We welcome the Ontario government’s decision to ban certain medically unnecessary procedures on cats and dogs. Starting January 1, 2027, declawing (onychectomy) in cats, and ear cropping and devocalization in dogs, will no longer be allowed unless a veterinarian decides the procedure is needed to treat an injury or disease and records that decision in the animal’s file. These painful and permanent procedures are widely recognized as cruel, outdated, and harmful, and banning them is an important step forward for companion animals in Ontario.
In a joint submission with Animal Environmental Legal Advocacy (AEL Advocacy) to the Ministry of the Solicitor General, our organizations strongly supported banning medically unnecessary procedures, while also suggesting practical changes to make the new rules stronger and more consistent with best practices across Canada.
For example, a short list of three specific procedures leaves important gaps. We continue to recommend a broader, principles‑based approach that bans any procedure that changes an animal’s body or natural function when there is no real medical reason to do it. This kind of approach helps stop harmful practices from continuing under new names or slightly different techniques.
Other parts of Canada are already doing more. Prince Edward Island’s law focuses on the purpose of the surgery, not just a short list of procedures. It clearly covers practices like tail docking and tail nicking and leaves room to add new cosmetic procedures over time. Ontario’s new regulation is an important step toward this kind of model, but there is still room to build a more complete and future‑proof framework.
Under the new rules, veterinarians can still perform declawing, ear cropping, or devocalization if they decide the procedure is truly needed to treat an injury or disease, and they write that decision into the animal’s medical record. This narrow exception is important to make sure animals can receive necessary medical care, while preventing these surgeries from being used for cosmetic or convenience‑based reasons.
Importantly, the final regulation does not give special exemptions to research facilities. During the consultation, there was discussion about allowing research institutions to continue performing these procedures. We raised serious concerns about this, because allowing medically unnecessary surgeries in research settings would significantly undermine the purpose of the ban. The fact that research facilities are exempt from the ban is a meaningful win for cats and dogs used in institutional settings. It shows that coordinated advocacy can influence how final rules are written.
The new rules also show how important good record‑keeping will be to making this ban work in real life. Veterinarians have to write down their reasons when they say a procedure is medically necessary. Those records will help inspectors tell the difference between truly needed medical treatment and surgeries that are still being done for cosmetic or convenience reasons.
In our most recent joint comments on proposed changes to section 14.1 of the PAWS Act, we supported stronger, species‑inclusive record‑keeping rules that apply to dogs, cats, and any other animals covered by future regulations. Strengthening section 14.1 in this way would support the new ban by making sure the documentation needed to enforce it is required, available, and consistent across the province.
What’s Next?
Taken together, the ban on declawing in cats, ear cropping and devocalization in dogs, the decision not to exempt research facilities, and the move toward stronger record‑keeping rules are real progress toward a more humane and transparent animal protection system in Ontario.
We will continue to:
- Monitor how these new rules are put into practice; and
- Advocate for a broader, principles‑based ban that includes other non‑therapeutic surgeries, such as tail docking.
