When 314 healthy birds were shot to death despite international expert intervention, Canadian media asked only one question: "Why are conspiracy theorists defending ostriches?"
By Avery Lane
On November 6, 2025, professional marksmen shot 314 ostriches to death over several hours at Universal Ostrich Farm in British Columbia. Some birds survived the initial shooting and spent the night suffering greatly before being finished off the next morning. The remains were buried in a landfill.
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. had written letters asking Canada to study the birds instead. Dr. Mehmet Oz offered to relocate them to his Florida ranch. American billionaire John Catsimatidis spent $50,000 on legal defense. The birds had been healthy for ten months after recovering from avian flu.
None of this mattered to Canadian courts, which said they must defer to the government agency's "expertise."
But here's what should alarm every American watching this story: Canadian legacy media made the massacre possible by systematically hiding the sovereignty implications while smearing anyone who questioned the cull orders as "anti-vax conspiracy theorists."
This wasn't journalistic failure. This was state propaganda executed with precision. And it's a blueprint for how media will cover the next pandemic when U.S. agencies implement WHO protocols over American objections.
What Actually Happened vs. What Media Reported
The Facts:
- 69 ostriches died from avian flu in December 2024-January 2025.
- Remaining 300+ birds recovered and showed no symptoms for 10+ months.
- CFIA ordered entire flock killed under "stamping-out policy" from World Organization for Animal Health -WOAH (key detail - pay attention).
- Farm owners fought in court, lost at every level.
- Supreme Court ruled judges must defer to agency's "reasonable" decision.
- RFK Jr. proposed scientific study of the birds' natural immunity.
- Dr. Oz offered relocation to prevent culling.
- Courts rejected all alternatives, said agency decision was "within range of reasonable outcomes".
- Government hired gunmen show up after nightfall. Birds were shot over several hours, some suffered through the night.
How CBC Framed It:
January 2025: "Ostrich farm challenges cull order in case drawing anti-vax support"
May 2025: "Ostrich farm loses court battle as far-right figures amplify claims"
July 2025: "Freedom Convoy supporters rally behind B.C. ostrich farm".
November 2025: "Supreme Court dismisses ostrich appeal as conspiracy theories swirl".
Notice what's in every headline? The politics of the supporters. Not the science. Not the sovereignty question where Canada doesn't make these decisions anymore - (WOAH does). Not the international policy origin. Not the judicial deference precedent.
The story wasn't "Courts say they cannot override agency implementing international health policy." They literally could not and the vast majority of Canadians are unaware of this fact - let alone what this actually means for Canada.
The story was "Conspiracy theorists exploit ostriches."
The Propaganda Techniques in Action
Technique 1: Guilt by Association
CBC and other legacy outlets systematically connected the ostrich case to politically unpopular movements:
"Many of the same actors and antics that generated the pandemic convoy supported Universal Ostrich Farms. Tamara Lich has been directly involved." (Policy Options, November 2025)
"The anti-vaccine, anti-government crusade to save 'the miracle cure birds'" (NBC News headline, November 2025)
"Throughout 2025, the ostriches have drawn support from right-wing social media, which began promoting the story as an example of government overreach, spurred on by anti-vaccination-related mistrust." (Foreign Policy, November 2025)
What this accomplished: Made "reasonable" Canadians afraid to question the cull. If you defended the ostriches, you were lumped in with vaccine skeptics and convoy protesters.
What media never reported: Whether the Freedom Convoy connection made the legal arguments less valid. Whether RFK Jr.'s scientific proposals had merit regardless of his vaccine views. Whether the sovereignty implications mattered even if "bad people" noticed them first.
Technique 2: Uncritical Appeals to Authority
Every major outlet repeated CFIA's justifications without scrutiny:
"The CFIA said it takes its responsibility to protect the health of both animals and Canadians extremely seriously, and that it takes all disease control measures deemed necessary to protect health and trade." (Repeated verbatim in dozens of articles)
Questions media never asked:
- Where did the "stamping-out policy" originate? (Answer: World Organization for Animal Health - an international body)
- Why couldn't recovered birds be tested? (CFIA refused to test them while alive or after death)
- What precedent does judicial deference to agencies set? (Answer: Courts can't override agencies implementing international policies)
- Why reject American scientific collaboration? (RFK Jr. offered NIH/CDC partnership)
- How is shooting birds over several hours, leaving some to suffer until morning, "humane"? (CFIA's own manual says shooting is "last resort")
Instead, media treated CFIA statements as unquestionable fact while portraying farm owners' scientific arguments as conspiracy theories.
