BANGALORE—In collaboration with Antoine Lewis, a renowned food and wine critic, Humane Society International/India organized a corporate roundtable focused on animal welfare trends in the food and hospitality industries.
The roundtable, which took place at Sheraton Grand, Bengaluru on March 8, saw participation from global leaders in the food and hospitality sector, including Sodexo, IKEA, Compass Group, Hilton, Marriott and Accor.
The event focused on supporting the development and implementation of animal welfare standards within corporate policies, with the purpose of improving the welfare of animals in the food supply chain. Considering the increasing consumer demand for ethical sourcing of food products and the parallel need for traceability, a transition away from battery-cage egg supply chains and towards cage-free egg supply chains and practices was highlighted. Additionally, consumers are increasingly paying attention to the massive negative impact high levels of consumption of meat, dairy and eggs has on the environment and their health, resulting in a growing trend towards the consumption of plant-based foods. To cater to this demand, participants discussed the need to increase the availability of plant-based food on menus.
Speakers included representatives from IKEA India; cage-free poultry farm, Happy Hens; plant-based meat company, Good Dot; and animal welfare experts from HSI. Antoine Lewis, food and wine critic from Mumbai, said, “Many chefs, hoteliers and restaurateurs I have spoken to have expressed a desire to move towards clean, ethically produced ingredients. This is a new area and naturally there are gaps between supply and demand. The roundtable will allow cage-free egg producers and the F&B industry to honestly understand the issues and challenges each faces and hopefully come up with equitable solutions.”
Humane Society International/India is assisting companies with developing and implementing cage-free commitments in their egg procurement policies.
Shreya Paropkari, manager of farm animal protection for Humane Society International/India, said “We are thrilled to be hosting India’s first corporate roundtable on animal welfare. Progressive companies in India have come together for this roundtable with the purpose to build a more humane, healthy and sustainable world. We are here to provide the support the companies require to help achieve this objective, and this roundtable is the first step towards more such collaborations.”
A similar conference will be conducted next week at JW Marriott, Mumbai, and will focus on relationship building with food and hospitality industry leaders and provide attendees with Humane Society International/India’s resources and assistance. Roshith Rajan, director of corporate social responsibility for Sodexo Asia Pacific, will be speaking at that event, sharing the company’s experience in the implementation of animal welfare standards.
Interview opportunities with Antoine Lewis and HSI expert Sara Shields available on request
Media Contact: Sanjana Rao, srao@hsi.org, +91 8897827214
Brussels premiere of BAFTA winner 73 Cows brings transition message to EU Parliament
Humane Society International / Europe
Brussels – European Union policy makers are being urged to help farmers transition away from animal agriculture and towards plant-crop farming in order to capitalise on the growing trend in plant-based eating. Speaking at an event this week at the European Parliament organised by Humane Society International/Europe, farmers, ecologists and academics agreed there is an urgent need for the EU to support transition farming to help farmers adapt and seize the economic opportunity of consumer diets shifting away from meat, dairy and eggs.
A major report from the Rise Foundation recently warned that Europe’s meat and dairy production must be halved by 2050 in recognition of its significant contribution to environmental degradation such as greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity loss. The EU currently raises 9 billion farm animals for food each year – with more than 360 million of these animals spending all or part of their lives in intensive cage systems – and globally the figure is an estimated 82 billion animals.
Oxford University’s Dr Marco Springmann, and Harvard University’s Dr Helen Harwatt were joined at the Brussels symposium event by ecologist and rewilding expert Alan Watson Featherstone, and Swedish farmer Adam Arnesson who is transitioning his pig farm to grow oats for a plant-milk company. Policy makers were also treated to Europe’s first public screening of BAFTA 2019 award winning short film 73 Cows about British cattle farmers Jay and Katja Wilde who sent their herd to a sanctuary and switched to crop cultivation instead.
Alexandra Clark, HSI/Europe’s food policy consultant, said “European consumers are more aware than ever of the animal welfare and environmental impacts of meat, dairy and egg production. The current level of animal production is simply unsustainable, and the continued growth of plant-based alternatives is inevitable. This presents Europe’s farmers with an exciting opportunity to meet this changing demand by transitioning away from industrial animal agriculture to plant-crop production. With the current reform of the EU’s agricultural policy, MEPs have a clear chance to assist farmers in those transition efforts by shifting subsidies away from propping up industrial animal production, and instead supporting farmers switch to fruit, vegetables, fungi, grains and leguminous crops that are growing in demand from an increasingly plant-based public.”
The EU is currently reforming its Common Agricultural Policy, with a crucial vote planned in the Agriculture Committee in early April. Dr Helen Harwatt from Harvard University believes this is a major opportunity for EU policymakers to take leadership in animal to plant protein agricultural shifts.
Dr Harwatt said: “Repurposing portions of agricultural land to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere will be crucial for limiting warming to 1.5°C. In turn, restoring this land to its natural habitat opens the door for reintroducing animal species, which would help toward tackling the wildlife crisis. Animal to plant protein shifts are essential and policy makers must ensure that policies and support are put in place to help farmers make this transition”
Swedish farmer Adam Arnesson has shifted his farm production from solely animal-based to the cultivation of multiple crops for human consumption including oats for oat milk production. In doing so he has doubled the number of people his output feeds annually and halved the climate impact per calorie.
Farmers Jay and Katja Wilde, who star in Alex Lockwood’s 73 Cows short film, were keen for MEPs to understand that the pressure and fear for the future that many animal farmers feel, could be alleviated if support existed to help them ‘plant for the planet’.
Speaking at the EU Parliament screening of 73 Cows, Jay Wilde said: “We are thrilled that our film has come to the European Parliament where we hope it inspires politicians to vote for a better future for both farmers and animals. Giving our cows to a sanctuary to live out their years in a safe haven was the best decision of our lives, it became the only decision when sending them to the abattoir was no longer something I could live with. But it’s been a very scary journey too because you’re stepping into the unknown. This shift in farming isn’t just a personal choice, its necessary to protect the environment, so if there was financial and practical support to help farmers like me plant for the planet, it would make life so much easier.”
Spanish MEP Florent Marcellesi said “We need to leave behind our unsustainable farming model and animal-based diets. Instead, we should turn as soon as possible to ecologic plant-based ones and build a farming model which is sustainable, healthy and respectful to animal welfare.”
Italian MEP Eleonora Evi said “Climate change is here, it’s already happening. For our sake but also for the sake of every other species on this planet, we need to take action to mitigate its effects by adopting an ‘all hands on deck’ approach. This means opening up the dialogue to different stakeholders. The agriculture sector has one of the highest levels of emissions, and therefore must become part of the solution. The transition to sustainable production methods and re-naturalization of agricultural areas must inevitably be considered.”
Finnish MEP Sirpa Pietikäinen said “If everyone would shift their diets towards plant-based, it would be beneficial for public health, animal welfare, biodiversity and climate.”
Facts
Up to 20 percent (€ 32.6 billion) of the EU’s entire annual budget is spent on animal agriculture (including feed)
Around 71 percent of EU farmland is used to grow animal feed
Animal agriculture is responsible for 14.5 percent of all human-induced greenhouse gas emissions
According to Euromonitor, in 2017 plant-based milks represented 12 percent of the global fluid milk market, and dairy alternatives are predicted to grow to a market value of €19bn by 2022
Europe is currently the largest market for meat substitutes, having a 39 percent global market share and, with an eight percent annual growth rate, they are predicted to reach a global net worth of €4.2bn by 2020
A 2017 report by Rabobank suggests that alternative proteins could represent a third of total EU protein demand growth in the next five years
The EAT-Lancet Commission found that a transformation to healthy diets from sustainable food systems is necessary to achieve the UN Sustainable Development Goals and the Paris Agreement
The EAT-Lancet Commission also found that transformation to healthy diets by 2050 will require substantial dietary shifts, including a greater than 50 percent reduction in global consumption of foods such as red meat and sugar, and a greater than 100 percent increase in consumption of healthy foods, such as nuts, fruits, vegetables, and legumes
Humane Society International’s Forward Food program is one of the largest plant-based culinary training programs globally. Aimed at encouraging universities, caterers, and other institutions to provide more vegan options, Forward Food helps to facilitate diet shifts at scale. HSI believes that by making animal-free food options tastier, more satisfying and widely available, more and more people will opt for meat-free meals which is good news for animals, people and the planet. Humane Society International advocates compassionate eating – or the Three Rs: “refining” diets by avoiding products from the most abusive production systems, and “reducing” or “replacing” animal products with plant-based foods.
Media contact:
United Kingdom: Wendy Higgins whiggins@hsi.org +44 (0)7989 972 423
Humane Society International / United Kingdom
Through extensive research, HSI UK has discovered that many animal fur items for sale in the UK, especially in independent boutiques, in markets and online, are either not labelled at all, or are incorrectly labelled or marketed as synthetic.
For the vast majority of British shoppers who reject the cruelty of the fur trade, trying to buy only fake fur can be a real challenge. Whether it’s raccoon dog fur bobble hats, rabbit fur key chains, or hooded coats trimmed with fox fur, misleading labelling or incorrect marketing is leading would-be ethical consumers to purchase real fur trim items in the mistaken belief that they are faux fur.
This is a double scandal—violating the rights of consumers who are not being protected from unfair trading, and artificially inflating the market for animal fur, causing immense suffering.
We believe that all retailers have a duty to ensure that they have rigorous buying and quality control procedures in place in order that they do not mislead customers.
Each year, HSI/UK finds more examples of ‘fake faux fur’ for sale, from well-known outlets on the UK high street to independent shops and markets, in London and other UK cities. The problem appears to be growing particularly acute online.
How can this happen? Isn’t fur expensive?
Shockingly, real fur can now be produced and sold for less than fake fur—a calculation that’s costing animals their lives.
Life is cheap in the animal fur industry; miserably poor conditions in countries such as China—where much UK fur trim comes from – means real fur can be produced and sold very inexpensively. At online wholesalers such as Alibaba.com, retailers can bulk-buy a 70cm raccoon dog fur hood trim for £3 per piece, or a raccoon dog fur pompom for a bobble hat for just 30p per piece.
This translates into cheap items on the high-street. Here are just a few of the items we’ve recently found in the UK:
A knitted hat with real marmot fur bobble costing £3.50
A handbag charm/keyring pom pom made from rabbit fur for sale at £5 each
A parka with real raccoon dog fur trim around the hood priced at £35
A gilet made from real raccoon dog fur with a £75 price tag
A short sleeveless jacket made of rabbit and marmot fur for sale at £35
Check before you buy, but please do not simply rely on labels or price when taking a decision on whether fur is real or fake—an animal’s life could depend on it. Check out our guide to telling the difference between real and fake fur—and if in any doubt, please leave it on the shelf.
Buyer beware: what’s (not) on the label
Shockingly, there’s no legal requirement for animal fur to be specifically listed on a garment’s fabric content label. We’ve recently found, for example:
A ladies’ coat with a real fur trim on the hood, labelled polyester 100%
A pair of fingerless gloves with real fur trim, labelled 100% acrilico [sic]
A knitted hat with a real fur bobble, labelled 100% acrylic
A pair of woolen gloves with real fur trim, labelled 80% wool, 20% polyester
By law, under the EU Textile Products Regulation (2011) a “textile product” that include parts of animal origin (for example, feathers, bone, or animal fur) must be clearly labelled or marked using the phrase “contains non-textile parts of animal origin”.
However, our retail surveys show extremely low compliance with this new Regulation, meaning consumers can’t rely on labels to avoid buying real animal fur. In addition, the fur labelling requirements under this Regulation do not apply to any non-textile items (for example a coat made primarily out of fur, or leather, which are not textiles would not legally require any fur labelling), plus shoes or accessories such as pom pom keychains are also exempt.
Current EU fur labelling laws are inadequate and poorly implemented, creating a confused marketplace.
Customers care—and deserve better
Opinion polls for decades show that the vast majority of the British public want no part in the cruel fur trade, and would not buy or wear real animal fur.
A poll commissioned by HSI/UK and conducted by YouGov shows that the vast majority (85%) of consumers expect to see real animal fur clearly labelled as such in the clothes and accessories they buy. The poll also reveals that, in addition to labelling, people rely most heavily on fur feeling synthetic (50%) and a cheap price (47%) as lead indicators to assess whether fur is real or fake. In fact, neither represents a reliable method to distinguish real from fake fur, and labels are unreliable.
UK shoppers are not getting the information they need to make informed, ethical buying choices.
The Advertising Standards Agency recently upheld two complaints from HSI/UK where real fur had been described as faux fur. It has since issued an Enforcement Notice and guidance to retailers reminding them of their responsibilities when it comes to describing fur.
Mexico City—To mark World Spay Day, teams of volunteer veterinarians spayed and neutered 531 cats free of charge in Mexico City. The campaign was executed at local veterinary clinic Cemegatos with support from Humane Society International/Mexico. This is the first time the campaign surpases the 500 cats benchmark. The campaign ran Feb. 21 to Feb. 24 and involved 21 veterinarians and over 30 volunteers.
Dr. Claudia Edwards, DVM, HSI/Mexico programs director, said: “Spay-neutering is critical to address the street cats problem. People often misunderstand cats and have prejudices against them, but they are the most extraordinary pets. Cats need to be included in humane population control campaigns accessible to people without the means to pay for this service.”
World Spay Day reminds us of the power of affordable, accessible spay/neuter services to save the lives of companion animals, community (feral and stray) cats and street dogs who might otherwise be put down in shelters or killed on the street. Spay/neuter is also adviseable for pets to keep them healthy and to avoid unwanted offspring. Mexico has an acute street cat and dog problem, with an estimated 23 million free roaming cats and dogs.
It doesn’t matter whether you live in a city, suburb, or on a farm, and it doesn’t matter whether you work in an office, a factory, or at home—or whether you don’t work at all. You’re going to come into contact with lots of synthetic chemicals every day, starting with your toothpaste (even your “natural” toothpaste) and shampoo, and going on from there. Synthetic, or human-made, chemicals, along with all of the naturally occurring chemicals, are just a fact of modern life. To make sure those chemicals are used safely, toxicity testing is a fact of modern life, too.
Unfortunately, there are serious problems with the current system of toxicity testing. Some of those problems may not come as a surprise, such as the fact that toxicity testing is extremely expensive, or that it raises tough moral and ethical issues because it harms or kills many animals. But some of the difficulties are less obvious. Like this one: the current approach to toxicity testing just doesn’t work as well as scientists would like.
Animal tests often miss the most important signs of toxicity in humans
When scientists study a chemical, they’re often trying to figure out if it’s safe for a person to be exposed to a very small amount of it for years at a time. After all, you don’t eat a tube of toothpaste every morning and night; you use just a dab, and when you’re done you spit it out. Similarly, you don’t eat the chemicals used to make plastic food containers, but you care about the safety of those chemicals because small amounts may get into your leftovers. In other words, scientists are frequently trying to answer questions about the safety of long-term exposure to low levels of a substance—but it’s impossible to study these long-term effects in animals, since most of them don’t live that long, and toxic effects are usually rare. To try to stake the deck to see these toxic effects, scientists expose animals to much higher doses of chemicals than humans would ever experience – the top dose in experiments generally must show some signs of overdose. Plus, the scientists would like the information much more quickly than an animal’s natural lifetime!
In fact, researchers might use concentrations of the chemical that are thousands of times higher than someone would experience in a typical real-world exposure. The problem is, this approach doesn’t make problems show up thousands of times faster. It makes different problems show up. It’s a little like tossing a rat into a vat of gasoline and then concluding that gasoline causes drowning. The rat dies of other causes before tests can show the neurological damage that can be caused by long-term, low-dose exposure to gasoline. All we can possibly learn from high-dose experiments is what might happen in overdose situations.
Animals are not simply small humans
Another problem with animal testing is that it assumes humans are just giant rats, mice, rabbits, or other experimental animals. Sure, there are some key similarities in basic biology, cells, and organ systems, but there are also differences, and those differences can make a big… well… difference!
Four main factors help determine how chemical exposure will affect an animal: how the chemical is absorbed, distributed throughout the body, metabolized, and eliminated. These ADME processes can vary greatly from species to species – and this can lead to critical differences in the effects of chemical exposure between species. Researchers try to use animals that are a close match to humans in ways that are likely to matter for the chemical being tested. If they’re concerned about potential effects on the heart, for instance, they might choose a dog or pig – because the circulatory systems in these animals are more similar to humans than other animals are. If they’re concerned about the nervous system, they might use cats or monkeys. But even with a relatively good match, differences between species can make it difficult to translate animal results into human risk, especially since small differences in biology can have large effects on ADME processes.
For instance, rats, mice and rabbits have skin that absorbs chemicals quickly—much faster than the skin of humans does. So tests using these animals can overestimate the danger of chemicals that are absorbed through the skin. Even something like how much mucus an animal produces to line its stomach can affect how much and how quickly a chemical is absorbed into the bloodstream.
In practice, researchers’ efforts to find the right animal stand-in frequently fail. Just look at the evidence from the world of medicine – the only place where there is abundant human information for comparison. According to the US Food and Drug Administration, more than 90 percent of promising new compounds fail when they’re tested in humans, either because they don’t work or because they cause too many side effects—but each of those failures had looked good in numerous animal tests, usually in several different species. And everyone has heard of medicines that crash and burn after they make it into drugstores and kitchen cabinets. The arthritis medication Vioxx, the weight-loss drug fenfluramine (the “Fen” in “Fen-Phen”), and the allergy medicine Seldane were all pulled from the market after numerous reports of cardiovascular side effects, such as heart attack, stroke, arrhythmia, and heart disease. Animal tests had given these drugs an all-clear.
Animal tests are time-consuming and expensive, limiting the number of chemicals that can be tested
Animal tests cost a lot of time and money. For example, it takes a about a decade and $3,000,000 to complete all of the animal studies required to register one single pesticide with the US Environmental Protection Agency. And the tests for that single pesticide ingredient will kill up to 10,000 animals – mice, rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, and even dogs. Now consider that there are tens of thousands of chemicals lined up for safety testing in countries all over the world – and new laws in some countries that will require more thorough testing of both old and new chemicals. For example, the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) regulations in Europe will require animal testing on all new and existing chemicals produced or imported into the EU in large volumes. Evaluation of each chemical could take millions of dollars, many years to complete experiments, and thousands of animal lives. When you do the math, animal tests just don’t make “cents!”
The high price of animal testing also means companies lose a lot of money and time when the tests don’t accurately predict how humans will respond. As we mentioned above, that happens way more than you think: fewer than 10% of potential new drugs make it through human trials. According to an article in Forbes magazine, drug companies spend an average of four billion dollars to develop a new drug. When the drug fails late in the game, that’s billions of dollars lost.
Objections to animal testing
Even as many industries continue to rely on rickety animal tests, others are facing new laws that prohibit testing certain kinds of products on animals. In the European Union, India, Israel, Sao Paulo, Brazil, South Korea, New Zealand, and Turkey have adopted full or partial animal testing and/or sales restrictions on cosmetics. The United Kingdom went a step further and outlawed testing household chemicals (e.g., cleaning and laundry products, air fresheners) on animals. And more countries are likely to adopt these bans, too, as more and more people object to chemical testing on animals.
Humane Society International
Oikeutta Elaimille
How many animals are killed globally on fur farms?
Each year, tens of millions of animals are bred and killed to supply the fashion industry with not only traditional fur coats but, increasingly, real fur trim for hooded jackets, and real fur pompoms used on hats, gloves, shoes and a range of other clothing and accessories. It’s estimated that as many as half of all animals raised for their fur are killed to satisfy the market for fur trim.
The industry has seen a decline in recent years, as consumers, retailers, designers turn their backs on real fur, and politicians vote in favour of fur production bans and, increasingly, fur sales bans.
Annual fur production:
2014: Europe 43.6m, China 87m, North America 7.2m, Russia 1.7m
2018: Europe 38.3m, China 50.4m, North America 4.9m & Russia 1.9m
2021: Europe 12m, China 27m, North America 2.3m & Russia 600,000
2022: Europe 10m, China 22m, North America 2m, & Russia 600,000
(Figures shown are estimates focused on mink, foxes, raccoon dogs, chinchillas and sables. Rabbits and animals trapped for their fur are excluded.)
What about trapping in the wild?
In addition to fur farming, many millions of animals are trapped and killed for their fur in the wild. Most fur from wild-trapped animals comes from the USA, Canada and Russia. In 2018, almost 3 million animals were killed for their pelts by trapping in North America, including 647,000 raccoons and 363,000 coyotes. Traps inflict great pain and anguish, both to the target animals and to unintended victims such as pets and endangered species.
Often left for days, unable to seek shelter, food or water, these animals can cause serious injury to themselves in an attempt to escape. When the trappers finally arrive, they will often stomp or beat the animals to death. We exposed the brutality of trapping animals for fur in an undercover investigation, in collaboration with Born Free USA.
Have any countries banned fur farming?
Yes, over the past two decades, 25 countries have either voted to ban the practice, have prohibited the farming of particular species, or have introduced stricter regulations that have effectively curtailed the practice. The Canadian province of British Columbia has also banned the farming of mink for their fur. Several other countries, including Romania, are also discussing the introduction of bans on fur farming. See the latest list at furfreealliance.com/fur-bans.
Have any countries banned fur sales?
Yes, in 2021 Israel became the first country in the world to ban real fur sales. In the United States, California became the first US state to ban the sale of fur in 2019 (the ban came into effect in January 2023) following similar bans in cities including Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berkeley and West Hollywood. To date, 16 towns and cities in the United States have banned fur sales and more US cities and states are looking to follow suit in the future. In the UK, the government is considering action on fur sales.
Is fur farming cruel?
Yes. Animals bred for their fur such as foxes, rabbits, raccoon dogs and mink are confined in small, barren, wire cages for their entire lives. Unable to express their basic natural behaviours such as digging, roaming large territories and, for semi-aquatic mink, swimming and diving, these naturally active and curious animals have been shown to display the stereotypical behaviour of mental distress such as repeated pacing and circling inside their cages. Such confined spaces can also result in animals self-mutilating and fighting with their cage mates.
When their pelts are at their prime, before they are one year old, the animals are gassed, electrocuted, beaten or have their necks broken. In December 2015 HSI filmed foxes on a Chinese fur farm being beaten to death, and rabbits being given a blow to the head before being shackled from their back legs and their throats cut before being skinned. Instances of raccoon dogs being slammed against the ground then skinned whilst still showing signs of consciousness have also been documented in China. (Warning, graphic footage)
Increasingly, international designers, brands, department stores and luxury online retailers are turning their backs on cruel real fur. In recent years, Max Mara, Gucci, Prada, Chanel, Moncler, Dolce & Gabbana and Versace have gone fur free, as has well-known former-fur-using brand Canada Goose – to name just a few! By supporting fur-free designers, we can all help to put the business of animal cruelty out of fashion. For a full list, check out the Fur-Free Retailer website at furfreeretailer.com.
Humane Society International
Adam Parascandola/HSI
The dog and cat meat trade in China
Globally, an estimated 30 million dogs and 10 million cats are slaughtered annually for human consumption. Of these, approximately 10 million dogs and 4 million cats are killed each year in China alone. A significant portion of the dog and cat meat trade in China is linked to criminal activity, with many animals are stolen pets and strays taken from backyards and streets. The journey to slaughterhouses entails cramming these animals into wire cages and transporting them for hours or days, with many suffering from dehydration, injuries, suffocation and heatstroke, and some dying before arrival.
Despite these atrocities, eating dog and cat meat is not widespread in China. The majority of the population does not consume it, and of the 20% who do, many have only tried it once or twice in their lifetime. Dog meat consumption primarily occurs in three regions: South China, Central China and Northeast China, although dogs and cats are taken from all over the country for the trade.
Supporting Chinese animal groups
HSI partners with Vshine, a well-respected animal protection organization in North China. Vshine operates two shelters for dogs, cats and other animals, including those rescued from the meat trade. Through Vshine’s extensive network of partner groups and shelters, we amplify efforts to combat the dog and cat meat trade across multiple regions of China. Our strategy includes supporting Chinese animal protection groups that are campaigning, conducting public education and hands-on rescue operations, with the goal of bringing an end to the dog and cat meat trade.
Rescue efforts
For over a decade, HSI has supported the rescue of thousands of dogs and cats from the meat trade through our partnerships with Chinese activists, including Vshine. Chinese activists liaise with local police to pull over trucks illegally trafficking dogs and cats on their way to slaughter, and work with law enforcement when illegal dog slaughterhouses are discovered. These animals are largely illegally acquired and illegally transported across provincial borders without the required paperwork. After being confiscated, animals are brought to Vshine’s shelter, where HSI support helps provide lifesaving medical care, food and rehabilitation, until the dogs and cats find loving homes locally.
Yulin festival
Although dog markets and slaughterhouses exist across China, the slaughter of dogs and cats during the annual summer solstice event in Yulin in Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, has become a symbol of the immense cruelty of the trade that sadly takes place every day. Initially launched in 2010 by local traders to boost declining sales, the event has faced widespread national and international outrage. Though marketed as a local “festival,” 72% of Yulin’s residents do not regularly consume dog meat. Thanks to efforts by HSI and partner groups, the scale of the event has diminished in recent years. Public displays of slaughter have been restricted, and authorities have cracked down on dog meat advertisements, signaling progress in the fight against the trade.
Legal and legislative progress
Several countries and regions across Asia, including Thailand, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and parts of Indonesia, have already banned dog meat consumption. Ending the trade in China is a realistic goal, although progress has been slow. Notably, in 2020, the Chinese cities of Shenzhen and Zhuhai implemented bans on dog and cat meat consumption, and China’s Ministry of Agriculture officially reclassified dogs as companion animals rather than livestock. Local Chinese animal welfare groups continue to advocate for nationwide legislation to ban the dog and cat meat trade. In the future, there is hope that the National People’s Congress will introduce animal welfare laws that will help to bring an end to this trade.
HSI’s partnership with Vshine
Under China’s 2017 Foreign NGO Law, foreign NGOs like HSI must register with the Chinese government and partner with a local organization to operate within the country. Vshine serves as HSI’s official partner, with an active presence throughout China. HSI continues to support Vshine’s campaigns and rescue and advocacy efforts that raise global awareness about the ongoing plight of animals in China caught in this cruel trade.
Humane Society International
Frank Loftus/The HSUS
Update: On January 9, 2024, South Korea’s National Assembly voted through a ban on the dog meat industry, making the breeding, slaughter and sale of dogs and dog meat for human consumption illegal from 2027.
The dog meat industry in South Korea
In South Korea, dogs are intensively farmed for human consumption, often kept in appalling conditions. They are only provided with minimal food and water, housed outdoors in small cages without protection from the scorching summers or freezing winters. Many dogs suffer from disease and malnutrition, enduring daily neglect. The methods used to kill them are exceptionally cruel, with electrocution being the most common practice.
Jean Chung
However, the majority of South Koreans do not regularly eat dog meat. It is primarily consumed by older men, who hold the mistaken belief that it offers health benefits. Dog meat is traditionally eaten as a soup called boshintang, which some believe invigorates the blood and combats lethargy, or as gaesoju, a tonic sold in traditional medicine shops. Consumption of dog meat is most common during the summer months, especially during Bok Nal, the three hottest days between July and August, when 70 to 80 percent of dog meat is eaten.
Jean Chung
Models for Change: Closing dog meat farms
HSI works collaboratively with dog meat farmers who wish to leave the industry but lack the resources to do so. We sign legally binding contracts with farmers, committing them to permanently close their operations. The dogs are voluntarily handed over to HSI. HSI also supports the farmers in transitioning to more humane and profitable businesses, such as medicinal herb or fruit and vegetable farming. This cooperative approach has helped HSI demonstrate to the South Korean government that the dog meat industry can be phased out with farmer participation rather than opposition.
Since 2015, HSI has worked directly in South Korea to shut down 18 dog meat farms and rescue more than 2,500 dogs who have found loving homes in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom and the Netherlands. A small number have found homes in South Korea.
These closures are a vital part of HSI’s broader strategy, which ultimately led to legislative action being taken aimed at phasing out dog meat farming in South Korea by 2027.
Jean Chung
Our broader campaign
HSI/Korea works on the ground with local organizations and activists to create culturally sensitive solutions that will change public perceptions. Many people in South Korea love and keep pet dogs. However, there is a misconception held by some that “meat dogs” are different from “pet dogs.” We are slowly changing this perspective by showcasing countless adoptions of former “meat dogs” into loving families. Our campaign shows the public that all dogs suffer in the same ways and are all deserving of love. Another goal of our campaign is to encourage pet adoption. At present, there is insufficient widespread acceptance of dog adoption and shelters in South Korea are overcrowded.
Michael Bernard/HSI
Progress
After almost a decade of campaigning by HSI/Korea and local groups, on January 9, 2024, South Korea’s National Assembly passed legislation banning the dog meat industry. This law, set to take full effect in 2027, makes the breeding, slaughter and sale of dogs for human consumption illegal. During the phase-out period leading up to 2027, HSI/South Korea will continue its work on the dog meat trade focusing its efforts on increasing public support for the ban, advising the government on dog welfare in relation to the dogs still on the farms, and conducting dog rescues to help highlight the ongoing plight of animals still trapped in this cruel industry.
Humane Society International / United States
CINCINNATI—Today the Procter & Gamble Company (NYSE: PG) joins with the Humane Society International #BeCrueltyFree campaign, to ban animal testing for cosmetics in all major global beauty markets by 2023.
The #BeCrueltyFree campaign was launched in 2012 with the aim of extending the European Union’s legal precedent – banning cosmetics animal testing and the sale of newly animal tested cosmetics – to countries where this practice is still allowed or even mandated by law. P&G’s support for #BeCrueltyFree will include joint education and capacity-building programs for non-animal alternatives, continued development of new animal-free approaches to safety assessment and advocating for the legislative end of cosmetic animal testing in key global beauty markets.
Kitty Block, President of Humane Society International and the Humane Society of the United States, said: “This partnership represents an important milestone in our efforts to end animal testing for cosmetics worldwide through our #BeCrueltyFree campaign. By working together with forward-looking companies like Procter & Gamble, we can make this ambitious goal a reality.”
Kathy Fish, Chief Research, Development and Innovation Officer, Procter and Gamble, shared “We are pleased to partner with the Humane Society International in the quest to end cosmetic animal testing. I’m proud of the passion and expertise our researchers have contributed already to this goal. I know they will continue to be a force for good, providing leadership and advocacy to help achieve our shared vision.”
For over two decades, P&G, HSI, the HSUS and Humane Society Legislative Fund have collaborated on the development and regulatory uptake of animal-free test methods. The organizations expect that by bringing their complementary strengths together, they will reach the end goal more quickly. A key focus will be gaining acceptance of new methods by regulators and enrolling many companies and governments globally to adopt cruelty-free public policies and practices.
Dr. Harald Schlatter, P&G Corporate Communications and Animal Welfare Advocacy, added: “We’ve invested more than $420 million over forty years in developing non-animal test methods. Our researchers have led or co-designed at least twenty-five cruelty-free methods that have replaced animal testing of cosmetic products. HSI and the HSUS have been powerful partners in advancing these methods globally.”
Troy Seidle, HSI Vice President for Research & Toxicology, said: “Animal testing of cosmetics not only causes unnecessary animal suffering, but it also represents outdated science. For more than 20 years, we have collaborated with Procter & Gamble to advance the development and regulatory acceptance of non-animal testing approaches, but in order to finally move proposed cosmetic animal testing bans into law in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Chile, South Africa and other influential markets, we need the active support of major industry leaders such as P&G. With the power of P&G’s household brands, I’m confident we can achieve a legislative end to cosmetic animal testing globally within five years.”
Humane Society International and its partner organizations together constitute one of the world’s largest animal protection organizations. For more than 25 years, HSI has been working for the protection of all animals through the use of science, advocacy, education and hands on programs. Celebrating animals and confronting cruelty worldwide – on the Web at hsi.org.
About the Humane Society of the United States
The Humane Society of the United States is the most effective animal protection organization, as rated by our peers. For more than 60 years, we have celebrated the protection of all animals and confronted all forms of cruelty. We and our affiliates are the nation’s largest provider of hands-on services for animals, caring for more than 100,000 animals each year, and we prevent cruelty to millions more through our advocacy campaigns. Read about our more than 60 years of transformational change for animals and people. HumaneSociety.org
About the Humane Society Legislative Fund
The Humane Society Legislative Fund is a social welfare organization incorporated under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code and formed in 2004 as a separate lobbying affiliate of The Humane Society of the United States. The HSLF works to pass animal protection laws at the state and federal level, to educate the public about animal protection issues, and to support humane candidates for office. Visit us on all our channels: on the web at hslf.org, on our blog at animalsandpolitics.com, on Facebook at facebook.com/humanelegislation and on Twitter at twitter.com/HSLegFund.
About Procter & Gamble
P&G serves consumers around the world with one of the strongest portfolios of trusted, quality, leadership brands, including Always®, Ambi Pur®, Ariel®, Bounty®, Charmin®, Crest®, Dawn®, Downy®, Fairy®, Febreze®, Gain®, Gillette®, Head & Shoulders®, Lenor®, Olay®, Oral-B®, Pampers®, Pantene®, SK-II®, Tide®, Vicks®, and Whisper®. The P&G community includes operations in approximately 70 countries worldwide. Please visit http://www.pg.com for the latest news and information about P&G and its brands.
Humane Society International/Canada expresses grave concerns regarding Canada’s new animal transportation regulations
Humane Society International / Canada
MONTREAL – Humane Society International/Canada is expressing its severe disappointment with the long-awaited amendments to the Health of Animals Regulations (Humane Transportation), published today in the Canada Gazette, Part II. The new animal transportation regulations fall far short of addressing the most serious risks to animal welfare, and will not fulfill their stated goal of ensuring that animals are treated humanely while transported between farms, slaughterhouses, auction markets and elsewhere.
Unfortunately, the regulations still allow hundreds of millions of animals to be transported for up to 72 hours without food, water or rest, depending on the species. Moreover, there are no meaningful requirements to protect animals from inclement weather, and only vague instructions for proper animal handling techniques and appropriate space allowances.
Riana Topan, campaign manager for farm animal welfare with HSI/Canada, stated: “Canadians strongly oppose animal suffering, and it is extremely disappointing that the CFIA continues to cater to the interests of the industries it is supposed to regulate, rather than the views of the public it represents. These new laws will do little to stop millions of animals from arriving dead, dying or injured at slaughterhouses each year because transport conditions will continue to be very poor.”
Animal advocates have long called on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) to improve animal transport laws and bring them in line with those of Canada’s trading partners, such as the European Union and the World Organisation for Animal Health.
Moreover, instead of ensuring that Canada’s regulations are informed by scientific research, the updated laws appear to have been influenced by livestock industry lobbyists who strongly opposed any changes to the regulations. In fact, investigations into the CFIA’s internal review process revealed that industry representatives fought hard to ensure that maximum allowable transportation times were not significantly reduced, even though CFIA staff recognized shorter times to be better for animals.
Topan continued: “Approximately 800 million farm animals will be transported in Canada at some point this year, and for each of these animals, transportation will be one of the most stressful experiences they are forced to endure. It is unacceptable that laws designed to protect animals have remained mostly unchanged since they were last updated in 1977. Canada has missed an important opportunity to bring its regulations in line with the best available scientific evidence, which shows that animals should not be transported for more than eight hours without a break.”
Media Contact: Christopher Paré – office: 514 395-2914 x 206 / cell: 438 402-0643, email: cpare@hsi.org
