Executive Summary

The United States (US) has a few key pieces of animal welfare legislation applicable at the federal level. The Animal Welfare Act (1966) sets general standards for the humane care and treatment that must be provided for certain animals who are bred for commercial sale, exhibited to the public, used in biomedical research, or transported commercially. The Horse Protection Act (1970) prohibits sored horses from participating in shows, exhibitions, sales or auctions and the Humane Slaughter Act (1978) mandates humane slaughter for certain species. Most US animal welfare laws are enacted at the state level. However, the scope of application of statutes vary across states.

Since the API was first published in 2014, several new pieces of legislation have been enacted and have been positive for animal welfare. The Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act (PACT), unanimously passed by Congress in November 2019, makes it a federal crime to engage in animal crushing. At the state level, California passed Proposition 12 in November 2018, considered one of the most progressive pieces of animal welfare legislation in the world. In fact, it sets specific minimum space requirements for animals raised for food, thus effectively banning cages for laying hens, sow stalls, and crates for calves. Furthermore, California passed the Circus Cruelty Prevention Act in May 2019, which outlaws the use of all wild animals in circuses. In October 2019, California became the first state to prohibit the sale of fur products, with a ban entering into force on 1 January 2023. California and Maryland also passed legislation prohibiting pet stores from sourcing animals from commercial breeders. Massachusetts passed two Protect Animal Welfare and Safety (PAWS) Acts: the first one in 2014 established an animal welfare task force, while PAWS II aims to improve cross-reporting of animal cruelty to law enforcement agencies, prevents the automatic euthanasia of animals confiscated from the animal fighting industry; and modernizes the state’s prohibitions against animal sexual abuse. In November 2019, Michigan passed Senate Bill 0174, which mandates cage-free conditions for egg-laying hens and prohibits the sale of non-cage-free eggs by December 2024.

However, there remains room for improvement in many areas related to animal welfare. Notably, there is a clear lack of federal protection for animals, since the Animal Welfare Act (1966) does not apply to birds, rats and mice used for research, horses used for research and farm animals. There is no federal legislation protecting farm animals during the rearing phase. Plus, the Humane Slaughter Act does not apply to poultry or fish. Furthermore, the US Department of Agriculture has removed public access to thousands of reports documenting the numbers of animals kept by research laboratories, companies, zoos, circuses and animal transporters, and whether those animals are being treated humanely in accordance with the Animal Welfare Act (1966). Since 3 February 2017, anyone wishing to access such information needs to file a Freedom of Information Act request, which can take months to be processed. Furthermore, cruel practices such as fur farming and various uses of animals for entertainment purposes are allowed in the US.

The US Department of Agriculture is responsible to promulgate laws and regulations pertaining to animal welfare on a limited number of issues. Its subsidiary the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) is responsible for enforcing the Animal Welfare Act, implemented by the APHIS Animal Care and Veterinary Units. With regards to animals used in scientific research, it is required that all institutions intending to use animals for research establish an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) to review the experiment planned. The Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM), created in 2000, promotes the Three Rs principles (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) and collaborates internationally on the development of alternatives to animal research.

Given the extensive body of scientific evidence, the US Government is urged to define in legislation, at a minimum, all vertebrates, cephalopods and decapod crustaceans as sentient. Furthermore, the US Government is strongly encouraged to expand the use of the Animal Welfare Act (1966), so that it applies to all sentient animals. The US Government is strongly encouraged to amend the PACT Act (2019), with removing the exemption for the animals killed for food or used in scientific research. Building upon the example of California’s Proposition 12, the US Government is urged to ban the worst forms of confinement for farm animals. In particular, the use of farrowing crates, sow stalls, and cages should be banned. The US Government is also urged to ban the production and sale of fur products, since fur farming is inherently cruel and causes pain, distress and suffering to animals. The US Government is also encouraged to outlaw cruel forms of entertainment that cause animal suffering, such as the use of animals for circuses, rodeos, fights, races, rides on wild animals, and the use of marine mammals in shows. The US Government is also urged to support the re-introduction and enactment of the Humane Cosmetics Act that would phase out cosmetic animal testing and the sale of cosmetics tested on animals. The US Government is strongly encouraged to allocate sufficient annual funding to ensure the effective implementation and enforcement of animal welfare standards. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each Animal Protection Index (API) indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