Technique 3: Dismissing Legitimate Questions as Misinformation
Legitimate scientific question: "The birds recovered and showed no symptoms for 10 months. Why not test them to confirm they're virus-free before killing them?"
How media framed it: "Farm owners claimed the ostriches had developed 'herd immunity' - a claim the CFIA called 'unsubstantiated.'"
What this omits: Whether the claim was actually unsubstantiated or whether CFIA simply refused to conduct the testing that would substantiate it.
Legitimate sovereignty question: "Why can't Canadian courts override an agency decision even when international experts disagree?"
How media framed it: "Supporters claim 'government overreach' in case drawing conspiracy theorists."
What this omits: The entire Vavilov precedent and what it means for judicial oversight of agencies implementing international policies. In other words - Canada is not in charge of these decisions anymore. We have given up control to an unelected foreign entity.
Legitimate scientific offer: "U.S. health officials want to study the birds' natural immunity to develop treatments."
How media framed it: "RFK Jr., known vaccine skeptic, intervened in Canadian case."
What this omits: Whether Kennedy's proposal had scientific merit regardless of his other views. Whether Dr. Oz's relocation offer was viable. Whether American expertise should have been considered.
Technique 4: Selective Fact Reporting
What CBC, Globe and Mail, and CTV emphasized:
- Freedom Convoy connections (heaven forbid!)
- "Harassment" of neighbors by supporters
- One supporter arrested for assault
- "Biosecurity risks"
- CFIA following "best practices"
- Supreme Court ruling against farm
What they systematically omitted:
- The Vavilov decision and what it means for judicial oversight
- That "stamping-out policy" comes from international organization NOT a Canadian institution or officials. Very key detail.
- Specific details of RFK Jr.'s scientific proposals.
- Dr. Oz's relocation offer and why it was rejected.
- That birds were healthy for 10+ months.
- Details of the cruel and brutal execution method (shooting them several times in front of each other through night, birds suffering and in pain). They made it sound like it was a humane and under veterinary care.
- That courts explicitly said they must defer to agency "expertise".
- Legal precedent this sets for future pandemic response.
The pattern is clear: emphasize politics, omit sovereignty, discredit supporters.
The Key Omission: Where the Policy Came From
In dozens of articles across CBC, Globe and Mail, National Post, and CTV, not one explained that the "stamping-out policy" is a measure implemented by the World Organization for Animal Health.
Why this matters:
- Canada didn't develop this policy domestically
- Canada adopted an international body's recommendation
- Canadian agencies implemented international policy
- Canadian courts deferred to agencies implementing international policy
- This creates precedent for WHO pandemic protocols
Why media didn't report it: If Canadians understood they were watching international policy override domestic judicial review, they might question:
- Who controls Canadian health policy?
- Can courts protect Canadians from international health mandates?
- What happens when WHO issues pandemic protocols?
- Are we watching a test case for future crises?
So media made it about "anti-vaxxers" instead.
The Parallel Universe: How Media Would Cover Trump Doing This
Imagine this scenario:
U.S. Department of Agriculture orders killing of 314 healthy animals on Texas farm despite:
- Canadian health officials offering to study them
- International billionaire offering to relocate them
- Scientific questions about necessity
- Federal courts saying they can't intervene because agency decision is "reasonable"
- Animals shot cruelly (nothing quick and painless) over several hours, some suffering until morning.
How CBC would frame it:
"Trump's America: Where Science Dies and Courts Bow to Executive Power"
"Authoritarian Overreach: U.S. Courts Powerless Against Agriculture Department"
"International Experts Condemn U.S. Rejection of Scientific Collaboration"
"Animal Rights Groups Horrified by Overnight Shooting Spree"
Every element that media dismissed in the Canadian case - the rejection of international help, the judicial deference to agencies, the questionable execution method, the scientific alternatives ignored - would become evidence of American authoritarianism.
But when CANADA does it:
"Anti-vaxxers exploit ostrich case to spread conspiracy theories"
"Courts uphold reasonable policy as far-right amplifies misinformation"
"Freedom Convoy supporters disrupt rural community"
The double standard reveals the agenda: protect Canadian government from scrutiny, discredit dissent, normalize sovereignty surrender.
Why This Matters: Media as State Propaganda
Canadian legacy media isn't failing at journalism. It's succeeding at its actual function: serving as the propaganda arm of a government that has surrendered sovereignty to international governance structures.
