
The study does not show that captivity can meet reptiles’ needs. Instead, it shows how limited the evidence is, and how much more research is needed before people can confidently claim that common captive care practices protect reptile welfare.
Wild and exotic animals retain complex social, physiological, and behavioural needs, even when bred in captivity. The VHS opposes the sale and keeping of exotic pets and advocates for stronger protections to prevent animals from being kept in environments where their needs cannot be met.
The findings also support the need for a precautionary, science-based approach to exotic animal regulations.The VHS has called for a positive list framework, which would only allow species to be kept as pets if they are proven suitable based on animal welfare, public health, safety, and environmental criteria.
Animals deserve more than guesswork
Reptiles are sentient animals with needs that are often poorly understood and difficult to meet in captivity. Animal care should not be based on what is convenient, traditional, or profitable. Rather, it should be based on strong evidence and on the animal’s well-being.
When it comes to reptiles and other exotic animals, compassion means looking beyond the enclosure and asking a more fundamental question: should these animals be kept as pets at all?
You can help reptiles by:
Sharing this information with your friends and family
Not purchasing reptiles as pets
Supporting reputable rescues that prioritize animal welfare
Not engaging with harmful content that promotes wild animals as pets
Social media can be part of the solution, not the problem.
Share our content to reach more people and spread the word!
In this episode of The Informed Animal Ally podcast, Vancouver Humane Society Communications Director Chantelle Archambault and co-host, VHS Executive Director Amy Morris, are joined by Wildlife Campaign Manager at World Animal Protection, Erin Ryan. Together, they explore the welfare concerns surrounding captive wild animal attractions, including roadside zoos, exotic pet expos, and other close-contact wildlife experiences. They discuss common misconceptions about education and conservation, the impact these attractions have on animals, red flags to watch for when choosing family activities, and compassionate alternatives that help children connect with wildlife without causing harm.
Note: This written discussion has been edited for length.
Featured Guest: Erin Ryan
Wildlife Campaign Manager for World Animal Protection
Erin Ryan is the Wildlife Campaign Manager for World Animal Protection. She brings more than 10 years experience working on a variety of wild animal welfare issues across the country with groups including the BC SPCA and Humane World for Animals Canada. She is a skilled and creative science communicator, a Registered Professional Biologist (RPBio), and holds a BSc and MSc in Applied Animal Biology from the UBC Animal Welfare Program. Erin is a proud member of the Syilx (Okanagan) Nation.
Chantelle: Hi and welcome back to The Informed Animal Ally, presented by the Vancouver Humane Society. I’m Chantelle Archambault, the Communications Director here at the VHS. I’m joined, as always, by my wonderful co-host, the VHS’s Executive Director, Amy Morris.
Amy: Hello.
Chantelle: And today we’re so excited to welcome former guest Erin Ryan back on the show. Thank you so much for being here, Erin.
Erin: Thanks for having me.
Chantelle: Since she was last on the show in 2022, Erin has moved into a role as the Wildlife Campaign Manager for World Animal Protection. She has more than 10 years’ experience working on a variety of wild animal welfare issues across the country, with groups including the BCSPCA and Humane World for Animals Canada. She is a skilled and creative science communicator, a registered professional biologist, and holds a BSc and MSc in Applied Animal Biology from the UBC Animal Welfare Program.
Erin is a proud member of the Syilx Okanagan Nation. Today we’re very grateful to have her back to talk about an important issue moving into summer, as families are looking for activities to do, which is captive animal attractions. But first, Erin, could you share a little bit about your background on animals in captivity and entertainment, and why you feel it’s so important to talk about this?
Erin: Yes, absolutely, and thanks for the introduction. So, of course, I’ve spent almost my entire career in wild animal welfare. In my background in applied animal biology, what we really focused on was sort of the scientific evaluation of different animal welfare scenarios, including a strong background in animals in captivity. So, I’ve looked at a lot of the research on, you know, animal welfare problems for wild animals that aren’t in captivity, including urban wildlife conflicts, pest control.
I’ve also done some work with understanding captive wildlife facilities, including the ongoing issue of roadside zoos in Ontario, which is a major part of my campaign work here with World Animal Protection, but then also animals in the tourism space and how you can be a responsible tourist. So, I think I’ve had sort of a lifelong interest in these animals and, you know, just seeing how we can improve their lives and what we can be doing better.
Amy: Thanks for sharing, Erin. Something that I’ve sort of noticed is that social media is full of animals in captivity that are pets. You know, there’s this blurred line, and it’s becoming more popularized than ever before. And people are seeing that. They’re thinking about fun things to do with their kids as summer break is coming. And so, what are some of the popular attractions or activities around wildlife in captivity that people may not realize can be harmful for the animals?
Erin: You’re totally right. Social media, unfortunately, has this bad habit of sort of normalizing some harmful activities. And abroad, that can look like things like riding elephants or even bathing with elephants, which people don’t realize is a harmful activity. It can translate into things like swim with dolphins experiences, or even on a local level, people visiting substandard facilities like roadside zoos that we have in Ontario, or low-quality facilities that people kind of assume that if they’re open and operating legally, that they must be okay, when in fact we know that there’s a lot that goes on behind the scenes or even to the untrained eye that these animals aren’t doing well.
