I would certainly have fewer concerns with the existence of subsection 447(3) at all if that last part requiring their destruction were removed.
I think the problem here is not that they're being seized, which I think is something that everybody supports, removing them from that situation. The problem is just the automatic death sentence.
I think that law enforcement agencies rely on a variety of provisions in the Criminal Code to justify seizing animals. It can be done pursuant to provincial legislation as well. There would still be existing tools that they could avail themselves of, even if that subsection were removed.
I think it would be fine to leave it in if the last part, destroying the animals, were removed, but if the subsection were deleted in its entirety, it wouldn't significantly affect law enforcement activities in any way. They would still have that ability to seize animals.