Categories
News/Blog

New Westminster can make plant-based food part of its climate plan

  • New Westminster is asking residents and businesses to comment on its draft Climate Change Adaptation and Resilience Plan by May 31. 
  • The draft plan looks at adaption strategies to build resilience into the city’s infrastructure against major climate impacts. Food should be part of that conversation.  
  • By adding plant-based food strategies into their draft plan, New Westminster can take a practical step toward strengthening food resilience by increasing access and affordability and reducing pressure on high-impact food systems.

TAKE ACTION: If you live or operate a business in New Westminster, please take a few minutes to comment on the City’s Draft Plan, encouraging them to consider plant-based foods as part of their strategy.

View the draft plan
Review key sections for comment
Make a quick comment

Share this post!

New West can build climate resilience through plant-based food.

When people think about preparing a city for climate change, they often picture cooling centres, shaded streets, stronger buildings, flood planning, and emergency response. But resilience is also about everyday needs, including whether people can access affordable, nutritious food when climate impacts disrupt daily life.

New Westminster can help build climate-ready neighbourhoods by supporting increased access to affordable plant-based meals, shelf-stable plant-based proteins, locally sourced produce, and culturally appropriate food options.

Below are key sections of the draft plan where New West residents and businesses can ask the City to include plant-based food.

Comment on the plan
Read key sections for comment

Only have a few minutes? Here is a quick comment:

If you do not have time to comment on each section, you can adapt the comment below and email mayorandcouncillors@newwestcity.ca:

Please include plant-based food in New Westminster’s climate adaptation and resilience planning.

Plant-based foods can be part of a stronger and more resilient food system. Foods such as legumes, grains, seeds, nuts, fruits, vegetables, and plant-based proteins can be affordable, nutritious, lower-impact, and easier to store than many animal-based products.

Climate impacts can disrupt food access and increase costs, so the City should support affordable, nutritious, lower-impact options through public facilities, City-run programs, community events, emergency planning, food security initiatives, and partnerships with local businesses and community organizations.

Signed, [Your Name]”

Share your feedback before May 31.

Email the mayor now

Plant-based food policy is a practical climate solution.

Animal products use a large share of the world’s farmland and contribute more than half of food-related emissions, while providing a much smaller share of global calories and protein.

C40’s Good Food Cities work found that cities shifting public food procurement saw a 31% drop in high-emission foods, a 44% increase in plant-based foods, and a 16% drop in food-related greenhouse gas emissions from public food purchasing.

And a Vancouver Humane Society cost-benefit analysis found that replacing 20% of the City of Vancouver’s animal-based food purchasing with plant-based alternatives could save up to $99,000 and reduce emissions by more than 500 tonnes.

Plant-Based Cities Movement notes that 82% of Canadians live in cities and that most food is consumed there. That gives municipal governments a real opportunity to reduce food-related emissions through local policy. 

For New Westminster, including plant-based food in their strategies offers a practical way to strengthen climate resilience while also reducing emissions, saving public funds, and helping prevent animal suffering through everyday policy choices.

Take quick action: Share this graphic

Help more New West residents learn about this opportunity.

Share this graphic on your social media before the May 31 deadline and encourage others to comment on the draft plan.

Key sections for comment:

To comment, create an account on New West’s online platform ‘Be Heard’, review the draft plan, and add your feedback directly to the sections you care about. You can leave as many comments as you’d like throughout the draft plan.

To make your submission impactful, and to ensure that it is included, do not copy and paste the text below. Use your own words so your submission reflects your personal concerns and experience.

Comment on the plan
Send a quick comment

Action 2.2.3: Public facilities can lead by example

Public facilities are more than just buildings. They are places where people gather, learn, celebrate, receive services, exercise, and build community.

As New Westminster updates public facility policies, the City could include food service and procurement in that work. This could mean making plant-based options available at City-hosted events, meetings, recreation centres, community programs, seniors’ programs, and other public spaces.

A climate-resilient public facility should not only be energy-efficient. It should also support access to affordable, nutritious, lower-impact plant-based food options in the places residents already use.

Theme 3: Neighbourhood resilience includes food access

When a heat wave, flood, storm, or supply chain disruption occurs, food access becomes a public resilience issue.

That is why plant-based food should be considered in emergency planning, food security work, community kitchens, public programs, and local food partnerships.

New Westminster can help build climate-ready neighbourhoods by working with community partners to improve access to affordable plant-based meals, shelf-stable plant-based proteins, local produce, and culturally appropriate food options.

Theme 6: Everyday City decisions can build food resilience

The draft Climate Plan says climate risk and resilience should be integrated into day-to-day decision-making and City operations.

New Westminster could make plant-based options a normal part of City operations by:

  • Requiring plant-based options at City-hosted events and meetings
  • Adding plant-based considerations to procurement guidelines
  • Providing staff guidance for plant-forward catering
  • Supporting public education about climate-resilient food choices
  • Ensuring City-supported food programs include affordable plant-based options

City decisions about catering, events, grants, facility rentals, community programs, concessions, procurement, and public education all shape what food options are available.

Action 6.1.8: Funding local food resilience solutions

Small grants, pilot projects, public education, and partnerships could help residents access affordable, nutritious, lower-impact plant-based foods while supporting broader climate resilience goals.

