South Korean Farmers Rally Against Proposed Dog Meat Ban

Farmers clash with police as they protest the government’s plan to ban the centuries-old practice of consuming dog meat.

In a heated demonstration near the presidential office in Seoul, South Korea, around 200 farmers who breed and raise dogs for human consumption expressed their opposition to a proposed ban on the controversial practice. The farmers, armed with trucks containing dogs in cages that they intended to release at the scene, were met with resistance from the police. The ruling party, led by President Yoon Suk Yeol, has introduced a bill to ban the breeding and sale of dogs for consumption, citing the need to end the controversy surrounding the consumption of dog meat. However, farmers argue that they should have a say in their livelihoods and what people choose to eat.

1: The Rationale Behind the Ban

President Yoon Suk Yeol’s ruling party has put forth a bill to ban the practice of breeding and selling dogs for consumption. The proposed legislation includes a three-year grace period during which financial compensation will be provided to those in the industry who are forced to shut down their businesses. The government argues that it is time to put an end to the controversy surrounding the consumption of dog meat. They claim that there is widespread support for the ban, not only from the opposition party but also from the public. A Gallup Korea poll conducted last year revealed that nearly two-thirds of respondents opposed eating dog meat, with only 8% admitting to having consumed it in the past year.

2: The Changing Attitudes Towards Dog Meat

South Korea has seen a significant shift in attitudes towards dog meat consumption in recent years. With over 6 million households owning dogs as pets, the practice has become increasingly unpopular. The president himself, along with his wife, are proud owners of six dogs, including a retired guide dog and a rescue dog. The decline in popularity has led to increased pressure on the government to take action against the industry. However, farmers argue that the proposed ban infringes upon their livelihoods and personal choices.

3: Farmers’ Perspective and Opposition

Ju Yeong-bong, a representative of an industry group and the leader of Thursday’s rally, voiced his disagreement with the proposed ban. He argued that politicians should not have the power to shut down an entire industry or dictate what people should eat. Ju pointed out that many countries with a tradition of animal husbandry have, at some point in their history, consumed dog meat, and some continue to do so. The farmers feel marginalized and excluded from the discussion surrounding the bill, and they believe that the proposed financial compensation is inadequate given the impact on their livelihoods.

4: Clashes and Controversy

During the protest, tensions escalated as farmers scuffled with the outnumbering police force and attempted to move closer to the presidential office. The police set up barricades to prevent their advance, resulting in a chaotic scene. Three protesters, including Ju Yeong-bong, were detained by the police. The farmers have accused First Lady Kim, a vocal critic of dog meat consumption, of exerting undue influence on the government and the ruling party to push for the ban. However, the presidential office maintains that there is widespread support and consensus for the ban, both domestically and internationally.


The clash between South Korean farmers and the government over the proposed ban on dog meat consumption highlights the ongoing debate surrounding cultural practices and animal rights. While the consumption of dog meat has declined in popularity, farmers argue that they should have a say in their livelihoods and that personal choices should be respected. The government, on the other hand, believes that it is time to put an end to the controversy surrounding the practice. As the nation grapples with this issue, it is essential to find a balance between cultural traditions, animal welfare concerns, and the evolving attitudes of the public.






Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *