CALGARY—Long-awaited new rules have shortened how long animals can be in transport in Canada, but while animal welfare groups believe it’s still too long, a spokesperson for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association says cutting transport times may actually be more dangerous for animals.

“Cattle transport outcomes in Canada are very positive,” said Brady Stadnicki, a policy analyst for the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association. “We would have liked to see a more outcome-based approach.

“We questioned whether a prescriptive reduction in the number of hours was going to ... demonstrably lead to real ... cattle welfare improvements,” he said.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s (CFIA) long-awaited amendments to animal transport regulations are receiving criticism from both the livestock industry and animal welfare groups.

The CFIA’s chief veterinary officer Dr. Jaspinder Komal said he feels the new regulations have “arrived at a balance” between the two sides. Animal welfare groups say the new regulations are nowhere near international standards, while industry advocates say the shortened transport times won’t actually benefit animals.

This is the first major set of amendments to rules created in 1977 for the transport of animals within Canada, such as cattle, horses, goats and chickens.

Komal said the CFIA consulted more than 400 scientific articles, current Canadian and international practices, scientific experts, stakeholders from the livestock industry, consumers, and animal welfare groups. Draft regulations were released in 2016, and the CFIA received more than 51,000 comments during the consultation process, according to a press release.

One of the most significant amendments concerns the maximum length of time animals can be transported. This maximum has been shortened to various lengths for different groups of livestock, and now includes the animal loading and unloading time, where previously it did not.

For example, the maximum transport time for healthy cattle and some other livestock has been reduced from 48 hours to 36 hours; for horses, from 36 to 28 hours. The minimum rest stop duration was increased from five to eight hours.

With more specific definitions for terms such as “compromised” and “unfit,” the regulations have also become more outcome-based, Komal said. This means it’s a handler’s responsibility to determine the state of animals prior to transport.

“If they feel that the well-being of animals is compromised, they have to stop,” Komal said.

The CFIA is giving the industry one year to catch up to the regulations, which come into force in February 2020. In the meantime, Komal said information and training will be made available to help companies get up to speed.

Animal welfare groups say the new regulations are nowhere near enough, citing international standards, scientific research and public polling.

Camille Labchuk, executive director of the national organization Animal Justice, said the amendments mean Canada is “still falling very far behind.” She gave as an example the European Union, where transport times are generally limited to eight hours, with some provisions.

“Transport is the most stressful day of an animal’s life,” she said. “We were hoping to see rules that actually reflect Canadian values and actually prevent animals from experiencing horrific suffering during transport.”

Labchuk pointed to a 2016 poll done by NRG Research Group that found 97 per cent of Canadians surveyed agreed animals should not be transported for more than eight hours without food, water or rest.

“This has been a pressing issue both for the animal advocacy community, and also for Canadians,” she said. “The transport times are slightly reduced, and that’s about the only positive thing I can say.”

However, industry representatives say shorter transport times could actually lead to more stress on the animals.

Stadnicki said Canada’s geography means the shorter the transport limit, the more rest stops livestock transporters will be required to accommodate. That sounds good in theory, he said, but the reality is that rest stops might not be as restful for the livestock as intended.

Stadnicki said the unloading and reloading process leads to higher risk of injury and disease for the animals, and it takes them a while to become comfortable enough in a new environment to eat, drink water and rest.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

“We wanted to make sure that any regulatory change was based on science and research that was applicable to Canada’s geography, climate, and the commercial conditions in which cattle are transported across Canada,” said Stadnicki, adding that government-based research into the effect of livestock rest stops is still ongoing.

Stadnicki said that as far as cattle are concerned, there’s already “a positive story to tell.” He pointed to statistics from the Beef Cattle Research Council showing that more than 99.9 per cent of long-haul and short-haul cattle arrive “with no signs of injury or stress.”

“(We) wanted to make sure that the regulations were not going to move us further away from that 99.9 per cent,” he said.

There are provisions in the new regulations to allow for longer transport time, Komal said. For example, transport times can be longer if transporters are using climate-controlled trucks that allow for full animal care during the journey.

“We want to encourage that to be used more and more,” said Komal, adding that these trucks are becoming more popular in other countries.

Stadnicki isn’t so sure.

“That provision sounds great in theory, but the reality is in Canada, there’s very little research that’s been done on the welfare outcomes (of those trucks),” he said. “We’d like to do more research.”

According to Komal, the CFIA found that around 98 per cent of animal transport in Canada already complies to the new regulations. He said this shows the new rules are a step in the right direction.

“Industry has done a lot of improvement in their animal welfare practices,” he said. “We think that industry will be complying when these regulations come into force.”

Stadnicki said that while the majority of industry may already be complying to the current regulations, the amendments leave out some Canada-specific conditions, such as geography.

Labchuk said this number indicates the new regulations won’t make a significant difference. She said Animal Justice hoped for more prescriptive regulations — for example, specific prescriptions for terms such as “overcrowding” or “extreme meteorological conditions,” instead of generalized definitions.

“With outcome-based standards, you have to wait until there’s a negative impact and some sort of suffering before you can prosecute or take enforcement action,” she said.

Read more about: