1
|
Re-Thinking Felid–Human Entanglements through the Lenses of Compassionate Conservation and Multispecies Studies. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:ani12212996. [PMID: 36359119 PMCID: PMC9655180 DOI: 10.3390/ani12212996] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2022] [Revised: 09/20/2022] [Accepted: 10/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Felids have long and complex historical associations with humans, ranging from fear and persecution to worship and care. With many felid species in widespread decline, re-thinking the messy entanglements of feline predators and human societies is a necessary step for fostering coexistence as current conservation frameworks that rely on the separation of people from nature are failing felids. Here, we explore two distinct but related interdisciplinary fields that, when put into dialogue with one another, offer novel perspectives and insights on felid–human relationships and conservation initiatives more broadly. We identified numerous similarities and emergent properties within compassionate conservation and multispecies studies, despite these fields arising from the sciences and social sciences and humanities respectively. Combined, reorientation of conservation values and practices to be morally inclusive of individual animals and their subjective experiences has the potential to support cohabitation and tolerance for felids, promoting multispecies flourishing. Abstract With many felid species in widespread decline, re-thinking the messy felid–human entanglements is a necessary step for fostering coexistence as current conservation frameworks centered on human exceptionalism and widespread violence toward wild animals are conspicuously failing felids. This paper argues for fostering a critical awareness of how we understand our relationships with nonhuman animals, particularly in the context of conservation. We bring two distinct but related interdisciplinary fields into a dialogue to critically question the values and conceptual assumptions that frame the practices of felid conservation today. Compassionate conservation and multispecies studies share many synergies and conceptual overlaps despite emerging from different academic domains. We identified four key areas for further exploration: (1) A shift in emphasis from practices of killing to the underlying assumptions that make forms of killing permissible and ethically unproblematic. (2) Re-engagement with individuals, not just species, in conservation settings. (3) Unsettling human exceptionalism through an emphasis on the agency of animals and an ethic involving compassion. (4) Acknowledging the ways in which humans co-become with other animals and cultivating relationships of multispecies cohabitation and flourishing.
Collapse
|
2
|
Bobier CA, Allen BL. Compassionate Conservation is indistinguishable from traditional forms of conservation in practice. Front Psychol 2022; 13:750313. [PMID: 36262450 PMCID: PMC9574382 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.750313] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2021] [Accepted: 08/29/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
Animal welfare and ethics are important factors influencing wildlife conservation practice, and critics are increasingly challenging the underlying ethics and motivations supporting common conservation practices. “Compassionate Conservationists” argue that all conservationists should respect the rights of individual sentient animals and approach conservation problems from a position of compassion, and that doing so requires implementing practices that avoid direct harm to individual animals. In this way Compassionate Conservationists seek to contrast themselves with “Traditional Conservationists” who often express consequentialist decision-making processes that ostensibly aim to dispassionately minimize net animal harms, resulting in the common use of practices that directly harm or kill some animals. Conservationists and other observers might therefore conclude that the two sides of this debate are distinct and/or that their policy proscriptions produce different welfare outcomes for animals. To explore the validity of this conclusion we review the ethical philosophies underpinning two types of Compassionate Conservation—deontology and virtue ethics. Deontology focusses on animal rights or the moral duties or obligations of conservationists, whereas virtue ethics focusses on acting in ways that are virtuous or compassionate. We demonstrate that both types permit the intentional harm and killing of animals when faced with common conservation problems where animals will be harmed no matter what the conservationist does or does not do. We then describe the applied decision-making processes exhibited by Compassionate Conservationists (of both types) and Traditional Conservationists to show that they may each lead to the implementation of similar conservation practices (including lethal control) and produce similar outcomes for animals, despite the perceived differences in their ethical motivations. The widespread presence of wildlife conservation problems that cannot be resolved without causing at least some harm to some animals means that conservationists of all persuasions must routinely make trade-offs between the welfare of some animals over others. Compassionate Conservationists do this from an explicit position of animal rights and/or compassion, whereas Traditional Conservationists respect animal rights and exhibit this same compassion implicitly. These observations lead to the conclusion that Compassionate Conservation is indistinguishable from traditional forms of conservation in practice, and that the apparent disagreement among conservationists primarily concerns the effectiveness of various wildlife management practices at minimizing animal harm, and not the underlying ethics, motivations or morality of those practices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher A. Bobier