For example, the City could support plant-based cooking workshops, community kitchen programs, food security partnerships, local growers, community gardens, food forests, or pilot projects in recreation centres and community centres.

These kinds of initiatives can reduce barriers and help residents see that resilient plant-based food can be familiar, affordable, culturally relevant, and enjoyable.

New West residents: Take action by May 31!

Food is key part of climate resilience. New Westminster has an opportunity to make affordable, climate-resilient, animal-friendly options more available in the places people already gather.

If you live or operate a business in New Westminster, please take a few minutes to ask the City to include plant-based food access in the plan.

Comment on the plan
Make a quick comment

Categories
News/Blog

Have your say: Canada’s Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle

  • The National Farm Animal Care Council’s (NFACC) Beef Code of Practice outlines guidelines for the on-farm care and handling of cattle raised for beef in Canada.
  • The code is being updated for the first time since 2013 and a public comment period is open until June 12, 2026.
  • While there are a few improvements, the new draft code fails to address some of the most significant welfare issues within the beef cattle industry.
  • Join the VHS in calling for stronger requirements for shelter, daily monitoring, pain control, humane handling, transport decisions, and emergency planning.

TAKE ACTION: Share feedback on the draft code on the issues that are important to you; everyone can participate! 

Top welfare priorities
Tips for submitting
Submit your feedback 

Share this post!

Top Welfare Priorities

We encourage you to read through the draft Beef Cattle Code of Practice and provide feedback on the issues that matter most to you, if possible.

However, we have prepared the VHS’s top welfare priorities with section headers and tips for submitting your feedback, if you are short on time and would like guidance.

Short on time? Under the heading ‘Which section of the draft Code would you now like to provide feedback on?’, select ‘General Comments on the Code’. This will allow you to bypass providing feedback on each section of the code.

IMPORTANT: Do not copy and paste wording, as duplicate responses and/or profanity or derogatory language will not be considered by NFACC. 

Section 1: Animal Environment

Section 1.2: Facilities for all cattle

Comment on Requirements:

Currently, there is no minimum shelter requirement to protect cattle from heat, cold, wind, rain, or other harsh weather.

  • The Code should set clear minimum shelter space requirements based on herd size, as well as maximum stocking densities (e.g. number of animals/acre) for cattle on pasture, feedlots, and auction markets.

The Code should require enrichment opportunities that allow cattle to express natural behaviours, including foraging, exercise, social behaviour, and grooming.

The Code should also prohibit tethering cattle as a form of housing. Tethering (tying an animal to an anchor point) should only be used temporarily when necessary for handling or procedures, and it should never be used as a regular housing practice.

Section 2: Feed and Water

Section 2.2: Water

Comment on Requirements

Cattle should have reliable access to clean water, including during heat waves and/or periods of high humidity, and water sources should be monitored regularly.

Snow should not be permitted as the sole winter water source. Snow may not reliably meet cattle’s needs, especially if conditions change or cattle are not checked frequently. A backup water system should always be required.

Comment on Recommended Practices

The following should be requirements:

  • Water sources must be easy for cattle to find and access.
  • The number of watering points and flow rate must be appropriate for the herd size.
  • Automated water systems must be checked daily to ensure they are working properly.

Section 3: Animal Health

Section 3.3.1: Disorders of the Respiratory Tract

Comment on Requirements

Recently weaned calves and newly arrived feedlot cattle should be monitored at least twice daily for two weeks to support early detection of respiratory disease.

A risk-based bovine respiratory disease prevention strategy should be a requirement as part of every herd health program, given that it is a significant health and welfare problem in the beef industry.

Section 3.3.2: Lameness

Comment on Recommended Practices

Lameness is a painful leg or hoof condition that is a common welfare issue within the beef industry. The Code should require training on causes, prevention, and treatment of lameness.

It should also require producers minimize cattle exposure to mud and standing water, and to include lameness prevention strategies in herd health programs.

Section 3.4: Safety and Emergencies

Comment on Requirements

The Code should require stronger emergency planning for fires, floods, and extreme weather.

Newly built facilities should have fire suppression and flood mitigation systems. Existing facilities should be retrofitted where possible.

Section 4: Animal Husbandry

Section 4.1: Handling and Moving Cattle

Comment on Requirements

Electric prods are used during handling and provide an electric shock to the animal. These devices cause pain, stress, and can lead to injury.

Given that electric prods can also easily be overused and that humane alternatives exist and are effective, the Code should prohibit electric prod use and require low-stress handling methods.

Section 4.3: Identification

Comment on Requirements

Branding, which is used to permanently identify cattle, should be prohibited.

Branding is painful and unnecessary, especially when alternatives such as microchipping, visual identifiers, descriptive markings, coat patterns, colour variations, and properly fitted leg bands are available.

Section 4.4: Disbudding and Dehorning

Comment on Requirements

The Code should require practices that eliminate painful horn removal (disbudding and dehorning) procedures, such as transitioning to hornless breeds of cattle.

Section 4.5: Castration

Comment on Requirements

Cattle should be castrated as young as practically possible and provided both anesthetics and pain control, in consultation with a veterinarian.

