CFIA cracks down on livestock haulers

Avatar photo

OTTAWA, Ont. — The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has more than doubled the maximum fines that can be levied against livestock haulers who mistreat animals during transport.

In what it calls the first increase in over 10 years, the CFIA announced administrative monetary penalties (AMPs) of up to $10,000 can now be imposed against transporters who violate the Health of Animals Act, up from $4,000.

“The agriculture industry knows that a healthy farm and processing business begins with healthy animals and while the majority handles and transports animals safely, a few need to do better,” said Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz. “Our Government is providing the Canadian Food Inspection Agency with the tools it needs to impose tougher fines and improve animal welfare.”

Repeat offenders can face fines that are 50% higher and the CFIA will now be able to look at an offender’s five-year history, up from the previous three years. That means a livestock hauler who has committed two serious violations within five years can face fines of up to $15,000 compared to the previous maximum of $6,000.

Avatar photo

Truck News is Canada's leading trucking newspaper - news and information for trucking companies, owner/operators, truck drivers and logistics professionals working in the Canadian trucking industry.

Have your say

This is a moderated forum. Comments will no longer be published unless they are accompanied by a first and last name and a verifiable email address. (Today's Trucking will not publish or share the email address.) Profane language and content deemed to be libelous, racist, or threatening in nature will not be published under any circumstances.


  • This makes perfect sense and fits in with the way most other things are done.
    The producer doesn’t get any money for his product and can’t afford to pay for any livestock problems he created. Besides, if responsibility was forced on him there soon wouldn’t be any production.
    The retail seller has most of the money generted by the product, but since he has the money he also has the power to create or is at least closely associated with those who create the laws. He certainly isn’t going to acceipt responsibility for any livestock problems even though his facility may have created them.
    So, naturally, that leaves the man in the middle. He isn’t making much for hauling the livestock so he doesn’t have any power or connection to power. Since no one in the transport industry is making any money there is always someone willing to take his place if you put him out of business.
    There fore it should be safe to make the middle-man 100% responsible for something where is involvment was about 10%.