- Department of Theology and Philosophy, Saint Mary's University of Minnesota, Winona, MN, United States
- *Correspondence: Christopher A. Bobier,
| | - Benjamin L. Allen
- Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, Australia
- Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kennedy BPA, Boyle N, Fleming PJS, Harvey AM, Jones B, Ramp D, Dixon R, McGreevy PD. Ethical Treatment of Invasive and Native Fauna in Australia: Perspectives through the One Welfare Lens. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:ani12111405. [PMID: 35681870 PMCID: PMC9179540 DOI: 10.3390/ani12111405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/30/2022] [Revised: 05/24/2022] [Accepted: 05/27/2022] [Indexed: 12/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary A public forum can reveal a wide range of perspectives on the ethical treatment of animals. This article describes how a panel of experts navigated through a discussion on the many and varied challenges of attempting to manage invasive and native fauna in Australia. The panel acknowledged the variety of these fauna, their effects on others and the consequences of control measures for three parties: animals, humans and the environment. The One Welfare concept has been developed to guide humans in the ethical treatment of non-human animals, each other and the environment. The forum accepted the need to consider this triple line, and exemplifies the merits of a One Welfare approach to discussions such as this. We used a series of questions about past, present and anticipated practices in wildlife control as the core of the panel discussion. We revealed five different but intersecting perspectives: conservation action, wildlife research, invasive animal ecology, mainstream animal protection and compassionate conservation. This article shows how understanding of lines of contention on various core topics can provide a framework for further discourse that may bear fruit in the form of One Welfare solutions. Abstract The One Welfare concept is proposed to guide humans in the ethical treatment of non-human animals, each other and the environment. One Welfare was conceptualized for veterinarians but could be a foundational concept through which to promote the ethical treatment of animals that are outside of direct human care and responsibility. However, wild-living animals raise additional ethical conundrums because of their multifarious values and roles, and relationships that humans have with them. At an open facilitated forum, the 2018 Robert Dixon Memorial Animal Welfare Symposium, a panel of five experts from different fields shared their perspectives on “loving and hating animals in the wild” and responded to unscripted questions from the audience. The Symposium’s objectives were to elucidate views on the ethical treatment of the native and invasive animals of Australia and to identify some of the resultant dilemmas facing conservationists, educators, veterinarians and society. Here, we document the presented views and case studies and synthesize common themes in a One Welfare framework. Additionally, we identified points of contention that can guide further discourse. With this guide in place, the identification and discussion of those disparate views was a first step toward practical resolutions on how to manage wild-living Australian fauna ethically. We concluded that there was great utility in the One Welfare approach for any discourse about wild animal welfare. It requires attention to each element of the triple bottom line and ensures that advocacy for one party does not vanquish the voices from other sectors. We argue that, by facilitating a focus on the ecology in the context of wild animal issues, One Welfare is more useful in this context than the veterinary context for which it was originally developed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Brooke P. A. Kennedy
- School of Environment and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia;
- Correspondence:
| | - Nick Boyle
- Taronga Conservation Society Australia, Bradleys Head Road, Mosman, NSW 2088, Australia;
| | - Peter J. S. Fleming
- Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Orange Agricultural Institute, 1447 Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia;
- Ecosystem Management, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia
| | - Andrea M. Harvey
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, TD School, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia; (A.M.H.); (D.R.)
| | - Bidda Jones
- Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia;
| | - Daniel Ramp
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, TD School, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW 2007, Australia; (A.M.H.); (D.R.)
