REPORT

« Moving Towards a Genuine Companion Animal Welfare Network »

Photographies : Marc Lajoie, Étienne Boucher et Éric Labonté, MAPAQ. Photographies : Marc Task Force on

09-0138A Companion Animal Welfare

Submitted to Mr. Claude Béchard Member for Kamouraska-Témiscouata Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food Minister Responsible for Canadian Intergovernmental Affairs and the Reform of Democratic Institutions Deputy Government House Leader Minister Responsible for the Bas-Saint-Laurent Region REPORT september 2009

Task Force on Companion Animal Welfare Table of Contents

Introduction...... 3 Background...... 3 Mandate...... 4 Organization of this Report ...... 4 Task Force Members ...... 5 Summary of Deliberations...... 6 First Meeting ...... 6 Second Meeting...... 6 Third Meeting...... 7 Fourth Meeting...... 7 A Few Statistics ...... 8 2008 Highlights ...... 8 Animal Welfare Laws and Regulations ...... 9 Overview...... 9 Concerns ...... 9 Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force...... 11 “Puppy Mills” ...... 12 Overview...... 12 Concerns ...... 13 Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force...... 14 ANIMA-Québec...... 15 Overview...... 15 Concerns ...... 16 Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force...... 17 Funding...... 18 Overview...... 18 Concerns ...... 18 Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force...... 19 Overpopulation of Abandoned or Undesired Animals ...... 20 Overview...... 20 Concerns ...... 20 Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force...... 20 Chairman’s Point of View...... 22 Recommendations to the Minister ...... 25 Conclusion ...... 27 Appendix 1...... 28 List of Task Force Participants and Organizations Represented ...... 28 Appendix 2...... 29 Overview...... 29

2 Introduction

Background Various events in 2008 demonstrated how important companion animal welfare is to Quebecers. The news media reported on unacceptable living conditions for certain animals, particularly dogs, in what are generally referred to as “puppy mill.” Fairly or not, Québec is often singled out as a haven for such substandards dog breeding operations.

Protests were held in front of the offices of the Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation (MAPAQ) and Premier Jean Charest. Mr. Geoffrey Kelley, member for Jacques-Cartier, and Kathleen Weil, member for Notre- Dame-de-Grâce and Minister of Justice, met with organizers of a 55,000 name petition to condemn animal abuse. The government is aware that new, concrete action must be taken to improve companion animal welfare and restore Québec’s tarnished image in this area.

In Québec, enforcement of the provisions on animal safety and welfare in the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42), in effect since January 2005 for dogs and cats, has been entrusted to ANIMA-Québec (Association nationale d’intervention pour le mieux-être des animaux du Québec) by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. Certain Societies for the Protection of Animals (SPAs) and Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCAs), as well as police departments are also involved in animal welfare through the enforcement of the Criminal Code. Municipalities also have the power to regulate animal nuisances, welfare, and control within municipal boundaries. Many people, however, feel that these efforts are not yielding sufficient results and that companion animal welfare is still too often being in jeopardy.

3 Mandate Given the many voices calling for improved companion animal welfare in Québec, it seemed important to bring stakeholders together to develop a concerted strategy for action. As a result, the Task Force on Companion Animal Welfare, chaired by Geoffrey Kelley, Member for Jacques-Cartier, was established with the following mandate:

Examine the various issues involving companion animals, in particular that of “puppy mills,” in order to propose possible collaborative solutions and develop a synergy among the various organizations involved in dog and cat welfare in Québec.

Organization of this Report This report is the product of the task force’s deliberations. It begins by describing the group’s composition and the work accomplished. It then presents certain statistics to draw up an overview of the Québec situation.

The heart of the document is a status report on the situation. The main concerns expressed during group discussions, as well as in documents and E-mails received from the participants, have been grouped by category: animal welfare laws and regulations, “puppy mills”, ANIMA-Québec, funding, and the overpopulation of abandoned or undesired animals. For each subject, the report presents an overview of the situation, lists the main concerns, and outlines some of the solutions proposed by task force members.

The report concludes with the observations and recommendations made by the chair on the basis of task force discussions and the various documents and E-mails submitted during the course of deliberations. The chair also drew on contributions from other individuals and organizations who offered their comments and suggestions upon learning of the creation of the task force.

We emphasize that the purpose of this report is not to present a comprehensive portrait of all that was discussed, but to provide readers with a general overview.

4 Task Force Members

In order to foster collaboration and broaden partnerships among various companion animal welfare stakeholders in Québec and ensure contributions from a majority of interested individuals, the task force was composed of over thirty members. Appendix 1 presents a complete list of participants and their respective organizations.

We wish to thank all those who participated, together with their organizations, for making themselves available and for providing such a wealth of insights. Their contributions are essential to the success of such a process as well as in implementing actions aimed at improving the welfare of companion animals in Québec.