At the federal level, the Criminal Code contains provisions banning animal cruelty. Since the API was first published in 2014, new legislation has been passed that improves animal protection. Notably, amendments to the Criminal Code explicitly prohibit all sexual abuse of animals and strengthen the Code’s provisions dealing with organizing and keeping animals for animal fighting. Moreover, the Ending of Captivity of Whales and Dolphins Act was passed in June 2019, which effectively outlaws the keeping, breeding and capture of cetaceans for public entertainment through amendments to the Criminal Code, the Fisheries Act and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act. In addition, the Health of Animals Regulations were amended in 2019, reducing the maximum length of transport without access to feed, rest or water for some animals. At the provincial level, Quebec passed the Act to Improve the Legal Situations of Animals in 2015, which recognises domestic and captive wild animals as sentient.  

However, there is room for improvement in many areas related to animal welfare. Notably, there is no legislation applicable at the federal level dedicated to positive requirements for animal welfare. The variability in legislative and regulatory animal welfare protection across provinces means there is no consistency in Canada in the level of protection offered to animals. Although the Criminal Code applies to all provinces and territories and can be enforced across the country, provincial enforcement agencies generally use provincial or territorial legislation first, as they tend to be easier to enforce. Despite having been improved in 2019, the current Health of Animals Regulations still allow for the transport of animals for very long periods of time (36 hours for ruminants) without feed, water or rest. Moreover, the Federal Government has failed to regulate farming practices to safeguard animal welfare, choosing instead to leave the industry to self-police through the development and implementation of the Codes of Practice. These Codes are developed by the National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC), an industry-led multi-stakeholder committee that includes representatives from two animal welfare organizations, World Animal Protection and Humane Canada. The Codes are not legally binding themselves, but they are referenced in the animal protection regulations of six provinces to establish accepted industry practices. They are also often introduced as evidence in court as established accepted practices, even when they are not referenced in the law.  The Federal Government also defers to the Canadian Council on Animal Care (CCAC), made up of industry representatives, to develop guidelines with regards to animals used in research. Once again, allowing the industry to self-police.

At the federal level, there is no specific body with responsibility for development of policy on animal welfare. The Federal Government also relies on implementation and more detailed regulation and enforcement taking place at the provincial level. Most provincial legislation is the responsibility of a provincial minister who usually has the power to make regulations and the powers of enforcement are typically given to the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), which is primarily funded by public donations in many provinces.

The Government of Canada is strongly encouraged to strengthen the Criminal Code’s animal cruelty provisions and to move them out of the property section of the Criminal Code, and into a separate section acknowledging them as sentient beings. Furthermore, the Government of Canada is urged to work with the provinces and territories to ensure consistent protection to animals across the country. In particular, they should address the daily treatment of farm animals on the farm. Moreover, recognizing that wild animals cannot have their needs entirely met when kept as pets, the Government of Canada is strongly encouraged to follow the lead of countries like the Netherlands and Belgium which have developed laws governing which animals can be kept as companion animals, based on clear criteria including animal welfare and other robust scientific risk assessments. Another significant wildlife welfare issue impacting many wild animals in Canada is fur farming. The Government is strongly encouraged to take steps towards phasing-out this inhumane and unnecessary industry at the federal level as other nations have done or are in the process of doing (e.g. UK, Netherlands, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand and Denmark). The Government is also highly encouraged to develop legislation mandating the humane treatment of stray animals, wild animals and animals used in scientific experiments. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each Animal Protection Index (API) indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

Law 29,228 of 2010 on the Protection of Free and Captive Domestic Fauna is the main piece of animal welfare legislation in Venezuela. It provides a definition of animal welfare and lists various acts which constitute animal cruelty. This law prohibits causing deliberate cruelty to animals, as well as a failure to act in case of animal cruelty. Moreover, it creates a duty of care onto animal owners. This law furthermore bans dog fighting. With regards to wild animals, Law 29,289 of 1970 on the Protection of Wildlife forbids some of the cruellest forms of hunting, such as using poison or explosives.