| | - Roselyn Dixon
- School of Education, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia;
| | - Paul D. McGreevy
- School of Environment and Rural Science, University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia;
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bobier C, Allen B. The virtue of compassion in compassionate conservation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2022; 36:e13776. [PMID: 34057247 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13776] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/22/2021] [Revised: 05/07/2021] [Accepted: 05/14/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
The role of ethics is becoming an increasingly important feature of biodiversity conservation dialogue and practice. Compassionate conservationists argue for a prohibition of, or at least a strong presumption against, the adoption of conservation policies that intentionally harm animals. They assert that to be compassionate is to care about animals and that it is antithetical to caring for animals to intentionally harm them. Compassionate conservationists thus criticize many existing conservation practices and policies. Two things together challenge the philosophical foundation of compassionate conservation. First, compassionate conservationists ground their theory in virtue ethics, yet virtue ethics permits exceptions to moral rules, so there cannot be an in-principle prohibition on adopting intentional harm-inducing policies and practices. But not all compassionate conservationists advocate for a prohibition on intentionally harming animals, only a strong presumption against it. This leads to the second point: compassion can motivate a person to adopt a harm-inducing conservation policy or practice when doing so is the best available option in a situation in which animals will be harmed no matter what policy or practice is adopted. Combining these insights with the empirical observation that conservationists regularly find themselves in tragic situations, we arrive at the conclusion that conservationists may regularly advocate for harm-inducing policies and practices from a position of compassion. Article Impact Statement: Compassionate conservationists should accept that the virtuously compassionate person may adopt harm-causing conservation policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Christopher Bobier
- Department of Theology and Philosophy, Saint Mary's University of Minnesota, Winona, Minnesota, USA
| | - Benjamin Allen
- Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia
- Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
The Impacts of Drought on the Health and Demography of Eastern Grey Kangaroos. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:ani12030256. [PMID: 35158580 PMCID: PMC8833700 DOI: 10.3390/ani12030256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2021] [Revised: 01/12/2022] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Eastern grey kangaroos, like most wildlife, are facing an increasingly uncertain future under rapid climate change. How individuals and populations cope with extreme climatic events will influence their capacity to adapt and persist. Here, we analyzed how drought impacted eastern grey kangaroo populations by focusing on their body condition, demography, activity rates at water points, and the likelihood of parasitic infections. We found that body condition was lower as environmental conditions became more extreme and that fewer males in the population were observed. The proportion of juveniles within the population increased as more favorable conditions returned. Kangaroos with poor body conditions were more likely to become hosts to ticks, while higher parasite egg burdens in scats occurred in autumn. Our study has shown that the impacts eastern grey kangaroos face during climatic events such as drought can be severe and may have long-term consequences. Abstract Extreme climatic events such as droughts and floods are expected to become more intense and severe under climate change, especially in the southern and eastern parts of Australia. We aimed to quantify the relationship between body condition scores (BCS), demography, activity rate, and parasitic infections of eastern grey kangaroos on a large conservation property under different climate extremes by employing camera traps established at artificial water points (AWPs). The survey period included a severe drought, broken by a significant flooding event. Climatic and environmental conditions were documented using remotely sensed indices of moisture availability and vegetation productivity. These conditions were found to affect all health and population parameters measured. BCS, juvenile proportions, and sex ratios were most correlated with 6-month lags in climatic conditions, while the activity rate of kangaroos at AWPs was most correlated with vegetation productivity. Ticks were mostly found on individuals with a poorer BCS, while the concentration of parasitic eggs in feces was higher in autumn than in spring. Our study offers a glimpse into some of the environmental drivers of eastern grey kangaroo populations and their health, information that may become increasingly important in today’s climate. It further emphasizes the importance of this knowledge for wildlife conservation efforts appropriate to managing the impact of climate change alongside other threats.
Collapse
|
6
|
Genetic Structure and Gene Flow in Eastern Grey Kangaroos in an Isolated Conservation Reserve. DIVERSITY 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/d13110570] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Dispersal is a key process for population persistence, particularly in fragmented landscapes. Connectivity between habitat fragments can be easily estimated by quantifying gene flow among subpopulations. However, the focus in ecological research has been on endangered species, typically excluding species that are not of current conservation concern. Consequently, our current understanding of the behaviour and persistence of many species is incomplete. A case in point is the eastern grey kangaroo (Macropus giganteus), an Australian herbivore that is subjected to considerable harvesting and population control efforts. In this study, we used non-invasive genetic sampling of eastern grey kangaroos within and outside of the Mourachan Conservation Property to assess functional connectivity. In total, we genotyped 232 samples collected from 17 locations at 20 microsatellite loci. The clustering algorithm indicated the presence of two clusters, with some overlap between the groups within and outside of the reserve. This genetic assessment should be repeated in 10–15 years to observe changes in population structure and gene flow over time, monitoring the potential impact of the planned exclusion fencing around the reserve.
