- freely available
Animals 2014, 4(4), 643-656; https://doi.org/10.3390/ani4040643
2. Difficulties with Common Ethical Stances
3. Knowing Animals
The rat’s sensitive eyes, shunning the intense artificial light, provide it with a hazy view in predominantly grey, ultraviolet and green hues. From within its cage, it hears the chirps, squeaks and whines of its neighbors, gaining information that we cannot hear unaided and are yet to understand. Background noise consists of the low babbles and hisses of distinctively scented humans, and the unregulated drones and blasts of ultrasonic sounds. Scents provide visceral warnings and enticements, induce new motivations, and inform the rat about social possibilities outside the cage. The environment wafts a succession of scents, from pleasant, calming fragrances to the innately alarming odours of intangible predators. The rat tastes little apart from its dry, satiating homogenous diet. Its vibrissae provide a protective, finely tuned force field to feel the details of the cage surfaces; with the rat perceiving security from close contact with the solid walls.
Strange night! Strangest in this, that so soon as dawn had come, I, who had talked with God, crept out of the house like a rat leaving its hiding-place—a creature scarcely larger, an inferior animal, a thing that for any passing whim of our masters might be hunted and killed. Perhaps they also prayed confidently to God. Surely, if we have learnt nothing else, this war has taught us pity—pity for those witless souls that suffer our dominion.
My favorites were the Modern Library editions ... At first I just ate happily gnawing and chewing ... When Norman made an especially big sale … I clapped my paws and silently shouted, “Way to go, Norm!”... He had seen me! … a little heap of strange food. A little pile of cylindrical neon green pellets. They smelled good, so I nibbled. … I woke up coughing and full of anguish. I tried to vomit but couldn’t.
There is another truth that I would not deny for a second namely that those rare humans who have a real gift for training and working with dogs owe that gift to experience, intuition and a certain kind of empathetic reasoning that has almost nothing to do with science.
4. Respect for the Research Animal
Conflicts of Interest
- Dillon, M. From The Horse’s Mouth: The Keith Haub Story; Harper Collins: Auckland, New Zealand, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Rollin, B. The ethics of agriculture: The end of true husbandry. In The Future of Animal Farming. Renewing the Ancient Contract; Dawkins, M.S., Bonney, R., Eds.; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2008; pp. 7–19. [Google Scholar]
- Banner, M.; Bulfield, G.; Clark, S.; Gormally, L.; Hignett, P.; Kimbell, H.; Milburn, C.; Moffitt, J. Report of the Committee to Consider the Ethical Implications of Emerging Technologies in the Breeding of Farm Animals; HMSO: London, UK, 1995. [Google Scholar]
- Comstock, G.L. An alternative ethic for animals. In Livestock, Ethics and Quality of Life; Hodges, J., Han, K., Eds.; CABI International: Wallingford, UK, 2000; pp. 99–118. [Google Scholar]
- Anthony, R. The ethical implications of the human-animal bond on the farm. Anim. Welf. 2003, 12, 505–512. [Google Scholar]
- Preece, R. Awe for the Tiger, Love for the Lamb; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Aurelius, M. Meditations; Penguin Books: London, UK, 2006; p. 50. [Google Scholar]
- Bustad, L.K. Living together: People, animals, environment—A personal historical perspective. Perspect. Biol. Med. 1988, 31, 171–184. [Google Scholar]
- Short, R.V. Primate ethics. In Primates. The Road to Self-Sustaining Populations; Benirschke, K., Ed.; Springer-Verlag: New York, NY, USA, 1986; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar]
- Bekoff, M. Animal passions and beastly virtues: Cognitive ethology as the unifying science for understanding the subjective, emotional, empathic, and moral lives of animals. Zygon 2006, 41, 71–104. [Google Scholar]
- Henshaw, D. Animal Warfare. The Story of the Animal Liberation Front; Fontana: London, UK, 1989. [Google Scholar]
- Halfpenny, M. Animal Rights Activists Jailed for Intimidation. The Independent. 25 October 2010. Available online: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/animal-rights-activists-jailed-for-intimidation-2115830.html (accessed on 27 October 2010).
- Medical Advances and Animal Research. The Contribution of Animal Science to the Medical Revolution: Some Case Histories. Research Defence Society and Coalition for Medical Progress. Available online: http://www.pro-test.org.uk/MAAR.pdf (accessed on 28 October 2010).
- Pro-Test. Standing up for Science. Available online: http://www.pro-test.org.uk/ (accessed on 28 October 2010).
