Public Opinion Research for the Animal Business Line: 2023-2024

Research Report

Prepared for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Supplier name: Earnscliffe Strategy Group
Contract number: CW2342897
Contract value: $174,717.21
Award date: December 20, 2023
Delivery date: April 23, 2024
Registration number: POR #108-23

For more information on this report, please contact information@inspection.gc.ca

Ce rapport est aussi disponible en français.

Canadian Food Inspection Agency Public Opinion Research for the Animal Business Line: 2023 to 2024

Prepared for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Supplier name: Earnscliffe Strategy Group
April 2024

This public opinion research report presents the results of a telephone survey and focus groups conducted by Earnscliffe Strategy Group on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency

The qualitative and quantitative data was conducted in March 2024.

Cette publication est aussi disponible en français sous le titre : Recherche sur l'opinion publique de l'Agence canadienne d'inspection des aliments pour le secteur d'activité des animaux 2023 à 2024

This publication may be reproduced for non-commercial purposes only. Prior written permission must be obtained from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. For more information on this report, please contact the CFIA at: information@inspection.gc.ca or at:

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency
1400 Merivale Road
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0Y9

Catalogue Number: A104-631/3-2024E-PDF

International Standard Book Number (ISBN): 978-0-660-72194-1

Related publications (registration number: POR – 108-23)

Recherche sur l'opinion publique de l'Agence canadienne d'inspection des aliments pour le secteur d'activité des animaux 2023 à 2024. (Final Report, French) ISBN 978-0-660-72195-8

© His Majesty the King in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of Health, 2024

Table of Contents

• Executive summary
• Introduction
• Detailed findings
• Conclusions
• Appendix A – Quantitative methodology report: Small pork producers
• Appendix B – Online questionnaire: Small-scale pork producers
• Appendix C – Qualitative methodology report: Focus groups and in-depth interviews
• Appendix D – Focus group recruitment screener
• Appendix E – Interview screener
• Appendix F – Focus group discussion guide: Small-scale pork producer
• Appendix G – Focus group discussion guide: General population
• Appendix H – Interview discussion guide
• Appendix I – Quantitative methodology report: General population
• Appendix J – Online questionnaire: General population
• Appendix K – Quantitative methodology report: Animal health businesses
• Appendix L – Online questionnaire: Animal health businesses

Executive summary

Earnscliffe Strategy Group (Earnscliffe) is pleased to present this report to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) summarizing the results of quantitative and qualitative research undertaken to understand awareness, and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is dedicated to safeguarding food, animals and plants, which enhances the health and well-being of Canada's people, environment and economy. The CFIA bases its activities on science, effective management of risk, commitment to service and efficiency, and collaboration with domestic and international organizations that share its objectives.

In support of the CFIA's mandate to mitigate risks to animal health, food safety, and the environment, the Communications and Public Affairs Branch (CPAB) informs Canadians about animal health programs, the Health of Animals Act and Regulations, as well as import and export requirements for animals and animal by-products.

Public Opinion Research (POR) was required to help the Agency in understanding awareness, and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals among businesses but also consumers and the general public (such as, pet importation regulations).

The research will also be used to better understand small-scale pork producers and hobby farmers who may be operating without full knowledge of the CFIA, Agriculture and Agri-foods Canada, or industry association networks. The total contract value of the multi-phased project was $174,717.21 including HST.

The objective of this research was to understand awareness and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals among key audiences. The key audiences of the research were small-scale pork producers, animal health businesses (including veterinarians) and the general public (including pet owners and travellers).

To meet the research objective, Earnscliffe conducted a four-phased research project.

The first phase, a quantitative online survey, was conducted with 152 small-scale pork producers. Small pork producers were defined as anyone who owns at least one pig, either for consumption or as a pet, and does not belong to a provincial or national pork producer association or a hog or pig farmer association. The surveys were conducted in English and French, between March 1st and 11th, 2024. The average length of the interview was 10 minutes. As the survey was conducted using a non-probability online opt-in panel, no estimate of accuracy can be provided.

The second phase, utilizing qualitative methodologies, included online focus groups and in-depth interviews, conducted between March 5 and 18, 2024. Our specific approach was as follows:

• Three focus groups with Canadian consumers and members of the general public (including pet owners and/or international travellers);
• Seven focus groups with small-scale pork producers (who either own a pig as a pet or own a pig for consumption/farming purposes); and
• Six in-depth interviews with veterinarians (including those who specialize in large animal veterinary).

Three groups were conducted in French (one among consumers and two among small-scale pork producers) and seven groups were conducted in English. Each group was approximately 90 minutes in length.

The in-depth interviews were conducted by videoconference (Teams) or telephone, depending on the interviewees' preference. Two interviews were conducted in French and four were conducted in English. The interviews were approximately 30 to 40 minutes in length.

It is important to note that qualitative research is a form of scientific, social, policy, and public opinion research. Focus group and interview research is not designed to help a group reach a consensus or to make decisions, but rather to elicit the full range of ideas, attitudes, experiences, and opinions of a selected sample of participants on a defined topic. Because of the small numbers involved, the participants cannot be expected to be thoroughly representative in a statistical sense of the larger population from which they are drawn, and findings cannot reliably be generalized beyond their number. As such, results are directional only.

The third phase involved a nationally representative online panel survey of 1,007 Canadian adults between March 14 to 18, 2024, in both English and French. The survey took an average of 7 minutes to complete. Since a sample drawn from an Internet panel is non-probabilistic in nature, the margin of error cannot be calculated for this survey.

The fourth phase, an online survey, included 165 animal health businesses who are regulated by the CFIA. The businesses were invited to participate in the reach by CFIA using an email invitation and included an open link to the survey online. The survey was completed in English or French, according to respondents' preference, and averaged 14 minutes in length. Fieldwork was conducted from March 14 to 24, 2024.

Key findings

Findings for small pork producers

Pig ownership and operational profile

• Non-farmers are significantly more likely than farmers to have five or fewer pigs (89% versus 61%). One in five (22%) farmers keep between six and 10, and 17% keep more than 10.
• Two-thirds or more of farmers (66%) and non-farmers (72%) have kept pigs for the last five years or less. A plurality of non-farmers (45%) and a majority of farmers (59%) acquire new pigs directly from pig farmers.
• Over half of farmers (54%) and non-farmers (58%) would say that they have intermediate knowledge when it comes to caring for pigs.
• One in five farmers (22%) capture and keep wild pigs, compared to 9% of non-farmers. The vast majority of non-farmers say that they have not noticed wild pigs (90%) or evidence of them (88%) on their property.
• None of the focus group participants would describe themselves as pig farmers – including those who keep pets on a farm and have them for pork production. Pet owners aside, the consistent rationale was that to be a pig farmer meant that was your profession or a significant source of income or operation.
• In terms of where focus group participants' pigs are kept, there were a variety of habits described varying from providing them with a pen to a pet pig having its own bedroom in a home. In cases where other animals are kept on the same property, there was always intermingling of species, although in the case of sheep, separation was explicitly mentioned.
• Among focus group participants, there were also different approaches to feeding, with some participating in a "loop" program to get grocery waste for free and possibly supplementing with commercial pig feed. Those who keep pigs as pets described using commercial pig feed and table scraps.
• These pig owner focus group participants generally felt sufficiently knowledgeable to care for their few pigs, even while usually acknowledging there is always more to learn. Self-assessing, they describe their knowledge as beyond beginner, but not beyond intermediate.
• Focus group participants do not tend to seek out information on care. Many described relying on social media to ask questions of other pig-owners and tend to find that satisfies most questions or concerns they have about the health or care of a pig.
• Those focus group participants who have pigs as pets do get them vaccinated and seen by a veterinarian on a regular basis, but those who keep pigs on farms for pork would not involve a vet unless there was a health issue that seemed significant.

Awareness and perceptions of pig diseases

• One-third of farmers (32%) and one-fifth of non-farmers (20%) say that they are very concerned that their pigs may encounter a virus or develop a disease.
• Among the 76% of farmers and 53% of non-farmers who are at least somewhat concerned about their pigs contracting a virus or developing a disease, no single source of infection stands out as more threatening than the others.
• Nearly half (45%) of farmers and one-fifth (20%) of non-farmers say that they have read, seen or heard something related to pig diseases in the last 12 months.
• Among the farmers and non-farmers who say that they have been exposed to recent content about pig diseases, two-thirds say that they saw, read or heard something about ASF when asked directly (66% and 64%, respectively).
• Seven in ten farmers (70%) and three-quarters of non-farmers (75%) believe that the level risk ASF poses to their pigs is low to moderate.
• Fewer than half of farmers and non-farmers feel it is likely that ASF will be found in Canada (44% and 31%, respectively); however, a majority of farmers and non-farmers do not know all the practices to prevent ASF from spreading to their pigs (54% and 62%, respectively).
• Non-farmers are more likely than farmers to believe that ASF spread in Canada would have only minor or no negative impact on their pig-related activities (71% versus 59%); few say it would be a very large negative impact (4% of farmers and 2% of non-farmers).
• Non-farmers are significantly more likely than farmers to say that they are not familiar with the role CFIA plays in preventing the spread of ASF in Canada (40% versus 19%). Conversely, more than one-fifth (22%) of farmers say that they are very familiar with the CFIA's role.
• Among focus group participants, there was little to no concern about pig diseases, nor awareness of specific things about which they should be concerned.
• Almost none of the focus group participants could name any diseases specifically affecting pigs. Some of the few that got mentioned were considered to be from unusual outbreaks that occurred long ago (e.g., hoof and mouth disease). A few did mention "swine flu" but the context suggest that it was as it appeared – they meant swine flu and not African swine fever.
• Prompted specifically on ASF, a few focus group participants did indicate having heard something, but it was never more than a vague recollection – typically of a news story – and there seemed to be conflation with swine flu.
• None of the focus group participants had taken any action specifically related to ASF and concern for it is very low with most of those who respond citing the fact they live in a low-risk environment, far from other pigs or any source of infection.

Biosecurity measures taken and barriers to taking measures

• Four in ten (40%) farmers say that their pigs come in contact with visitors, or people who have contact with pigs on other properties; fewer (20%) have contact with pigs from other farms. While fewer non-farmers say that their pigs are in contact with people who have contact with other pigs (16%) or directly with pigs from other farms (9%), a majority say that their pigs have contact with visitors (51%).
• Over half of non-farmers (53%) would say they are not familiar with the national biosecurity standards compared to one-quarter of farmers (24%). One-quarter of farmers (26%) say that that they are very familiar with these standards, compared to only 5% of non-farmers.
• Despite soft awareness of the standards, strong majorities of farmers and non-farmers say that they do take measures to reduce the risk of diseased among their pigs (73% and 62%, respectively).
• The main source of food for pigs among farmers and non-farmers is pig feed – either pre-mixed by the supplier (45% and 49%, respectively) or made on their farm (33% and 22%, respectively).
• While non-farmers are more likely than farmers to feed their pig human food scraps (24% versus 11%), a sizeable proportion of both farmers (38%) and non-farmers (49%) say that they are not aware of any risk to their pigs if they are fed food scraps that have already come in contact with others.
• While some focus group participants take some limited measures to prevent the spread of disease to or among their pigs, this was mostly the pet owners whose pigs would get vaccinated annually and possibly seen by a veterinarian regularly or on an ad hoc basis. Those living in a homestead or farm environment tended not to typically have any biosecurity measures, nor have a veterinarian see their pig regularly.
• Very few focus group participants were familiar with the national biosecurity standards and those few were all owners of the larger operations included in this study. There was some assumption that the standards do not relate as well to their circumstances and are designed with only large operations in mind.
• None of the focus group participants described there as being any barrier that is preventing them from taking measures they would otherwise take to prevent their pigs from getting diseases.

Communication and information sources

• Non-farmers are more likely than farmers to spend 5 hours or less per month researching caring for pigs (84% versus 67%), with veterinarians being the most common source of information for both farmers (41%) and non-farmers (40%).
• Over one-third (35%) of farmers and 16% of non-farmers have received information from the CFIA in the past year. Among those who have, 43% of farmers and 20% of non-farmers say that they are satisfied.
• Although sometimes reluctant to describe themselves as regularly seeking out information on caring for pigs, it was clear most focus group participants do in one way or another. However, the kind of information being sought often had to do with managing pigs and property, exchanging ideas/best practices, and information about pig mental health or capabilities.
• Few focus group participants had ever been to CFIA's website and none of those who had were describing having visited the site for information that would relate to their pig operations. Historically, information on CFIA's website was generally felt to be accurate but overly dense, lengthy and technical.
• The sources of information on pigs focus group participants rely upon are generally felt to be trustworthy, which is why they rely upon them, however, there was a tendency to describe needing to weigh or verify some information they come across – particularly when it is word of mouth or on a social media feed.
• Asked what constitutes an official source of information on caring for pigs, the most common answer among focus group participants was a veterinarian. Some did mention government and a small number mentioned a body that provides them with a license or registration number.
• Almost none of the focus group participants felt that there are regulatory requirements that relate to them although some admitted there may be but they feel they are not realistic. The few larger operations were, by contrast, definitely aware and respectful of regulations that apply to their pigs.
• Asked how they would prefer to receive information from the Government of Canada if the government felt it important to get them information, by far the most common preference among focus group participants is by email. A few did say they would like hard copy of information received in regular mail.
• Showing focus group participants online information provided by CFIA on ASF, the reaction to the "Close your gate on African swine fever" web page was generally positive. Most of the positive reaction was due to feeling the information was simple, clear, succinct which was offered by some as unusual for online information provided by the Government of Canada.
• Reactions among focus group participants to ASF videos on CFIA's YouTube channel were mixed in the sense that people tended to see things they appreciated about each video while also seeing things they felt were problematic or unrelatable.

Findings for animal health businesses

Regulatory responsibilities

• Strong majorities of respondents believe that the federal regulatory responsibilities for regulated animal health businesses are clear (60%) and are comfortable with their regulatory responsibilities (71%).
• A plurality (42%) of respondents seek information about animal health regulations monthly or quarterly. The most common sources of information used by respondents are the CFIA (77%), a Google search (59%) or industry associations (47%).

Impressions of the CFIA

• Sizeable and similar proportions of respondents say that they are very familiar with the activities with the CFIA (47%) and trust the CFIA to do what is right (42%). That considered, 18% are not familiar and 27% do not trust the CFIA.

CFIA communications

• Nearly all respondents (96%) say that they have interacted with the CFIA online in the past year, most commonly through email notifications (86%), the CFIA website (51%) or the My CFIA portal (50%).
• Of those who have, nearly half (48%) of respondents are satisfied with the information they have received from the CFIA, and nearly two-thirds (63%) of respondents feel that the frequency of information received from the CIFA is 'about right'.
• 88% of respondents say that they most prefer to receive emails from CFIA, while 41% prefer notices in their My CFIA portal.

Antimicrobial resistance among livestock industry and producers

• One-quarter (25%) of respondents say their concern about AMR impacts their desire to administer antimicrobials to their animals; however, only 10% of respondents say that they do not use antimicrobials in their animals.
• While availability (29%), cost (23%) and logistic considerations (19%) are factors that impact respondents' decision to administer vaccines, nearly half (47%) of respondents say that they use vaccines as a preventative alternative to antimicrobials in their animals.

Qualitative insights among veterinarians

• Awareness of antimicrobial resistance was high among veterinarians.
• The majority felt that they had sufficient knowledge of antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance which they had gleaned primarily through school and continuing education, but also from the Government of Canada, the medical association, and in conversation with colleagues and peers.
• Many volunteered that online learning, webinars, were efficient ways to share information that might make it a little easier to gather more information.
• The vast majority of veterinarians do not use antimicrobials for disease prevention, some preferring vaccination. There was a sense that it is unnecessary in the vast majority of cases and contributes to resistance.
• Almost all veterinarians interviewed faced challenges when deciding on different treatment options for their patients/clients. These included cost, compliance, availability of options, availability of concentrations/sizes of medications/formulations.
• Antimicrobial resistance plays at least a minor role when providing treatment, if not a more considerable one if the circumstances warrant it. Things veterinarians take into consideration before prescribing are not wanting to create resistance on farms; having clients/patients finish the full course of (antibiotic) treatment; and, available information if culturing before treatment.
• Awareness of the CVMA FirstLine app was very low with only one veterinarian interviewed having used it and being somewhat familiar with it.
• Most have had cases of antimicrobial resistance in their practice on at least one occasion, although few mentioned having experience with any recent cases. As for detection, they were identified using sensitivity results or detected treatment failure.
• In terms of information needs, almost all agreed that there is enough guidance material on vaccines but not specifically about autogenous vaccines.
• Their preferred means of receiving information is email, webinars, in-person workshops, website information (on the CFIA's website) or industry association website.
• The idea of working for CFIA was very appealing and, in fact, preferable to working in a situation that requires terrible working hours, conditions and the threat of physical harm caused by the animals being treated.
• Many suggested the CFIA consider targeting mid- to late-career veterinarians as they could be either looking for a change or for an opportunity for part-time hours.

Findings for the general public

Familiarity with CFIA

• A majority of respondents (58%) say that they are not familiar with the activities of the CFIA, and only 9% say that they are very familiar.
• One-fifth (20%) of respondents have seen, read, or heard something from the CFIA recently, with 13% who say that they have read or watch content from CFIA and 10% have visited the CIFA website.

Impression of CFIA activities and priorities

• Over four in ten respondents completely agree that the CFIA looks out for the best interests of Canadians (45%) or is believable as a science-based regulator (43%).
• One-quarter agree completely that CFIA's enforcement activities are strong enough (26%) or that CFIA treats businesses fairly (25%). Fewer have complete agreement that they know what the CFIA does (20%) or that getting information from the CFIA is easy (17%).
• Among a list of four CFIA priority areas, 'helping prevent the spread of plant pests and animal diseases in Canada' is more commonly ranked as the top priority among respondents (at 30%), while over half of respondents (54%) rank 'helping to keep international markets open to Canadian food, plant, and animal products' last among the four tested. In terms of perceived priority level, there is little that distinguishes 'helping to keep foreign animal diseases out of Canada' and 'verifying the safety and quality of feed, fertilizer, veterinarian biologics, and seeds in Canada' among respondents.
• Awareness of the CFIA was very low among focus group participants and virtually none had seen, read, or heard anything about the CFIA recently or were aware of the CFIA's role in ensuring animals in Canada are safe and healthy. Awareness was mostly tangential and the CFIA was most often linked to inspections, labelling, and food safety.

Travel

• Few (14%) dog and/or cat owners say that they have travelled with a pet. Among those who have, most (80%) have done so with a dog and one-fifth (19%) with a cat. While some have moved to another country (14%) or to Canada (11%) with a pet, the most common purpose of travel was for vacation (77%).
• While most focus group participants were pet owners, of mostly dogs and cats, very few had travelled with their pets outside of Canada. Only a couple of small dog owners had travelled with their dogs when they drove across the border into the U.S.
• Nearly half (45%) of respondents would say that they have limited or no understanding of regulations and requirements for bringing pets into Canada, while 11% claim to have a great deal of understanding.
• One-third (33%) of respondents say that they are aware the CFIA website contains information pertaining to bringing animals into Canada, including 4% who say that they have used that information.
• Over one-fifth (22%) of respondents say that they are very confident in the governments' ability to prevent the entry of serious or infectious animal diseases, and 46% say they have some confidence.
• Strong majorities of dog and/or cat owners say that they are aware there are requirements to bring an animal into another country (73%) or into Canada (71%), or when adopting a pet and bringing it back to Canada (69%).
• The vast majority of respondents who have travelled with a pet say that they are aware that if they are travelling with a pet they will need to meet specific criteria to enter into another country (89%) and returning to Canada (90%), and if they are planning to purchase or adopt a pet abroad, they will need to meet certain criteria in order to bring the pet back to Canada (79%).
• Some focus group participants indicated that they have brought back food when they have travelled outside of Canada. However, the types of food that they have typically brought back tended to be packaged foods, such as candies and treats, rather than fresh fruits, vegetables, or meats which they understood were prohibited.
• While not widely understood, some focus group participants were cognizant of the potential risk(s) associated with bringing food from another country into Canada. The biggest risk tended to be around bringing in foreign insects and/or bacteria.
• In terms of animal diseases, including those that exist elsewhere in the world, focus group participants named bird flu, mad cow, rabies, and swine flu.
• Very few focus group participants, if any, had seen, read, or heard anything about ASF over the past year or so.

Resources and reaction to CFIA website/communications

• No focus group participant could remember, specifically, having visited the CFIA's website or page dedicated to traveling with pets, food or plants or the Automated Import Reference System (AIRS).
• When focus group participants were shown the page dedicated to traveling with pets, food, or plants, overall reaction was generally positive. The page was described as clear and visually appealing if not a little generic-looking. The vast majority felt the page included expected content and appeared easy to navigate.
• Reactions among focus group participants when shown the AIRS, were also generally positive. Most were pleased such a site existed. Being able to quickly check the requirements around specific commodities was appreciated and the site looked easy to use.
• The vast majority of focus group participants seemed to really like the Paws and Plan campaign. Participants noticed and appreciated the double meaning of the campaign slogan, Paws and Plan. The dog featured in the ads was described as very cute and likely to capture their attention.

Resources and reaction to African Swine Fever creative

• When shown the page dedicated to protecting Canada's pigs from African Swine Fever to focus group participants, overall reaction was generally positive. The page was described as clear, visually appealing with a good mix of icons/illustrations and text, and very easy to navigate.
• Overall reaction among focus group participants to the Don't Pack Pork campaign was positive to mixed.

Message testing

• Overall, focus group participants felt the language used in all three messages tested was clear and understood. No one felt any of the wording/terminology was confusing or hard to understand.
• The message, "Do your part to protect Canada" was particularly resonant and persuasive. Focus group participants appreciated the responsibility the "do your part" conveyed, and the importance "to protect Canada". They also appreciated the message to declare "all foreign food, plants, and related products" which was clear and broad.
• While reaction to the message, "some food, plant and animal products are not allowed in Canada" was generally positive, some questioned the ambiguity.

Research firm: Earnscliffe Strategy Group (Earnscliffe)
Contract number: CW2342897
Contract value: $174,717.21
Contract award date: December 20, 2023

I hereby certify as a representative of Earnscliffe Strategy Group that the final deliverables fully comply with the Government of Canada political neutrality requirements outlined in the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada and Procedures for Planning and Contracting Public Opinion Research. Specifically, the deliverables do not include information on electoral voting intentions, political party preferences, standings with the electorate or ratings of the performance of a political party or its leaders.

Signed:

Date: April 23, 2024

Doug Anderson
Principal, Earnscliffe

Introduction

Earnscliffe Strategy Group (Earnscliffe) is pleased to present this report to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) summarizing the results of quantitative and qualitative research undertaken to understand awareness, and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals.

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is dedicated to safeguarding food, animals and plants, which enhances the health and well-being of Canada's people, environment and economy. The CFIA bases its activities on science, effective management of risk, commitment to service and efficiency, and collaboration with domestic and international organizations that share its objectives.

In support of the CFIA's mandate to mitigate risks to animal health, food safety, and the environment, the Communications and Public Affairs Branch (CPAB) informs Canadians about animal health programs, the Health of Animals Act and Regulations, as well as import and export requirements for animals and animal by-products.

In order to maximize the reach and impact of CFIA communications, CPAB has developed the following high level communication objectives for the Animal Health Business Line.

General public:

• Increase awareness of animal health issues, help Canadians understand their role and actions in prevention and response.
• Showcase CFIA's role in protecting animal health and welfare, and production which contributes to a secure and safe food supply in Canada and enables Canadian producers to access international markets.

Industry:

• Encourage compliance with regulatory and policy requirements through understanding and awareness. Industry and the CFIA need to work collaboratively on animal disease prevention and emergency response.
• To assess the level of awareness and understanding of ASF among stakeholders and their attitudes towards the disease.
• Raise awareness of issues that can impact animal health, food safety and the environment (includes informing potential issues around feed as part of the departmental results indicator on feed facilities).

Public Opinion Research (POR) was required to help the Agency in understanding awareness, and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals among businesses but also consumers and the general public (such as, pet importation regulations).

The research will also be used to better understand small-scale pork producers and hobby farmers who may be operating without full knowledge of the CFIA, Agriculture and Agri-foods Canada, or industry association networks. The total contract value of the multi-phased project was $174,717.21 including HST.

The objective of this research was to understand awareness and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals among key audiences. The key audiences of the research were small-scale pork producers, animal health businesses (including veterinarians) and the general public (including pet owners and travellers).

To meet the research objective, Earnscliffe conducted a four-phased research project.

Phase 1 – Quantitative online survey: Small-scale pork producers

The first phase, an online survey, was conducted online using Leger's proprietary opt-in online panel. The survey included 152 small-scale pork producers. Small pork producers were defined as anyone who owns at least one pig, either for consumption or as a pet, and does not belong to a provincial or national pork producer association or a hog or pig farmer association. The survey averaged 10 minutes in length. Fieldwork was conducted from March 1 to 11, 2024.

Since a sample drawn from an Internet panel is non-probabilistic in nature, the margin of error cannot be calculated for this survey. Details regarding the weighting procedures and response rate can be found in Appendix A.

Phase 2 – Qualitative focus groups and in-depth interviews

The second phase consisted of a series of 10 online focus groups conducted between March 14 and 18, 2024. The target audiences included small-scale pork producers (who either own a pig as a pet or own a pig for consumption/farming purposes) and members of the general public (including pet owners and/or international travellers).

Seven groups were conducted in English and three groups were conducted in French. The six groups conducted in the East included participants from Atlantic Canada, Quebec and Ontario. The four groups conducted in the West included participants from Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. The focus groups were approximately 90 minutes in length and participants received an honorarium ($300 for small-scale pork producers and $125 for general population participants) as a token of appreciation for their time.

The table below shows the number of participants in each group:

Concurrently, a series of six in-depth interviews with veterinarians were conducted. The interviews were conducted by videoconference (Teams) or telephone, depending on the interviewees' preference, between March 5th and 11th, 2024. Two interviews were conducted in French and four were conducted in English. The interviews were approximately 30 to 40 minutes in length. Participants received an honorarium of $400 as a token of appreciation for their time.

Appended to this report are the detailed methodology, recruitment screeners, discussion guides, and materials tested in the focus groups.

It is important to note that qualitative research is a form of scientific, social, policy, and public opinion research. Focus group and interview research is not designed to help a group reach a consensus or to make decisions, but rather to elicit the full range of ideas, attitudes, experiences, and opinions of a selected sample of participants on a defined topic. Because of the small numbers involved, the participants cannot be expected to be thoroughly representative in a statistical sense of the larger population from which they are drawn, and findings cannot reliably be generalized beyond their number.

Phase 3 – Quantitative online survey: General population

The third phase involved a nationally representative online survey of 1,007 Canadian adults between March 14 to 18, 2024, in both English and French. The survey took an average of 7 minutes to complete. A full description of the sample frame, data cleaning process, and weighting are outlined in the Quantitative Methodology Report (Appendix J). The questionnaire used is provided in Appendix K. The sample for the survey was drawn from Leger's proprietary online panel. Since a sample drawn from an Internet panel is non-probabilistic in nature, the margin of error cannot be calculated for this survey.

Phase 4 – Quantitative online survey: Animal health businesses

The fourth phase, an online survey, included 165 animal health businesses who are regulated by the CFIA. The businesses were invited to participate in the research by CFIA using an email invitation that included an open link to the survey online. The survey was completed in English or French, according to respondents' preference, and averaged 14 minutes in length. Fieldwork was conducted from March 14 to 24, 2024. Details regarding the sampling procedures and response rate can be found in Appendix L, and the questionnaire is provided in Appendix M.

Detailed findings

The following report contains analysis of both the quantitative and qualitative findings of this research project. The report is sectioned by the key audiences examined: that is, small-scale pork producers, animal health businesses and the general public.

In addition to the results shown in table format, further analyses were conducted to see what, if any, differences exist by demographic or firmographic characteristics. Unless otherwise noted, differences highlighted are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. The statistical test used to determine the significance of the results was the Z-test. Due to rounding, results may not add to 100%. The response options "Don't know" and "prefer not to respond" are denoted by DK/NR.

Other relevant variable or demographic characteristics used to analyze the data can be found in the quantitative data tables, presented under a separate cover. The capital letter subscript in the tables indicates that the result for a particular cell is statistically significantly greater than a result found in the same row, in the column with the same capital letter noted in the original cell.

With respect to the qualitative findings, except where specifically identified, the findings represent the combined results within the various target groups. Quotations used throughout the report were selected in order to bring the analysis to life and provide typical verbatim commentary from participants across the various groups. A glossary of terms can also be found in the Qualitative methodology report in Appendix C that explains the generalizations and interpretations of qualitative terms used throughout the report.

Section A: Small-scale pork producers

Section A details the results of the quantitative (through an online survey) and qualitative (through online focus groups) with small-scale pork producers.

The quantitative research surveyed two different types of small-scale pig producers – those who keep pigs for consumption/farming purposes (referred to as "farmers"; whom may or may not also keep pigs as a pet) and those who only keep pigs as a pet (referred to as "non-farmers"). The two profiles vary in a number of ways, in addition to the reason they keep pigs. For example, farmers are also much more likely to have more than five pigs (39%) while 42% of the non-farmers have just one pig. As a result, examining the aggregate of all interviews blurs the important distinctions between these two segments and with the sample being unweighted, it is more appropriate to keep the profiles separated. In the tables included in this report, we present the findings for farmers and non-farmers separately. Statistically significant differences between the groups are denoted by an asterisk (*) beside the percentage that is significantly greater.

Pig ownership and operational profile

While a majority and farmers and non-farmers keep between one and five pigs, non-farmers are significantly more likely to have five or fewer pigs (89% versus 61%). One in five (22%) farmers keep between six and 10, and 17% keep more than 10. A significant difference between farmers and non-farmers is in their reason to keep pigs – with farmers being likely to keep pigs to consume (57%), to sell (34%) or to barter (25%), and non-farmers being likely to keep them as a pet (65%). Two-thirds or more of farmers (66%) and non-farmers (72%) have kept pigs for the last five years or less. A plurality of non-farmers (45%) and a majority of farmers (59%) acquire new pigs directly from pig farmers.

Over half of farmers (54%) and non-farmers (58%) would say that they have intermediate knowledge when it comes to caring for pigs.

Q9: In a typical year, how many pigs, on average, do you keep (or plan to keep) on your property? Please include any pigs that you own, board, or otherwise keep on your property.
Base: All respondents.

Q11: Why do you keep pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q10: How many years have you kept or cared for pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q13: How do you acquire new pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q12: You indicated you have kept pigs for [Q10]. How would you rate your knowledge when it comes to caring for pigs?
Base: All respondents.

One in five farmers (22%) capture and keep wild pigs, compared to 9% of non-farmers. Among those who do not capture or keep wild pigs, one-quarter of farmers (24%) say that they have noticed them or evidence of their presence on or around their property. Over four in ten (44%) of farmers say their domestic pigs do not have any contact with wild pigs – most commonly due to installing (56%) and regularly inspecting fencing (56%). Some farmers say that they ensure that their pigs have clean and controlled water sources (38%) or that they ensure food storage is not contaminated by wild pigs (32%). Over one-third (36%) of farmers say that they monitor their surroundings for wild pig presence.

The vast majority of non-farmers say that they have not noticed wild pigs (90%) or evidence of them (88%) on their property. While half (52%) of non-farmers say that they install secure fencing around their property or pig enclosure to ensure their domestic pigs have no contact with wild pigs, three in ten (29%) say that they do not take any of the measures to prevent contact tested.

Q4: Do you capture and keep wild pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q5: Have you noticed any wild pigs on or around your property?
Base: Those who do not capture or keep wild pigs.

Q6: Have you seen any evidence of wild pigs on your property? Evidence could include droppings, footprints, etc.
Base: Those who do not capture or keep wild pigs.

Q7: Do your domestic pigs have any contact with the wild pigs?
Base: Those who capture or keep wild pigs, have noticed wild pigs on their property and/or have seen evidence of wild pigs on their property.

Q8: Which of the following measures, if any, do you take to ensure your domestic pigs do not have contact with the wild pigs?
Base: Those with pigs who don't have contact with wild pigs.

Qualitative Insights: Pig ownership and operational profile

The small pork "producers" in our groups had very few pigs and tended to have five or more years of experience with them. The use of the term "producers" is not universally appropriate since some clearly are keeping their pigs as pets and as a result, are not ever intending to harvest an animal. Further, none of the participants would describe themselves as pig farmers – including those who keep pets on a farm and have them for pork production. Pet owners aside, the consistent rationale was that to be a pig farmer meant that was your profession or a significant source of income or operation. As a result, messages aimed at pig farmers are unlikely to be noticed or regarded as relevant by what CFIA considers small pork producers.

"I wouldn't count myself as a pig farmer as we've done it for a year, and it's not the main focus of the farm. Cows are the make farmers." – West (English), small pork producers

In terms of where pigs are kept, there were a variety of habits described varying from providing them with a pen to a pet pig having its own bedroom in a home. In cases where other animals are kept on the same property, there was always intermingling of species (e.g., dogs, cats, chickens), although in the case of sheep, separation was explicitly mentioned. Routines varied depending on the type of site. Most lived in rural settings with large properties and these owners had pasture or orchard areas the pigs are allowed to graze/roam but there are also areas with straw that was refreshed periodically and water bowls that are routinely cleaned out.

These pig owners generally felt sufficiently knowledgeable to care for their few pigs, even while usually acknowledging there is always more to learn. Self-assessing, they describe their knowledge as beyond beginner, but not beyond intermediate. They do not tend to seek out information on care. Many described relying on social media to ask questions of other pig-owners and tend to find that satisfies most questions or concerns they have about the health or care of a pig. The sense is that pigs are very easy animals to keep. Those who have pigs as pets do get them vaccinated and seen by a veterinarian on a regular basis, but those who keep pigs on farms for pork would not involve a vet unless there was a health issue that seemed significant.

"I would call the vet. I still have a lot of experience, so I wouldn't call for anything I know, but if so, I would contact the vet." East (French), small pork producers.

Awareness and perceptions of pig diseases

While only one-fifth (20%) of non-farmers say that they have read, seen or heard something related to pig diseases in the last 12 months, nearly half (45%) of farmers say the same. Among those farmers who have, a majority (59%) are unable to say specifically what they have seen, read or heard; however, a small proportion of farmers with recent exposure to content about pig diseases say the content was related to swine/pig flu (7%) or African Swine Fever (ASF) (5%).

Concern among farmers and non-farmers that their pigs may encounter a virus or develop a disease varies slightly. One-third of farmers (32%) and one-fifth of non-farmers (20%) say that they are very concerned; conversely, one-quarter of farmers (24%) and 42% of non-farmers would say that they are not concerned. Among the 76% of farmers and 53% of non-farmers who are at least somewhat concerned about their pigs contracting a virus or developing a disease, no single source of infection stands out as more threatening than the others.

Q14: Over the past 12 months, have you seen, read, or heard anything about pig diseases?
Base: All respondents.

Q15: What specifically have you seen, read or heard?
Base: Those who've seen, read, or heard about pig diseases.

Q18: How concerned are you that your pigs could contract a virus or will develop a disease that could harm them or cause death? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all concerned and 7 is very concerned.
Base: All respondents.

Q19: Pigs could become infected by different means. Which sources of infection are you most concerned about?
Base: Those who are at least somewhat concerned.

Among the 45% of farmers and 20% of non-farmers who say that they have been exposed to recent content about pig diseases, two-thirds say that they saw, read or heard something about ASF when asked directly (66% among farmers and 64% among non-farmers). The majority of farmers (70%) and non-farmers (75%) believe that the level risk ASF poses to their pigs is low to moderate. Mirroring that, fewer than half of farmers and non-farmers feel it is likely that ASF will be found in Canada (44% and 31%, respectively); however, a majority of farmers and non-farmers do not know all the practices to prevent ASF from spreading to their pigs (54% and 62%, respectively).

Respondents were asked to consider a list of precautions that might be implemented in the even that that ASF were ever to spread to Canada and say which they were aware of. Farmers are more likely to have awareness of the variety of precautions, whereas non-farmers are more likely to be non-responsive/do not know (22% versus 6% among farmers). Highest awareness among both audiences is for suspension of international pork trade, whereby 49% of farmers and 53% of non-farmers say they are aware of this precaution option.

Non-farmers are more likely than farmers to believe that ASF spread in Canada would have only minor or no negative impact on their pig-related activities (71% versus 59%). While some indicate that it would have a large negative impact on their pig-related activities (31% of farmers and 18% of non-farmers), few say it would be a very large negative impact (4% of farmers and 2% of non-farmers).

A majority of non-farmers (65%) and farmers (53%) would contact a veterinarian if their pigs show sign of disease or illness. Farmers are more likely than non-farmers to say that they would contact pork associations (29% and 13%, respectively) or the federal government/CFIA (26% and 11%, respectively). Furthermore, a majority of both farmers (67%) and non-farmers (58%) say that they know that they must report a suspected case of ASF to the CFIA.

Non-farmers are significantly more likely than farmers to say that they are not familiar with the role CFIA plays in preventing the spread of ASF in Canada (40% versus 19%). Conversely, more than one-fifth (22%) of farmers say that they are very familiar with the CFIA's role.

Those who have heard something about pig diseases in the past year and those who are concerned about pig diseases are both more likely to feel that it is likely that ASF will be found in Canada (55% and 52%, respectively) than those who have not been exposed to information about pig diseases recently and those not concerned about pig diseases (31% and 24%, respectively). Furthermore, these groups of respondents have opposing views of the impact ASF would have on their pig-related activities if it were to spread to Canada. Over four in ten respondents who have heard something about pig diseases in the past year (47%) and those who are concerned about pig diseases (43%), compared to 14% of those who have not been exposed to information about pig diseases recently and 7% of respondents not concerned about pig diseases.

Q16: In the last 12 months have you seen, read or heard anything about African swine fever?
Base: Those who've seen, read, or heard about pig diseases.

Q17: What specifically have you heard about African swine fever?
Base: Those who've seen, read, or heard about African swine fever.

Q20: How much of a risk do you think African swine fever currently poses to your pig(s)?
Base: Those who are at least somewhat concerned.

Q21: To the best of your knowledge, what is the likelihood that African swine fever will be found in Canada?
Base: All respondents.

Q23: If African swine fever were to ever spread to Canada, how much do you think it would affect your pig-related activities (i.e. acquiring, owning, selling, etc.)?
Base: All respondents.

Q22: If African swine fever were to ever spread to Canada, which of the following precautions are you currently aware of that could be implemented?
Base: All respondents.

Q24: Please rate your level of agreement with the following statement: I know all the best on-farm practices to prevent African swine fever from spreading to my pigs.
Base: All respondents.

Q25: If your pigs show symptoms of disease or illness, who do you contact? Select all that apply.
Base: All respondents.

Q26: Are you aware that if you suspect your pig is infected with African swine fever you must report it to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, as ASF is a reportable disease under the Health of Animals Act?
Base: All respondents.

Q50: How familiar would you say you are with the role of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) in preventing the spread of African swine fever in Canada? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all familiar and 7 is very familiar.
Base: All respondents.

Qualitative Insights: Awareness and perceptions of pig diseases

There was little to no concern about pig diseases, nor awareness of specific things about which they should be concerned. The reasoning generally included one or more of the following explanations: that the few pigs they have are rarely in contact with other pigs; that the "real" pig farmers need to worry about things; that pigs are fairly easy to care for and resilient; and/or, that diseases will sometimes happen for any species and all you can do is keep them healthy and well-treated.

"No concern because my pig is solo, and he is outdoors, and not around other animals. I guess he could be in contact with mice, but that would be it." – West (English), small pork producers

Almost none could name any diseases specifically affecting pigs. Some of the few that got mentioned were considered to be from unusual outbreaks that occurred long ago (for example, hoof and mouth disease). A few did mention "swine flu" but the context suggest that it was as it appeared – they meant swine flu and not African swine fever.

Prompted specifically on ASF, a few did indicate having heard something, but it was never more than a vague recollection – typically of a news story – and there seemed to be conflation with swine flu.

None have taken any action specifically related to ASF and concern for it is very low with most of those who respond citing the fact they live in a low-risk environment, far from other pigs or any source of infection. Further, one important aspect of their lack of concern for ASF and other serious infection is that, due to the fact they don't rely on pigs for their livelihood, they would not be devastated economically as would be the case for farmers who have large pork producing operations.

"I just don't think there are that many routes of exposure [for ASF]." – East (English), small pork producers

Biosecurity measures taken and barriers to taking measures

Pigs owned by non-farmers spend less time outdoors than those owned by farmers; indeed, over one-third (35%) of non-farmers say their pigs spend less than 25% of their time outdoors, compared to only 15% of farmers. Mirroring this, 40% of non-farmers say that their pigs live indoors as a pet, compared to 4% of farmers. A majority (60%) of farmers keep their pigs in a fenced off pasture, and four in ten (39%) keep them in a small structure.

Four in ten (40%) farmers say that their pigs come in contact with visitors, or people who have contact with pigs on other properties; fewer (20%) have contact with pigs from other farms. While fewer non-farmers say that their pigs are in contact with people who have contact with other pigs (16%) or directly with pigs from other farms (9%), a majority say that their pigs have contact with visitors (51%).

Compared to small-scale producers who live in rural areas, those who live in urban or suburban areas are much more likely to say that their pig come with contact with other pigs (4% versus 24%) or people who have contact with other pigs (17% versus 41%). Those who recall hearing about pig disease recently are also more likely than those who have not to say their pigs come in contact with other pigs (29% versus 8%) or people who have contact with other pigs (53% versus 20%).

Q28: Approximately what percentage of time do your pigs spend outside?
Base: All respondents.

Q29: Where do you keep your [insert "domestic" if Q4-yes] pig(s)?
Base: All respondents.

Q30: Do your pigs ever come into contact with other pigs that you do not own or keep, such as pigs on other farms?
Base: All respondents.

Q32: Do you allow visitors to your property to interact with your pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q33: Do you or any other people who interact with pigs on your property, such as family or workers, also interact with pigs on other properties regularly?
Base: All respondents.

Familiarity of the national biosecurity standards is one of the most significant differences between farmers and non-farmers. While sizeable proportions of each audience have no familiarity with the national biosecurity standards, over half of non-farmers (53%) would say they are not familiar compared to one-quarter of farmers (24%). One-quarter of farmers (26%) say that that they are very familiar with these standards, compared to only 5% of non-farmers.

Strong majorities of farmers and non-farmers say that they do take measures to reduce the risk of diseased among their pigs (73% and 62%, respectively), and all the specific measures tested see uptake of between approximately one-fifth and half among both audiences.

No single barrier prevents small pork producers from implementing more measure to reduce disease risk, farmers are significantly more likely than non-farmers to say that cost (32% versus 15%) and time (31% versus 16%) are barriers.

Q40: How familiar are you with the national biosecurity standards? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all familiar and 7 is very familiar.
Base: All respondents.

Q34: Do you implement measures to reduce the risk of your pigs developing a disease?
Base: All respondents.

Q35: Which of the following measures do you use to reduce the risk of disease in your pigs?
Base: Respondents who implement measures to reduce risks.