The Funding Model Ensures Compliance
CBC receives $1.4 billion annually from the federal government. Think about that. The organization "reporting" on government actions receives $1.4 billion from that same government.
Private outlets receive hundreds of millions in government subsidies. The Trudeau government created a newspaper bailout fund providing $595 million over five years. Media companies that criticize government policies risk losing access to these funds.
This is textbook state media - just with better branding than Russia Today or China Daily.
The Ideological Alignment Runs Deeper
Even without funding incentives, Canadian media class is ideologically committed to:
- Trusting "experts" and "institutions"
- Supporting international cooperation over national sovereignty
- Viewing skepticism of government as dangerous
- Seeing critics as "far-right" regardless of actual arguments
- Dismissing populist movements (truckers, farm defenders) as threats
They genuinely believe international governance through WHO, UN, and similar bodies represents enlightened policy. National sovereignty is viewed as backwards nationalism.
The ostrich case perfectly embodied their worldview:
- International health policy (good)
- Implemented by credentialed experts (good)
- Opposed by truckers and Americans (bad)
- Involving vaccine-skeptic talking points (very bad)
So they framed it accordingly, never realizing they were documenting the end of judicial sovereignty.
The Evidence of Coordinated Narrative Control
Look at how every major outlet used the same framing:
Globe and Mail: "The plight of the ostriches has spurred street protests and a social media campaign to 'Save Our Ostriches,' with activists decrying government overreach"
CBC: "The case has attracted attention from far-right figures and anti-vaccine activists who claim government overreach"
National Post: "Ostrich farm case draws support from Freedom Convoy figures as farm claims government overreach"
CTV: "Universal Ostrich case amplified by anti-vaccine movement, far-right supporters"
Every single one:
- Mentions "government overreach" in scare quotes or as a "claim"
- Connects to far-right/anti-vax movements
- Emphasizes the politics of supporters
- Treats CFIA position as established fact
- Omits international policy origins
- Ignores sovereignty implications
This isn't coincidence. This is coordinated narrative management.
Whether through formal government guidance, informal ideological alignment, or financial incentives, Canadian media moved in lockstep to:
- Discredit the opposition
- Protect the agency
- Hide the sovereignty question
- Make "reasonable" Canadians ashamed to object
What Media Accomplished: Making Judicial Deference Acceptable
The real achievement of this propaganda campaign wasn't convincing Canadians the ostriches needed to die. It was normalizing something far more dangerous:
Courts cannot override agencies implementing international health policies.
By focusing obsessively on the politics of supporters rather than the legal precedent being set, media ensured most Canadians never understood what happened:
- International body (World Organization for Animal Health) issues policy recommendation
- Canadian agency (CFIA) adopts policy
- Agency applies policy in specific case
- Courts rule they must defer to agency's "reasonable" interpretation
- No judicial oversight remains
This is the Vavilov precedent in action. And media made sure Canadians didn't notice.
Why? Because the same framework will apply to the WHO Pandemic Agreement when the next crisis hits:
- WHO issues pandemic response protocols
- Canadian health agencies adopt protocols
- Agencies implement protocols in Canada
- Courts defer to agencies' "expertise"
- No judicial protection for Canadian rights
The ostrich massacre was the test case. Media's job was to ensure it passed without Canadians understanding the implications.
They succeeded.
The COVID Playbook: Silencing Dissent Through Character Assassination
If this pattern feels familiar, it should. Legacy media used the exact same playbook during COVID-19.
The COVID Template
During the pandemic, anyone who questioned:
- Lockdown effectiveness → "Anti-science conspiracy theorist"
- Vaccine mandates → "Anti-vaxxer endangering others"
- Natural immunity → "Spreading misinformation"
- Lab leak origins → "Racist conspiracy theory"
- Government overreach → "Selfish extremist"
Media focused on:
- Political affiliations of skeptics
- "Dangerous misinformation"
- "Experts say" appeals to authority
- Emotional stories about harassment
- "Far-right" connections
Media omitted:
- Legitimate scientific debate
- Evidence supporting alternative views
- Cost-benefit analysis of policies
- Government funding of "independent" experts
- Conflicts of interest
- International policy origins (WHO guidance)
Result: Made it socially and politically impossible to question government health policies, even when they were wrong.