From zoos to exotic pet expos: what families don’t see
Chantelle: I’ve heard so many times that certain zoos are accredited by certain places, so they must be okay, or they’re still operating and they’ve been operating for a long time, so they must be okay. But we see again and again that the animals in those situations are not, they’re certainly not thriving, and they seem to be really having these negative behavioural patterns that are a result of just being stressed and bored and frustrated.
Erin: It’s a lot similar to food labeling systems, where consumers are wading through the different labels like free range versus free run, or organic. What does that actually mean for animal welfare? When we talk about some of the zoo standards, not everybody’s going to be an expert on all the different accreditations or certifications that a program may or may not have. But, generally we see that the absence of any type of accreditation is a type of red flag.
Chantelle: That’s certainly true. And then there’s also accreditations that are industry-based or volunteer-based that are less rigorous, let’s say.
Erin: Yeah, those that don’t carry the same weight or don’t necessarily translate into a humane experience for the animals.
Chantelle: Yes, exactly. That being said, zoos are often marketed as educational or conservation-focused spaces. What are some of the biggest animal welfare concerns that you’ve seen with zoos in Canada?
Erin: I think where we see some really professional facilities that are operating at a much higher level, that type of education work does happen, but it varies widely, and there’s no requirement or no prescribed method that says your education has to be of a certain quality or has to be correct. And unfortunately, I’ve even seen cases while visiting roadside zoos in Ontario where the so-called education that was being provided was blatantly wrong, or it was focused only about the animals at the zoos and not about the animals in their natural behaviour or what they would normally experience. So, it’s unfortunately not giving this education or conservation experience.
And many of these places argue that simply by owning these animals and keeping them forever, that they’re in fact contributing to conservation, when generally the opposite is true, that these wild populations are facing pressures because people are taking them from the wild to start breeding stock for animals in captivity.
But generally, you know, these programs aren’t meaningfully contributing to conservation in the wild, and that’s really what we’d want to see from any type of legitimate facility.
Chantelle: Yeah, absolutely. What is the typical experience of an animal in a zoo that you’ve seen?
Erin: In some of the worst facilities I’ve seen, it’s generally animals in really barren conditions. And in somewhere like Ontario, where there’s no sort of regulations about it, you can imagine the most DIY animal cages you can imagine. So, think about wood frames with sort of chicken wire nailed to these wooden frames, hand-built ramps or shelters that don’t actually meet the animal’s biological needs.
And you can see this reflected in how the animals behave, because what we see is a lot of stereotyping or repetitive behaviors. That can be things like pacing around repetitive paths in the enclosure, and you can start to see that they’ll wear down paths where they do this. You can also see things like chewed materials or things like bar biting. I saw a really poor example of giraffes who were basically bar biting at their fenced-in enclosure, and you could see very deeply worn holes on either side of their wooden fencing.
I saw a serval that had a repetitive pacing pattern that was so specific that their paw prints were wearing down the individual footprints where they were putting their feet every time. So, it wasn’t even just one paced path, it was the individual steps they were taking over and over and over again.
Amy: Yeah, it’s really interesting to come at these facilities with a lens of the experience of the animals. And I know growing up, my family took me to aquariums and zoos, and I always was sort of like disturbed by the penguin exhibits because they’re really small and they’re sort of like always on display. You know, even as a child, I looked at them and thought, something just doesn’t feel right watching this.
The breeding that’s happening is just happening in a vacuum, in a non-natural habitat, and there’s such a loss of knowledge of what their natural habitat is meant to be. And they’re not getting to do any of their long swims, their deep dives, the hunting behaviors that make them who they are.
You know, it’s like they clock in for work every day, they go out, they’re gone all day, and they clock back out or whatever on their way back home, and you just don’t see that in these captive facilities. And for me, that is a symbol of so many of the animals. You know, it’s one example, but you can find with each animal you look at in an enclosure, you can see the ways in which something’s lacking for them.
I even remember once my mom took me to a zoo in San Diego that’s supposed to be amazing for conservation. And we were walking by the cat enclosures, and they’re very small, incredibly small, and one of the cats was spraying or peeing outside of the enclosure because, you know, the enclosures were so small and you could see just a sort of like stain on the pavement where people walk by. So, all of these experiences for me have been a big sign of why these places are harmful for animals, but there’s still a draw to see wild animals, to engage with them.
So even, you know, on a local level, there’s even these exotic pet expos. People are trying to keep wild animals as pets, including reptiles, and they’ve become popular for family outings as well. And, you know, I have a lot of concerns about these events. I’m curious to hear, Erin, what concerns you have about these events, both for the animals involved and for the messages they’re sending to children.
What children really learn from captive animals
Erin: You actually raised a really good point in your previous anecdote that ties in closely to this.
