GNORING

COMPASSIONATE

HE

UNIVERSITY

EDITED

OR

NATURE

The

BY

CHICAGO

Case MARC

CONSERVATION

PRESS for

BEKOFF

NO

MORE Part

One

2

4 3 1 S

Contents Benjamin Foreword it Who Preface Acknowledgments Ethics, ohn The Trying Environmental Venturing 7a. The A Talking Eileen Ecocide Dale Conservation, Ben

Shouldn’t

Pragmatic

Animal Infirm

A. Lives,

A. °eterscn

to

Crist Conservation,

Minteer

about Vucetch

and

Make B

beyond

Ethical

Who

BeA,q Beck Protection

the

View

Bushmeat

Difficult Animal Education

Dies,

Extinction and

about Foundations the of

the Michael and

and

Tyranny Rights, Movement,

Decisions

Us

“Bushmeat

Animal

Why

of

P.

and

Animal

of

of

Nelson

Easier Protection Small

Conservation

Conservation,

Human

Crisis”

Minds

Differences

Welfare

and

45 27 63

77

9 Part

Part

Three

Two

10

6

12 7 8

9 13 14

Conservation

Why Guidelines

Decision Joel Cautionary Danel

Coyotes,

Why Camilla

“Predator Why Animal

Reversing Marco Toward Reintroductions

Importance Przewalski’s Philip from

Lessons Why Sarah

Liv Conservation It The

Animal

Engaging Conservation, Brian

Eric

All

Baker

Berger

We

Ignoring

Evolutionary Imperative

J.

Individuals the

Comes

J. T.

P. Czech

Festa-Bianchet

Restorations

Shelton

Evolutionarily H.

Really Seddon Blumstein Welfare

Making

in to

Compassionate B.

Brink

Management”

for Fox

the

with Animal

Wildlife

Fail

King

of

Horses

Behavior

Down

Restoring,

Nature

Extinction

Economics

Behavioral

Don’t of

Biodiversity,

or

the

of and in

to

Matter

Extinction

Failing

Biology

Welfare Conservation

Steady

“Ratchet

to Tales

Conservation

and

Yolanda

Means

Care

Sustainable

Money

and

Recreating,

Red of

Conservation,

to

Research and

about

State

Is

and “Enlightened

Experience

Ineffective

Learn?

and

tip”

Important van Wolves

Politics

Conservation

Economics

Tourism

(and

the

Economy Heezik

Public

Harvest

for

and

Evidence

How

Species

through

and

for

Perceptions

Redecorating

Management”

in

Management

to

Conservation

New

Coexistence

for

Change

in

Brought

Wild

Zealand

EvidenceBased

of

This)

Nature

Biodiversity

Back ,....

103

95 125

113 119

137

153

159

167

183

171

Part

Part

Four

Five

16 15 20

17

18

19

22

23

21

Anthropological for Human Fostering

Nature Barbara

Conservation Susan Human

The Lessons The Pohlip Consuming David Empathy, Children, Carrie the The Oin

Culture,

to Using

Compassionate 4 Daniel Explaining A Cultural Peter India’s Vivek The

Paradigm

Triangular

Animals Protect

Mass Interconnectedness

War

Cultural

F.

Social,

Tedeschi,

Clayton Johns

J. Empathy

Packwood

Menon

and Dimensions

Ramp, Resilience

Natural

J.

Gene

from

L

Religion, on

Tradition

Media

Environmental

Animals,

Conservation

King

Animals

Animals

and

China’s

Nature Economic,

Nature—Turning

Politics Shift

Social Playing Other

Dror

Myers

Sarah

Heritage

and Other

Conservation Perspectives

Freeman

for

and or

and

Ben-Am

of

and

Wildlife

Movements

in

Compassion

Work

of

Politics Jr

Wildlife

Field M.

Social

Nature

Human

Spirituality

and

Animals

Social

Education,

Their

of

Bexell, Identity

and Biodiversity

Ethical

Crisis

Justice,

Keely

of

the

Homes

Management

on

Neuroscience Social

Jason

and

and Development

and

Tide? to

Ignoring

Context and

Boom

Jolie Develop

the

Conservation

Interactions Empathy,

Leigh

Activism

Health

Environment

NeSmith

and

Nature

of

in

Jarvis

a

Australasia

Conserving

David and

Unified

and

History

Compassion

B.

in

Global

Croft

Movement

205

223 197

237

257

295 287

211 271

331

7 24 25

26

Conservation Josphat

Biocultural Is Avatar

Bron

Anthony

The

Some Moving

About Marc

Contributors’

Index

Green

Search

Taylor

Bekoff

Closing

the

Ahead

Ngonyo

Religion

L.

Evolution

Contributors

Rose

for

and

Contact

Words

Biosynergy

with

and

and

an

Its

Heart,

Oxymoron?

Mariam

Challenges and

A

Information

Gabriela

Earthly

Peace, and

Wanjala

Compassion

in

Rose

Spirituality

and

Kenya

Compassion ....,......

343

353

405 389 379 361 399

Foreword

THE

in (some seems were elements, inhabitants of seven more more

and rates, know we all takes not other

“needless” ing of and tending

their

our

One

Another other thinkers.

Marc

should

to

be less

TWENTY-SIX

protectionism

taken

and

of billion such use

solar the to it.

animals

this

descriptions

is

seen

these

be animals. beautiful “Conservation” to

the

Bekoff

more lands, a

form

that

“Nature.” from capital not

system of exploitation.

conservation more

Nature

Some

people

as product

the

natural

by

be

of

privileged Nature

of waters,

has

space,

We planet than

these

humans.

N,

seen

argue

forms needless as

COMPELLING of for of

(going

been

and

are of

Nature).

processes the these

one

decades, is none

natural

as processes, all

Earth

that

said is

“Protectionism”

some that being (hence

nature exploring

dualistically

or

of

on

attending

“Nature.”

Ihere

essays

exploitation

of

the attending to

morally

eleven

eventually

(although Ignoring

assign

resources our

irreversibly

be

and and

of

microbes,

the

is and

so

is

the

authors

ESSAYS

the

no

here interactions, billion), the

double-barreled

much to

a

superior.

interactions

“Nature”

female

separate, to

consensus this this intersections

unity

iconic

and of may

has or protectionism

plants,

alike mentions transformed

inthisbookdifferwidely and Nature

“Nature.”

