Introduction
Imagine a quiet ostrich farm in the interior of British Columbia. Now imagine it at the centre of a legal, health, and ethical storm. That’s exactly what’s happening with the Universal Ostrich Farms near Edgewood, B.C. A flock of nearly 400 ostriches, an outbreak of avian influenza, strict federal regulators, a “stamping-out” policy, and finally the highest court in Canada weighing in. This story isn’t just about one farm and one disease—it’s about the intersection of animal welfare, public health, farming rights, and the powers of the state.
What’s at Stake?
On one side: hundreds of enormous birds, farm owners who argue the remaining ones are healthy, and a unique agricultural business. On the other side: a federal agency saying the risk is too great, invoking law to cull the flock. Add to that the legal battleground culminating in the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) removing its barrier to the cull—this isn’t just local news, it’s national precedent.
Who Is the Farm?
History of the Operation
Universal Ostrich Farms has been operating for decades, originally selling ostrich meat, eggs, and oil. The business later claimed to shift focus toward breeding, tourism and research. Some regulators question how formal the “research” portion is.
Business Model: Meat, Eggs, Breeding—or Something Else?
The farm’s website (now altered) once described large-scale ostrich meat and oil production. The regulators argue that some of the claimed research lacked formal oversight. The question of how exotic-animal farms are regulated in Canada (especially when animals aren’t “typical poultry”) becomes key here.
The Outbreak
Timeline of the Outbreak and Deaths
In December 2024 several ostriches at the farm died following flu-like symptoms. Two test-positive birds triggered the federal intervention. Ultimately, 69 birds died.
The Test Results: H5N1 Strain and Implications
The lab results confirmed a strain of the highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) H5N1 in the flock. Under Canada’s law, poultry includes ostriches, so the farm fell under the Health of Animals Act. The disease spread risk and the possibility of mutation made regulators move quickly.
Government Response & the Culling Order
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) issued two key decisions: a Notice to Dispose (December 31 2024) requiring disposal of all ostriches by February 1 2025, and an Exemption Denial (January 10 2025) rejecting the farm’s request to spare some birds. These decisions relied on Section 48 of the Health of Animals Act and the CFIA’s stamping-out policy. Under this policy, if a flock is infected, all birds may be destroyed to prevent spread—even asymptomatic ones.
Legal Battle Begins
Federal Court: Judicial Review Application
The farm applied for judicial review, arguing the remaining birds were healthy and deserved further testing.
Federal Court of Appeal: Stay Denied
On September 12 2025 the Federal Court of Appeal rejected the farm’s application for stay. This meant the order could proceed unless halted by further appeal.
The Role of the Supreme Court
Temporary Stay Granted
On September 24 2025 the Supreme Court granted a stay of the cull order—pausing enforcement until it decided whether to hear the appeal. This was a lifeline for the farm, albeit temporary.
Supreme Court Declines to Hear Appeal
On November 6 2025 the Supreme Court announced it would not hear the farm’s appeal, meaning the earlier decisions stood and the cull order could proceed. The legal path for the farm to stop the cull effectively ended.
Implications of the Decision
For the Farm and Its Owners
The farm now faces the execution of the cull of its flock—an emotionally, financially and operationally devastating outcome. They may also face issues of compensation and liability.
For Animal Welfare & Exotic-Animal Farming Policy
This case raises questions: How should exotic-animal farms be regulated, especially when their operations resemble poultry farms? How much oversight should there be when novel pathogens emerge?
For Public-Health Law & Biosecurity
The ruling reinforces the power of regulators to act in the face of disease risk—even if the animals appear healthy. It sets precedent for how “poultry” definitions, stamping-out policies and federal agency powers play out.
Public Reaction and Controversy
Animal-Rights vs. Regulatory Imperatives
Supporters of the farm argue the birds were healthy, perhaps even immune, and that the government over-reacted. Regulators argue the risk to industry and public health was too high to gamble with.
International Attention & U.S. Involvement
The story drew U.S. political figures and activists, making it not just a Canadian farm story but a flashpoint for broader debates about government overreach, animal rights and public-health emergency powers.
What Happens Next?
If the Cull Proceeds
- Execution of cull under CFIA custody of the birds.
- Compensation rules for affected farmers—will this farm qualify?
- Long-term consequences for the site: investigation, potential business closure.
If Further Legal or Policy Challenges Emerge
Although the Supreme Court declined to hear the case, new legal action—such as claims for compensation or regulatory reform—might follow. Farms across Canada may watch this case closely.
Lessons for Other Farms & Regulators
- Early detection & transparent reporting matter.
- Exotic or “non-traditional” poultry farms must clearly articulate their regulatory status.
- Regulators may act decisively even when public optics are complex.
Why It Matters to You
You might not live near Edgewood, B.C., but this story touches on issues that reach everyone:
- Food-supply security: Diseases in animal agriculture can ripple through the food chain.
- Public health: Emerging pathogens like avian flu keep public-health officials vigilant.
- Legal rights vs. state power: When does the government’s duty to protect override an individual operation’s rights?
- Transparency and trust: Farms, regulators, and the public all must trust the system. This case tests that trust.
Conclusion
The case of the B.C. ostrich farm is more than a local farm dispute. It is a legal and moral fulcrum balancing animal welfare, public-health safety, regulatory authority and farm rights. The Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the appeal cleared the way for the cull—and with it, a precedent. As such, it offers a cautionary tale: when novel risks emerge, regulations adapt fast, and the stakes are high for farms of all kinds.
FAQs
1. Why did the CFIA order the cull of ostriches?
Because the farm had confirmed infections of the H5N1 avian influenza strain and under the Health of Animals Act and CFIA’s stamping-out policy, the risk of spread required disposal.
2. Are ostriches considered poultry under Canadian law?
Yes. The CFIA considers ostriches as poultry for the purposes of the Health of Animals Act, meaning they fall under the same disease-control regulations.
3. What was the Supreme Court’s role?
The Supreme Court granted a temporary stay of the cull and then declined to hear the farm’s appeal, effectively allowing the earlier decisions to stand. This made the cull order enforceable.
4. Does the farm receive compensation for the birds?
Compensation rules exist in such culling cases, but the farm’s eligibility may be affected by compliance, cooperation and circumstances of the outbreak. The public record does not yet fully clarify the amount or status.
5. What does this case mean for other farms?
It signals that exotic-animal operations must comply fully with disease-control regulations. It also emphasises that regulators may act swiftly and decisively when public-health risks are identified—even if owners believe their animals are healthy.