In the cracks and edges of Hong Kong’s concrete jungle live a group of silent residents—community stray dogs. Their fate has long been dictated by an outdated management policy centred on “capture and kill.” This policy is not only ethically questionable but has also been proven ineffective internationally over time. In the face of rising public calls for animal welfare, Hong Kong stands at a crossroads in its animal management policy. This article aims to analyze the feasibility of the “Trap-Neuter-Return” (TNR) programme as a humane and scientific alternative, exploring localised and long-term management strategies and presenting a concrete roadmap for policy transformation. The Dilemma of the “Capture and Kill” Policy: An Ineffective Cycle and Moral Deficit The current stray dog management policy implemented by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department is essentially a reactive “removal” approach. The underlying logic is to reduce the number of stray dogs by capturing and humanely destroying them. However, numerous ecological studies and international practices have shown that this approach has fundamental flaws. When dogs are removed from an area, the ecological niche and food resources left behind quickly attract dogs from nearby regions or trigger surviving individuals to increase their reproduction rate due to lower population density, leading to rapid rebounds in numbers and creating a cruel cycle that drains public funds without solving the problem. More critically, this policy simplifies life into “problem numbers” awaiting resolution, completely disregarding animal welfare and conflicting with Hong Kong’s increasingly mature civic moral consciousness. Thousands of healthy dogs are destroyed each year, resulting not only in loss of life but also emotional harm to the staff involved and the informed public. The 2010 review of animal welfare legislation at the University of Hong Kong clearly pointed out that the current laws are fragmented and outdated; our management thinking must also keep pace with the times. “Trap-Neuter-Return” (TNR): An Internationally Recognised Humane Alternative In contrast, the “Trap-Neuter-Return” programme represents a paradigm shift from “confrontational removal” to “scientific management.” The standard TNR procedure includes: humanely trapping all stray dogs in the target area, having them neutered by a veterinarian, administering necessary vaccinations (such as for rabies), and marking them (e.g., ear tipping), before returning them to their original habitats, with follow-up monitoring and limited care from volunteers or the community. The scientific basis of TNR lies in blocking reproduction at the source through sterilisation, allowing the number of dogs in a specific area to decline naturally and steadily over time, eventually leading to population extinction. After sterilisation, the hormonal levels of animals drop, significantly reducing disruptive behaviours such as roaming, fighting, and howling, thereby decreasing community complaints. Simultaneously, vaccinations improve group health levels, reducing public health risks associated with zoonotic diseases. Importantly, TNR acknowledges the right to life for these animals, allowing stable populations that have adapted to the community to age peacefully, embodying the spirit of compassion. The Practical Foundations and Challenges of TNR in Hong Kong It is noteworthy that implementing TNR in Hong Kong is not just a theoretical discussion; there is already preliminary practical groundwork. Even before 2011, some local animal welfare groups (such as the Lamma Island Animal Protection Group) had been spontaneously and on a small scale practising TNR for years in the outlying islands and rural areas, observing significant outcomes: the stray cat population in targeted areas was controlled, the number of new kittens sharply decreased, and the overall health of the populations improved. These empirical experiences demonstrate that TNR is entirely feasible at the operational level, given community understanding and cooperation. However, these grassroots efforts face systemic challenges that inhibit scaling to a territory-wide policy. The largest obstacle is the incompatibility of legal and administrative frameworks. The then-existing “Rabies Ordinance” (Cap. 421) and “Dogs and Cats Ordinance” (Cap. 167) aimed to strictly regulate animal movement to prevent disease, creating potential conflicts with the practice of returning sterilised dogs to the streets. Government departments maintain a conservative stance due to concerns about legal liabilities and public health risks. Furthermore, lacking official coordination and resource investment leads to a scattered, low-coverage plan that cannot achieve the scientifically necessary sterilisation rate of over 70% for effective long-term control. Additionally, misunderstandings among some citizens about stray animals, improper feeding leading to aggregation, and ongoing issues of pet abandonment pose further challenges to the success of TNR. Policy Optimization Recommendations: Moving Toward a New Management Phase Balancing Science and Humanity To elevate TNR from a grassroots practice to an effective public policy, the Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals proposes the following four-phase action plan: Phase One: Initiate an Officially Led Feasibility Study and Pilot Programme.The government should immediately allocate funding to commission an independent academic institution to conduct an in-depth, one-year study on the comprehensive impacts of implementing TNR in different types of communities (such as rural areas, new town fringes, and outlying islands). Meanwhile, the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department should actively collaborate with experienced animal welfare organisations to launch a three-year “government-community partnership” TNR pilot programme in two to three representative areas with strong community support. The programme must establish clear scientific assessment indicators, including changes in dog populations, reproduction rates, community complaint figures, cost-benefit analysis, and shifts in public attitudes Phase Two: Create a “Testing Space” for Legal and Administrative Coordination.To address fundamental legal barriers, the government should consider invoking current ordinance exemption clauses or enacting temporary regulations to provide clear legal exemptions for approved pilot programmes, allowing the sterilisation and return of dogs under strict regulations. This would alleviate legal concerns for enforcement agencies, representing a crucial step toward breaking the policy impasse. Phase Three: Establish Cross-Departmental Cooperation and Community Co-governance Models.A dedicated task force should be formed, led by the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, together with the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (to address hygiene problems arising from waste and feeding), the Housing Department, and the Home Affairs Department (to coordinate public housing and community relations). This task force

