Rights for Cetaceans

[Moontanman]

http://the-scientist.com/2012/07/20/rights-for-cetaceans/

 

Rights for Cetaceans

 

An animal rights law group plans to renew law group plans to renew the fight for recognizing certain species as persons.

 

 

The Nonhuman Rights Project, a nonprofit organization advocating for legal rights for animals, is planning on filing two lawsuits on behalf of captive animals in the United States by the end of next year, according to Wired Science. Although the group has not yet decided which species will be targeted, highly intelligent social animals such as bonobos, chimpanzees, elephants, and dolphins are strong contenders.

 

The head of the organization, animal law scholar and attorney Steven Wise, has made it his mission to have the US courts recognize certain species as persons instead of “things,” and as such, they would have rights to basic privileges such as freedom from imprisonment and captive breeding.

[ewmon]

I didn't know where the title about "recognizing certain species as persons" was going, but now that I've read the OP, I agree that highly intelligent animals (regardless of being social or not — as some felids are not very social), should be free from imprisonment and forced breeding.

 

To the list of great apes, elephants and cetaceans, I also lean toward adding canids, maybe felids, and perhaps other carnivores such as bears, sea lions, seals, etc ... and just possibly a few kinds of cephalopods.

 

To the inhumanity of imprisonment and forced breeding, I would also add forced labor — basically circus acts and elephants used in forestry or tourism, but also activities such as dogs used in law enforcement (and even guide dogs once artificial vision reaches a certain sophistication). Every now and then, we read about a police dog being shot/killed etc ... I mean, did the dog ask for this hazardous/deadly duty, or was it forced upon it? Of course it was forced. As it is, in some/many jurisdictions, police dogs are officially recognized as police officers, and if someone harms/shoots one, they are charged with harming/shooting a police officer. So in this example, we already have highly intelligent animals legally recognized as "persons".

 

As for imprisonment, the larger and more natural the enclosure, the less of a "cage" it forms and the more a "game preserve" it becomes; so it seems that the definition of the prohibited "cage" should be a function of each particular species.

 

As for forced breeding, with a large enough enclosure and population, the more natural the mating selection, and thus, the less "forced" the breeding.

 

So, what I'm driving at is that, with sufficient enclosure and population, the concepts of imprisonment and forced breeding would not exist even though the animals remain under human control and observation. I'm talking about a Jurassic Park concept where the animals roam "free" (to a great extent), and the zoo guests are the ones with limited movement.

 

I think each continent should have at least one (and probably a few or several) game preserve(s) for highly intelligent animals not native to that continent so that people need not be required to have/expend the prohibitive finances required, for example, to visit Africa in order to experience apes, elephants, lions, etc "in the wild".