And my experience is that children are so much more intelligent and savvy than we give them credit for, and that they are more likely to have sort of a gut reaction to say, this doesn’t feel right. But then, you know, either two things can happen: the adults in their lives can normalize it for them, or they can check themselves and think, wait a minute, is this something that I’ve normalized? Is this a behavior I’ve internalized?
But it’s funny, I saw that a lot at a recent reptile expo that I went to, is that some, I would say probably the large majority of folks who were attending are, you know, reptile or exotic animal enthusiasts who are there with a specific purpose or specific reasons for going. But then there are a lot of foot traffic where it seems like this is a fun outing for the family for the long weekend or something like that. And what I saw is that, you know, even though there are signs everywhere saying that these enclosures are temporary and that’s why they’re so small, is that I would overhear both kids and their parents who maybe hadn’t been to an event like this before that were saying, man, this doesn’t feel right. Those enclosures look too small. Those animals don’t look happy. Wow, it really looks like they’re trying to get out. And then, you know, it was interesting to watch people kind of stuff that down, to have that gut reaction, to question it, and then try to normalize it. Well, it’s happening, so it must be okay, or maybe I’m not thinking correctly.
And then, of course, it also has that secondary effect of normalizing the ownership of these animals. We saw some pretty incredible animals, but also, I’m just, as a biologist, trying to understand the needs that those animals have and what their counterparts would experience in the wild, and I can’t see how anyone could meet those needs in a home without the animal suffering quite a bit.
Chantelle: Yeah, they do have extremely complex needs, and then having them in these small containers doesn’t really showcase the difficulty level.
I know that there are some breeders and sellers who put in more effort to show people what the requirements are going to be, but it is extremely difficult for the average person to meet the needs of these animals in a home or impossible. We also heard that same defense that it’s okay that animals are in these small containers because it’s just temporary. But if you think about it, it’s like these expos are happening in one building over the course of a weekend.
A seller has hundreds of animals, and they’re transporting them from a different city, usually. They’re going to the expo, they’re there for the weekend, and then they’re going home. They’re not going back to their hotel room every night and putting them in these large, suitable containers. That’s where they are for those, that set of days that is the travel and the expo. So, it’s temporary, but it’s still like, I wouldn’t want to be in a small closet for the equivalent of a long weekend.
Erin: I think that’s a good point. It kind of ties into what Amy, you were talking about like the penguins and their restricted movement and how that doesn’t really showcase what a penguin should be doing and acting. And, you know, as a person, you can imagine maybe back to the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic when we were all mostly staying indoors. I think about if some alien from outer space were watching me in those months, do they think that would be an accurate representation of humans’ natural behaviour to be cooped up inside and see the things we did then versus when we have our full scope of natural environment available to us? And the answer is certainly no.
So, I think it’s, you know, it’s really important that for an education value, we understand the full range of what these animals can and want to do, rather than seeing how they behave in a restricted environment and saying, well, that’s just how they are.
Amy: Yeah, absolutely. We were not doing well just in our homes for those months when that was happening, and that’s in our fully enriched environments with entertainment and things to do. And these animals are in a container, so that’s a great point.
Chantelle: So, we have a lot of concerns about these activities, but a lot of parents do choose these activities because they genuinely want their kids to learn about animals and build empathy for animals and be around them. How much do you think children are actually learning from activities that involve captive wild animals and close contact experiences?
Erin: I think on average, and a lot of the peer-reviewed evidence that I’ve seen, is that on average, not a lot. A lot of the kids who report learning after visiting the facilities are generally from families or kids that already have an interest in the natural world, already have an interest in sort of environmental sciences that’s often passed down to them by family or friends, and that these facilities rarely inspire new interest in people. And unfortunately, you know, what we see on average is that what kids remember is saying it was fun to see the tigers. They don’t remember saying, this is how a tiger behaves in the wild. These are the threats that tigers face in the wild.
This is what we need to do to protect tigers. So, it kind of misses the mark. And I know one of the most disappointing things that I saw when I was visiting roadside zoos last year was we would see school buses full of kids arrive at these already substandard facilities, and then half an hour later, all the children were on the playground.
So, it didn’t even matter that they’d come to see these animals or reportedly learn about these animals. They were more interested in hanging out with their friends and playing outside, which is absolutely what kids should be doing.
Chantelle: Yeah, that’s a great point. I was at the Greater Vancouver Zoo to check out the facilities and see how the animals are living and behaving. And I was at the tiger exhibit where there’s this tiger who is stuck by herself in this cage for years. There was a child walking by surrounded by these big cat enclosures, and there were all these animals to see. These animals spend all their time in these enclosures so that children could come and see them. And this child was walking by and saying, why are we here? Can we go back to the dinosaurs? And the dinosaur exhibit does not even have animals, obviously, because it’s just this exhibit with animatronic dinosaurs that are more interactive.
That is quite an engaging exhibit, but it really shows that you don’t need to have live animals for children to be interested. You need to engage them in the things that they’re interested in. So, if there were other ways that these facilities were teaching children about animals, say like animatronic animals or holographic shows, I’ve seen that done as well. There are so many other ways to see animals without having the animals need to be there for their entire life experience.
