JIBC Research Brief

Principle Researcher(s) & Affiliation(s)
Emma Fanning

Research Brief
Animal Cruelty
Variability in Animal Cruelty Legislation in Canada

Advisor(s): Gregory Anderson

Date: August 22, 2019.
Introduction
Companion animals provide unique health benefits such as alleviating
depression and anxiety, which makes pet ownership desirable to many
Canadians (Maharaj, 2016). Not to mention their adorable appeal.
Canada was home to over 6.4 million dogs and 8.5 million cats in 2016
(Hunter & Brisbin, 2016). Each province and territory in Canada has
their own preventative companion animal cruelty legislation to provide
animal welfare.

Research Field
Animal Cruelty

Student Involvement
N/A

Partners & Collaborators
N/A

Methods
The research data for this study was collected utilizing secondary
research. This qualitative study retrieved credible sources through the
Justice Institute of British Columbia’s (JIBC) EBSCOhost and library
catalogue. Various keywords and subject terms were searched to scout
academic journals for the literature review process. Initially, the term
‘animal cruelty’ was reviewed which rendered over seven-thousand
(7,000) results. In order to retrieve relevant research to this study, the
search was limited to Full Text, Scholarly, Journals, SocINDEX,
PsycINFO, and MEDLINE providers. Academic journals as old as 2009
were considered. Additional keywords such as, ‘Canada’ and ‘law” were
inputed which returned twenty-one (21) results. Literature provided by
Google Scholar was also critically assessed using the same keywords
and dates to provide vital secondary research. For the purpose of this
study, eleven (11) academic journals were examined for their reliability
and relevance.

Funding Sources
N/A: Course-bases project.

Results/Findings
Three themes became pertinent from this research. The following
themes are that:

Project Period
From:
From: (Month/Year)
January 2019
To:
To: (Month/Year)
April 2019

Political climate impacts the movement of governments to strengthen
provincial legislation.
Each province and territory has jurisdiction to amend provincial level
legislation, however amendments are rarely made.
There is mutual agreement amongst literature that Canada has
insufficient legislation to promote companion animal welfare.

‐ Funded
‐ In Kind

$ 0.00
$ 0.00

‐ Total

$ 0.00

Provincial acts of legislation were further assessed in comparison to the
themes.

Structured Abstract
Discussion
This research of preventative animal cruelty legislation in Canada provided that federal
and provincial levels of legislation are generally ineffective to substantiating justice for
companion animals. In comparison to Canada, the United States actually hands more
severe sentences to animal cruelty offenders with sentences averaging two (2) to ten (10)
years. While in Canada, sentences average from six (6) to eighteen (18) months (Deckha,
2012). This research also considered the legal status of companion animals. Companion
animals are considered ‘property’ as per federal and provincial legislation. For this reason,
provincial level legislation can be enhanced as per the powers given to amend matters of
‘property’ by the Constitution Act (1867) (Verbora, 2015). The main limitation of this
research was the lack of primary research available on the repercussions of legislation of
animal welfare. Provincial level legislation remains to be the most effective method in
punishing animal cruelty offenders, however various recommendations were made to
promote companion animal welfare through legislation.
Conclusions or Recommendations
From this research, various conclusions and recommendations were created. The
recommendations include, but are not limited to: (1). Amend current legislation at the
federal and provincial level to have harsher fines and sentences; (2). Allow organizations
such as the BC SPCA, to be included in designing legislation; (3). Provide ‘expert witness
testimonies’ to stand as evidence; (4). Conduct more primary research to consider the
repercussions of animal cruelty on society; (5). Change the ‘property’ status of companion
animals to include basic rights to be free of harm such as humans.
This research concluded that companion animals are not granted sufficient rights to
promote their welfare. Federal and provincial legislation make it challenging to convict
suspected animal abusers. Provinces such as B.C and Ontario who accommodate large
urban cities still do not constitute harsh legislation. Current practices do not promote fair
justice for the vulnerable population of pets.

Key References

Publications/Presentations/Reports
Deckha, M. (2012). Property on the borderline: A comparative analysis of the legal
status of animals in Canada and the United States. Cardozo Journal of
International & Comparative Law, 20(2), 313–365. Retrieved from
https://works.bepress.com/maneesha_deckha/1/
Ledger, R. A., & Mellor, D. J. (2018). Forensic use of the five domains model for
assessing suffering in cases of animal cruelty. Animals, 8(7),101-120.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ani8070101
Verbora, A. R. (2015). The political landscape surrounding anti-cruelty legislation in
Canada. Society & Animals: Journal of Human-Animal Studies, 23(1), 45–67.
https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-12341353

www.jibc.ca/research