Harmonize Enhanced Feed Ban

Summary#

The Canada Gazette published a proposal (Part I) that would change rules about certain cattle parts now banned from non-ruminant feed, fertilizer and pet food. The change would let some lower‑risk tissues be reused instead of destroyed, while keeping high‑risk parts and all human‑food bans in place. The proposal is led by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and was published on July 11, 2026 with a 60‑day comment period.

What it does#

• Allows a defined list of lower‑risk specified risk material (SRM) to be treated as prohibited material and used in non‑ruminant livestock feed, fertilizer and pet food. Eligible tissues include the skull, eyes, trigeminal and dorsal root ganglia, tonsils, and distal ileum from cattle over 30 months, and the distal ileum from cattle under 30 months.
• Keeps the highest‑risk tissues — the brain and spinal cord of cattle over 30 months — banned for all uses.
• Keeps SRM completely banned in human food and keeps the ban on feeding mammalian protein to ruminants.
• Requires a new CFIA permit to separate eligible SRM from high‑risk SRM in cattle over 30 months. No permit would be needed to handle distal ileum from cattle under 30 months.
• Changes would be made to the Health of Animals Regulations, Feeds Regulations, 2024, Fertilizers Regulations, and related parts of the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations and Food and Drug Regulations to reflect the new framework.
• Adoption would be voluntary for slaughter and processing establishments. They could continue following current rules if they prefer.

Who's affected#

• Slaughter and meat processing establishments. They would decide whether to apply for permits and repurpose some SRM instead of disposing of it.
• Renderers and deadstock collectors. Some businesses may get more prohibited material to process; others (including one SRM‑only renderer) could lose significant revenue.
• Feed, pet food and fertilizer manufacturers. They could gain access to more and cheaper cattle‑derived inputs, including imports from the U.S.
• Cattle producers. Benefits are mostly indirect (lower costs downstream and potentially stronger demand/prices).
• Canadian Food Inspection Agency, provincial inspection authorities, and trading partners (notably the United States).
• Consumers and the public indirectly, through changes in product supply and trade.
  Note: the source lists different counts of affected businesses in different places (for example, it reports both 424 and 644 businesses), so the exact number is unclear from the document.

Why it matters#

• It aims to align Canada’s rules with U.S. practice and current international risk assessments. The federal analysis says this can be done without increasing the nation’s BSE risk if safeguards stay in place.
• Practical effects for business: processors could save on disposal and handling costs and gain new revenue streams. The government estimates a total net benefit of about $97.6 million over 10 years (about $13.9 million per year), with industry benefits around $102.0 million and industry costs around $4.3 million (all in 2025 dollars). CFIA implementation costs are estimated at about $0.1 million over 10 years.
• It could change market dynamics: cheaper imports and new domestic supplies of rendered products could lower prices for tallow and meat‑and‑bone meal and put pressure on some Canadian renderers.
• Health and safety: the proposal keeps the main protections — the mammal‑to‑ruminant feed ban and SRM exclusion from human food — and relies on permits, segregation, traceability and surveillance to manage risk.
• This is a proposal, not law. Interested parties had 60 days from publication (July 11, 2026) to comment.