Collapse
|
7
|
Croft DB, Witte I. The Perils of Being Populous: Control and Conservation of Abundant Kangaroo Species. Animals (Basel) 2021; 11:ani11061753. [PMID: 34208227 PMCID: PMC8230889 DOI: 10.3390/ani11061753] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 06/08/2021] [Accepted: 06/09/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Australia's first people managed landscapes for kangaroo species as important elements of their diet, accoutrements and ceremony. This developed and persisted for about 65,000 years. The second wave of colonists from the United Kingdom, Ireland and many subsequent countries introduced familiar domesticated livestock and they have imposed their agricultural practices on the same landscapes since 1788. This heralded an ongoing era of management of kangaroos that are perceived as competitors to livestock and unwanted consumers of crops. Even so, a kangaroo image remains the iconic identifier of Australia. Kangaroo management is shrouded in dogma and propaganda and creates a tension along a loose rural-city divide. This divide is further dissected by the promotion of the consumption of kangaroo products as an ecological good marred by valid concerns about hygiene and animal welfare. In the last decade, the fervour to suppress and micro-manage populations of some kangaroo species has mounted. This includes suppression within protected areas that have generally been considered as safe havens. This review explores these tensions between the conservation of iconic and yet abundant wildlife, and conflict with people and the various interfaces at which they meet kangaroos.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- David Benjamin Croft
- School of Biological Earth & Environmental Sciences, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia
- Correspondence:
| | - Ingrid Witte
- Rooseach@Rootourism, Adelaide River, NT 0846, Australia;
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Hampton JO, Jones B, McGreevy PD. Social License and Animal Welfare: Developments from the Past Decade in Australia. Animals (Basel) 2020; 10:E2237. [PMID: 33260531 PMCID: PMC7760378 DOI: 10.3390/ani10122237] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/02/2020] [Revised: 11/21/2020] [Accepted: 11/26/2020] [Indexed: 12/03/2022] Open
Abstract
"Social license to operate" (SLO) refers to the implicit process by which a community gives an industry approval to conduct its current business activities. It has become an important focus for many natural resource management fields (especially mining), but there is less awareness of its role in animal use industries. This article describes how animal welfare has recently become arguably the most crucial consideration underpinning the SLO for Australian animal use industries. It describes several industries in Australia that have faced animal welfare scrutiny in the past decade (2010-2020) to illustrate how persistent issues can erode SLO, lead to regulatory bans, and decimate previously profitable industries. Industries described include the live export of livestock, greyhound and horse racing, kangaroo harvesting, and dairy and sheep farming. In these cases, there has been intense public discourse but little scholarly progress. This article examines factors that may have contributed to these developments and suggests approaches that may assist these industries in maintaining their SLO. Animal welfare has become a mainstream societal concern in Australia, and effective management of the community's expectations will be essential for the maintenance of SLO for many animal use industries.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan O. Hampton
- Faculty of Veterinary and Agricultural Sciences, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia
| | - Bidda Jones
- RSPCA Australia, P.O. Box 265, Deakin West, ACT 2600, Australia;
- Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia;
| | - Paul D. McGreevy
- Sydney School of Veterinary Science, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales 2006, Australia;
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Austin CM, Ramp D. Flight responses of eastern gray kangaroos to benign or harmful human behavior. Ecol Evol 2019; 9:13824-13834. [PMID: 31938484 PMCID: PMC6953569 DOI: 10.1002/ece3.5818] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/02/2019] [Revised: 10/01/2019] [Accepted: 10/04/2019] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Globally, wilderness is being converted for rural and agricultural land use. In countryside landscapes, many habitat structures remain intact, providing suitable habitat for wildlife species that can accurately assess novel risks and develop tolerance to benign disturbances. Associative learning that promotes avoidance and also facilitates desensitization to benign disturbance is key to persisting in these landscapes. Conversely, learning to distinguish and avoid negative interactions with humans, like hunting, is vital. To determine if eastern gray kangaroos are capable of learning from previous interactions with humans, we tested the flight responses of wild kangaroos which have previously experienced either low or high frequencies of harmful and benign encounters with humans. We found that eastern gray kangaroos rapidly habituated to benign disturbance as there was no significant difference in assessment distance between groups that previously experienced low or high frequencies of disturbance. The threat of harmful disturbances was not as quickly learnt, as groups that experienced low frequencies of harmful disturbance delayed flight longer than those experiencing frequent harm. We found that the influence of environmental and group parameters on a kangaroo's decision to flee depended on the intent and frequency of previous interactions with humans. Our study indicates that kangaroos are learning from previous encounters with humans, correctly assessing novel risks which may be contributing to their persistence in countryside landscapes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Caitlin M. Austin