As an international metropolis where Eastern and Western cultures converge, Hong Kong’s social fabric is woven with deep-rooted traditions and thriving global trade. Among these are the practices of using wildlife products in traditional medicine to pursue health and wearing fur to signify status and aesthetics. However, when these age-old traditions intersect with contemporary animal protection ideals and welfare science, profound ethical tensions and real-world conflicts arise. The Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals believes that a progressive society must possess the courage and wisdom to examine and update its cultural practices. This article aims to analyze the complex impact of traditional cultural consumption on local and global animal protection and to explore a sustainable path that respects cultural roots while promoting ecological sustainability and animal welfare. Traditional Medicinal Consumption: Demand, Regulatory Gaps, and Hidden Suffering The tradition of using wildlife in medicine is rooted in profound cultural and historical understanding. A 1996 survey indicated that an estimated 6.8% of Hong Kong’s adult population regularly uses traditional Chinese medicine containing wildlife ingredients. Although Hong Kong fulfills its obligations under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) through the “Wildlife Protection Ordinance” (Cap. 586), it still faces multiple challenges in practice. The public’s limited understanding of regulations, constrained law enforcement resources, and some consumers’ myths about “wild” sourced medicinal materials being “more natural and effective” create potential market space for illegal trade. This demand not only poses a direct threat to the survival of endangered species such as pangolins, saiga antelopes, and bears but also involves severe animal welfare issues in the hunting, transport, and captivity processes behind the supply chain. For example, the cruel practice of live bear bile extraction has drawn widespread public concern and protests in Hong Kong. Many animals subjected to exploitation are kept in appalling conditions for extended periods, enduring immense physical suffering and psychological stress. However, for some species, the sustainable and welfare-compliant techniques for captive breeding remain underdeveloped or costly, making a complete ban on wild sourcing a practical challenge, highlighting the limitations of relying solely on prohibitive measures. The Fur Trade Hub: Global Role and Local Ethical Choices On the other hand, Hong Kong is a significant re-export hub for the global fur trade. Data from 2010 indicated that around 93% of imported furs for clothing were transhipped through Hong Kong to other markets. While this trade brings economic activity, it also places Hong Kong at the center of global animal welfare controversies. Animals in fur farming, such as minks and foxes, are often kept in small cages that do not meet their basic natural behaviour needs, and their slaughter methods frequently prioritize fur integrity over humane and painless death. Although the local citizens who directly consume fur may not be the majority, Hong Kong’s role as a critical trading node makes it inescapably responsible for the animal welfare standards in the global industry. Moving Beyond Binary Opposition: Exploring Innovative Transformations in Cultural Heritage Confronted with these challenges, simple condemnations or calls for outright bans often prove ineffective and may even stir cultural opposition. The key lies in transcending binary thinking of “tradition versus modernity” or “culture versus protection” and seeking constructive dialogue and creative transformation. The core principle is to respect the cultural essence and spiritual values of traditions while guiding their practical forms towards more humane and sustainable directions. For traditional medicine, it is crucial to decouple “effectiveness” from “source.” Through research and industry collaboration, we should actively promote verified herbal alternatives, synthetically produced effective ingredients, and establish a regulated breeding system that meets animal welfare standards, providing viable and effective options for industry and consumers. This is not about denying traditional wisdom but rather innovatively preserving its essence and responding to contemporary ecological ethics. Regarding the fur trade, we need to address supply chain responsibility and consumer awareness. Encouraging industries to adopt higher welfare standards for breeding and slaughter, and raising public awareness about the costs to animals behind fur production, will help cultivate a more ethically conscious consumer mindset. Policy Optimization Recommendations: Steering Towards a Responsible Future To systematically guide change, the Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals proposes the following four policy recommendations: Conclusion: Creating a New Tradition with Wisdom and Compassion Traditions are not static; their forms continually evolve with the knowledge, values, and discoveries of the times. In the age of globalization, our cultural responsibilities surpass geographic boundaries, encompassing care for global ecology and all life. Hong Kong is uniquely positioned to be a model for the dialogue and integration of Eastern traditions and modern animal ethics. This requires the government to exhibit policy foresight, the industry to embrace innovative transformation, academia to provide knowledge support, and every citizen to make ethical consumer choices. Let us respect the past with wisdom and care for all beings with compassion, together creating a new practice that inherits the essence of culture while embodying contemporary ethical principles, allowing Hong Kong to truly become a society that embodies both civilisation and kindness.