“Compassion”

using interfering

mounted

gender).

not

of

photos

Ignoring

that

even in

and human

at

animals,

support

on we

so

and

takes

faster is

humans any

“compassionate of many

exactly cruelty

can

being

of

Indeed,

transforming an

conservation

facilitates into

animals in

this

the

this other

observe

expedition and

life

more chemical

ways is

ignored

simpler form

Nature

what

toward Nature attend

should

there faster as

parts

and that

and

we

as of

at

is 2 Venturing SmaI

The

Conservation,

Paul AS

to such one relationship. two remain have

ignore which

tives, I imagination the ing

chooses and the one conservation the

cessful protection today. movements,

argue

another

To ONE

By rnegarnovements finds advocates

insights relationship

core

at as Animal

opportunities

can

Waldau

be relatively

fundamental

are

the

times

The Differences “animal

that silent

social

EXAMINES

to

sure,

insights also marty

described

term

vibrant,

describe choice

the efforts

and

prompted

beyond Historically, justify

about

such

affirm of movement

the

movement

Protection

minor reasons differences protection,”

animal

prospects the

is

of

of differences

and

in

as worldwide one for

key

features

the

below, advocates conservation.

ordinal other

the

no the

has

the

because

advocates

the movement

insights

these of

possible

way the

Environmental relationship

animal often

conservation

as

found

however,

natural

movement.

of

are, other,

are

movement

“animal

of

is an

each

Tyranny

“causes”

between

Movement,

these

meant at

nature. movement been of

from

of animal

synergies, in

of protection times

is

It each

the allies.

movement

each

many meant

is the

described rights’ both

differences

of

to

to

other

possible,

ought Instead,

real. movement, the

social

protection the

suggest

name

of relationship

even

of

countries longer

known a

these

it txso

conservation

startlingly In movement and

movement

is to

Education

offer

these movement

siblings.

this as

without

this

movements,

that

have then,

social “animal by

and

tense—differences

by

chapter,

movement important

do

no worldwide chapter around

other

deeper

various between an

to

not movements

broad

stretch

However and,

quEstion

as

arm-in-arm

liberation,” reaffirm

movement

major

undermin

involve

advancing

however,

the

suggests,

perspec

thereby,

some

and

names

lessons

animal just of these

world

social

that

one

suc

the

the

im to

of

as beings 28 portant

promote an est has that

is important cess question

pace to porary of from

ment and ments a

The that Background variety species

a ing diversity

about rights” off much

of movement ways

here

deeper

strength

astonishing

this The

human

Second, relevance

Third,

human-caused

What

from

make

with in

to

to

animal

and

humans

one

to

beyond

in

framed

the

question, address the in realities,

the relationship recognition protections,

of or

the

efforts line

by

different sense in its certain

often law to another. what

ancient it

“animal

value to

skills

animal

because 1970s why

pointing

conservation different

the

movement be

is

inception

and,

to

the

and

our

encounter

array in

attempting on

to an

a of

are

comes

the

has

natural

addresses

that of

which

lack terms groups

worldwide

develop

in

the cultural

second, species.

extraordinary legal protection”)

the

movement cultures. problems,

animal

the

in

points

recognition

it the

of of

industrialized

to

ways

in

of

riches

produces

the

living to

the

Animal

most had

of

the

education,

is animal

considers ally

part

coherence.

not

mind movement?

an

what extremely three

latter traditions. how In

studies the

made animal

than

in

rapid

decisively

of

This

reached

and

beings relevant conservation

fact, astonishing overlap

and

many

(under

animal the

PAUL

are

today both protection

can

questions.

multiple

Movement has of

part

range

in limits

growth

diversity

these

any

for

not

worldwide movement modern moral

to

be

countries this

outside

the

locales

of

diverse,

WALDAU

by

Some

of when and

the

The features

a

number

any

only rightfully

movement’s

important

these

of

of

field

efforts forms conservation

the chapter,

rights, of

facets

development

problems. variety yet

the answer

of

movement

First, movement?

animal

cannot

people

historical

the

people

our

to

nineteenth

known

social

a

its

at humanities

around animal

to

of

of

of

feature

deal

are

animal

in

own or

thought

many

why critical

the

the the

social the

points of

animal

protection

a

characterize

even

being be

around

movements

deep,

with

social

as

Others, living conservation

species. conservation

conservation animal

is

protection

movement? causes

easily proceeded

the

related

names,

movement

“religion

of

movements

the I

century “liberation

points

to

of

worked

answer

an

sustaining

critical protection

and

world.

movement

the important

as

beings animal

understood

protection

astonishing

but however,

efforts

But

“protection”

our to,

such world

this

are

call

and

and

movement.

also this

at

out

thinking of

first,

This

The

movement.

sciences. and

movement

beyond

movement movement

distinctive a diversity

clearly

upon that the

for as

roots

then

animals’ different

in

features are

opening contem develop

attempt

answer find its

the modern “animal

living great

unique move

gained

unless

asked

range

a

suc

took

for and

in

fact do

the set

the

as

a

local political

These other-than-human

even many which or justification powerful place widespread commentator

nior

ways, However cacy must stances.

industries insight such ary

Concern have about Karen

established called must religious formulation done rights

The

No ern complete no

Advocates

depends

efforts speechwriter

when

for

and

be quarters religions

age roots

age

comes

is

industrial

identified

fact

somehow

to possibilities. that

all

Armstrong

of “the

said

“the The

the

forms

time.

one

has has

you.

leading

for

all

living that

sages

that

are

has

for today

disregard.

“it

ethic upon that

axial

polarization, from beings—not

cause” ever Matthew

ever religious

of

[nonhuman

chooses of

might

As

but

dominating

is connected Venturing

of

use

the not,

conservation

farm.

the

in extend it beings

difficult

its

of

far

concern

been cultural age.”

are

inflicted

his of

in living with

diverse also

China,

antecedents nonhuman

President

Golden

modern

As

to has

her

as

kindness

easily

as

not alive (Scully

to

traditions)

Scully,

During

more be

to became

a the suggested

the

witness

beyond

2006

often

beings

characterize orthodox

recurring

animals] understanding

to the

institutions to

India,

sure,

for

which

sources.

all upon

very

Axial

and

be

Rule:

get

form

solicitous

ancient

2002,

entire

and

George

who

other

book

animal

the

had

understood

and

the

a

animals

a scenes well. beginning

produced

to of

animals Israel,

hallmark sages

do

man

promote environmental

recently, has

has

Tyranny is period

belief—was

happened

today’s

to

be

The

world. anticruelty x)

preoccupation

living

Some

such not

W.

roots

go protection, One

found

impacted (such

or

common

to

to

to were

Great

and

as

do

Bush,

it.” forward animals, such be

caricature understand

from

an

beings.

of

of

. of

animal has consistent

a

not mere

as to that .