We would also like to gratefully acknowledge the tremendous contributions of representatives of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (known in French as the MAPAQ) in organizing all the task force’s work, in particular the contributions of Dr. Madeleine Fortin, Dr. Nathalie Hébert, Me Gabrielle Bernard, and Mrs Lilie Jacques.

5 Summary of Deliberations

The task force met four times to develop a portrait of the situation and identify potential avenues for improving companion animal welfare and restoring Québec’s tarnished image as a place where animals are abused. Along with meetings, participants exchanged numerous E-mails and materials in order to document the issues and promote debate.

First Meeting The first meeting, held in Longueuil on March 13, 2009, was an opportunity for participants to make contact and get comfortable with each other as a group. Participants around the table expressed their views on the current situation as well as what they expected in terms of improvements in companion animal welfare. This allowed the task force to see the current situation from a variety of perspectives. The chair reiterated the government’s commitment to exploring many possible avenues for solving the problems described.

A timeline and status report on the current animal welfare situation was presented, along with a draft regulation regarding the registration of certain dog owners, which had been released by the government in 2003 but not adopted. Participants were invited to send in written comments on the proposed regulation.

Second Meeting At the second meeting on April 6, 2009, in Québec City, a summary of comments received from participants on the draft regulation was presented. Discussions touched on the traceability of pets through the use of microchips, and participants discussed the legal and administrative differences between issuing permits and requiring registration, as well as the issue of relative costs.

The president of the Ordre des médecins vétérinaires du Québec outlined the role of his institution, that is, to ensure the protection of the public in the field of veterinary services, notably by dealing with complaints filed against veterinarians. The order operates under the auspices of the Québec Veterinary Surgeons Act and the Professional Code. The Office des professions makes sure that the Ordre adequately fulfills its mandate.

The structure and operation of ANIMA-Québec were also presented. ANIMA-Québec is a nonprofit organization linked to the MAPAQ by a framework agreement specifying the obligations of both parties. It is administered by a board of directors.

6 Third Meeting During the third meeting, held in Longueuil on May 8, 2009, discussions focused on the application of the Criminal Code and the inspection process under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42).

A review of the pilot service agreed upon by ANIMA-Québec and the Estrie SPA regarding inspection services in Estrie under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) was presented.

Fourth Meeting The fourth and final meeting of the task force was held in Québec City on June 12, 2009. Discussions addressed such issues as the legislative and regulatory changes desired by stakeholders, management of stray animals, euthanasia methods, sterilization, and the overall funding of animal welfare activities.

Presentations were made on private animal control companies as well as on stray cat management as it occurs in Québec.

Participants agreed that much had been accomplished, but that other meetings should be planned as early as fall 2009 to continue discussions.

From our point of view, the four task force meetings have enabled the various stakeholders to get to know each other. Despite the apparent simplicity of the matter, experience has shown that this was an ambitious project, one that resulted in significant progress being made. […] For the future, we believe it is important the meetings continue1.

1 SPA de l’Estrie, “Notre vision des suites à donner au groupe de travail sur le bien-être des animaux de compagnie,” June 1, 2009.

7 A Few Statistics

Animal welfare and protection are central to the mandate of several non-profit organizations. Eighteen task force member organizations were therefore invited to complete, on a voluntary basis, a questionnaire designed to provide an overview of their human and financial resources and activities. The table in Appendix 2 brings together 2008 data for 13 of the 18 organizations approached, including ANIMA-Québec. This represents a response rate of over 72%.

It is important to bear in mind that this data should in no way be interpreted as a complete picture of animal welfare and related activities in Québec. Five of the non-profit organizations approached did not respond, while other stakeholders who play significant roles, such as police departments, veterinary clinics, and private animal control companies, were not approached.

2008 Highlights – The thirteen organizations that responded to the questionnaire employ a total of 222 people, including twenty inspectors, and are assisted by 725 volunteers. Of the twenty inspectors, five only enforce the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42), ten are responsible for ensuring compliance with the (federal) Criminal Code and municipal bylaws, four only enforce municipal bylaws, and one enforces the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42), the Criminal Code, and municipal bylaws.

– There were 4,802 dogs and 19,175 cats euthanized in 2008. This number is less than the actual total, as it excludes private animal control companies and veterinary clinics, which also carry out euthanasia.

– The thirteen organizations received 2,758 complaints under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (L.R.Q., c. P-42), the Criminal Code, and municipal bylaws. They conducted 1,119 inspections of premises where animals are kept or sold and 73 seizures or rescues. Police interventions under the Criminal Code are not included.

– The organizations arranged for the adoption of 16,000 abandoned or unwanted dogs and cats.

This overview shows the scope of the efforts currently deployed in Québec. A large number of staff and volunteers are involved in companion animal welfare. However, the number of complaints received and animals euthanized demonstrates clearly that much education and inspection work remains to be done if certain types of irresponsible conduct by citizens are to be eliminated.