In Hong Kong, a city renowned for its cuisine, there exists a group of economically important animals—pigs and chickens—whose welfare is long ignored by both the law and public attention behind the scenes of the pork and poultry we consume daily. However, the serious shortcomings of current animal welfare legislation mean that these primary food sources, such as pigs and chickens, lack fundamental welfare protections during breeding, transportation, and slaughter. The Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals must highlight that this legal neglect not only causes immense unnecessary suffering to countless animals but also stands in stark contrast to Hong Kong’s image as a civilised international metropolis. There is an urgent need to examine and reform this outdated system, extending protection for animal welfare to all life. The Severe Imbalance and Fundamental Absence of Legal Protection The core dilemma of animal welfare law in Hong Kong lies in its “selective protection.” The current “Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance,” dating back to 1935, was not designed to systematically protect the welfare of farm animals. More specific regulations can be found in the “Public Health (Animals and Birds) Regulations” and relevant subsidiary legislation, which primarily focus on public health concerns. This outdated framework has a fundamental flaw: while it provides clearer regulations for the transport and slaughter of cattle, sheep, and goats, it offers nearly complete legal silence on the welfare protections for pigs and chickens, the primary sources of meat consumption in Hong Kong. This absurd legal imbalance means that the majority of food animals, including pigs and chickens, lack any species-specific minimum welfare standards throughout their entire life cycle—from birth and rearing to transportation and slaughter. For example, do they have basic space and bedding in crowded farming environments? Are there legal requirements for breaks, access to water, and protection from extreme temperatures during long transport periods? At the moment of facing their imminent death in the slaughterhouse, is there a law ensuring they are effectively and humanely stunned to avoid immense fear and suffering? Current legislation provides no answers to these critical questions. A 2010 review of relevant Hong Kong law by the University of Hong Kong clearly stated that local legislation is fragmented and outdated, failing to meet the growing international concern for animal welfare. Hidden Suffering and Systemic Failures in Slaughterhouses The direct consequence of legal absence is the suffering of animals during slaughter. Past investigations and related studies by our organisation have revealed severe animal welfare issues in some local slaughterhouses. To drive away fearful animals that hesitate to move forward, it is not uncommon for workers to use electric prods, sticks, or blunt objects, exacerbating the animals’ fear and stress. During unloading, herding, and waiting to be slaughtered, animals often suffer injuries due to overcrowding, poor facility design, or rough handling. The most crucial aspect of humane slaughter—the effective stunning of animals to ensure they lose consciousness before bleeding—poses significant risks. Evidence suggests that the electrical stunning equipment used for pigs may have voltage parameters below internationally recognised effective standards, potentially leading to animals being merely immobilised rather than fully unconscious, allowing them to experience subsequent processes while still aware, enduring immense suffering. Furthermore, improper maintenance of stunning equipment, insufficient training of operators, and overly rapid slaughter line speeds undermine the principles of “humane slaughter.” These issues not only affect animal welfare but also result in significant pre-slaughter stress, compromising meat quality and producing “low-quality meat” that is discoloured and retains less moisture, ultimately harming consumer interests. Conclusion: The Moral Obligation to Move from Silence to Action The suffering of food animals is often overlooked due to the hidden nature of their production processes, but this should not serve as an excuse for our avoidance of responsibility. The civilised nature of a society is reflected in how it treats the vulnerable lives that serve it. Hong Kong has ample resources and expertise to change the status quo. We call upon the SAR Government, legislative bodies, the industry, and every citizen to confront this critical issue of ethics, food safety, and social progress. By promptly improving legislation, enforcing laws strictly, and raising public awareness, we can not only alleviate the suffering of countless animals but also endow Hong Kong with a deeper sense of civility, truly building a city that respects all life.

