Jump to content

Compassionate conservation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The eastern gray squirrel is considered an invasive species in some countries. Advocates of compassionate conservation oppose killing individual animals in conservation programmes.

Compassionate conservation is a discipline that combines conservation and animal welfare. The two fields have often been treated as separate and sometimes as being in conflict.[1][2] Proposed principles of compassionate conservation include "first do no harm, individuals matter, inclusivity, and peaceful coexistence".[3]

Supporters argue that conservation has usually measured success through the preservation of species, populations and ecosystems, rather than through explicit concern for the welfare and intrinsic value of individual animals.[4] They argue that conservation action should be guided by compassion for all sentient beings and that killing animals for conservation purposes is unnecessary because the same objectives can be pursued through non-lethal methods.[5][6]

Some conservationists have criticised compassionate conservation, arguing that it may conflict with conservation goals.[7][8]

History

[edit]

The international wildlife charity Born Free Foundation, which advocates for the welfare of individual wild animals, used the phrase "compassionate conservation" for an Oxford-based symposium it hosted in 2010.[9] The Centre for Compassionate Conservation was established in 2013 at the University of Technology Sydney.[10] Ignoring Nature No More: The Case for Compassionate Conservation, a collection of essays edited by compassionate conservation advocate Marc Bekoff, was published in the same year.[11]

Later conferences were held on the topic, and supporters published articles in conservation journals.[9]

Criticism

[edit]

Some conservationists have described compassionate conservation as "seriously flawed". They argue that its implementation is impractical and could have negative effects on wildlife, ecosystems, humans,[7] and native biodiversity.[8] Other critics argue that a "do no harm" approach goes "too far" and would not necessarily improve the welfare of individual animals.[12] Andrea S. Griffin et al. argue that compassionate conservation's focus on empathy "is subject to significant biases and that inflexible adherence to moral rules can result in a 'do nothing' approach".[8]

Several management approaches supported by advocates of compassionate conservation as alternatives to lethal control have been studied experimentally or observationally. Trap-neuter-return management of feral cat populations has been proposed as an alternative to lethal methods such as shooting or baiting, but research has not found TNR to be an effective means of controlling feral cat populations.[13][14][15][16]