Erin: That’s an excellent example, is that, you know, often the argument that kids in particular need to see these animals to learn about them or to inspire awe about them is totally untrue. If you’ve ever asked a five-year-old their favourite dinosaur, they can tell you all about it, the specific name, they will absolutely call you out if you get it wrong. And of course, none of them have ever seen a dinosaur.
Changing minds with curiosity and compassion
Amy: Many of us grew up going to zoos, marine parks, having pony rides, other animal attractions without questioning them. And maybe I’ll share one other story, certainly because I feel like I’ve experienced a bunch of these different animal exhibits, and I have had sort of some changes in how I see things or had to work through what I felt when I saw things.
So, one example is in the place where I grew up in New Hampshire, there’s a place called Clark’s Training Post that has bears and they’re doing tricks. And so, they do a whole performance where they’re being fed ice cream cones as a positive reward, and they’re swinging on the swings and they’re pushing things around. And, you know, it’s positive reinforcement-based and it’s cute. And, you know, for me, that was this confusing thing where I went, well, these bears live a long time and everything’s positive reinforcement, but something still feels wrong about this. And it’s only once I started working in the field that I really understood, okay, you know, what’s the full picture? What are the bears experiencing? What are their habitats like outside of this moment? What does being forced to perform do for them? So many questions about them and their experience.
Have your own views changed over time as you’ve worked in this field? And was there a moment that shifted how you saw these experiences? And I’d be happy to hear both from Erin and Chantelle on this.
Erin: Yeah, I always say to people, you know, we never judge or shame folks for what they did in the past when they didn’t know better because, you know, I was definitely a kid who has been to zoos. I went to Marine Land when I was a kid, and now it’s been a huge part of my own work in, you know, basically encouraging places like that to shut down and advocating for better protections against those facilities. So, I think it’s just important that when we know better, we do better.
But for me, I think, you know, most of my love of animals and my understanding of them comes from, you know, my grandfather and my Syilx culture. So, I was basically raised in my grandparents’ backyard, and my first exposures with their animals were in the wild. And, you know, seeing them do all their natural behaviours and learning how to coexist with them.
And I think the older I got, the more it just didn’t feel right that this was the relationship we had with them. And it felt very exploitative and it felt not true to how I viewed the role of animals in our culture and in our world, and it didn’t feel good. So, I don’t know that I can pinpoint one specific example, but, you know, I do think a lot about my childhood and how I was raised watching wild animals be wild animals and learning to respect that from my whole life, basically.
Chantelle: Yeah, I completely relate to that experience. I was really interested in animals as a child, so I just sought out every opportunity to be near them. And my parents also helped me seek out all opportunities, which included opportunities that were not good for the animals. So, I have pictures of me at a petting zoo feeding captive deer. I used to go to the zoo. I went to the aquarium all the time.
But those weren’t the only places that I engaged with knowing about animals. And I wouldn’t say that they were a main part of why I got into this work. I read books about animals. I adopted a cat. I had all these different experiences where I was seeking out animals. I was watching for wildlife when we were going on walks. I was looking for frogs and birds and squirrels. So, there’s all these places that I was engaging with animals. And then as I grew older, I started to kind of pick and choose which activities I was engaging in that felt more wrong than others.
So, I would say, okay, well, the aquarium seems like it’s fine, but the zoo maybe seems like it’s not as good. And I’m okay eating some meat right now, but I feel like veal is maybe a meat I shouldn’t be eating. And it was just a very gradual thing where I finally realized that kind of any exploitation of animals is something that I’m not okay with happening. So, I don’t engage in those activities anymore. I’m vegan. I really had a moment where I was looking more into these activities and what they mean and what the experience is for the animals.
And I do carry some guilt that I engaged in those activities because I did contribute to a system where animals were being exploited. But I also recognize that there’s a journey where you go from what is okay in the general public and what feels like it’s acceptable within your culture to recognizing what the realities are. But I think that experience of carrying some guilt is fairly common when people learn more about these issues because these experiences seem like such a normal part of childhood and you learn more about them and you realize that they’re not okay. So, I’d like to ping this back to you, Erin, and Amy as well. How would you approach a conversation where someone is feeling that kind of guilt or defensiveness?
Erin: Yeah, I think you said the feeling of guilt is normal. And I always try to approach it with some compassion and say like, you know, when you didn’t know, you didn’t know. We can’t hold that against ourselves.
Although I should tell myself the same thing because, of course, I feel the same way in, you know, so many different instances. But what’s really important is that, again, that sense of when we know better, we do better.
And I think that defensiveness on the flip side kind of comes out when people don’t want to hear or aren’t open to maybe hearing some different opinions. And the result is a feeling of like, well, I’m a good person, so what I did couldn’t have been wrong. But acknowledging that even if, you know, you didn’t make exactly the right choices, that you’re still a good person. It doesn’t mean that, you know, just because this experience happened in your past or we know that shifting social norms has a profound effect on folks.