Comment on Recommended Practices

Calves must be monitored after castration to ensure they are nursing or eating and to check for signs of infection or other complications.

Section 4.5.1: Spaying

Comment on Requirements

Spaying should only be carried out by a veterinarian, and both anesthetics and pain control should be required.

Section 4.6: Weaning

Comment on Recommended Practices

Abrupt weaning of calves from their mothers should be prohibited. Low-stress, gradual weaning strategies should be required.

This includes two-stage or fence-line weaning, avoiding weaning during other major stressors such as adverse weather, commingling with animals from other groups, marketing, or transport, and avoiding painful procedures like branding, dehorning, and castration at the time of weaning.

Calves should also be acclimated to human handling and feed delivery methods they will experience after weaning.

Section 4.8: Tail Docking

Comment on Requirements

Tail docking should only be permitted when medically necessary, in consultation with a veterinarian, and with both anesthesia and pain control.

Section 5: Preparations for Transport

Section 5.1: Evaluating and Preparing Cattle for Transport 

Comment on Recommended Practices

Transport is a stressful process that can pose a significant risk to the health and welfare of cattle. Therefore, the Code should require stronger protections during transport decision-making, planning, scheduling, and loading/receiving.

  • Farm personnel should be trained and have ready access to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s (CFIA) guidance and veterinarian-developed protocols for assessing an animal’s fitness for transport.
  • Monitoring should increase as the transport date approaches, so health or body condition concerns can be identified early.
  • If there is uncertainty about whether an animal is fit for transport, consulting a veterinarian should be required.
Section 5.2: Planning and Scheduling Transport

Comment on Recommended Practices

Transport should be planned to minimize the time animals spend loaded in parked vehicles and to account for forecasted weather conditions. Transport must not take place during extreme weather.

Section 5.3: Loading and Receiving Cattle

Comment on Recommended Practices

The Code should require loading practices that reduce stress and injury, including adjusting loading densities, absorbent material for the weather conditions and providing ramps when the vertical distance between the loading surface and vehicle floor causes cattle to hesitate, stop moving forward, or refuse to move.

Section 6: On-Farm Euthanasia

Section 6.1: Euthanasia Decisions

Comment on Requirements:

Delayed or inappropriate decisions around humane euthanasia can lead to prolonged animal suffering.

The Code should require training to help personnel assess quality of life, prognosis, and when euthanasia is needed. A required training module should be developed to support timely, humane decision-making.

General Comments

The Code should include a clear duty of care section, similar to other Codes of Practice, which require that all personnel responsible for cattle must be required to know the Code, be properly trained, and be competent and confident in cattle care and handling.

The Code should also require cattle to be checked daily at a minimum. Daily observation is essential to identify illness, injury, lack of access to food or water, extreme weather impacts, calving difficulties, and other welfare concerns.

There should also be stronger requirements for consistent, practical tools for measuring welfare outcomes across the beef cattle industry.

Submit your feedback now!

Tips for submitting

To make your submission impactful, and to ensure that it is reviewed by NFACC, consider these tips before submitting your feedback:  

  • REMINDER: Do not copy and paste the text below, as duplicate submissions will be ignored by NFACC. Use your own words so your submission reflects your personal concerns and experience.
  • Keep responses relevant to on-farm practices.
  • Provide references and examples whenever possible. 
  • Reference exact wording in the draft code that you would like to see changed and how you would like it changed.
  • Make it personal, the committee members are interested in how this code impacts you.
Thank you so much for taking the time to speak up for beef cattle in Canada.
Submit your feedback now!
References

TBD

Stay Informed. Help Animals.

Learn about farmed animal welfare in Canada and what you can do to help! Sign up now to get clear explanations, action alerts, and practical steps you can take when it matters most.  Click here to learn more.

Categories
News/Blog

Have your say: Canada’s Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Equines

Update

The public feedback period for the Equine Code of Practice is now closed. Thank you to everyone who spoke up for animals. Please go to this page for current campaigns.

  • In 2024, we asked for your help in completing a national survey that gathered top equine welfare concerns. Your voice was heard, and responses from this survey were used to create a draft Equine Code of Practice.  
  • The public comment period for the National Farm Animal Care Council’s (NFACC) Equine Code of Practice is now open until March 12, 2026  
  • The Equine Code of Practice provides a guideline for the on-farm care and handling of horses and donkeys raised in Canada.  
  • While this draft provides many much-needed updates to the Equine Code of Practice, there are still changes to be made to improve equine welfare. 
  • Note that the code does not include transport, such as the live export of horses for slaughter; it only includes on-farm practices and deciding if individual horses are fit for transport. 

TAKE ACTION: Join us in providing feedback on the draft code on the issues that are important to you; everyone can participate! 

Top welfare priorities
Tips for submitting
Submit your feedback 

Share this post!

Top Welfare Priorities

We encourage you to read through the draft Equine Code of Practice and provide feedback on the issues that matter most to you if possible.

However, we have prepared the VHS’s top welfare priorities with section headers and tips for submitting your feedback if you are short on time and would like guidance. REMINDER: do not copy and paste the text below, as duplicate submissions will be ignored by NFACC.

