Talk:Animal welfare

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Cats Portal This article is supported by WikiProject Cats. This project provides a central approach to Cat-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

	Dogs Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dogs, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it needs.

I removed the REDIRECT to Animal Rights, because the Animal Welfare position is really different, and deserves an entry of its own.

Bhuston 23:21, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

This page needs more information about what animal welfare is, aside from distinguishing it from animal rights. Rosemary Amey 15:53, 6 May 2004 (UTC)

OK, Rosemary, I'll see what I can do.--Publunch 13:43, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

In the interests of balance and good scholarship, I have written a couple of paragraphs about people and arguments that are either anti-animal welfare, or else attempts to circumscribe animal welfarism's scope. I have also listed one or two books. I could list more if people are really interested. Please note that I am doing this in the interest of balance and am not a supporter of anti-welfarism.

--Publunch 13:43, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 More on animal welfare 2 Yahoo->Google 3 NPOV? 4 External Links 5 Sources 6 Singer 7 Sources 8 Five freedoms 9 Nazi Germany 10 Query 11 Explaining my revert

[edit] More on animal welfare

Would the next editor for the animal welfare page include the five freedoms, please.

Done, as part of the first step towards standing this article up on its own merits. That task still largely remains: Animal welfare is a much older, more thoroughly institutionalised and politically widespread doctrine than Animal rights. As more editors (preferably using non-Anglosphere examples) add further detail to the history of the Animal welfare movement, the remaining material treating of welfare's contrasts with rights doctrine will want trimming and refining, I think. For that reason, I corrected the intro which implied both welfarism and rights allocate ethical value to animals: Several proponents of welfarism recommend it precisely because it does no such thing - for them, the ethics are entirely located in the human component of the human-animal relationship. Again, I'm not convinced that it is correct to characterise Singer's as a welfarist position - he believes rights to be reducible to utilitarian welfare principles, as far as I can see - so in denying that there are any irreducibly human, sovereign rights, he concurs in at least one crucial respect with Animal rights advocates. Still. That's for another day. Keep it coming! Adhib 17:33, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In the interests of balance other animal welfare tools like the 3Rs might be included--and more mention of events outside of the UK?Ratinabox 15:14, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yahoo->Google

I changed the category/directory link from a Yahoo! category to a Google category simply because Yahoo has been responsible for some atrocious human rights violations in China. Please read Yahoo!'s article for more details.

[edit] NPOV?

"This has less to do with concern for the animal (although this is a factor), and more the indisputable evidence that well-cared-for meat tastes better." What indisputable evidence?

[edit] External Links

I added a UK focussed link as all the others appeared to be American. Also, it appears as if the http://www.animaluse.org/ site is either down or no longer about animal welfare. Don't know if anyone else wants to take a look. I didn't delete it but it might need to be replaced if it remains as is. Misssunshine 4 July 2006

[edit] Sources

This article needs to be sourced. It reads like a personal essay. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Singer

As somewhat stated by Adhib, Peter Singer is not a supporter of animal rights, as he is a philosophical utilitarian. He advocates improved conditions for animals on utilitarian grounds, not via claiming that animals have or should have "rights." If Singer is to be mentioned on this page, his name would best be removed from the context of animal "rights."

[edit] Sources

I've removed some OR and have requested sources. We need some solid writing rather than "some critics say this, some that." SlimVirgin ^(talk) 08:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Five freedoms

Could someone who knows more about this add something on what the 5 freedoms are, who came up with them, how often if ever they are realized for farmed animals (I believe these are advocated only for farmed animals though I could be wrong.) Thanks!

Rosemary Amey 23:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Not just for farmed animals, although I believe they were originally developed for use by farmers. The RSPCA uses them as a basis for care guides for companion animals as well. And in theory they could be applied to any animal in any situation. 195.149.48.125 15:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nazi Germany

This section needs a rewrite, as some of it is very unclear e.g. "Both the growing jewish and muslim German communities are nowadays allowed to practice Shechita, on the exemptional [sic] rulings given by the original law, which were fore seen for Hitlers muslim allies." Can the editor who added it say what that refers to, please? SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 20:56, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I think this section should be taken out. It is a random slice of a negative use of animal welfare and if anything alienates the reader from the cause in the US and elsewhere. One questions the motive of the author to include such a historical note. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.244.226.21 (talk) 22:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Alienates the user from the acuse by inserting critical thinking? --Polentario (talk) 11:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Query

I have a query about this section:

Canadian ethicist David Sztybel distinguishes six different types of animal welfare views from his perspective as an animal rightist and animal liberationist:^[1]

• animal exploiters' animal welfare: the reassurance from animal industry publicists that they treat animals "well" (e.g., spokespersons for the animal industry)
• commonsense animal welfare: the average person's concern to avoid cruelty and be kind to animals
• humane animal welfare: a more principled opposition to cruelty to animals, which does not reject most animal-using practices (except perhaps the use of animals for fur and sport)
• animal liberationist animal welfare: a viewpoint which strives to minimize suffering but accepts some animal use for the perceived greater good, such as the use of animals in some medical research
• new welfarism: a term coined by Gary Francione to refer to the belief that measures to improve the lot of animals used by humans will lead to the abolition of animal use
• animal welfare/animal rights views which do not distinguish the two

The source is Sztybel, David. "Distinguishing Animal Rights from Animal Welfare," in Marc Bekoff (ed.). The Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1998, pp. 130-132.

Does anyone know what he says exactly? The above doesn't look like something anyone knowledgeable about this would write, to be frank, except for the "new welfarism" definition, which is more or less right. For example, I can't find any references to the term "animal liberationist animal welfare" except on sites that have copied it from Wikipedia. SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 13:07, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I've removed this section, because it really does seem like a very idiosyncratic view. We should probably use one of the mainstream or better known scholarly sources for an overview, then we can go into more detail about individual views if necessary. SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 17:17, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Explaining my revert

Polentario, that seems to be animal rights you're writing about. Also, I'm not sure what the image of the cat adds. SlimVirgin ^talk|edits 16:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

The entry was about the the methods of animal welfare activists including violence. The fact that oldfashioned animal welfare installed animal shelters while PETA prefers to kill and neuter ambulantly is nothing about animal rights. --Polentario (talk) 09:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No it wasn't. It was explicitly about some animal rights activists. MikeHobday (talk) 09:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, you dont read. Hogwash. --Polentario (talk) 16:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Please don't be personal (again). Let me give some examples. The Animal Liberation Front is an animal rights group, not an animal welfare group. So is PETA. As I understand your claims, Pim Fortuyn was killed by an animal rights activist, not an animal welfare supporter. Need I go on? MikeHobday (talk) 17:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)