I think I always encourage people to lead with curiosity rather than judgment. So, I know in my own life when I’ve been confronted with challenges, what I try to do, especially the scientist in me, is understand, oh, like you’re saying that this belief I held is wrong or that something’s not true or that something’s different than the way I expected it. Like let’s, you know, try to talk about it. Or if I’m feeling uncomfortable in the moment, I may just say, okay, but then I’ll take it home and sort of do my own background work to try and understand the issue a little bit better in all the different angles. But I would also say with that, so don’t judge yourself on things you couldn’t have known and always lead with curiosity over judgment.
Chantelle: That’s great advice.
Amy: Yeah, I think guilt and judgment are so closely linked and certainly associated with the values that we hold. And as our values grow from what we learn, those things show up in different ways.
And I think it applies to so many areas of animal protection, whether it is what we eat, whether it is how we train and keep our pets, whether it is, you know, what activities we’re doing when it comes to tourism, whether we’re choosing to, I don’t know, ride a donkey or a camel just for the fun of it. You know, there’s such a range of things to reflect on in our decision-making around animals.
And certainly, there’s a lot of self-forgiveness that has to happen when you think about what you have done, what your past experiences have been, and then also kindness and empathy for others that are going through that process. And I still don’t always know how to handle situations, and they do come up.
I was wearing a shirt with a raccoon on it, and a woman came up to me and she said, oh, you like raccoons? I have a raccoon in my car right now. I’m going to bring the raccoon to the climbing area with me. And so, she has a pet raccoon. She explained that the raccoon had been domesticated. They’ve been trying to domesticate these raccoons over 30 years. And so, it was one of those situations where I was like, oh, I really wish I wasn’t wearing a raccoon shirt right now because I wish I didn’t know that this woman has a raccoon in her car. And I just, I remember being in that conversation and trying to find that line of not normalizing her behavior, of showing curiosity, but also really not knowing what to say.
And I think it’s okay to have those moments and they’re going to happen. And it’s also about like taking those moments and then reflecting on them later where maybe you didn’t know what to say when your friend said that they took picturesor, you know, with like a drugged tiger or when a person talks about visiting a sanctuary, but it doesn’t sound really like a sanctuary and it sounds more like wild animals are being kept for entertainment. You know, these things happen all the time. And it’s just about thinking about how you would want someone to talk with you about it and how you can approach something with curiosity and kindness while still holding to your values.
And so as much as possible, I think reflecting on these things in advance and sort of having these almost like having conversations in your head sometimes and practicing the skills of being able to both be curious but also share about your experiences, your boundaries, what you’ve learned in a kind way is really important because that’s where social change happens in the situations where people do not feel defensive when they’re met with curiosity and then they can also meet your perspective with curiosity. And it is really hard to do that. And certainly, in a way, I think as animal protectors, as people who care for individual lives of animals, that’s our biggest job is to get into a practice of having those conversations in a connecting way.
Erin: It’s a good point. Social change, we think about happening in, you know, government buildings and parliament, but social change also happens in living rooms, at coffee shops and bars and all those tough conversations.
Better ways for families to experience wildlife
Chantelle: For listeners who are thinking about these things and they want their children or their grandchildren or they want to talk to friends about the activities their friends do and making sure that they still have access and connection to animals and nature, what are some more compassionate and animal-friendly alternatives you’d recommend?
Erin: I think at the local scale, one thing that we’re losing, especially as we’re facing increased urbanization, is exploring the wonder of nature and animals in your own backyard. So many people don’t get to experience that the way that, you know, even I did growing up with a forested backyard.
So, finding ways that you can engage with local naturalist societies for different wildlife viewings that may be closer to home rather than in sort of faraway places. But then also looking for sort of those genuine rescue and sanctuary models. And unfortunately, the reality is many of those places, by nature of the work they do, may or may not allow visitors for the protection of the animals. But there are certainly models where, you know, they’re primarily doing wildlife-friendly viewing rather than direct interactions. I would say that anytime you’re directly handling or interacting with an animal, that’s generally a red flag.
Chantelle: Oh, that’s a great point to bring up, red flags that people can look for when they’re going into looking at these activities. Are there any other red flags that people can look for if someone is unsure whether an activity involving animals is ethical?
Erin: So, I think that direct interaction is one. There’s also the aspect of even if it’s not the person or the visitor handling, how do the people handling the animals interact with the animal? Are they being, you know, their authentic selves? Are they kind of being forced to perform, in an example Amy gave, are they forced to perform tricks or sort of performances? Like are they brought near a stage? Those are typically red flags.
If there’s any type of photo opportunities, I generally call that a red flag. Any opportunities to feed animals, it doesn’t always fall into direct interaction because you may not be hand-feeding animals, but encouraging, even throwing food can be a form of sort of coercion.
And I would also look for, does the animal have somewhere to hide? Because if there’s nowhere in their enclosure that they can get away from guests, I would also say that that’s a red flag that’s built for the guests and not for the animals. I think green flags are definitely those places that are observation only where animals are more or less behaving as they would and they have their own choice of whether they want to be seen and what they want to do when they’re out of their enclosures or roaming about.
Chantelle: Those are really helpful tips. Thank you, Erin.