Greece

found

concerned, Small ancient as

radical

Transformation

much .

also the religion.

others Each

an

massive

observed been religion”

those 900

only

that

shape

among

important the

resources—opposition

protections to

instance

Today,

more the Differences in

on movement

tradition

in success

taught

BCE

human-centeredness have

theme

is

the

prompted what

finds

highly

involved

movement

any

something

best-known The

results. many

values, punishments easy

curious

respect

in (Waldau human

animal

to then,

functioned given

you

best-selling

that

a

a that of

observed time

even

200

to

polarized

developed

best-selling

individuals’ fascination

have

Upton

are in

The

would

language, there

identify

day

“your

and scholars

by

for

BCE,

movement,

in cultures legal

though

in

when

2011)

ancient

example

people at also prominent

prehistory

the

caring.

important

with

how are

as

not

any

Sinclair’s

concern

systems

ancient scholar

circum

its

sacred experi his the

across

often

many

book,

advo

with have

mod lives

care own and

from

such

and

and as

and 29

Yet

sal

se

of

a

it 30 enced

array Similarly, other ment human-centeredness and

1996)

with comfort conservationists

sistence and

in to Consider

Ironically. is Inconvenient

self-indulgence ing. possibh (PEW

But the

which

A

known ecology-conscious ieligious ses jor from ture a

agriculture—in startlingly tor

ated Couple by of fauna.

(2008) reason

the sorts.

is

classic opposition faculty

was

but animal

claims some

reports, who

the

out thus

that Organization

that

by animal factory

Commission conservation

two conservationists

made it

A

for

justif} emits,

Pew

industrialized In to this

and

sunply focusing is,

inconvenient

we familiar rationalizations common of member

advocates

about

movement Join high aggressive

examples, fact,

nonetheless, Truth

such

with

there the

Charitable

farming. must

movement. for

inspired

as well-known

such of

the

figures

refuse

the it fact,

opposition our “tradition,”

the as those

anchored

(2006). on are

were, to entitled protect northwest at

animal

element

2008) advocates

the

myopia tenor

species. of as industrialized

a many many

challenges

What although agriculture

is

emendous

for to solely

majm used question

this Trusts

2006 conservation

the and

often

a

recognize Such

the

about movement

even that “’s arid frustration paradigmatic Such

reasons PAUL

report conservationists—an is in in entire

to and private

to

environmentalists

by of emission American report tragic

have

and

more a much

eating the depth opposition

“by

many invasive

the formidable

why to rcluctance myopia that

continued as pollution

WALDAII

transportation

confirms,

the

ens

power animal described

seen

most agricultures the proper4 about

United

quotidian. of

of

even the in

the more of

and

iromnentalists with Johns

of

Long

the

the

impacts decrying

law

species

some opposition form may greenhouse

more-than-human

measures,

consumer plant this,

Al and

environmental

has

United movement opposition

States some could industrialized coalition to silence

Shadow” school

Hopkins

in rights, Gore

be

of

social

give of conservationists’ been

a as

emissions

of that can

harms sector.

ignoring factory driven 2008

course,

animal

be it

there Nations abiding,

avoided greenhou’.e

laments

up

in and were, grounded

confined products dislocation in gases are and at

listed.

of

(FAQ School

to

report the spired

stems an

to times

business,

are privileges by farming. harming

conservationists

is the

protectionists’

nonhuman agriculture of

nature. Irom

and income

face protection Food that

in

the almost 2006)

that conservationists

greenhouse world

animal

of pablished

by from

his

of ignore

aminal

in reflects gas

industrialized there denial of Public problems

and factory

even opposition more

poignant a

local

political,

What

that a

of

stream. emissions

diverse (Abram autistic

the

judgment

move

Agricul

nature. many

are as

animals

produc in

Health have and/or than ways reveal oirith flora

dis a

could farm

gas

in ma have the sec

cre

An

r

tion standards” nizations Heavy allows nonhuman tion. and with repudiating

edgment, certain nomenon

wise ment major at contemporary campus tr animal man credited communities talk tive November protection). aie conservationists, potection

and disc

Public in circles One

A Harvard

the 55

ndividnaI The

the What some many

second

to

committed religious uss privilege.

stems low focus conservationists helps

explanation midwestern

larger

environmental

hint

oppose

ions. to

animal

around

American

Policy to

among

places.

secular else

ways animals,

address

on

Law rabid be

2020 nuance

concerns in example course, at

community Again,

who nonhuman

sure, a

leaders could

courses “moral common establishment Venturmg movement If

few

the

movement School

Ignoring people some

the so, forms But

and meeting

who

for

factory

opposed law the

lass that

how differences which animal they

prevent fairness

of world—for

consider

from religious

the

equivalency” discussing to

causes animal workers, in

school absolutely

some schools, of in

there beyond

to use

ignore

the share

animal of refusal

animals, on farming

human-centeredness, in

February

their can ignore Nature?

any has, movement life’s

conservationists, today

Washington, this and tyranny conservationists’

of

(some have

movement

observed

communities the the a

now operates

talk the the an maybe

then, discussions. fear

of future law

issue?

how example, balance

Tyranny refuse

nature. may been movement’s animal fall conservation-minded those natural local

(this of

2011 of be

experienced often

of

“animal both their

these short lie

is as Fairness

found motivated equally to

small as

communities’

to was

people

who

that

of a impacted require in law A DC,

give

me a

consequences—deep

each allow factor supporters SinaI!

communities

and kind the

conservationist problems of

the

so

course his in caricature differences oppose at rights”

of

much appalling profile current

and tyranny

when

individuals, from like

a year more Differences explanation of

by such representatives conservation acknowledgment

by in

conference

political by

balance

fundamentalist

animal

various at their

attention

because working

thousands the it econiche, global

are in

a

and than

their

ethical

of

comes

fear individuals

versions of

certain

could can inauguration described small fear

the

opponents

require protectionists

correctness as two-thirds

university. affiliated

climate to policy

given

they

prompt on well hand

of animal to to and colleagues

banish

differences. watersheds, foster harm

public

of of of a supporting protections animal

deem

loss

as acknowl

to

that this societal discussion Christian or conserva legislative

in below).

disrup

intrepid

me with to

move orga other in animal

animal glove

of Since of

of phe policy and

there

the

such

law 31 high

at hu

in

ac on

an

a

a 32

proposals

be protection

for

are

interests, not and

suggested, equip which

forward,

Other further

tecorvo social

it. the who

tonishingly

fundamental suggested.” These

social denominated demographics

leaders as

see and

The Worldwide First all

tion

mere

marginalized

example,

Yet

dominated and

Overall,

civil only

environmentalists.

