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.     

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.     

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.     

元代自然资源的保护和利用探幽

元代1264年定都燕京后,为加强政治统治,在中原先进的农耕经济影响下,改变过去“逐水草而居”游牧经济的生产方式,在积极保护动、植物资源和合理开发利用土地、水资源等方面,采取了一些恢复和发展农业生产的举措。剖璞见玉,对今仍有史鉴作用。     

Sustainable Agriculture: New Paradigms and Old Practices? Increased Production with Management of Organic Inputs in Senegal

Farmers in Sahelian countries are confronted with a variety of soil fertility and management problems. During the last two decades, NGOs have worked with farmers and research institutions to develop and test practices that will increase food production, while at the same time enhance the natural resource base.Since 1987, The Rodale Institute (RI) has worked closely with farmers' associations and government institutions to promote regenerative agriculture-farming systems that prioritize the use of local resources while improving them as they are used to grow food, using agro-ecological methods. The Senegalese Agricultural Research Institute has collaborated in this program as a partner of RI. The Senegal Regenerative Agriculture Resource Center model has been applied as a new and viable approach that builds on traditional knowledge and farmer-to-farmer exchange.Research results on soil conservation and improvement have shown that fields spread with amended animal manure or compost yield greater harvests than fields farmed with traditional methods.     

岷江上游地区的草地资源与畜牧业发展

岷江上游草地面积837226hm^2,大约占了该区土地面积的35％。这块草地蕴藏着丰富的生物多样性,具有重要的生态学功能,是岷江上游绿色生态屏障的重要组成部分。高山草甸草地和亚高山草甸草地是该区的主要植被类型,其面积分别占草地总面积的54．8％和17．2％,其产草量分别占该区各类草地总产草量的53．47％和26．46％。岷江上游各县天然草地的面积和各县草地畜牧业在经济结构中所占的比重都表现了从高海拔到低海拔递变的趋势,基本上与植被的垂直梯度变化相耦合。指出了当前草地畜牧业发展存在的一些问题：超载过牧现象严重,生产效率低下,集约化水平低。除了饲草的生产与加工、畜种改良和草种改良等措施外,结合岷江上游的实际情况,在发展的思路和技术措施上着重阐述了以下几个方面：发展特色畜牧业,摒弃头数畜牧业;以市场为导向的主动畜群时空周转;结合“天保工程”和“退耕还林工程”,促进农林牧业的紧密结合。