On the moral acceptability of killing animals

According to a rights view it is acceptable to kill animals if they are innocent threats or shields or are in a lifeboat situation. However, according to advocates of such a view, our practices of killing animals for food or scientific research may be morally unacceptable. In this paper we argue that, even if we grant the basic assumptions of a rights view, a good deal of killing of animals for food and scientific research continues to be morally acceptable.     

Obligations to animals are not necessarily based on rights

I offer a very qualified argument to the effect that rights are grounded in a certain sort of prejudice that privileges individualistic and perhaps masculinist ways of thinking about moral life. I also propose that we look carefully at other conceptions of social ontology and moral life, including the much discussed care conception.     

Grass carp status in the United States: A review

Grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idella Val.) were introduced into the United States in 1963 as potential biological control agents for nuisance aquatic weeds. Since that time an oftentimes bitter controversy has raged over its effects on sportfishing, and its possible natural reproduction and naturalization in North America. This review considers the history, ecology, and present status of grass carp in the United States in light of the voluminous scientific research conducted since its importation. Particular attention is given to the role of grass carp in the fisheries management plans of Arkansas. Recent development of a sterile, triploid grass carp hybrid may lead to widespread use of grass carp to control nuisance aquatic weeds in culturally eutrophicated waters of the United States.     

Animal Agriculture: Symbiosis, Culture, or Ethical Conflict?

Several writers on animal ethics defend the abolition of most or all animal agriculture, which they consider an unethical exploitation of sentient non-human animals. However, animal agriculture can also be seen as a co-evolution over thousands of years, that has affected biology and behavior on the one hand, and quality of life of humans and domestic animals on the other. Furthermore, animals are important in sustainable agriculture. They can increase efficiency by their ability to transform materials unsuitable for human consumption and by grazing areas that would be difficult to harvest otherwise. Grazing of natural pastures is essential for the pastoral landscape, an important habitat for wild flora and fauna and much valued by humans for its aesthetic value. Thus it seems that the environment gains substantially when animals are included in sustainable agricultural systems. But what about the animals themselves? Objections against animal agriculture often refer to the disrespect for animals’ lives, integrity, and welfare in present intensive animal production systems. Of the three issues at stake, neither integrity nor animal welfare need in principle be violated in carefully designed animal husbandry systems. The main ethical conflict seems to lie in the killing of animals, which is inevitable if the system is to deliver animal products. In this paper, we present the benefits and costs to humans and animals of including animals in sustainable agriculture, and discuss how to address some of the ethical issues involved.     

Zoo Animal Welfare

The continuing existence of zoos and their good purposes such as conservation, science, education, and recreation, can be ethically justified only if zoos guarantee the welfare of their animals. The usual criteria for measuring animal welfare in zoos are physical health, long life, and reproduction. This paper looks at these criteria and finds them insufficient. Additional criteria are submitted to expand the range of welfare considerations: natural and abnormal behavior; freedom and choice; and dignity. All these criteria should play a role in analyzing zoo animal welfare and interests but dignity has the overriding part because it impacts on both animal and human interests.     

Ethical Considerations of the Human–Animal-Relationship Under Conditions of Asymmetry and Ambivalence

Ethical reflection deals not only with the moral standing and handling of animals, it should also include a critical analysis of the underlying relationship. Anthropological, psychological, and sociological aspects of the human–animal-relationship should be taken into account. Two conditions, asymmetry and ambivalence, are taken as the historical and empirical basis for reflections on the human–animal-relationship in late modern societies. These conditions explain the variety of moral practice, apart from paradoxes, and provide a framework to systematize animal ethical problems in a broader field. This allows the development of ideal relationships as moral orientation across anthropocentric or sentientistic ethical theories. These ideal relationships are called the patronage-model, the friendship-model and the partnership-model. The ethical problem of creating transgenic animals is discussed in the light of these ideal relationships.     

Dynamics of Bacterial Abundance,Biomass, Activity,and Community Composition in the Oligotrophic Traunsee and the Traun River (Austria)

The holomictic Traunsee is the deepest and second largest lakein Austria. The special characteristic of this ecosystem isthe fact that local salt and soda industries presumably alterthe lake by the discharge of waste materials. Since thebeginning of the 20th century salt and soda works areannually releasing up to 50,000 tons of solid wastes and up to150,000 tons of chloride into Traunsee. To assess potentialeffects of these anthropogenic impacts on the bacterioplanktonthree sampling sites, influenced as well as not influenced bythe industrial discharge, were chosen for comparison andsampled monthly from November 1997 to October 1998. Bacterialabundance ranged between 0.4 to 3.0 × 10⁶ cells ml^-1 with decreasing numbers along the depth profile. Theproportion of actively respiring bacteria, i.e. INT [2-(4-iodophenyl)-3-(4-nitrophenyl)-5-phenyltetrazolium chloride]reducing cells, never exceeded 10% of DAPI (4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole) stained cells. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was used to examine the seasonal and spatial distribution of dominant phylogenetic groups of thebacterioplankton. Up to 84% of bacteria detected with DAPIcould be detected via FISH applying the universal bacterialprobe EUB338. Percentages of alpha- and beta-Proteobacteriaand members of the Cytophaga-Flavobacterium cluster did notexceed 60% of DAPI-stained cells.Beta-Proteobacteriaappeared to be the most abundant group, not only in Traunsee butalso in two reference lakes, Attersee and Hallstättersee. No significant differences in any of the bacterial parameters couldbe detected between the three sampling sites and all measurementswere found in the range reported for oligotrophic lakes. The highdischarge of the Traun River, resulting in a lake water renewaltime of only one year, may diminish possible effects of industrial waste discharge in the pelagic zone.     

STREAM RESTORATION IN THE VICINITY OF BRIDGES1

ABSTRACT: The number of stream restoration and enhancement projects being implemented is rapidly increasing. At road crossings, a transition must be created from the restored channel through the bridge or culvert opening. Given conflicting design objectives for a naturalized channel and a bridge opening, guidance is needed in the design of the transition. In this paper we describe the use of vanes, cross vanes, and w‐weirs, commonly used in stream restoration and enhancement projects, that may provide an adequate transition at bridges. Laboratory experiments were conducted on vanes and cross vanes to provide a transition for single span bridge abutments and on w‐weirs to provide a transition for double span bridges which have a pier in mid‐channel. The results of the experiments provided design criteria for transitions using each of the three structures. Prior field experience provided guidance on appropriate applications in terms of the stream and bridge characteristics.     

EFFECTS OF WATERSHED BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON HABITAT AND FISH IN WISCONSIN STREAMS1

ABSTRACT: We evaluated the effectiveness of watershed‐scale implementations of best‐management practices (BMPs) for improving habitat and fish attributes in two coldwater stream systems in Wisconsin. We sampled physical habitat, water temperature, and fish communities in multiple paired treatment and reference streams before and after upland (barnyard runoff controls, manure storage, contour plowing, reduced tillage) and riparian (stream bank fencing, sloping, limited rip‐rapping) BMP installation in the treatment subwatersheds. In Spring Creek, BMPs significantly improved overall stream habitat quality, bank stability, instream cover for fish, abundance of cool‐ and coldwater fishes, and abundance of all fishes. Improvements were most pronounced at sites with riparian BMPs. Water temperatures were consistently cold enough to support coldwater fishes such as trout (Salmonidae) and sculpins (Cottidae) even before BMP installation. We observed the first‐time occurrence of naturally reproduced brown trout (Salmo trutta) in Spring Creek, indicating that the stream condition had been improved to be able to partially sustain a trout population. In Eagle Creek and its tributary Joos Creek, limited riparian BMPs led to localized gains in overall habitat quality, bank stability, and water depth. However, because few upland BMPs were installed in the subwatershed there were no improvements in water temperature or the quality of the fish community. Temperatures remained marginal for coldwater fish throughout the study. Our results demonstrate that riparian BMPs can improve habitat conditions in Wisconsin streams, but cannot restore coldwater fish communities if there is insufficient upland BMP implementation. Our approach of studying multiple paired treatment and reference streams before and after BMP implementation proved effective in detecting the response of stream ecosystems to watershed management activities.     

The use and abuse of scientific studies

In response to Evelyn Pluhar'sWho Can Be Morally Obligated to Be a Vegetarian? in this journal issue, the author has read all of Pluhar's citations for the accuracy of her claims and had these read by an independent nutritionist. Detailed analysis of Pluhar's argument shows that she attempts to make her case by consistent misappropriation of the findings and conclusions of the studies she cites. Pluhar makes sweeping generalizations from scanty data, ignores causal explanations given by scientists, equates hypothesis with fact, draws false cause conclusions from studies, and in one case claims a conclusion opposite of what the scientist published. Such poor reasoning cannot be the basis of an argument for moral vegetarianism. A broader search of the literature and attention to reviews and textbooks in nutrition shows that each of Pluhar's claims is suspect or incorrect. Pluhar has not undermined my central claims: even if animals have certain rights and well-planned vegetarian diets are safe in complex industrialized societies, these diets cannot be so regarded if the presuppositions of high levels of wealth, education, and medical care do not exist; and, women, children, the aged and some ill persons are at greater risk on restrictive vegan diets. Thus, any duty of moral vegetarianism is not categorical but provisional in nature.