Q41: What are some barriers that stop you from doing more to prevent your pigs from getting diseases? Select all that apply.
Base: All respondents.

The main source of food for pigs among farmers and non-farmers is pig feed – either pre-mixed by the supplier (45% and 49%, respectively) or made on their farm (33% versus 22%). Non-farmers are more likely than farmers to feed their pig human food scraps (24% versus 11%).

The research suggests that the variety of food and water sources among farmers is greater than non-farmers, including supplier (36%), other farmer-made (30%) and homemade feed (30%), kitchen or restaurant scraps (33%), and municipal (54%), well (39%) and well water (31%) sources. Whereas non-farmers are most likely to provide their pigs with supplier feed (53%), kitchen or restaurant scraps (40%), and a municipal water source (60%).

A sizeable proportion of both farmers (38%) and non-farmers (49%) say that they are not aware of any risk to their pigs if they are fed food scraps that have already come in contact with others.

Q36: What is the main source of food for your pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q37: In the last year, have you fed your pigs any of the following?
Base: All respondents.

Q38: Are you aware of any risks to your pigs if you feed them food scraps that are left over after others have already come into contact with it (i.e. kitchen or restaurant waste/leftovers).
Base: All respondents.

Q39: Which of the following do you use as a water source for your pigs?
Base: All respondents.

The majority (53%) of farmers have sought veterinarian care for their pig(s) in the past year, and among those, three-quarters (76%) say that they seek this care at least annually. Among non-farmers who have sought veterinary care for their pig(s) in the past year (38%), mirroring farmers, the vast majority (81%) do so at least annually.

While access and affordability are barriers to seeking veterinarian care for some farmers and non-farmers, not seeing the need to do so is far more common for both (52% among farmers and 41% among non-farmers).

Accessing veterinarian care in the past year is highest among small-scale pork producers who are very familiar with the national biosecurity standards (82%), those very concerned about pig diseases (64%) and respondents who have recent recall of information about pig diseases (61%).

Q42: In the last year, have you sought veterinary care for your pigs?
Base: All respondents.

Q43: Which of the following best describes how often your pigs receive veterinary care?
Base: Respondents who've seen a veterinarian within the past year.

Q44: Why don't you have annual veterinary care for your pigs?
Base: Respondents who haven't seen a veterinarian within the past year.

Q45: If one of your pigs were to die or needed to be euthanized which of the following steps would you be most likely to take to dispose of it?
Base: All respondents.

Qualitative insights: Barriers to biosecurity measures

Reflecting the main differentiation through the quantitative results, the qualitative discussions with small pig producers demonstrated some differences on biosecurity that seemed to be driven more by whether they were farmers (even as they do not describe themselves as farmers) or were people who owned a pig or two as a pet or for consumption.

While some take some limited measures to prevent the spread of disease to or among their pigs, this was mostly the pet owners whose pigs would get vaccinated annually and possibly seen by a veterinarian regularly or on an ad hoc basis. Those living in a homestead or farm environment tended not to typically have any biosecurity measures, nor have a veterinarian see their pig regularly. Measures described included keeping water fresh, food free from contamination and cleaning stalls/replacing straw.

None had heard of the Canadian Association of Swine Veterinarians.

"It's not that I don't seek care, we've just been lucky and we haven't really needed it. Most of my knowledge comes from expert pig farmers." – West (English), small pork producers

"We do have a vet that comes over regularly, we're fortunate not to have any issues with contamination. We try our best to keep our standards highs. Because we want to maintain our business relationships." – West (English), small pork producers

That typical behaviour noted, there were qualitative participants both aware of biosecurity measures and taking some. The minority of participants who had more pigs on their property and were doing so as a significant part of their business plan, or were running larger non-pig animal farm operations were much more likely to have a wide variety of biosecurity measures in place. The most common related to preventing mingling with pigs from other operations and with people who are around other pigs or other species. One or two talked about regulatory requirements to which they had to adhere in order to market their pigs the way they do.

Very few were familiar with the national biosecurity standards and those few were all owners of the larger operations included in this study. Only those who knew about the standards felt they related to their operations, although some of the others guessed that they might, given that CFIA had invited them to this focus group and is now asking about them in this forum. There was some assumption that the standards do not relate as well to their circumstances and are designed with only large operations in mind. As one example, the mention of keeping pigs outdoors as being inconsistent with the standards was sometimes cited as one way in which the standards did not really apply to the nature of their pig ownership.

None described there as being any barrier that is preventing them from taking measures they would otherwise take to prevent their pigs from getting diseases. When probed, it was certainly the case that some measures would be prohibitively expensive, but cost was not the reason the measures were not being taken. It tended to be a feeling that it would be pointless.

One of the more common explanations was that the pig owner was already taking measures to a degree that was reasonable, given the scale or nature of their pig ownership. The risk was seen as small since they would not be economically devastated if they lost all of their pigs.

"As we have grown and have more pigs now, I would say in the last 5 years we've increased our measures." – West (English), small pork producers

In terms of food, there were different approaches to feeding described, again consistent with the differences identified in the quantitative sample. Those who keep pigs as pets described using commercial pig feed as a staple and add table scraps as a treat and because it is economical. Several described participating in a "loop" program to get grocery waste for free and were often supplementing with commercial pig feed.

Water sources varied, but for pets was primarily treated city water. In rural areas, a wider variety of water sources were described including treated, well or surface water. Most described regularly replacing the water in troughs or bowls with fresh, clean water.

Communication and information sources

Non-farmers are more likely than farmers to spend 5 hours or less per month researching caring for pigs (84% versus 67%), and a majority of both audiences say that they are able to find all the information they need (64% among non-farmers and 60% of farmers).

While small-scale pork producers use a variety of sources when looking for information on caring for their pigs, veterinarians are the most common among both farmers (41%) and non-farmers (40%). One-quarters of farmers (25%) and one-fifth of non-farmers (20%) say that they consult the Federal Government.

Q48: Approximately how many hours a month do you spend researching about procedures for caring for pigs from all sources combined?
Base: Those who do conduct research about caring for pigs.

Q49: Please rate your level of agreement with the following statement: I am able to find all of the information I need to know about necessary precautions to ensure my pigs are safe from diseases.
Base: All respondents.

Q46: Which of the following sources do you use to find information on caring for pig(s)?
Base: All respondents.

Q47: Which of those sources do you trust the most?
Base: Those who do conduct research about caring for pigs.

Over one-third (35%) of farmers and 16% of non-farmers have received information from the CFIA in the past year. The most common forms of receiving information from the CFIA are also the most preferred methods – mail, email and the CFIA website.

While 38% of non-farmers and 11% of farmers say that they have never received information from the CFIA, among those who have received communications from the CFIA in the past year, 43% of farmers and 20% of non-farmers say that they are satisfied.

Strong majorities of farmers (77%) and non-farmers (69%) feel the information received from the CFIA is helpful, but fewer (41% of farmers and 28% of non-farmers) feel they very clearly understand the information.

Incidence of receiving information from the CFIA in the past year is highest among small-scale pork producers who are very familiar with the national biosecurity standards (61%), respondents who have recent recall of information about pig diseases (55%) and those very concerned about pig diseases (48%). Furthermore, those very familiar and very concerned also more likely to be satisfied with the communications received by the CFIA than their counterparts (93% and 71%, respectively).

Q51: Have you received any information from the CFIA in the past year?
Base: All respondents.

Q52: How have you received information from the CFIA?
Base: Those who received information from CFIA.

Q58: In the future, how would you prefer that the CFIA get you the information you need?
Base: All respondents.

Q54: Overall, how satisfied are you with the communications you have received from CFIA?
Base: All respondents.

Q55: Why do you give CFIA that rating for its communications? That is, what could they do to better communicate with you?
Base: Respondents who gave CFIA a rating of its communication.

Q56: Please rate how well your company understands the information when it is received from the CFIA?
Base: Respondents who gave CFIA a rating of its communication.

Q57: In general, do you consider the information you receive from the CFIA helpful?
Base: Respondents who gave CFIA a rating of its communication.

Qualitative insights: Communication and information sources

Although sometimes reluctant to describe themselves as regularly seeking out information on caring for pigs, it was clear most do in one way or another. However, the kind of information they seek varied considerably and was never about disease prevention, although it may sometimes have involved asking what certain symptoms might indicate.

Information being sought often had to do with managing pigs and property (e.g., breeds that rut fields more or less than others, or dig/escape less), exchanging ideas/best practices, and information about pig mental health or capabilities (e.g., giving them old bowling balls to play with or teaching them tricks). Some of this information is from following farmers on social media (YouTube, in particular), being part of Facebook/regional groups of pig owners or talking to others at feed retailers.

Few had ever been to CFIA's website and none of those who had were describing having visited the site for information that would relate to their pig operations. For many of the participants, discussions demonstrated that information sought or received from CFIA was about other non-pig aspects of CFIA's mandate, such as food recalls. Historically, information on CFIA's website was generally felt to be accurate but overly dense, lengthy and technical.

The sources of information on pigs they rely upon are generally felt to be trustworthy, which is why they rely upon them, however, there was a tendency to describe needing to weigh or verify some information they come across – particularly when it is word of mouth or on a social media feed. As one put it, once you get the same answer from five different people in a Facebook group, there is heightened confidence that the information is accurate and reliable. The implication is that before some threshold, the initial responses are deemed plausible but unverified.

"If you constantly read the same thing, then it's trustworthy"  – West (English), small pork producers

None reported having attended townhalls or conferences on caring for pigs.

Some do share information with other pig farmers, but most behaviour seemed to be consuming rather than sharing information.

Asked what constitutes an official source of information on caring for pigs, the most common answer was a veterinarian. Some did mention government and a small number mentioned a body that provides them with a license or registration number.

There was no discernible sense of there being a lack of information available on caring for pigs.

Almost no one clearly expressed being a member of a national or provincial association for pig farming. A few were guessing that they may be but were uncertain and sometimes offered that they do not pay to belong to one so they would doubt they are. Most could confidently express that they are not members of any such association. None had any intention of becoming members and the reasons were that it was not for people like them who are not in the business of pork production or that their operation was not large enough for the association membership to make sense for them.

As mentioned above, almost none of the participants felt that there are regulatory requirements that relate to them although some admitted there may be but they feel they are not realistic. The few larger operations were, by contrast, definitely aware and respectful of regulations that apply to their pigs.

"Having someone who targets smaller farms and gives good, affordable stuff that is better for us. Feasible on a small scale." – East (French), small pork producers

Asked how they would prefer to receive information from the Government of Canada if the government felt it important to get them information, by far the most common preference is by email. A few did say they would like hard copy of information received in regular mail.

Section B: Animal health businesses

Section B details the results of the quantitative (through an online survey) and qualitative (through in-depth interviews) with regulated animal health businesses. The qualitative component focused exclusively on veterinarians.

Regulatory responsibilities

Respondents were shown a list of six priority areas and were asked to say whether each is a high, medium, or low propriety for their business. While more respondents indicate that each is a high priority than either a medium or low, the largest proportion of respondents agree that 'addressing animal health risks' is a high priority.

Strong majorities of respondents believe that the federal regulatory responsibilities for regulated animal health businesses are clear (60%) and are comfortable with their regulatory responsibilities (71%).

While some look up animal health regulations as much as daily (10%) or weekly (16%), a plurality seek this information monthly or quarterly (42%). The most common sources of information used by respondents are the CFIA (77%), a Google search (59%) or industry associations (47%).

Q2 : Thinking about the past two years, what have your priorities been for your business? Please rate the activity according to the level of priority for you.
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q3: Overall, in your opinion, how clear are the federal regulatory responsibilities for regulated animal health businesses?
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q4: Overall, how comfortable are you with the federal animal health regulatory responsibilities related to your business?
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q5: How often do you look for information about animal health regulations of any kind?
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q7: What other sources of information about animal health regulations do you use, or have you used in the past? Select all that apply.
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Impressions of the CFIA

Sizeable and similar proportions of respondents say that they are very familiar with the activities with the CFIA (47%) and trust the CFIA to do what is right (42%). That considered, 18% are not familiar and 27% do not trust the CFIA.

Q9: How familiar would you say your company is with the activities of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency? Please use a number between 1 and 7, where 1 means 'not at all familiar' and 7 means 'very familiar'.
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q10: How much does your company trust the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) to do what is right? Please use a number between 1 and 7, where 1 means 'does not trust at all' and 7 means 'trusts completely'.
Base: Respondents with some familiarity with the CFIA activities (n=161)

CFIA communications

Nearly all respondents (96%) say that they have interacted with the CFIA online in the past year, through email notifications (86%), the CFIA website (51%) or the My CFIA portal (50%). Nearly half (49%) have had personal interactions with representatives of the CFIA. Nearly half (48%) are satisfied with the information they have received from the CFIA, and one-quarter (23%) have a neutral impression.

Mirroring the manner in which information is currently received, 88% of respondents say that they most prefer to receive emails from CFIA, while 41% prefer notices in their My CFIA portal. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of respondents feel that the frequency of information received from the CIFA is 'about right', while one-fifth (22%) say it is 'not enough'.

Strong majorities of respondents agree that the communications from CFIA are helpful and give them the information they need (68%) and are clear and easy to understand (65%). Respondents in the West are less likely than those in other provinces to agree that the communications from CFIA are clear and easy to understand (50%) or that they are helpful and provide the information they need (58%).

When trying to understand new or existing requirements related to animal health, respondents are divided over whether they would prefer to receive this information through informal or formal consultations (both 22%) from the CFIA.

Q11: How has your business received information from the CFIA in the past year? Select all that apply.
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q12: Overall, how satisfied are you with the communications you have received from CFIA? Please use a number between 0 and 10, where 0 means 'not at all satisfied' and 10 means 'very satisfied'.
Base: Communicated or received communication with the CFIA (n=162).

Q14: Would you say the frequency with which you get communications from the CFIA is…?
Base: Communicated or received communication with the CFIA (n=162).

Q15: To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about communications from CFIA?
Base: Communicated or received communication with the CFIA (n=162).

Q16: In the future, how would you most prefer that CFIA get you the information you need to know? Select all that apply.
Base: Communicated or received communication with the CFIA (n=162).

Q22: When you are trying to understand new or existing requirements related to animal health, which of the following three options would you prefer for hearing from the CFIA?
Base: All respondents (n=165).

My CFIA Portal

Nearly all have heard of (95%) and used or registered (94%) for the My CFIA portal. Among those who have used it, the majority (53%) are neutral (26%) or are dissatisfied (27%) with their experience.

Six in ten (60%) respondents say that their company is ready for digital by default online services, and only 7% say that they are not at all ready.

Q18: Have you heard of the My CFIA portal? It is an electronic way to manage and track service requests online, including export certificates and permissions such as licences, permits and registrations.
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Q19: Have you used, or registered for the My CFIA portal?
Base: Respondents who have heard of the My CFIA portal (n=160).

Q20: How would you rate your experience with the My CFIA portal? Please use a number between 0 and 10, where 0 means 'not at all satisfied' and 10 means 'very satisfied'.
Base: Respondents who have used the My CFIA portal (n=157)

Q21: CFIA is planning on moving from a paper-based reporting system to a digital/electronic preferred system of reporting and inspecting, also called digital by default online services. Thinking about the technology in use at your farm/business how would you describe your level of readiness for this change?
Base: All respondents (n=165).

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) among livestock industry and producers

One-quarter (25%) of respondents say their concern about AMR impacts their desire to administer antimicrobials in their animals. When it comes to determining which vaccines to give their animals, six in ten (59%) respondents say that they consult veterinarian advice.

Only 10% of respondents say that they do not use antimicrobials in their animals, and six in ten (60%) say that they use them on veterinarian advice. Three in ten (31%) respondents say that their use of antimicrobials has changed throughout their career, nearly all (27%) who say that they have decreased their use. While 17% say that they do not have a veterinarian, twice as many (34%) indicate that their veterinarian has discussed with them preventative measures and alternatives to antimicrobial use.

When it comes to vaccines, nearly half (47%) say that they use them as an alternative to antimicrobials. However, availability (29%), cost (23%) and logistic considerations (19%) are all factors that impact respondents' decision to administer vaccines.

Q38: Does your concern about AMR impact your desire to administer antimicrobials?
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Q39: How do you determine what vaccines to give to your animals? Select all that apply.
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Q40: Has your veterinarian discussed preventative measures with you for alternatives to antimicrobial use?
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Q41: What alternatives to antimicrobials do you use, if any? Select all that apply.
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Q42: How do you use antimicrobials? Select all that apply.
Base: Livestock industry and producers who use alternatives (n=52).

Q43: In the last 5 years, have you ever had a treatment failure? For example, a treatment prescribed to your animal(s) doesn't work and a different treatment is required.
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Q44: Has your use of antimicrobials changed throughout your career?
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Q45: What factors impact your decision to administer vaccines? Select all that apply.
Base: All livestock industry and producers (n=70).

Focus on producers

Amongst the animal health business sample were 21 cattle, swine, goat and/or sheep producers who completed several distinct questions.

Nearly half (48%) of producers say they are very familiar with the national biosecurity standards that relate to their commodity group, and only 14% say that they are not familiar with them. A majority take all the measures tested to protect their animals, including ensuring clean water sources (71%), secure food storage practices (71%), and monitoring the animals surroundings (71%).

While producers recognize multiple benefits of biosecurity, including reduced costs associated with disease management and treatment and improved health of animals (both 43%), some also note challenges in improving biosecurity (in particular cost (52%) and time (33%)).

Producers are divided on whether they should be required to protect their animals from reportable diseases through regulations; 38% believe they should, 29% believe they should not and 33% do not have an opinion.

Conversely, there is consensus among producers that they would consult a veterinarian (100%) if their livestock showed signs of an infection or disease; 10% would consult the CFIA. While relatively few would consult CFIA if their livestock showed signs of infection/disease, half (48%) say that they would be very likely to make a report to the CFIA is they were concerned that one of their animals had a reportable disease.

When asked about antimicrobial resistance specifically, three-quarters of producers say that they familiar and concerned about it (76% for each).

Q24: How familiar are you with the national biosecurity standards for your commodity group? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all familiar and 7 is very familiar.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q25: Which of the following measures if any do you use to protect your animals? Select all that apply.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q26: Are you currently involved with an industry biosecurity program?
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q29: What do you see as the challenges in improving biosecurity? Select all that apply.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q30: What do you see as the benefits of biosecurity? Select all that apply.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q31: In your opinion should livestock producers be required (regulated) to protect their animals from contagious (reportable) diseases?
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q32: If your livestock showed signs of an infection or disease, who would you consult? Select all that apply.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q33: If you were concerned that the animal had a reportable disease how likely would you be to report it to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all likely and 7 is very likely.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q34: How familiar are you with antimicrobial resistance (AMR)?
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep (n=21).

Q35: Where have you heard about AMR? Please select all that apply.
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep with some familiarity with AMR (n=17).

Q37: How concerned are you about the risk posed by AMR? Are you…?
Base: Animal producers of cattle, swine, poultry, goat, and sheep with some familiarity with AMR (n=17).

Focus on veterinarians

While only six veterinarians completed the online survey, the following findings emerge from this subset. Firstly, half (50%) of the veterinarians surveyed said that they always consider antimicrobial resistance when providing treatment, but fewer say that they always feel pressured by clients or colleagues to provide an antimicrobial as a preventative measure (33% and 17%, respectively).

While the majority (67%) surveyed indicated that they feel that they have had sufficient education related to antimicrobial use and resistance, half (50%) say that there are few or no opportunities for continuing education on these topics.

Q46: Do you consider antimicrobial resistance when providing treatment?
Base: Veterinarians (n=6).

Q47: What are the challenges you face when deciding on different treatment options? Select all that apply.
Base: Veterinarians (n=6).

Q48-49: Do you ever feel pressured to provide an antimicrobial as a preventative measure?
Base: Veterinarians (n=6).

Q50: Do you feel you've had sufficient formal education on antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance?
Base: Veterinarians (n=6).

Q51: Do you feel that there are sufficient opportunities for continuing education on antimicrobial use and antimicrobial resistance?
Base: Veterinarians (n=6).

Qualitative insights: Veterinarians awareness of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and antimicrobial use (AMU)

Awareness of antimicrobial resistance was high among veterinarians.

The majority felt that they had sufficient knowledge of antimicrobial resistance and use which they had gleaned primarily through school and continuing education, but also from the Government of Canada, the medical association, and in conversation with colleagues and peers. However, most had the sense that there was always more to learn and that they would appreciate having additional opportunities for continuing education.

When asked about what substantive topics it would be helpful to have more resources on, veterinarians volunteered the following:

• Review sessions that cover foundational knowledge concerning AMU and AMR as it pertains to a variety of different types of practice;
• Up-to-date information on what drugs are currently available and best practices surrounding them;
• Briefings on advances in the field, including the release of any new treatments;
• Strategies for minimizing antimicrobial resistance, including alternative forms of treatment;
• Strategies for explaining to customers and why alternatives might be preferable;
• And educational initiatives for producers (i.e., third party information helps share the message).

Many volunteered that online learning, webinars, were efficient ways to share information that might make it a little easier and more efficient. Ease of access was mentioned as a benefit, with some noting that they currently found it difficult to find information at the moment – especially information that was relevant to their specific field of practice.

"Webinars as well as in-person workshops or talks, especially in conjunction with a major conference. Having that as an option." – Veterinarian

Qualitative insights: Veterinarians impression of prevention

The vast majority of veterinarians do not use antimicrobials as disease prevention, some preferring vaccination. There was a sense that it is unnecessary in the vast majority of cases and contributes to resistance.