Amy: So, what are some things people with children in their lives can do to help normalize a kinder, more animal-friendly summer break?
Erin: I would encourage folks to check out local options. So, engaging, again, local societies, local naturalists, local wildlife viewing, and finding options there. But then also looking for those types of experiences where either it’s observation only or maybe it’s a purely educational experience. I know I always wanted to be a kid who went to summer camps and I was not, but looking for that type of option would be really good.
Amy: Yeah, absolutely. This has been a really helpful and interesting discussion. I’m really glad that you were here for it and I hope that everyone listening at home found it helpful as well.
Chantelle: Erin, you’ve highlighted some great actions people can take at home to look for red flags and to look for kinder alternatives. Another quick thing you can do is if there’s an animal attraction near you that you’re concerned about or that people don’t realize is harmful to animals, just share this podcast episode and other information about animals used in entertainment with your local community or parenting groups.
Thank you again so much for having this conversation today, Erin and Amy, and thank you to everyone at home who’s listening. We hope to see you again next month as we talk about more ways that you can be an ally to animals.
Wild cats like servals, leopard cats, and ocelots belong in the wild, not in private homes. That’s why the VHS welcomed a new provincial ban on the breeding, sale, public display, and future ownership of exotic cats in B.C.
During the province’s consultation period, the VHS submitted recommendations supporting the ban and encouraged compassionate British Columbians to share their concerns about the exotic pet trade.
Thanks to widespread public support, no more exotic cats will be brought into captivity as pets in B.C. While animals already in B.C. can be kept with a permit as long as welfare and safety standards are met, the province is taking an important step toward preventing future suffering.
Exotic cats are wild animals with complex physical and behavioural needs that cannot be met in a household environment. Many experience stress, poor welfare, and serious health concerns when kept as pets. They can also pose risks to people, other animals, and local ecosystems if they escape. The VHS continues to encourage the government to strengthen protections for other exotic pets facing similar welfare concerns.
Thank you for speaking up for exotic cats and supporting advocacy that helped make this important win possible. Together, compassionate people across B.C. are helping create a safer, kinder future for wild animals.
This piece written by Melanie Denomme, a Biological Sciences PhD student at Brock University, originally appeared in The Conversation. Every day, millions of people watch their pet reptiles run, dig, swim or climb up against the walls of their enclosure. …
New research finds repetitive behaviours in reptiles
New research shared by a Biological Sciences PhD student at Brock University examines the behaviours of reptiles kept in captivity as pets. The research looks in particular at the repetitive behaviours of bearded dragons, such as scratching, pacing, or rubbing against the walls of their enclosure (often referred to by reptile hobbyists as “glass surfing”).
Though the opinion piece approaches the research from a perspective of reptile keeping, it raises questions about the inherent concerns with bringing and breeding undomesticated animals who have complex needs into captivity.
Repetitive or “stereotypic” behaviours in animals often signify stress, discomfort, frustration, or a desire to escape. These behaviours are common in undomesticated, wild animals kept in captivity, such as in zoos, at aquariums, or as exotic pets.
Note:The VHS uses the term “exotic pets” to refer to animals that are not domesticated, that are not native to the local habitat of British Columbia, and that are kept in private homes or similar environments. The term does not apply to domesticated animals such as dogs, cats, or domestic rabbits.
Like mammals, reptiles show signs of frustration at not being able to escape confinement
In an opinion article published on the Brock University website, researcher Melanie Denommé states, “Mammalian carnivores, such as mink, polar bears and lions, sometimes perform repetitive pacing in captivity. And while there may be multiple reasons for the behaviour, researchers have found that thwarted escape is a common motivation.”
The researchers’ results supported that the same was true for reptiles: “Lizards climbed up, dug at or walked against the only ‘door’ in their enclosure more than any other barriers.”
Why do reptiles want to escape?
“Enclosures that are too hot, small or boring may be a common cause of wanderlust,” the Denommé states. The researcher suggests that increasing the space and enrichment available to reptiles can help reduce repetitive behaviours, but notes that this does not always succeed.
This reflects the reality that it is extremely difficult or impossible to meet the complex needs of many reptiles and other exotic animals in a captive home environment.
Should anyone keep reptiles?
Most captive reptiles are exotic species not native to B.C., with the potential to impact local ecosystems and wildlife if released.
Reptiles already kept in private homes, rescues, zoos, and aquaria across B.C. need experienced, thoughtful care in the environment best suited to their specialized needs.
If a keeper understands the complex needs of these animals and feels prepared to meet them, taking in rescued or surrendered reptiles is valuable and much-needed.
At the same time, it is important to move away from breeding and bringing new reptiles into captivity who are not well-suited to captive environments.
Why move away from keeping reptiles as pets?
Many reptiles and other exotic pets spend their lives bored, frustrated, and suffering when their needs are not met.
Interested buyers may not be given adequate information which can lead to reptiles suffering, dying, or being released into an unsuitable native ecosystem. Reputable rescues for exotic animals are often at or over capacity and many organizations are struggling to meet the demand created by the exotic pet industry.
