# data[].attributes.body
https://wwf.panda.org/wwf_news/?364291/WWF-welcomes-Chinas-move-to-strengthen-protection-for-Chinese-pangolins---amid-concerns-for-human-health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
WWF welcomes China’s move to strengthen protection for Chinese pangolins - amid concerns for hu

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The decision to upgrade the protection level of the Chinese pangolin to the same level as the giant panda is expected to help strengthen the focus on pangolin monitoring, rescue and conservation in Ch

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.scmp.com/comment/opinion/article/3085432/chinese-ban-animal-cruelty-can-be-easy-soft-power-win-beijing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What China stands to gain from banning animal cruelty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A ban on animal cruelty would reaffirm Chinese age-old cultural traditions of compassion and have popular support. Such a move can be easily achieved by Beijing and would greatly improve China's image in the eyes of people around the world.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is the cultural perspective on eating meat (different cultures)?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is the cultural perspective on eating meat (different cultures)?

# data[].attributes.body
https://animalequality.org/news/5-common-practices-in-slaughterhouses-that-you-need-to-know/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's quite possible that you are part of the majority of people that do not know how a slaughterhouse works or how animals end up in these places; this is because the meat industry tries very hard to hide its routine procedures. No school would take children on a field trip to one of these inhumane places.

In order to get consumers to buy their products, the meat industry has to keep the horrors that millions of animals face every day hidden from our eyes and ears.

We have listed below some of the most common slaughterhouse procedures, because being informed is a choice of all compassionate and responsible consumers. If you are an animal lover, you will definitely find this information necessary (and outrageous).

1. Forced fasting

They stop feeding animals up to 24 hours before being sent to slaughter so there are no traces of food in their digestive system that impede the processing of the meat.

2. Inhumane transportation

Animals are sent to slaughter crammed into trucks that can travel long distances while banned from food and water. For some animals, this will be the first and the last time they see the sunshine because they lived their entire lives inside artificially illuminated factory farms.

For birds like chickens and hens, the journey to the slaughterhouse is usually done at night, because these animals develop less activity when there's no light.

3. Watching and waiting for the end

Animals have to wait their turn at the slaughterhouse. The wait can last one or two days long. Some animals, such as pigs and cows, witness how their peers are sent to death, and suffer terribly knowing that they will be next.

4. Electrocution

Before dying, different types of mechanisms are used to knock out animals before being slaughtered. Pigs are left unconscious; they are electrocuted with an apparatus applied to their temples. Hens and chickens are forced to pass upside down by electrified water. And cows have their skulls drilled with a special gun, which introduces a retractable bullet into their brains.

5. Cruel death

Decapitation occurs when the animals are hung upside down. Hanging upside down allows them to bleed out quicker, meaning that it is more commercially beneficial for subsequent processing of the meat.

Slaughterhouses "process" many animals a day, so its operation is similar to an assembly line. Cows and pigs, animals of great weight, are lifted from the floor by their rear legs, causing them tears and breaks. After that, they are slaughtered by the killers, their trembling bodies can be extended endless minutes.

Chickens and hens are hung upside down on conveyor belts. They are mechanically slaughtered by machines. In poultry slaughterhouses, almost everything is automated. They can kill more than 50,000 animals in just one week.

How You Can Help Animals Inside Slaughterhouses:

To avoid contributing to the daily horror millions of poor animals inside slaughterhouses face, you can replace meat, dairy, and eggs in your diet. Millions of compassionate people around the world are already doing it. At LoveVeg.com you can find great tips and delicious and healthy food without the cruelty.

You can also lend your voice against this cruelty by signing our petition to put an end to factory farming. Forever.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Common Slaughterhouse Practices | Animal Equality

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's quite possible that you are part of the majority of people that do not know how a slaughterhouse works or how animals end up in these places; this is because the meat industry tries very hard to hide its routine procedures. No school would take children on a field trip to one of these inhumane places.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.greenmatters.com/p/fungi-based-meat

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As more and more people are beginning to cut back on meat - whether it's for dietary or environmental reasons - a plethora of plant-based meat alternatives have entered the market. Beyond, Impossible, and Gardein are only a few of the mega popular brands, which are made from ingredients like peas and soy, but now, a new plant-based protein is starting to gain traction.

Fungi-based meats are supposedly great for you, and for the environment. But are they better than other meat alternatives?

Researchers at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) recently conducted a study that found that replacing 20 percent of meat with fungi-based meats could halve deforestation by 2050.

"The food system is at the root of a third of global greenhouse gas emissions, with ruminant meat production being the single largest source," PIK researcher, Florian Humpenöder, told SciTechDaily.

And luckily, microbial proteins aren't just eco-friendly and nutritious - they're also tasty.

"The substitution of ruminant meat with microbial protein in the future could considerably reduce the greenhouse gas footprint of the food system," says Humpenöder. "The good news is that people do not need to be afraid they can eat only greens in the future. They can continue eating burgers and the like, it's just that those burger patties will be produced in a different way."

What are fungi-based meat alternatives?

Fungi-based meat alternatives, or microbial proteins, look and taste just like meat. They're also packed with protein, and their environmental impact is next to nothing. According to ScienceDaily, they are made with microbial cultures that live on sugar at a steady temperature. The process was developed in the 80s, and an actual fungi-based protein was officially approved by the FDA in 2002. But with veganism on the rise, environmentalists are now hopeful they will take off.

The PIK team used a computer simulation model to look at the environmental impact of replacing meat with fungi-based meats. They found that based on population growth, food, demand, land use, and dietary patterns, deforestation will be worse than ever if nothing changes.

"...Replacing minced red meat with microbial protein would be a great start to reduce the detrimental impacts of present-day beef production," Humpenöder stated, as per Science Daily.

A cruelty-free option that won't drive deforestation to the same extent that meat would, fungi-based meats require far less land-clearing and resources than cattle, and even less than growing the ingredients for other plant-based meat alternatives. Cattle farms, and other types of farms, also require quite a bit of deforestation, water, feed (for cattle), and more. Not to mention, manufacturing fungi-based meats doesn't produce nearly as much methane as cows and fertilizers do on their own.

Here are a few of our favorite microbial protein companies:

While you might not see as much fungi-based meats as you see soy- or pea-based protein alternatives, there are companies out there that make it.

Meati is a startup that makes a wide variety of products: Meati Classic Cutlet, Meati Crispy Cutlet, and Meati Steak Filet are a few of their products that are already or are about to be on the market.

California-based Prime Roots, also uses Koji, a Japanese fungus to make salmon burgers, shrimp, lobster, tuna, chicken, sausage, and beef.

But one of the most popular ones is probably Quorn - the brand has made a decently big name for itself in the U.S., and has started selling its products to restaurants for an eco-friendly and tasty plant-based alternative.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Fungi-Based Meat Alternatives Are Healthy - And Eco-Friendly

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As more and more people are beginning to cut back on meat - whether it's for dietary or environmental reasons - a plethora of plant-based meat alternatives have entered the market. Beyond, Impossible, and Gardein are only a few of the mega popular brands, which are made from ingredients like peas and soy, but now, a new plant-based protein is starting to gain traction.

# data[].attributes.body
https://impossiblefoods.com/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Impossible™ Beef From Plants:

19G PROTEIN*

as much protein
as animal beef

CRAVEABLE TASTE**

that meat
lovers love

BETTER FOR THE PLANET

96% less land, 92% less water, and 91%
less GHG emissions than animal beef***

* Impossible TM Beef Made From Plants vs USDA 80/20 ground meat (113g serving). See nutrition information for fat content

** In Aug & Dec 2021 in-home use tests, over two-thirds of 259 beef-eating consumers said Impossible Beef tasted as good or better than animal beef.