"Nope – there are better alternatives that will prevent infections and management that will be more beneficial rather than doing preventative AMU." – Veterinarian

Interestingly, however, almost all have felt that they had faced pressure from their clients to use antimicrobials as disease prevention. A few mentioned being met with consternation and frustration when they refused to prescribe antibiotics. By contrast, none of those interviewed ever felt pressured by their colleagues to use antimicrobials as disease prevention.

In terms of vaccines, most seemed to have experienced some challenges related to shortages and backorders and some related to cost.

In terms of shortages/backorder, veterinarians spoke of the inventory balance to strike in ensuring there are enough vaccines but not having too many that surpass the expiration dates. Specific shortages that were noted were related to vaccines for respiratory viruses in dairy cows, as well as feline and canine vaccines.

Where costs are concerned, some mentioned the cost of some small animal vaccines (e.g., Lyme and leukemia vaccines in particular) are prohibitive to clients. To this, it was mentioned by one interviewee that the insurance coverage that some clients had factored into whether they could afford vaccinations.

Others mentioned facing challenges with the ways in which vaccinations were sold. They highlighted that many vaccines were only available in bulk so, if their clinic only needed one, they either would have to pass on the cost of all the vaccines to the one client if they were going to bring them in – which made it prohibitive to access non-routine vaccines or those with short shelf lives.

Few, if any, veterinarians seemed to be using autogenous vaccines. In fact, most volunteered they were not all that familiar with them and were open to hearing more about them.

"If I understand them correctly, it's a vaccine that's taken from someone and given to someone else. I'm not familiar with it. It's not a typical type of vaccination. It has uncertain viability." – Veterinarian

Most also had the sense that they were expensive and that there were limitations (i.e., finding someone that would make them) in Canada.

While knowledge was limited, many also held a nebulous sense that there were regulatory hurdles or challenges complicating their wider distribution and use.

Qualitative insights: Veterinarians impression of treatment

Almost all veterinarians interviewed faced challenges when deciding on different treatment options for their patients/clients. These included cost, compliance, availability of options, availability of concentrations/sizes of medications/formulations (i.e., injectable, oral, etc.).

"Cost can be an issue as well as time commitments, if a drug is multiple times a day, clients have difficulty doing that." – Veterinarian

Antimicrobial resistance plays at least a minor role when providing treatment, if not a more considerable one if the circumstances warrant it. Things veterinarians take into consideration before prescribing are not wanting to create resistance on farms; having clients/patients finish the full course of (antibiotic) treatment; and, culturing before treatment.

"We don't want to create resistance on farms. We have a limited repertoire to use, so we want the limited toolbox available to us at all times." – Veterinarian

Awareness of the CVMA FirstLine app was very low with only one veterinarian interviewed having used it and being somewhat familiar with it.

Qualitative insights: Veterinarians impressions of occurrence of resistance

Most interviewees do not routinely run culture and sensitivity on their patients. The situations in which they do so more regularly were with infections that are not resolving (including when antibiotics are being used with no improvement), on large animal post-mortems, and some skin, ear, or urinary tract infections on small animals.

For some, they are not recommended mainly for reasons of timing (i.e., four-day turnaround when the animal could have been treated in that timeframe) and cost. For one veterinarian, they are routinely suggested and for another, they are more routinely used on the bacteriology side but not a lot of antibiotic susceptibility testing.

Most have had cases of antimicrobial resistance in their practice on at least one occasion, although few mentioned having experience with any recent cases. As for detection, they were identified using sensitivity results or detected treatment failure.

"Document the culture and sensitivity and, if indicated, switch antibiotics to something that they're not resistant to Generally its very rare for vets to report or flag a resistant bacteria." – Veterinarian

Once resistance was established and documented, the next step was often selecting another antibiotic; in which cost was typically the only barrier. No one seemed to detect any differences in resistance across species. Although a few interviewees raised unprompted that they felt that they were supposed to report cases of resistance, none of those who mentioned it said that they did ultimately report it.

Almost all did think that having access to portable AMR diagnostic tests would be helpful in their practice, although there were no preferences mentioned when it came to specific tests.

Qualitative insights: Veterinarians impressions of CFIA Communications

In terms of information needs, almost all agreed that there is enough guidance material on vaccines but not specifically about autogenous vaccines.

As mentioned above, it was noted that easily accessible information online would be welcomed. This included through a specific-use app, although a few admitted that this might already be available through an app (for example, the FirstLine app) that they were unfamiliar with.

What they would like to better understand around antimicrobial use and resistance, is:

• the science behind it, including how best to approach a culture and sensitivity
• what is the best empirical treatment
• what's the frequency and dosage
• how to guide on how best to approach, and reminder of best practices
• what has been experienced by others in the same region

Their preferred means of receiving information is email, webinars, in-person workshops, website information (on the CFIA's website) or industry association website.

"Email, even if it is just an email saying, click this link to see updates on our website." – Veterinarian

Qualitative insights: Vet recruitment         

The idea of working for CFIA was very appealing and, in fact, preferable to working in a situation that requires terrible working hours, conditions and the threat of physical harm caused by the animals being treated.

The benefits of a career in government were well known (i.e., pension, benefits, set hours).

"There's always the government job upside (pension, benefits, set hours). There isn't a negative persona attached to working for them. Everyone I know working for government seems to be happy. I'd never be against a CFIA job." – Veterinarian.

While it did not necessarily come up spontaneously, when asked, meat hygiene was seen as at the very least a minor obstacle in recruiting vets.

Many suggested the CFIA consider targeting mid- to late-career veterinarians as they could be either looking for a change or for an opportunity for part-time hours.

Section C: General public

Section C details the results of the quantitative (through an online survey) and qualitative (through online focus groups) with the general public.

Familiarity with CFIA

Familiarity of the activities of the CFIA is limited. Indeed, a majority of respondents (58%) say that they are not familiar, and only 9% say that they are very familiar. As with familiarity, interaction with CFIA is also limited. Among those with some familiarity, one-fifth (20%) have seen, read, or heard something from the CFIA recently, 13% say that they have read or watch content from CFIA and 10% have visited the CIFA website.

Pig owners and hobby farmers are the most likely to say that they are very familiar with the activities of the CFIA (34% and 18%, respectively).

QREP2: How familiar would you say you are with the activities of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)? Please use the 7-point scale below for your response. A rating of 7 indicates 'very familiar'. A rating of 1 indicates 'not familiar at all'.
Base: All respondents (n=1007).

QREP2A: Select all the following that apply to you:
Base: Respondents who have some familiarity with the CFIA's activities (n=742).

QREP3: Have you seen, heard, or read anything recently about the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)?
Base: Respondents who have some familiarity with the CFIA's activities (n=742).

QREP4: Where have you seen, heard, or read about the CFIA? Please select all that apply.
Base: Respondents who are familiar with the CFIA's activities and recall where they've seen, heard, or read about it (n=144).

Impression of CFIA activities and priorities

Respondents who expressed some familiarity with the CFIA were asked to state their level of agreement with a variety of statements about CFIA activities. With exception of the statement "I understand what the CFIA does" where one-quarter (25%) disagreed, there was not significant levels of disagreement toward any of the statements tested.

Over four in ten respondents completely agree that the CFIA looks out for the best interests of Canadians (45%) or is believable as a science-based regulator (43%). One-quarter agree completely that CFIA's enforcement activities are strong enough (26%) or that CFIA treats businesses fairly (25%). Fewer have complete agreement that they know what the CFIA does (20%) or that getting information from the CFIA is easy (17%).

Hobby farmers are more likely than other types of respondents to say that they are very familiar with the activities of the CFIA (18%), have read article or watch videos from the CFIA (24%), and agree completely with each of the following statements about CFIA activities: "all businesses are treated fairly by the CFIA" (36%), "I understand what the CFIA does" (34%), and "getting more information about food, plant or animal safety from the CFIA is easy" (28%).

When exposed to a list of possible adjectives to describe the CFIA, only one, 'scientific', is selected by a majority of respondents (50%). 'Informative' (46%) and 'trusted' (45%) round out the top three descriptors of the CFIA.

To understand how Canadians would priorities CFIA activities, respondents were asked to rank priority areas from high to low. Half of the respondents were shown four CFIA priority areas: helping prevent the spread of plant pests and animal diseases in Canada; helping to keep foreign animal diseases out of Canada; verifying the safety and quality of feed, fertilizer, veterinarian biologics, and seeds in Canada; and helping to keep international markets open to Canadian food, plant and animal products. The other half were shown the same four, plus an additional animal health priority (that is, enforcing the food safety and nutritional quality standards established by Health Canada) that would not fall under CFIA' purview.

Looking specifically at CFIA priority areas, 'helping prevent the spread of plant pests and animal diseases in Canada' is more commonly ranked as the top priority (at 30%), and least likely to be ranked last by respondents. Among respondents, there is little that distinguishes 'helping to keep foreign animal diseases out of Canada' and 'verifying the safety and quality of feed, fertilizer, veterinarian biologics, and seeds in Canada' in terms of priorities. Conversely, over half of respondents (54%) rank 'helping to keep international markets open to Canadian food, plant and animal products' last among the four tested.

When shown the CFIA priorities alongside 'enforcing the food safety and nutritional quality standards established by Health Canada' four in ten respondents (41%) rank this as most important. Ranking amongst the four CFIA priorities is the same as when respondents only rank these four.

QREP5: Below are some statements to describe the activities of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). How much do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?
Base: Respondents who have some familiarity with the CFIA's activities (n=742).

QREP6: Of the words listed below, please select the ones that best describe the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Please select all that apply.
Base: Those who gave a rating of 5 and above at QREP2 (n=223).

Q11ANIMAL: Please rank what you personally believe the priorities of the CFIA should be in order of most important to least important. Four priority areas shown.
Base: Respondents who provided a ranking; excludes DK/NR (n=503).

Q11ANIMAL: Please rank what you personally believe the priorities of the CFIA should be in order of most important to least important. Five priority areas shown.
Base: Respondents who provided a ranking; excludes DK/NR (n=504).

Qualitative insights: Awareness of the CFIA

Awareness of the CFIA was very low and virtually none had seen, read, or heard anything about the CFIA recently or were aware of the CFIA's role in ensuring animals in Canada are safe and healthy. Awareness was mostly tangential and the CFIA was most often linked to inspections, labelling, and food safety.

"Inspecting food that goes out to Canada to ensure it is safe" – East (English), general population

Travelling with animals

While most (85%) dog and/or cat owners have not travelled with a pet, 14% say that they have. Among those who have, most (80%) have done so with a dog and one-fifth (19%) with a cat. While some have moved to another country (14%) or to Canada (11%) with a pet, the most common purpose of travel was for vacation (77%). Fewer have travelled with a pet they purchased or sold (6%).

The research suggests that travelling with pets occurs at all times throughout the year, and nearly half (45%) of this type of traveller travel with their pet once a year or more.

At 29%, hobby farmers are more likely than other respondents to say that they have travelled outside with their pet.

Q3ANIMAL: Have you ever travelled outside of Canada with your pet(s) (for vacation, moving abroad, etc.)?
Base: Those who own at least one dog or cat (n=521).

Q3AANIMAL: If yes, which pet did you travel with? Select all that apply.
Base: Those who have travelled with a pet (n=73).

Q3BANIMAL: What was the purpose of travel? Select all that apply.
Base: Those who have travelled with a pet (n=73).

Q3DANIMAL: How often do you travel with your pet(s)?
Base: Those who have travelled with a pet (n=73).

Q3EANIMAL: What time of the year do you typically travel with your pets? Select all that apply.
Base: Those who have travelled with a pet (n=73).

Qualitative insights: Pet travel

While most participants were pet owners, of mostly dogs and cats, as was found in the survey, very few had travelled with their pets outside of Canada. Only a couple of small dog owners had travelled with their dogs when they drove across the border into the U.S.

Almost all preferred to have a friend or family member care for their pets at home while they were away, rather than travel with their pets, mainly to ensure their pets' comfort and to avoid hassle.

"My cat is better at home, and when we leave, I prefer that he stays at home." East (French), general population

Qualitative insights: Travel and food

Some participants indicated that they have brought back food when they have travelled outside of Canada. However, the types of food that they have typically brought back tended to be packaged foods, such as candies and treats, rather than fresh fruits, vegetables, or meats which they understood were prohibited.

Others indicated that they do not bring back any types of food to ensure a more pleasant travel experience and avoid any hassle at customs.

"I enjoy smooth sailing when I go on vacation, so I keep it simple so it's not a big hassle. You just want to go home." – West (English), general population

While not widely understood, some participants were cognizant of the potential risk(s) associated with bringing food from another country into Canada. The biggest risk tended to be around bringing in foreign insects and/or bacteria.

In terms of animal diseases, including those that exist elsewhere in the world, participants named bird flu, mad cow, rabies, and swine flu.

When asked, most were concerned about the threat of bringing in foreign foods and/or animal diseases and the importance of preserving our ecosystems and food chains.

Very few, if any, had seen, read, or heard anything about ASF over the past year or so.

Animal health – importing pets

As it relates to regulations and requirements for bringing pets into Canada, understanding is limited. Nearly half (45%) would say that they have limited or no understanding of the regulations, while 11% claim to have a great deal of understanding. One-third (33%) of respondents say that they are aware the CFIA website contains information pertaining to bringing animals into Canada, including 4% who say that they have used that information.

Confidence in the governments' ability to prevent the entry of serious or infectious animal diseases is higher – with over one-fifth (22%) who say that they are very confident, and 46% having some confidence.

Half of respondents say that they own a pet (53%). Most pet owners have one (60%), and dog (57%) and/or cat (52%) ownership is most common. Strong majorities of dog and/or cat owners say that they are aware there are requirements to bring an animal into another country (73%) or into Canada (71%), or when adopting a pet and bringing it back to Canada (69%). If they were to look up these requirements, dog and/or pet owners are most likely to use the Government website (52%) or a search engine (35%).

Four in ten (40%) dog and/or cat owners say that they "agree completely" with the statement "Canada's requirements for bringing my pet dog and/or cat into the country help promote the health and well-being of animals when travelling", and only 4% disagree.

When asked if Canada's regulations pertaining to travelling with their dog and/or cat are easier to understand, or are stricter than other countries, or whether they have not been able to meet Canada's requirements, a majority of respondents do not or cannot provide a response (68%, 67% and 64%, respectively).

The vast majority of respondents who have travelled with a pet say that they are aware that if they are travelling with a pet they will need to meet specific criteria to enter into another country (89%) and returning to Canada (90%), and if they are planning to purchase or adopt a pet abroad, they will need to meet certain criteria in order to bring the pet back to Canada (79%).

Hobby farmers and those who have travelled with a pet are both more likely than their counterparts to agree completely that Canada's regulations pertaining to travelling with their dog and/or cat are easier to understand than other countries (21% and 28%, respectively), are stricter than other countries (20% and 22%, respectively), and to have experienced not been able to meet Canada's requirements (12% and 14%, respectively).

Understanding of the current regulations and the requirements for bringing pets into Canada is highest (that is, expressing a great deal of understanding) among respondents who have travelled with a pet (45%), own a pig (36%) or are a hobby farmer (22%). Each of these audiences are also more likely to be confident in the government's ability to prevent the entry of serious or infectious animal diseases into Canada (39%, 43%, and 31%, respectively). And finally, they are more likely to have used the CFIA's website to access information (23%, 27%, and 12%, respectively).

Q6ANIMAL: How would you rate your understanding of current regulations and the requirements for bringing pets into Canada? Please use a 7-point scale where 1 means little understanding, 7 means a great deal of understanding, and 4 means some understanding.
Base: All respondents (n=1007).

Q8ANIMAL: How confident are you in the government's ability to prevent the entry of serious/infectious animal diseases that are not currently in Canada? Please use a 7-point scale where 1 means not at all confident, 7 means very confident, and 4 means somewhat confident.
Base: All respondents (n=1007).

Q9ANIMAL: Are you aware that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's (CFIA) website has information, including import requirements, for bringing various types of animals into Canada?
Base: All respondents (n=1007).

Q10ANIMAL: How often do you look for information about animal health of any kind?
Base: All respondents (n=1007).

Q4ANIMAL: Would you say you are very aware, somewhat aware, not very aware or not at all aware of each of the following:
Base: Those who own at least one dog or cat (n=521).

Q4DANIMAL: Where would you look for information to learn about the requirements to travel with your pet? Select all that apply.
Base: Those who own at least one dog or cat (n=521).

Q5ANIMAL: How much do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements?
Base: Those who own at least one dog or cat (n=521).

Qualitative insights: Rabies

Virtually no one had seen, read, or heard anything about rabies recently and certainly not about canine rabies.

Read a brief description of dog rabies, participants were surprised to hear it existed or that it could affect/be transmitted to humans.

There certainly seemed to be some interest in learning more about it and how it is transmitted.

Qualitative insights: Resources and reaction to CFIA website/communications

No one could remember, specifically, having visited the CFIA's website or page dedicated to traveling with pets, food or plants or the Automated Import Reference System (AIRS) though a few wondered whether they may have visited either page in the past when looking for information about what they could or could not bring back to Canada.

When shown the page dedicated to traveling with pets, food or plants, overall reaction was generally positive. The page was described as clear and visually appealing if not a little generic-looking (i.e., having the same look and feel as most government websites). From a content perspective, the vast majority felt the page included what one might want or need to know and that it seemed to be organized in an intuitive way that would be easy to navigate.

Reactions when shown the AIRS, were also generally positive. Most were pleased such a site existed. Being able to quickly check the requirements around specific commodities was appreciated and the site looked easy to use.

"The page is very interesting and easy to use. I didn't know it existed but it's a very interesting page." East (French), general population

Worth noting, participants did not question the validity or credibility of information on either site.

Participants were also shown various elements of the Paws and Plan campaign about bringing or traveling with a dog to Canada. Overall, the vast majority of participants seemed to really like the campaign. Participants noticed and appreciated the double meaning of the campaign slogan, Paws and Plan. The dog featured in the ads was described as very cute and likely to capture their attention.

Reactions to the video were very positive. It was described as short, sweet and informative. The main message was to take a moment to understand the requirements (i.e., vaccinations, records) around bringing a dog into Canada. Participants appreciated how effectively this was communicated through the attention-grabbing icons. They also appreciated the background music which was felt to be uplifting and the accompanying sounds throughout (i.e., flying plane, icon dings). They even recognized and commented on the closing jingle which communicated very clearly that this was a Government of Canada ad.

"I like that it identifies the 3 things you most likely will need." – West (English), general population

Participants also liked the images of the social media ads, for many of the same reasons outlined above (i.e., cute dog, catchy slogan). Between the two, the ad with the dotted plane and calendar icon, seemed to more effectively communicate the importance of preparation and planning when traveling with a pet.

Few participants noted the difference when shown the image of the social media ad with the message, Travelling with your dog?

Qualitative insights: Resources and reaction to African Swine Fever creative

When shown the page dedicated to protecting Canada's pigs from African Swine Fever, overall reaction was generally positive. The page was described as clear, visually appealing with a good mix of icons/illustrations and text, and very easy to navigate. The elements of the website that were particularly resonant and appreciated were the availability of the pdf version of the website content in different languages and the description/notice at the top that conveyed the importance of and everyone's responsibility to protect Canada's pigs.

"I like that there are several language options to educate those who arrive from other countries." – East (French), general population

Participants were also shown various elements of the Don't Pack Pork campaign. Overall, reaction to the campaign was positive to mixed.

The elements across the campaign that were deemed effective included:

The majority liked the colours, especially the use of the colour pink and its link to pork, and thought they were attention-grabbing.

The message, "Protect Canada" was especially resonant.

The red circled "X" on the parcel ad very effectively communicated what not to do (i.e., "no pork").

The video with the world map that illustrated countries in which African Swine Fever is present, was particularly attention-grabbing and helpful. In fact, some indicated they may think twice about traveling to some of these locations as a result.

The use of illustrations and images in the videos as a compelling way to communicate.

"Yes, if they didn't have audio, I prefer the first one because you can easily understand with the images you use." – East (French), general population

The elements across the campaign that were deemed less effective included:

The use of different coloured font in the slogan, "Don't pack pork" which seemed to put the emphasis on the words "pack pork" rather than "don't". Similarly, the visual of the suitcase over the pig, seemed to be encouraged rather than prohibited. Participants felt using the red circled "X" would more effectively communicate that message (whether on the word or illustration image).

The icons of the meat in the suitcase in the international student video were confusing. Participants were not always sure what type of meat was depicted; often confusing it for chicken.

"A little too fast. Targets international students. They should add a picture of a pork for the pork line, instead of a chicken leg." – West (English), general population

Qualitative insights: Message testing

Participants were shown three messages related to awareness and declarations related to their travel and luggage.

Overall, the language in all three messages was clear and understood. No one felt any of the wording/terminology was confusing or hard to understand.

Reaction to the second message was particularly positive. As noted earlier, the message, "Do your part to protect Canada" was particularly resonant and persuasive. Participants appreciated the responsibility the "do your part" conveyed, and the importance "to protect Canada". They also appreciated the message to declare "all foreign food, plants, and related products" which was clear and broad.

"I prefer message B, because it means protect and but the emphasis on Canada and attracts attention." – East (French), general population

While reaction to the first message was generally positive, it implied a little more ambiguity than the second message, in that it conveyed, "some food, plant and animal products are not allowed in Canada."

With respect to the third message, while the message was deemed important, some felt it was a little wordy and long. They thought, depending on how it is used, they might overlook it.

Conclusions

The objectives of this multi-faceted research were to understand awareness and behaviours around regulatory requirements related to the health of animals among key audiences. The key audiences of the research were small-scale pork producers, animal health businesses (including veterinarians) and the general public (including pet owners and travellers).

