"Don't Eat It" vs "No Problem": What Do You Think About the Dog Meat Controversy?

Controversy Over Dog Meat Consumption on July 16, Chobok
"Dogs Are Livestock, So No Problem" vs "Not Livestock Under Livestock Hygiene Control Act"
Animal Protection Groups Urged Closure of Chilseong Market Dog Meat Restaurants on July 6
Experts Say "Dog Meat Consumption Not Illegal Yet, But Social Discussion Needed"

On the 16th, the first day of the hottest period of summer (Chobok), members of the Animal Freedom Coalition and Animal Rights Action Kara held a press conference at the Blue House Fountain Plaza urging the ban on dog meat consumption. [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Han Seung-gon, Intern Reporter Min Jun-young] On the 16th, marking the first of the three hottest days of summer (Chobok), the controversy over dog meat consumption is intensifying. Those in favor of eating dog meat argue that dog meat is also part of health foods, and since dogs are included in the Livestock Act alongside cattle, pigs, and chickens, consuming dog meat is not problematic.

On the other hand, animal protection groups are calling for a ban on dog meat consumption, labeling it as clear animal cruelty. Experts emphasize that from the perspective of animal rights, dog meat consumption should be prohibited, but there is currently no law in place to regulate dog meat consumption itself, which exacerbates the controversy.

Fourteen animal organizations, including Nabiya Saranghae, Dasom, Daegu Animal Protection Alliance, Happy World with Animals, and Animal Rescue 119, held a press conference in front of the Blue House fountain in Seoul that morning, urging, "The government and the National Assembly should exclude dogs from livestock to ban dog meat consumption, which is the people's wish."

The groups criticized, "The Blue House, which promised to exclude dogs from livestock, has been silent," and added, "The Troika bills, which embody the national desire to end dog meat consumption, have become worthless paper."

They continued, "Every year on the Boknal days, numerous citizens come out into the blazing sun to call for the end of dog meat consumption," but "the government and the National Assembly hide behind the excuse that 'social consensus is needed,' pouring cold water on the movement to end dog meat consumption," reiterating their criticism.

The groups stated, "Despite the cowardly excuses of the government and the National Assembly, the consecutive collapse of major dog markets, public petitions calling for a ban on dog meat consumption, tireless dog meat ban bills, and judicial rulings all show that social consensus to ban dog meat consumption has already been reached," emphasizing, "The government and the National Assembly must no longer hide behind the cowardly shield of social consensus and betray public opinion."

The 'Troika bills' pointed out by the groups refer to amendments to the Livestock Act excluding dogs from livestock, the Animal Protection Act prohibiting arbitrary slaughter of animals, and the Waste Management Act banning the use of food waste as animal feed. However, these bills did not pass.

As animal groups continue to oppose dog meat consumption, citizens expressed mixed opinions.

Office worker A (38) said, "I don't understand why people react sensitively only to dog meat consumption when they regularly eat beef, pork, and chicken," adding, "Since dogs are included in the Livestock Act anyway, eating dog meat is neither illegal nor problematic."

He continued, "Eating dog meat was not a big issue in the past, but as South Korea hosts international sports events like the Olympics, it seems we are increasingly mindful of international opinion," and pointed out, "Every country has foods that outsiders find disgusting, so I don't understand the rejection of our traditional foods."

On the other hand, university student B (26) said, "Public opinion to reduce dog meat consumption is growing, and I don't see why people insist on eating dogs," adding, "In the past, when food was scarce, people caught and ate dogs easily found nearby, but now that food is abundant, going to a Bosintang (dog meat soup) restaurant just to eat dog meat is stubbornness."

She added, "Although dogs are included in the Livestock Act, under the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, dogs are not classified as livestock, so technically they shouldn't be eaten," and said, "Because dogs are not legally included, they are slaughtered in unhygienic and cruel ways, and even if dogs were reclassified as livestock, the distinction between dogs raised for food and pets is unclear, so I oppose dog meat consumption itself."

Amid ongoing controversy over dog meat consumption, a survey showed that 46% of respondents had "never eaten dog meat."

Last year, Animal Freedom Union commissioned Gallup Korea to conduct a nationwide survey of 1,500 people on "Public Awareness of the Dog Meat Industry." The results showed that 46% responded they had "never eaten dog meat," 41.8% said they "used to eat it but no longer do," and 12.2% said they "still eat it."

In the same survey, when asked if they intended to consume dog meat in the future, 71.9% answered "no intention to consume," and among those who had never eaten dog meat, 94.7% said they would not consume it in the future.

Experts suggest that since there is no law to prohibit dog meat consumption under current legislation, social discussion should take priority.

Attorney Kwon Hyun-jung of the animal rights research legal group PNR said, "There is a need to ban dog meat consumption from the perspective of social awareness of dogs and animal rights, but there is currently no legislation in our legal system that precisely regulates dog meat consumption itself."

She added, "During the last National Assembly, the group I am involved with proposed a legislative amendment to ban dog meat consumption, but it was not discussed and was eventually discarded, leaving the issue of dog meat consumption unaddressed in related laws such as the Livestock Products Management Act," and said, "There is also the viewpoint of 'why only dogs?' so discussions among people need to be sufficiently held first."

She further explained, "Those in favor of dog meat consumption base their arguments on the Livestock Act, while opponents rely on the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, so legally there is room for different interpretations," and added, "Currently, enforcement is impossible, and even if there are stores selling dog meat, under the current legal system, they cannot be regulated as illegal."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.