Wild Animal Suffering

[Tom L.]

.........
The one area I disagree with you Nobody is how we handle questions about wild animal suffering when debating the ethics of meat eating with omnivores. If you say “yes, we should control wild animals” the average omnivore will just think you are a loony and not take you seriously after that, and so it will damage your argument. It is just too radical a position for the majority of omnivores. It also allows them to divert the discussion away from their own meat eating. I think the better response is to say that lions are irrelevant when you are standing in the supermarket choosing whether to buy a steak or a veggie burger. You have to debate strategically at times.

I agree that most non-veg people will think it's too radical a matter to even consider. However, my gut feeling is that many (if not most) omnis are not particularly interested in really thinking about animal-treatment issues. They generally think ANY serious consideration of this is "loony". One (vegan) member over at VeggieBoards commented in a thread about this (I'm quoting from memory, which isn't perfect): "Nobody is saying that animals don't suffer and die in nature, or that this suffering doesn't matter. They do and it does. But what are you suggesting be done about this?"

I think the non-anthropogenic bad things that happen to animals should matter to someone who cares about animals, but when someone brings this up, it usually appears to be an excuse not to make any real effort in that area at all: "Nature is at least as cruel as humans, so we just shouldn't get all hot-and-bothered about slaughterhouses, etc".

 

[Lou]

This article just came out.
I only started reading it but it looks like some great thoughts on this subject.

The wild frontier of animal welfare

Should humans care whether all creatures live good lives, even in the forests or jungles? A group of philosophers and scientists has an unorthodox answer.

www.vox.com

 

[Jamie in Chile]

I'll perhaps have a look later. Speaking about Vox, it looks like Ezra Klein has now left Vox for NYT. I heard him talking about this on the 80,000 hours podcast and he was talking about bringing the animal rights and vegan agenda more into NYT perhaps in his work there.

 

[Jamie in Chile]

OK, I read the article. I think it's worth reading. Thanks for sharing.

That last part got me thinking - should we start by trying to assist wild animals in urban environments where we´ve to some extent created the environment. We might have a greater responsibility to intervene, as well as less risk of collapsing the natural ecosystem through intervention since it arguably isn´t really a natural ecosystems in the first place.

 

[Vegan Dogs]

.

I am agAinst sics...single issue campaigns..Save urang utang stuff. reason habitats of wildlife are destroyed is 90 percent due to animal agriculture. No point thinking a donation to save an urang is any overall use
while crunching on a steak.

Only 25 percent of species including dinosaurs are carnivores. Those going extinct today besides herbivores like elephants are lions down to 25 thousand and tigers down to 4 thousand...Practically already extinct. Zoos are entertainment not useful to re wild mass populations no captive bred animals can survive free is the truth 70 percent die in agony even feral pet cats so a waste of time

Suffering of wildlife exists diseases spread the most by pet diseases in Africa....no vaccines done on wildlife...pet ownership is unnatural...

We could help one day with medications vaccinations....mercy kill...contraception....hardly need to worry about over population but under population .....

We interfered with wildlife....still do...created unnatural pet species....cage and kill wildlife....

Rewilding with land released from animal agriculture is the biggest help possible

 

[Vegan Dogs]

OK, I read the article. I think it's worth reading. Thanks for sharing.

That last part got me thinking - should we start by trying to assist wild animals in urban environments where we´ve to some extent created the environment. We might have a greater responsibility to intervene, as well as less risk of collapsing the natural ecosystem through intervention since it arguably isn´t really a natural ecosystems in the first place.

Yes and what destroys urban wildlife the most ? Outdoor Fed by humans pet cats. Deal with truth and keep them in easy help

 

[Michelle Campbell]

At this point in the game, the questions you're asking me don't make any sense. That was talked about in the third paragraph, which you talked about. You don't agree with the idea that animal deaths are OK unless they happen in a very specific way, like when an omnivore dies by choice. The number of animals killed as a result of this is very small compared to the total number of animals killed early each year. Most of them are members of r-selected species that die before they reach adulthood. For more details https://awremoval.com.

 

[Michelle Campbell]

That was talked about in the third paragraph, which you talked about.

 

[Hashtag_Eevee]

Well said. Would you promote painlessly slaughtering, and feeding to predators, or just eliminating predators altogether? How you answer is important as to how you view life.
Side note: my thread was locked and I was called a troll

Lab meat!