Despite having that common general set of objectives, this undertaking involved a conducting both quantitative and qualitative research among each of a variety of unique target audiences, covering a diverse range of topics, with some unique to each target audience and sometimes unique even to the mode. As a result, it is difficult to provide a synthesized set of conclusions. Therefore, as with the body of the report, conclusions are provided specific to each of the audiences.

The findings among small-scale pork producers demonstrate that this subset of the pork producing sector is incredibly diverse, including many who self-define as something other than a pig farmer. The more pigs one owns, or the more it is an economic endeavour and further, the more significant an economic endeavour it is, the more these owners see themselves as farming pigs. That variance in self-definition, which is arguably to be expected among pet owners but more surprising among those for whom one or more pigs will be consumed, appears to have an effect on their patterns of thinking and behaviour as they relate to pig diseases and biosecurity, as well as among other facets of pig-keeping and care.

The challenge for CFIA lies in communicating information which many of owners of few pigs, or a single pigs, assume is not directed at them. While those with farming operations, either with larger numbers of pigs or with other animals raised for economic benefit, demonstrated a need to have at least some basic biosecurity measures implemented, many others are doing less and yet still feel confident that what they are doing is both reasonable and sufficient, given how few pigs they have and how little the economic impact would be to their home or operation in a worst-case scenario.

The basics include regular veterinary care for pet pigs, clean water, facilities, and some segregation for those whose pigs are for consumption. While most report using processed pig food, many of these small-scale pig owners are feeding their pigs table scraps or repurposed produce from grocery stores.

They are not attending town halls or conferences about pig ownership, but small-scale producers do get information on raising and caring for pigs from a variety of sources. The network of those with pig-owning experience appears to be an initial source relied upon by many. This may be from conversations at pig feed outlets, discussions with neighbours and family members who have or have had pigs, or via online interactions with owners who regularly post about a specific breed of pig. It is not necessarily the case that online sources are instantly credible but hearing the same advice corroborated by others with similar circumstances has an ability to instill confidence in the information.

All this is to suggest that small scale pig owners may benefit from more unique messaging and approaches, particularly in terms of educating about the relevance to their circumstances of adhering to regulatory guidelines for pig safety and risk mitigation.

The research among animal health businesses shows this audience has much more interaction with CFIA and the information it provides that is relevant to their work. However, on several metrics, there appears to be room for improvement: satisfaction with the information they have received from CFIA; the clarity of federal regulatory responsibilities; and to some degree, even the trustworthiness of the CFIA.

Specifically focusing on veterinarians, there is a high degree of awareness of antimicrobial resistance and confidence in having sufficient knowledge to apply to their work. The Government of Canada is among the sources of information they do rely on when it comes to AMR and there is appetite for continued updates on AMR, including specifically on autogenous vaccines. One of the key challenges to their work when it comes to AMR is determining what is best, given the animal owners circumstances as well as the animal's condition and the expense of the best possible approaches. At times, in addition to cost, there are other barriers to providing the optimal treatment, including availability.

According to the veterinarians interviewed, CFIA is an attractive option for employment and there was encouragement for communicating about opportunities for veterinarians since working as a vert in the CFIA offered physical safety, financial stability, and more reasonable work-life balance.

In terms of the views of the Canadian general population, awareness of the activities of the CFIA is not widespread, but that is also not unique for among regulatory bodies or government departments. Low familiarity has a tendency to limit the ability of Canadians to endorse the work being done by the CFIA, although many more people give the CFIA the benefit of the doubt than actually holding negative views of the work it is doing.

For example, while it may be discouraging that less than half agree that CFIA looks out for the best interest of Canadians, the ratio of agreement to disagreement on that point is more than seven to one. Very few hold negative views. Together, it suggests that while the low awareness is not currently creating disenchantment, increasing awareness may be worthwhile, particularly if CFIA ever needs to rely on a favourable relationship with the public to navigate a challenging issue or obtain buy-in for a policy or regulatory change.

On the topic of travelling internationally with animals, most Canadian pet owners do not claim this is something they do and Canadians are even less likely to be familiar with rules as they relate to traveling internationally with pets. The small number who do travel with their pet, did tend to be fairly well-informed, basically having learned the rules from experience and not from sources like the CFIA's AIRS web page.

That said, when shown the site, focus group participants felt it was a clear and simple resource, suggesting that once CFIA is able to connect with pet owners who may one day travel internationally with their pet, the information could be welcome and effective.

Canadians tend to have some understanding of the rules and risks associated with bringing food, plants, or animals into Canada, although awareness of African Swine Fever is fairly low. While reactions to the Don't Pack Pork campaign as tested were mixed, participants did agree with and appreciate the notion of friendly reminders to protect Canada and clear examples of what to avoid packing.

If there is a summary to be drawn that is common across all these research undertakings, it is that there is respect for the purpose of the CFIA, even if the specific Agency activities examined were not very familiar and/or if the topics covered were assumed to be less important than the CFIA would hope. Whether in the context of small-scale pig owners, animal health businesses, pet owners, or Canadians in general, demonstrating the relevance of a specific regulatory requirement is vital and, for many, the key barrier to impacting behaviour.

Appendix A – Quantitative methodology report: Small pork producers

Survey methodology

The overall approach adopted for this project was an online survey, the details of which are presented in the sections below.

Questionnaire design

The questionnaire for this research was designed by the CFIA, in collaboration with Earnscliffe, and provided for fielding to Leger. The survey was offered to respondents in both English and French and completed based on their language preferences. Respondents could not skip any of the questions but were provided with the opportunity to decline to answer or to say they did not know.

While the questionnaire is similar in content to previous CFIA studies, results have not been tracked or compared to those results due to dissimilarities in sample design and selection.

Sample design, selection, and weighting

The research involved an online survey of 152 small pork producers, who were defined as anyone who owns at least one pig, either for consumption or as a pet, and does not belong to a provincial or national pork producer association or a hog or pig farmer association.

The online survey was conducted using Leger's proprietary online panel. As no statical profile is known for small pork producers, no quotas were set and no weights were applied to the final data.

Data collection

The online survey was conducted from March 1 to 11, 2024, in English and in French. The survey was an average of 10 minutes in length. The survey was undertaken by Leger using their proprietary online panel.

Nonresponse

Respondents for the online survey were selected from among those who have volunteered to participate in online surveys by joining an online opt-in panel. The notion of non-response is more complex than for random probability studies that begin with a sample universe that can, at least theoretically, include the entire population being studied. In such cases, non-response can occur at a number of points before being invited to participate in this particular survey, let alone in deciding to answer any particular question within the survey.

That being said, in order to provide some indication of whether the final sample is unduly influenced by a detectable non-response bias, the tables below illustrate the unweighted distributions of the sample's demographic characteristics.

Quality controls

Prior to launching the survey, Earnscliffe tested the links to ensure programming matched the questionnaires. Leger conducted a pre-test of the surveys, and the data was reviewed by Earnscliffe prior to a full launch of the surveys. Upon completion of the pre-test, Earnscliffe reviewed the data to ensure all skip patterns were working and the questionnaire was easily understood by all respondents.

Reporting

Results with upper-case sub-script in the tables presented under a separate cover indicate that the difference between the demographic groups analysed are significantly higher than results found in other columns in the table. In the text of the report, unless otherwise noted, demographic differences highlighted are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. The statistical test used to determine the significance of the results was the Z-test. Due to rounding, results may not always add to 100%.

Margin of Error

Respondents for the online survey were selected from among those who have volunteered to participate/registered to participate in online surveys. Because the online sample is based on those who initially self-selected for participation in the panel, no estimates of sampling error can be calculated for the entire sample. The treatment here of the non-probability sample is aligned with the Standards for the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research for online surveys.

Results

Final dispositions

A total of 3,945 individuals entered the online survey, of which 152 qualified as valid and completed the survey. The response rate for this survey was 7%.

Total entered survey: 3945
Completed: 152
Not qualified/screen out: 3655
Over quota: 0
Suspend/drop-off: 138

Unresolved (U): 2116
Email invitation bounce-backs: 6
Email invitations unanswered: 2110
In-scope non-responding (IS): 138
Qualified respondents break-off: 138

In-scope responding (R): 170
Completed surveys disqualified: 18
Completed surveys – valid: 152

Response rate = R/(U+IS+R): 7%

Appendix B – Online questionnaire: Small-scale pork producers

Email Invitation

LA VERSION FRANÇAISE SUIT

Welcome and thank you for your interest in this study. Earnscliffe Strategy Group, in collaboration with Leger Marketing, has been hired to administer an online survey on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The purpose of the study is to gain insights into understanding and views on issues important to Canadians.

This online survey will take about 15 minutes to complete. Your participation in the study is voluntary and completely confidential. All your answers will remain anonymous and will be combined with responses from all other respondents. As a token of our appreciation for your participation, you will receive [insert reward].

If you have any questions about the survey or if you encounter any difficulties, please email [INSERT EMAIL CONTACT].

To begin, click on the link below.

[URL]

Online Landing Page

Welcome and thank you for your interest in this study. Earnscliffe Strategy Group, in collaboration with Leger, has been hired to administer an online survey on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The purpose of the study is to gain insights into understanding and views on issues important to Canadians.

Your responses to this survey will be kept entirely confidential and any information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act and other applicable privacy laws. Do you wish to continue?

• Yes
• No [TERMINATE]

1. In what year were you born?

   [INSERT YEAR. IF YOUNGER THAN 18 YEARS, THANK & TERMINATE]

2. Please indicate if you or someone in your household owns:

   a) Any type of pig as a pet

   b) Any type of pig for consumption/farming purposes

   Yes	1
   No [Thank & terminate]	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

   
   
3. Do you or does someone in your household belong to a provincial or national pork producer or hog/pig farmer association?

   Yes [Thank and terminate]	1
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say [Thank and terminate]	9

   
   
4. Do you capture and keep wild pigs?

   Yes [Skip to 7]	1
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

   
   
5. Have you noticed any wild pigs on or around your property?

   Yes	1
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

   
   
6. Have you seen any evidence of wild pigs on your property? Evidence could include droppings, footprints, etc.

   Yes	1
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

   
   
7. [If yes to 4, 5 or 6] Do your domestic pigs have any contact with the wild pigs?

   Yes [Skip to 9]	1
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	8

   
   
8. Which of the following measures if any do you take to ensure your domestic pigs do not have contact with the wild pigs? [Select all that apply]

   Install secure fencing around the pig enclosure or farm perimeter	1
   Regularly inspect fences for any signs of damage or breaches	2
   Implement biosecurity measures such as controlled access to the pig area	3
   Ensure that water sources for pigs come from clean and controlled outlets	4
   Ensure secure food storage practices to prevent contamination from wild pigs	5
   Monitor the surroundings for signs of wild pig presence	6
   Educate staff and visitors about the importance of preventing contact between domestic and wild pigs	7
   None of the above	8
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

   
   
9. In a typical year, how many pigs on average do you keep (or plan to keep) on your property? Please include any pigs that you own, board, or otherwise keep on your property.

   Open end record number (take highest number if range is given)	1
   Prefer not to say [thank and terminate]	9

   
   
10. How many years have you kept or cared for pigs?

    Less than 1 year	1
    1 to 5 years	2
    6 to 10 years	3
    11-20 years	4
    20+ years	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
11. Why do you keep pigs? (Check all that apply)

    Food for myself, family or friends	1
    Hobby	2
    To use for trading or bartering for products from other farmers	3
    Pet	4
    To sell them/generate income	5
    Boarding someone else's pigs	6
    Others, please specify: _______	7
    Don't know/prefer not to say	9

    
    
12. You indicated you have kept pigs for [Insert answer from Q10]. How would you rate your knowledge when it comes to caring for pigs?

    Beginner	1
    Intermediate	2
    Advanced	3
    Expert	4
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
13. How do you acquire new pigs? (Select all that apply).

    Auction	1
    Physical market	2
    Online market	8
    Facebook	10
    Kijiji	3
    Buy directly from another pig owner/farmer	4
    I breed new pigs from the ones I own	5
    I board pigs owned by someone else	6
    Other, please specify: _______	7
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
14. Over the past 12 months have you seen, read of heard anything about pig diseases?

    Yes	1
    No [Skip to Q18]	2
    Don't Know/Prefer not to say [Skip to Q18]	9

    
    

    [IF YES TO Q14 ASK Q15]

15. What specifically have you seen, read or heard?

    [OPEN]
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    

    If Q15 = "African swine fever", code as yes in Q17

16. In the last 12 months have you seen, read or heard anything about African swine fever?

    Yes	1
    No [Skip to Q18]	2
    Don't know/prefer not to say [Skip to Q18]	9

    
    
17. What specifically have you heard about African swine fever?

    [OPEN]	1
    Don't remember	9

    
    
18. How concerned are you that your pigs could contract a virus or will develop a disease that could harm them or cause death? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all concerned and 7 is very concerned.

    1 - Not at all concerned
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7 - Very concerned
    9 - Don't know/Prefer not to say

    [If Q18 answer = 1-3, skip to Q21]

19. Pigs could become infected by different means. Which sources of infection are you most concerned about? Select all that apply. [RANDOMIZE]

    Wild pigs/boars that are infected with a virus that come into contact with your pigs	1
    Your pigs eating food that carries viruses and diseases	2
    Visitors to your property carrying viruses or disease from other farms	3
    Getting a virus by coming into contact with equipment or vehicles borrowed from another farm	4
    Developing an illness or disease on their own (no known transmission)	5
    Other, please specify: _____	6
    I am not concerned about my pigs getting infected [SINGLE SELECT]	7
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [SINGLE SELECT]	9

    
    
20. How much of a risk do you think African swine fever currently poses to your pig(s)?

    No risk at all	1
    Low risk	2
    Moderate risk	3
    High risk	4
    Very high risk	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
21. To the best of your knowledge, what is the likelihood that African swine fever will be found in Canada?

    Very unlikely	1
    Unlikely	2
    Likely	3
    Very likely	4
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
22. If African swine fever were to ever spread to Canada, which of the following precautions are you currently aware of that could be implemented? (Select all that apply) [ROTATE]

    Imposition of control zones and movement restrictions	1
    Depopulation of infected animals	2
    Depopulation of healthy animals	3
    Suspension of international trade, including pork, pork products or live pigs	4
    Other, please specify: _____	5
    Don't know [SINGLE SELECT]	9

    
    
23. If African swine fever were to ever spread to Canada, how much do you think it would affect your pig-related activities (i.e. acquiring, owning, selling, etc.)?

    No negative effect on my pig-related activities – I will continue with business as usual	1
    Minor negative effect on my pig-related activities – I will need to make small adjustments in how I control and care for my pigs	2
    Large negative effect on my pig-related activities – I will need to make large adjustments in how I control and care for my pigs	3
    Very large negative effect on my pig-related activities – I will likely not be able to own pigs anymore	4
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
24. Please rate your level of agreement with the following statement:

    I know all the best on-farm practices to prevent African swine fever from spreading to my pigs

    Strongly disagree	1
    Disagree	2
    Neither agree nor disagree	3
    Agree	4
    Strongly Agree	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
25. If your pigs show symptoms of disease or illness, who do you contact? Select all that apply. [RANDOMIZE]

    Nobody	7
    The internet [Ask 25A]	8
    A veterinarian	1
    Other pig farmers in the area	2
    Pork associations	3
    Federal government/Canadian Food Inspection Agency	4
    Provincial government (Provincial health authorities)	5
    Local government (local health authorities)	6
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [SINGLE SELECT]	9

    
    

    [ASK Q25A if Q25=The internet]

    Q25A. Which websites do you go to for advice on how to care for pigs? _______

26. Are you aware that if you suspect your pig is infected with African swine fever you must report it to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, as ASF is a reportable disease under the Health of Animals Act?

    Yes	1
    No	2
    Prefer not to say	9

    
    
27. If African swine fever were to ever spread to Canada, how confident are you in government regulators' ability to control the spread so that it is contained quickly? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all confident and 7 is very confident.

    1 - Not at all confident
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7 - Very confident
    9 - Don't know/Prefer not to say

28. Approximately, what percentage of time do your pigs spend inside and outside?

    ___ % Indoor	1
    ___ % Outdoor	2
    Don't know/prefer not to say	9

    
    
29. Where do you keep your [insert "domestic" if Q4-yes] pig(s)? (Select all that apply).

    Fenced off area to roam (pastured)	1
    Unfenced area to roam (open pastured)	2
    Used for regenerative agriculture (permanent or portable fences)	3
    A small structure (including small barn)	4
    Indoor - grouped in pens	5
    Indoor - individual stalls/pens	6
    Indoor - in my house as a pet	7
    Other, please specify: ______	8
    Don't know/prefer not to say	9

    
    
30. Do your pigs ever come into contact with other pigs that you do not own or keep, such as pigs on other farms?

    Yes	1
    No	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
31. [If Q11 = Boarding someone else's pigs] Do you keep the pigs you board separate from other pigs on your property?

    Yes	1
    No	2
    I do not keep any pigs besides the ones that I board for others	3
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
32. Do you allow visitors to your property to interact with your pigs?

    Yes	1
    No	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
33. Do you or any other people who interact with pigs on your property, such as family or workers also interact with pigs on other properties regularly?

    Yes	1
    No	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
34. Do you implement measures to reduce the risk of your pigs developing a disease?

    Yes	1
    No [Skip to Q36]	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [Skip to Q36]	9

    
    
35. [If Q34 = "yes"] Which of the following measures do you use to reduce the risk of disease in your pigs? (Select all that apply) [RANDOMIZE]

    I provide physical barriers such as fences and gates to prevent my pigs from coming into contact with wildlife	1
    I put up signage to inform people to not feed my pigs	2
    I avoid sharing equipment with other pig owners or farmers	3
    I implement controls for rodents or other pests that could spread disease	4
    I wash my hands either before or after I interact with my pigs	5
    I wash my clothes or my equipment either before or after interacting with my pigs	6
    I have dedicated clothes or equipment that is only used for interacting with my pigs	7
    I control how visitors interact with my pigs, including washing their hands or notifying me of the visit ahead of time	8
    I seek advice from my vet as soon as signs of disease or illness are observed in my pigs	9
    I only acquire pigs from reputable suppliers/sources	10
    I do not interact with my pigs for a period of time after I interact with pigs on other properties	11
    I isolate new pigs for 14 days before introducing them to any other pigs I have on my property	12
    Other, please specify: _____	13
    I don't undertake any specific measures [SINGLE SELECT]	98
    Don't know/prefer not to say [SINGLE SELECT]	99

    
    
36. What is the main source of food for your pigs? [RANDOMIZE]

    Pig feed – made by you or someone on your farm using plant-based feed ingredients	1
    Pig feed – pre-mix from a feed supplier	2
    Food scraps/leftover from human food	3
    Leftover feed for other animals	4
    Other: _____	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
37. In the last year, have you fed your pigs any of the following? (Select all that apply). [RANDOMIZE]

    Pig feed purchased from a reputable store or supplier	1
    Pig feed I made myself	2
    Feed purchased from other farmer or another person who keeps pigs or other animals	3
    Leftover feed for other animals on your farm
    Pet food
    Food recycling program or grocery waste	4
    Fruit or vegetable scraps/left over fruit or vegetables from a kitchen or restaurant or similar source	5
    Other food scraps/left over food originally meant for human consumption (i.e. kitchen, restaurant, or similar source)	6
    Other, please specify: _____	7
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [SINGLE SELECT]	9

    
    
38. Are you aware of any risks to your pigs if you feed them food scraps that are left over after others have already come into contact with it (i.e. kitchen or restaurant waste/leftovers)

    Yes	1
    No	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
39. Which of the following do you use as a water source for your pigs? (Select all that apply).

    Surface water (i.e. ponds, creeks or reservoirs)	1
    Municipal water supply	2
    Collected rain water (not including puddles or reservoirs)	3
    Well water	4
    Other, please specify: _____	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [SINGLE SELECT]	9

    
    

    How familiar are you with the national biosecurity standards? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all familiar and 7 is very familiar.

40. Dans quelle mesure connaissez-vous les normes nationales en matière de biosécurité? Veuillez répondre à l'aide d'une échelle de 1 à 7, où 1 signifie que vous ne les connaissez pas du tout et 7, que vous les connaissez très bien.

    1 - Not at all familiar
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7 - Very familiar
    9 - Don't know/Prefer not to say

41. What are some barriers that stop you from doing more to prevent your pigs from getting diseases? Select all that apply.

    It is too expensive to implement any more measures	1
    It is too difficult to implement any more measure	2
    I do not have the time to do anything more	3
    I do not know enough about what measures to take to prevent diseases	4
    Other, please specify: _____	5
    I do not face any barriers [SINGLE SELECT]	6
    Prefer not to say [SINGLE SELECT]	9

    
    
42. In the last year, have you sought veterinary care for your pigs?

    Yes [skip Q44]	1
    No [Skip to Q44]	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
43. [If Q42 = “yes”] Which of the following best describes how often your pigs receive veterinary care?

    Regularly - At least once every six months	1
    Regularly - At least once a year	2
    Only when there is something wrong with them	3
    Other, please specify: _____	4
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    [SKIP Q44]

44. [If Q42 = "no"] Why don't you have annual veterinary care for your pigs? Select all that apply.