- Centre for Compassionate ConservationFaculty of ScienceUniversity of Technology SydneyUltimoNSWAustralia
| | - Daniel Ramp
- Centre for Compassionate ConservationFaculty of ScienceUniversity of Technology SydneyUltimoNSWAustralia
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Gordon IJ. Adopting a utilitarian approach to culling wild animals for conservation in National Parks. CONSERVATION SCIENCE AND PRACTICE 2019. [DOI: 10.1111/csp2.105] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Iain J. Gordon
- Division of Tropical Environments & SocietiesJames Cook University Townsville Queensland Australia
- Fenner School of Environment and SocietyAustralian National University Acton Australian Capital Territory Australia
- The James Hutton Institute Aberdeen UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Hayward MW, Callen A, Allen BL, Ballard G, Broekhuis F, Bugir C, Clarke RH, Clulow J, Clulow S, Daltry JC, Davies-Mostert HT, Fleming PJS, Griffin AS, Howell LG, Kerley GIH, Klop-Toker K, Legge S, Major T, Meyer N, Montgomery RA, Moseby K, Parker DM, Périquet S, Read J, Scanlon RJ, Seeto R, Shuttleworth C, Somers MJ, Tamessar CT, Tuft K, Upton R, Valenzuela-Molina M, Wayne A, Witt RR, Wüster W. Deconstructing compassionate conservation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2019; 33:760-768. [PMID: 31206825 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13366] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/03/2019] [Accepted: 05/19/2019] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
Compassionate conservation focuses on 4 tenets: first, do no harm; individuals matter; inclusivity of individual animals; and peaceful coexistence between humans and animals. Recently, compassionate conservation has been promoted as an alternative to conventional conservation philosophy. We believe examples presented by compassionate conservationists are deliberately or arbitrarily chosen to focus on mammals; inherently not compassionate; and offer ineffective conservation solutions. Compassionate conservation arbitrarily focuses on charismatic species, notably large predators and megaherbivores. The philosophy is not compassionate when it leaves invasive predators in the environment to cause harm to vastly more individuals of native species or uses the fear of harm by apex predators to terrorize mesopredators. Hindering the control of exotic species (megafauna, predators) in situ will not improve the conservation condition of the majority of biodiversity. The positions taken by so-called compassionate conservationists on particular species and on conservation actions could be extended to hinder other forms of conservation, including translocations, conservation fencing, and fertility control. Animal welfare is incredibly important to conservation, but ironically compassionate conservation does not offer the best welfare outcomes to animals and is often ineffective in achieving conservation goals. Consequently, compassionate conservation may threaten public and governmental support for conservation because of the limited understanding of conservation problems by the general public.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matt W Hayward
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
- Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela University, University Way, Summerstrand, Port Elizabeth, 6019, South Africa
- Mammal Research Institute, University of Pretoria, Lynwood Road, Hatfield 0028, Pretoria, South Africa
| | - Alex Callen
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Benjamin L Allen
- Institute for Life Sciences and the Environment, University of Southern Queensland, West Street, Toowoomba, QLD, 4350, Australia
| | - Guy Ballard
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Northern Ring Road, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
- Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Department of Primary Industries, New South Wales Government, Orange, NSW, 2800, Australia
| | - Femke Broekhuis
- WildCRU, Department of Zoology, University of Oxford, Tubney House, Abington Road, Oxford, OX135QL, U.K
| | - Cassandra Bugir
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Rohan H Clarke
- School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Wellington Road, Clayton, VIC, 3168, Australia
| | - John Clulow
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Simon Clulow
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
- Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Balclava Road, Sydney, NSWs, 2019, Australia
| | - Jennifer C Daltry
- Fauna & Flora International, The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, Cambridge, CB23QZ, U.K
| | - Harriet T Davies-Mostert
- Mammal Research Institute, University of Pretoria, Lynwood Road, Hatfield 0028, Pretoria, South Africa
- Endangered Wildlife Trust, Pinelands Office Park, Building K2, Ardeer Road, Modderfontein 1609, Johannesburg, South Africa
| | - Peter J S Fleming
- School of Environmental and Rural Science, University of New England, Northern Ring Road, Armidale, NSW, 2351, Australia
- Vertebrate Pest Research Unit, Department of Primary Industries, New South Wales Government, Orange, NSW, 2800, Australia
| | - Andrea S Griffin
- School of Psychology, University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Lachlan G Howell
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Graham I H Kerley