*** Impossible Foods Life Cycle Assessment of Impossible Beef (ISO compliant; WSP, 2022)

MEET OUR NEWEST, BIGGEST, BEEFIEST, JUICIEST BURGERS

Indulge your taste buds with our beefier, thicker, and juicier burger patties, Impossible™ Indulgent Burger Patties Made From Plants. Like premium animal beef, our newest burger patties are great for special occasions where high quality, taste, and indulgence take priority. Try them in addition to our original quarter-pound burger patties.

82% of consumers thought that Impossible Indulgent Burger Patties Made From Plants tasted as good as or better than ground beef from cows. ¹
1. Based on a blind taste test of naked patties by 205 consumers in February 2023

(GET OUT THE GRILL)

Sizzlin' Summer Recipes

It's the summer of Impossible™. From burgers to brats, we've got you covered with delicious, mouthwatering recipes sure to please any guest.

TO HELP SAVE EARTH

By eating meat made from plants instead of meat made from animals, we can drastically cut our carbon footprint, use less water supplies and help ensure that our precious Earth is here not just tomorrow but for future generations. With Impossible Beef Made From Plants, it's never been more delicious to help save the planet.

(NOT SERVING YET?)

PUT IT ON YOUR MENU

Consumers can't get enough of Impossible TM products. You can grow your business by serving it at your restaurant.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Impossible Burger is made from simple, plant-based ingredients. For the health of people and the planet.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/11/opinion/zoos-animal-cruelty.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | Modern Zoos Are Not Worth the Moral Cost (Published 2021)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many of them aspire to be good civic institutions that care for animals on their grounds and in the wild. But is it really worth their captivity?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.rewildingbritain.org.uk/explore-rewilding/what-is-rewilding/examples-of-rewilding

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is rewilding?

Rewilding is about creating the conditions for nature to thrive, it's about re-establishing the natural processes that repair ecosystems and boost biodiversity

Grey seal pup in seaweed - Alex Mustard/scotlandbigpicture.com - Image credit: Alexander Mustard/2020VISION

Rewilding is a journey, where change happens at nature's pace and unfolds over years, decades and even centuries. It exists on a spectrum, where people are starting to make changes that will benefit nature at one end, and large-scale functioning ecosystems - a flourishing of wild nature on its own terms - sits at the other.

There are some notable pioneering projects putting elements of rewilding into practice across Britain. Some, such as Carrifran and Creag Meagaidh in Scotland, have been going for years. Others, such as Sheepdrove Organic Farm and Wild Ken Hill in England, are just beginning. Many are members of our Rewilding Network. Discover more and find out who's doing what on our Rewilding Projects page.

Examples of rewilding include:

Protecting, expanding and connecting ancient woodlands to enable a diverse range of wildlife to establish and disperse, and increasing carbon storage

Reducing high populations of grazing animals to help trees and other vegetation grow

Removing fishing pressure and creating proper marine protection to stop dredging and bottom trawling so that sea life can recover and flourish

Restoring wetlands and introducing beavers to boost biodiversity, store carbon and help flood prevention

Bringing back missing specie s to plug crucial gaps in the ecosystem, and re-forge key relationships between species (for example, between predators and prey and scavengers)

Wild boar boost biodiversity but are missing in much of Britain - Photo: Chris du Plessis

Restoring key marine ecosystems such as kelp forest, seagrass and oyster beds to boost biodiversity, suck in carbon and get natural processes working

Removing dams so that fish can move freely and the forces of erosions and deposition are allowed to re-establish themselves

Reconnecting rivers with floodplains, restoring their natural course to slow the flow, easing flooding and creating habitats for fish and other aquatic and wetland wildlife

Connecting up habitats and providing wildlife bridges so wildlife can move and disperse naturally, helping them adapt to climate change and build resilience.

Setting aside large areas for nature so that nature can truly evolve on its own terms, maximising biodiversity, carbon storage and essential eco benefits

Creating a wildlife-friendly garden and helping wildlife move through it to help nature on a smaller scale

Next in What is rewilding?

Natural processes lie at the heart of rewilding, but what are they and why do we talk about them so much?

12 steps to rewilding

If you want to start rewilding, or you're just interested in a rewilding approach, then take yourself down our 12 steps

Keystone species and trophic cascades

Keystone species and trophic cascades are key elements of healthy ecosystems. We explore what that means

Reintroductions and bringing back species

Bringing back native species is a key part of re-establishing natural processes and restoring ecosystems

Restoring natural processes

Restoring natural processes is an essential part of rewilding. We explain what that means to rewilders across Britain

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is rewilding? Rewilding is about creating the conditions for nature to thrive, it's about re-establishing the natural processes that repair ecosystems and boost biodiversity Rewilding is a journey, where change happens at nature's pace and unfolds over years, decades and even centuries.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.exoticanimalsforsale.net/tigers-for-sale.asp

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tigers

Tigers are a large, strong, and very dangerous cat with the ability of taking down a 500 lb antelope. It is also a strong territorial swimmer. A male tiger covers up to a 40 mile territory and female territories of up to 7 miles. Males identify their territories by scattering fieces and urine and do not cope well with the rest of the males.

Tiger are the largest member of the cat (felid) family. In most cases, they appear in thick reddish coats plus white and black tails and bellies. Their bodies, heads, limbs and tails have narrow brown, black or gray stripes. Their are nine subspecies; Siberian, Bengal, Indochinese, Sumatran, South Chinese, Malayan, Javan, Caspian and Bali. Though Bali, javan and Caspian are becoming extinct both in the wild and as endangered.

Tigers as pets

Generally, big cats such as tigers and lions are the most awe inspiring and beautiful animals. Therefore, People often get intrigued keeping them as pets. Owners are required to keep in mind that even the smaller of the non domestic cats, such as servals and bobcats, are not at all like domestic cats. In that, diverse species have got different temperaments and can exhibit unwanted cat behavior from aggression to urine marking. So, it is a huge responsibility and commitment to appropriately care for them.

Tigers are surprisingly inexpensive and easy to purchase as pets. Meaning, anyone is capable of owning a large influential carnivore whether they are properly equipped to care for them or not. In the Canada and US, Pet tigers have been involved in a number of mauling and fatalities in recent years. Nevertheless, more pet tigers and even other big cats end up abused, neglected or given up to sanctuaries in a case where their owners are not in a position to care for them.

Habitat

Tigers are known to occupy a multiplicity of habitats from evergreen forest, woodlands, grasslands, tropical forest and also the rocky country. However, they are typically nocturnal {active during the night} and are waylaying predators relying on camouflage due to their stripes.

What do Tigers eat?

Ambar deer, water buffalo, wild pigs and antelope are the main diet and any other food that can get in to their opportunistic paws makes up its diet. They are also known to hunt dogs, sloth bears, crocodiles, leopards and monkeys as well as pythons and hares. While injured and old tigers, are known to attack domestic cattle and humans.

The amount of food for pet tigers vary with species but in any case, still a 300 lb pet tiger eat much more than an adult human being and house cat diet (food) put together. Domesticated and non domesticated Tigers eat meat, and in large amount. They will eat a minimum of 10 pounds of meat (5000 kcal) daily for up to 20 years and this excludes the supplements and vitamins needed to add to the diet.

