A new push from climate activists now argues that pet ownership is a major cause of global warming. According to reports amplified by the Associated Press, owning a dog or cat may soon be considered a “climate-intensive decision.”

Experts quoted in the report say pets contribute to environmental damage because they eat meat, and that their diets make them as harmful to the planet as cars or power plants.

“All pets eat every day. And most of them eat meat. The environmental impact of meat includes the land the animal lived on, the food it ate, the waste it generated and other factors,” said Allison Reser, director of sustainability and innovation at the Pet Sustainability Coalition.

Reser said feeding animals is “one of the most climate intensive decisions we make.”

Climate scientists claim that meat-based pet food is now part of a global environmental problem. They argue that livestock used to feed pets require too much land and water, and that their waste increases carbon emissions.

The new idea being pushed by activists is to shift pets — and their owners — toward “lower-impact” diets. That means replacing meat with insects, plants, or lab-grown substitutes.

The AP report went further, quoting Cornell University assistant professor Alison Manchester, who suggested that dogs could thrive on vegan diets.

“Dogs can get plenty of protein and the right balance of protein without actually ingesting any meat,” Manchester said.

She admitted, however, that cats still depend heavily on meat for survival. “I don’t know of a balanced, commercially available vegan cat food,” Manchester said. She claimed that pet owners can still make “eco-friendly choices” by switching from beef to chicken or fish-based diets.

According to her, “beef is the most pollutive protein,” while poultry and seafood are “lower-impact.”

These ideas have set off alarm bells among veterinarians, pet owners, and nutrition experts who warn that cats are obligate carnivores — meaning they require animal protein to stay healthy. Forcing pets into plant-based diets could cause severe malnutrition, muscle loss, and organ failure.

Critics say this new campaign is another example of extreme climate ideology reaching into ordinary people’s lives. First it was cars, then farms, and now it’s family pets.

The phrase “carbon pawprint” is already being used in social media campaigns urging owners to track their pets’ emissions. Some activists suggest that future policies could involve “pet taxes” or food restrictions tied to climate goals.

Meanwhile, ordinary Americans are mocking the idea. Many argue that it’s absurd to compare household pets — which bring companionship, safety, and comfort — to industrial polluters or global energy systems.

The notion that feeding your dog could harm the planet, critics say, shows how far environmental groups have drifted from reality.

For now, most pet owners remain unconvinced that Fido’s dinner is a global threat. But if activists get their way, families could soon face pressure to rethink not just what they drive — but what they feed their pets.