Section 2: Facilities and Housing

Section 2.3.1 – Indoor space allowance

Comment on Requirements:

Tie-stalls should be banned, which keep animals tethered in one place and prevent them from moving freely, socializing, or behaving naturally, often leading to physical and mental health problems. (Popescu et al., 2019; Yngvesson et al., 2019).

Section 6: Loose Horse Management

Section 6.5.1 – Stocking density

Comment on Requirements

Currently, there are no requirements about how much space horses need or shelter access in feedlots or other similar environments. Clear minimum standards should be set, based on research, to give horses enough room, reduce stress, fighting, and injuries, and protect them from harsh weather.

Section 7: Husbandry

Section 7.1 – Turnout, social opportunities, and enrichment 

Comment on Requirements

Currently, there are no minimum requirements for turnout (giving equines free access to pasture or paddock), social opportunities, and enrichment in the draft code.

Turnout and enrichment allow horses to express natural behaviours and provide mental stimulation, including grazing, freedom of movement and social interaction.

Minimum requirements should include: 

Turnout: Horses should be allowed outside for at least 12 hours each day (Bell et al., 2001). They need enough space to move freely at their own pace and to get away from other horses if there is aggression.

Enrichment: Horses should have regular contact with other compatible horses, a variety of toys and feeding options, and opportunities to do natural things like rolling in pasture or using scent and scratching stations.

Section 7.2 – General behaviour and handling of horses

Comment on Recommended Best Practices

Horses are easily frightened and may react by bolting or becoming aggressive. To keep both people and horses safe, it should be a requirement to avoid loud noises, sudden movements, or other actions that could scare them.

Section 7.3 – Methods of identification

Comment on Requirements

Hot and freeze branding are painful and stressful for horses and can have lasting effects on their behaviour. Since there are safer ways to identify horses, like microchipping, branding should no longer be allowed. Instead, clear visual identification methods, such as coat markings, hair patterns, colour differences, scars, or properly fitted leg bands, should be used.

Section 8: Exercise & Training

Section 8.2 – Guidelines for training horses

Comment on Recommended Best Practices

It should be required to use the First Training Principles when training and handling horses (refer to Appendix L – Handling Horses and How Horses Learn).

Equestrians often use training methods that compromise equine welfare to achieve competition-related goals. Training horses should never harm their well-being and should match what they are physically and mentally able to do.

Using proven, humane training methods helps keep both horses and trainers safe and reduces problem behaviours.

Section 9: Reproductive Management

Section 9.5.4 – Weaning

Comment on Recommended Best Practices

It should be a requirement that foals are not weaned before 6 months of age, and when possible, weaning should wait until after 9 months. Gradual weaning helps reduce stress and supports healthy growth and development in young horses (Henry et al., 2020).

Section 10: Transport

Section 10.1 – Fitness for transport

Comment on Requirements

People who assess an animal’s suitability for transport should receive proper training, and their assessments should be recorded and documented so there are clear, reliable records.

Section 10.4 – Loading and unloading

Comment on Recommended Best Practices

Recommendations (a.), (b.), (c.), (d.), (e.) should be requirements given the high stress of loading and unloading for equines.

Section 10.4.2 – Post-transport management

Comment on Recommended Best Practices:

Horses may hide signs of pain when people are watching (Torcivia & McDonnell, 2020), so recently transported horses should be closely monitored for dehydration, injuries, colic, fever, or breathing problems, especially after long trips or when horses from different places have been mixed.

Comment on Recommended Best Practices:

There should be a recommended practice of video monitoring recently transported horses.

Section 11: Change or End of Career

Section 11.1 – Change or end of career

Comment on Requirements:

Every equine industry should have a transition plan for what happens to horses at the end of their working careers, and having this plan should be required for operation.

Section 12: Euthanasia

Section 12.2 – Methods of euthanasia

Comment on Requirements:

Euthanasia must be carried out in a way that causes no pain or fear, and horses must be made unconscious immediately.

Submit your feedback now!

Tips for submitting

To make your submission impactful, and to ensure that it is reviewed by NFACC, consider these tips before submitting your feedback:  

  • IMPORTANT: Do not copy and paste wording, as duplicate responses and/or profanity or derogatory language will not be considered by NFACC. 
  • Keep responses relevant to the draft code. Issues involving transportation, such as live horse export, will not be considered by NFACC.  
  • Provide references and examples whenever possible. 
  • Reference exact wording in the draft code that you would like to see changed and how you would like it changed  
  • Make it personal, the committee members are interested in how this code impacts you  
  • Consider looking through the submission form for formatting style before you begin drafting your feedback 
Thank you so much for taking the time to speak up for equids in Canada.
Submit your feedback now!
References

Bell R.A., Nielsen B.D., Waite K., Rosenstein D. & Orth M. (2001) Daily access to pasture turnout prevents loss of mineral in the third metacarpus of Arabian weanlings. Journal of Animal Science 79:142-1150.  