- Peters, A.R.; Lamming, G.E.; Fisher, M.W. A comparison of plasma LH concentrations in milked and suckling post-partum cows. J. Reprod. Fertil. 1981, 62, 567–573. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, M.W.; McLeod, B.J.; Heath, D.A.; Lun, S.; Hurst, P.R. Role of ovarian failure in reproductive senescence in aged red deer (Cervus elaphus) hinds. J. Reprod. Fertil. 2000, 120, 211–216. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, M.W.; Mellor, D.J. Developing a systematic strategy incorporating ethical, animal welfare and practical principles to guide the genetic improvement of dairy cattle. N. Z. Vet. J. 2008, 56, 100–106. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, P.B. Ethics on the frontiers of livestock science. In Redesigning Animal Agriculture; Swain, D., Charmley, E., Steel, J., Coffey, S., Eds.; CAB International: Wallingford, UK, 2007; pp. 30–45. [Google Scholar]
- Edgar, D.G.; Dodd, D.C.; McClure, T.J.; Owens, E.L.; Wallace, T. The Farmers’ Veterinary Guide; Dairy Exporter Books: Wellington, New Zealand, 1972. [Google Scholar]
- Clarke, R.T.J.; Reid, C.S.W. Foamy bloat of cattle. A review. J. Dairy Sci. 1974, 57, 753–785. [Google Scholar]
- Ulyatt, M.J.; Bailey, R.W. Obituary—Campbell Stuart Wemyss Reid. Royal Society of New Zealand. Available online: http://www.rsnz.org/directory/yearbooks/ybook97/obitReid.html (accessed on 21 June 2008).
- Crawford, M.; Ghebremeskel, K. The equation between food production, nutrition and health. In Food Ethics; Mepham, B., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 1996; pp. 64–83. [Google Scholar]
- Nowak, P. Sex, Bombs and Burgers. How War, Porn and Fast Food Created Technology as We Know It; Allen & Unwin: Crows Nest, Australia, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- LaFollette, H.; Shanks, N. Brute Science: Dilemmas of Animal Experimentation; Routledge: London, UK, 1996; p. 204. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, R.A. The Design of Experiments; Oliver and Boyd: Edinburgh, UK, 1937. [Google Scholar]
- Richter, S.H.; Garner, J.P.; Würbel, H. Environmental standardization: Cure or cause of poor reproducibility in animal experiments. Nat. Methods 2009, 6, 257–261. [Google Scholar]
- Dare, T. Animal Ethics Committees: Ethics committees or compliance bodies? In Animal Ethics Committees and Animal Use in a Monitored Environment: Is the Ethics Real, Imagined or Necessary? ANZCCART: Wellington, New Zealand, 2005; pp. 35–38. [Google Scholar]
- Regan, T. Sentience and rights. In Animals, Ethics, and Trade: The Challenge of Animal Sentience; Turner, J., D’Silva, J., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2006; pp. 79–86. [Google Scholar]
- Sandøe, P.; Christiansen, S.B.; Forkman, B. Animal welfare: What is the role of science? In Animals, Ethics, and Trade: The Challenge of Animal Sentience; Turner, J., D’Silva, J., Eds.; Earthscan: London, UK, 2006; pp. 41–52. [Google Scholar]
- Ott, R.S. The natural wrongs about animal rights and animal liberation. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1995, 207, 1023–1033. [Google Scholar]
- Fraser, D.; MacRae, A.M. Four types of activities that affect animals: Implications for animal welfare science and animal ethics philosophy. Anim. Welf. 2011, 20, 581–590. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, S.L. The least harm principle may require that humans consume a diet containing large herbivores, not a vegan diet. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2003, 16, 387–394. [Google Scholar]
- Lamey, A. Food fight! Davis versus Regan on the ethics of eating beef. J. Soc. Philos. 2007, 38, 331–348. [Google Scholar]
- Coppinger, R.P.; Smith, C.K. The domestication of evolution. Environ. Conserv. 1983, 10, 283–292. [Google Scholar]
- Budiansky, S. The Covenant of the Wild. Why Animals Chose Domestication; Weidenfield & Nicolson: London, UK, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Midgley, M. Animals and Why They Matter; University of Georgia Press: Athens, GA, USA, 1983. [Google Scholar]
- Salt, H.S. Animals’ Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress; Macmillan & Co: New York, NY, USA, 1894. [Google Scholar]
- Maehle, A.-H. Cruelty and kindness to the “brute creation”. Stability and change in the ethics of the man-animal relationship 1600–1850. In Animals and Human Society. Changing Perspectives; Manning, A., Serpell, J., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 1994; pp. 81–105. [Google Scholar]
- Rollin, B.E. Animal rights as a mainstream Phenomenon. Animals 2011, 1, 102–115. [Google Scholar]