Wildlife contraceptives have also been proposed as a non-lethal method for managing overpopulation in native wildlife species. Attempts to use this approach for overabundant koala populations on Kangaroo Island in South Australia were unsuccessful because of logistical and cost-effectiveness barriers. Other non-lethal approaches, including wildlife fertility control, were also unsuccessful. As with trap-neuter-return programmes, non-lethal reproductive management of part of a population may result in compensatory increases in reproductive success among untreated individuals.[17] Translocation to lower-abundance habitats was also unsuccessful because many translocated individuals died, undermining the intended welfare benefit of the approach.[18]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ Fraser, D. (May 2010). "Toward a synthesis of conservation and animal welfare science". Ingenta Connect. Retrieved 2020-04-20.
  2. ^ Gray, Jenny (2018-08-31). "Challenges of Compassionate Conservation". Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science. 21 (sup1): 34–42. doi:10.1080/10888705.2018.1513840. ISSN 1088-8705. PMID 30325231.
  3. ^ Katz, Tristan (2024-11-01). "Taking natural harms seriously in compassionate conservation". Biological Conservation. 299 110791. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110791. ISSN 0006-3207.
  4. ^ Ramp, Daniel; Bekoff, Marc (2015-03-01). "Compassion as a Practical and Evolved Ethic for Conservation". BioScience. 65 (3): 323–327. doi:10.1093/biosci/biu223. hdl:10453/34122. ISSN 0006-3568.
  5. ^ Wallach, Arian D.; Batavia, Chelsea; Bekoff, Marc; Alexander, Shelley; Baker, Liv; Ben-Ami, Dror; Boronyak, Louise; Cardilini, Adam P. A.; Carmel, Yohay; Celermajer, Danielle; Coghlan, Simon (2020). "Recognizing animal personhood in compassionate conservation". Conservation Biology. 34 (5): 1097–1106. doi:10.1111/cobi.13494. ISSN 1523-1739. PMC 7540678. PMID 32144823.
  6. ^ Keim, Brandon (2014-06-04). "Do Conservation Strategies Need to Be More Compassionate?". Yale E360. Retrieved 2020-04-20.
  7. ^ a b Oommen, Meera Anna; Cooney, Rosie; Ramesh, Madhuri; Archer, Michael; Brockington, Daniel; Buscher, Bram; Fletcher, Robert; Natusch, Daniel J. D.; Vanak, Abi T.; Webb, Grahame; Shanker, Kartik (2019). "The fatal flaws of compassionate conservation". Conservation Biology. 33 (4): 784–787. doi:10.1111/cobi.13329. ISSN 1523-1739. PMID 30977162. S2CID 109939975.
  8. ^ a b c Griffin, Andrea S.; Callen, Alex; Klop-Toker, Kaya; Scanlon, Robert J.; Hayward, Matt W. (2020). "Compassionate Conservation Clashes With Conservation Biology: Should Empathy, Compassion, and Deontological Moral Principles Drive Conservation Practice?". Frontiers in Psychology. 11: 1139. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01139. ISSN 1664-1078. PMC 7269110. PMID 32536896.
  9. ^ a b Marris, Emma (2018-09-26). "When Conservationists Kill Lots (and Lots) of Animals". The Atlantic. ISSN 1072-7825. Retrieved 2020-04-27.
  10. ^ Gray, Jenny (2017). Zoo Ethics: The Challenges of Compassionate Conservation. CSIRO Publishing. p. 180. ISBN 978-1-4863-0699-2.
  11. ^ Bekoff, Marc (2013-04-16). "Ignoring Nature No More: Compassionate Conservation at Work". Psychology Today. Retrieved 2020-05-11.
  12. ^ Johnson, Paul J.; Adams, Vanessa M.; Armstrong, Doug P.; Baker, Sandra E.; Biggs, Duan; Boitani, Luigi; Cotterill, Alayne; Dale, Emma; O'Donnell, Holly; Douglas, David J. T.; Droge, Egil (December 2019). "Consequences Matter: Compassion in Conservation Means Caring for Individuals, Populations and Species". Animals. 9 (12): 1115. doi:10.3390/ani9121115. PMC 6941047. PMID 31835670.
  13. ^ Coe, Seraiah T.; Elmore, Jared A. (23 December 2021). "Free-ranging domestic cat abundance and sterilization percentage following five years of a trap-neuter-return program". Wildlife Biology. 2021. doi:10.2981/wlb.00799. S2CID 233938210.
  14. ^ Roebling, Allison D.; Johnson, Dana (June 2014). "Rabies Prevention and Management of Cats in the Context of Trap, Neuter, Vaccinate, Release Programs". Zoonoses Public Health. 61 (4): 290–296. doi:10.1111/zph.12070. PMC 5120395. PMID 23859607. Retrieved 11 March 2024.
  15. ^ Franzen, Jonathan (25 December 2023). "How the "No Kill" Movement Betrays its Name". The New Yorker. Retrieved 11 March 2024.
  16. ^ Bucklin, Danielle M.; Shedden, Jennifer M. (Spring 2023). "Do trap-neuter-return (TNR) practices contribute to human-coyote conflicts in southern California?". Human-Wildlife Interactions. 17 (1). doi:10.26077/b86e-600f.
  17. ^ Duka, Toni; Masters, Pip (December 2005). "Confronting a tough issue: Fertility control and translocation for over-abundant Koalas on Kangaroo Island, South Australia". Ecological Management & Restoration. 6 (3): 172–181. doi:10.1111/j.1442-8903.2005.00234.x. ISSN 1442-7001.
  18. ^ Watters, Freyja; Ramsey, David; Molsher, Robyn; Cassey, Phillip (2021-09-10). "Breeding dynamics of overabundant koala (". Wildlife Research. 48 (7): 663–672. doi:10.1071/WR20162. ISSN 1035-3712.

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]