With

real

forms

the

concludes

general

animal people

is.

movements, the

segments

background despite

Question—Why

hardest include

mention

segments

1966),

animal

rights

difficulties of

and

and for

many

are this

ideologically

into

“The

of

animal

however, the

quickly

This

example,

education publications)

activists merely

movement

now

the

sketch

completely

features

Conservation

radicals and “It’s effect.

many

segments of movement that dominated multiplicity major

in

truth

of

are,

historian conservation

are

all

important

being

movement

women’s and hard of

the

begin.”

and

the

to

in

to

it

kinds

there

course, Yet,

not graduate

in a

is

As

that

and contrmersial or efforts ideological be

is

win mind, modern key

has enough

has

that animal

made

of

by Is

the important

moderates moving

in

more

as that

by

also geographically

is

concern had of any

of the

the it.

rights.

a

had major

an

public

for

environmental without

reason

both

worldview pertaining

we

advocates Movement? PAUL

opposition

strategies

advances

But programs

and

that

important

suggests to “a version

other

effective movement

protection Animal

as

success

turn

at

far start

orientation

women

ways,

it

one environmental

policy

would,

WALDAU

of

all.

to to

group

or

is greater

significant social

to

the

a

agree

note, only philosopher-filmmaker

of conservatives—powerful

a

Such

worldwide

to revolution, where that

with

(as for

vandals

Movement three the

humans-first

cousin the diverse

discussions—in

and

younger

the and

People

are

and

if

evidenced

afterwards,

educator a

movement

impact

animal

with

moving

the

animal

certain a of

enacted,

multi-issue

importance

the

questions

youth, moving students

pattern

other

those

of

of

animal

precautions,

animal

one

for movements.

often

the

generation.

the

even but

on

movement

movement

at

groups

Important

David

within

social the

and

agenda historian by

conservation

society

astonishingly

earth.” put

is

also

a might

study

once

movement

harder movement

polarized that

curriculum,

slow

not

Ethical

agenda,

of

the an

some

Orr

conservationists

movements,

ecological

that

the

overlap we’ve

will

that

“public

uncommon

United

than

education

easily

suggests pace,

While Animal

continues still

has

(1994, (Beers

movement—

membership

are

to

Treatment

additional

help

is

diversity

milieu previousll

won, moved

movement now to

the

has

the

and

emulate.

crucial

quickly.

policy’ between

faculty

States,

even

sustain

5)

visions.

anyone

2006)

protec

bane (Pon

some

goes

can

that has still such

to for

as in

the

of

to

of

worth Animals

company 0131

and intelligence Youth profit for... significant (the tion

are tection

for six erinary only to

a ing

“s studies” day—to-day helds nailv

differences, has

an ad-antage nionsense allot’, point similarities of cxample and

telling

thirteen),

Smilar

by?”

Fin

relatively Admittedly, straight

iy”

nimaIs

about developments mainstream protection

appeal

of

Red

one

shared

that ed mulling significant organization

Culture

ther, of

Hurricane

of

peaking

of movement—overall

Medicine

puts

example

Cross.

to

those

or that

“human-animal

brings

relatively

8 such

can

points

is

features

that

world years

to

overshadow the

+

two

purpose.

and

of unconvinced

unimportant

and that percent

off

research

described

individuals

now over

Study.” to not

animal developments,

which

the

making

iAntunng

among many

home

males. subcultures

both

Public wavs—nlore

(1999—2005)

involving

in

young could

Katrina). of PETA

had regularly

intensely

be

what

two

that

minor at

some

these

female,

meaningfully

all.

had

many only an company

people movement According

common

13—14-year-aids

be motements Policy

both

itself held 13—24-year-olds

people.

the

beyond

obvious

But

because

differences studies;’

years that

just differences

individuals

made

Harvard appear female

involved in following animal today,

nearly important

it with

as

one today

on

received

at

the

the

the

is authentically the

the

“the

In

cause

about

Tufts point—something

this has

to important

obvious

today

it

world,” students animal

Tyranny

some

graduate entering grouped and

2006,

Law

pool protectionists

greatly a remain,

the

addresses

fostered

with leading

is

below.

two-to-one really and

study

would University’s

great

the

allowed

.”

at in essential

School

study,

entering

in of

Label answer movement’s

published

thereby

either of an

29.1%

role

(the thirty under

outweigh North

means

suggests to

classes program

Small

publicity

measuring

because

global

astonishing

important

create.

issues

consider

“PETA

appears

to of

Networks,

class

one

similarities

is

of margin

to

Differences umbrella

classes

obscure women

and

brings

America

is when Cummings

that

youth in

this

its

fifty

Indeed,

about

amiss

of that

I

sizes

of

the

after

US insights

is

conservationists, directed

latest

the below

these

the education

further

the

age

When the

number

applicants

meaning over such

entirely

dissimilarities. directly

culture

veterinary

obvious in

when

ranged Inc.,

the the

most

terms

animal

would

tyranny

from group.”

the and #i

“Humanitarian

movements,

the

Equally

differences

School

2005 appeal

have

what

at

assessing

overall

a

trendsetting

the

animal

of female.

the like

marketing marketing

the frontiers involve the

runner-up

from

simi]arities

movement

in volunteer

academic

included any

mere

devasta

What

any

of

political

existen schools

“animal

vantage

of

Center

of

reveal

non

eight small

corn ani it

pro

Vet

“tyr

This

For

fact the

the

33

the are

is —

is 34

Second

Move ties Conservation Conservation upon

take habitats

active and niches high

although

individuals in mon are shared and While

movement, “others”

nearby birds, local

tiny charismatic

included

there”

against centered humans. does contexts. who to

those

ecosystems. The

to

essential As

take

mix

them communities

on

insight mammals,

individuals,

animal

at would

citizens

recognize not

the (including the

each

overlap

living beyond insights

feral

the

that

Question—Why

a metaphors,

and seriously a

there

are

It powerful.

justifications seriously

mean

animal

But nonhuman Different

mattering

list

of cannot

that protect then,

are

colonies, megafauna “neighbors”

protectionists to

and

the

beings’

call

by these

is

Movement?

This is

of the their

that

amphthians, essential

exactly

realities

impossible

individuals

raccoons,

animal

some

and

businesses,

beyond communities), public

movement the

nonhuman

upon

human

be

as

nonhuman

difference

often

cousins,

drive well-being. movements

in

Pace, social

large,

other-than-human

the

primates

denied

individuals

difference

and

that,

what such

protection

that policy

individuals,

of

to

the

animal

ignorance-driven

any

Does

community.

often

mice,

of both to

and

other and their

in

frankly,

and happen as

is

species

natural

and

that “ethics”

themselves

PAUl

ignore—other-than-human

“others”

human

their is

sometimes priorities. animals

elephants

that

ecological Beyond

work

movements

calls in the deer,

movement

and reptillans important, well-being.

as

governments living

“ethics”

and

both

Different

WALDAU

communities

are to

to

line.

have

businesses,

allies, Animal

biodiversity,

upon

means diligently

coyotes,

individual

members

whether

be

are

are

our

any beings.

call

world,

or

and

In

dogs

long

in

caricatured

worlds.

necessarily

included

in

ethics, as

and set

both

difference close has

upon

but

conservation

rely Similarly,

in

tigers

our Protection

members Ways,

and

and

harmed

of

to to a

on the The many

kindred

of

it

and

to on conservation

variety

practices

backyards evolutionary

must

fundamental

and

protect

notice

cats its

behalf so does

How

communities

and

value

focal

versions

within animal

Than

governments many

advocates

segments.

