You have 0 items in your cart
Frank is Fed Up with the Feds Falsehoods
CFIA Disinformation #7
Edgewood, BC – June 8, 2025
Disinformation Response to two CFIA Statements (May 31, 2025):
- Update on the CFIA’s actions at an HPAI infected premises at a BC ostrich farm
- CFIA’s basis for applying disease control measures at an avian influenza infected ostrich farm
We never thought we would have to speak out like this, but after the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) published their May 30 (and now updated on May 31) media releases, we have no choice. What they released to the public is not science. It is by definition disinformation. Disinformation is “false information deliberately created and disseminated with the intent to mislead, manipulate, or cause harm.” Is this CFIA media release a narrative designed to justify the destruction of our farm, discredit our family, and protect a broken trade system?
Let’s get the truth out. Tune in regularly for Frankly Speaking episodes in the CFIA Disinformation series.
Cooperation and Fines
Disinformation #7: Universal Ostrich Farm has not cooperated with the requirements set out under the Health of Animals Act (HAA). The farm owners failed to report the initial cases of illness and deaths to the CFIA, as required by the HAA. After being placed under quarantine as an infected place, Universal Ostrich Farm failed to adhere to quarantine orders. Universal Ostrich Farm was issued two notices of violations with penalty, totaling $20,000. The farm also failed to undertake biosecurity risk mitigation measures. This includes a failure to address significant biosecurity hazards such as the accumulation of manure, the encouraging of wild birds to feed with the ostriches and the improper handling and disposal of deceased animals that have been infected with or exposed to HPAI. These actions significantly increase the risk of disease transmission and reflect a disregard for regulatory compliance and animal health standards.
Response: In the midst of preparing our legal defense, we were hit with two $10,000 Notice of Violation fines. The fines do not appear to be standard regulation, but rather retaliatory in nature, which is concerning since CFIA has been aware that both alleged violations are under dispute within the allotted timeframe.
The first fine was issued March 18th, for a violation alleged to have occurred between December 10 and 28, 2024, three months after the time period in the fine. A dispute was filed within the allotted time. Reasons for dispute include the fact that we had called our vet when the first birds began to exhibit signs of what appeared similar to either pseudomonas bacterial infection (that had hit the farm in 2020) or food poisoning from bad feed (Tribunal Record, Feb 20, 2025). When CFIA were notified, they indicated that this did not appear consistent with avian flu. They advised contacting them again if additional bird deaths occurred, at which point they would come out and do a simple test.
Call log from CFIA to UOF on December 28, 2024 (Rule 318 Certified Tribunal Record of the CFIA):
The second fine was issued April 4th, for a violation alleged to have occurred for failing to comply with an issued notice of quarantine between February 6 and 26, 2025. This ticket was also disputed in the allotted time frame. Reasons for dispute include, but are not limited to, that the quarantine notice was not properly served, rendering the violation invalid. The CFIA policy states that officers must thoroughly discuss these measures but never did.
We formally disputed the Notice of Violation (File 2425WA0246) issued for failure to comply with the quarantine notice dated February 6, 2025. After careful review, we believe that there was an Improper Delivery of the Quarantine Notice. Section 91.4(1) of the Health of Animals Act requires that a quarantine notice be personally delivered to the person who owns or controls the animals. However, the quarantine notice was delivered by email on February 6, 2025 @ 3:48 pm rather than through personal delivery. This is a procedural violation of the Health of Animals Act, as personal delivery is mandated. The lack of proper service of the notice means that UOF was not properly informed of the quarantine measures, which hinders the ability to comply within the required timeframe.
The CFIA has claimed that our actions “significantly increase the risk of disease transmission and reflect a disregard for regulatory compliance and animal health standards.” This is yet another unfounded and unjust accusation that appears designed to discredit our farm without a fair or evidence-based assessment.
We have maintained continuous communication with CFIA representatives and have made every reasonable effort to comply—even with unrealistic and, at times, unachievable requests, particularly those made during harsh winter conditions that imposed physical and logistical limitations.
Furthermore, any Notices of Violation issued by the CFIA have been formally responded to, with clear explanations that the claims contained within them were neither justified nor supported by fact. We believe these accusations reflect a troubling pattern of punitive enforcement rather than constructive engagement, and they overlook our efforts for good faith, transparency and collaboration.
It is critical that regulatory integrity not be misused to silence or discredit those who question policy, especially when those policies have real-world consequences for animal welfare, scientific inquiry, and rural livelihoods.
Stay tuned… daily Frankly Speaking episodes are set to reveal the CFIA Disinformation series…
Media Contact:
Katie Pasitney
Spokesperson, Eldest Daughter, Universal Ostrich Farm
1-250-870-8246
Share This Story