8

Animal Welfare Laws and Regulations

Overview In Québec, the three levels of government all have laws and regulations governing animals and their welfare. We will present a few of the main features of these in order to better demonstrate the environment in which the different partners operate.

Municipalities are empowered to regulate public nuisances (noise, smell, etc.), animal control within their boundaries (permitted species, number of animals per species or space, individual and commercial licenses, etc.), and stray animals. Certain bylaws include notions of animal welfare. However, there is no obligation to regulate, and what bylaws do exist vary widely from one municipality to the next. Infractions generally are punishable by fines. Bylaws may be administered by municipal inspectors or police officers, or contracted out to private animal control organizations or SPAs/SPCAs.

For the Québec Government, the animal safety and welfare section of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) has been in force since January 2005 for dogs and cats. It provides for routine and complaint-generated inspections. The Act specifies how the safety and welfare of animals can be compromise. Infractions are punishable by fines and may also lead to individuals being prohibited from possessing animals, or having limits placed on the number of animals they may possess (maximum two years). ANIMA-Québec, which employs inspectors and has a service agreement with the Estrie SPA, is responsible for enforcing the law.

At the federal government level, cruelty to animals is regulated by the Criminal Code. Criminal Code penalities may include fines, prison terms, and prohibition orders (maximum five years). The Criminal Code is enforced by police officers and SPA/SPCA special constables, who are appointed by the Minister of Public Safety. Intent to commit an act of cruelty must be established. Part XII of the Health of Animals Regulations, administered and enforced by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, also deals with the transportation of animals (all species).

Concerns Stakeholders bemoan the inconsistencies in existing municipal bylaws and the lack of regulation in several municipalities. Requiring municipalities to pass pet bylaws and harmonize practices would strengthen regulation and improve knowledge of premises where animals are kept.

Animal control services contracted out by municipalities to private animal control companies or SPAs/SPCAs were discussed. Certain private animal control companies were criticized by several task force members, who believe that

9 municipalities need to be more vigilant and insist on better monitoring. Differences in the standards applied by municipalities increases confusion over their role. Furthermore, access to municipal databases can also be quite complex, where such records even exist. A central databank accessible to animal welfare organizations would facilitate pet owner monitoring.

Concerning the section on animal safety and welfare in the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42), several stakeholders criticized its limitation to dogs and cats, and expressed the wish that it be extended to other domestic animals.

Furthermore, the fines and penalties imposed under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) were regarded as insufficient and task force members feel they have not had the required deterrent effect. For example, offenders can be forbidden to have pets, but only for a maximum of two years, and fines are low compared to other Canadian provinces. The maximum penalty in Québec for pet owners who violate the safety and welfare of their pets is $600 for a first offence and $1,800 for the second offence, whereas in Ontario, violations are punishable by up to 24 months imprisonment and fines of up to $60,000. In Québec, it is often less onerous to plead guilty and pay the fines imposed that to make the adjustments required to improve animal welfare.

Several SPAs/SPCAs would prefer that the power to enforce the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) not be assigned exclusively to ANIMA-Québec, thus making it possible for their organizations to do more work in the field. The section on ANIMA-Québec will discuss this idea.

Stakeholders also called for changes to the federal Criminal Code regarding cruelty to animals, so that animals are considered as living beings capable of feelings and able to experience discomfort, stress, and pain, rather than as mere inert consumer goods. The federal government has already been approached concerning this matter. Stakeholders also pointed out difficulties in applying the Criminal Code, as the Code requires proof that the animals have been improperly treated and that such treatment was intentional and willful.

Stakeholders are concerned by the confusion over the variety of laws and regulations and jurisdictions. Generally speaking, it is extremely difficult for people to know where to turn in matters of animal welfare, with numerous resources available: the MAPAQ, ANIMA-Québec, police departments, SPA/SPCA special constables, municipalities, and the Office de la protection du consommateur all receive complaints about animal welfare.

Some complainants may end up knocking on several doors, generating parallel, uncoordinated actions by the various organizations in the field. Task force members were concerned about this failure to work together. In some cases,

10 inspectors from the SPAs/SPCAs reportedly followed or preceded inspectors from ANIMA-Québec within hours or days, adding to the confusion.

Administering the various laws and regulations can also become complex for inspectors. Inspectors who are called on to enforce the Criminal Code or the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) need proper basic training and regular in-service training. A training program needs to be worked out with the Department of Public Safety to enable inspectors to understand and apply the relevant legislation.

Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force – Call on the Ministère des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de l’Occupation du territoire to analyze the municipal bylaw situation and propose adjustments as required to extend licensing practices and harmonize municipal bylaws. – Regarding the animal safety an welfare section of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42): o Update the Regulation on animal species or categories governed by Division IV.1.1 of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) to include, in addition to dogs and cats, other animals kept as domestic animals. o Substantially increase the penalties and fines for offenders. – Centralize the processing of complaints so they can be assigned to the appropriate resource in the field. – Combine information on existing breeding operations and on premises visited in response to complaints in a single databank in order to have an overview of the situation and prevent unnecessary duplication of efforts.