Additionally, a commercially prepared meat blend (enclosing primarily horse meat) and also bones are offered to pet tiger as this aid in natural chewing and nutrition. But research shows that these commercial diets only are not actually what a pet tiger needs. Usually, they are deficient in taurine and with too much amount of Vitamin A and other ingredients. Each food varies as so to the individual tiger's requirements in a particular activity, species, season and other factors).

According to Animal scientists, a raw meat diet is the preferred source of protein for tigers. However, pet owners may be required to supplement this with other nutrients.

Enrichment

The main reason for Tiger's large enclosure is to offer enrichment opportunities. Tigers naturally need and are habitual in utilizing their brains to play with things, catch things, climb, jump and explore. This adds to its good health because a bored tiger is definitely an unhealthy tiger.

In Zoos normally, large plastic balls are used for the tigers to jump on in pools, so, it is advisable to present the tiger with hanging containers with food inside, or even areas to ascend to it. Tigers do and can get bored and depressed without good enrichment.

Interaction

The moment a tiger cub gets adequately big and with energy to push, it will be a bad idea to wrestle or play with them. Since their play bites is likely to cause serious injuries or even death to a person! Unfortunately, it is hard to predict tiger's behavior since they are still wild animals at heart. So, it is good to remember the huge commitment of time, space, and money that they require.

Enclosures/Housing a Tiger

Tigers need a lot of space to climb, swim and jump. While in the wild they roam for several miles of land and this is one thing several people can't access. Tigers house should include a large plot of fenced in property with good access to small lakes or ponds, shelters and trees since this is what a pet tiger needs to be safe from the world or to keep the people around safe.

Reproduction (breeding)

Breeding (mating) generally happens when the females are about 4 years of age. A female will give off a strong scent which attracts a male to her while in estrus. The mating Season of tigers is normally around November all the way to April (tropical climates) and during the winter in temperate regions. Tigers have a gestation period of 103 days and with the ability to litter 3 to 4 cubs.

It will take Cubs 8 weeks following their mother after which they become independent at 18 months old. After 2 and a half years a cub will leave their mothers who all along have been guarding them from wandering males which normally kill them.

Hybrids-albinos Tiger barb

The Albino Tiger barb is adored by a large number of aquarists and shunned by others. It should be understood that Albinism is a genetic condition which is caused by a particular combination of the recessive alleles in DNA. The Albino Tiger therefore, inherits this trait from both its parents. It is the lack of pigmentation and so the Albino Tiger looks very pale in contrast to the ordinary Tiger.

If one is seriously looking for a pet tiger, it is recommended that s/he have an understand the huge commitment of time, space and money that is required, otherwise the tiger will not be good for you or the tiger.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Tigers are a large, strong, and very dangerous cat with the ability of taking down a 500 lb antelope. It is also a strong territorial swimmer. A male tiger covers up to a 40 mile territory and female territories of up to 7 miles.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.fourpawsusa.org/campaigns-topics/topics/science-and-research/research-strays#:~:text=In%20high%20numbers%2C%20stray%20dogs,experiencing%20health%20and%20welfare%20problems

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
FOUR PAWS in US - Global Animal Protection Organization

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Stray dog overpopulation is a global concern with implications for public health and safety, environmental protection, wildlife conservation, as well as animal welfare. Irresponsible pet ownership (e.g., abandonment) and lack of birth control programs lead to an increase in stray dogs. In high numbers, stray dogs can contribute to spreading diseases, cause human-animal conflicts (e.g., bites and traffic accidents), threaten the survival of other species of animals, cause economic burdens (e.g., costs associated with management, rabies vaccination), while often experiencing health and welfare problems themselves.

The STRAYS project was developed by the University of Leeds, FOUR PAWS International, and IZSAM (Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale dell'Abruzzo e del Molise 'Giuseppe Caporale'), with the aim to determine the most sustainable, effective, and efficient method of managing the number of stray dogs. Please find our publications and studies about stray dogs here.

Stray dog overpopulation is a global problem that is of public health, animal welfare and environmental concern. FOUR PAWS has been involved in the humane management of stray dog populations for more than 25 years, using Catch-Neuter-Vaccinate-Release (CNVR) to manage stray dog populations. We use this method to humanely reduce the number of dogs while at the same time improving their welfare.

FOUR PAWS vets work with communities across Eastern Europe using stationary and mobile clinics to neuter dogs. FOUR PAWS also supports programs in Germany and Switzerland that help control stray cat colonies through education and awareness campaigns, and by providing support for local veterinary neutering efforts.

STRAYS PhD Research

The STRAYS Project was structured as an academic PhD research study and involved collecting data on dog populations from two study sites (Lviv, Ukraine and Teramo, Italy) and on public attitudes towards stray dogs using online surveys (in Italy, Ukraine, and Bulgaria). Stray dog population size, financial costs, welfare impact on the dog population and impact on public health are some of the factors this study considered when comparing different dog population management methods (catch-neuter-vaccinate-return, long-term sheltering, and mass culling). Collected data was used in statistical modelling to determine long-term effectiveness in humanely reducing population size.

Need to target sources for stray dog population increase

The key result of the STRAYS project is that methods targeting multiple sources of population increase, (i.e., reducing: births in the free-roaming dog population, abandonment of dogs, and allowing owned dogs to roam) are most effective at reducing free-roaming dog population size, while also being cost-effective and improving dog health and welfare. Furthermore, neutering interventions applied continuously (monthly) and covering a high proportion of the population (i.e., >65%) will increase effectiveness and efficiency overall. Mass culling and long-term sheltering do not offer a sustainable solution to stray dog overpopulation, as they do not address the causes for population increase. It is important to also consider public attitudes towards stray dogs and dog ownership practices to adequately tailor responsible pet ownership campaigns.

CNVR & Responsible pet ownership education have the biggest impact

Humanely reducing the number of stray dogs through catch-neuter-vaccinate-return (CNVR) campaigns coupled with responsible pet ownership education represent together the most effective, efficient, and sustainable technique to reduce stray dog population size, while ensuring animal welfare and reduced costs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stray dog overpopulation is a global concern with implications for public health and safety, environmental protection, wildlife conservation, as well as animal welfare. Irresponsible pet ownership (e.g., abandonment) and lack of birth control programs lead to an increase in stray dogs.

# data[].attributes.headline
Connections with HS Animal Rights Group?

# data[].attributes.subject
Connections with HS Animal Rights Group?

# data[].attributes.body
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse, animal neglect or animal cruelty, is the infliction by omission (neglect) or by commission by humans of suffering or harm upon non-human animals. More narrowly, it can be the causing of harm or suffering for specific achievements, such as killing animals for entertainment; cruelty to animals sometimes encompasses inflicting harm or suffering as an end in itself, referred to as zoosadism.

Divergent approaches to laws concerning animal cruelty occur in different jurisdictions throughout the world. For example, some laws govern methods of killing animals for food, clothing, or other products, and other laws concern the keeping of animals for entertainment, education, research, or pets. There are several conceptual approaches to the issue of cruelty to animals.

Utilitarian advocates argue from the position of costs and benefits and vary in their conclusions as to the allowable treatment of animals. Some utilitarians argue for a weaker approach that is closer to the animal welfare position, whereas others argue for a position that is similar to animal rights. Animal rights theorists criticize these positions, arguing that the words "unnecessary" and "humane" are subject to widely differing interpretations and that animals have basic rights. They say that most animal use itself is unnecessary and a cause of suffering, so the only way to ensure protection for animals is to end their status as property and to ensure that they are never viewed as a substance or as non-living things.

