Ontario should do more to protect vulnerable animals

Animals are part of our families and communities, and what we do — and don’t do — in the political arena has a significant impact on their lives and deaths. The Ontario budget being presented later this month is an opportunity to make small investments that will better protect animals.

Heinous cases of animal abuse — the details of which we won’t repeat here — are often in the news. It is the Ontario Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals which investigates potential abuse. The OSPCA is legally responsible for enforcing animal cruelty laws, yet it is a non-profit and charity reliant on donations.

Just 77 enforcement officers, most of them women, must cover our entire province and investigate 16,000 complaints annually. On top of oversized caseloads, the in- spectors’ conditions vary substantially depending on where they work. Some do not have two-way radios or reliable cell service, and cover regions that take more than five hours to cross. In some places, officers don’t even have office space and must use their own vehicles to investigate cases. It’s unacceptable.

In 2012, the provincial government began providing the OSPCA with a modest $5 million per year, which was used to reach more communities, hire new officers and improve their training. Yet this funding covers only about a third of the organization’s animal protection budget.

Ontario’s 2017-18 budget was $141 billion, so doubling or even tripling funding for the OSPCA would be a minuscule commitment. It would, however, make a meaningful difference for the women and men working to uphold animal cruelty laws, and for vulnerable animals. It would also likely help create more enforcement jobs.

Jurisdictions around the world are recognizing the importance of rigorous animal cruelty investigation workforces that aren’t forced to hold bake sales to raise funds. This stems from mounting evidence of links between violence against animals and the subsequent or simultaneous abuse of women and children. But it also reflects the fact that most of us care about animals.

In some places, humane enforcement officers are employed by municipalities. In others there are animal-cruelty focused branches of regional or national police forces. New York City recently created a municipal policing team concentrating on crimes against animals.

All of these examples offer useful lessons. A larger and thoughtful conversation about how to strengthen our antiquated and pitiful animal cruelty laws, and the best methods for their enforcement, is sorely needed.

We already spend public money on other species to help them (conservation) and to employ them to help us (canine and equine policing units). But our dollars also subsidize industries that harm animals.

People are increasingly taking animals’ well-being seriously, making changes in their own lives, and demanding more from business and government. It’s high time we put our money — public money — where our values are. Animals deserve better.

Kendra Coulter is a labour studies professor and holds the Chancellor’s Chair for Research Excellence at Brock University.

Amy Fitzgerald is a criminology professor and director of the Animal and Interpersonal Abuse Research Group at the University of Windsor.