5.
Ethical Issues
In (Nonhuman) Animal Welfare
& (Nonhuman) Animal Rights
Larry D. Sanders
Spring 2002
Dept. of Ag Economics Oklahoma State University
1
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.
2
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
3
The Core of the Ethical Issue:
1.
2.
3.


“Nonhuman animals are only of instrumental
value.”
If so, do they still deserve treatment with
minimal standards?
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
4
The “treatment” question:
1.
2.
Decide whether the entity (nonhuman
animal) has moral standing.
If so, decide reasons to thwart the interests
of the being with moral standing.
5
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
6
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
7
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
8
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
9
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)
10
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?
11
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
12
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)
13
Utilitarian Measurement of Welfare

Utilitarian assumptions:
–
–
–

Farm practices evaluation
1.
2.
3.
4.
–
–
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
Assess benefits (food & producer income)
Assess harm (include animal suffering)
Compare to alternatives (opportunity cost)
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) 14
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
15
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
16
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
17
See Case Study “Animal Rights/Animal
Welfare” student presentation/materials for
additional information & views.
18
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.
TMR
VP
USDA farm animal policy:
http://www.nal.usda.gov/awic/farmanimals/farm.htm
19
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
20
food, fiber, or other agricultural purposes.