Henry, S., Sigurjónsdóttir, H., Klapper, A., Joubert, J., Montier, G., & Hausberger, M. (2020). Domestic foal weaning: Need for re-thinking breeding practices? Animals 10(2): 361. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10020361  

Popescu, S., Lazar, E. A., Borda, C., Niculae, M., Sandru, C. D., & Spinu, M. (2019). Welfare quality of breeding horses under different housing conditions. Animals 9(3): 81. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9030081  

Torcivia, C., & McDonnell, S. (2020). In-Person Caretaker Visits Disrupt Ongoing Discomfort Behavior in Hospitalized Equine Orthopedic Surgical Patients. Animals 10(2): 210. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10020210  

Yngvesson, J., Rey Torres, J. C., Lindholm, J., Pättiniemi, A., Andersson, P., & Sassner, H. (2019). Health and body conditions of riding school horses housed in groups or kept in conventional tie-Stall/Box housing. Animals 9(3): 73. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/ani9030073 

Stay Informed. Help Animals.

Learn about farmed animal welfare in Canada and what you can do to help! Sign up now to get clear explanations, action alerts, and practical steps you can take when it matters most.  Click here to learn more.

Categories
News/Blog

Protect ducks and geese from force-feeding for foie gras (Federal e-petition)

Update

This petition is now closed. Thank you to everyone who signed and spoke up for animals. Please go to this page for current campaigns.

  • The Vancouver Humane Society is joining the Canadian Coalition for Farmed Animals and advocates across Canada in calling for a ban on force-feeding ducks and geese for foie gras production.
  • Foie gras is produced by force-feeding ducks and geese until their livers swell up to ten times their normal size, causing a painful condition known as hepatic lipidosis (fatty liver syndrome).
  • Many other nations have banned the production and/or import of foie gras due to the severe animal welfare concerns, including the UK, Argentina, Australia, and India.

TAKE ACTION: Canadian residents can sign the official parliamentary e-petition until January 2, 2026. After you sign, be sure to click the link in the confirmation email so your signature is counted.

View updates

End foie gras production, import, and sale in Canada

Join the Vancouver Humane Society, the Canadian Coalition for Farmed Animals, MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, and advocates across Canada in calling to protect ducks and geese from inhumane force-feeding for foie gras.

The petition calls on Canada’s Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food to:

  • Ban the practice of force-feeding ducks and geese for the production of foie gras;
  • Ban the importation and sale of foie gras produced by such force-feeding;
  • Provide financial assistance and guidance to producers for transitioning to plant-based agriculture.

Sign the federal e-petition on the Parliament of Canada website before January 2, 2026, at 10:28 a.m. PT

Important: After you sign the petition, be sure to check your email and click the confirmation link to ensure your signature is counted.  

View updates (Petition closed)

Categories
News/Blog

Support the Protecting Victims Act: Criminalize the distribution of animal sexual abuse images

Success!

Bill C-16, the Protecting Victims Act, has passed in Canada! Thank you to everyone who supported this historic milestone. You can find more ways to speak up for animals on the VHS’s Current Campaigns page.

  • Last week, the Government of Canada introduced Bill C-16, the Protecting Victims Act.
  • This bill that moves to criminalize the distribution of animal sexual abuse images, while recognizing animals as victims and tools of coercive control.
  • These types images are not only acts of cruelty toward animals—they are also used to groom and exploit children and control victims.
  • This historic milestone was made possible through years of advocacy from Humane Canada (the federation of humane societies and SPCAs) and Member organizations.

TAKE ACTION: Use the quick message tool from Humane Canada to call on your MP to support the Protecting Victims Act.

Contact your MP

Take action

Violence against animals and violence against people are deeply connected, a reality that has left children, survivors, and animals without the protections they need. Bill C-16, the Protecting Victims Act, is a crucial step forward that recognizes the violence link and takes action where it is urgently needed.

The bill criminalizes the distribution of animal sexual abuse images, material that has been used to groom, manipulate, and exploit children. It also expands protections for people whose animals are harmed or threatened as a form of coercive control, a tactic widely used in intimate partner violence and criminal harassment.

These measures close long-standing gaps in Canadian law and strengthen safety for the entire family unit.

But Bill C-16 is not yet law. For these protections to take effect, Parliament must pass the legislation. Your voice can help ensure that happens.

Contact your MP
Categories
News/Blog

End fur farming in Canada (Federal e-petition)

Photo: We Animals

Update

This petition is now closed. Thank you to everyone who signed and spoke up for animals. Please go to this page for current campaigns.

  • The Vancouver Humane Society is joining The Fur-Bearers and advocates across Canada in calling for an end to fur farming for all species in Canada.
  • Wild animals confined on fur farms are kept in cramped and inhumane conditions to be killed for non-essential fur products.
  • The Province of British Columbia has banned fur farming of minks due to public health risks, but many animals continue to suffer across the country.

TAKE ACTION: Canadian residents can sign the official parliamentary e-petition until August 17, 2025. After you sign, be sure to click the link in the confirmation email so your signature is counted.

You can also use the quick action tool from The Fur-Bearers to send an email to federal decision-makers calling for change.

View updates
Email decision-makers (The Fur-Bearers action)

End inhumane fur farming in Canada

Join the Vancouver Humane Society, The Fur-Bearers, MP Gord Johns, and advocates across Canada in calling to protect wild animals farmed for their fur.

Sign the federal e-petition on the Parliament of Canada website before August 17, 2025, at 11:40 a.m. PT

Important: After you sign the petition, be sure to check your email and click the confirmation link to ensure your signature is counted.  