- Blackwell, T.E.; Rollin, B.E. Leading discussions on animal rights. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 2008, 233, 868–871. [Google Scholar]
- Nibert, D.A. Animal rights and human social issues. Soc. Anim. 1994, 2, 115–124. [Google Scholar]
- De Grazia, D. Animal ethics around the turn of the twenty-first century. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 1999, 11, 111–129. [Google Scholar]
- Hodgson, P. The next Animal Welfare Act. In Learning, Animals and the Environment: Changing the Face of the Future; ANZCCART: Wellington, New Zealand, 2002; pp. 75–77. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, E. Animal rights and the values of nonhuman life. In Animal Rights. Current Debates and New Directions; Sunstein, C.R., Nussbaum, M.C., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2004; pp. 277–298. [Google Scholar]
- Tulloch, G. Animal ethics: The capabilities approach. Anim. Welf. 2011, 20, 3–10. [Google Scholar]
- Cochrane, A. Animal rights and animal experiments. Res. Publ. 2007, 3, 293–319. [Google Scholar]
- Garner, R. Animals, Politics, and Morality; Manchester University Press: Manchester, UK, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Potter, V.R. Bioethics, the science of survival. In Perspectives in Biology and Medicine; The Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD, USA, 1970; pp. 127–153. [Google Scholar]
- Varner, G.E. The prospects for consensus and convergence in the animal rights debate. Hastings Cent. Rep. 1994, 24, 24–28. [Google Scholar]
- Fox, M.W. A call for common understanding of animal welfare, animal rights, and animal well-being. J. Am. Vet. Med. Assoc. 1990, 196, 832–833. [Google Scholar]
- Perry, D.; Perry, G. Improving interactions between animal rights groups and conservation biologists. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22, 27–35. [Google Scholar]
- DeGrazia, D. The ethics of animal research: What are the prospects for agreement? Camb. Q. Healthc. Ethics 1999, 8, 23–34. [Google Scholar]
- Davis, S.L.; Croney, C.C. Defining a middle ground for philosophers and production: Bioethics. Poult. Sci. 2004, 83, 310–313. [Google Scholar]
- Somerville, M. The Ethical Imagination. Journeys of the Human Spirit; Melbourne University Press: Carlton, Australia, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Haidt, J.; Joseph, C. Intuitive ethics: How innately prepared intuitions generate culturally variable virtues. Daedalus 2004, 133, 55–66. [Google Scholar]
- Saul, J.R. The Doubter’s Companion. A Dictionary of Aggressive Common Sense; Penguin: Toronto, ON, Canada, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Hemsworth, P.H. Ethical stockmanship. Aust. Vet. J. 2007, 85, 194–200. [Google Scholar]
- Gatward, G. Livestock Ethics. Respect, and Our Duty of Care for Farm Animals; Chalcombe Publications: Lincoln, UK, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Burn, C.C. What is it like to be a rat? Rat sensory perception and its implications for experimental design and rat welfare. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2008, 112, 1–32. [Google Scholar]
- Berdoy, M. The Laboratory Rat: A Natural History; Oxford University: Oxford, UK, 2003. Available online: http://www.ratlife.org (accessed on 28 September 2014).
- Wells, H.G. The War of the Worlds; Penguin: London, UK, 1898; p. 149. [Google Scholar]
- Romanes, G.J. Animal Intelligence; Kegan Paul, Trench & Co: London, UK, 1886. [Google Scholar]
- Rollin, B.E. The Unheeded Cry; Iowa State University Press: Ames, IA, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Savage, S. Firmin. Adventures of a Metropolitan Lowlife; Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, UK, 2006; pp. 21, 22, 78, 91, 92, 93. [Google Scholar]
- Stewart, D. The limits of Trooghaft. Encounter 1972, 38, 3–7. [Google Scholar]
- Budiansky, S. The Truth about Dogs. An Inquiry into the Ancestry, Social Conventions, Mental Habits, and Moral Fiber of Canis Familiaris; Viking: New York, NY, USA, 2000; p. 15. [Google Scholar]
- Raffensperger, C. Learning to speak ethics in technological debates. In Engineering the Farm. Ethical and Social Aspects of Agricultural Biotechnology; Bailey, B., Lappé, M., Eds.; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2002; pp. 125–133. [Google Scholar]
- Schofield, J.; University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. Personal communication, 2009.
- Leach, M.; Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. Personal communication, 2010.
