Why Animal Welfare Organisations Should Go Vegan

A dog is a pig is a cow. If we believe one deserves saving, the science and the ethics say we have to reckon with all of them.

Imagine attending a fundraiser for your local animal rescue. You walk in past photos of dogs and cats who found their forever homes, volunteers laughing and talking about the animals in their care. Then you look down at the buffet table: pulled pork sliders, chicken skewers, a cheese platter.

The contradiction is right there — but most of us have been so conditioned not to see it that we reach for the food without a second thought.

This post is about why that contradiction matters, and what animal welfare organisations can do to align their values with their actions.

The Uncomfortable Truth About Speciesism

The word "speciesism" was coined in the 1970s by psychologist Richard Ryder, who used it to describe "prejudice or discrimination based on species" — the assumption that the interests of some animals automatically outweigh the interests of others.¹

Animal rescue organisations exist because we recognise that animals are sentient, capable of suffering, and deserving of protection. They are not resources. They are individuals. That is the entire moral foundation of rescue work.

But here is the question that follows logically: why does that reasoning stop at the species boundary?

When a shelter serves pigs, chickens, and cows at a fundraiser while simultaneously working to save dogs and cats, the implicit message is that some animals count and others don't. But what is that distinction actually based on?

What the Science Says

The distinction between "companion animals" and "food animals" is not scientific. It is cultural.

Research published in the International Journal of Comparative Psychology by Marino and Colvin demonstrated that pigs show cognitive capabilities comparable to dogs and even young children — including self-awareness, memory, emotional empathy, and the ability to anticipate future outcomes.² Sheep can recognise and remember up to 50 individual human faces.³ Goats rival dogs in some tests of social intelligence. These are not the blank, unthinking creatures we are culturally conditioned to imagine.

Perhaps most telling: in a study of pig farmers, all participating farmers agreed that pigs are sentient beings capable of feeling stress, fear, and joy. The people closest to these animals already know the truth. The cognitive dissonance required to hold that knowledge while serving pork at a rescue fundraiser is real — and it has a name.

Psychologist Elisa Aaltola attributes widespread cognitive dissonance around animal consumption to strategic ignorance and an avoidance of empathy — dissociating the meat from the animal it came from.⁴ Animal rescue organisations, of all institutions, should be actively working against that dissociation, not reinforcing it.

The Mission Contradiction

An organisation cannot credibly claim to stand for animal welfare while simultaneously funding its operations through an industry responsible for the systematic suffering of billions of animals each year.

As one animal rescue operator put it: "Saving animals in a rescue shelter or clinic and then eating the corpses and secretions of other animals makes no sense at all. That is the kind of hypocrisy that animals do not need from people tasked with their protection."⁵

Animal welfare pertains to the physical and emotional wellbeing of animals — it is scientifically measurable, not arbitrary. If the welfare argument justifies rescuing a dog, it applies equally to a pig. There is no scientific basis for treating them differently. There is only habit, culture, and convenience.

The Real-World Impact

A single 150-person event that goes vegan can spare the lives of up to 50 farmed animals. Across hundreds of fundraisers and volunteer days held by rescue organisations every year, the cumulative impact of serving animal products is enormous — in lives, and in the moral message sent to everyone who attends.

These events are also powerful opportunities for education. When a rescue serves vegan food and explains why, it opens a conversation. It signals to donors, volunteers, and the wider community that the organisation's commitment to animals is genuine and consistent — not selective.

Addressing the Common Concerns

"Our donors won't want to be told what to eat." No one is dictating what individuals eat at home. An organisation choosing what it serves at its own events is an act of institutional integrity, not policing personal choices.

"Vegan food is expensive or hard to source." Plant-based catering has become significantly more accessible and more affordable. Many organisations find vegan menus equal in cost to or cheaper than meat-heavy alternatives — and attendees are often pleasantly surprised by the quality.

"This feels extreme." Consider what is actually being proposed: that an organisation devoted to reducing animal suffering not serve animal products at its own events. That is not extreme. It is consistency.

Beyond the Menu

Mission alignment extends beyond food. Rescue organisations that run stalls or merchandise tables can also consider replacing leather goods with vegan alternatives, sourcing accessories from cruelty-free suppliers, partnering with vegan-owned businesses for raffle prizes, and choosing cleaning products not tested on animals. Every point of purchase is an opportunity to model the values the organisation claims to hold.

Leading the Community

Animal rescue organisations occupy a position of moral authority. The defence of nonhuman animals and the rejection of speciesism is supported by all major ethical frameworks — utilitarian, rights-based, and virtue ethics alike.⁶ Whether you are motivated by minimising suffering, upholding individual rights, or simply acting with integrity, the conclusion is the same.

The dog on the adoption floor and the pig at the fundraiser buffet are not morally different. They feel the same fear, the same pain, the same relief. The only thing that separates them is the story we have decided to tell about them.

Animal rescue organisations have the power to change that story. It starts with what is on the menu.

References

1. Ryder, R. D. (2011). Speciesism, Painism and Happiness: A Morality for the Twenty-First Century. Imprint Academic.

2. Marino, L. & Colvin, C. M. (2015). Thinking Pigs: A Comparative Review of Cognition, Emotion, and Personality in Sus domesticus. International Journal of Comparative Psychology, 28. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/8sx4s79z

3. Kendrick, K. M. (2001). Sheep don't forget a face. Nature, 414, 165–166. As referenced in Compassion in World Farming. Stop – Look – Listen: Recognising the Sentience of Farm Animals. https://www.ciwf.org.uk/media/3816923/stop-look-listen.pdf

4. Aaltola, E. as cited in Sentient Media (2023). New Study: How We Misjudge Animal Intelligence. https://sentientmedia.org/new-study-animal-intelligence/

5. Besch, C. (2021). Rescue Organizations are Rife with Hypocrisy. LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rescue-organizations-rife-hypocrisy-catherine-besch

6. Treich, N. (2021). Animal welfare: antispeciesism, veganism and a "life worth living." Social Choice and Welfare. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-020-01287-7