11

“Puppy Mills”

Overview Québec has a disturbing reputation as a haven for substandard dog breeding operations, with deplorable conditions. Puppies from these operations, commonly known as puppy mills, are generally in fragile health and may have temperament problems. Generally,

A puppy mill is defined by the National Companion Animal Coalition as a high-volume, substandard dog breeding operation that sells purebred or mixed breed dogs to unsuspecting buyers. Some of the characteristics common to puppy mills are: – Substandard health and/or environmental issues. – Substandard animal care, treatment, and/or socialization. – Substandard breeding practices leading to genetic defects or hereditary disorders. – Erroneous or falsified certificates of registration, pedigree, and/or genetic background. Note: These conditions may also exist in small volume or single-breed establishments2.

Under existing laws and regulations, no registration or permit is required to operate a companion animal breeding operation. In fact, anyone can become a dog or cat breeder. Currently, there is not enough information to provide a clear picture of breeding activities. Although animal welfare and protection organizations have information on breeding and shelter operations in their own areas, this information remains fragmentary and scattered.

The negative publicity surrounding puppy mills affects purebred dog breeders from recognized associations that impose strict standards, notably with regard to animal welfare. These breeders work conscientiously for the respect of animals and the development of their industry.

Professional breeders have seen their efforts thwarted and their image unfairly tarnished by unscrupulous “breeders” who put profits ahead of animal welfare. Clandestine breeders manage to unload what they see as their “product” onto pet stores or ill-informed buyers. A way must be found to increase consumer confidence, certify that the pets we buy are healthy, and indicate pet origins.

2 National Companion Animal Coalition leaflet “Acquiring a Dog?” for prospective dog owners.

12 Concerns Although all agree on the goal of closing down puppy mills, there is no real consensus on what constitutes a puppy mill in the first place. Some stakeholders consider a puppy mill to be any breeding operation where several breeds are present or high volumes of puppies are produced. The notion of “substandard” in CNAC’s definition leaves far too much room for interpretation.

Several discussions addressed the possibility of establishing a registration or permit system to better control dog breeding and put an end to puppy mill–type practices.

Microchip traceability was presented as a complement to a registration system. Certain municipalities already have bylaws requiring dog and cat owners to implant microchips to identify their pets. This can make it easier to track down the owner of a stray pet, among others.

Thus, discussions examined the possibility of updating a draft regulation to register certain dog owners. The reader will recall this regulation was tabled by the MAPAQ in 2003 but not adopted. However, task force members expressed many reservations regarding the effectiveness of registration in the fight against puppy mills.

Our experience shows that there is a maximum number of dogs that a person can reasonably handle in a breeding operation or shelter […] Merely registering the facility does not seem like an adequate or viable solution for improving dogs’ living conditions.3

Stakeholders see registration as a tool for establishing a database on dog owners, but as insufficient to close down puppy mills, most of which are clandestine operations.

Given that much information on dog owners is already available from ANIMA-Québec, SPAs/SPCA, and municipalities, it seems preferable to begin by gathering and sharing that information. The cost of issuing and managing registration certificates appeared high, and the potential benefits relatively low.

The advantage of permits over registration would stem from the establishment of breeding standards, which would be required before a permit could be issued. However, like registration, issuing permits would not necessarily be the best way to eliminate puppy mills, since these operations operate outside the law. The cost of managing a permit system would also be very high.

Stakeholders agreed that inspections needed to be intensified under current legislation and that a framework, including standards, was needed. The

3 Regroupement des Éleveurs de Chiens Champions du Québec (RECCQ) brief, June 9, 2009.

13 regulation of breeding standards seemed to several stakeholders to be the method of choice, both in order to standardize breeding practices and better define the inspectors’ work. Such standards would make actions against puppy mills more effective. Existing documents, such as the Guide des pratiques généralement reconnues – Espèce canine published by ANIMA-Québec, or the Code de pratiques – Principes généraux de bien-être et de sécurité en matière d’élevage canin au Québec published by the Regroupement des Éleveurs de Chiens Champions du Québec could be a good place to begin in setting standards.

Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force – Increase the number of inspectors qualified to enforce the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) and, to that effect, establish agreements with the SPAs/SPCAs who wish to participate in inspections. – Regulate housing, breeding, care, and euthanasia standards for companion animal. – Establish a central database of information on breeding activities currently available from stakeholders in the field as a first step toward establishing an inspection strategy. – Introduce an animal tracking system using microchips, including a central database for locating animals and determining their histories.

14 ANIMA-Québec

Overview ANIMA-Québec was created by MAPAQ in 2002, following the recommendations issued by the 1999 task force on the safety and welfare of animals. The organization was founded to achieve several key objectives: – Prevent animal cruelty. – Watch over the protection, safety, and welfare of animals. – Work with organizations in the private and public sectors to develop programs (particularly inspection programs) dealing with animal safety and welfare. – Sign and administer the necessary agreements to implement these programs. – Develop education and information tools regarding animal safety and welfare for animal owners and keepers. – Establish relations with organizations directly or indirectly involved in animal safety and welfare.

To date, ANIMA-Québec’s activities have focused on promoting companion animal welfare pursuant to the mandate conferred on the organization by the MAPAQ.

ANIMA-Québec was created to bring together as many animal welfare stakeholders as possible. In 2002, relations between the various stakeholders were relatively conflicted.

ANIMA-Québec is responsible for inspecting premises where animals are kept and raised and has the power to hire inspectors and sign agreements with other organizations to provide inspection services. However, the inspectors must be appointed by the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. In addition, as a government agent, ANIMA-Québec is subject to the same rules as the government in terms of protection of personal information and confidentiality.

ANIMA-Québec currently employs five inspectors, with four based in Québec City and one in Montréal. In 2007, it signed a service agreement with the Estrie SPA governing inspections in that region.

ANIMA-Québec’s core funding comes from a MAPAQ grant ($400,000 per fiscal year for fiscal years 2007–2008 and 2008–2009), as well as donations and sponsorships. It is important to note that ANIMA-Québec decided not to directly seek donations from the public so as not to adversely affect other animal welfare organizations.

15 Here is an overview of ANIMA-Québec’s achievements from January 2005 to June 30, 2009:

– Number of inspections performed 1,672 – Seizures and rescues conducted 9 – Notices of non-compliance issued 594 – Infraction reports issued 78 – Total complaints received 1,630

Concerns Historically, relations between animal welfare stakeholders, including ANIMA-Québec and SPAs/SPCAs, have been very difficult and tinged with mistrust. The initial task force meetings made it clear that the stakeholders were largely unfamiliar with each other and had no shared understanding of each other’s roles and responsibilities. The meetings helped improve this significantly.

The stakeholders agree on the need for partnership and cooperation to reach the common goal of improving companion animal welfare, particularly given the limited human and financial resources available. Although the task force meetings opened the door to the idea of working together, there is still much to be done to establish a real relationship of trust needed for everyone to work in partnership.

It is high time to put aside our differences and preconceived notions. We need to take off our blinders and put aside our personal interests to further the cause of animal welfare. We must stop publicly attacking each other. This only feeds public confusion and misunderstanding. We all have our strengths and weaknesses, but if we work together, I am convinced that we will achieve a constructive synergy.4

It is clear that ANIMA-Québec’s achievements so far, although significant, are not enough to meet the public’s expectations with respect to protecting companion animal welfare. All stakeholders agree that we must step up inspections and do a better job of publicizing the results. This would help demonstrate to the public that we are regularly taking concrete steps to improve the welfare of companion animals in Québec.

Some question the lack of visibility of ANIMA-Québec actions, which, in their view, adds to the impression that nothing or too little is being done to protect the welfare of companion animals.

4 E-mail from Dr. Joël Bergeron, President of Ordre des médecins vétérinaires du Québec (OMVQ), June 10, 2009

16 ANIMA-Québec cannot work in a vacuum and should also capitalize on the expertise of SPAs/SPCAs. These organizations have been active in the field for many years and have acquired extensive inspection expertise by enforcing the Criminal Code. A number of them have expressed interest in sharing their experience. They want to be able to enforce the section on animal safety and welfare in the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) in their areas.

In other respects, the composition of ANIMA-Québec’s board of directors has troubled stakeholders since the organization’s inception, notably due to the presence of a pet industry representative, a situation that some feel undermines the organization’s credibility. Due to the considerable profits involved in selling animals and animal food, the industry’s role is negatively perceived by a number of stakeholders.

Lastly, whereas ANIMA-Québec was initially supposed to rely on service agreements with SPAs/SPCAs to have inspections conducted, very little effort has been made in this regard. Despite perceptions of these service agreements as unwieldy, an assessment of the only agreement ever signed—which was presented by the Estrie SPA at one of the task force meetings—points to their feasibility. The financial resources allocated for inspections and for the housing, and care of seized animals are considered the most positive aspects. Communications about the steps taken, the general complexity of the agreement and liability insurance requirements are issues where there is room for improvement.

Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force – Quickly increase the number of field inspections through service agreements with interested SPAs/SPCAs. – Increase media coverage of ANIMA-Québec initiatives under the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42). – Reassess ANIMA-Québec’s structure and role and the composition of its board of directors to make more room for SPAs/SPCAs.

17 Funding

Overview The statistics presented in the Appendix 2 show that the 13 organizations that answered the questionnaire have a total budget of $11.3 million, of which $2.9 million comes from donations and fundraising activities. However, each and every one of these organizations is independent and they have no common funding. Some are having difficulties assuming the expenses associated with their infrastructure and operating costs. These organizations also depend on the generosity of people in their region. Furthermore, fundraising campaigns require a lot of work, and their success varies from one region to the next.

Soliciting donations, a necessary practice for SPAs/SPCAs to be able to continue operating, sometimes puts organizations in competition with each other, which does little to foster cooperation. Furthermore, due to limited resources and the considerable need for shelter, SPAs and SPCAs have not always been able to invest enough in their infrastructure. As a result, some are outdated and need work, while others need additional space to meet their needs.

ANIMA-Québec receives government funding for its operating and seizure costs pursuant to its mandate. In fiscal years 2007–2008 and 2008–2009, it received $400,000 in annual funding.

For fiscal year 2009–2010, the Conseil du trésor granted the Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation an additional budget of $500,000 in order to increase the number of inspections across Québec under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42).

Concerns Quebecers are less inclined than residents of other provinces to make donations to organizations active in animal welfare and other fields. As a result, compared to organizations in other provinces, SPAs/SPCAs are not as well funded to carry out their mission.

Traditionally, Québec residents have been stingier than residents of other provinces in their support of SPAs/SPCAs, which means many SPAs/SPCAs depend on animal control contracts for their operating funds.5

Funding is a major concern for SPAs/SPCAs, which must dedicate a lot of time and energy to raising money. It may be a good idea to collaborate on this in order to improve the fundraising results. Moreover, the lack of funding leads to

5 Animal aide Outaouais, Pontiac – Animal Welfare in Québec, May 18, 2009.

18 deteriorating animal shelter infrastructure and limits SPAs/SPCAs ability to intervene. Some stakeholders note that the animal shelter infrastructure at certain SPAs/SPCAs need to be upgraded. There are not enough financial resources available to meet the short term infrastructure needs.

SPAs/SPCAs also express certain fears about potential increases in the number of animals requiring shelter as a result of seizures and rescues carried out through inspection agreements under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42). This increase in animal traffic would mean additional expenses that would need to be covered.

In addition, when animals are seized under the auspices of the Criminal Code, the contribution paid by the Ministère de la Sécurité publique to SPAs/SPCAs to house them is $5.25 a day. This amount has not been adjusted for many years, and the actual cost to shelter these animals (excluding veterinary care) is now about $15 a day.

A number of stakeholders believe that new taxes (e.g., on the sale of animals or animal food) could be used to help fund animal welfare. In addition, municipal taxes are a considerable annual expense for SPAs/SPCAs. An amendment to the Act respecting municipal taxation giving animal shelters a tax exemption would provide a valuable indirect financial boost to help these organizations fulfill their mission.

Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force – Solicit corporations and existing foundations more than in the past. – Create a foundation to collect all animal welfare donations and redistribute sums to the various stakeholders. – Call on the Ministère de la Sécurité publique to adjust the housing allowance for animals seized under the auspices of the Criminal Code in order to reflect the actual cost of this service. – Establish new taxes on the sale of animal food or animals, or use the current sales tax to fund animal welfare activities. – Raise awareness at the Ministère des Affaires municipales, des Régions et de l’Occupation du territoire about the major impact that municipal taxes have on SPA/SPCA finances.

19

Overpopulation of Abandoned or Undesired Animals

Overview The overpopulation of abandoned or unwanted animals is a serious problem. SPAs/SPCAs are operating at full capacity, and any new space added fills up very quickly. Furthermore, it is getting difficult to find foster homes for all the abandoned animals. Dogs must be sent to Ontario, and SPAs/SPCAs have to perform a considerable number of euthanasias, which is against their principles.

Stakeholders are very concerned about the number of euthanasias conducted in Québec. The status report on the non-profit organizations whose representatives serve on the task force—which revealed that 4,802 dogs and 19,175 cats were euthanized in 2008—masks an even more alarming situation, because private animal control companies and veterinary clinics also carry out euthanasias.

Euthanasia by injection is a major expense for SPAs/SPCAs, because it must be performed by a veterinarian. In addition, there is no consensus among stakeholders on the use of carbon monoxide (gas chamber) for euthanasia. Currently in the United States, there is a movement to prohibit the use of gas chambers. However, in the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) “Guidelines on Euthanasia”6, published in June 2007, carbon monoxide is considerer to be a reliable and painless method when performed according to established procedures.

Concerns Stakeholders stress that Québec has fallen behind other jurisdictions in terms of pet owner accountability, which leads to more impulse purchases and abandonments. Adopting animals from an SPA/SPCA has grown less popular, as is sterilization.

Moreover, certain SPAs/SPCAs deplore how difficult it is to get access to veterinarians, either because of shortages in certain sectors or, more commonly, because these services are too expensive.

Solutions Suggested by Members of the Task Force – Educate the public about the costs and responsibilities associated with animal ownership, and launch school-based initiatives that will help modify attitudes and behaviour in the medium and long term. – Require that animals be sterilized starting at a specific age, unless used for reproduction by recognized breeders.

6 http://www.avma.org/issues/animal_welfare/euthanasia.pdf

20 – Encourage people to go to SPAs/SPCAs to adopt pets. – Invite the Ordre des médecins vétérinaires and SPAs/SPCAs to develop a shared-cost medical service for sick and injured animals.

21 Chairman’s Point of View

First, the chairman would like to thank all those who took part in the task force, and wishes to stress Quebecers’ strong interest and concern for animal welfare. He acknowledges that there was a real need for this task force and is convinced that progress will be made in the short term thanks to the stakeholders’ dedication to working together.

The chairman shares the concerns raised during the deliberations conducted these past few months and recognizes that major changes are required with respect to companion animal welfare in Québec. The work done by the task force has demonstrated the need for alignment between existing regulatory tools such as the Criminal Code, the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q. c. P-42), and municipal bylaws, and between interventions by partners active in the field of animal protection. Closer ties between the various organizations dedicated to animal welfare, the Ministère de la Sécurité publique, the MAPAQ, the Ministère des Affaires municipales, des régions et de l’Occupation du territoire and municipalities would foster concerted efforts for better animal protection. A true partnership between the various stakeholders would have a significant impact on results in the field.

Québec’s image as a haven for puppy mills must become a thing of the past. Everyone agrees that we need to act fast and send a clear message that these practices will no longer be tolerated in Québec. Cooperation and partnership are critical if we are to benefit from the expertise of all the resources at our disposal.

The Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) has been criticized for having certain weaknesses, notably its lax fines and penalties. Other jurisdictions, such as Ontario, have recently implemented a legislative and regulatory framework with standards for keeping and caring for animals, as well as much stricter fines and penalties than in Québec.

Establishing regulated breeding standards is a first step towards better supervision of the housing and care of companion animals in Québec. Of course, developing these standards will involve costs for the government, but it will facilitate inspection work.

Other legislative measures could be envisaged to improve the situation, notably implementing animal owner registration or issuing custody permits conditional to established standards. The chairman believes that establishing regulated breeding standards is the first step towards better supervision. He also feels that these options should be reassessed in light of the results obtained once standards on animal custody and care are implemented and inspection activities are stepped up.

22 ANIMA-Québec is a relatively young organization that has successfully developed expertise and quality work tools. Its achievements to date deserve recognition. Although insufficient financial resources explain some of the difficulties the organization has encountered in carrying out its inspection coordination mandate under the auspices of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42), we cannot overlook its shortcomings in terms of networking and developing partnerships. Clearly, ANIMA-Québec cannot fulfill its mandate without changing the way it does things, particularly by adopting a partnership model and drawing on the expertise of SPAs/SPCAs. It is time to work together toward the common goal of improving companion animal welfare.

The chairman is also concerned about the geographic distribution of ANIMA-Québec’s inspection resources: only one inspector is located in Montréal, while outlying regions are served from Québec City. Given the distances involved, this generates delays and significant travel expenses for inspection activities. Steps must be taken in collaboration with SPAs/SPCAs to add new inspectors in the field. It is important to ensure that inspectors receive proper basic training as well as regular in-service training. In addition, since a number of these inspectors would also be mandated by the Minister of Public Security to intervene by virtue of the Criminal Code, joint training with the Ministère de la Sécurité publique is also advisable.

Certain SPAs/SPCAs have animal control contracts with municipalities to secure part of their funding. However, competition between SPAs/SPCAs and private animal control organizations—and among private animal control organizations themselves—pushes down prices and affects profitability. This loss of income inevitably has an impact on the quality of facilities and the care animals receive. In order to minimize these problems, municipalities need to be made aware of the costs associated with such a service.

The sustainability of funding—whether for inspection activities or managing animal housing facilities and care for animals—is a significant concern. Year after year, considerable efforts must be made to obtain sufficient funding, and fundraising campaigns are not coordinated.

In addition to calling on government to get more involved in protecting companion animal welfare, the public must play a role itself. The solution to funding challenges cannot come from the government alone. Animal welfare is a collective responsibility, and the public, like all stakeholders, must do its part. It would be worthwhile to better coordinate fundraising campaigns and promote contributions in the form of donations and bequests.

In addition, people must be urged to act responsibly when acquiring companion animals. Too many pets are abandoned after an ill-considered impulse purchase, and the quasi-negligent attitude some people have regarding pet sterilization leads to too many undesired births, increasing the need for euthanasia.

23 If one thing has emerged from the task force’s deliberations and discussions, it is the certainty that in order to improve the situation, stakeholders must work together in partnership and form a true network dedicated to a common goal.

24 Recommendations to the Minister

The chairman recommends that the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food take the following priority actions to improve animal welfare in Québec:

• Foster further networking between the various organizations involved and develop a partnership model in order to avoid overlap and improve coordination.