You can read the opinion piece or full research paper at the link below. Please share this post to help others learn more about the complex needs of reptiles.
The VHS is grateful to the Animal Welfare Foundation of Canada for their generous grant funding of our work to raise awareness about the suffering of wild, exotic animals kept in captivity as pets and used in mobile live animal programs.
Parrots are one of the most popular pets in Canada, but animal rescues say there aren’t enough resources to support the birds that can often outlive their owners.
Experts are warning of a growing crisis around the care of aging parrots in Canada, a recent CTV News story warns.
Parrots are exotic, undomesticated animals with complex needs who can live up to 80 years or longer. This means they often outlive their original guardians, or the circumstances that enabled a family to care for them.
A rescue in Ontario is pointing to a large demand for rescue services for birds who were bred and sold in the 70’s and 80’s. Still, parrots continue to be bred and imported for the pet trade, exacerbating the long-term strain on a system that is already struggling to keep up.
The VHS and animal allies are calling on the B.C. government to update the Controlled Alien Species regulation to prioritize animal welfare when determining which species can be kept, bred, and traded, and supporting a ban on the import of exotic species whose complex needs cannot be fully met in human care.
Scientists hope understanding coyote widowhood will someday help humans in their own grief.
New research around coyote bonds and behaviours shows that coyotes experience grief over the loss of a partner.
A 2012 study previously found that coyotes select one mate for life, offering more evidence of complex social relationships between these animals.
A new study from Rachel Tong and Sara Freeman finds even more evidence of complex emotions tied to these social bonds: coyotes who experience the loss of a partner show the same stress signals in their brains that we see in human grief.
Though it may seem clear to many through common sense and observation that animals experience strong bonds, scientific research like this helps to grow public awareness of animal sentience, which can in turn support stronger protections for animals.
According to the National Geographic article on the study, “Freeman hopes her work can help build compassion for coyotes, which are often regarded as pests and targeted in wildlife killing contests and by frustrated landowners.”
After more than four decades in captivity, a loggerhead sea turtle named Jorge is finally swimming free—an outcome that once seemed almost impossible. His story, shared earlier this year in the National Geographic, highlights both the power of public advocacy and the deep, lasting harms that captive display can cause to wild animals.
Here’s how Jorge the sea turtle prepared for the improbable journey-decades after he was found tangled in a fishing net off the coast of Argentina.
A remarkable return after 41 years in captivity
Jorge was rescued as a young turtle in 1984 after becoming tangled in fishing nets off the coast of Argentina. Instead of being rehabilitated and returned to the ocean—a practice that was uncommon at the time—he was sent hundreds of miles inland to an aquarium in Mendoza. There, he spent more than half his life in a shallow tank, far from the ocean, fed an unnatural diet, and deprived of the complex conditions sea turtles need to thrive.
For decades, Jorge became a local celebrity. But as awareness grew about the impacts of captivity on wild animals, public concern grew as well. Eventually, more than 60,000 people signed a petition calling for Jorge’s release, and environmental lawyers filed a lawsuit to push for his return to the sea.
That advocacy worked.
In 2021, a coalition of researchers, veterinarians, and conservation institutions began a careful three-year rehabilitation process to determine whether Jorge could survive in the wild. Through gradual reintroduction to saltwater, live prey, ocean-like temperatures, and currents, Jorge relearned skills he had almost lost. In April 2025, at roughly 60 years old, he was released into the Atlantic Ocean.
It was his first time swimming freely in open water in four decades.
Satellite tracking showed Jorge travelling north toward the warm waters of Brazil, the region he knew as a young turtle. Against the odds, he is navigating currents, hunting, resting, and behaving like a wild sea turtle once again.
Jorge’s story shows advocacy can change animals’ lives
Jorge’s freedom did not happen by accident. It happened because tens of thousands of people spoke up, signed petitions, applied legal pressure, and refused to accept that lifelong captivity was the only option for a healthy wild animal.
This is a powerful reminder that advocacy matters. Public voices can influence policy decisions, challenge outdated practices, and create opportunities for animals who have long been denied their natural lives. Without sustained public pressure, Jorge would likely still be swimming in circles in a shallow tank instead of enjoying his freedom in his home waters.
Captive display prevents wild animals from thriving
As hopeful as Jorge’s story is, it also underscores a sobering reality: captivity prevented him from living as a sea turtle for most of his life.
During his decades in confinement, Jorge lost essential survival instincts. He did not know how to hunt, navigate open waters, or respond to other animals in his environment. His rehabilitation required years of intensive, expert intervention—resources that are rarely available for most captive animals.
Captive wildlife are unable to engage in many natural behaviours that are crucial to their physical, social and psychological well-being. Even well-intentioned facilities struggle to replicate the vast space, social complexity, sensory stimulation, and choice that animals experience in the wild.
As Jorge’s case shows, captivity can strip animals of the skills they need to survive, leaving them dependent on human care.
Most captive animals will never return to the wild
Jorge is an exception, not the rule.
