Ethical Conservation

Ethical Conservation "is the logical extension of the animal rights philosophy to wildlife protection and the protection of wildlife habitat and wilderness areas".

Ethical conservation exists to protect wild animals and their habitat from exploitation and abuse by inconsiderate, uncaring and greed-driven humans.

Most people involved in wildlife "management" believe that animals do not have rights and exist primarily to serve the interests of humans.

How else can we explain the arbitrary manner in which some humans decide which animals shall live and which shall die? The individual animal's right to life or freedom is dismissed out of hand.

The currently popular buzz concept in orthodox conservation circles is "wise use", or as it is also known, "sustainable utilisation". This concept implies that any number of wild animals can be killed or captured just so long as the bio-diversity of the area is not compromised, or as long as the long-term viability of a species or population is not threatened by the killing or capture. Concern for the actual individual animal that is killed or captured is limited only to its value as a target for hunters, its ability to generate income from tourism or the profit it can earn when traded.

The same principle applies to all other components of the natural environment, which include trees, rivers, mountains and minerals.

In other words, wildlife is seen as a resource, to be used in any way that will earn money - trophy hunting; capture for zoos or circuses; capture for sale to research institutions; capture for slaughter and human consumption; trapping for furs, harpooning of whales and dolphins for their flesh and body oils; capture to supply the world trade in wild animals as pets and collectors items; use of body parts for medicinal purposes - these and many more are considered acceptable as long as the principle of "wise use" is adhered to.

Orthodox conservationists, who have bought into the "wise use" philosophy, tout this as the "sensible" way to manage wildlife so that wildlife habitat is not converted into agricultural land and so that rural people can benefit from conservation efforts and therefore be inclined to support such conservation efforts.

This is wishful thinking, and "wise use" is the most insidiously dangerous and animal-unfriendly concept to arise in the history of formal environmental conservation. Animals are relegated to the status of commodities that exist solely by the grace of humans, for humans.

"Sustainable utilisation" is also a smokescreen, used by recreational animal-killers and others who, for reasons of political expediency, job security or greed, wish to win favour with human communities and populations that were previously oppressed under apartheid or colonialist rule, and who now hold the fate of wildlife and environmental conservation in their hands.

Whereas previously hunters were proud of their bloody pastime and boasted openly of their "brave and skillful exploits", they have encountered increasing resistance from the general public. Consequently they now attempt to justify their violently lethal exploitation of wild animals by aligning themselves with "wise use" principles. This attitude to killing animals forms an integral part of the orthodox conservation philosophy that influences the formulation and implementation of orthodox conservation policy throughout the world. "Wise use" has become the driving force behind the orthodox conservation movement, and greatly influences those responsible for "managing" official and private conservation areas. The belief is that if humans manage stocks of domestic animals so that these can be killed and eaten, or otherwise exploited, then there is nothing wrong with applying the same management principles to so-called "stocks" of wild animals.

So, exactly "who" or "what" is the "Wise Use Movement" (WUM)?

WUM is a growing, world-wide body of anti-environmentalists who want to be given free commercial access to all the world's "marketable resources" ? plant, animal and mineral.

The WUM is "a coalition of ranchers, miners, trappers, loggers, fisherman, hunters, whalers, sealers, property rights advocates, pro-gun supporters, industry associations and corporate front groups which are linked through numerous formal and informal national and international networks, and which oppose the environmental (and animal rights) movement"(Wise Use Briefing Paper/ Barbara Maas/ IFAW)

In order to divert the attention of the authorities and a gullible, apathetic public from its own unethical activities, and to counter the successes of the ethical environmental and animal care movements, the WUM brands ethical environmentalists, progressive animal welfarists and animal rightists as "radicals", "fanatics", "terrorists", "eco-imperialists", "extremists", "elitists", "humaniacs", etc..

The WUM, exploiting its control over the world's media, tries to portray ethical environmentalists and animal rightists as violent people who value nature and animals above humans.

However, it is elements within the WUM that consistently resort to violence, including murder, to achieve their objectives. And, all too often, ethical environmentalists and animal rightists are the victims of this violence.

The extent to which the animal rights and ethical conservation movement achieves its objectives over the next few years, will depend on how effectively activists pre-empt, and counter, the onslaught of the WUM.