However, there is room for improvement in many domains related to animal welfare. Notably, Law 39,338 is only applicable to domesticated animals, and it is unclear whether this law applies to captive wild animals. Fur farming is still allowed in Venezuela. Furthermore, the culling of stray animals is authorised in legislation. Overall, there is a lack of species-specific regulations for farm animals, draught animals and animals used in scientific research.

Law 39,338 grants responsibility for animal welfare to municipal authorities. Each municipal authority is entrusted to create a centre for the rescue and recovery of domesticated animals. Law 29,289 on the Protection of Wildlife gives responsibility to the Ministry of People Power for the Environment to implement this specific legislation. Overall responsibility for animal welfare does not seem to have been allocated to one specific Ministry.

The Government of Venezuela is urged to enact a comprehensive animal welfare legislative act that would enshrine animal sentience, and would forbid animal cruelty towards all animals, including wild animals. Further animal welfare provisions will stem from this recognition of animal sentience. In particular, the Government of Venezuela is urged to ban the worst forms of confinement for animals reared in farming, and to mandate humane slaughter for all animal species. In addition, the Government of Venezuela is strongly encouraged to fully ban fur farming, which is inherently cruel and causes pain, distress and suffering to animals. The Government of Venezuela is urged to outlaw the culling of stray animal populations, and to implement spay-and-neuter campaigns as a tool to control stray animal populations. The Government of Venezuela is also strongly encouraged to ban the use of all animals for entertainment, in circuses for instance. Overall, the Government of Venezuela is strongly encouraged to align its current legislation with OIE standards. Responsibility for animal welfare should be allocated to a Ministry, and a specific government body shall enact and assess the implementation of animal protection legislation. Such a government body should include representatives from animal welfare organisations. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each Animal Protection Index (API) indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

Argentina’s Animal Protection Law 14346, dating back from 1954, prohibits abuse and cruelty to animals. While the law does not explicitly recognise animal sentience, a landmark court ruling in 2016 has granted a writ of habeas corpus to a chimpanzee kept in a zoo, recognising that animals are bearers of rights and therefore should be considered persons under the law. This ruling could be used as a precedent in further court cases. In addition, initiatives at the municipal level are positive for animal welfare. Notably, the autonomous city of Buenos Aires and the province of Mendoza have prohibited euthanasia as a mean of stray animal population control. Over 20 cities, including Buenos Aires, have also banned the use of wild animals in circuses. Regarding wild animals, the Wildlife Conservation Law establishes that the protection of wild fauna is of public interest, and therefore all citizens have a duty to protect it. Since the API was first published, a Bill was proposed by Senator Ordarda prohibiting the sale of new cosmetic products and their ingredients tested on animals. At the time of writing, it is unclear whether this Bill has been adopted.

However, there is room for improvement in many domains related to animal welfare. Notably, Law 14346 does not cover a failure to act in case of animal cruelty and does not define a positive duty of care onto animal owners. Furthermore, Argentina does not ban the worst forms of confinement in animal farming, and still allows for the religious slaughter of animals without prior stunning. There are only basic welfare standards for animals kept in captivity, and Argentina does not ban fur farming. Legislation surrounding the use of animals in research is also far from aligned with international standards, since the Three Rs principles – Replacement, Reduction, Refinement – are not enshrined in legislation.

Animal welfare falls under the responsibility of the National Service of Health and Quality of Agricultural Food (SENASA), an organ of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock. In 2004, a National Commission for Animal Welfare was created, which comprises representatives from animal welfare organisations. There are no apparent limits to the issues that this Commission may address, but since its creation in 2004, it appears to have focused only on producing norms relating to the use of animals in farming.