committed

as

to

is,

conservation-minded in

both

thrive

of

wolves,

not

else

spirits.

including

of

point keep

our

living of in other

the

species

species. contexts

Movement

cloaked

more

the animal

local

our fact

movement

eclipse humans aiid

of

can

households

individual

in

and

these

cousins, is

human

ethics beings

and

animals

must

moral

Clearly,

habitats For beyond.

a

who or

that

a functioning

on to

ecological

the panoply

only

sometimes

nonhuman movement to

in

also migrating

the

protecting

example,

realities

sentient

and

struggle

that live are

human-

notice

animal

count,

circle. abili

calls

those com

many many

and

lives

those or

that

Also non

“out

in

are.

of

in

community? animal

a and humans individual of in contexts. protection human explains thing broad shelters, that people a There that experience analysis altruistic predisposition ary p care as

that to-individual that have insights man local on discernible,

Focus

companion

pronounced

animal

oach

not One

different

Conservation

taking

forces center

individual-to-individual

“self-actualization

ethics, one-on-one

conservation

actors

each

great

individuals

is

theoretical

at

harming

thrive confirms

of

individuals—in

in

have

also

(Trivers

why

the feral

that

caring—in

the Such protection

the human

of responsibility

that

centers

a

(this

personal and

because

as

a individual-to-individual

This immediate

version us

with animal

motivating

encounters

so tradition if

realism Darwinian

are cats

theistic

for

actions created

natively

not

the

Venturzng

individual

that many does may

caring 2011

is cashes actors—the

the

considerations, nonhuman

individual-to-individual

efforts

and

on

true

simple

in

they

other or

is

of caring

meaning.

in

not

and

heartbeat saving

is

a

Christian animal

dogs, emphasis of is

lives

are,

survival

other ethics

of comprehends

part impacts

whether

healthy

a

out

geniuses

for account—namely,

beyond possible

in are emphasize

are Jeremy

practicality

good

words,

this

nonhuman

rational

quite

from about

beyond

one’s

as be

sensibilities and

less

less specific

words, neighbors

level

that

protectionists

kind

a

True,

explained

summary),

the

advantages

habitat

on

of

focus ethics,

on Benthsm

immediately this local the

existentially individual

an

only

of

actions

other

there

of calculations

Tyranny

is

specific

the

has

the

the the level human

ethics

nonhuman

preventing

individual-to-individual way, animals

to

some highly

and

as fauna.

others.

on

conservation a foundational

animal them—everyday choice-to-choice, they

individuals nontheistic for

are

a are

provides

central

as

by

can choice-to-choice,

of

cooperation.

side-effect also

of

living

that Robert

standpoint,

animal

itself, for humans communities.

multiple

those relevant

course, not Viktor encounter. Small

start

Further,

from

do

relevant

Thus “do-able”

provide

movement

those of

suggests

harm lives

only

beings.

in place

Peter its

a

Differences Trivers’s with

actions

specific

many

movement very

is Frankl’s

are Buddhist one although

importance

offspring,

and with of important living

grounds

vision a

from

to

to

in ways

profoundly

Why? Other Singer’s products a

easily Accordingly, self-transcendence”).

in

personal,

paradigm

a

experience individuals

circumstances.

the

human concern

day-to-day comprehensible

impact

biological is

the a

reciprocal

harms

the

beings

suggestion day-to-day

human

of

that

nonetheless

daily encounters

the

ethics,

Because ethical

understood

sense

understanding for

advocates and

standpoint

utilitarian

but

of

of

it

life. ethics-based

existentially

discernible,

suggesting for

lives in

puts individual-

important

that of

evolution

its

family

also

of for

is

features

basis a

feminist

theories

specific

animal

animal

theme

a

larger

having

some

ethics.

below

of front many

had

focus

have

This

that

feel can

hu ap

for

35 by

as to

of

a 36

are meaningful

ening each enormous has

of recognition the ics ecomche can for

Third

Consider Animal

When

creates thinking tolerance. their fosters which

riches the factual den” everything

the

Paying

the

of “Animal for

year animal

though

living the By animal

exceed number requests

crucial

use

of

1933

this

ethical

individual

it limits

the

conservation-inspired

Question—What

others

us

American

students of

for

animals after a

nonetheless

optimal information,

Movement

considerations,

deeper

in

about first our attention Nobel

as

development

year

law potential

130. fewer movement

their

answer

Further, spin-offs

law” of

of

a

as

that

an

(Waldau

year,

skills

sciences in

shared

American course

this

well. the

2002.

This

individual

the

own

nsy

have

seek Prize

circumstances nonhuman

has

than sense

really

Bar

the

development importance

to

since

role

to

larger tenfold

looking Similarly, for

become “keeps

completely

insights

environment. in

2011 to

more

the education

Association and

American which a

thus

winner

and this

of

counts”

dozen

is 2000

remedying

of

law the

both all

root individual-to-individual

puts striking.

Are

intuitively values.

community?”

their

create

86)

than

question

increase

terribly

of

beyond animals lessons

schools

Conservation features.

a

about

as

American

in question

animal

the

which

PAUL

all distinct the

of

for

legal

a

40 limits,

and

in physics.

relevant

important

offered result

our

and

habitat

riches

any

When

law Most teaching

of the

silent

within about offering the

obviously WALDAU one invest

education

are

understands.

law

experience

the

recognition

but

tendency

field

Sciences importance

and of

of

species law

of

building

notices. even

such

as liarvaid

Relevant

almost

and all

to

petitions about

in habitat,

the a

it

legal

a

in

schools personal

at

important

Movement? conservation ethics

decade

the

topic with

group

though

a

the

humanities least

has

establishment

line

to can

couise. everything

200 education.

words

The in

blocks

protections

of Law

last ignore

personal wildlife

Further, fosters of — great

signed

then

magnificently one

Features tell has

on

the

interactions

law and

namely. taking

protection

science

decade,

School

skills

the

us beesi

As of

animal

power

that

offered potential

nature,

schools educational

by

a

certain

since and,

Erwin

communities,

01

basis

close deeper this

commitment,

full

coies

like conservationists

driven

took

spring

“supplies

‘who

adopted

are

of

and

of

law

as

responsibility skill

such

it

This of

emphases

accredited

rigor, to

diversity the

Schrbdinger.