The Ostrich Template: Identical Tactics
Anyone who questioned the cull:
- Defended natural immunity → "Anti-vaxxer exploiting ostriches"
- Questioned agency decision → "Spreading conspiracy theories"
- Supported farmers' rights → "Far-right extremist"
- Wanted scientific testing → "Dangerous misinformation"
- Opposed government → "Freedom Convoy adjacent"
Media focused on:
- Political affiliations of supporters (Tamara Lich, convoy ties)
- "Conspiracy theories" about government overreach
- "Experts say" CFIA appeals
- Emotional stories about neighbor harassment
- RFK Jr.'s "anti-vax" views
Media omitted:
- Whether the birds were actually healthy
- Legitimate scientific alternatives (study vs. kill)
- Legal precedent being set (Vavilov judicial deference)
- International policy origins (WOAH stamping-out policy)
- Whether American experts' offers had merit
- What "reasonable" agency decisions means for rights
Result: Made it socially and politically impossible to object to killing 314 healthy birds, even when international experts disagreed.
The Pattern: Character Assassination as Policy Protection
Media's job in both cases wasn't to inform. It was to:
- Identify dissenters (anyone questioning official policy)
- Find political connections (convoy, anti-vax, right-wing)
- Emphasize those connections (in every headline, every story)
- Ignore the substance (is the policy actually justified?)
- Make opposition toxic (no "reasonable" person would associate with these people)
The formula is simple:
- Don't debate the policy merits
- Don't examine the evidence
- Don't question the authority
- Just make anyone who objects look crazy
It worked with COVID lockdowns and mandates.
Millions of Canadians supported policies that:
- Destroyed businesses
- Isolated elderly people who died alone
- Caused massive mental health crises in children
- Violated charter rights
- Were based on international (WHO) guidance that courts said they couldn't question
Anyone who objected was labeled an "anti-vax conspiracy theorist."
It worked with the ostrich massacre.
Canadians watched 314 healthy birds get shot to death over several hours, despite:
- 10 months of being symptom-free
- American health officials offering alternatives
- Legitimate scientific questions about necessity
- Courts admitting they couldn't override agency decisions
Anyone who objected was labeled an "anti-vax conspiracy theorist."
Why This Tactic Is So Effective
Once media successfully associates a position with "bad people," most citizens won't:
- Research the actual facts
- Question the government narrative
- Defend the position publicly
- Support people making legitimate arguments
- Think critically about the policy
Because they're afraid of being labeled:
- Anti-science
- Conspiracy theorist
- Right-wing extremist
- Anti-vaxxer
- Convoy supporter
This is psychological warfare, not journalism.
Media isn't saying: "Here are the facts, you decide."
Media is saying: "Only bad people question this policy. You're not a bad person, are you?"
The Stakes: They're Practicing for the Next Pandemic
The ostrich massacre wasn't about bird flu. It was a trial run for pandemic response.
They tested whether they could:
- Implement international health policy
- Override judicial review through Vavilov deference
- Kill healthy animals despite international expert objections
- Use media to make opposition politically toxic
- Set precedent without public understanding
They succeeded on all counts.
Next time - when it's human health instead of ostriches - they'll use the same playbook:
When WHO issues pandemic protocols and Canadian agencies implement them:
- Courts will defer (Vavilov precedent is set)
- Alternatives will be rejected (already normalized)
- International experts who disagree will be ignored (established practice)
- Anyone who objects will be labeled "anti-vax conspiracy theorist" (proven effective)
- Media will focus on politics of opposition, not substance of policies (perfected technique)
And it will work. Because it worked with COVID. And it worked with the ostriches.
The only difference is scale.
Why They Had to Kill the Ostriches
Here's the terrifying truth: The ostriches had to die because they proved natural immunity works.
If CFIA had allowed testing that confirmed the birds were healthy and virus-free after natural infection:
- It would validate natural immunity
- It would question the necessity of stamping-out policies
- It would suggest alternatives to killing exist
- It would undermine future pandemic response protocols
- It would give skeptics ammunition
They couldn't allow that precedent.
Better to:
- Kill 314 healthy birds
- Reject international scientific collaboration
- Set judicial deference precedent
- Normalize international policy implementation
- Make opposition politically toxic
Than to admit natural immunity worked and killing wasn't necessary.
The birds died to protect the narrative. And media made sure "reasonable" Canadians never questioned it.
The Americans Who Noticed
While Canadian media dismissed concerns as conspiracy theories, Americans watching the case saw something different:
U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. saw birds that could be studied for natural immunity research.
Dr. Mehmet Oz saw animals that could be relocated rather than killed.
Billionaire John Catsimatidis saw government overreach worth fighting.
Were they all "anti-vax conspiracy theorists"? Or did they simply see what Canadian media refused to report: that this case demonstrated courts deferring to agencies implementing international health policies over all objections?
American conservative media covered the sovereignty angle extensively. Canadian media called this "foreign interference" and "misinformation."
Who was right?
The birds are dead. The precedent is set. And most Canadians still don't know what happened because their media told them it was about truckers and anti-vaxxers instead.
The Blueprint for Pandemic Response Coverage
When the next pandemic arrives and U.S. health agencies begin implementing WHO protocols, watch how legacy media will:
Frame sovereignty concerns as conspiracy theories: "Anti-vax groups claim WHO 'controls' U.S. policy"
Guilt by association: "Far-right figures amplify anti-WHO sentiment"
Uncritical appeals to authority: "CDC experts say following WHO guidelines protects public health"
Dismiss legitimate questions: "Conspiracy theorists question why courts defer to health agencies"
Selective fact reporting: Emphasize: political connections of skeptics, harassment claims, "misinformation" concerns Omit: where protocols originated, what judicial deference means, whether alternatives exist
The ostrich massacre showed the playbook works:
- Courts deferred to agency
- Alternatives were rejected
- Suffering was inflicted
- Media made it politically impossible to object
- Precedent was set
- Public never understood what happened
What This Means for Americans
You're watching Canadian legacy media serve its actual function: making sovereignty surrender palatable by hiding what's happening.
They're not failing at journalism. They're succeeding at state propaganda.
Their job is to:
- Make dissent look crazy
- Make government actions look reasonable
- Make international governance look sophisticated
- Make national sovereignty look backwards
- Make judicial oversight look unnecessary
They did this with the ostriches. They'll do it with pandemic response. They're probably doing it right now with issues you haven't noticed yet.
The question for Americans is: Will your media do the same thing?
When the next pandemic hits and CDC implements WHO protocols, will American media:
- Question where the protocols came from?
- Examine what judicial deference means?
- Consider whether alternatives exist?
- Protect democratic accountability?
Or will they:
- Focus on "anti-vax" connections?
- Dismiss sovereignty concerns as conspiracy theories?
- Frame dissent as dangerous misinformation?
- Make it politically impossible to object?
The Canadian model is already being replicated in American media. The same techniques. The same framing. The same systematic omission of sovereignty questions.
The Warning
Legacy media didn't fail to cover the ostrich massacre properly. They succeeded at their actual mission: protecting government agencies implementing international policies from meaningful scrutiny.
By the time Canadians realized 314 healthy birds were shot to death despite international expert intervention and judicial deference had eliminated meaningful oversight, media had successfully framed anyone who objected as a conspiracy theorist.
This is what state propaganda looks like in a so called "democracy". Not crude. Not obvious. Just systematic emphasis on politics over substance, feelings over facts, and authority over accountability.
The ostriches are buried in a landfill. The precedent is set. The courts have accepted they cannot override agencies implementing international health policies.
And Canadian media made it all possible by asking only one question: "Why are conspiracy theorists defending ostriches?". When you hear language like that you need to look more closely because that is the playbook.
They never asked: "Why can't our courts protect us from international health policies we disagree with?"
Because if Canadians asked that question, they might not like the answer.
Americans: Your media is learning the same techniques. Don't let them get away with these manipulations. You can still turn it around.
Avery Lane is a Canadian author documenting how legacy media enables sovereignty surrender through systematic propaganda techniques. This is part of the Northern Warning series examining threats to national independence that state-funded media won't report honestly. The ostrich massacre wasn't about bird flu - it was about normalizing judicial deference to agencies implementing international policies. And media made sure you'd never figure that out.