The Government of Argentina is urged to recognise animals as sentient beings in legislation and to improve its anti-cruelty legislation through mandating a duty of care onto animal owners. Regarding farm animals, the Government of Argentina is urged to mandate the humane slaughter of all farm animals, without any exemptions for religious slaughter. The worst forms of confinement in factory farming should also be banned. The Government of Argentina is also strongly encouraged to ban fur farming, which is inherently cruel and causes pain, distress and suffering to animals. The Government of Argentina is encouraged to mandate the humane treatment of stray animals at the national level, as well as to ban the use of animals for cruel forms of entertainment, such as circuses. The use of animals for scientific research should be more tightly regulated, with ethics committees able to weigh the interest of the experiments with animal welfare concerns. Overall, the Government of Argentina is strongly encouraged to align its current legislation with OIE standards. The scope of responsibilities of the National Commission for Animal Welfare should be extended to all animal species. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

Since the API was first published in 2014, Peru has improved with regards to animal welfare, since a new Animal Protection and Welfare Law 30407 has been enacted in 2016. This new legislation is applicable to all domestic and wild animals in captivity. Importantly, Law 30407 recognises all vertebrates as sentient beings. Peru is regarded as progressive in certain areas of animal welfare, for instance through its national ban on the use of wild animals in circuses, as well as numerous prohibitions on mistreating animals. The use of animals for scientific research is also regulated by regional and a National Ethics Committee for Animal Welfare.

However, there is room for improvement in many domains related to animal welfare. Former legislation related to animal protection, Law 27265, provided more precise animal welfare provisions with regards to the transport and slaughter of farm animals, which have not been transposed in Law 20407. Moreover, inhumane practices such as bullfighting, cockfighting and other activities deemed culturally important are exempt from anti-cruelty provisions. Stray animals, working animals and wild animals also lack protection in Peru, especially since cruel hunting methods, such as falconry, are still authorised.

The Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation, acting as the governing body for Law 30407, is expected to coordinate with other relevant Ministries to enact complementary regulations to Law 30407. However, no evidence of such supplementary measures was found, which limits the ability to monitor progress on animal welfare in the country.

The Government of Peru is encouraged to define animals as sentient beings in its Civil Code, following the phrasing of Law 30407. With regards to farm animals, the Government of Peru is urged to mandate humane slaughter, which notably requires unconsciousness prior to slaughter, for all animals. Law 30407 authorises the keeping of wild animals as companion animals: instead, the Government of Peru is encouraged to adopt a positive list of species, indicating which animals can be kept as companion animals, based on clear criteria including animal welfare. The Government of Peru is also urged to remove the exemptions of animal cruelty for activities deemed of cultural importance, such as bullfighting and cockfighting. The Government is highly encouraged to develop detailed legal provisions to implement welfare standards for animals used in testing, which would therefore bring Peru closer to international standards. It is recommended that the scope of application of Law 30407 is extended to include all wild animals. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each Animal Protection Index (API) indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

Animal welfare legislation in Mexico includes the Federal Animal Health Act (2007), General Wildlife Law (2000), and the Official Mexican Standards at Federal level and general animal welfare legislation at State level. The Federal Animal Health Act (2007) provides a good basis for all other animal welfare legislation by mandating the Five Freedoms be respected for all animals. Similarly, the General Wildlife Law (2000) is clear in providing welfare provisions for wild animals. Nearly all Mexican states have separate animal welfare legislation, meaning that almost all animals in Mexico are provided some level of protection. State animal welfare legislation, particularly in relation to responsible pet ownership should be praised, as should the general anti-cruelty provisions that prohibit such acts as cosmetic mutilation and bestiality.

Animal welfare legislation in Mexico has some limitations. Federal standards, while including some welfare provisions, are aimed at ensuring animal health rather than animal welfare. One example is that standards for space requirements on a species-specific basis are not mandated at the Federal level. State animal welfare legislation is inconsistent, with some states providing more protections for some categories of animals than others. Similarly, while all states prohibit animal fights; there are some exemptions; only two states (Jalisco and Coahuila) prohibit bullfighting, and cockfighting is permitted in all states.

