Canada Tightens Captive Wild Animal Rules

Summary#

This bill, called the Jane Goodall Act, would change Canada’s Criminal Code and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (WAPPRIITA). It would restrict keeping, breeding, transporting, and using great apes, elephants, and many other listed wild animals in captivity. It creates new criminal offences, a federal permit system, and a pathway for the government to add more species.

• Creates criminal offences for owning in captivity, breeding, or possessing reproductive materials of listed animals, with limited exceptions (Criminal Code 445.2(2)).
• Limits performances and rides using listed animals, unless provincially licensed (Criminal Code 445.2(4)).
• Requires federal permits to import, export, or move listed animals between provinces; adds strict criteria for when permits can be issued (WAPPRIITA 6(2), 7.1, 10(1)(b), 10.1).
• Lets the federal Cabinet add or remove species from the protected list based on expert input (Criminal Code 445.3; WAPPRIITA 21.2).
• Creates “animal advocates” who can ask courts to order changes in an animal’s housing, relocation, or forfeiture after a conviction (Criminal Code 447.01–447.03).
• Names several major Canadian zoos and aquariums that are “deemed” permitted/designated at the start for certain activities (Related Provisions).

What it means for you#

• Households and private owners

  • New ownership of listed species becomes a criminal offence unless an exception applies. Existing animals may be “grandfathered” if they were already in captivity and remain so; breeding and acquiring sperm/eggs/embryos would be banned (Criminal Code 445.2(2), 445.2(3.2)).
  • Using listed animals for shows or rides would be illegal unless provincially licensed (Criminal Code 445.2(4)).
  • Moving a listed animal across provincial borders would require a federal permit; import/export also requires a permit (WAPPRIITA 6(2), 7.1, 10(1)(b)).

• Workers (zookeepers, veterinarians, researchers)

  • Facilities will need to meet high care standards to be designated as eligible animal care organizations and to keep permits (WAPPRIITA 10.1(3), 10.1(6)).
  • Courts can order changes to enclosures, social grouping, relocation, or surrender of animals after a conviction; staff may need to implement such orders (Criminal Code 447.02(1)).
  • Non-harmful scientific research can proceed with provincial or federal authorization, but will face permit and licence checks (Criminal Code 445.2(3.4); WAPPRIITA 10(1)(b), 10(1.1)).

• Businesses (zoos, aquariums, sanctuaries, circuses, breeders, animal entertainers)

  • Keeping, breeding, showing, importing/exporting, or transporting listed animals will require licences or permits and compliance with “highest” animal care standards; entertainment performances are restricted (Criminal Code 445.2(2), 445.2(4); WAPPRIITA 10.1(3), 10.1(5)).
  • Several institutions are automatically designated/permited at the start (e.g., Assiniboine Park Zoo, Calgary Zoo, Granby Zoo, Montréal Biodôme, Ripley’s Aquarium of Canada, Toronto Zoo, Vancouver Aquarium) for set activities, subject to modification or revocation (Related Provisions).
  • Officers and directors can be personally liable if a corporation commits an offence (Criminal Code 445.2(4.1)).

• Local and provincial governments

  • Provinces can license captivity for non-harmful research or where it is in the animal’s best interests, and can authorize performances; they can also ask the federal minister to review permits (Criminal Code 445.2(3.4), 445.2(4); WAPPRIITA 10.1(12)).
  • Provincial systems may need to process licensing and coordinate with federal permits. Timing: provisions take effect 180 days after Royal Assent (Coming into Force).

• Indigenous peoples

  • The Act states it upholds Aboriginal and treaty rights and does not abrogate or derogate from them (Related Provisions).

• Zoo and aquarium visitors

  • Fewer entertainment-style shows and rides involving listed animals; more emphasis on welfare, conservation, and non-harmful research (Criminal Code 445.2(4); WAPPRIITA 10.1(3)(c)(iii)).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No fiscal note or cost estimate identified. Data unavailable.
• The bill creates new federal permitting, designation, review, and enforcement tasks under WAPPRIITA and new court processes involving animal advocates under the Criminal Code. Dollar amounts are not stated in the bill. Data unavailable.
• No explicit appropriations, fees, or fine schedules are added in the bill text. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Improves animal welfare by stopping new captivity, breeding, and entertainment uses for great apes, elephants, and other listed species, except in narrow cases (Criminal Code 445.2(2), 445.2(4)).
• Uses expert-informed lists and permits so only facilities meeting the highest standards keep such animals, reducing suffering and public safety risks (Criminal Code 445.3(2); WAPPRIITA 10.1(3), 21.2(2)).
• Aligns import, export, and interprovincial transport with welfare criteria, which can curb harmful trade and breeding pipelines (WAPPRIITA 7.1, 10(1)(b), 10(1.1)).
• Creates animal advocates and court tools to act in the “best interests” of animals after offences, enabling relocation to sanctuaries or better conditions (Criminal Code 447.01–447.02).
• Grandfathers existing animals and allows rehab and non-harmful research, balancing welfare goals with continuity of care and science (Criminal Code 445.2(3.2), 445.2(3.4)).

Opponents' View#

• May disrupt conservation breeding or legitimate research by adding permit hurdles and banning most breeding, relying on case-by-case “best interests” judgments that can be subjective (Criminal Code 445.2(2)(b); WAPPRIITA 10(1)(b), 10(1.1)).
• Imposes new administrative and compliance burdens on facilities and provinces; smaller zoos and sanctuaries may struggle to meet “highest” standards or navigate permits (WAPPRIITA 10.1(3), 10.1(6)).
• Creates uneven treatment by “deeming” select large institutions as designated/permited at the start, which could disadvantage others (Related Provisions).
• Overlaps with provincial jurisdiction on captive wildlife and performances, risking legal disputes over licensing and enforcement (Criminal Code 445.2(3.4), 445.2(4); Preamble notes shared jurisdiction).
• Enforcement is complex for private owners of listed reptiles and other species; grandfather rules limit but do not remove the risk of underground trade or non-compliance (Criminal Code 445.2(2)–(3.2); Schedules 1–4).