[Bosintang Byeolgok (別曲)] (Part 2) "Lawless Dog Meat Industry Must Disappear" vs "Citizens' Right to Choose Must Be Guaranteed"

The debate over meat dogs centers on two main issues. First, "Is it right to ban the consumption of dog meat?" The second is, "Should the slaughter of dogs for consumption be regulated by law?" Related organizations are divided over these two questions, and public opinion is also split.

Dog Meat Ban Campaign
Photo by Asia Economy DB

"The dog meat industry must disappear for real protection to be possible"

Choi Min-jung, policy team leader of the animal rights protection group KARA, described the dog meat industry on the 25th as "a lawless zone." She said, "Large-scale dog farms exhibit bizarre behaviors not seen even abroad. Dogs cannot be raised in groups, so when they are confined, abuse inevitably becomes widespread. Also, dogs are not included under the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, so they are not strictly managed."

Dog meat is excluded from the scope of the Livestock Products Sanitary Control Act, so there are no specific legal regulations on the slaughtering, processing, and distribution processes. Therefore, dog slaughter is not illegal, but if the method is judged as "killing animals in a cruel way" under the Animal Protection Act, punishment can be imposed. However, the criteria for what constitutes cruelty are vague, which is problematic. Regarding dog slaughter, Team Leader Choi said, "Not only should the death of dogs itself be prevented, but the slaughtering process is often cruel and illegal."

Explanations from those involved in the dog meat industry that dogs are raised separately for slaughter for consumption are said to differ from reality. Choi claimed, "Even pet dogs that cannot reproduce often end up flowing into the dog meat industry, and many abandoned pets are sold for broth purposes."

Choi said, "Ultimately, what we must do is protect the rights of all animals, including dogs." Regarding the growing public opinion to protect dogs in particular, she explained, "The dog meat industry is where animal rights violations are most widespread." She added, "There are also parts where animals within the legal framework are not well protected," and argued, "A social monitoring network that can continuously oversee this is necessary."

Protest in Favor of Dog Meat Consumption
Photo by Yonhap News

"Respecting the people's right to choose... Understanding the characteristics of dog slaughter"

On the other hand, the Korea Dog Meat Association opposes banning dog meat, emphasizing "the people's right to choose their food."

Former Secretary-General Joo Young-bong said, "There is still consumption of dog meat, and production is carried out accordingly. If there were clear side effects from eating bosintang or social problems, then banning it would be appropriate, but since there have been no such problems in the past, banning it by law is not right."

A June 2021 survey by Realmeter, a public opinion research company, on "Perceptions of dog meat consumption and related legislation" supports the association's claim. In this survey of 1,012 people nationwide aged 19 and older, 72.1% responded that dog meat consumption should be "left to individual choice." Only 21.5% said it should be banned by law. However, nearly half, 57.8%, agreed with legal regulation of dog slaughter for consumption purposes.

Dogs are generally slaughtered using the "electric stunning method," which is an improvement over the previously cruel method of beating with sticks. However, the electric stunning method is also criticized as cruel to dogs. In April 2020, the Supreme Court overturned the original ruling and sent the case back to the second trial in the case of farm owner A, who was prosecuted for violating the Animal Protection Act by slaughtering 30 dogs using the electric stunning method between 2011 and 2016. The court stated, "It is unclear whether the electric stunning method used for various livestock is a painless slaughter method for dogs as well," and "Since it may differ by animal species, such circumstances must be considered."

Former Secretary-General Joo said, "Unlike cattle, pigs, and chickens, dogs have an aggressive nature, so there are safety issues during slaughter. That is why they are confined in cages and given electric shocks," emphasizing the need to understand this specificity. He also said, "People in their 20s and 30s nowadays rarely eat bosintang. Naturally, the culture of using dogs for food may disappear, as we observe. In this situation, it is not right to forcibly make dog meat consumption an issue and ban it."

July 25, 2016, a foreigner protesting against dog meat in front of Seoul City Hall
[Photo by Asia Economy DB]

Foreign perspectives... "Respectful but regretful"

When judging the validity of our bosintang culture, "foreign perspectives" are often mentioned together. There has been considerable controversy whenever famous foreigners voiced opposition to our bosintang. The South Korean government’s so-called "bosintang crackdowns" before the 1988 Seoul Olympics and the 2002 Korea-Japan World Cup were largely due to sensitivity to foreign views.

Despite the passage of many years, foreign perspectives seem not to have changed much. They respect our culture but do not hide their shock and rejection. Audra Horton (USA), director of the animal rescue team at Humane Society International (HSI) in Philadelphia, USA, said in a video interview with this paper, "I feel sorry for the situation in Korea because dogs basically suffer great pain within the dog meat industry," but added, "I understand and respect the cultural differences."

When asked if she would be willing to try bosintang when visiting Korea, she firmly said, "No," emphasizing, "Dogs are more emotionally rich and intelligent animals than we think." She added, "I hope Koreans take good care of dogs, recognize them as companion animals, and that adoption culture becomes more active."

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