Throughout history, some individuals, like Leonardo da Vinci for example, who once purchased caged birds in order to set them free, were concerned about cruelty to animals. His notebooks also record his anger with the fact that humans used their dominance to raise animals for slaughter. According to contemporary philosopher Nigel Warburton, for most of human history the dominant view has been that animals are there for humans to do with as they see fit.

Several religious traditions, especially those originating in India, have promoted animal welfare as an important or fundamental concept, even to the point of promoting vegetarianism or veganism. Examples include Buddhism, Jainism, Hinduism (cattle are sacred animals in India), and some forms of Judaism (many Orthodox Jews do not wear leather).

René Descartes believed that non-humans are automata-complex machines with no soul, mind, or reason. In Cartesian dualism, consciousness was unique to human among all other animals and linked to physical matter by divine grace. However, close analysis shows that many human features such as complex sign usage, tool use, and self-consciousness can be found in some animals.

Charles Darwin, by presenting the theory of evolution, revolutionized the way that humans viewed their relationship with other species. Darwin believed that not only did human beings have a direct kinship with other animals, but the latter had social, mental, and moral lives too. Later, in The Descent of Man (1871), he wrote: "There is no fundamental difference between man and the higher mammals in their mental faculties."

Modern philosophers and intellectuals, such as Peter Singer and Tom Regan, have argued that animals' ability to feel pain as humans do makes their well-being worthy of equal consideration. There are many precursors of this train of thought. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism, famously wrote in his An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation (1789):

The question is not, can they reason nor can they talk? but, can they suffer?

These arguments have prompted some to suggest that animals' well-being should enter a social welfare function directly, not just indirectly via its effect only on human well-being. Many countries have now formally recognized animal sentience and animal suffering, and have passed anti-cruelty legislation in response.

Animal cruelty can be broken down into two main categories: active and passive. Passive cruelty is typified by cases of neglect, in which the cruelty is a lack of action rather than the action itself. Oftentimes passive animal cruelty is accidental, born of ignorance. In many cases of neglect in which an investigator believes that the cruelty occurred out of ignorance, the investigator may attempt to educate the pet owner, then revisit the situation. In more severe cases, exigent circumstances may require that the animal be removed for veterinary care.

Farm animals are generally produced in large, industrial facilities that house thousands of animals at high densities; these are sometimes called factory farms. The industrial nature of these facilities means that many routine procedures or animal husbandry practices impinge on the welfare of the animals and could be considered cruelty, with Henry Stephen Salt claiming in 1899 that "it is impossible to transport and slaughter vast numbers of large and highly-sensitive animals humanely". It has been suggested the number of animals hunted, kept as companions, used in laboratories, reared for the fur industry, raced, and used in zoos and circuses, is insignificant compared to farm animals, and therefore the "animal welfare issue" is numerically reducible to the "farm animal welfare issue". Similarly, it has been suggested by campaign groups that chickens, cows, pigs, and other farm animals are among the most numerous animals subjected to cruelty. For example, because male chickens do not lay eggs, newly hatched males are culled using macerators or grinders. Worldwide meat overconsumption is another factor that contributes to the miserable situation of farm animals. Many undercover investigators have exposed the animal cruelty taking place inside the factory farming industry and there is evidence to show that consumers provided with accurate information about the process of meat production and the abuse that accompanies it has led to changes in their attitudes.

The American Veterinary Medical Association accepts maceration subject to certain conditions, but recommends alternative methods of culling as more humane. Egg-laying hens are then transferred to " battery cages" where they are kept in high densities. Matheny and Leahy attribute osteoporosis in hens to this caging method. Broiler chickens suffer similar situations, in which they are fed steroids to grow at a super-fast speed, so fast that their bones, heart, and lungs often cannot keep up. Broiler chickens under six weeks old suffer painful crippling due to fast growth rates, whilst one in a hundred of these very young birds dies of heart failure.

To reduce aggression in overcrowded conditions, shortly after birth piglets are castrated, their tails are amputated, and their teeth are clipped, and are earmarked. Calves are sometimes raised in veal crates, which are small stalls that immobilize calves during their growth, reducing costs and preventing muscle development, making the resulting meat a pale color, preferred by consumers.

In the United States, animal cruelty such as soring, which is illegal, sometimes occurs on farms and ranches, as does lawful but cruel treatment such as livestock branding. Since ag-gag laws prohibit video or photographic documentation of farm activities, these practices have been documented by secret photography taken by whistleblowers or undercover operatives from such organizations as Mercy for Animals and the Humane Society of the United States posing as employees. Agricultural organizations such as the American Farm Bureau Federation have successfully advocated for laws that tightly restrict secret photography or concealing information from farm employers.

The following are lists of invasive procedures that cause pain, routinely performed on farm animals, and housing conditions that routinely cause animal welfare concerns. In one survey of United States homeowners, 68% of respondents said they consider the price of meat a more important issue.

Animal welfare activists suggest a total ban on fur production due to the suffering inflicted on animals, especially minks. It has been suggested that fur production is immoral as fur clothes are luxury items. Minks are solitary and territorial animals; however, in fur farms, they are raised in cages and skinned after being killed either by breaking their necks or using lethal gas.

There are studies providing evidence of a link between animal cruelty and violence towards humans. A 2009 study found that slaughterhouse employment increases total arrest rates, arrests for violent crimes, arrests for rape, and arrests for other sex offenses in comparison with other industries. A large national survey by the Norwegian Centre for Violence and Traumatic Stress Studies found a "substantial overlap between companion animal abuse and child abuse" and that cruelty to animals "most frequently co-occurred with psychological abuse and less severe forms of physical child abuse."

A history of torturing pets and small animals, a behavior known as zoosadism, is considered one of the signs of certain psychopathologies, including antisocial personality disorder, also known as a psychopathic personality disorder. According to The New York Times, "[the FBI has found that a history of cruelty to animals is one of the traits that regularly appears in its computer records of serial rapists and murderers, and the standard diagnostic and treatment manual for psychiatric and emotional disorders lists cruelty to animals a diagnostic criterion for conduct disorders." "A survey of psychiatric patients who had repeatedly tortured dogs and cats found all of them had high levels of aggression toward people as well, including one patient who had murdered a young boy." Robert K. Ressler, an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation's behavioral sciences unit, studied serial killers and noted, "Murderers like this ( Jeffrey Dahmer) very often start by killing and torturing animals as kids."

Acts of intentional animal cruelty or non-accidental injury may be indicators of serious psychological problems. According to the American Humane Association, 13% of intentional animal abuse cases involve domestic violence. As many as 71% of pet-owning women seeking shelter at safe houses have reported that their partner had threatened and/or hurt or killed one or more of their pets; 32% of these women reported that one or more of their children had also hurt or killed pets. Battered women report that they are prevented from leaving their abusers because they fear what will happen to the animals in their absence. Animal abuse is sometimes used as a form of intimidation in domestic disputes.

Cruelty to animals is one of the three components of the Macdonald triad, behavior considered to be one of the signs of violent antisocial behavior in children and adolescents. According to the studies used to form this model, cruelty to animals is a common (but not universal) behavior in children and adolescents who grow up to become serial killers and other violent criminals. It has also been found that children who are cruel to animals have often witnessed or been victims of abuse themselves. In two separate studies cited by the Humane Society of the United States, roughly one-third of families suffering from domestic abuse indicated that at least one child had hurt or killed a pet.

Many times, when Asiatic elephants are captured in Thailand, handlers use a technique known as the training crush, in which "handlers use sleep-deprivation, hunger, and thirst to 'break' the elephants' spirit and make them submissive to their owners"; moreover, handlers drive nails into the elephants' ears and feet.

