I do. I believe this is a precedent that has been intended to be set. One of the big proponents of this bill, responsible for the petition, states on its website, when asked why it advocates for horses only, that it considers horses pivotal in this movement. It says that if society and our lawmakers can agree that we shouldn't slaughter or eat horses, logically, the next step will be to examine the welfare of all animals for food.
When asked the question directly in relation to Bill C-355 on whether the bill wouldn't have been more effective if the statement “by air” had not been part of it, the answer in part is that it has been their experience that if their ask too much from the government, they risk getting none of it. They say small steps are more effective in achieving their goals, because there is less of industry convincing their leaders that the steps being taken are too drastic and unfair.
They go on to say that when Bill C-355 becomes law, the Canadian Horse Defence Coalition and other like-minded organizations will continue to defend horses from slaughter and export for the same purposes by any means of transport.
As the old adage goes, “If they tell you who they are, believe them.” It has been directly stated that this is to set a precedent.