While the Ministry of Health; in conjunction with the Secretariat of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food; is responsible for implementation of the Federal Animal Health Act (2007), and the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources is responsible for the implementation of the General Wildlife Law (2000), there is no Government Ministry assigned overall responsibility for animal welfare. At a state level, responsibility for different aspects of animal welfare are assigned to the appropriate department; for example, the Department of Health may be responsible for provisions regarding rabies, while the Department for Education may be responsible for promoting and disseminating humane education.

Given the extensive body of scientific evidence proving that animals are sentient, the Federal Government of Mexico is urged to follow the example of the Federal District and of Michoacán de Ocampo and recognise that all animals for whom there is scientific evidence – at a minimum, all vertebrates, cephalopods and decapods crustaceans – are sentient beings and to enshrine this principle into legislation at a Federal level. Recognising animals as sentient will underpin further animal welfare considerations. The Federal Government of Mexico is strongly encouraged to extend current prohibitions on the use of animals for entertainment purposes. Such a prohibition should cover rodeos, animal races, all animal fights including bullfighting and cockfighting, rides on wild animals and all other forms of entertainment. The Federal Government of Mexico is encouraged to create a national multi-stakeholder committee in order to effectively engage all actors involved in maintaining animals’ well-being to find solutions for welfare concerns. This committee would guide the country’s policies and strategies on animal welfare, in line with international standards. This committee should include representatives of animal welfare organisations. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each Animal Protection Index (API) indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

Law 84 is the main animal welfare law in Colombia. It provides a detailed definition of cruelty acts towards animals and establishes a duty of care onto animal owners. It is positive that the legislation surrounding the use of animals for research purposes mandates the approval of experiments using live animals by an ethics committee. Since the API was first published in 2014, Colombia has showed progress in various areas related to animal welfare. For instance, Law 1638 of 2013 has banned the use of wild animals in circuses. Furthermore, Law 1774 of 2016 amended Law 84 and added a paragraph to the Civil Code, recognising animals as sentient beings. More recently, in April 2019, the House of Representatives unanimously approved Bill 120/2019, which bans all animal testing for cosmetic products and their ingredients. If enacted, the ban would be applicable to all cosmetics manufactured within Colombia and imported into the country. At the time of writing, this Bill has been presented to the Senate. If the Senate approves the Bill, the law will come into force 12 months later.

However, there remains room for improvement in many areas related to animal welfare. Notably, Law 84 exempts bullfighting and cockfighting from cruelty considerations. Furthermore, there is a lack of species-specific regulations surrounding the rearing of farm animals, and the treatment of stray animals. Humane slaughter is also not mandated in legislation. The exploitation of animals for the fur industry is also allowed. Other forms of entertainment using animals are allowed.

Responsibility for animal welfare is divided across multiple Ministries and government bodies. The Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development has responsibility for wild animals, while the Ministry of Public Health is in charge of scrutinising experiments that intend to use live animals. The Colombian Institute of Agriculture, part of the Ministry of Agriculture, promotes the work of the OIE. However, there is no Ministry dedicated to animal welfare, and there is a lack of a central authority dedicated to developing policy on animal protection in Colombia. 

The Government of Colombia is urged to ban the worst forms of confinement for animals reared in farming and to mandate humane slaughter for all livestock animal species. In addition, the Government of Colombia is strongly encouraged to fully ban fur farming, which is inherently cruel and causes pain, distress and suffering to animals. The Government of Colombia is urged to outlaw the culling of stray animal populations, and to implement spay-and-neuter campaigns as a tool to control stray animal populations. Building upon the 2013 ban on the use of wild animals in circuses, the Government of Colombia is strongly encouraged to ban the use of all animals for entertainment which cause animal suffering. As culture should not be an excuse for animal cruelty, the Government of Colombia is strongly encouraged to remove the exemptions in Law 84 allowing bullfighting and cockfighting. Such practices are inherently cruel and should be outlawed. Overall, the Government of Colombia is strongly encouraged to align its current legislation with OIE standards. Responsibility for animal welfare should be allocated to a Ministry, and a specific government body should enact and assess the implementation of animal protection legislation. Such a government body should include representatives from animal welfare organisations. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.

Executive Summary

Brazil has a long tradition of incorporating animal protection in its legislation, since the main Decree relating to animal welfare dating back to 1934. Decree 24.645 establishes protection against cruelty and ill-treatment of animals. Environmental Crimes Law 9,605 of 1998 prohibits engaging in an act of abuse for domesticated or wild animals. Since the API was first published in 2014, this law has been strengthened to make it a crime to mistreat a domesticated animal. Furthermore, painful or cruel experiments on living animals, even if conducted for educational or scientific purposes, are considered crimes when alternatives resources exist. Furthermore, legislation on the slaughter of animals was improved in 2017, when Normative Instruction No. 12 of 2017 mandated humane slaughter to be carried out only by qualified establishments and employees. In 2017 and 2018, further legislation was enacted prohibiting cruelty during the transport of live animals. With regards to companion animals, federal legislation 13,426 enacted in 2017 regulates the humane dog and cat population management, through measures such as extensive spay-and-neuter campaigns.

However, there is still room for improvement in many animal welfare areas. Notably, while Senate Bill 351 of 2015 makes a breakthrough acknowledgement that animals are no longer considered things in law, their sentient status is still not clearly defined. Moreover, there is a clear lack of nationally applicable legislation with regards to the rearing of farm animals. The worst forms of confinement, such as sow stalls, farrowing crates and cages, are not prohibited in legislation, and halal slaughter is authorised without prior stunning. Brazil’s economy largely relies on its agricultural exports, and the live animal exports is inherently cruel. The use of animals for entertainment is still authorised, such as in circuses or rodeos, which causes animal cruelty. In 2017, an amendment to the Constitution specified that some sports using animals, such as rodeos and vaquejadas, could be exempt from cruelty consideration if considered of cultural importance. However, culture should never be an excuse for animal abuse. Furthermore, the use of animal testing for cosmetic products has not yet been banned.

 Animal welfare is institutionalised in the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock and Food Supply (MAPA) through regulations, policies and committees dedicated to the subject. The National Council for the Control of Animal Experimentation of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation oversees the use of animals in science and education. The Ministry of the Environment oversees issues concerning wild animals, although animal welfare is not an institutionalised subject within this Ministry. Its division, the Brazilian Institute for Environmental and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA), is the relevant federal administrative agency responsible for policing and enforcing of federal environmental laws. The Ministry of Environment works throughout the country with partners, for example, with agencies such as Interpol and local police on issues such as illegal wildlife trade. However, acknowledging recent Decree 9962/2019, there may be ongoing changes at government level with regards to responsibility for animal welfare.

The Government of Brazil is urged to enshrine animal sentience in legislation, recognising that vertebrates, cephalopods and decapod crustaceans are sentient. With regards to farm animals, the Government of Brazil is urged to ban all slaughter conducted without prior stunning. Furthermore, the Government is highly encouraged to enact more detailed, species-specific legislation with regards to the rearing of farm animals, which would ban the worst forms of confinement for these animals. The Government of Brazil is furthermore highly encouraged to adopt a Positive List of species, specifying which animals can be kept as companion animals, based on clear criteria including animal welfare and other relevant concerns. Such a list would help with preventing the exotic pet trade, which negatively impacts wild animals. The Government of Brazil is also urged to ban fur farming, as well as the culling of stray animals. The Government of Brazil should also outlaw cruel practices which use animals for entertainment, such as circuses and rodeos. It is positive that hunting of animals is prohibited at the federal level, however, some States still allow recreational hunting. The Government of Brazil is thus highly encouraged to ban sports hunting throughout the whole country. Further legal and policy recommendations are associated with each indicator and contained in the relevant sections of this report.