The practice of cruelty to animals for divination purposes is found in ancient cultures, and some modern religions such as Santeria continue to do animal sacrifices for the healing and other rituals. Taghairm was performed by ancient Scots to summon devils.

The American Humane Association (AHA) has been associated with monitoring American film-making since the release of the film Jesse James (1939), in which a horse was pushed off a plank and drowned in a body of water after having fallen 40 feet into it. Initially, monitoring of animal cruelty was a partnership between the AHA and the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (also called the Hays office) through the Motion Picture Production Code. Provisions in the code discouraged "apparent cruelty to children and animals", and because the Hays Office had the power to enforce this clause, the AHA often had access to sets to assess adherence to it. However, because the AHA's Hollywood office depended on the Hays Office for the right to monitor sets, the closure of the Hays Office in 1966 corresponded with an increase in animal cruelty on movie sets.

One of the most infamous examples of animal cruelty in the film was Michael Cimino's flop Heaven's Gate (1980), in which numerous animals were brutalized and even killed during production. Cimino allegedly killed chickens and bled horses from the neck to gather samples of their blood to smear on actors for Heaven's Gate, and also allegedly had a horse blown up with dynamite while shooting a battle sequence, the shot of which made it into the film. This film played a large part in renewed scrutiny of animal cruelty in films and led to renewed official on-set jurisdiction to monitor the treatment of animals by the AHA in 1980.

After the release of the film (1981), the star and director of the picture, Warren Beatty apologized for his Spanish film crew's use of tripwires on horses while filming a battle scene, when Beatty was not present. Tripwires were used against horses when (1988) and The 13th Warrior (1999) were being filmed. A water buffalo was sliced nearly in half during the production of Apocalypse Now (1979), while a donkey was bled to death for dramatic effect for the Danish film (2005), in a scene later deleted from the film.

There is a case of cruelty to animals in the South Korean film (2000), according to its director Kim Ki-Duk. In the film, a real frog is skinned alive while fish are mutilated. Seven animals were killed for the camera in the controversial Italian film Cannibal Holocaust (1980). The images in the film include the slow and graphic beheading and ripping apart of a turtle, a monkey being beheaded and its brains being consumed by natives and a spider being chopped apart. Cannibal Holocaust was only one film in a collective of similarly themed movies ( cannibal films) that featured unstaged animal cruelty. Their influences were rooted in the films of Mondo filmmakers, which sometimes contained similar content. In several countries, Cannibal Holocaust was banned or allowed for release with most of the animal cruelty edited out.[citation needed ]

More recently, the video-sharing site YouTube has been criticized for hosting thousands of videos of real-life animal cruelty, especially the feeding of one animal to another for entertainment and spectacle. Although some of these videos have been flagged as inappropriate by users, YouTube has generally declined to remove them, unlike videos that include copyright infringement.

The SAG has contracted with the AHA for monitoring animal use during filming or while on the set. Compliance with this arrangement is voluntary and only applies to films made in the United States. Films monitored by the American Humane Association may bear one of their end-credit messages. Many productions, including those made in the United States, do not advise AHA or SAG of animal use in films, so there is no oversight.

Some other animal welfare organizations worldwide, such as the Animal Anti-Cruelty League in South Africa, have also monitored the use of animals in the film.

The use of animals in the circus has been controversial since animal welfare groups have documented instances of animal cruelty during the training of performing animals. Animal abuse in circuses has been documented such as keeping them in small enclosures, lack of veterinary care, abusive training methods, and lack of oversight by regulating bodies. Animal trainers have argued that some criticism is not based on fact, including beliefs that shouting makes the animals believe the trainer is going to hurt them, that caging is cruel and common, and that the use of whips, chains or training harms animals.

Bolivia has enacted what animal rights activists called the world's first ban on all animals in circuses.

Bullfighting is criticized by animal rights or animal welfare activists, referring to it as a cruel or barbaric blood sport in which the bull suffers severe stress and slow, torturous death. Several activist groups undertake anti-bullfighting actions in Spain and other countries. In Spain, opponents of bullfighting are referred to as anti-taurinos.

The Bulletpoint Bullfight warns that bullfighting is "not for the squeamish", advising spectators to "be prepared for blood". It details prolonged and profuse bleeding caused by horse-mounted lancers, the charging by the bull of a blindfolded, armored horse who is "sometimes doped up, and unaware of the proximity of the bull", the placing of barbed darts by banderilleros, followed by the matador's fatal sword thrust. It stresses that these procedures are a normal part of bullfighting and that death is rarely instantaneous. It further warns those attending bullfights to "be prepared to witness various failed attempts at killing the animal before it lies down."

The " Toro Jubilo" or Toro embolado in Soria, Medinaceli, Spain, is a festival associated with animal cruelty. During this festival, balls of pitch are attached to a bull's horns and set on fire. The bull is then released into the streets and will run around in pain, often smashing into walls in an attempt to douse the fire as spectators attempt to dodge the animal. The pitch balls can burn for hours, and they burn the bull's horns, body, and eyes. The animal rights group PACMA has described the fiesta as "a clear example of animal mistreatment".

Dog fighting is a sport that turns dogs against one another in a ring or a pit for gambling or the entertainment of the spectators.

Rattlesnake round-ups, also known as rattlesnake rodeos, are annual events common in the rural Midwest and Southern United States, where the primary attractions are captured wild rattlesnakes which are sold, displayed, killed for food or animal products (such as snakeskin) or released back into the wild. The largest rattlesnake round-up in the United States is held in Sweetwater, Texas. Held every year since 1958, the event currently attracts approximately 30,000 visitors per year and in 2006 each annual round-up was said to result in the capture of 1% of the state's rattlesnake population. Rattlesnake round-ups became a concern by animal welfare groups and conservationists due to claims of animal cruelty. In response, some round-ups impose catch-size restrictions or releasing captured snakes back into the wild.

Military animals are creatures that have been employed by humankind for use in warfare. They are a specific application of working animals. Examples include horses, dogs and dolphins. Only recently has the involvement of animals in war been questioned, and practices such as using animals for fighting, as living bombs or for military testing purposes (such as during the Bikini atomic experiments) may now be criticized for being cruel.

Princess Anne, Princess Royal, the patron of the British Animals in War Memorial, stated that animals adapt to what humans want them to do, but that they will not do things that they do not want to, even with training. Animal participation in the human conflict was commemorated in the United Kingdom in 2004 with the erection of the Animals in War Memorial in Hyde Park, London.

In 2008 a video of a US Marine throwing a puppy over a cliff during the Iraq conflict was popularised as an internet phenomenon and attracted widespread criticism of the soldier's actions for being an act of cruelty.

Under all three of the conceptual approaches to animal cruelty discussed above, performing unnecessary experiments or demonstrations upon animals that cause them substantial pain or distress may be viewed as cruelty. Due to changes in ethical standards, this type of cruelty tends to be less common today than it used to be in the past. For example, schoolroom demonstrations of oxygen depletion routinely suffocated birds by placing them under a glass cover, and animals were suffocated in the Cave of Dogs to demonstrate the density and toxicity of carbon dioxide to curious travelers on the Grand Tour.

Many apartment complexes and rental homes institute no-pet policies. No pet policies are a leading cause of animal abandonment, which is considered a crime in many jurisdictions. In many cases, abandoned pets have to be euthanized due to the strain they put on animal shelters and rescue groups. Abandoned animals often become feral or contribute to feral populations. In particular, feral dogs can pose a serious threat to pets, children, and livestock.