View updates (petition closed)

Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur / We Animals Media

Categories
News/Blog

Pig welfare survey highlights top concerns

Update

The feedback period for the Pig Code of Practice is now closed. Thank you to all who spoke up for pigs!

  • The National Farm Animal Care Council’s (NFACC) Pig Code of Practice, last updated in 2014, was up for review until June 4, 2025.
  • The code of practice serves as a guideline for the on-farm care and handling of pigs raised in Canada.  
  • There are many significant welfare issues associated with the current pig code of practice, including: extreme confinement; lack of opportunities to engage in natural behaviour; lameness and injury; unnecessary painful procedures; and inhumane forms of on-farm euthanasia. 
  • Hundreds of advocates spoke up for pigs, submitting their top welfare concerns with help from the VHS’s tip sheet.
  • Keep an eye out for the next public feedback stage around fall 2026 to winter 2027, when NFACC will release specific updates for comment.

Thank you! The 5-minute survey to speak up for millions of pigs is now closed. 

Read the top welfare concerns for pigs

Advocates filled out a short survey and shared their top 3 concerns for pig welfare. Scroll down to read a few of the top welfare issues the VHS recommended for consideration. 

Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals

Note: Click or tap to expand images. Though the images do not show graphic violence or injuries, they depict animal suffering and may be upsetting to some viewers. All photos were taken on Canadian pig farms between 2020 and 2022.

Top welfare priorities

Extreme confinement 

Recommendation: End extreme confinement, including use of gestation and farrowing crates. 

Background: Gestation and farrowing crates are used to isolate and confine individual pigs who are pregnant (gestation crates) and ready to give birth and nurse piglets (farrowing crates).

Both types of enclosures are so small and narrow that the mother pig can only stand up, lie down, and take a few steps forward or back, but cannot turn around. 

Click for image of gestation crates

A sow bites the bar of a small gestation crate
Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals

On an industrial pig farm, a sow chews repetitively on the metal bars of her gestation crate while her neighbours drink accumulated water from a channel that runs in front of their enclosures. Sows confined inside these bare, concrete-floored enclosures can sit, stand and lie down, but they cannot walk or turn around. Quebec, Canada, 2022. 

Lack of space & enrichment 

Recommendation: Require more space and species-specific enrichment opportunities to engage in natural behaviours. 

Background: Inadequate space and overcrowding can contribute to stress, aggression, injury and lameness and restrict the ability to engage in important natural behaviours.

Appropriate environmental enrichment is crucial for allowing pigs to express species-specific natural behaviours (e.g. rooting, chewing, exploring) and prevent boredom, stress and abnormal behaviours. Appropriate nesting materials are also a crucial form of enrichment for pregnant pigs. 

Click for image of a crowded industrial pig farm

Pigs packed tightly in an industrial farm
Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals

Young pigs live in compact pens inside this industrial farming facility. The windows open to the hallway and not to the outdoors, and investigators confirm that the pigs live in complete darkness except for when a farm hand enters the rooms. Canada, 2020.

Unnecessary painful procedures 

Recommendation: End painful procedures, such as castration, tail docking, teeth clipping, and ear notching.  

Background: Pigs can experience acute and chronic pain during and after these unnecessary procedures. Current pain control requirements do not account for both acute and chronic pain. For instance, castration for piglets younger than 10 days of age requires the use of analgesics (for lasting relief), but anesthetics (for immediate pain) are only “recommended”.

Click for image of pigs with docked tails

Pigs with docked tails on a farm
Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals

Pigs can be seen with docked tails on an industrial farm. Tail docking of pigs does not require anesthetics for acute pain control. Canada, 2020.

Inhumane forms of euthanasia 

Recommendation: Ban euthanasia by blunt force trauma. 

Background: Blunt force trauma, usually striking the piglet’s head against a hard surface or with a blunt instrument, is an approved method of euthanizing piglets under the current code of practice. This unethical practice presents significant welfare risks and places an emotional burden on handlers. 

Click for image of piglets on a farm

A frightened piglet stares through bars to a group of his peers
Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals

Curious piglets look at one another from inside a small pen. The pig on the right is ill and thin. At this farm, there are no windows facing the exterior and the pigs live in darkness. Canada, 2020.

Lameness & injury 

Recommendation: Improve flooring, bedding and housing conditions to reduce lameness and injury. 

Background: Concrete, slatted flooring has been identified as a major contributor to lameness and injuries in pigs. Improved flooring requirements are needed to reduce the incidence of lameness and injury and to ensure pigs can move freely and lie down and rise comfortably.

Access to bedding, such as straw or shavings, can provide thermal comfort, cushioning and enrichment opportunities.  

Click for image of piglets on a slatted floor

Piglets on a slatted floor
Jo-Anne McArthur/We Animals

Slatted floors can be seen in this pig farm that houses more than one thousand pigs in a windowless building. Investigators told We Animals Media they had visited this farm many times and confirmed that the lights inside the building were only turned on when people briefly entered to check on and feed the pigs. Canada, 2020.