Many animals who are kept in captivity for long periods are not releasable. Animals accustomed to human interaction, proximity, and feeding often lose their fear of people, struggle to forage independently, or lack the social and survival skills needed in the wild. This is especially true for animals bred in captivity, who may never have learned natural behaviours at all.
Once wild instincts are lost, release can be dangerous or fatal for animals. This is why prevention matters so deeply.
The most effective way to ensure wild animals remain wild is to stop keeping and breeding wild, exotic animals in captivity in the first place. Rather than continuing systems that breed or import animals who cannot be released, we must shift toward models that prioritize animal well-being.
That means transitioning zoos and aquariums away from permanent display of wild animals and toward sanctuary-based models that focus on rescue, rehabilitation, and release of injured or displaced native wildlife. Sanctuaries exist to serve animals—not to use them as attractions—and they recognize that freedom, not entertainment, is the ultimate goal.
Jorge’s journey is inspiring, but it should not distract us from the larger truth it reveals. No animal should have to spend 40+ years in captivity before we finally ask if a small enclosure is the best place for them to thrive.
His story shows us what can happen when advocacy succeeds, and why we must work to ensure fewer animals need such extraordinary intervention again.
Wild animals belong in the wild, and protecting them starts with the choices we make today.
The Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM), which represents local governments across B.C., recently voted to endorse resolution NR75 – Mobile live animal programs
This resolution calls on the provincial government to regulate mobile live animal programs and to strengthen exotic animal rules.
Mobile live animal programs, such as travelling petting zoos, presentations and displays, or exotic animal events where animals can be purchased, are connected to animal welfare concerns and public health and safety risks.
2,450 messages were sent to UBCM delegates in support of resolution NR75. Thank you to everyone that advocated for stronger protections for animals!
What happens next?
This vote signals that this issue is important to municipalities across B.C. and that provincial leadership is needed to ensure the health, safety, and wellbeing of animals, people, and the environment.
Resolutions endorsed by the UBCM must be acknowledged and responded to by the provincial government.
Help us take the next step by telling the provincial government that this issue is important to you and requires provincial leadership!
TAKE ACTION: Add your name to the VHS’s campaign asking the provincial government to take meaningful action on this issue by implementing the UBCM’s recommendations.
Exotic animals are wild animals from other countries often imported to Canada through the exotic pet trade. These animals are not domesticated, even if bred in captivity, and their welfare can suffer when sold, bred, transported, or displayed. The exotic pet trade also poses risks to the environment and public health and safety.
Animal welfare issues
Mobile live animal programs (MLAPs) can take many forms, including travelling petting zoos, presentations, and expos where animals can be purchased. They involve the transport of animals to a location for display, public entertainment, or sale to the public, and feature a variety of different animals.
MLAPs often include exotic animals—wild animals from other countries imported to Canada—such as spiders, snakes, lizards, and tortoises.
Animals involved in MLAPs face many animal welfare risks, including:
Travel to and from events
The public handling of animals
Unregulated housing and breeding practices outside of events where they may face restricted movement due to lack of space
Limited behavioural opportunities
Abnormal social groupings, such as highly social animals being housed alone
Exposure to unnatural environmental conditions (lighting, temperature, substrate, sounds, odours)
The accidental or intentional release of exotic pets (e.g. when pets are no longer wanted but a new home cannot be found for them) can introduce invasive species to our ecosystems. Some invasive species who have impacted our local ecosystems include the red-eared slider turtle, goldfish, and American bullfrog.
Invasive species can threaten native wildlife, compromise habitats, and spread new diseases.
Public health & safety concerns
While the risk of disease transmission is always present when interacting with exotic animals, MLAPs increase risk due to:
The number of animals and variety of species
High amount of close human contact
Difficulties in following hygiene protocols (if present)
These risks are particularly prevalent at events marketed to children.
The transportation and frequent handling of animals at these events presents a significant risk factor for stress, and stressed animals may also be more likely to bite or scratch, compounding risks of disease transmission and physical harm.
Community impacts
Escaped or released animals and the surrender of unwanted exotic pets stress already overwhelmed shelters, rescues, and veterinary services, which may not have the resources and expertise to accommodate such a wide range of exotic species.
There have been many documented instances of escaped or released exotic pets in B.C. in recent years.
Outdated regulations leave exotic animals at risk
Currently, there are no provincial regulations in place that are specific to MLAPs and there is a lack of consistent and enforceable standards for keeping, breeding, displaying, and selling exotic pets.
B.C.’s Controlled Alien Species Regulation (CASR), introduced in 2009, has banned ownership of more than 1,000 dangerous species like tigers and venomous snakes that pose a threat to people, property, and wildlife.
However, the CASR does not address animal welfare or disease risks, making many exotic species that suffer in captivity or can spread zoonotic diseases still legal to own and trade.
Regulate mobile live animal programs to address animal welfare concerns and public health and safety risks;
Update the Controlled Alien Species Regulation to equally prioritize animal welfare considerations alongside public safety and prohibit the import of all exotic species.
TAKE ACTION: Add your name to the call to action to show your support for this resolution!
Social media can be part of the solution, not the problem.