    I cannot easily find a veterinarian or veterinary care	1
    I do not feel the need to contact a veterinarian	2
    My pigs are not meant as a food source, so they do not need to be checked unless they are obviously sick	3
    I do not trust veterinarians	4
    I cannot afford a veterinarian	5
    Other, please specify_____	6
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
45. If one of your pigs were to die or needed to be euthanized which of the following steps would you be most likely to take to dispose of it? SINGLE SELECT [RANDOMIZE]

    Sell it to anyone who wants it	1
    Bury it in the ground	2
    Donate it to science or research	3
    Use a waste collection service specializing in livestock	4
    Work with a veterinarian to find out why it died	5
    Bring it to the local dump/garbage disposal location	6
    Other, please specify: _____	7
    I do not know what I would do	8
    Prefer not to say	9

    
    
46. Which of the following sources do you use to find information on caring for pig(s)? (Select all that apply) [RANDOMIZE]

    Federal Government	1
    Provincial Government	2
    Your veterinarian	3
    Provincial Pork Boards (e.g. Alberta Pork, SaskPork, Manitoba Pork, Ontario Pork)	4
    Industry Associations (e.g. Canadian Pork Council)	5
    Industry publications on social media	6
    Social media groups	7
    Online discussion boards and forums	8
    Flyers and other takeaways where I purchase farm supplies	9
    Word of mouth from other pig farmers	10
    Specific websites (e.g. National Hog Farmer, The Pig Site)	11
    Other, please specify: _____	97
    I do not search for information from any sources	98
    Don't know/prefer not to say	99

    
    
47. Which of those sources do you trust the most?

    (Carry forward previous answers, select only one option)

48. [If Q46 is not "I do not search for information from any sources" or "don't know/prefer not to say"] Approximately how many hours a month do you spend researching about procedures for caring for pigs from all sources combined?

    Less than 1 hour	1
    1 to 5 hours	2
    6 to 10 hours	3
    11+ hours	4
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
49. Please rate your level of agreement with the following statement:

    I am able to find all of the information I need to know about necessary precautions to ensure my pigs are safe from diseases.

    Strongly disagree	1
    Disagree	2
    Neither agree nor disagree	3
    Agree	4
    Strongly Agree	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
50. How familiar would you say you are with the role of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) in preventing the spread of African swine fever in Canada? Use a scale of 1-7 where 1 is not at all familiar and 7 is very familiar.

    1 - Not at all familiar
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7 - Very familiar
    9 - Don't know/Prefer not to say

51. Have you received any information from the CFIA in the past year?

    Yes [ask Q52]	1
    No [skip Q52]	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [skip Q52]	9

    
    
52. How have you received information from the CFIA? Select all that apply. [RANDOMIZE]

    Mailed documents	1
    Telephone communications	2
    Email (including CFIA Listservs)	3
    Portal notices in My CFIA	4
    Personal interaction with a CFIA representative	5
    CFIA website	6
    Social media [ASK Q53]	7
    Through an industry association	8
    Other [specify]	9
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	99

    
    
53. Through which social media websites/applications have you received information from the CFIA? Select all that apply. [RANDOMIZE]

    Facebook	1
    X (formerly Twitter)	2
    Instagram	3
    YouTube	4
    TikTok	5
    Other	6
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	99

    
    
54. Overall, how satisfied are you with the communications you have received from CFIA? Note the scale is now 0 is not at all satisfied and 10 is very satisfied.

    10 - Very satisfied
    9
    8
    7
    6
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0 - Not at all satisfied
    Not applicable: I have never received or do not remember receiving information from the CFIA [SKIP to Q58]
    Don’t know/Prefer not to say [SKIP to Q58]

55. Why do you give CFIA a rating of [rating number from Q54] for its communications? That is, what could they do to better communicate with you?

    [Open ended]
    Don't know/Prefer not to say

56. Please rate how well your company understands the information when it is received from the CFIA?

    7 - Very clear
    6
    5
    4
    3
    2
    1
    0 - Not clear at all
    Don't know/Prefer not to say [SKIP Q55]

57. In general, do you consider the information you receive from the CFIA helpful?

    Yes	1
    No	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
58. In the future, how would you prefer that the CFIA get you the information you need? Select all that apply. [RANDOMIZE]

    Mailed documents	1
    Telephone communications	2
    Email (including CFIA Listservs)	3
    Portal notices in My CFIA	4
    Personal interaction with a CFIA representative	5
    CFIA website	6
    Social media [ASK Q58B]	7
    Through an industry association	8
    Other [specify]	9
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	99

    
    

    58B. Through which social media websites/applications have you received information from the CFIA? Select all that apply. [RANDOMIZE]

    Facebook	1
    X (formerly Twitter)	2
    Instagram	3
    YouTube	4
    TikTok	5
    Other	6
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	99

    The last few questions are strictly for statistical purposes. All of your answers are completely confidential.

59. Please indicate your gender.

    Male	1
    Female	2
    Gender diverse	3
    Prefer not to say	9

    
    
60. Which of the following provinces or territories do you live in?

    Newfoundland and Labrador	1
    Nova Scotia	2
    Prince Edward Island	3
    New Brunswick	4
    Quebec	5
    Ontario	6
    Manitoba	7
    Saskatchewan	8
    Alberta	9
    British Columbia	10
    Yukon	11
    Nunavut	12
    Northwest Territories	13
    Prefer not to say	99

    
    
61. What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?

    Grade 8 or less	1
    Some high school	2
    High school diploma or equivalent	3
    Registered apprenticeship or other trades certificate or diploma	4
    College, CEGEP or other non-university certificate or diploma	5
    University certificate or diploma below bachelor's level	6
    Bachelor's degree	7
    Post graduate degree above bachelor's level	8
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	99

    
    
62. Are you an Indigenous person, that is, First Nations (North American Indian), Métis or Inuk (Inuit)?

    Yes [SKIP TO Q64]	1
    No	2
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9

    
    
63. [IF NOT INDIGENOUS] Are you…? [SELECT UP TO THREE]

    White	1
    South Asian (e.g., East Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, etc.)	2
    Chinese	3
    Black	4
    Filipino	5
    Latin American	6
    Arab	7
    Southeast Asian (e.g., Vietnamese, Cambodian, Malaysian, Laotian, etc.)	8
    West Asian (e.g., Iranian, Afghan, etc.)	9
    Korean	10
    Japanese	11
    Other [SPECIFY]	98
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	99

    
    
64. What is the language that you speak most often at home?

    English	1
    French	2
    Other	8
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
65. Which of the following categories best describes your total household income? That is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes?

    Under $20,000	1
    $20,000 to just under $40,000	2
    $40,000 to just under $60,000	3
    $60,000 to just under $80,000	4
    $80,000 to just under $100,000	5
    $100,000 to just under $150,000	6
    $150,000 and above	7
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9

    
    
66. Would you describe the community you live in as…

    Urban	1
    Suburban	2
    Rural	3
    Remote	4
    Don't know/Prefer not to say	9

    
    
67. What are the first three characters of your postal code?

    [RECORD]
    Don't know/Prefer not to say

Appendix C – Qualitative methodology report: Focus groups and in-depth interviews

Methodology

The qualitative phase of the research included online focus groups and in-depth interviews, conducted between March 5 and 18, 2024. Our specific approach was as follows:

• Three focus groups with Canadian consumers and members of the general public (including pet owners and/or international travellers);
• Seven focus groups with small-scale pork producers (who either own a pig as a pet or own a pig for consumption/farming purposes); and
• Six in-depth interviews with veterinarians (including those who specialize in large animal veterinary).

Three groups were conducted in French (one among consumers and two among small-scale pork producers) and seven groups were conducted in English. Each group was approximately 90 minutes in length.

The in-depth interviews were conducted by videoconference (Teams) or telephone, depending on the interviewees' preference. Two interviews were conducted in French and four were conducted in English. The interviews were approximately 30 to 40 minutes in length.

In appreciation of their time, participants were provided an honorarium upon completion of the group or interview ($400 for veterinarians, $300 for small-scale pork producers and $125 for general population participants).

The table below shows the date, time and composition of each group, along with the number of participants per group. Region 'East' includes participants from Atlantic Canada, Quebec, and Ontario, while region 'West' includes those from Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia.

Recruitment

Participants were recruited using recruitment screener (see Appendices D and E) for each group and for the interviews. For each focus group, 6 participants were recruited.

The screener contained a series of standard screening questions to ensure participants qualified based on their age, region, employment industry, and community size, ensuring a good mix of other demographics such as gender, household income, location, etc.

Our fieldwork subcontractor, Quality Response, relied on panels and databases of Canadians. This is the approach employed most often. Quality Response reaches out to members of their database first via email and follows-up with telephone calls to pre-qualify respondents.

Quality Response's database includes approximately 35,000 Canadians with profiling on a range of attributes including standard personal demographics, household composition, medical background, technology usage, financial services, health and wellness, business profiles, and other relevant criteria. Their database is constantly being updated and replenished and operates out of their own, onsite telephone room in Toronto, Ontario. Potential group participants are recruited to their database via mixed-mode: following a proprietary telephone survey, online, referral, social media and print advertising. Initial contact is often made via email or online pre-screening for speed and economies, followed up by personal telephone recruitment and pre-group attendance confirmation.

Quality Response supplemented their recruitment with qualitative panel partners for specific areas including Metroline (Atlantic Canada; 4,500 Canadians), Brookson Research (Atlantic Canada; 9,500 Canadians); MBA Recherche (Quebec; 35,000 Canadians), Pele Research (Western and Northern Canada; 3,000 Canadians), Qualitative Coordination (Western and Northern Canada; 5,500 Canadians), and Walmsley (Western and Northern Canada; 5,500 Canadians).

While qualitative research and their panels more generally are not meant to be representative of the general population in Canada, every attempt is made to ensure each panel composition is reflective of the general population by region, age, and gender.

Quality Response understands the nuances of qualitative recruiting and the importance of locating qualified, interested respondents. Their recruiting is undertaken in strict accordance with the Standards for the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research – Qualitative Research.

Reminder calls were made prior to the groups to confirm participants' intention to attend and to encourage higher rates of participation.

Moderation

Two moderators were used to conduct the focus groups and conduct the interviews. Our team worked together to moderate the groups, debriefing with the CFIA after the first night of groups on the functionality of the discussion guide; any issues relating to recruitment, turnout, technology and, key findings including noting instances that were unique and that were similar to previous sessions. Together, we discussed the findings on an ongoing basis in order to allow for probing of areas that require further investigation in subsequent groups and before the final results were reported.

A note about interpreting qualitative research results

It is important to note that qualitative research is a form of scientific, social, policy, and public opinion research. Focus group research is not designed to help a group reach a consensus or to make decisions, but rather to elicit the full range of ideas, attitudes, experiences and opinions of a selected sample of participants on a defined topic. Because of the small numbers involved the participants cannot be expected to be thoroughly representative in a statistical sense of the larger population from which they are drawn and findings cannot reliably be generalized beyond their number.

Glossary of terms

The following is a glossary of terms which explains the generalizations and interpretations of qualitative terms used throughout the report. These phrases are used when groups of participants share a specific point of view and emerging themes can be reported. Unless otherwise stated, it should not be taken to mean that the rest of participants disagreed with the point; rather others either did not comment or did not have a strong opinion on the question

Appendix D – Focus group recruitment screener

Focus Group Summary

Hello/Bonjour, this is _______________ calling on behalf of Earnscliffe Strategies, a national public opinion research firm. Would you prefer that I continue in English or French? Préférez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais? [If French, continue in French or arrange a call back with a French interviewer: Nous vous rappellerons pour mener cette entrevue de recherche en Français. Merci. Au revoir].

We are organizing a series of discussion groups on issues of importance on behalf of the Government of Canada. We are looking for people who would be willing to participate in an online discussion group that will last up to 90 minutes. These people must be 18 years of age or older. Up to 6 participants will be taking part and for their time, participants will receive an honorarium of [insert amount].

May I continue?

Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential. Your decision to participate or not will not affect any dealings you may have with the Government of Canada. We are interested in hearing your opinions; no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view. The format is a 'round table' discussion led by a research professional. All opinions expressed will remain anonymous and will be used for research purposes only in accordance with laws designed to protect your privacy. All views will be grouped together to ensure no particular individual can be identified in any reporting for this research. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. This will only take about 5 minutes. May I ask you a few questions?

Interviewer note: If a participant asks for information on this research they can be told: Earnscliffe Strategy Group is located at 46 Elgin Street, Suite 400, Ottawa, ON K1P 5K6. Stephanie Constable, Principal is leading this project and can be reached at [613.563.4455].

If a participant asks for information on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, they can be told: Canadian Food Inspection Agency, located at 1400 Merivale Rd, Ottawa, ON K1A 0Y9. Ric Hobbs, Corporate Communications Officer, can be reached at 613.773.6212.

Monitoring text:

[read to all]: "This call may be monitored or audio taped for quality control and evaluation purposes."

[additional clarification if needed]:

• To ensure that I (the interviewer) am reading the questions correctly and collecting your answers accurately;
• To assess my (the interviewer) work for performance evaluation;
• To ensure that the questionnaire is accurate/correct (i.e. evaluation of programming and methodology – we're asking the right questions to meet our clients' research requirements – kind of like pre-testing)
• If the call is recorded, it is only for the purposes of playback to the interviewer for a performance evaluation immediately after the interview is conducted or it can be used by the Project Manager to evaluate the questionnaire if they are unavailable at the time of the interview – all audio tapes are destroyed after the evaluation.

1. Do you or does anyone in your immediate family or household work in any of the following areas?

   A public opinion or marketing research firm
   A magazine or newspaper, online or print
   A radio or television station
   A public relations company
   An advertising agency or graphic design firm
   An online media company or as a blog writer
   The government, whether federal, provincial or municipal
   A political party

   [if "yes" to any of the above, thank and terminate]

2. Do you or does someone in your household belong to a provincial or national pork producer or hog/pig farmer association?

   Yes	1	[Thank and terminate]
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to say	9	[Thank and terminate]

   
   
3. Please indicate if you or someone in your household owns any type of pig as a pet.

   Yes	1	Qualifies as a small-scale pork producer
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[Thank and terminate]

   
   
4. Please indicate if you or someone in your household owns any type of pig for consumption/farming purposes.

   Yes	1	Qualifies as a small-scale pork producer
   No	2	Continue for general population, go to Q7
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[Thank and terminate]

   If yes to Q3 or Q4, qualifies as a small-scale pork producer. Proceed to Q5.

5. In a typical year, how many pigs on average do you keep (or plan to keep) on your property? Please include any pigs that you own, board, or otherwise keep on your property. Do not include wild pigs that you have seen on your property.

   [Open end, record number]

6. How many years have you kept or cared for pigs?

   Less than 1 year	1
   1 to 5 years	2
   6 to 10 years	3
   11 to 20 years	4
   20+ years	5
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[Thank and terminate]

   
   
7. What kind of pet do you or does anyone in your household own, if any?

   No pets in the household	1
   Dog(s)	2
   Cat(s)	3
   Pig(s)	4
   Other farm animal [record mention(s)]	5
   Other animal [record mention(s)]	6
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

   [for general population groups: minimum 3 per group who own a pet]

8. In which province or territory do you live?

   Newfoundland and Labrador	1	[East]
   Nova Scotia	2	[East]
   New Brunswick	3	[East]
   Prince Edward Island	4	[East]
   Quebec	5	[East]
   Ontario	6	[East]
   Manitoba	7	[West]
   Saskatchewan	8	[West]
   Alberta	9	[West]
   British Columbia	10	[West]
   Nunavut	11	[thank and terminate]
   Northwest Territories	12	[thank and terminate]
   Yukon	13	[thank and terminate]

   [East: minimum one from each Atlantic Canada, Ontario and Quebec in each group]
   [West: minimum one from each Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia in each group]

9. In the last three years, have you travelled outside of Canada and the United States?

   Yes	1
   No	2
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[Thank and terminate]

   [for general population groups: minimum 2 per group who have travelled outside of Canada and the US]

10. Which of the following age categories do you fall into? Are you…? [ensure good mix]

    Under 18 years	1	[thank and terminate]
    18-24 years	2
    25-34 years	3
    35-44 years	4
    45-54 years	5
    55-64 years	6
    65-74 years	7
    75 years and older	8
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
11. How do you identify yourself? [Do not read] [Gender refers to current gender which may be different from sex assigned at birth (male or female) and may be different from what is indicated on legal documents.]

    Male gender	1
    Female gender	2
    Gender diverse	3
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9

    
    
12. What is your current employment status?

    Working full-time	1	[ensure good mix]
    Working part-time	2
    Self-employed	3
    Retired	4	[maximum 1 per group]
    Unemployed	5	[maximum 1 per group]
    Student	6	[maximum 1 per group]
    Other	7
    Prefer not to answer	9

    
    
13. [If employed/retired] What is/was your current/past occupation?

    please specify

14. Which of the following categories best describes your total household income; that is, the total income of all persons in your household combined, before taxes? [read list] [ensure good mix]

    Under $20,000	1
    $20,000 to under $40,000	2
    $40,000 to under $60,000	3
    $60,000 to under $80,000	4
    $80,000 to under $100,000	5
    $100,000 to under $150,000	6
    $150,000 or more	7
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
15. What is the last level of education that you have completed? [ensure good mix]

    Some high school or less	1
    Completed high school	2
    Some college/university	3
    Completed college/university	4
    Post-graduate studies	5
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
16. What is your racial and/or ethnic background? [select all that apply] [ensure good mix as best possible]

    Black (African, Afro-Caribbean, African-Canadian descent)	1
    East Asian (Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Taiwanese descent)	2
    Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit, Métis)	3
    Latin American (Hispanic descent)	4
    Middle Eastern (West Asian or North African descent (Afghan, Egyptian, Iranian)	5
    South Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Indo-Caribbean descent)	6
    Southeast Asian (Filipino, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Thai descent)	7
    White (European descent)	8
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9

    This research will require participating in a video call online.

17. Do you have access to a desktop or laptop computer with high-speed internet which will allow you to participate in an online discussion group?

    Yes	[continue]
    No	[thank and terminate]

    
    
18. Does your desktop or laptop computer have a camera that will allow you to be visible to the moderator and other participants as part of an online discussion group?

    Yes	[continue]
    No	[thank and terminate]

    
    
19. Do you have a personal email address that is currently active and available to you?

    Yes	[continue, please record email]
    No	[thank and terminate]

    
    
20. Have you participated in a discussion or focus group before? A discussion group brings together a few people in order to know their opinion about a given subject.

    Yes	1	[max 4 per audience]
    No	2	[skip to invitation]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
21. When was the last time you attended a discussion or focus group?

    If within the last 6 months	1	[thank and terminate]
    If not within the last 6 months	2	[continue]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
22. How many of these sessions have you attended in the last five years?

    If 4 or less	1	[continue]
    If 5 or more	2	[thank and terminate]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

Invitation

23. Participants in discussion groups are asked to voice their opinions and thoughts. How comfortable are you in voicing your opinions in front of others? Are you…? [read list]

    Very comfortable	1	[minimum 4 per group]
    Fairly comfortable	2	[continue]
    Comfortable	3	[continue]
    Not very comfortable	4	[thank and terminate]
    Not at all comfortable	5	[thank and terminate]
    DK/NR	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
24. Sometimes participants are asked to read text, review images, or type out answers during the discussion. Is there any reason why you could not participate?

    Yes	1	[continue]
    No	2	[skip to q27]
    DK/NR	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
25. Is there anything we could do to facilitate your participation?

    Yes	1	[continue]
    No	2	[thank and terminate]
    DK/NR	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
26. What specifically? [open end]

    [interviewer to note for potential one-on-one interview]

27. Based on your responses, it looks like you have the profile we are looking for. I would like to invite you to participate in a small group discussion, called an online focus group, we are conducting at [time], on [date].

    As you may know, focus groups are used to gather information on a particular subject matter. The discussion will consist of about 6 people and will be very informal.

    It will last up to 90 minutes and you will receive [insert amount] as a thank you for your time. Would you be willing to attend?

    Yes	1	[recruit]
    No	2	[thank and terminate]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

Privacy questions

Now I have a few questions that relate to privacy, your personal information and the research process. We will need your consent on a few issues that enable us to conduct our research. As I run through these questions, please feel free to ask me any questions you would like clarified.

P1) First, we will be providing a list of interviewees' names and profiles (screener responses shared today) to the interviewer so that they can ensure they are speaking with the right individual. Do we have your permission to do this? I assure you it will be kept strictly confidential.

We need to provide the names and profiles of interviewees (screener responses shared today) because only the individuals invited are allowed to be interviewed and this information is necessary for verification purposes. Please be assured that this information will be kept strictly confidential. [go to p1a]

P1a) Now that I've explained this, do I have your permission to provide your name and profile to the discussion group moderator?

P2) A recording (video and audio) of the group discussion will be produced for research purposes. The recordings will be used by the research professional to assist in preparing a report on the research findings and creating transcripts (if applicable). Once the research reports are finalized, all recordings will be destroyed.

Do you agree to be recorded (video and audio) for research and reporting purposes only?

It is necessary for the research process for us to record (video and audio) the session as the researchers need this material to complete the report.

P2a) Now that I've explained this, do I have your permission for recording?

P3) A small number of researchers from the Government of Canada may be online to observe the groups.

Do you agree to be observed by Government of Canada employees?

P3A) It is standard qualitative procedure to invite clients, in this case, Government of Canada employees, to observe the online. They will be there simply to hear your opinions first hand although they may take their own notes and confer with the moderator on occasion to discuss whether there are any additional questions to ask the group.
Do you agree to be observed by Government of Canada employees?

Invitation:

Wonderful, you qualify to participate in one of our discussion sessions. As I mentioned earlier, the group discussion will take place on [date] at [time] for up to 90 minutes.

Can I please confirm your email address so that we can send you the link to the online discussion group?

As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us. If for some reason you are unable to attend, and because you are prohibited from sending a replacement on your behalf, please call us so that we may get someone to replace you. You can reach us at [insert phone number] at our office. Please ask for [name].  Someone will call you in the days leading up to the discussion to remind you.

So that we can call you to remind you about the interview, send you any information or resources in advance, or contact you should there be any changes, can you please confirm your name and contact information for me?