In Ontario, Canada, no pet policies are outlawed under the Ontario Landlord and Tenant Act and are considered invalid even when a tenant signs a lease that includes a no pets clause. Similar legislation has also been considered in Manitoba.

Many jurisdictions around the world have enacted statutes that forbid cruelty to some animals but these vary by country and in some cases by the use or practice.

Egyptian law states that anyone who inhumanely beats or intentionally kills any domesticated animal may be jailed or fined. The Egyptian Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals was established over a hundred years ago and was instrumental in promoting a 1997 ban on bullfighting in Egypt.

In ancient Egyptian law, the killers of cats or dogs were executed.

Animal cruelty in Nigeria is prohibited under Section 495 of the Criminal Code (1990). These include, according to 495(1)(a), cruelly beating, kicking, over-loading, infuriating, or terrifying an animal, or allowing this to happen as the owner. Section 495(1)(b) defines failure to act as the willful or unreasonable doing or omission of any act that causes unnecessary suffering (or as the owner, permitting an act that causes unnecessary suffering). This section also prohibits transporting animals in a way that causes unnecessary suffering (c), administering poison (d), performing operations without due care (e), and actions related to animal fighting (f).

The Animal Protection Act No 71 of 1962 in South Africa covers "farm animals, domestic animals and birds, and wild animals, birds, and reptiles that are in captivity or under the control of humans."

The NSPCA is the largest and oldest animal welfare organization in South Africa that enforces 90% of all animal cruelty cases in the country by means of enforcing the Animals Protection Act.

196. Ill-treatment of Domestic Animal.

Whoever cruelly beats, tortures, or otherwise willfully ill-treats any tame, domestic, or wild animal, which has previously been deprived of its liberty, or arranges, promotes, or organizes fights between cocks, rams, bulls, or other domestic animals or encourages such acts, commits an offense, and upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two months or with a fine.

197. Riding and Neglect of Animal.

Whoever wantonly rides, overdrives, or overloads any animal or intentionally drugs or employs any animal, which by reason of age, sickness, wounds or infirmity is not in a condition to work, or neglects any animal in such a manner as to cause it unnecessary suffering, commits an offense, and upon conviction, shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one month or with a fine or with both.

Brazil is a high-volume animal producer, slaughtering around 30.8 land-based animals per person per year, compared to a global average of 10.1. The country's dependency on farmed animals is relatively high, with around 8 farmed animals per person, double the global average of 4.1. A 1998 law prohibits the abuse of domestic and wild animals. It imposes more serious penalties for cruelty than the 1934 decree, with a sentence of 3 months to a year plus a fine, with the penalty increased by one-sixth to one-third of the animal is killed.

In Canada, it is an offense under the Criminal Code to intentionally cause unnecessary pain, suffering, or injury to an animal. Poisoning animals is specifically prohibited. It is also an offense to threaten to harm an animal belonging to someone else. Most provinces and territories also have animal protection legislation. However, it is not explicitly illegal in Canadian law to kill a dog or cat for consumption.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund releases an annual report ranking the animal protection laws of every province and territory based on their relative strength and general comprehensiveness. In 2014, the strongest four jurisdictions were Manitoba, British Columbia, Ontario, and Nova Scotia. The weakest four were Saskatchewan, Northwest Territories, Quebec, and Nunavut.

Law 20380 established sanctions including fines, from 2 to 30 Mensual Tributary Units, and prison, from 541 days to 3 years, for those involved in acts of animal cruelty. Also, it facilitates animal care through school education and establishes a Bioethics Committee to define policies related to experiments with animals.

In 2017, after many years of legal wrangling, Costa Rica passed their Animal Welfare Law. It includes prison sentences of three months to one year for harming or killing a domesticated animal or for conducting animal fights. There are monetary fines for those who mistreat, neglect or abandon animals, for breeding or training animals for fighting, or for violating regulations on animal experimentation. The law does not cover agricultural practices, aquaculture, zootechnical or veterinary activities, killing of animals for consumption, for sanitary or scientific reasons, or reproductive control. Wild animals are covered under the Wild Life Act.

The current policy of Mexico, in civil law, condemns physical harm to animals as property damage to the owners of the abused animal, considering the animals as owned property.

This law is considered to extend throughout the rest of the 31 constituent states of the country. In addition, The Law of Animal Protection of the Federal District is wide-ranging, based on banning "unnecessary suffering". Similar laws now exist in most states.

The Animal Legal Defense Fund releases an annual report ranking the animal protection laws of every state based on their relative strength and general comprehensiveness. In a 2013's report, the top five states for their strong anti-cruelty laws were Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Oregon, and California. The five states with the weakest animal cruelty laws in 2013 were Kentucky, Iowa, South Dakota, New Mexico, and Wyoming.

In 2004, a Florida legislator proposed a ban on "cruelty to bovines", stating: "A person who, for practice, entertainment, or sport, intentionally fells, trips, or otherwise causes a cow to fall or lose its balance using roping, lassoing, dragging, or otherwise touching the tail of the cow commits a misdemeanor of the first degree." The proposal did not become law.

In the United States, ear cropping, tail docking, rodeo sports, and other acts are legal and sometimes condoned. Penalties for cruelty can be minimal if pursued. Currently, 46 of the 50 states have enacted felony penalties for certain forms of animal abuse. However, in most jurisdictions, animal cruelty is most commonly charged as a misdemeanor offense. In one recent California case, a felony conviction for animal cruelty could theoretically net a 25-year to a life sentence due to their three-strikes law, which increases sentences based on prior felony convictions.

In 2003, West Hollywood, California, passed an ordinance banning declawing of house cats. In 2007, Norfolk, Virginia passed legislation only allowing the procedure for medical reasons. However, most jurisdictions allow the procedure.

In April 2013, Texas Federal Court Judge Sim Lake ruled that the Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act of 2010, which criminalized the recording, sale, and transport of videos depicting animal cruelty as obscenity, violates the First Amendment. Judge Lake noted that obscenity tests require an explicitly sexual depiction, which the criminalized videos lack. This follows the precedent set by United States v. Stevens, which additionally held that restrictions on the possession of animal cruelty videos were unconstitutional.

In November 2019, then-U.S. President Donald Trump signed the Preventing Animal Cruelty and Torture Act, making certain intentional acts of cruelty to animals federal crimes carrying penalties of up to seven years in prison. The Act expanded upon the 2010 Animal Crush Video Prohibition Act signed by President Barack Obama that banned the creation and distribution of videos that showed animals being crushed, burned, drowned, suffocated, impaled, or subjected to other forms of torture. The underlying acts, which were not included in the 2010 bill, are part of the PACT Act and are now felony offenses. The bill was unanimously passed in both the House and Senate.

State welfare laws

Several states have enacted or considered laws in support of humane farming.

On 5 November 2002, Florida voters passed Amendment 10 by a margin of 55%, amending the Florida Constitution to ban the confinement of pregnant pigs in gestation crates.

On 14 January 2004, the bill AB-732 died in the California Assembly's Agriculture Committee. The bill would have banned gestation and veal crates, eventually being amended to include only veal crates. On 9 May 2007, the bill AB-594 was withdrawn from the California State Assembly. The bill had been effectively killed in the Assembly Agriculture Committee, by replacing the contents of the bill with language concerning tobacco cessation coverage under Medi-Cal. AB-594 was very similar to the current language of Proposition 2.

On 7 November 2006, Arizona voters passed Proposition 204 with 62% support. The measure prohibits the confinement of calves in veal crates and breeding sows in gestation crates.

