Animal welfare was all but ignored at COP25. This is why that is a grave mistake

I was fortunate last month to represent Brooke at the UN Climate Change meeting in Madrid, known as COP25. Each year government delegations from nearly 200 countries meet to check progress and agree further international action on climate change. COP25 was considered an important opportunity to prepare for 2020, a significant year for countries to outline long-term plans to arrive at net zero emissions.

My role, along with our Programme Manager Fredred Valdivia, was to make sure animal welfare and specifically working equines weren’t left out of discussions, and it was quickly apparent this was needed. We didn’t hear anyone, apart from the Brooke team and our partners from Central America, talk about the implications of climate change for the welfare of animals, whether they were wild animals, animals kept as pets, production animals or working animals. And this, in a year when unusually severe wild fires had been raging in the United States, the Amazon and most recently in Australia. Experts from the University of Sydney estimate that around 480 million reptiles, birds and mammals, including thousands of koalas, have been killed as huge blazes sweep across Australia.

In climate change discussions, there is plenty of emphasis on the importance of conserving bio diversity and ecosystems — but how can we say we are really paying attention when in just one country, nearly half a billion animals are feared dead as a result of fires? We have seen distressing images of horses caught in the wild fires in U.S; if horse owners in California have been unable to protect their horses, what fate be expected for working equines in Africa, Asia and Latin America caught up in fires, drought, hurricanes, and floods? And what help can the owners of working animals expect to receive to prepare for an increased frequency and length of climate related natural disasters?

From the point of view of what we heard in Madrid, no one is thinking how we assess and measure the impact of climate change, and any associated weather phenomena, on animals; nor the implications for the ecosystem if animals are in poor condition, not just if they have perished.

At COP25, we spoke about how the farmers Brooke works with in Central America are using sustainable farming systems using agroecology — farming practices that strengthen resilience, avoid carbon emissions and empower often poor, small scale food producers. This is in line with a general shift in many international organisations’ thinking. These smallholder farmers rely on working horses and donkeys for agricultural production and transport. In the mountains of Nicaragua, for example, coffee and cocoa producers often live far from the road where a vehicle passes to pick up sacks for processing at the local cooperative.

Donors and international NGOs support these farming communities and know how vulnerable they are to climate change — but they pay scant or no attention to the working animals who connect the farmers to their market. The sustainability of the production systems used by these people, who farm organically using compost rather than chemical fertilisers, is recognised for the role they can play in keeping ecosystems healthy, with good quality soil and water sources, tree coverage and providing an environment where birds, insects and animals can thrive alongside humans. So why not consider the welfare of working horses who support the work of small scale farmers?

We also spoke about how working horses and donkeys are often essential for the survival of communities most affected by climate change. These communities can face prolonged periods of drought and food insecurity, and if they are vulnerable to disaster, their dependent animals are also vulnerable. Strengthening community resilience to adapt to the effects of climate change and manage dry seasons is important; so too is ensuring they are able to keep their working animals in good welfare condition. If horses, donkeys and mules become weak or die as a result of starvation and dehydration, they are no longer able to provide transportation for people and supplies nor to assist in agricultural activities, which are essential for recovery after drought.

After initial quizzical looks, we had a number of “A-ha” moments when we were talking about animal welfare and the role of working equines. Indeed many people sought us out after presentations where we raised animal welfare as a relevant issue that needs to be part of the conversation. They wanted to hear about the work Brooke has been doing to help government and local authorities and also communities include these animals in emergency plans and disaster risk reduction.

Climate change must be recognised by all of us as a key risk that affects the welfare of working horses, donkeys and mules around the world. After all, there are around 100 million of them supporting an estimated 600 million people. We still have far to go in understanding the consequences and implications of climate change on animals directly, on the communities who depend on working animals and on the environment in which they live. But likewise, we must also make sure that those campaigning on and influencing policy around climate change take a more holistic view when they talk about ecosystems and biodiversity. Many participants in Madrid told us that whilst the need to take an eco-centric approach to climate change is generally recognised, the impact of it on the ecosystem is often still looked at through a human centric approach. I was pleased that we were able to challenge current thinking.

COP26 will be held in Glasgow later this year, and is recognised as a key meeting when strong political leadership must address the climate change crisis. I hope that our influence this time, to take a more holistic approach to climate resilience, presents an opportunity that will not be ignored.