First name
Last Name
Email
Cell phone number
Other phone number

If the respondent refuses to give his/her first or last name, email or phone number please assure them that this information will be kept strictly confidential in accordance with the privacy law and that it is used strictly to contact them to confirm their attendance and to inform them of any changes to the discussion group. If they still refuse thank and terminate.

Thank you very much. We will contact you a couple of days before the session to confirm your attendance.

Appendix E – Interview screener

In-depth interview summary

Veterinarians

• Six (6) interviews total
• 4 in English; 2 in French
• Veterinarians in a rural or remote (4) or urban (2) areas; aim for 4 who specialize in large animal veterinary
• Good mix of age, gender, region, size of business

Group # / Audience / Region / Time

• Thursday, February 29, 2024 – Wednesday, March 13, 2024
• Interviews are up to 30 minutes in duration. Schedule for one-hour intervals

Hello/Bonjour, this is _____ calling on behalf of Earnscliffe Strategies, a national public opinion research firm. Would you prefer that I continue in English or French? Préférez-vous continuer en français ou en anglais? [If French, continue in French or arrange a call back with a French interviewer: Nous vous rappellerons pour mener cette entrevue de recherche en Français. Merci. Au revoir].

From time to time, we solicit opinions by talking with people. We are preparing to conduct a series of one-on-one interviews on behalf of the Government of Canada, more specifically the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), and I would like to speak with you about your understanding and views on biosecurity.

We are reaching out to you today to invite you to share your feedback, one-on-one, in a telephone interview with a research professional. The session will last 30 minutes and participants will receive an honorarium of $400 for their time.

Your participation is voluntary and completely confidential. Your decision to participate or not will not affect any dealings you may have with the Government of Canada. We are interested in hearing your opinions; no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view. All opinions expressed will remain anonymous and will be used for research purposes only in accordance with laws designed to protect your privacy. All views will be grouped together to ensure no particular individual can be identified in any reporting for this research. But before we invite you to attend, we need to ask you a few questions to ensure that we get a good mix and variety of people. This will only take about 5 minutes.  May I ask you a few questions?

Interviewer note: If a participant asks for information on this research they can be told: Earnscliffe Strategy Group is located at 46 Elgin Street, Suite 400, Ottawa, ON K1P 5K6.  Stephanie Constable, Principal is leading this project and can be reached at [613.563.4455].

If a participant asks for information on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, they can be told: Canadian Food Inspection Agency, located at 1400 Merivale Rd, Ottawa, ON K1A 0Y9.  Ric Hobbs, Senior Communications Advisor, can be reached at 613.773.6212

Monitoring text:

[read to all]: "This call may be monitored or audio taped for quality control and evaluation purposes."

[additional clarification if needed]:

• To ensure that I (the interviewer) am reading the questions correctly and collecting your answers accurately;
• To assess my (the interviewer) work for performance evaluation;
• To ensure that the questionnaire is accurate/correct (i.e. evaluation of programming and methodology – we're asking the right questions to meet our clients' research requirements – kind of like pre-testing)
• If the call is recorded, it is only for the purposes of playback to the interviewer for a performance evaluation immediately after the interview is conducted or it can be used by the Project Manager to evaluate the questionnaire if they are unavailable at the time of the interview – all audio tapes are destroyed after the evaluation.

1. Can you please provide me with your job title?

   [if not "veterinarian", thank and terminate]

2. Which of the following types of animals do you serve in your veterinary practice? [ensure good mix]

   [Do not read list record all mentions]

   Cats	1
   Dogs	2
   Birds	3
   Horses	4
   Cattle	5
   Swine	6
   Fish / aquatic	7
   Poultry	8
   Bees	9
   Exotic species	10
   Other	11
   Don't know/prefer not to answer	9999	[thank and terminate]

   
   
3. Which of the following describe your veterinary practice? Please say all that apply. [read list] [ensure good mix]

   Companion-animal veterinary
   Large animal veterinary
   Emergency and critical care
   Mixed animal veterinary practice
   Veterinary specializations [specify types]
   Species specific Vet [specify types]
   Food safety and inspection veterinary	[thank and terminate]
   Research veterinary	[thank and terminate]
   Food Safety and Inspection	[thank and terminate]
   Other [capture specific mention(s)]
   Don't know/prefer not to answer	[thank and terminate]

   
   

   Aim for 4 who are large animal veterinary.

4. Which of the following best describes the place where you practice now?

   Large urban population centre (population of 100,000 or greater)	1
   Medium urban population centre (population of 30,000 to 99,999)	2
   Small urban population centre (population of 1,000 to 29,999)	3
   Rural area (population of less than 1,000)	4
   Remote area (isolated from other communities)	5
   Don't know/prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

   
   

   Aim for 4 from rural or remote areas.

5. In which province or territory do you live? [ensure a good mix]

   Newfoundland and Labrador	1
   Nova Scotia	2
   New Brunswick	3
   Prince Edward Island	4
   Quebec	5
   Ontario	6
   Manitoba	7
   Saskatchewan	8
   Alberta	9
   British-Columbia	10
   Nunavut	11
   Northwest Territories	12
   Yukon	13

   
   
6. Approximately how many full-time employees does your practice currently employ? [record actual number; ensure good mix] Provincial employees can state how many in their department

   Under 5	1
   6 to 10	2
   11 to 20	3
   More than 20	4
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

   
   
7. Which of the following age categories do you fall into? Are you…? [ensure good mix]

   Under 18 years	1	[thank and terminate]
   18-24 years	2	[thank and terminate]
   25-34 years	3
   35-44 years	4
   45-54 years	5
   55-64 years	6
   65-74 years	7
   75 years and older	8
   Prefer not to answer	99	[thank and terminate]

   
   
8. How do you identify yourself? [Do not read] [Gender refers to current gender which may be different from sex assigned at birth (male or female) and may be different from what is indicated on legal documents.]

   Male gender	1
   Female gender	2
   Gender diverse	3
   Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9

   
   
9. What is your racial and/or ethnic background? [select all that apply] [ensure good mix as best possible]

   Black (African, Afro-Caribbean, African-Canadian descent)	1
   East Asian (Chinese, Korean, Japanese, Taiwanese descent)	2
   Indigenous (First Nations, Inuit, Métis)	3
   Latin American (Hispanic descent)	4
   Middle Eastern (West Asian or North African descent (Afghan, Egyptian, Iranian)	5
   South Asian (Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Indo-Caribbean descent)	6
   Southeast Asian (Filipino, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Thai descent)	7
   White (European descent)	8
   Prefer not to answer	9

   
   
10. Have you participated in a one-on-one interview or focus group before? A discussion group brings together a few people in order to know their opinion about a given subject.

    Yes	1	[continue]
    No	2	[skip to invitation]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
11. When was the last time you attended a discussion or focus group?

    If within the last 6 months	1	[thank and terminate]
    If not within the last 6 months	2	[continue]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
12. How many of these sessions have you attended in the last five years?

    If 4 or less	1	[continue]
    If 5 or more	2	[thank and terminate]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

Invitation

13. Based on your responses, it looks like you have the profile we are looking for. I would like to invite you to participate in an interview that will last 30 minutes. Would you be available on [date] @ [time]? Participants will receive $400.00 for their time.

    Very comfortable	1	[continue]
    Fairly comfortable	2	[continue]
    Comfortable	3	[continue]
    Not very comfortable	4	[thank and terminate]
    Not at all comfortable	5	[thank and terminate]
    DK/NR	9	[thank and terminate]

    
    
14. D'après vos réponses, il semble que vous ayez le profil que nous recherchons. Nous aimerions vous inviter à participer à une entrevue de 30 minutes. Êtes-vous disponible le [date] à [heure]? Les personnes qui y participeront recevront un montant de 400,00 $ pour les remercier de leur temps.

    Yes	1	[recruit]
    No	2	[thank and terminate]
    Don't know/Prefer not to answer	9	[thank and terminate]

Privacy questions

Now I have a few questions that relate to privacy, your personal information and the research process. We will need your consent on a few issues that enable us to conduct our research. As I run through these questions, please feel free to ask me any questions you would like clarified.

P1) First, we will be providing a list of interviewees' names and profiles (screener responses shared today) to the interviewer so that they can ensure they are speaking with the right individual. Do we have your permission to do this? I assure you it will be kept strictly confidential.

We need to provide the names and profiles of interviewees (screener responses shared today) because only the individuals invited are allowed to be interviewed and this information is necessary for verification purposes. Please be assured that this information will be kept strictly confidential. [go to p1a]

P1a) Now that I've explained this, do I have your permission to provide your name and profile to the interviewer?

P2) An audio recording of the interview will be produced for research purposes. The recordings will be used by the research professional to assist in preparing a report on the research findings and will be destroyed once the report is completed.
Do you agree to be audio recorded for research and reporting purposes only?

It is necessary for the research process for us to audio record the session as the researcher needs this material to complete the report.

P2a) Now that I've explained this, do I have your permission for audiotaping?

Invitation:

Wonderful, you qualify to participate in one of our interviews. As I mentioned earlier, the interview will take place on [date] at [time] for up to 30 minutes

Group # / Audience / Region / Time

• Thursday, February 29, 2024 – Wednesday, March 13, 2024
• Interviews are up to 30 minutes in duration. Schedule for one-hour intervals

Can I please confirm your email address so that we can send you the link to the online discussion group?

As we are only inviting a small number of people, your participation is very important to us.  If for some reason you are unable to make this appointment, and because you are prohibited from sending a replacement on your behalf, please call us so that we can reschedule. You can reach us at [insert phone number] at our office. Please ask for [name].  Someone will call you in the days leading up to the interview to remind you.

So that we can call you to remind you about the interview, send you any information or resources in advance, or contact you should there be any changes, can you please confirm your name and contact information for me?

First name
Last Name
Email
Cell phone number
Other phone number

If the respondent refuses to give his/her first or last name, email or phone number please assure them that this information will be kept strictly confidential in accordance with the privacy law and that it is used strictly to contact them to confirm their attendance and to inform them of any changes to the discussion group. If they still refuse thank and terminate.

Thank you very much. We will contact you a couple of days before the session to confirm your attendance

Appendix F – Focus group discussion guide: Small-scale pork producer

Objectives:

• Gain a better understanding of the level of awareness of pig diseases such as African swine fever among small-scale farmers and of the measures in place on their farms to mitigate the risk of animal disease
• Discover what resources may be needed to put in place biosecurity practices
• Discover the perceived barriers to sound biosecurity practices
• Uncover how small-scale farmers stay informed on animal health issues (such as African swine fever) that could impact their farms and what sources of information they rely on
• Gather feedback on how to best communicate with small-scale farmers on African swine fever as well as other potential foreign animal diseases and animal health issues

Introduction

Section time: 10 min / Cumulative time: 10 min

Moderator introduces herself/himself and her/his role: role of moderator is to ask questions, make sure everyone has a chance to express themselves, keep track of the time, be objective/no special interest. Thanks participants for attending / value of being there.

• The name of the firm the moderator works for, and the type of firm that employs them (i.e. an independent public opinion research firm).
• These groups are being conducted on behalf of the Government of Canada, specifically the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), in order to understand your views, information consumption and activities relating to the few pigs you have.
• We are interested in hearing your opinions; no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view.
• Role of participants: speak openly and frankly about opinions, remember that there are no right or wrong answers and no need to agree with each other.
• Participants do not have to direct all comments to the moderator; they can exchange ideas with each other.
• Results are anonymous and reported all together; individuals are not identified; participation is voluntary.
• The length of the session (90 minutes).
• The presence of any observers, their role and purpose, and the means of observation.
• The presence and purpose of any recording being made of the session (video recording of the discussion).

Moderator will go around the table and ask participants to introduce themselves.

• State your first name, where you are joining from, and what you do during the day.

Pig ownership and operational

Section time: 15 min / Cumulative time: 25 min

I would like to begin by asking a few questions about your experience keeping and caring for pigs.

• When we reached out to invite you to participate in this research, you indicated that you keep pigs on your property. How many do you have currently and for how many years have you been keeping or caring for pigs?
  • Can you describe where you keep them and what routines you have in tending to them?
  • Excluding pets, do you keep other animals on your property?  Are your facilities or practices different for those other animals?
• Why do you keep pigs? How do you market them (or maybe you don't?)?
  • [PROMPT AS NEEEDED] Do you keep them: as a food source, as a hobby, to trade/sell, as a pet, etc.
• Do you consider yourself a pig farmer? Why do you say that?
• How would you rate your knowledge when it comes to keeping and caring for pigs? Would you say you are a beginner, intermediate, advanced or expert?
  • Why do you rate your knowledge that way?
    • Do you feel you need to learn more?
• What type of feed do you typically feed your pig(s)
• Do you ever use grocery waste or food recycling programs or other types of food scraps as feed?

For definition as needed:

• Food recycling programs involve collecting and processing food waste from various sources to divert it from landfills and use it for purposes like composting or biogas production.
• Grocery store waste management focuses on minimizing waste generated within stores by strategies like inventory management, donation programs, and recycling initiatives.
• Table/food scraps management entails separating and properly disposing of food waste generated at the household or commercial level through methods such as composting, animal feeding, or food waste disposers.
  • If yes, what are some of the drivers behind using different sources of food?

Awareness and knowledge of pig diseases

Section time: 15 min / Cumulative time: 40 min

• Generally speaking, how concered are you about your pigs contracting any sort of virus or disease? Why do you say that?
• Are you aware of potential sources of infection that could affect your pigs?
  • What are they? Do some concern you more than others? Why?
• Have you heard, read or seen anything in the last 12 months about any pig diseases?
  • What was it? How did you hear about it?
  • How did you feel about what you heard? Did it cause you to take any action?
  • [IF ASF NOT MENTIONED] What have you heard about it? How did you hear about it?
  • [IF ASF NOT MENTIONED] Has it affected your operations, processes, facilities or behaviour in anyway? If so, how?
• [IF ASF NOT MENTIONED] Have you heard, read or seen anything in the last 12 months about African swine fever?
  • What was it? How did you hear about it?
  • How did you feel about what you heard? Did it cause you to take any action?
  • Do you feel African swine fever poses a risk to your pigs?
  • How concerned are you about ASF?  Why do you say that?

Barriers to biosecurity measures

Section time: 20 min / Cumulative time: 60 min

• Is there anything you do specifically to prevent the spread of disease to or among your pigs?
  • What are the measures you take to prevent the spread of disease? Are they something you've always done to protect your pigs, or started more recently?
  • How do you seek out information about measures to prevent disease?
  • How important do you feel these measures are?
  • [IF DO NOT HAVE MEASURES IN PLACE] Is there a reason why you do not have any of these sorts of measures in place? What is it?
• Do you feel you know enough about measures to prevent disease in order to protect your pigs from it? Why or Why not?
• Are you familiar with the national biosecurity standards that relate to pigs/the hog sector?
  • [IF YES] Which standards are you aware of? Where did you hear of them? Do you know them well enough to explain them to others? How do they affect you/your pigs?
  • [IF NO] Have you tried to find out about them before? Where would you go to find information about these standards?
  • Do you feel these national biosecurity standards relate to you and your pigs?
  • Probe for awareness of the Canadian Association of Swine Veterinarians?
• Do you feel there are any other measures you could be taking to prevent your pigs from getting diseases?
  • [IF YES] What are they? Why haven't you put them in place yet?
  • [IF NO] Do you think the measures you have in place are sufficient? Why?
• Is there anything that stops you from taking measures to prevent your pigs from getting diseases?
  • [PROMPT AS NEEDED FOR ANYTHING RELATED TO COST, TIME, ETC.]
• How often do you seek out veterinary care for your pigs?
• [IF SEEK OUT CARE] For what reasons do you usually contact your vet or seek veterinary care for your pigs?
• [IF DO NOT SEEK CARE] Probe for thoughts or reasons behind not seeing care, is it the expense, etc?
• How important is it to you to get regularly veterinary care for your pigs? Why do you say that?

Communication and information sources

Section time: 25 min / Cumulative time: 85 min

• Do you seek out information on caring for pigs? Why or why not?
  • How much time do you spend looking for this information? Is it something you do regularly, or just on occasion?
• Have you been to the CFIA website?
  • Did you find that information useful?
• Which [other] sources do you use to find information on caring for pigs?
  • Are there any sources you feel are more trustworthy than others? Why/why not?
    • If you found the information, was it easy or hard to understand? If hard, please elaborate especially in relation to the CFIA site?
  • Do you attend any townhalls or conferences on caring for pigs?
  • Do you use social media to look for information? Do you find social media a trustworthy source?
  • When you find information, are you likely to share that with other pig farmers? How sure would you have to be of the information before sharing with someone else?
  • What would you consider an "official source" for information on caring for pigs? For example: Government? Experienced farmers? Others?
  • Do you wish there was more information available? If yes, on which topics in particular?
  • What about industry associations
    • Are you a member of a national or provincial association for pig farming? If yes, are those groups good sources of information?
    • If no, any thoughts about joining them?
    • Why or why not?
• When do you search for information on caring for pigs?
  • Does your information search or your sources change as you became more experienced? How?
  • Are there sources that you used previously that you no longer use? Why or why not?
  • When looking for information on caring for pigs, do you ever consider if the information is telling you about a best practice or something that is legally mandatory?
  • Have you ever reached out to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency for information? If yes, how did you feel reaching out to them? If no, would you feel comfortable reaching out them?
• Do you feel you need to receive information about regulations regarding your pigs?  If the Government of Canada feels it is important to get you information about regulations relating to your pigs, how would you prefer to receive that information?

Again, thinking specifically seeking information about a pig disease and/or caring for your pigs from Internet sources,,,

• What would you search for? Words you would use?

To wrap up I wanted to show some web content. Let's assume you end up using a search such as symptoms of African swine fever and you end up on this page. [moderator to review with participants the contents of the webpage]

Close your gate on African swine fever - Canadian Food Inspection Agency (canada.ca)

• [raise hand] To start, has anyone been on this page before?
• What are your impressions of this webpage? What comes to mind? 
• What do you think about the visual shown [Indicate with mouse image of close the gate ad]
• How confident are you that this page will have the information you would be looking for?
  • What if anything appears to be missing?
• Is it credible? Trustworthy?

Conclusion

Section time: 5 min / Cumulative time: 90 min

This wraps up all of the formal questions I had for you today.

• Before we conclude, do you have any final thoughts and/or advice you would like to pass along?

We really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us today.  Your input will be very helpful to help the CFIA as they aim to gather information about how producers think about and manage biosecurity.

Appendix G – Focus group discussion guide: General population

Introduction

Section time: 10 min / Cumulative time: 10 min

Moderator introduces herself/himself and her/his role: role of moderator is to ask questions, make sure everyone has a chance to express themselves, keep track of the time, be objective/no special interest. Thanks participants for attending / value of being there.

• The name of the firm the moderator works for, and the type of firm that employs them (i.e. an independent public opinion research firm).
• As mentioned, when we invited you to participate in this discussion group/interview, we're conducting research on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). This work is important for the CFIA because they will be using your feedback to improve their services.
• We are interested in hearing your opinions; no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view.
• Role of participants: speak openly and frankly about opinions, remember that there are no right or wrong answers and no need to agree with each other.
• Participants do not have to direct all comments to the moderator; they can exchange ideas with each other.
• Results are anonymous and reported all together; individuals are not identified; participation is voluntary.
• The length of the session (90 minutes).
• The presence of any observers, their role and purpose, and the means of observation.
• The presence and purpose of any recording being made of the session (video recording of the discussion).

[Moderator will go around the "table" and ask participants to introduce themselves.]

• As you know, my name is Stephanie. I have been in public opinion research for 25 years and have a passion for qualitative research and getting to meet and speak with interesting people like yourselves. / As you know, my name is Doug. I became a researcher 30 years ago and I have come to truly love finding out what people think about all kind of different topics and issues.
• Now let us go around the virtual room. Please tell us what you feel comfortable sharing about yourself including your first name, where you're joining us from, and whether or not you have a pet, or travelled internationally, including in the US in the last year.

Awareness of the CFIA

Section time: 5 min / Cumulative time: 15 min

As mentioned, we are conducting this research on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (or CFIA).

• [hands up] How many of you are aware of the CFIA?
• What do you know about them?
• Have you seen, read or heard anything about the CFIA recently?
  • What have you heard? Where did you hear about it?

Pet travel

Section time: 15 min / Cumulative time: 30 min

As part of your introduction, I asked you to share whether you had a pet and/or travelled internationally, including to the US in the past year.

• [hands up] Besides food inspection, were you aware that the CFIA was responsible for helping ensure animals in Canada are safe and healthy?
• What do you know about this?
• How did you come to learn about this?

As part of this responsibility, the CFIA also sets the requirements for bringing certain animals into the country, to prevent the introduction and spread of serious diseases.

• [hands up] Has anyone ever travelled with a pet outside of Canada?

  [If yes]

  • Why did you bring your pet?
  • What type of pet did you travel with?
  • Where did you travel?

  [if travelled outside the USA]

  • What was the process like? Why?
  • How much research did you do in advance? Why?
  • Did you talk to your vet in advance? Why or why not?
  • Did you encounter any issues travelling with your pet? If yes, what were they?
  • Did you encounter any issues meeting the requirements of the destination country? If yes, what were they?
  • Did you encounter any issues coming back to Canada with your pet? If yes, what were they?

  [If no]

  • Why do/did you not travel with your pet?

Resources and reaction to CFIA website/communications

Section time: 15 min / Cumulative time: 45 min

• [hands up] Has anyone visited the CFIA's website to look for information about bringing a pet into Canada or travelling with a pet?
  • Can you please describe your experience using their website?
  • Were you able to find the information you were looking for?
  • Was the process of finding the information easy or difficult? Why?

I would like to share my screen to show you their website and the page dedicated to travelling with pets, food or plants.
[moderator to share screen and display web page for participants.]