to

importantly,

things

notice, something coherent

for sense can

the

of

these

course cind

our

b

the

thus 2010,

a

dynam students

benefit

sharp

its student

history

course. critical

foster

what a

hearts,

lives

of about

skills

even lot

and has

first

will

this

and

the

the

of

by

or-

of

ciring world mals though Minds cated. companion subtitle their evident well-known, animals or wildlife, The tiative people nating in haps A animal the species way see develop all Conservation’s tail emerge entire cross-cultural deeply that quiries of this

the

courses

the It

Animal suggested of

in

core with

natural

matter

street”

is

surely roost illuminate

desire

which

animal conservation

may and

ultimately degree-granting

beyond

work

the important

(http:

moving who to protection the

line— in

of

in

that

ever

insights

such

the

our

obviously the Diana Saving

in

law, multiple

International

seem

emergence

has to “close

animals

connections

feature

run

helps

of

tile

even the development

//wems-initiative.org/). protection more in

past

protect way

the

animal

the as

it

literature tile

opened

the

current

animal

the newly

‘entnnng Reiss’s

turns appealing

harmful Dolphin

of the

to

Lessons

to

animal

treatment

iconic

species in that conservation

fully.

biology, Center

second

of

fields.

tile recognize,

as

in

our

Wildlif

general

efforts

the

studies.

humans’

out,

programs

of the

representatives

many emerged

many

2011 conservation

movement—for protection

hearts.”

realities between

Union

nonhuman

dogs and

Lives.

species movement

beyond

forms.

line,

These national

of

is

paragraph for

but

about

restoration

of

of book

but is different

awareness

Enforcement other a

Today,

and

other theil, Biodiversity,

evident dangerous

mind nonetheless

the extending

for

and

field

Other

at the one

they education-based Doing

around

conservation

The

cats

both

Animal

and movement Conservation

arts Traffic

Tyranny

animals, that environmental

animals field

is

thus,

of

and

movement.

of

study—a

kinds

Dolphin

Conservation

of

developments

impoverished

in

as biology,

international

religion

so the dealing

this that

example,

animal

the the

that

heart

many humans’

implications

their

university-level

makes

group

Monitoring of

undergraduate

Protection

are involves of

chapter,

reaches

that whole social

world,

Small

has

in

rarely scientists

and

recent recuperation

to

with fields, and attention

the

protection

the

of

These exploded it

draw (http://traffic.org)

developments the

the

favorite

Differences

science—based animal

easier

and animals, Nature smaller, of

Mirror:

courses

serious focuses nonhuman efforts often

there beyond

if include

living

depths

example

but

the

it are the

System

insights’

ecological

today

fails

and

to

particularly education

and more-than-human

protection

in

is

nearby domesticated goes attention

can

(IUCN) beings

to Exploring

risks.

see less biology, history-based

on

a the focusing popularity

the and

to

care

reduce

openly

very graduate

appears

come

(WEMS)

in

well why

take clearly animals,

relevance rapid well species

breadths

approaches

if

now Thus

any

awareness

across

real

Red

one

is

of and

and naming in to

Dolphin

trade are beyond

call

known

easy on

detail, spread

seeing

domi in

many

dove levels about “two- trun

heart

even

fails List, line,

ani

also per

and

Ini

out

our the the

the

in

of

in to to 37 38 to

certain making a

Such trade

people used

animals medical own dollars

cats fed companion

inbreeding individual

other-than-human mentality to power. see found conservationists. without

to of laudable, flora

is protections

conservation Similarly, conservation

niches to

ful sense privilege the

see In

caused products

humans human-centeredness.

the also the a in in

challenge It

quality experiences summary,

companion-animal-centered to larger where the

is exotic turns that research harms are

cats breakthroughs Such human-centered

at

creates play

any spent that

category whereby all animals’ but by consumed

creates

animals that the an

and

harming

ecosystem. of

acknowledgment marketed out the

of extensions

for down species.

ignorance

are

and

it the

exclusive areas, insights life

annually.

their companion

making

produces dogs by

pressures

can

feral

the that

disturbed Consider

in

salient imbalances when any

the animals lives.

“pets”

the lots by

be

consequences, the feral

on can

in

the

even Cat

virtue to number

by

pet and

done harsh

companion the

or which of

of

world, concern brought

features

Foregrounding thrust

colon) be wildlife fact a

cats Protecting the fully

on

mere human different

how

industry. simple, harmful never-ending key

animal and has

sold

PAUL

in

of

other that realities

food

of challenged alone the

of

ways representative human animal protecting their

but risks,

imbalanced

favoritism exists.

how

into

to

of

for

serious

the

walking equivalent dominance

WALDAU

paradigm pleasurable category animal animals

the animals when human citizens such

nondogs

can Lots

that very one’s

feral

human human

cats especially

suffered

protection

domination if result

the

be

valuing. search the medical

are

of

by popularity,

such

feral cats impact)

own with

industry. of

presence the

seriously

because in

needs unowned by can

households, failure very support both of drives is and cats,

can

of

industrialized by

from definitive cat acts, merely such pleasures one-hundred-plus family

dogs for

if

create all

Dogs

problems

noncats other insights. destructive

exacerbate

the focusing someone colonies

and

is into marketable

to the

nonhumans

Lastly, like

presences. disease dogs is for of since

out really

animal see dogs,

another dog

and

among

pleasure

such the extensions

nonhuman incredibly

individual

walking

but representative of

are

and

these

are

overbreeding or

cats

center at on that dangers just

balance

willingly

cats,

animals

and

unreflectively

the countries indulged of all

cat

movement

made the cats individual-level

products

mindless

may

‘This

consequences another compromise the

of costs

can

already starvation

can with and

billion

of

most

harmful dogs wildlife of are

animals

fauna exist

with have

ecological “pets.”

amounts

is foster

refuses cause (that human

other

with often dogs

no who

beauti

of and

Imman and

form and

pro US

for a both and

and

all

way

is,

and

is

no in

F

paradigms mal have community more-than-human to ment: that the

animal number conservation

to concentrating

Shared the another one There onl) efit dividual’s human living,

animal borders als pmompt possible, Focusing

between rogether

obscure some that of

consider

protection

animal

we attested, There animal widely

behooves a An that

religion.

Vv

the series

drive are,

ay protection

call

open interconnected think

example

protection species of

conclusion:

Visions

prompts

of

and international humans

paradigmatic

the comprise

important. is local that

circles family movement solely in “wildlife.” proposed movement

humans’ all

of

both

it another

movement’s doors

“backward”

cultural

Getting fact, impressive can,

any solely life—namely,

Venturing is nested

is

as

specifics

that the

so

and on

can the individuals whole, (including where community. as

civil

around then,

many

(so

the

important

human

on presence connectedness a

companion

illustrates for class

Suffice reach and communities—the conservation

divides.

that whole religious Ethics

and

evident webs

awareness, larger society,

beyond “pets.” status

prompt

and dogs local this

ways insight

powerful

in

relevant

the

of conservation

advance

a individuals

free-living

its

that

worldwide it

full companion is to world. key benefits

world.

of fauna, and of Both to the

in to Thus,

in and understanding clearly such

communities look

lives

that a understanding the understanding are animals

say Tyranny which insight the

failure to cats), and

insight

that and

animal the to

In

cross-fertilization The one’s locally and

free-living that local while

sits

not popularity

nonhuman

as

all a such

need

all

same

animal generalities in takes beneficiary

such

c this the well—the

of at is under animals) individual

there to as nonhuman

econiche.

that the and

cation

turn

protection small

and ignored. it heart an

to see the larger

key

insight, is place, mutual

involved

more

and environment, learn international one

are

of the fosters look humans’ movements. individuals

one important

paradigmatic of Differences

of

insight animals. of

how

communities

employment many and ignores

special

dominion responsible,

social himself ecosystem, the a in so all can of

more In

animals

robust enhancement but

and

comes to countless

communication the when of

in local one

conservation

exist.

place

reflective cannot

act

which there As

each realities broadly.

conservation legal nature truly

that

in

or sense,

communities version

a in

This

community, many

from both

because of

healthy

form

a in

herself,

ways

and

of alert are companion of protections of community significant the

supports be ways

our

if is

life these the an cultures are This then, circles

created

the

of also allowed one human

of

that between

the

individu larger,

move area dialectic

like

one of ani ethics, insights seen the

Earth.