Categories
News/Blog

Email the Minister of Agriculture about slaughterhouse footage

Recently, the Vancouver Humane Society sent a letter to the B.C. Minister of Agriculture calling for urgent changes for farmed animals in response to shocking footage reportedly taken at a B.C. slaughterhouse. The Ministry has since responded to the VHS and not acknowledged the urgency to protect farmed animals in the wake of this horrific footage. Instead, the government continues to delay action on moving forward with recommendations on B.C.’s Farmed Animal Framework. Can you send a message urging the Minister to prioritize stronger protections for farmed animals?

Take action

In January, Chilliwack-based pig slaughterhouse Johnston’s Meats was ordered to take “corrective actions” after shocking footage released by Animal Justice showed horrific suffering.

Despite this, the Ministry of Agriculture said no illegal behaviour was found, and that the footage depicted “standard practices in a busy hog processing facility.”

Calling for action from the B.C. government

The investigation and the Ministry’s response raised serious concerns, leading the VHS to send a letter to Premier David Eby and Agriculture Minister Lana Popham.

The letter:

  • Detailed the shocking suffering of pigs seen in the footage released by Animal Justice and the history of near-annual investigations at B.C. farms and slaughterhouses over the past decade.
  • Highlighted “that slaughterhouse inspectors, who are required to be on-site daily, failed to identify and report the issues captured in the footage … This raises serious questions about the effectiveness of current oversight and enforcement activities.”
  • Urged the Premier and Agriculture Minister to prioritize next steps following the province’s recent review of its farmed animal welfare framework, including government-mandated and proactively enforced regulations based on the best available animal welfare science; proactive oversight including “consistent video surveillance”; and appropriate penalties to prevent cruelty and ensure accountability.

The Ministry of Agriculture has refused to acknowledge the urgency of this situation as farmed animals continue to suffer.

Could you please take the action below and tell the Ministry animal protection should be a priority?

Note: A valid Canadian postal code is required to send messages to Canadian decision-makers. If you do not have a postal code, you can reach Premier David Eby by email at Premier@gov.bc.ca and Agriculture Minister Lana Popham at AF.Minister@gov.bc.ca.

Photos: Animal Justice

Categories
News/Blog

End fur farming in Canada (Federal e-petition)

Update

This petition is now closed. Thank you to the 7,058 people who spoke out against inhumane fur farming!

Photo: We Animals

  • The Vancouver Humane Society is joining The Fur-Bearers and other organizations across Canada in calling for a national prohibition on fur farming in Canada. 
  • Fur farming causes significant animal suffering and poses serious risks to public health and the environment for the sake of luxury fashion items.
  • More than 20 countries have already banned fur farming or introduced legislation to do so in the coming years.
  • A new federal e-petition, launched by The Fur-Bearers, calls on the Canadian government to ban fur farming for all animal species across the country.

TAKE ACTION: Canadian residents can sign the official parliamentary e-petition until January 27, 2025. After you sign, be sure to click the link in the confirmation email so your signature is counted.

Petition updates
Learn more

Call on the Canadian government to ban cruel fur farming

Join the Vancouver Humane Society, The Fur-Bearers, MP Gord Johns, and other organizations in urging the federal government to end fur farming across Canada. 

Sign the federal e-petition on the Parliament of Canada website before January 27, 2025, at 6:48 a.m. PST

Important: After you sign the petition, be sure to check your email and click the confirmation link to ensure your signature is counted.  

Petition updates

Photo: Jo-Anne McArthur / We Animals Media

Inhumane fur farming persists in Canada despite widespread opposition

There are close to 100 fur farms left in Canada. Animal species that are farmed for their fur include mink, fox, wolves, bobcats, lynxes and chinchillas

Although British Columbia banned mink fur farming in 2021, farming other species for their fur is still allowed in the province. There are currently no prohibitions at the national level

Polling from 2024 revealed that 78% of Canadians and 81% of British Columbians are against killing animals for their fur. 

Animal welfare concerns

On fur farms, animals are kept in small, wire cages for the entirety of their lives, depriving them of the ability to engage in natural behaviors typical in the wild. This can lead to stress, stereotypic behaviors, and self-mutilation.

Warning: The following video contains graphic footage. Viewer discretion is advised.

Inside Canada’s Fur Farms

Over the past several months, The Association for the Protection of Fur-Bearing Animals obtained footage from inside Canada’s fur farms. This second video shows never-before-seen images of fox and mink suffering in deplorable conditions. Please join us and take the pledge to #MakeFurHistory at www.MakeFurHistory.com.

Public health risks

Animals confined in fur farms have been shown to be hosts for zoonotic diseases. For example, during COVID-19, deadly outbreaks were seen in fur farms globally, including locally in the Fraser Valley. Millions of animals were culled in an attempt to control the spread of the virus.

Environmental degradation

Manure runoff from large industrial fur farms pollutes nearby soil and bodies of water, threatening local animal populations, humans, and ecosystems. 

Petition updates

Visit furfarming.ca to learn more about The Fur-Bearers’ campaign to ban fur farming across Canada and the organizations that have signed on in support.

Categories
News/Blog

Urge Metro Vancouver to prioritize plant-based in updated food strategy

Update

The feedback period for the Metro Vancouver Regional Food Strategy is now closed. Thank you to all who spoke up for a plant-forward future!