• Regulate standards for animal custody and care to better govern companion animal breeding activities.

• Increase the number of inspectors qualified to enforce the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) in Québec, in order to improve geographic coverage, including remote or outlying areas.

• Provide basic and on-the-job training for inspectors.

• Require ANIMA-Québec to modify the composition of its board of directors by removing the pet industry representative, increasing the participation of SPAs/SPCAs, and ensuring regional representation in order to provide better governance and increase public trust.

• Work jointly with all SPAs/SPCAs to assess need to upgrade existing infrastructure to provide sufficient animal housing capacity.

• Work jointly with all organizations involved in companion animal welfare to: o Assess the desirability of creating a common fund to finance animal welfare activities. o Increase education initiatives to foster greater public accountability with respect to companion animal ownership.

• Draw inspiration from existing practices in other jurisdictions and assess the possibility of amending the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42), notably to impose stricter penalties on offenders.

25 In the medium term:

o Re-evaluate the need to establish a mandatory registration system for premises where animals are kept, based on the results obtained from the implementation of regulated standards of animal custody and care and an increase in inspection activities. o Evaluate the desirability of reviewing the Regulation respecting the animal species or categories designated under Division IV.1.1 of the Animal Health Protection Act (R.S.Q., c. P-42) in order to include animals kept for recreational purposes.

26 Conclusion

In just a few short months, the task force’s work has led to a considerable rapprochement between the various animal welfare stakeholders, as well as a better understanding of the roles, responsibilities, and methods of each. Task force members were able to get to know each other and lay the groundwork for better collaboration in the future. The issue of companion animal welfare is highly complex and sometimes emotional, but we must learn to put aside past conflicts and frustrations to develop a new vision based on a partnership model.

It is important to take advantage of this renewed openness to bring about a major shift in our approach to animal welfare concerns, and maximize cooperation between all partners. A common vision has emerged from this partnership: together, we can do more for animal welfare.

The chairman has faith in the task force members’ desire to make a difference and foster cooperation in working toward the common goal of animal welfare.

27 Appendix 1

List of Task Force Participants and Organizations Represented

ORGANIZATIONS REPRESENTATIVES SPCA Laurentides-Labelle Corinne Gonzalez SPA Mauricie Serge Marquis SPA Estrie Bruno Felteau Emmanuelle Jodoin SPCA de la Montérégie Linda Robertson SPA de Drummondville Philippe Labonté SPA de Granby Jean-René Martin SPA de Victoriaville Dominique Roux SPCA de Montréal Alanna Devine Daniel Davenport SPCA de l'Outaouais Yves Geoffrion Nathalie Joly SPCA Rouyn-Noranda Sylvia Loiselle SPCA de Charlevoix Monique Murray SPCA Duplessis–Côte-Nord Élizabeth Barsalou SPCA de Val-d'Or Louise Pash SPA de Québec Dr. Claude Martineau Denys Pelletier Ordre des médecins vétérinaires Dr. Joël Bergeron ANIMA-Québec Dr. Denise Tousignant Dr. Suzanne Lecomte Académie de médecine vétérinaire du Québec Dr. Michel Pépin Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) Louis Mc Cann Association des mushers du Québec Marc de Repentigny Canadian Kennel Club Ed Graveley Humane Society International/Canada Nikolas Gour Centres d’adoption d’animaux de compagnie du Québec Johanne Tassé Animal aide Outaouais Katherine Telfer Fédération des municipalités du Québec Farid Harouni SPCA du Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean Sylvie Tremblay Regroupement des Éleveurs de Chiens Champions du Québec Benoit Bouchard Association des techniciens en santé animale du Québec Danny Ménard Élizabeth Lebeau MAPAQ (Institut national de santé animale) Dr. Madeleine Fortin Dr. Nathalie Hébert MAPAQ (Direction des affaires juridiques) Gabrielle Bernard

28 Appendix 2

Overview

January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2008 Table based on responses provided by 13 of the 18 organizations surveyed

Criteria Results Number of employees 222 Number of inspectors 20 Number of volunteers 725 Accommodation capacity—dogs 692 to 786 Accommodation capacity—cats 1,143 to 1,173 Number of dogs adopted 7,560 Number of cats adopted 8,248 Number of dogs euthanized 4,802 Number of cats euthanized 19,175 Number of animal welfare complaints 2,758 Number of inspection visits 4,119 Number of seizures or rescues 73 Number of animals seized or given up by their 863 owner Partnership with veterinarians (yes or no) Yes (10 out of 13 organizations) Municipal animal control contracts (yes or no) Yes (11 out of 13 (number of municipalities) organizations) (1 to 25 contracts) Region served Home region or entire province Total budget $11,346,806 Donations and funding activities $2,858,526 (total)

29 Photographies : Marc Lajoie, Étienne Boucher et Éric Labonté, MAPAQ. Photographies : Marc Task Force on

09-0138A Companion Animal Welfare