Executive summary: The reintroduction of predators like jaguars into ecosystems like Iberá National Park raises ethical questions about the suffering caused by predation and whether we have obligations to prevent it, balanced against conservationist goals of restoring biodiversity and ecological processes.
Key points:
Predation causes suffering to prey animals through painful killing, being eaten alive, and chronic fear/stress, suggesting we may have obligations to prevent it from a utilitarian perspective focused on reducing suffering.
However, conservationists argue for the intrinsic value of biodiversity and restoring evolutionary processes, which predation is a part of, prioritizing these goals over individual animal welfare.
Empirical research on the welfare impacts of predator reintroductions like measuring stress levels in prey species can help inform these ethical tradeoffs, but current evidence is limited and inconclusive.
Conservationists acknowledge individual suffering but view it as an unavoidable part of nature, focusing more on population and ecosystem levels, while some advocate for “compassionate conservation” prioritizing individual welfare.
Improving measurement of wild animal welfare and developing interventions to reduce suffering without harming ecosystems could help resolve these tensions between utilitarian and conservationist ethics.
Projects like Iberá′s predator reintroductions represent opportunities to study welfare impacts and develop frameworks for navigating these difficult ethical issues going forward.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The reintroduction of predators like jaguars into ecosystems like Iberá National Park raises ethical questions about the suffering caused by predation and whether we have obligations to prevent it, balanced against conservationist goals of restoring biodiversity and ecological processes.
Key points:
Predation causes suffering to prey animals through painful killing, being eaten alive, and chronic fear/stress, suggesting we may have obligations to prevent it from a utilitarian perspective focused on reducing suffering.
However, conservationists argue for the intrinsic value of biodiversity and restoring evolutionary processes, which predation is a part of, prioritizing these goals over individual animal welfare.
Empirical research on the welfare impacts of predator reintroductions like measuring stress levels in prey species can help inform these ethical tradeoffs, but current evidence is limited and inconclusive.
Conservationists acknowledge individual suffering but view it as an unavoidable part of nature, focusing more on population and ecosystem levels, while some advocate for “compassionate conservation” prioritizing individual welfare.
Improving measurement of wild animal welfare and developing interventions to reduce suffering without harming ecosystems could help resolve these tensions between utilitarian and conservationist ethics.
Projects like Iberá′s predator reintroductions represent opportunities to study welfare impacts and develop frameworks for navigating these difficult ethical issues going forward.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.
This is great!