39 across is

fails easily

world any

social ben the the

the yet in

that the the that

in

is

by

as 40

movements day instructive most Ecology (an workshops commitment

held in servation

sustainability mals of character others—this tions the in

as Earth 2011,

There

protection not problem and munity

these

each

a fact, These (well

association

When

ence ers”

can Mans interesting

self-transcendence.” compassion/anticruelty human many societies.

at

species. outstanding

in ignore,

but

the

xv)

as

the

(http://fore.research.yale.edu/). the movement be,

are

our social are,

above

of

our

movement two animal have

Search

The

ethical humans about development

2011 that of

a

getting is that species classroom

human

treatment

many

then, This part and

violence today

important, largest is group,

movements movements.

following

living been 8o of

a

annual is. the

for ways

example powerful

movement systems, conservation

is of more

percent

facets

human beyond experience

many as or

and

Meaning, to

the

point

the

sustained

the

community beings.

a and

members

that as

in making

whole.

of

meeting

thereby practical

than This

group’s are workshop

a

of

our section of

reasons

nonhuman

animal

of

and in of win-win the

around

animal

share “religion

Sponsored

the

course,

impacted which is As

traditions foreground the all

“self-actualization io,ooo shared

‘I

others—again. self

various PAUL true

in

practical,

his

of

more-than-human working

Viktor

benefits

humane provided

annual

context

insight

invites the a that movement

some

to allows

protection the

has

not wide approach focused is

for

world. and

WAI

emphasize

scholars

insight Yale

animals,

wisdom world)

in shapes

Franki by

only by

a that

other

conference. At

driving

of range the

fact humans an recognition together very

ecology”

DAU sustainability-focused education

the

a

more

University’s

the

a

revealing for

on

invitation began

larger

been biologically

that that easily species—paradoxically it American

(1982, self-identify offers

our

and high

traditions American

human teaching our of

is

matters

than the

the

to

possible

secular

deepens

character the our

teachers), to movement

originally world

local community. percentage

become

surmount benefits

following

and

115)

particular A

example notice of

our

message

individuals

to own Forum

high

not

Academy

about how

environment,

anchored the wrote rich

understand Academy

that cultures

oniy treatment

as

the

whether

and as

as profile

and to religious. driving

in

there world

both

on

is has ftilly passage

of of

driving nonhuman any

as

of

in individuals

humans.

value religious

practices

our our

many how Religion

take hut a

humans his of

as emerged,

in

of differences conservation side-effect human

is

full

workshop

this larger Religions these

children’s

well. insight of also

sni

the Religion influential

a

the

of

seriously, insights (Waidau

religions, So

and

robust

of

human

all-scale

experi

animal

crucial tradi for

con

and it

as and

other

“oth it ani to

coIn

and

the

is

a the we is, of

of

F

seeing war wars. Because Arid without

any

oppressions that lished Humanity.

defining Indeed, though harm the of other worse

and other, the rights women (Kristoff

Beyond

of This

We

by Our

sive

indigenous

on

hope

If

problem nothing violence The

have men in in Durant

New There

genocide-based

one one

all

visited

each Worse comparable

is

time, than all this destructiveness, even

Violence

are a

our

some

global know for

important

that

characteristics.”

war. were around been

our mass

York is the

and The

is routine the

other,

that

war tempted human

Goidhagen,

dating larger (1968)

could

strengthens Than occurred

human-on-human of genocides people upon this

that Few

statistics

killed

killed murder Times

peoples author WuDunn

X’enrurng

cause

course

or need

the

pattern

our Better

in

believe

genocide,” War: form time from be

“gendercide”

because, the

observed

species

addition

in in world. to try

Magazine

accounts

our

of worse

talk

explains after

in

that all good on

the amend have

indigenous,

of

the

period.”

to

of Genocide, beyond “mass

our

our

past

2009.

One fullest

will

the the the

today

of

soften

human-on-human

last

another, beginning

the

has

as than

likely reason

time.”

to violence ability

that

there

abuse twentieth wars centuries,

change.

particularly

the

suggested fifty of murder war published problem his the

violence, long

in

xvii) that attention.

this

war, over

mass

Eliniinationisin, Tyranny “nothing

title any been

of

there

remains

years. of The

to

so

to

small-scale

had human

the of

tragedy

girls

describing often

commit frequently be

in the

one

in

and

killing century the

of

article

destroyed Goldhagen

are

of twentieth

above, 2009 concerned. a

precisely

a

this

of genocidal

are last

tragic So

decade deep twentieth

course, cover

that worse centers also eliminations

Small

behavior

by

oppression.

even numbing.

way

3,421 further

are

Daniel

included

societies

many

the astounding directly

concern and,

set

extraordinary

Differences story

than

and than

rivaled

because during (xi): though

there century.

on

persistence reminds

killing years,

of

century,

The

in

other

violence, in

Jonah

the

nation-against-nation

problems

war”

It people announcing, aggregate,

or recent

is

excerpts still

appears are over historians

On

by our

only

Ongoing it much

is

indirectly

human-on-human they

More

fact

is adage

us, worse

Goldhagen

has

among

August stories in

age were how often

just

268 decades

of

were that

“More existence.

harm

been

other

has that

girls

of

from any

than

to

than Assault

as

often had

slaughtered Will such

war-based

assumed

of

“women’s our

23, been

claiming girls.

more “nothing

afflicted curtailing

are

one

violence.

done

groups

yet

gives been a in

war.

pub 2009,

and mas

age’s

we

killed book

41

form any the than

girls

Al on

an

to 42

any other

tinction species

and animals also yond

to But

identifying

are are

some servationists violence. regard yet

human

Condusion—The continue in advocates be choice

discussion Lappe). tions

Conservation ing which together, sarv predicament.

