Speech by Rick at the Peace Service for Animals

On Sunday afternoon, 21 December 2025, the 12th edition of the Peace Service for Animals was held at the Nassaukerk in Amsterdam. Rick had the honor of being able to contribute this year. Naturally, it was about the animals that end up disappearing into pets’ food bowls. Below is the text, and underneath it the video of the speech.

Today I am also here for all those animals who disappear unseen into the food bowls of the animals we love so much. When I became vegan more than 25 years ago, I became increasingly convinced that for everything we use animals for, there must also be a solution that does not involve animals.

With one topic, however, that seemed difficult: dogs and cats. Keeping dogs and cats is, within the framework of veganism, a contentious issue in itself, but there was always the adopt-don’t-shop escape. Even then, though, the question remains: what should they eat? Isn’t it very unnatural to feed these animals a plant-based diet? Aren’t we failing the animals we directly care for?

With cats, this seems even more the case, because cats have a very specific nutritional requirement: taurine. A cat cannot produce enough of it on its own and must get it from food. If that goes wrong, it can lead to serious damage to the eyes and heart, and it can ultimately be fatal.

When you heat animal ingredients, a large part of the taurine is lost. To ensure there is enough taurine in meat-based kibble, taurine has to be added after heating so that a cat does not develop deficiencies. That same taurine, produced synthetically, can also be added to plant-based kibble. In that sense, the step from “meat kibble” to “plant-based kibble” is less mysterious than people think: it is exactly the same taurine.

The health of the animals we care for comes first. It is the responsibility we take on the moment we decide to have an animal live with us. Dogs and cats hold a special place in our society. Most people try to take good care of their pets. For pets there are veterinarians, behaviorists, dog training schools—everything to safeguard their welfare.

I myself am a certified behavior therapist. During my training, I was once told that the carabiner—the clip you use to attach the leash to the harness—that I used was a bit large and that it was less comfortable for my dog. A perfectly good tip that I took to heart, but the contrast a little later during the break could not have been greater, in my view: they couldn’t keep up with the demand for the kroket sandwiches.

And you don’t only see that contrast there. You see it everywhere an animal comes close.
When a dog is euthanized after an incident, or when people talk about “high-risk dogs,” you see how intense the emotion is. Suddenly it is about responsibility, about protection, about what is still “acceptable” and what is not.

And recently you saw the same effect with problem wolf Bram. The wolf was given a name and a story, and suddenly the topic was everywhere. Then, all at once, we become very precise about what we may and may not do to an animal.

I don’t think that is exaggerated. I think it is telling. It shows that we do have that moral sharpness. It just seems that this sharpness depends very strongly on one thing: whether the animal has a face in our minds.

And that shows the same thing: with dogs we are hyper-careful; with other animals we switch that moral feeling off remarkably easily. And despite the kroket sandwiches I saw go by, I have always believed that through our dogs and cats, people can understand that animals are more than just “an animal.” Dogs and cats—who doubts that we must take good care of them? They have feelings, can suffer pain and experience happiness. In other words: they have interests. Interests we should take into account.

But don’t other animals have that too? Of course they do! It just takes us much more effort to see it. A kroket doesn’t cry out anymore. But a cow, a pig, a chicken, and a fish: morally speaking, they are essentially no different from our dogs and cats. If we believe we must care well for dogs and cats, then we should, in fact, believe we must care well for all those other animals too.

And that is why it is so strange to put other animals into the dog’s or cat’s food bowl. Yes, you have taken on the responsibility to care for them—but does that mean you must abandon the other animals? That is why I want to pause at the simple fact that “pet food” once also had a face—and at all those animals who disappear, through the food bowls we place in front of our pets, through their stomachs.

Because imagine it, very plainly: if the animal behind that food were a dog—a Labrador, a Dachshund, it doesn’t matter—then the conversation would be over immediately. Then we would all feel: you don’t do that.

And that is what is strange: that boundary we find self-evident with dogs and cats is not a mysterious boundary. It is simply this: we recognize the animal as an individual.

With a chicken, a pig, or a fish, we recognize that less easily, because it doesn’t come close. We don’t see it. We don’t meet it. And because of that it can disappear into a product—or into a kibble—without our moral sense switching “on.”

But once you accept that the difference is mainly in our distance, then the food bowl suddenly becomes a very concrete place. Not for grand statements, but for consistent action: if we can properly safeguard the health of our own animals, why would we still pretend that sacrificing other animals should be the standard?

For an average medium-sized dog, over the course of its life—depending on size, lifespan, and what you feed—it can amount to more than 100 other animals from factory farming. For a large dog, it can rise toward 400. Enormous numbers of animals to feed our own animals. With not only major consequences for other animals, but also for the environment.

At VegaVriend, we track the impact of buying plant-based products instead of animal-based ones. According to our calculations, over the course of one year, together with our customers we have spared the lives of approximately 30,000 animals from factory farming and about 1,500,000 kilograms of CO₂-equivalent. That is comparable to about 250 trips around the world in a passenger car.

So by switching pets to plant-based food, we can spare an incredible amount of suffering and environmental impact. But that only has value if the health of our own animals is also properly safeguarded. We don’t want to “trade” our care for our own animals for a good feeling about impact. No—that wouldn’t feel right, of course.

Fortunately, more and more scientific research shows that plant-based food is not unhealthier at all. On the contrary: many studies show it is at least comparable, and often even comes out favorably.

People often think that our dogs and cats need certain INGREDIENTS, but in fact what they need are certain NUTRIENTS. All the nutrients dogs and cats need can also be obtained from plant-based sources.

If we do not deprive our own animals of anything with a plant-based diet, then it is unnecessary to sacrifice other animals. And once you accept that that food bowl is not only about your dog or cat, but also about animals you will never see, then those numbers take on meaning. Today I wanted to make those animals visible.