Related searches: CBC bias, Canadian state media, Universal Ostrich Farm media coverage, propaganda techniques, Vavilov decision media coverage, WHO pandemic agreement media, legacy media government funding, state propaganda democracy
References and Sources
Court Decisions and Legal Documents
- Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 - Supreme Court of Canada decision establishing "reasonableness" standard for judicial review https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/cb/2019/37748-eng.aspx
- Universal Ostrich Farms Inc. v. Canada (Food Inspection Agency), 2025 FCA 147 - Federal Court of Appeal decision upholding CFIA cull order https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fca/
- 2025 Canadian ostrich culling controversy - Wikipedia comprehensive timeline https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Canadian_ostrich_culling_controversy
News Coverage Demonstrating Media Patterns
- "How the son of Russian spies paved the legal path for the cull of B.C. ostriches" - CBC News, November 6, 2025 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/ostriches-cull-court-reasonablessness-alexander-vavilov-9.6969653
- "Hundreds of ostriches at B.C. farm to be killed after top court dismisses appeal" - CBC News, November 6, 2025 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/livestory/bc-ostrich-farm-decision-scoc-9.6968394
- "Canadian Ostriches Have Become Martyrs for the U.S. Right" - Foreign Policy, November 11, 2025 https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/11/11/canada-ostriches-us-right-conservatives-cull-universal-ostrich-farm/
- "Why the conspiratorial right rallied around a flock of ostriches" - NBC News, November 10, 2025 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/news-analysis/conspiratorial-right-rallied-flock-ostriches-rcna242541
- "On ostriches, polarizing politics and buried heads" - Policy Options, November 12, 2025 https://policyoptions.irpp.org/2025/11/ostriches/
- "Cull of B.C. ostriches moves ahead after Supreme Court declines to hear farmers' appeal" - The Globe and Mail, November 6, 2025 https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-supreme-court-declines-appeal-bc-ostrich-cull/
- "Canadian court dismisses farm's attempt to save ostrich flock despite efforts by RFK Jr." - CNN, November 6, 2025 https://www.cnn.com/2025/11/06/americas/canada-ostrich-flu-cull-rfk-latam-intl
- "Canadian ostrich farm loses long legal battle to avoid cull of its birds, despite plea from RFK Jr." - CBS News, November 7, 2025 https://www.cbsnews.com/news/canada-ostrich-farm-cull-court-ruling-rfk-jr-dr-oz-intervention/
U.S. Government Intervention
- Robert F. Kennedy Jr. letter to CFIA requesting study of ostriches instead of culling - May 2025 (Referenced in multiple news sources including CBS, CNN, and CBC coverage)
- "Senate confirms Dr. Oz to lead Medicare and Medicaid" - NPR, April 3, 2025 https://www.npr.org/sections/shots-health-news/2025/03/25/g-s1-55766/dr-mehmet-oz-medicare-medicaid-cms-trump
Government Funding of Canadian Media
- CBC receives $1.4 billion in annual government funding - Government of Canada Public Accounts https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/cbc-radio-canada.html
- "Journalism and Written Media Independent Compensation Fund" - $595 million over 5 years to private media https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/journalistic-initiatives.html
International Policy Origins
- World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH) - Stamping Out Policy for Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza https://www.woah.org/en/disease/avian-influenza/
- Canadian Food Inspection Agency - Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza Response Plan https://inspection.canada.ca/animal-health/terrestrial-animals/diseases/reportable/avian-influenza/eng/
Alternative Coverage
- "Massacre at Universal Ostrich Farms: Canada kills hundreds of birds despite no evidence of avian flu" - The Blaze, November 7, 2025 https://www.theblaze.com/align/massacre-at-universal-ostrich-farms-canada-kills-hundreds-of-birds-despite-no-evidence-of-avian-flu
- "Ostrich farm devastated but defiant after Canadian government slaughtered 300 birds" - The Post Millennial, November 7, 2025 https://thepostmillennial.com/ostrich-farm-devastated-but-defiant-after-canadian-government-slaughtered-300-birds
- "Trump Allies Flock Into Bizarre Canadian Ostrich Farm Fight" - The Daily Beast, September 25, 2025 https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-allies-flock-into-bizarre-canadian-ostrich-farm-fight/
- "U.S. billionaire backs B.C. ostrich farm as it fights to appeal avian flu cull order" - CTV News, July 30, 2025 https://www.cp24.com/news/canada/2025/07/29/us-billionaire-backs-bc-ostrich-farm-as-it-fights-to-appeal-avian-flu-cull-order/
Legal Analysis
- "The Gravitational Force of Vavilov" - Administrative Law Matters, legal analysis of Universal Ostrich case https://www.administrativelawmatters.com/blog/2025/09/11/the-gravitational-force-of-vavilov-universal-ostrich-farms-inc-v-canada-food-inspection-agency-2025-fca-147
- "Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov: A Practical Guide" - Borden Ladner Gervais LLP https://www.blg.com/en/insights/2019/12/a-practical-guide-to-the-revised-standard-of-review-analysis
Final Disposition
- "'Deep burial' for ostriches at B.C. landfill as CFIA completes cull and disposal work" - CBC News, November 13, 2025 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/avian-flu-ostriches-burial-9.6978573
Note: All links were accessed and verified as of November 2025. Some sources may require subscription or may be archived. For academic or legal citation purposes, please refer to official court documents and government publications directly.
