Welcome again 🙂 In my earlier blogs, we established the fact that although there are some conflicts between animal welfare and species conservation, they can indeed co-exist. Some questions came to mind after I published my posts. How do we decide whether to prioritise animal welfare or conservation in situations where it is necessary? Are there any guidelines in place to aid us in making a choice?
To recap, animal welfare is concerned with individual animals while conservation is concerned with whole populations of animals. A simplistic example would be looking at foxes and birds. If the foxes are overhunting birds to the point that their numbers are declining, do we eliminate the foxes to conserve bird numbers and risk their welfare? Before I did any research about this, I thought about some factors that had to be considered, like maybe whether the predator has lost its habitats due to anthropogenic activities or if there is a possibility of species relocation so that both groups of animals can survive.
I came across this video:
From what I have learnt from prior readings, most animal welfare advocates are solely interested in the well-being of the animal while most conservation biologists only support the efforts for conservation, leading to conflicts between the two proponents. However, Shane Mahoney, the conservationist in the video, believes that both philosophies are vital to their survival.
Regarding my initial thoughts about how a decision could be made, Mahoney seems to suggest that most decisions are derived from human empathy, which in my opinion, is kind of vague. So I continued watching, and he states that we “need to have a debate on ecological and welfare realities in order to make fully informed and fully considerate decisions.”
Another important point that he discussed was that support for animal welfare will ultimately help the broadening conservation efforts as well, which reinforces the earlier argument that we should consider efforts from both camps in order to aid the survival of a species.
Back to whether species relocation is feasible and can be considered, I found this information. “When a species is threatened — by an invasive species, for example, or habitat destruction —Â conservation biologists are faced with a choice. They can try to preserve its habitat, breed it in captivity, preserve tissue samples, or attempt a managed relocation to a new habitat.” It seems that it may be a feasible solution, albeit being a challenging and complicated process. Perhaps if the birds can be relocated to areas it once originated from or scientists studying possible new habitats, then we would not have to sacrifice either animal welfare by culling the foxes and conservation of the bird species?
-Amanda
Reference List:
Featured image: “Tulsa Bird” by 熊.陈美芬.Phan Ly Photography.On/Off is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0
Hi Amanda,
Overall, I find your blog very honest. Most likely a valuable learning journey for you.
Further growth could be achieved by critically evaluating Mahoney’s message by investigating who he is, what his agenda is and what his background is.
Now, let me present you with a real dilemma. The issue of domestic cats preying on wildlife. Here’s a recent article on the problem in Australia, but this is something that is likely occurring in many jurisdictions around the world. And it’s one of the most contentious issues, pitting conservation biologists squarely against animal welfare advocates. Here’s a link, but by all means, do more digging.
https://theconversation.com/feral-cat-cull-why-the-2-million-target-is-on-scientifically-shaky-ground-111824
My Q (and maybe you want to write a post about this because this would be too much for a reply to a comment, I think) is:
1) Where do you, as an animal-welfare advocate and environmental-studies student stand on this issue?
2) Where does your stance come from and to what extent does it reflect your personal values as opposed to scientific evidence about risk?
3) Is this strategy (culling cats) any different (ethically) from killing rats, as the government actively does in SG, and do both (culling cats and rats) types of initiatives deliver similar benefits to biodiversity and conservation?
4) Would you (or your fellow animal-welfare advocates) personally speak out to stop the programme to control rats, and why or why not?
You don’t have to answer or blog about this, but I just thought maybe it would be illuminating to critically examine your own views.
jc
Hi Amanda
Interesting blog! Really learnt how two factions of environmentalism (animal welfare and conservation biologists) can have such different objectives, which can potentially lead to clashes in the 2 schools of thoughts. This is somewhat like the case of whether we should be preserving the ecosystem because of its E.S (ecosystem services) or biodiversity. As always, there is the dilemma of whether we should be acting as ‘moderators of nature’ and cull these predatory species or should we let nature take its course, which will eventually lead to the demise of the birds, in this blog’s context.
You mentioned in the opinion piece that relocation of bird species back to the land of origin could be a feasible solution to offset the need for culling. I am curious where the place of origin that you were referring to. Is it the original place where the ancestral lineage is from or just the location where the birds potentially migrated from? Because if you were referring to the original location where the predecessors dwelled in, there might be the plausibility of other native species which presently dominate the area, and these birds might become an intrusion to the current ecosystem instead. What are your thoughts on this haha?
Furthermore, I feel that the word ‘captivity’ influences the way people perceive this technique of conservation. It seems to have a rather negative connotation to it, which might be the reason why animal welfare groups disapprove of it. Do you think captivity breeding is essential since the growth environment is more conducive with lesser natural predators? Hope to hear from you!
Hi Wen Han!
Thanks for dropping by. Regarding the relocation of the species, it is in the area that they once inhabited. I believe that this applies to birds who are permanent residents in their habitats, and not migratory bird species. I also agree with what you say that reintroducing them back to the original area might pose a threat to the ecosystem there. In this case, risk assessments and intensive research will have to be done to assess the suitability of the area. This solution is definitely not very ideal unless in situations where other solutions are not as effective. To address the part about having captivity breeding, I think it is definitely necessary as these programmes greatly increase the chances of survival – something that may not be as achievable in the wild with the pressures from predators and other factors like habitat loss.
– Amanda
Hi Amanda! Interesting post!
When reading the part on “breed in captivity, preserve tissue samples”, I thought of how we can probably leverage on technology in situations like overhunting, given that technology is so advanced now. Do you know if there are any current technology that is useful, such that we do not have to cull predators, and at the same time conserve preys.
Cheers,
Nicole
Hi Nicole!
Thanks for the question. I think that technology currently is unable to completely replace the need to cull predators. While there is technology to aid in conservation efforts, it does not address this particular problem. An example of such technology would be biobanking, where the genetic material of endangered species are preserved and used to enhance genetic diversity through assisted reproductive technologies in conservation breeding programmes. Another would be acoustic sensors. They are non-invasive and can be deployed in the areas of interest to monitor wildlife and their acoustic surroundings. Information gathered would be used to ‘estimate species occupancy, abundance, population density and community composition, monitoring spatial and temporal trends in animal behaviour and human disturbance, and calculating acoustic proxies for metrics of biodiversity’.
– Amanda