- Centre for African Conservation Ecology, Nelson Mandela University, University Way, Summerstrand, Port Elizabeth, 6019, South Africa
| | - Kaya Klop-Toker
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Sarah Legge
- Centre for Biodiversity Conservation Science, University of Queensland, University Drive, Saint Lucia, QLD, 4072, Australia
- Fenner School of Environment and Society, The Australian National University, Linnaeus Way, Acton, Canberra, ACT, 2601, Australia
| | - Tom Major
- College of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, College Road, Gwynedd, LL572DG, U.K
| | - Ninon Meyer
- Fondation Yaguara Panama, Ciudad del Saber, calle Luis Bonilla, Panama City, 0843-03081, Panama
| | - Robert A Montgomery
- Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, 220 Trowbridge Road, East Lansing, MI, 48824, U.S.A
| | - Katherine Moseby
- School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of New South Wales, ANZAC Parade, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia
- Arid Recovery, Roxby Downs, SA, 5725, Australia
| | - Daniel M Parker
- Wildlife and Reserve Management Research Group, Department of Zoology and Entomology, Rhodes University, Drosty Road, Grahamstown, 6139, South Africa
- School of Biology and Environmental Sciences, University of Mpumalanga, D725 Roads, Mbombela, 1200, South Africa
| | | | - John Read
- Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide, Kintore Avenue, Adelaide, SA, 5005, Australia
| | - Robert J Scanlon
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Rebecca Seeto
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Craig Shuttleworth
- College of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, College Road, Gwynedd, LL572DG, U.K
| | - Michael J Somers
- Mammal Research Institute, University of Pretoria, Lynwood Road, Hatfield 0028, Pretoria, South Africa
- Centre for Invasion Biology, University of Pretoria, Lynwood Road, Hatfield 0028, Pretoria, South Africa
| | - Cottrell T Tamessar
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | | | - Rose Upton
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Marcia Valenzuela-Molina
- Instituto Politécnico Nacional, Centro Interdisciplinario de Ciencias Marinas, Av. Instituto Politécnico Nacional s/n Col. Playa Palo de Santa Rita, C.P. 23096, La Paz, B.C.S., México
| | - Adrian Wayne
- Department of Biodiversity, Conservation and Attractions, Brain Street, Manjimup, WA, 6258, Australia
| | - Ryan R Witt
- School of Environmental and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia
| | - Wolfgang Wüster
- College of Natural Sciences, Bangor University, College Road, Gwynedd, LL572DG, U.K
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Hampton JO, Warburton B, Sandøe P. Compassionate versus consequentialist conservation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2019; 33:751-759. [PMID: 30411399 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13249] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2018] [Revised: 10/31/2018] [Accepted: 11/02/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Ethical treatment of wildlife and consideration of animal welfare have become important themes in conservation, but ethical perspectives on how best to protect wild animals and promote their welfare are diverse. There are advantages to the consequentialist harms ethical framework applied in managing wild herbivores for conservation purposes. To minimize harms while achieving conservation goals, we argue that overabundant wild herbivores should in many cases be managed through consumptive in situ killing. Advantages of this policy are that the negative welfare states imposed on animals last only a short time; remaining animals are not deprived of positive welfare states (e.g., linked to rearing offspring); poor welfare states of animals in overabundant populations are avoided (e.g., starvation); negative welfare impacts on heterospecifics through resource depletion (i.e., competition) are prevented; harvesting meat reduces the number of (agricultural) animals raised to supply meat; and minimal costs maximize funding for other wildlife management and conservation priorities. Alternative ethical approaches to our consequentialist framework include deontology (containing animal rights) and virtue ethics, some of which underpin compassionate conservation. These alternative ethical approaches emphasize the importance of avoiding intentional killing of animals but, if no population reduction occurs, are likely to impose considerable unintentional harms on overabundant wildlife and indirectly harm heterospecifics through ineffective population reduction. If nonlethal control is used, it is likely that overabundant animals would be deprived of positive welfare states and economic costs would be prohibitive. We encourage conservation stakeholders to consider animal-welfare consequentialism as an ethical approach to minimize harms to the animals under their care as well as other animals that policies may affect while at the same time pursuing conservation goals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan O Hampton
- School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, 90 South Street, Murdoch, WA, 6150, Australia
| | - Bruce Warburton
- Landcare Research, P.O. Box 69040, Lincoln, 7640, New Zealand
| | - Peter Sandøe
- Department of Food and Resource Economics and Department of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Rolighedsvej 25, DK-1958, Frederiksberg, Denmark
