1

5. Ethical Issues

In (Nonhuman) Animal Welfare& (Nonhuman) Animal Rights

Larry D. Sanders

Spring 2002Dept. of Ag Economics Oklahoma State University

2

INTRODUCTION

Purpose: – to understand ethical issues related to animal welfare

& animal rights Learning Objectives:

1. To review the concepts of animal rights and animal welfare.

2. To understand the key conflicts related to animal rights and animal welfare.

3. To understand the ethical dimensions of animal rights and animal welfare.

3

How it might have been in another time, another place

For a long time he looked at the dead mammoth, sadness and regret welling in his heart. Somberly, he went down to kneel by the mammoth’s huge head and stroke it gently. From the sacred pouch hanging around his neck, he took the special amulets, breathed on them, and began the process of singing the cow’s soul to the Blessed Star People.

The darts had worked. …--W. Michael Geer & Kathleen O’Neal Gear, People of the Wolf

4

The Core of the Ethical Issue:

1. “Nonhuman animals are only of instrumental value.”

2. If so, do they still deserve treatment with minimal standards?

3. If (2) not so, should they have the same rights as humans, & how do we implement this?

If “yes” to (2), ethical views are likely anthropocentric & utilitarian

If “yes” to (3), ethical view is likely ecocentric

5

The “treatment” question:

1. Decide whether the entity (nonhuman animal) has moral standing.

2. If so, decide reasons to thwart the interests of the being with moral standing.

6

Sampling of Recent Conflicts:

The desire for animal research to solve human problems vs. the desire to end/limit lab experiments on animals

The desire for wildlife management thru licensed hunting vs. the desire to stop violent acts on wildlife

The desire for animal skins & furs as clothing vs. the desire to stop the trapping of wildlife & the domestication of animals for clothing

The desire for pets vs. the desire to limit or end the raising of animals for pets or humane treatment of pets

The desire for animal production for human use, including meat vs. the desire to end such production or set standards on production

7

The Key Debate

Animal rights view:– Revolutionary change, often to the point of

vegetarianism, giving nonhuman animals moral standing that allows human-like treatment

Animal welfare view:– Moderate reform in animal agriculture, but

maintain commercial use of animals for human consumption & nonfood use, while establishing some standards for treatment of animals

8

Legal Structure for Animal Agriculture in US

1. Domesticated animals are chattel (personal property).

--own, buy, sell animals w/disposal left to discretion of owner.

--owner can’t create nuisance w/animals

2. Production practices that harm animals are prohibited.

--humane destruction

--no cruelty to animals (1641)

3. Environments often regulated

--transport/slaughter, animal health, food wholesomeness

9

Conduct & Performance of US Animal Agriculture

Animal agriculture purposes: food, coproduct, economic stabilizer

Function of changing technology & profit Confinement evolving as primary system for

commercial production of poultry, hogs, feeder cattle (CAFO: confined animal facility operation)– Better & worse for animals– Proponents see animals treated w/care for profitability– Critics see confinement management as cruel &

inhumane

10

Ethical Issues in Animal Agriculture & Animal Care

Personal tastes & preferences– Bound by history, culture & religion

Individual producer practices– Animal power & animal production for human use for

profit, but “humane treatment” expected Public policy issues

– “Humane treatment”?– Hunger issues (i.e. protein sources, grain thru animals)– Animal experimentation for human purposes– “Intelligent species” special (i.e. apes, dolphins)

11

Animal Welfare vs. Animal Rights

Why should we care about farm animals?– Capable of feeling pain?– Level of intelligence?– Value life?– Worthy of respect?– Healthier animals mean healthier food?

12

Animal Welfare vs. Animal Rights (cont.)

Moral concern & the social contract come together in contrast between rights & welfare– Natural order & hierarchy – Descartes, Kant rejected natural order; also rejected

animals as members of moral community– Bentham: pleasure/pain fulfills moral requirements for

animals– Reflections about animals were about human-human

treatment, w/animal discussions as an aside

13

Utilitarian Measurement of Welfare

Bentham: hedonism (benefit=pleasure; harm=pain; concludes animals deserve moral consideration)

Mill: human well-being valued more highly than animals, but some consideration to animals

Singer/Fox: utilitarian reasoning– Certain farming methods cause suffering

– This suffering should be taken into consideration at all decision levels (producers practices, consumer choices, farm animal regulation)

– Benefits vs. costs (intensive ag too costly; favors vegetarianism not because meat-eating wrong, but wrong to bring pain/suffering to animals)

14

Utilitarian Measurement of Welfare

Utilitarian assumptions:– Universality (all affected parties’ experiences count)– Maximize utility (greatest good for the greatest number)– Axiology determined by whether party more or less satisfied

w/solution Farm practices evaluation

1. Assess benefits (food & producer income)2. Assess harm (include animal suffering)3. Compare to alternatives (opportunity cost)4. Choose option w/greatest net benefit

– May or may not conclude against animal production, CAFOs, meat eating; depends on implementation, values

– May or may not reduce suffering (assurance problem)

15

Animal Interests & Animal Rights

Some contend animals have rights based on intrinsic value (“wrong to kill animals, period”)

May be based on empathy for others (“treat other human & nonhuman animals as you would like to be treated”)

May be based on self-interest May need to extend argument from contractual to to

metaphysical realm (deny rights, denies capacity to act rationally, denies humanity)

May need to assume animals have language to assume rationality

May need to assume animals are Regan’s “subject of a life” (create their own reality), thus deserve rights

16

Proposed Criteria for Moral Standing

Membership in Homo sapiens Personhood Potential personhood Rationality Linguistic capacity Sentience Being alive Being an integral part of an ecosystem Being an ecosystem

17

Additional Thoughts (Sanders)

Some sociologists/others see the primary criteria of “what makes us human” as “symbolic interaction”– While originally thought to show this ability limited to Homo

sapiens, case studies of gorillas learning/developing sign language cloud this perception (dolphins also?)

Acknowledging “moral standing” extends to nonhuman animals and perhaps other life doesn’t assure that humans will no longer eat, kill or otherwise use these species– Native Americans, other indigenous peoples praised the

“souls”/”spirits of animals, other species as they used them for nourishment and clothing

– If the extreme ecocentric view of all life as sacred and/or has moral standing, still begs the ethical question of what is permissible to be killed/exploited for food & other human uses

18

See Case Study “Animal Rights/Animal Welfare” student presentation/materials for additional information & views.

19

References

W. Michael Geer & Kathleen O’Neal Gear, People of the Wolf, Tom Doherty Associates Book, New York, 1990.

M. Harris, Cannibals & Kings: The Origins of Cultures, Vintage Books, New York, 1977.

C. Sagan, The Dragons of Eden, Ballantine Books, New York, 1977.

TMRVPUSDA farm animal policy:

http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/farmanimals/farm.htm

20

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA)

US law to protect certain animals from inhumane treatment and neglect; passed in 1966 & amended in 1970, 1976, 1985 & 1990. USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) administers AWA, its standards, and its regulations.

Requires that minimum standards of care and treatment be provided for certain animals bred for commercial sale, used in research, transported commercially, or exhibited to the public. Individuals who operate facilities in these categories must provide their animals with adequate care and treatment in the areas of housing, handling, sanitation, nutrition, water, veterinary care, and protection from extreme weather and temperatures. Although Federal requirements establish acceptable standards, they are not ideal. Regulated businesses are encouraged to exceed the specified minimum standards.

Exemptions include: the AWA regulates the care and treatment of warmblooded animals, except those, such as farm animals, used for food, fiber, or other agricultural purposes.