- Smart, J.A. Sudden illness and death in housed Merinos. In Proceedings of the Society of Sheep and Beef Cattle Veterinarians of the NZVA; Annual Seminar 2004. New Zealand Veterinary Association: Auckland, New Zealand, 2004; pp. 217–220. [Google Scholar]
- Fraser, D.; Weary, D.M.; Pajor, E.A.; Milligan, B.N. A scientific conception of animal welfare that reflects ethical concerns. Anim. Welf. 1997, 6, 187–205. [Google Scholar]
- Russell, W.M.S.; Burch, R.L. The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique; Methuen & Co.: London, UK, 1959. [Google Scholar]
- 8th World Congress on Alternatives and Animal Use in the Life Sciences, Montreal. Available online: http://www.wc8.ccac.ca/files/C17932_LivreCW8Abstract.pdf (accessed on 26 September 2014).
- Beauchamp, T.L.; Childress, J.F. Principles of Biomedical Ethics, 4th ed.; Oxford University Press: New York, NY, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Hinman, L.M. Ethics. A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory; Harcourt Brace College: Fort Worth, TX, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Würbel, H. Ideal homes? Housing effects on rodent brain and behavior. Trends Neurosci. 2001, 24, 207–211. [Google Scholar]
- Wolfer, D.P.; Litvin, O.; Morf, S.; Nitsch, R.M.; Lipp, H.-P.; Würbel, H. Cage enrichment and mouse behavior. Nature 2004, 432, 821–822. [Google Scholar]
- Rollin, B.E. Cultural variation, animal welfare and telos. Anim. Welf. 2007, 16, 129–133. [Google Scholar]
- Toth, L.A.; Gardiner, T.W. Food and water restriction protocols: Physiological and behavioral considerations. Contemp. Top. 2000, 39, 9–17. [Google Scholar]
- Rowland, N.E. Food or fluid restriction in common laboratory animals: Balancing welfare considerations with scientific inquiry. Comp. Med. 2007, 57, 149–160. [Google Scholar]
- Kasanen, I.H.E.; Sørensen, D.B.; Forkman, B.; Sandøe, P. Ethics of feeding: The omnivore dilemma. Anim. Welf. 2010, 19, 37–44. [Google Scholar]
- Garner, J.P. Stereotypies and other abnormal repetitive behaviors: Potential impact on validity, reliability, and replicability of scientific outcomes. ILAR J. 2005, 46, 106–117. [Google Scholar]
- Lassen, J.; Gjerris, M.; Sandøe, P. After Dolly—Ethical limits to the use of biotechnology on farm animals. Theriogenology 2006, 65, 992–1004. [Google Scholar]
- Fisher, M.; Diesch, T.; Orange, M. Scapegoats and tourists—Science as the cause of and answer to ethical dilemmas. In Mixing it Up—Ethics, Science and Adventure Tourism; ANZCCART: Wellington, New Zealand, 2014; in press. [Google Scholar]
- Shriver, A. Knocking out pain in livestock: Can technology succeed where morality has stalled? Neuroethics 2009, 2, 115–124. [Google Scholar]
- Ali, A.; Cheng, K.M. Early egg production in genetically blind (rc/rc) chickens in comparison with sighted (Rc+/rc) controls. Poult. Sci. 1985, 64, 789–794. [Google Scholar]
- Collins, S.; Forkman, B.; Kristensen, H.H.; Sandøe, P.; Hocking, P.M. Investigating the importance of vision in poultry: Comparing the behaviour of blind and sighted chickens. Appl. Anim. Behav. Sci. 2011, 133, 60–69. [Google Scholar]
- Maehle, A.-H.; Tröhler, U. Animal experimentation from antiquity to the end of the Eighteenth Century: Attitudes and arguments. In Vivisection in Historical Perspective; Rupke, N.A., Ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 1987; pp. 14–47. [Google Scholar]
- Suomi, S.J.; Harlow, H.F. Depressive behaviour in young monkeys subjected to vertical chamber confinement. J. Comp. Physiol. Psychol. 1972, 180, 11–18. [Google Scholar]
- Ingold, T. From trust to domination. An alternative history of human-animal relations. In Animals and Human Society. Changing Perspectives; Manning, A., Serpell, J., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2000; pp. 1–22. [Google Scholar]
- Kedgley, S. Lifting the veil of secrecy surrounding animal experimentation. In Lifting the Veil: Finding Common Ground; Cragg, P., Stafford, K., Love, D., Sutherland, G., Eds.; ANZCCART: Wellington, New Zealand, 2004; pp. 27–32. [Google Scholar]
- Kellert, S.R.; Wilson, E.O. The Biophilia Hypothesis; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Pollan, M. An animal’s place. The New York Times Magazine, 10 November 2002; 58–64. [Google Scholar]
- Armstrong, J. In Search of Civilization. Remaking a Tarnished Idea; Allen Lane: London, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
© 2014 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).