ANIMAL WELFARE (1) Flashcards
history recap
- Bible: donkey shall not have to plow by an ox
- Thomas Wenworth (1635): first legislation (against plowing by the tail)
- Jeans-Jacques Rousseau discourse on equality (how we treat them should be based on how they feel not reason ex. human babies)
- 4 stages of cruelty (william Hogarth): baby behaviour to animals, leads to bad behaviour to others, leads to bad behaviour to yourself
- Various contempary recreations (running of bulls, cock-fighting, etc.)
setting the scence (1945)
-end of WWII
-intensification of animal production as a way to provide food security
setting the scene (1965)
-Brambell committee (UK)
-conclude animals should be afforded the Five Freedoms
setting the scene (1994)
-new approach (David Mellor) focusing on the POSITIVE experiences rather than only avoiding the bad ones
*five domains
goals of animal production over the years
- Subsistence
- Consumption
- Positive social, environmental and economic impact
5 freedoms framework
- Freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition
- Freedom from discomfort and exposure
- Freedom from pain, injury and disease
- Freedom from fear and distress
- Freedom to express normal behaviour
freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition
-readily access to fresh water
-diet to maintain full health and vigour
freedom from discomfort and exposure
-appropriate environment (shelter and comfortable resting area)
freedom from pain, injury and disease
-prevention or rapid diagnosis or treatment
freedom from fear and distress
-ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering
freedom to express normal behaviour
-provide sufficient space
-proper facilities
-company of animals own kind
weaknesses of five freedoms
-as principles, they are unsound and illogical
-doesn’t provide a convincing basis for animal welfare assessment and management
5 domains
- Nutrition
- Environment
- Health
- Behaviour
- Mental state
nutrition
-balanced and varied diet
environment
-comfortable and pleasant
health
-fit and uninjured
behaviour
-calm, social, playful, pleased
mental state
-able to express rewarding behaviour
quality of life
- A good life
- A life worth living
- A life not worth living
definition of animal welfare
-physical and mental state of an animal in relation to the conditions in which it lives or dies
good welfare
If it is:
-healthy
-comfortable
-well nourished
-safe
-able to express innate behaviour
If it is not:
-suffering from unpleasant states (pain, fear, discomfort)
approaches to address animal welfare
- Biological functioning approach
- Natural living approach
- A feelings based approach
*should have all 3 elements
biological functioning approach
-capable of normal growth and reproduction
-reasonably free form disease, injury, malnutrition and abnormalities of behaviuor and physiology
natural living approach
-kept in reasonably natural environments
-allowed to develop and use their nature adaptation and capabilities
feelings based approach
-affective states are key to quality of life
-high level of welfare=animals experience comfort, contentment and pleasure
a wicked problem
-can’t be solved, only managed thorugh technology development and societal acceptance
-not “true and false”, but “better or worse”
-animal production: same environment can produce very different outcomes
-constraints and resources change over time
-stakeholders have radically different frames of reference about the problem
natural welfare
-live in wild
-need to find food/water
maximal welfare
-animals in our care
-food, diet, reasonable environment
minimal welfare
-when maximizing economic output and reducing amount given/spent on animals
desired/appropriate welfare
-between maximal and minimal welfare
ethics
-guidelines from society (group)
Ex. code of practice, vet oath
morals
-own personal decision
-influenced by own experience, culture and traditions
animal ethics
-field of ethics
-deals with how and why we should take nonhuman animals into account in our moral decisions
Ex. duty to animals and duty to stakeholders
Vet oath
“I will strive to promote animal health and welfare”
“prevent and relieve animal suffering”
ethical dilemma
-decision-making problem between two or more possible courses of action, none of which is unambiguously preferable
contractarian view
-human society works thanks to moral agreements between people
-animals can’t participate in these agreements, we may have indirect ethical obligations towards animals b/c they matter to other humans
Ex. consumers will care
*could be used to justify anything that someone agreees with (ex. slavery, inequalities)
utilitarian view
-activities which have adverse impact on well-being of animals may be justified if they lead to net increase in well-being (for humans or animals)
Ex. animal research, killing animals for food if they were in good conditions
*linked to subjective cos-benefit analysis
relational view
-our duties to animals depends on if they are close to us or not
*inconsistent, prejudicial and promote stereotypes
animal rights view
-fixed ethical rules place limits on our treatment of animals, whatever the circumstances
Ex. not used as our slaves or for experiments
*inflexible, underplays consequences (pests), no guidance when managing conflicting rights (rights of predators vs. prey)
respect for nature view
-we have a duty to protect not just animals but the species to which they belong, ecosystems and habitats
-leave animal the way evolution made them
*subjective definition of natural (was domestication unnatural?)