• For those of you who indicated they had visited the CFIA's website, do you remember whether this was the page you visited?
  • Did the information meet your needs? Did it tell you want you wanted to know? Was it clear and easy to understand? Why or why not?

  [Non pet travellers]

• What are your overall reactions to this page/this content? Why?
• Where would you click if you wanted information about travelling with or bringing a dog into Canada? Why?

  Now I would like to visit the Automated Import Reference System (AIRS).
  [moderator to share screen and display web page for participants.]

  [For those of you who have travelled with their pet]

  • Have you used the Automated Import Referenc System (AIRS)?
  • What about the pet import tool?
  • Has anyone applied for an import permit?
• What are your overall reactions to this page/this content? Why?
• Is it the right page for pet imports? Why or why not?

Now I would like to show you some ads and videos that you might come across in your searches on the Internet.

[moderator to show each ad one by one and ask participants to review in silence. Moderator to probe each ad with the following prompts]

• What is your overall reaction to this ad? Why?
• What first comes to mind when you see it? Why?
• Would it grab your attention if you were online? Why or why not?
• What did you take away as the main message?
• Was it clear and understandable? Why or why not?
• After watching it, how confident would you say you are that you would be able to travel with your pet/dog? Why or why not?
• Did you notice any differences between the two ads? What were they?

Travel/Food

Section time: 10 min / Cumulative time: 55 min

For this next section, I would like to focus on international travel. It need not be with a pet/dog.

• When you travel to locations outside of Canada, have you ever brought food back with you?

  [if yes]

  • What types of food have you brought back?
  • Was it special or traditional food that is not available in Canada?
• In general, what are everyone's thoughts on bringing back food into Canada? Why?
• What about meat, specifically? Why?
• Do you perceive any risks bringing food from another country into Canada? Why or why not?
• Do you get the sense that one piece of meat or fruit or seed could have an impact on Canada? Why or why not?
  • What impact do you think it could have?
    • To the best of your knowledge, could bringing back food items contribute to the spread of disease in Canada? Why or why not?

Awareness of African Swine Fever (ASF)

Section time: 10 min / Cumulative time: 65 min

Now I would like to spend a little time talking about animal diseases today.

• Which, if any, animal diseases can you name?
• Are you aware of any animal diseases that exist elsewhere in the world but have not come to Canada yet? [record mentions of rabies, FMD, canine rabies, ASF]
• How concerned are you that any foreign animal diseases could have a negative impact on Canadian animals? Why?
• [hands up] Has anyone seen, read or heard anything about African Swine Fever (ASF) over the past year or so?
  • What have you heard?
  • Where did you hear about it?

ASF Creative

Section time: 10 min / Cumulative time: 75 min

Now I would like to show you some ads you may have seen in social media or at the airport.

Video A:

Video B:

[moderator to show ads one by one and ask participants to review in silence. Moderator to show two image concepts and two video concepts. Moderator to probe each ad with the following prompts]

• Does anyone recall seeing this ad?
• What is your overall reaction to this ad? Why?
• What first comes to mind when you see it? Why?
• Does anything stand out? Would it grab your attention? Why or why not?
• What did you take away as the main message?
• Was it clear and understandable? Why or why not?
• Does anything here change how you think about African swine fever? Why or why not?

Message testing

Section time: 5 min / Cumulative time: 80 min

The following are some messaging options for future ads.

[moderator to show three messages on screen one by one and ask participants to review in silence. Moderator to show two image concepts and two video concepts. Moderator to probe each ad with the following prompts]

Message 1: Be aware and declare:
Some food, plant and animal products are not allowed in Canada. Learn more.

Message 2: Do your part to protect Canada. Be aware and declare all foreign food, plants, animals and related products.

Message 3: Be aware and declare if you visited a farm abroad. Your clothes and footwear could carry animal diseases or invasive alien species that could harm Canada's agriculture, environment and economy.

• What is your reaction to this message? Why?
• What is the main message?
• Were there any words you particularly like? Were there any you particularly dislike? Why?
• Was it clear and easy to understand? Why or why not?

Animal health/Rabies [if time permits]

Section time: 5 min / Cumulative time: 85 min

Earlier we talked about animal diseases.

• [hands up] Has anyone heard anything recently about rabies? What did you hear?
• Have you heard anything about canine rabies (aka dog rabies)? What did you hear?

Dog rabies is a specific variant of rabies that is different from the variant found in Canadian wildlife. Dog rabies is a variant of rabies that is adapted to dogs, and thus makes it a greater risk to human health due to our close proximity with dogs. While many other countries has dog rabies, Canada does not.

• Knowing this, does this change how you feel about the risk of dog rabies entering Canada? Why or why not?

Conclusion

Section time: 5 min / Cumulative time: 90 min

This wraps up all of the formal questions I had for you today.

• Before we conclude, do you have any final thoughts and/or advice you would like to pass along?

We really appreciate you taking the time to speak with us today.

Appendix H – Interview discussion guide

Name:
Position:
Address/Phone number:
Date/Time:
Interview conducted by:

Thank you for agreeing to take part in this research project on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). Just as a reminder:

• The name of the firm the moderator works for, and the type of firm that employs them (i.e. an independent public opinion research firm).
• This interview is being conducted on behalf of the Government of Canada, in order to explore awareness of some programs and activities.
• We are interested in hearing your opinions; no attempt will be made to sell you anything or change your point of view.
• Your anonymity is guaranteed, and you will not be directly cited. In this regard, we encourage you to be as frank as possible.
• Role of interviewees: speak openly and frankly about opinions, remember that there are no right or wrong answers.
• An audio recording of the interview will be produced for research purposes. It will be used by the research professional to assist in preparing a report on the research findings and will be destroyed once the report is completed.
• Your input will be compiled into a report that will provide feedback to the CFIA.
• The length of the interview is approximately 30 minutes.
• Are you comfortable with all of this before we begin?

Awareness

• What, if anything, have you heard about antimicrobial resistance (AMR)?
• Do you feel you've obtained sufficient knowledge about AMR? Yes / No
• Do you feel you've obtained sufficient knowledge about antimicrobial use (AMU)? Yes / No
• As it relates to AMU and AMR, do you feel that there are sufficient opportunities for continuing education on AMU and AMR? Yes / No
• What educational initiatives, if any, would be helpful to you?

Prevention

• Do you typically recommend antimicrobials as a preventative measure for your clients/patients?
  • Why or why not?
• Do you ever feel pressured by clients to provide an antimicrobial as a preventative measure? Yes / No
• Do you ever feel pressured by colleagues to prescribe an antimicrobial as a preventative measure? Yes / No
• What challenges, if any, do you face when finding vaccines for your clients? Is there a specific vaccine that you need or have challenges obtaining?
  • Prompt: Are they cost prohibitive? Are they easily available?
• What is your impression of autogenous vaccines for your patients/clients? Are they a viable option?
• Are there any limitations? What are they?
  • Prompt: Are there any regulatory limitations?
• Have you used autogenous vaccines with your patients/clients? If yes, did it work for your specific case?

Treatment

• What challenges, if any, do you face when deciding on different treatment options for your patients/clients? Any others?
• What role does antimicrobial resistance play, if any, when providing treatment?

  Major role
  Minor role
  No role
  [don't read] Don't know

• [If major or minor] As it relates to antimicrobial resistance, what do you consider and/or what actions do you take prior to prescribing?
• Do you ever feel pressured by clients to provide an antimicrobial as a treatment option? Yes / No
• Do you ever feel pressured by colleagues to prescribe an antimicrobial as a treatment option? Yes / No
• Are you aware of the CVMA FirstLine app? Yes / No
• [If yes] How familiar are you with the CVMA FirstLine app?

  Very familiar
  Somewhat familiar
  Not very familiar
  Have only heard of it
  [don't read] Don't know

  [If at least not very familiar] And, have you used it? Yes / No

Occurrence of resistance

• Do you routinely recommend running culture and sensitivity on your patients/clients?
  • If not, are there any instances or circumstances whereby you would recommend it?
• Have you had any cases of antimicrobial resistance in your practice? Yes / No
• [If yes] What was the pathogenic agent and how did you establish it was a case of resistance?
  • Prompt: was it through lab analysis or to address treatment failure?
• [If yes] What were your next steps when you established it was a case of resistance?
• [If yes] Have you experienced any barriers when providing treatment for this/these case(s)? If so, what were they?
• [If yes] In your experience, are there specific species that you see more cases of resistance than others?
• If an animal has a case of resistance, how would or do you modify primary care for that client/patient, if at all?
• Would having more access to portable AMR diagnostic tests be helpful in your practice? Why or why not?
  • [If yes] Which diagnostic kit would be most useful in your practice?

CFIA communications

We wanted to talk a bit about how the CFIA can meet your needs for information on AMU and AMR related topics.

• As a veterinarian, would you say there is enough guidance material on vaccines? And what about specifically for autogenous vaccines?
• What types of information on AMU and AMR, if any, would be helpful to you?
• What would be your preferred method to get information from the CFIA?
  • Prompt: would you prefer to receive information on the website, through email and/or in an information package?

Vet recruitment

• In general, what are your impressions about the CFIA as a potential employer?
  Reminder – confidential and anonymous
• What do you think CFIA could do to increase the Agency's ability to hire and retain veterinarians? Probe for any differences in small and rural communities.
• [If pay is mentioned] The pay scale is set through Union negotiations and there isn't flexibility in the salary for a CFIA vet. Are there other things that might help make the CFIA a more attractive employer to veterinarians?
• Meat hygiene is one of the necessary tasks conducted by CFIA vets. Do you think this is an obstacle in recruiting vets?
  

  Major obstacle
  Minor obstacle
  Not an obstacle
  [don't read] Don't know

• [if major or minor obstacle] Are there other tasks or opportunities that might offset this role?
• How important is it to you personally to have the opportunity to move your career through different paths?
  

  Very important
  Somewhat important
  Not very important
  Not important at all
  [don't read] Don't know

• [If somewhat or very important] And, what might be the different paths you would be interested in exploring?

Conclusion

This concludes what we need to cover. We really appreciate you taking the time to share your views. Your input is very important.

• Before wrapping up is there anything else you wanted to let the CFIA know?

Thanks again and have a great day!

Appendix I – Quantitative methodology report: General population

Survey methodology

The overall approach adopted for this project was an online survey, the details of which are presented in the sections below.

Questionnaire design

The questionnaire for this research was designed by CFIA, in collaboration with Earnscliffe, and provided for fielding to Leger. The survey was offered to respondents in both English and French and completed based on their language preferences. Respondents could not skip any of the questions but were provided with the opportunity to decline to answer or to say they did not know.

Sample design, selection, and weighting

The research involved an online survey of 1,007 Canadians aged 18 and older.

The online survey was conducted using Leger's proprietary online panel. Respondent quotas and weighting were used to ensure that the results are nationally representative by region, age, and gender according to the most recent Census data.

The following are the specific quotas for age, gender, and region set for this project:

Data collection

The online survey was conducted from March 14 to 18, 2024, in English and in French. The average length was 7 minutes and was undertaken by Leger using their proprietary online panel.

Nonresponse

Respondents for the online survey were selected from among those who have volunteered to participate in online surveys by joining an online opt-in panel. The notion of non-response is more complex than for random probability studies that begin with a sample universe that can, at least theoretically, include the entire population being studied. In such cases, non-response can occur at a number of points before being invited to participate in this particular survey, let alone in deciding to answer any particular question within the survey.

That being said, in order to provide some indication of whether the final sample is unduly influenced by a detectable non-response bias, the tables below compare the unweighted and weighted distributions of each sample's demographic characteristics.

Quality controls

Prior to launching the survey, Earnscliffe tested the links to ensure programming matched the questionnaires. Leger conducted a pre-test of the surveys, and the data was reviewed by Earnscliffe prior to a full launch of the surveys. Upon completion of the pre-test, Earnscliffe reviewed the data to ensure all skip patterns were working and the questionnaire was easily understood by all respondents.

Reporting

Results with upper-case sub-script in the tables presented under a separate cover indicate that the difference between the demographic groups analysed are significantly higher than results found in other columns in the table. In the text of the report, unless otherwise noted, demographic differences highlighted are statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. The statistical test used to determine the significance of the results was the Z-test. Due to rounding, results may not always add to 100%.

Margin of Error

Respondents for the online survey were selected from among those who have volunteered to participate/registered to participate in online surveys. The data have been weighted to reflect the demographic composition of the Canadian population aged 18 years or older. Because the online sample is based on those who initially self-selected for participation in the panel, no estimates of sampling error can be calculated for the entire sample. The treatment here of the non-probability sample is aligned with the Standards for the Conduct of Government of Canada Public Opinion Research for online surveys.

Results

Final dispositions

A total of 1,434 individuals entered the online survey, of which 1,007 qualified as valid and completed the survey. The response rate for this survey was 11%.

Total entered survey: 1434
Completed: 1007
Not qualified/screen out: 21
Over quota: 303
Suspend/drop-off: 103

Unresolved (U): 8307
Email invitation bounce-backs: 2
Email invitations unanswered: 8305

In-scope non-responding (IS): 103
Qualified respondents break-off: 103

In-scope responding (R): 1017
Completed surveys disqualified: 10
Completed surveys – valid: 1007

Response rate = R/(U+IS+R): 11%

Appendix J – Online questionnaire: General population

Email Invitation

LA VERSION FRANÇAISE SUIT

Welcome and thank you for your interest in this study. Earnscliffe Strategy Group, in collaboration with Leger Marketing, has been hired to administer an online survey on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The objective of this research is to help the Government of Canada understand the perceptions that Canadians have regarding the safety and protection of plant health in Canada.

Please be assured that we are not selling or soliciting anything. The survey is voluntary, and your responses will be kept entirely confidential and anonymous and will be administered according to the requirements of the Privacy Act, the Access to Information Act, and any other pertinent legislation. The survey will take approximately 7-10 minutes of your time to complete.

This study has been registered with the Canadian Research Insights Council's Research Verification Service so that you may validate its authenticity. If you would like to enquire about the details of this research, you can visit  CRIC's website. If you choose to verify the authenticity of this research, you can reference project code #########.

To begin, click on the link below.
[URL]

Online Landing Page

Welcome and thank you for your interest in this study. Earnscliffe Strategy Group, in collaboration with Leger, has been hired to administer an online survey on behalf of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. The objective of this research is to help the Government of Canada understand the perceptions that Canadians have regarding the safety and protection of plant health in Canada.

Your responses to this survey will be kept entirely confidential and any information you provide will be administered in accordance with the Privacy Act and other applicable privacy laws. Do you wish to continue?

• Yes
• No [terminate]

QDemo1: In what year were you born?

• [drop down box 1900-2021; if 2007-2024 terminate
• Prefer not to say [99]
• [if respondent selects "prefer not to say" ask QDemo1A]

QDemo1A: Would you be willing to indicate in which of the following age categories you belong?

1. Younger than 18 years old [terminate]
2. 18 to 24
3. 25 to 34
4. 35 to 44
5. 45 to 54
6. 55 to 64
7. 65 or older

99. Younger than 18 years old [terminate]

QDemo2: In which province or territory do you live?

1. British Columbia
2. Alberta
3. Saskatchewan
4. Manitoba
5. Ontario
6. Quebec
7. New Brunswick
8. Prince Edward Island
9. Nova Scotia
10. Newfoundland and Labrador
11. Yukon
12. Northwest Territories
13. Nunavut
14. Outside Canada [terminate]

99. Prefer not to say [terminate]

QDemo3: Which of the following best describes your gender identity? Gender refers to current gender which may be different from sex assigned at birth and may be different from what is indicated on legal documents.

1. Man
2. Woman
3. Other

99. Prefer not to say

Qlifestyle: Which of the following descriptions would you say describe you at least somewhat? [randomize]

1. Does not describe me at all
2. Describes me somewhat
3. Describes me completely

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

1. Foodie
2. Camper
3. Cottager
4. Hobby farmer
5. Own a pig as a pet
6. Have more than one pig
7. Own a goat or sheep
8. Gardener
9. Nature enthusiast
10. Hiker
11. Outdoor enthusiast
12. Pet owner
13. Small bird flock owner
14. Animal lover
15. Travel enthusiast
16. Travel south for the winter or a "snow bird"
17. Biology or ecology hobbyists and enthusiasts

Familiarity with the CFIA

QRep1: When you think of organizations in Canada that are dedicated to safeguarding and protecting animal health, which organizations come to mind? Please type one organization per box for as many organizations as you can think of.

• [Provide 3 boxes. Record the order that the brands are mentioned]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

QRep2: How familiar would you say you are with the activities of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)? Please use the 7-point scale below for your response. A rating of 7 indicates 'very familiar'. A rating of 1 indicates 'not familiar at all'.

• [Show 7-point scale]
• Anchor "Not familiar at all" over 1 [skip to "Animal health questions" section]
• Anchor "Very familiar" over 7

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

QRep2A: Select all the following that apply to you: [multiple response; randomize]

1. I follow the CFIA on a social media platform
2. I have visited the CFIA website
3. I have contacted the CFIA by phone
4. I have contacted the CFIA by email or through the website
5. I have read articles, or watched videos, from the CFIA
6. In person interaction with a CFIA employee
7. I have a friend or family member who works at the CFIA

98. None of the above
99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

QRep3: Have you seen, heard, or read anything recently about the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)?

• Yes
• No [skip to QRep5]
• Don't know/Prefer not to say[skip to QRep5]

QRep4: Where have you seen, heard, or read about the CFIA? Select all that apply.

1. Word of mouth (for example, friends, family)
2. Social media (not including CFIA social media)
3. A digital assistant (for example, Alexa, Siri, Google Assistant)
4. Traditional media (for example, newspapers, TV, radio)
5. Internet (includes online news sites but not social media)
6. Direct contact from the CFIA (includes CFIA social media and CFIA website)

97. Other [specify]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

QRep4B: [if QRep4=2] Which social media platforms or websites have you seen, heard or read about the CFIA? [multiple response]

1. X, formerly known as Twitter
2. Facebook
3. Instagram
4. Tik Tok
5. YouTube
6. Reddit

97. Other

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

QRep5: Below are some statements to describe the activities of the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). How much do you agree or disagree with each of the following statements? [randomize]

• [Show 7-point scale]
• Anchor "Disagree completely" over 1 [skip to "Animal health questions" section]
• Anchor "Agree completely" over 7

99. Don't know/Not applicable

1. The CFIA looks out for the best interests of Canadians
2. All businesses are treated fairly by the CFIA
3. I understand what the CFIA does
4. Getting more information about food, plant or animal safety from the CFIA is easy
5. As a science-based regulator, the CFIA is believable when it issues a statement
6. CFIA enforcement activities are strong enough to encourage companies to comply with the regulations

QRep6: [For those rating 5 or above on QRep2] Of the words listed below, please select the ones that best describe the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA). [multiple response; randomize]

1. Efficient
2. Transparent
3. Innovative
4. Informative
5. Scientific
6. Fair
7. Dedicated
8. Consistent
9. Trusted
10. Responsive
11. Respectful
12. Collaborative
13. Punitive
14. Caring
15. Global leader
16. Service oriented

98. None of the above
99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Animal health questions

Q1Animal: Do you own any pets?

1. Yes
2. No [skip to Q8Animal]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say [skip to Q8Animal]

Q1AAnimal: [if Q1Animal=1] How many pets do you own?

• One
• Two
• Three or more

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Q2AAnimal: [if Q1AAnimal=1] What type of pet do you own?

1. Dog
2. Cat
3. Ferret
4. Rabbit
5. Rodent (e.g., hamster, rat, guinea pig, mice)
6. Hedgehog
7. Turtle/tortoise
8. Amphibian (e.g., frog, toad, salamander)
9. Other reptile (e.g., lizard, gecko, snake)
10. Caged bird (e.g., parrot, song bird, etc.)
11. Fish
12. Insects/arachnids
13. Small flock of birds (e.g. pigeons)
14. Pot-bellied pig
15. Other types of pigs

97. Other [specify] (←screen out any livestock owners as a pet owner)

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Q2BAnimal: [if Q1AAnimal > 1] What type(s) of pets do you own? Select all that apply.

1. Dog
2. Cat
3. Ferret
4. Rabbit
5. Rodent (e.g., hamster, rat, guinea pig, mice)
6. Hedgehog
7. Turtle/tortoise
8. Amphibian (e.g., frog, toad, salamander)
9. Other reptile (e.g., lizard, gecko, snake)
10. Caged bird (e.g., parrot, song bird, etc.)
11. Fish
12. Insects/arachnids
13. Small flock of birds (e.g. pigeons)
14. Pot-bellied pig
15. Other types of pigs

97. Other [specify] (←screen out any livestock owners as a pet owner)

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

[if Q2AAnimal or Q2BAnimal = "dog" (1) or "cat" (2), then ask Q3Animal, Q4Animal, Q5Animal; else skip to Q6Animal]

Q3Animal: Have you ever travelled outside of Canada with your pet(s) (for vacation, moving abroad, etc.)?

1. Yes
2. No [skip to Q4Animal]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Q3AAnimal: If yes, which pet did you travel with? Select all that apply.

• [insert pet(s) selected from Q2AAnimal or Q2BAnimal]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Q3BAnimal: What was the purpose of travel? Select all that apply.

1. Vacation
2. Purchasing/adopting/selling the pet
3. Moving/relocating with the pet to another country
4. Moving/relocating with the pet to Canada

97. Other [specify]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Q3CAnimal: Which country/countries did you travel with your pet(s)?

• [open ended]

99. Don't know/Prefer not to say

Q3DAnimal: How often do you travel with your pet(s)?

0. Less than every couple of years
1. Once every couple of years
2. Once per year
3. 1-3 times per year
4. More than 3 times per year