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Fraser-Celin VL, Hovorka AJ. Compassionate Conservation: Exploring the Lives of African Wild Dogs ( Lycaon pictus) in Botswana. Animals (Basel) 2019; 9:ani9010016. [PMID: 30621013 PMCID: PMC6356948 DOI: 10.3390/ani9010016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2018] [Revised: 12/13/2018] [Accepted: 12/30/2018] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary This paper argues that animals should be positioned as subjects in research and scholarship to further develop compassionate conservation, a new field that aims to bridge conservation biology and animal welfare science. Animals can be treated as subjects by attending to their lived experiences and by recognizing their capacity to act. This paper merges interviews, blog posts, biological research, and observations to position African wild dogs as subjects in conservation research and scholarship using responsible anthropomorphism. It presents wild dogs as thinking, feeling, and sentient animals who have agency (capacity to act), and whose welfare is negatively affected by habitat loss and conflict with farmers. By positioning wild dogs as subjects, we can develop an ethical starting point for a more compassionate conservation. This ‘enriched’ scholarship allows us to more fully appreciate the complex lives of wildlife, their circumstances, and their experiences. Abstract This paper argues for a more compassionate conservation by positioning animals as subjects in research and scholarship. Compassionate conservation is a multidisciplinary field of study that broadly attends to the ethical dimensions of conservation by merging conservation biology and animal welfare science. However, animal geography is rarely discussed in the compassionate conservation scholarship despite sharing similar tenets. This paper argues that responsible anthropomorphism and animal geography concepts of animal subjectivity (lived experiences) and agency (capacity to act) positions African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus) as subjects in conservation research and scholarship. It merges biological research, public communication, and interview and participant observation data to present wild dogs as thinking, feeling, self-conscious animals with agency, and whose welfare is negatively affected in human-dominated landscapes in Botswana. This paper argues for more attention to be paid to animal subjectivity and agency to foster more compassionate relations with wildlife. It argues that positioning animals as subjects in research and scholarship is an ethical starting point for moving compassionate conservation forward. This ‘enriched’ scholarly approach moves us closer to appreciating the lives of wildlife and the complexity of their circumstances and experiences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Alice J Hovorka
- Faculty of Environmental Studies, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Palmer A, Malone N. Extending Ethnoprimatology: Human-Alloprimate Relationships in Managed Settings. INT J PRIMATOL 2018; 39:831-851. [PMID: 30573939 PMCID: PMC6267655 DOI: 10.1007/s10764-017-0006-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2017] [Accepted: 10/15/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The majority of studies in ethnoprimatology focus on areas of sympatry where humans and nonhuman primates (hereafter, primates) naturally coexist. We argue that much can be gained by extending the field’s scope to incorporate settings where humans manage most aspects of primates’ lives, such as zoos, laboratories, sanctuaries, and rehabilitation centers (hereafter, managed settings). We suggest that the mixed-methods approach of ethnoprimatology, which facilitates examination of both humans’ and primates’ responses to one another, can reveal not only how humans’ ideas about primates shape management strategies, but also how those management strategies affect primates’ lives. Furthermore, we note that a greater focus on managed settings will strengthen links between ethnoprimatology and primate rights/welfare approaches, and will introduce new questions into discussions of ethics in primatology. For example, managed settings raise questions about when it might be justifiable to restrict primates’ freedom for a “greater good,” and the desirability of making primates’ lives more “natural” even if this would decrease their well-being. Finally, we propose that because ethnoprimatology is premised on challenging false dichotomies between categories of field site—specifically, between “natural” and “unnatural” free-ranging populations—it makes sense for ethnoprimatologists to examine settings in which humans exert considerable control over primates’ lives, given that the distinction between “wild” and “captive” is similarly unclear.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra Palmer
- UCL Anthropology, University College London, WC1H 0BW, London, UK
| | - Nicholas Malone
- Anthropology, School of Social Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, 1010 New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Wallach AD, Bekoff M, Batavia C, Nelson MP, Ramp D. Summoning compassion to address the challenges of conservation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2018; 32:1255-1265. [PMID: 29700860 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13126] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2018] [Revised: 04/15/2018] [Accepted: 04/20/2018] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Conservation practice is informed by science, but it also reflects ethical beliefs about how humanity ought to value and interact with Earth's biota. As human activities continue to drive extinctions and diminish critical life-sustaining ecosystem processes, achieving conservation goals becomes increasingly urgent. However, the determination to react decisively can drive conservationists to handle