Advocates

wildlife

One

form

order

described willing while

its ignored

more recognize Thiough

people

the forms

of

zoos,

murders

of

habitat. to line

—we important

caused life.

we community

we of

species

This

to

animal

any

conservation-minded And

habitat,

to

and

of

violence

the described

to arid of offer

invite in make

(Waldau can

The even

tyrannize

the writing of can

today form

as

insight violence

talk

that

a

once

full

its

insights

Enter by but of research

conservation conservationist

number

line.

name

protection. animal

two

a

solve

as can the habitat,

living push

feature human

about

range

of very there

also

still

develops one

that

Future they

this it

violence 2011, was

Conservation movements

reader again

be

the better. war, to some

are

as yet

movement, wish special

is

beings,

laboratories. of

must forms is

of

a hook

me. the

are

of

acts, problems the

used cooperation

also cclehration

xv) violence an

another

ways,

the

genocide,

to the

forms Wifl

basis

perspectives is to

in

know strengthens

animal PALL astonishing

yield

I of

eliminate

driven

of or citizens about wisdom

to importance

hope—namely,

and came ignore our animal

the

discussed

violence such Be

the

violence, foi

of

and we

lend

to done

species

WALDAU

of

global midst—what

moral.

coniiec’ting Although human-on-human

Chosen movement

m

by to relentless

the

habitat

can

of

between the

as

these animal

naturally

or movement,

understand our

here

any

concluding intentionally

the

the

our and human amount

animal

choose

against

problem

climate

in into what

of

legal,

great

risk

world practices,

with

ability accelerated

destruction,

this character

protection

protecting

as

conservation mass that

extinction,

to

are has

that

does

protectionist

juggernaut?

to suggested need

and

we

an of

sentient

chapter

the

change

then,

we

that

concerned face of to

seriognc5 a

we violence

insight

minor

destruction

do

enYironmental to particular it

meaning

rationalize

violence

to

want”

disingenousness

violence

that

matter ammal

squarely. BOW nonhuman

in is

connect share

other-than-human

rate

can,

as countless

living

that

erase above,

differences factory

that

can

activists

live

our

(Frances in that

of

ethics—”Every

with

of this

when that

rights,

its

a beyond

could

concern help better

species

yet beings

to ]ife ho of heritage our

iii In

we

some

advocates

concern.

farms,

violence

animals. we the wildlife

a

a

unneces another

k-length

implica

right us working

and do world

equally

time as

Moore

if

might

harm

mean

with

con the see

that

ex be

we most

for

the

and in

to

in

in

I

which

religions healing rather active nurture

and is

References

one

Ph’air

A Bee

Dosant, Crotkl. i,,idhagen.

to ,aoe

i ocr,

I Ps,ruis Re .3

S

leave

sorod apr.s. c’s

ostrong,

,sro,

‘s5jrk. tilts-, rh

aldau, Lnvrcc Schuster. 1

fur th,rriiieity

luuimamsilai Lappe.” St

o

SiC: Hopkins Pictures. citivens ,‘orls busson: ss our Srok: choice

than ,

t’rs,

a

Coma

Das

i

insights

individuals’

corso. De,iie. p://69.93.14.237/. \Tbmcsi b \lhert.

Usired Neinc,rks

Diana.

Do F)asid. traditions

I viktor

SI.

Will, Nn.

lsiand

Farm for

Kiropf. rscces id.

Robeit,

political

Paul.

omental

St. Basic

about

and

division, http://www.smallplanet.org.

2002.

Kaien. holas

Ission

99r.

Houghton Daniel.

Blooinbeig

(OlIn. our

MerGe’s

States.

2006. aooh. we

and

iaresoutls Ness

Worldwide.

Animal

2011.

i996. in

F.

Press.

2011.

tgricuiture

Books.

Moore.

ft. Venturi

2011, being

2006

D.,

19’. can Foci

on Doonttiiiti: each F

children.

issues

aoo6,

Sock:

i906. artli New

An

For

Athens:

2009.

systems The

i and

industIial Animal struggle

ethical

Press. he

Pioduction

1w

‘slim TI5,’

make

Durant.

the

dir

The

is

“Hunianitarisii culture.stude

Sc Si

York:

Spell

Dolphin of

PublicAtiairs. and rig

Shc’r

The linked New

Direa

oncenient

MS si The

hool

Peerr

14 Follr

Organization

tinconseiosss in

Rights. these An

Swallow

beyond prospect Tl’

orse

Options’

Greet

of

d:

Haccos.ri.

Rodaie York:

Soc. l as

Farm character

abstract

of have

1968.

ia

of the

slier,

Pu to

Os

Psirer

in

Thor

ii Public

a to Lappe. Fool

rh

New

Irarisformation:

Truth: Senssions,

Dsuir,

the movements Edw gain

Alfied

Animal Ame’iica.” way

Press/Ohio the

,,C,

The

Press.

the

2006.

slipped

of ww.fao.org/dor \Var. Baltic’

: Mirror

God:

Youth York:

oittimi, is The of

Health. of

Tyranny

‘sian. Lessons

The

selF.

the 2009. to

1 A animal the

available

Im is

conservation’s

Pr Genocide.

I

of Pss’clsottierapy New

Planetary

onc Knopf.

celebrate

Osford

Lturirss

a

.5 liii’ United Exploring pluctior Otils Culture

spiritual The

ilguer into

soothing

Unisersity half

of

Proeri

cit

.Suffs York:

The

of

will History. H:u

tie

Dc,’e

movement’s

at

University

nictit

Small

an In’ Flis’ima

Nations.

Home Begitiriing

0mg Emergency

Oripio, .

Studs:’

rep/oso/aoyose/ao7om

Pantheon. http:l/www.humanespot.org/content/

2003

Dolphin

of

Sky: choose

it

appalling

the

end

end character

and yt

New Press. and

The’

one,

Differences

.trimals, us

)ioriiuyi

/s

I I

2006.

Sc protective,

Retriesid world

Putting Theology. the

Pen

lit rniog

ii

Press. Yoik: g.icv

of

Winds If

of

to This mcc’s

Our .Huisiis

Dr’

Global

Clsaritable

power

La

Oppr

asd

work

Simon arid Livesiock’s f

lack

ept

Religious

Meat

asd

we

to

Srnn’al

Moss bat

can

New

ion

.\ugust

the

esirrn

Warming

Mo t’e

proniote

Saving

oglto

want

of

on

in together.

and

Ongoisg

e happen constructive, Gall to

pm York:

8hts

Hunian

Trusts

Lappe th civility,

oo.H

Traditions.

into

ch

Long Schustes.

instill F

to .

Dolphin

and

to Algcri.

‘East

2006.

ippor’uniry

able:

Simon

her’

FM.

1’

Assault

am and

Shadow: live

life. What

peace

if

d

Ingron.

This

and lndu’,

and

Ria .

Johns New the

Lives. Ann,, from

Ness 43 and Ness

in

1,Ark

on

to