Human Ecology Forum Animal Rights and the Antarctic Treaty System Helena Ellinor Widolf Institute of Antarctic and Southern Ocean Studies and Antarctic CRC, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, AUSTRALIA Abstract Today, Antarctic and sub-Antarctic native fauna is pro- tected under a variety of instruments in the Antarctic Treaty This paper outlines an investigation into the rights of System (ATS). Currently, there are 43 Antarctic Treaty individual animals belonging to species that live in Parties (states) that have all obligated themselves to abide by Antarctica and the Southern Ocean, home to many species of the provisions within the ATS. The Antarctic Treaty came mammals, birds, finfish, crustaceans and cephalopods. I into force in 1961 and applies to all areas south of 60˚ South address the identification of prominent animal rights issues, Latitude. The most recent addition to the Treaty is the an assessment of the relevance of those issues to Antarctic Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty management and an examination of Antarctic legal provi- (1991) known as the Madrid Protocol, which designates sions and management guidelines. Antarctica as a natural reserve devoted to peace and science. It establishes environmental principles, including the protec- Keywords: Antarctica, animal rights, ethics, policy tion of wildlife from the conduct of all human activity (Jackson cited in Rubin 2000, 61). Protection for faunal Environmental Management species is primarily dealt with by Annex II of the Protocol. The killing of all species of mammals, birds and plants is pro- It is important for environmental managers to be aware hibited, with the exception of special circumstances for of evolving public attitudes about environmental issues and which a permit is required. In Australia, such permits are for policy-makers to accommodate changing community issued only by the Australian Antarctic Division under strict expectations. This is particularly true for management guidelines (Heap 1990). Under Annex II, permits may be regimes that govern the world’s largest natural reserves such granted for the taking of specimens for zoological and botan- as Antarctica. These places hold value for many people that ical gardens, scientific research, and educational purposes. can no longer be accommodated in other parts of the world There are guidelines for the numbers of animals that can be due to changes to the natural environment caused by human taken, and the circumstances under which they can be taken. activities. Animal rights issues are much debated in contem- The conservation of marine species such as fish and porary Western societies. As a concept that is largely based invertebrates today is primarily dealt with by the Convention on personal interpretation and opinion, the very existence of on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources animal rights is disputed by some, whilst seen as axiomatic (CCAMLR) (1981), an ATS instrument. Adopting the ecosys- by others (Rodd 1990). tem approach, CCAMLR aims to preserve populations of dif- Considered by many as being the world’s last wilderness ferent marine species in order to maintain the integrity of the unaltered by humans, Antarctica provides a habitat for many marine environment (CCAMLR 2001). different faunal species, many of which are found nowhere else on Earth. The Southern Ocean that surrounds the conti- Wilderness Values nent is home to a vast variety of marine species such as whales, seals, penguins, finfish, and krill. Antarctic and sub- Broom (cited in Paterson and Palmer 1989) and Pyers Antarctic fauna include many species of whales, seals, pen- and Gott (1994) confirm that contemporary Western attitudes guins, albatrosses, petrels, skuas, shearwaters, prions, terns, toward the treatment of animals vary widely, but add that the gulls, sheathbills, cormorants and fulmars, and a large variety majority of Australians accept the need to protect native of finfish, mollusks, and crustaceans. Approximately 45 species. This includes species in the wild that they may never species of bird breed south of the Antarctic Convergence, have seen, such as wildlife in Antarctica. Antarctica’s remote- including all of the species of Antarctic and sub-Antarctic ness is understood to add to the romantic picture that many penguins. Few bird species breed in Antarctica itself, includ- people hold about its wildlife, adding to the desire to protect ing the Emperor, Adelie and Gentoo penguins, Snow petrels, it. Dawkins (1980) has commented that the media have been Antarctic petrels, and South Polar skuas (Rubin 2000). highly instrumental in evoking public sympathy for seals, due Human Ecology Review, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2002 59 Human Ecology Forum to footage of fluffy seal pups with big round eyes lying help- of Antarctic animals. Some of these include Greenpeace, lessly on the ice. Penguins have also become high-profile ani- World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the Animal Liberation mals, perhaps