Beneath the glitzy surface of Hong Kong as an international metropolis lies a dark, unregulated animal production chain. Each day, pet shops showcase adorable dogs and cats, but the origins of these animals often stem from legal and ethical grey areas. The Research Department of the Hong Kong Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals must point out that the regulatory system surrounding pet breeding and commercial sales in Hong Kong has fundamental flaws and loopholes that not only result in unnecessary suffering for numerous animals but also expose consumer rights and public health to risk. The current framework, centred around the “Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance” and the “Public Health (Animals and Birds) Regulations,” has long become outdated, and a comprehensive system reform is urgently needed. Legal lag and regulatory vacuum: A breeding ground for animal suffering The core issue in Hong Kong’s animal welfare legislation lies in its “passive” and “fragmented” nature. The “Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance,” enacted in 1935, was designed to punish obvious acts of cruelty, yet it is powerless to regulate chronic and systematic neglect and exploitation that do not meet the threshold of “cruelty.” This has allowed the entire pet breeding industry to operate almost in a legal vacuum. A 2006 survey revealed a shocking fact: there were only two licensed dog breeders in all of Hong Kong. This absurdly contrasts with the vast pet supply in the market and implies that the overwhelming majority of dogs and cats traded as commodities have mysterious origins. These unlicensed “backyard breeders” operate solely for profit maximisation, treating breeding animals as production machines, confined for life in small cages and continually forced to breed until their bodies fail. Young animals grow up under harsh conditions devoid of adequate socialisation, medical care, or environmental stimulation, leading to numerous physical and psychological problems. At the same time, the regulatory oversight of pet sales is similarly nonexistent. Although pet shops require a licence under the “Public Health (Animals and Birds) Regulations,” the licensing conditions are severely outdated, focusing only on basic hygiene and cage size, without any provisions for key animal welfare indicators—such as mandatory training for staff on animal care, the socialisation needs of animals, genetic disease screening, or medical protection for sick individuals. Even more absurdly, if a shop owner is convicted of animal cruelty, the licensing authorities have no power to revoke their pet shop licence. This means that a legally recognised animal abuser can continue to operate their pet sales business legally, a loophole that openly mocks the spirit of the rule of law. Multiple risks within the supply chain: A lose-lose-lose situation for animals, consumers, and society This out-of-control supply chain creates a lose-lose-lose situation for animals, consumers, and society. For animals, their suffering spans their entire lives. For consumers, they often end up purchasing young animals from cruel breeding facilities that come with genetic diseases or potential behavioural issues due to severe information asymmetry. This not only results in high subsequent medical costs and emotional trauma but also raises the risk of abandonment due to behavioural problems, creating a vicious cycle. For society as a whole, the unregulated flow of animals increases potential risks of zoonotic disease transmission, while numerous animals abandoned due to health or behavioural issues ultimately become a burden on public resources. A 2011 public opinion survey clearly indicated that over 90% of Hong Kong citizens support implementing animal welfare-protecting ethical policies in pet shops, highlighting a significant gap between public expectations and outdated policies. Policy reform blueprint: Moving towards a responsible and transparent pet supply chain In the face of such severe challenges, piecemeal fixes are inadequate. Hong Kong must decisively build a comprehensive regulatory system centred on animal welfare, from source to endpoint. Our research department proposes the following specific policy recommendations as a starting point for reform: Firstly, a comprehensive mandatory licensing system must be established. The government should immediately legislate that all commercial dog and cat breeders, regardless of scale, must apply for a licence from the Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department (AFCD). The approval of licences must be contingent upon compliance with legal animal welfare standards, including, but not limited to: restrictions on the breeding frequency and retirement age of breeding animals, space and enrichment requirements for living environments, mandatory genetic disease screening, and socialisation training for young animals along with the minimum weaning age (recommended at eight weeks). Any unlicensed breeding activities should be treated as a serious offence and heavily penalised. Secondly, the pet sales licensing system must be thoroughly reformed and a traceability mechanism established. The “Public Health (Animals and Birds) Regulations” should be amended to explicitly include specific animal welfare standards as part of the licensing and renewal conditions, granting authorities the power to revoke licences for actions harmful to animal welfare. Concurrently, a mandatory microchipping and registration system should be implemented for all animals sold, linking each microchip’s data to the licensed breeder’s number, ensuring transparent sourcing that allows consumers to make informed, responsible choices. Furthermore, a legally referenced “Code of Practice for Commercial Animal Breeding and Sales” should be developed and implemented. This code should be based on the latest scientific research on animal welfare, providing clear and specific operational guidelines for the industry covering animal husbandry, medical care, behaviour health, and transport, thereby embedding the “Five Freedoms” principles of animal welfare into every aspect of the industry. Finally, enhancing public education and enforcement resources is crucial. The government should lead a long-term public education campaign promoting the concepts of “being a responsible pet owner” and “adopt, don’t shop,” while educating citizens on how to identify responsible breeders and sellers. Additionally, resources must be allocated to enforcement departments such as the AFCD, providing professional training and establishing effective inspection and reporting mechanisms to ensure that the new laws do not become mere paper provisions. Conclusion: Showcasing civility through legislation and driving change through choice As a society that prides itself on being civilised and progressive,