  • The Metro Vancouver Regional Food Strategy aims to create a sustainable, resilient, and healthy food system across 21 municipalities, an electoral area, and a treaty First Nation.
  • Metro Vancouver is updating the Regional Food System Strategy for the first time since 2011 and is seeking public input.  
  • This is an important opportunity for Metro Vancouver residents and food system stakeholders to advocate for a shift toward more humane, healthy and sustainable plant-based food production and consumption across the region. 

TAKE ACTION: If you’re a Metro Vancouver resident, your input is needed to help advocate for an updated strategy that prioritizes less animal-based products and more plant-based foods. Share your feedback in the online survey before the deadline of December 31, 2024.

Fill out the online survey
Questions and key points

Call for plant-based policies to be included in Metro Vancouver’s Regional Food System Strategy

If you are a Metro Vancouver resident, fill out the short survey before the December 31st deadline. 

Scroll down to review the main questions asked and key points to consider in your submission. 

Express your thoughts in your own words as much as possible, as duplicate responses may not be accepted. 

Fill out the online survey

Survey questions and tips

Below are the main questions included in the Metro Vancouver survey. Click on each key point for tips and context to help answer the questions in your own words.

1. What changes have you seen in the regional food system over the last 10 – 15 years?

(Examples: changes to imports/exports, climate considerations, community changes, consumer habits, costs, etc.)

Growing public awareness and concern about the impact of animal-based foods…

on the environment, health, and animal welfare, resulting in more people reducing their consumption of animal products.

  • A 2022 survey of Lower Mainland Residents found that 65% of respondents have reduced their consumption of animal products. 
  • A 2019 survey found that 25% of B.C. residents have tried a vegetarian diet, compared to the national average of 18%.
  • A 2018 survey found that almost 40% of British Columbians aged 35 and under follow a vegetarian or vegan diet, more than three times higher than the national average. 
Increased demand for plant-based foods/beverages…

and more products being offered in stores, restaurants, etc.

  • A 2022 survey found that 65% of respondents in the Lower Mainland would eat more plant-based meals if there were more tasty options available when going out to eat. 
Scientific research and experts urging all levels of government to support food system change…

…toward plant-based eating patterns.

  • Growing awareness that the type of food plays a much larger role in a food’s overall carbon footprint than the distance it travels. Previously, much of the focus has been on prioritizing local food, but it’s also increasingly important that plant-based food be incorporated into food system strategies. 
  • Food system change, including shifting toward plant-based diets, is necessary to meet global climate targets and stay below 2 degrees of global warming. 
  • In the City of Vancouver, nearly 98% of the ecological footprint of food comes from the land and energy used for growing and producing it, particularly red meat and dairy products. 
Government acknowledgement and action around the need for food system change…

toward more plant-based foods. 

  • The City of Vancouver passed a motion declaring the various social, economic, and environmental benefits of plant-based procurement. 
  • The District of North Vancouver passed a motion to ensure plant-based options are included and prioritized at municipal events, meetings, and other gatherings where the District purchases food. 
Public support for government action…

…including meat reduction efforts incorporated into government strategies. 

  • In a 2022 survey of Lower Mainland residents, 58% of respondents would support shifting government subsidies from animal-based food production to plant-based food production. 
  • 60% of survey respondents would support including animal production-reduction efforts into local, provincial and federal climate, health and animal welfare strategies. 

Are there any other food system-related changes or trends you’ve noticed in the Lower Mainland over the last decade? 

2. What do you think the role of Metro Vancouver should be in the implementation of a regional food system strategy?

(Examples: protecting agricultural lands, convening member jurisdiction on specific issues, providing local research and data, public education, etc.) 

As a regional organization, Metro Vancouver and member jurisdictions can prioritize humane, healthy and sustainable plant-based foods across the supply chain.

This could include:

  • Prioritizing and incentivizing plant-based food production and processing.
  • Supporting partnerships that enable businesses, public institutions and others to collaborate on plant-based procurement throughout the region through bulk ordering and supplier connections.
  • Public marketing, education, and promotion around increasing plant-based food consumption, in alignment with the updated Canada Food Guide, which recommends choosing plant-based proteins more often.
  • Supporting more plant-based options in food service, including through public institutions like schools, hospitals and community centers, as well as in catering, corporate programs, and cafeterias.
  • Supporting consumption of more plant-based foods across consumer, corporate, business and institutional levels. 

Are there other food system-related roles you think Metro Vancouver should be involved in? 

3. Is there any other feedback or other information you would like to share?

(Examples: suggestions, priorities, actions programs applied elsewhere, policy recommendations, challenges, resources, etc.) 

Metro Vancouver is uniquely positioned to support a much-needed food system shift towards plant-based food across multiple sectors.

This could include strategies and practices such as: 

  • Promoting and supporting strategies that prioritize plant-based food choices. For example, setting plant-based meals as the default option at events, meetings and municipal facilities.
  • Incentivizing plant-based food production, processing, purchasing and procurement. For example, through municipal food service contracts.
  • Encouraging member jurisdictions to set a target for reducing the volume of animal products purchased at municipal levels and follow the lead of other jurisdictions that have implemented meat reduction and/or plant-forward strategies. 

Are there other food-system related ideas or examples you would like to share? 

Fill out the online survey