not so much for their capacity to evoke senti- Society, Friends of the Earth (FOE), Australians for Animals, mentality as for their unique and peculiar appearance and the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Wilderness behavior. Antarctic birds of flight such as albatrosses and Society, and the World League for the Protection of Animals petrels also capture the imagination of the public, often being (ASOC 2001). These organizations run independent cam- depicted as symbols of freedom and beauty. Many people paigns in an attempt to influence policy-makers when making also consider Southern Ocean whales as being charismatic. decisions about policy and legislation concerning the welfare Their exposure through the media has contributed much to of Antarctic animals and their environment. the general public’s increasing admiration for Antarctic and sub-Antarctic wildlife. Today they have become icons for the Are Animal Rights Relevant rights of wild animals and have been the center of much to Antarctic Management? attention over animal rights issues (Skare 1994; Carwardine 1998; Gill and Burke 1999). In democratic countries it will always be the extent of public support for a particular issue that determines its rele- Public Support vance to management strategies. Antarctic managers and operators, like managers and operators of public services, are Animal welfare organizations in the Western world have obligated to make decisions about Antarctica based on the done much to promote the rights of animals in the past few desires of the general population. In order to gain some decades. The Antarctica Project is one conservation organiza- insight into public support for animal rights issues in tion that works exclusively for the Antarctic environment. It Antarctic, a statewide telephone survey was conducted with- leads the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC) in the Australian state of Tasmania. The survey was planned that is comprised of 240 member groups in 50 countries, run- according to guidelines established by de Vaus (1990) and ning international campaigns to protect Antarctica’s wilder- Neuman (1997). The survey was conducted between 27 ness (The Antarctica Project 2001). ASOC works to ensure August 2001 and 6 September 2001. A sample population of that the environment comes first when management decisions 123 participants was selected at random from Tasmania’s are made about Antarctica. The Antarctica Project works telephone books. According to de Vaus (1990), at a 95 % con- towards protecting the Antarctic environment because its fidence level a sample size of 123 reduces the sampling error members believe that as the world’s last wilderness unaltered of a survey to 9%. Participants were presented with four by humans, it is important for the citizens of the world to pro- statements and asked to respond according to a Likert scale tect it. They also believe that Antarctica is important because from 1 to 5 (see Table 1). there is much scientific knowledge to be gained from it, be- As approximately 64.2 % of the sample population cause it is highly valued as a tourist destination, and because (between 55.2 % and 73.2 % calculated against the sample the unique Antarctic environment represents wilderness val- error {c.a.s.e.}) strongly agree with Statement 1, we can con- ues that cannot be enjoyed by people in other parts of the clude with 95% confidence that most people in Tasmania do world (The Antarctica Project 2001). There are many not want to see Antarctic animals disturbed by tourists. As Australian organizations in ASOC that work for the welfare 65.8 % of participants strongly agreed with Statement 2, it Table 1. Results from “Entitlements of Antarctic Wildlife: A Statewide Survey in Tasmania, Australia 2001” (% of sample population) n = 123. Responses/ Statements 1. Strongly 2. Generally 3. Neutral (do not 4. Generally 5. Strongly Disagree Disagree agree or disagree) Agree Agree 1. Tourism to Antarctica is best kept to a minimum in order to control disturbances to Antarctic animals. 4.8 % 4 % 11.3 % 15.4 % 64.2 % 2. It is important that the public is informed about scientific research on animals in Antarctica. 2.4 % .8 % 11.3 % 19.5 % 65.8 % 3. Animals living in natural reserves such as Antarctica are entitled to live out their natural lives without being disturbed by human beings. 6.5 % 2.4 % 8.9 % 15.4 % 66.6 % 4. It is justified to catch/ kill fish and squid in the Southern Ocean to provide people with food. 23.5 % 8.9 % 36.5 % 17 % 13.8 % 60 Human Ecology Review, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2002 Human Ecology Forum can be estimated that most people in Tasmania want to be the Environment for taking such prompt action in stopping informed about research on Antarctic animals. Statement 3, the branding. Animal rights were a consistent theme in many supporting the entitlement of Antarctic animals to not be dis- of the letters, especially those that came from other countries turbed by human beings, has been supported by 82 % of the such as the USA (Harwood 2001).