complex challenges without due deliberation, particularly when wildlife individuals are sacrificed for the so-called greater good of wildlife collectives (populations, species, ecosystems). With growing recognition of the widespread sentience and sapience of many nonhuman animals, standard conservation practices that categorically prioritize collectives without due consideration for the well-being of individuals are ethically untenable. Here we highlight 3 overarching ethical orientations characterizing current and historical practices in conservation that suppress compassion: instrumentalism, collectivism, and nativism. We examine how establishing a commitment to compassion could reorient conservation in more ethically expansive directions that incorporate recognition of the intrinsic value of wildlife, the sentience of nonhuman animals, and the values of novel ecosystems, introduced species, and their members. A compassionate conservation approach allays practices that intentionally and unnecessarily harm wildlife individuals, while aligning with critical conservation goals. Although the urgency of achieving effective outcomes for solving major conservation problems may enhance the appeal of quick and harsh measures, the costs are too high. Continuing to justify moral indifference when causing the suffering of wildlife individuals, particularly those who possess sophisticated capacities for emotion, consciousness, and sociality, risks estranging conservation practice from prevailing, and appropriate, social values. As conservationists and compassionate beings, we must demonstrate concern for both the long-term persistence of collectives and the well-being of individuals by prioritizing strategies that do both.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arian D Wallach
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, Faculty of Science, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, 2007, Australia
| | - Marc Bekoff
- Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80309, U.S.A
| | - Chelsea Batavia
- Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331, U.S.A
| | - Michael Paul Nelson
- Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331, U.S.A
| | - Daniel Ramp
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, Faculty of Science, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, NSW, 2007, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Hampton JO, Teh-White K. Animal welfare, social license, and wildlife use industries. J Wildl Manage 2018. [DOI: 10.1002/jwmg.21571] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/10/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Jordan O. Hampton
- Ecotone Wildlife Veterinary Services; PO Box 76 Inverloch VIC 3996 Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Lewis PM, Burns GL, Jones D. Response and Responsibility: Humans as apex predators and ethical actors in a changing societal environment. FOOD WEBS 2017. [DOI: 10.1016/j.fooweb.2016.09.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/24/2023]
|
18
|
Ben-Ami D, Mjadwesch R. Integrating animal protection criteria into conservation management: a case study of the management of Eastern Grey Kangaroos in the ACT. Isr J Ecol Evol 2017. [DOI: 10.1163/22244662-20181018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Dror Ben-Ami
- Department of Zoology, University of Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel
- The Centre for Compassionate Conservation, University of Technology Sydney, 15 Broadway, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia
| | - Ray Mjadwesch
- Department of Zoology, University of Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv, Israel
- The Centre for Compassionate Conservation, University of Technology Sydney, 15 Broadway, Ultimo NSW 2007, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
19
|
Ethics and Responsibility in Wildlife Tourism: Lessons from Compassionate Conservation in the Anthropocene. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2017. [DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-55574-4_13] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/07/2023]
|
20
|
Wallach AD, Bekoff M, Nelson MP, Ramp D. Promoting predators and compassionate conservation. CONSERVATION BIOLOGY : THE JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY FOR CONSERVATION BIOLOGY 2015; 29:1481-1484. [PMID: 25976274 DOI: 10.1111/cobi.12525] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/26/2014] [Accepted: 02/23/2015] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Arian D Wallach
- Dingo for Biodiversity Project, P.O. Box 156, Mount Perry, 4671, Queensland, Australia
- Charles Darwin University, School of Environment, Darwin, Northern Territory, Australia
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, School of the Environment, University of Technology Sydney, P.O. Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia
| | - Marc Bekoff
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, School of the Environment, University of Technology Sydney, P.O. Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia
- Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80309, U.S.A
| | - Michael Paul Nelson
- Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, 97331, U.S.A
| | - Daniel Ramp
- Centre for Compassionate Conservation, School of the Environment, University of Technology Sydney, P.O. Box 123, Broadway, NSW, 2007, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
|
22
|
Moore RS, Wihermanto, Nekaris KAI. Compassionate conservation, rehabilitation and translocation of Indonesian slow lorises. ENDANGER SPECIES RES 2014. [DOI: 10.3354/esr00620] [Citation(s) in RCA: 72] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/23/2022] Open
|