On 28 June 2007, Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski signed a measure into law prohibiting the confinement of pigs in gestation crates (SB 694, 74th Leg. Assembly, Regular Session).

In January 2008, Nebraska State Senate bill LB 1148, to ban the use of gestation crates for pig farmers, was withdrawn within five days amidst controversy.

On 14 May 2008, Colorado Governor Bill Ritter signed into law a bill, SB 201, that phases out gestation crates and veal crates.

Venezuela published a "Law for Protection of Domestic Fauna free and in captivity" in 2010, defining responsibilities and sanctions regarding animal care and ownership. Animal cruelty acts are fined, but are not a cause for imprisonment. The law also forbids the possession, breeding, and reproduction of pit bull dogs, among similar breeds that are alleged to be aggressive and dangerous. It elicited reactions from dog owners, who said that aggressiveness in dogs is determined more by treatment by the owner than by the breed itself.[citation needed ]

Israel banned the sale of fur to the fashion industry in June 2021, being the first country in the world to do so.

As of the year 2006, there were no laws in China governing acts of cruelty to animals. There are no government-supported charitable organizations like the RSPCA, which monitors the cases of animal cruelty. All kinds of animal abuses, such as to fish, tigers, and bears, are to be reported to law enforcement and animal welfare.

In September 2009, legislation was drafted to address deliberate cruelty to animals in China. If passed, the legislation would offer some protection to pets, captive wildlife, and animals used in laboratories, as well as regulate how farm animals are raised, transported, and slaughtered.

As of 2010, Hong Kong has supplemented or replaced the laws against cruelty with a positive approach using laws that specify how animals should be treated. The government department primarily responsible for animal welfare in Hong Kong is the Agriculture, Fisheries, and Conservation Department (AFCD).

Laws enforced by the AFCD include these:

the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance (also enforced by the police)

the Public Health (Animals and Birds) Ordinance (including regulations for licenses imposed on livestock keepers and animal traders and a Code of Standards for Licensed Animal Traders)

the Dogs and Cats Ordinance

the Pounds Ordinance

the Rabies Ordinance

the Wild Animals Protection Ordinance

In addition, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department (FEHD) does the following:

enforces the Public Health and Municipal Services Ordinance, which includes regulations for slaughterhouses and wet markets

publishes a Code of Practice for the Welfare of Food Animals (which describes their transport)

publishes Operational Guidelines for the Welfare of Food Animals at Slaughterhouses

The Department of Health does the following:

enforces the Animals (Control of Experiments) Ordinance.

publishes a Code of Practice for the Care and Use of Animals for Experimental Purposes

As of 2006, Hong Kong has a law titled "Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Ordinance", with maximum of 3-year imprisonment and fines of HKD$200,000.

The Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 was amended in the year 1982. According to the newly amended Indian animal welfare act, 2011 cruelty to animals is an offense and is punishable with a fine which shall not be less than ten thousand Rupees, which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees or with imprisonment up to two years or both in the case of a first offense. In the case of a second or subsequent offense, with a fine which shall not be less than fifty thousand Rupees, but may extend to one lakh Rupees and with imprisonment with a term which shall not be less than one year but may extend to three years. This amendment is currently awaiting ratification from the Government of India. The 1962 Act is the one that is practiced as of now. The maximum penalty under the 1962 Act is Rs. 50 (under $1). Many organizations, including ones such as the local SPCA, PF, A, and Fosterdopt are actively involved in assisting the general population in reporting cruelty cases to the police and helping bring the perpetrator to justice. Due to this, much change has been observed in the subcontinent. In 2022, A provision of a maximum of five-year imprisonment with a minimum 75 thousand rupees fine for killing an animal has been made. The draft Bill also suggests five freedoms of animals including freedom from thirst, hunger and malnutrition and from fear and distress, under Section 3A.

In Japan, the 1973 Welfare and Management of Animals Act (amended in 1999 and 2005) stipulates that "no person shall kill, injure, or inflict cruelty to animals without a due course", and in particular, criminalizes cruelty to all mammals, birds, and reptiles possessed by persons; as well as cattle, horses, goats, sheep, pigs, dogs, cats, pigeons, domestic rabbits, chickens, and domestic ducks regardless of whether they are in captivity.

Killing or injuring without due reason: up to one year's imprisonment with labor or a fine of up to one million yen

Cruelty such as causing debilitation by discontinuing feeding or watering without due reason: a fine of up to five hundred thousand yen

Abandonment: a fine of up to five hundred thousand yen

Separate national and local ordinances exist about ensuring the health and safety of animals handled by pet shops and other businesses.

Animal experiments are regulated by the 2000 Law for the Humane Treatment and Management of Animals, which was amended in 2006. This law requires those using animals to follow the principles outlined in the 3Rs and use as few animals as possible, and cause minimal distress and suffering. Regulation is at a local level based on national guidelines, but there are no governmental inspections of institutions and no reporting requirement for the numbers of animals used.

Cruelty towards animals protected under the Animal Welfare Act (2015) is punishable by a fine of 20-100,000 ringgit and/or imprisonment of up to three years. Cruelty towards animals protected under the Wildlife Conservation Act (2010) is punishable by a fine of 5-50,000 ringgit and/or up to one-year imprisonment. Under the AA, a person commits an offense of animal cruelty if they "cruelly beats, kicks, ill-treats, overrides, overdrives, overloads, tortures, infuriates or terrifies any animal.

Veterinarian Lana Dunn and several Saudi nationals report that there are no laws to protect animals from cruelty since the term is not well-defined within the Saudi legal system. They point to a lack of a governing body to supervise conditions for animals, particularly in pet stores and in the exotic animal trade with East Africa.

South Korea's animal welfare laws are weak by international standards. South Korea's animal protection law states that anyone who abuses or is cruel to animals may be sentenced to a maximum of three years in prison or fined 30 million won ($25,494), but the standards to decide penalties have been low as the animals are treated as objects under the current legal system, Choung said.

The Taiwanese Animal Protection Act was passed in 1998, imposing fines of up to NT$250,000 for cruelty. Criminal penalties for animal cruelty were enacted in 2009 , including a maximum of one-year imprisonment.

Thailand introduced its first animal welfare law in 2014. The Cruelty Prevention and Welfare of Animal Act, B.E. 2557 (2014) came into being on 27 December 2014.

The European Union Council Directive 1999/74/EC is a directive passed by the European Union on the minimum standards for keeping egg laying hens which effectively bans conventional battery cages. The directive passed in 1999, banned conventional battery cages in the EU from 1 January 2012 after a 13-year phase-out.

It is also illegal in many parts of Europe to declaw a cat.

In France, cruelty to animals is punishable by imprisonment of two years and a financial penalty (€30,000).

In Germany, killing animals or causing significant pain (or prolonged or repeated pain) to them is punishable by imprisonment of up to three years or a financial penalty. If the animal is of foreign origin, the act may also be punishable as criminal damage.

The Animal Health and Welfare Act 2013 came into force in 2014, improving animal protection. The maximum penalty is up to €250,000 and up to five years in prison. Sentences of up to three years have been imposed in several cases.

Since 1 October 2014, violence against animals has been a crime in Portugal. Legislation published in the Diário da República on 29 August criminalizes the mistreatment of animals and indicates that "those who, without reasonable cause, inflict pain, suffering, or any other hardship to a companion animal abuse" are to be subject to imprisonment of up to one year. If such acts result in the "death of the animal", the "deprivation of an important organ or member", or "serious and permanent impairment of its capacity of locomotion", those responsible will be punished by imprisonment up to two years.

As for pets, the new law provides that "whoever, having the duty to store, monitor or pet watch, abandons them, thereby putting in danger their food and the provision of care owed" faces up to six months imprisonment.

In Sweden cruelty to animals is punishable by a financial penalty and prison for up to two years. The owner will lose the right to own animals and the animals will be removed from the owner.

Under Turkey's Animal Protection Law No. 5199, cruelty to animals is considered a criminal offense, punishable by up to four years in prison. In July 2021, Turkey banned the opening of circuses which use animals, and dolphinariums. Existing facilities will cease operations in ten years. HAYTAP, the Animal Rights Federation in Turkey, used to believe that the previous law did not contain a strong enough punishment for animal abusers.

Up until then, dogs were used for delivering milk, bread, fish, meat, fruit, vegetables, animal food (the cat's-meat man), and other items for sale and for collecting refuse (the rag-and-bone man). As Nigel Rothfels notes the prohibition against dogs pulling carts in or near London caused most of the dogs to be killed by their owners as they went from being contributors to the family income to unaffordable expenses. Cart dogs were replaced by people with handcarts. About 150,000 dogs were killed or abandoned. Erica Fudge quotes Hilda Kean:

At the heart of nineteenth-century animal welfare campaigns is the middle-class desire not to be able to see cruelty.

The Protection of Animals Act 1911 extended the ban on draft dogs to the rest of the kingdom. As many as 600,000 dogs were killed or abandoned.

The Protection of Animals Act 1911 has since been largely superseded by the Animal Welfare Act 2006, which also superseded and consolidated more than 20 other pieces of legislation, including the Protection of Animals Act 1934 and the Abandonment of Animals Act 1960. The Act introduced a new welfare offense, which means that animal owners have a positive duty of care, and outlaws neglect to provide for their animals' basic needs, such as access to adequate nutrition and veterinary care.

Under the Criminal Damage Act 1971, domestic animals can be classed as property that is capable of being "damaged or destroyed". A charge of criminal damage may be appropriate for the injury or death of an animal owned by someone other than the defendant, and prosecution under the Animal Welfare Act 2006 may also be appropriate.

In Australia, all states and territories have enacted legislation governing animal welfare. The legislation is:

Welfare laws have been criticized as not adequately protecting animals. Whilst police maintain an overall jurisdiction in the prosecution of criminal matters, in many states officers of the RSPCA and other animal welfare charities are accorded authority to investigate and prosecute animal cruelty offenses.

1. Warburton, Nigel (2013). Philosophy: the basics (5th ed.). Routledge. p. 71. ISBN 978-0-415-69317-2.

2. Cassuto, David N. (2007). "Bred Meat: The Cultural Foundation of the Factory Farm". Law and Contemporary Problems. 70 (1): 59-87.

3. Norwood, FB; Lusk, JL (2010). "Direct versus indirect questioning: An application to the well-being of farm animals". Soc Indic Res. 96 (3): 551-565. doi:10.1007/s11205-009-9492-z. S2CID 145217722.

4. ^ Matheny, Gaverick; Leahy, Cheryl (2007). "Farm-Animal Welfare, Legislation, and Trade". Law and Contemporary Problems. 70 (1): 325-358.

5. ^ Schwartzkopf-Genswein, K. S.; Stookey, J. M.; Welford, R. (1 August 1997). "Behavior of cattle during hot-iron and freeze branding and the effects on subsequent handling ease". Journal of Animal Science. 75 (8): 2064-2072. doi:10.2527/1997.7582064x. ISSN 0021-8812. PMID 9263052. S2CID 18911989.

6. ^ Goode, Erica (25 January 2012). "Ear-Tagging Proposal May Mean Fewer Branded Cattle". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on 6 April 2017.

7. ^ Bale, Rachael (17 August 2016). "Fur Farms Still Unfashionably Cruel, Critics Say". National Geographic.

8. ^ Arluke, A.; Levin, J.; Luke, C.; Ascione, F. (1999). "The relationship of animal abuse to violence and other forms of antisocial behavior". Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 14 (9): 963-975. doi:10.1177/088626099014009004. S2CID 145797691.

9. ^ Alleyne, E.; Tilston, L.; Parfitt, C.; Butcher, R. (2015). "Adult-perpetrated animal abuse: development of a proclivity scale" (PDF). Psychology, Crime & Law. 21 (6): 570-588. doi:10.1080/1068316X.2014.999064. S2CID 143576557. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 July 2020.

10. ^ Baxendale, S.; Lester, L.; Johnston, R.; Cross, D. (2015). "Risk factors in adolescents' involvement in violent behaviours". Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research. 7 (1): 2-18. doi:10.1108/jacpr-09-2013-0025.

11. ^ Fitzgerald, Amy J.; Kalof, Linda; Dietz, Thomas (2009). "Slaughterhouses and Increased Crime Rates: An Empirical Analysis of the Spillover From "The Jungle" Into the Surrounding Community". Organization & Environment. Santa Barbara, California: SAGE Publications. 22 (2): 158-184. doi:10.1177/1350508416629456. S2CID 148368906. Archived from the original on 25 May 2019.

12. ^ Muri, K.; Augusti, E.M.; Bjørnholt, M.; Hafstad, G.S (2022). "Childhood experiences of companion animal abuse and its co-occurrence with domestic abuse: Evidence from a national youth survey in Norway". Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 37 (23-24): NP22627-NP22646. doi:10.1177/08862605211072176. PMC . PMID 35156447. S2CID 246806885.

13. Felthous, Alan R. (1998). Aggression against Cats, Dogs, and People. In Cruelty to Animals and Interpersonal Violence: Readings in Research and Applications. West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press. pp. 159-167.

14. ^ Gibson, Caitlin (24 September 2014). "Loudoun Program Underscores the Link between Domestic Violence, Animal Abuse". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 16 September 2016.

15. ^ Duncan, A.; et al. (2005). "Significance of Family Risk Factors in Development of Childhood Animal Cruelty in Adolescent Boys with Conduct Problems". Journal of Family Violence. 20 (4): 235-239. doi:10.1007/s10896-005-5987-9. S2CID 40008466.

16. ^ Hile, Jennifer (16 October 2002). "Activists Denounce Thailand's Elephant "Crushing" Ritual". National Geographic Society. Archived from the original on 18 February 2007. Just before dawn in the remote highlands of northern Thailand, west of the village Mae Jaem, four-year-old elephant bellows as seven village men stab nails into her ears and feet. She is tied up and immobilized in a small, wooden cage. Her cries are the only sounds to interrupt the otherwise quiet countryside. The cage is called a "training crush." It's the centerpiece of a centuries-old ritual in northern Thailand designed to domesticate young elephants. In addition to beatings, handlers use sleep deprivation, hunger, and thirst to "break" the elephants' spirit and make them submissive to their owners.

17. ^ "Circus Incidents: Attacks, Abuse and Property Damage" (PDF). Humane Society of the United States. 1 June 2004. Archived (PDF) from the original on 4 March 2016.

18. ^ Taylor, Alfred S. (October 1832). "An Account of the Grotta del Cane; With Remarks Upon Suffocation by Carbonic Acid". The London Medical and Physical Journal. New Series. LXVIII (76): 278-285. Archived from the original on 29 July 2020.

19. ^ "Nigeria | World Animal Protection". api.world animal protection. org. Despite the fact that there is no report that anybody has ever been tried and convicted for the offense, the 1999 Constitution prohibits the abuse of animals under Miscellaneous Offences. It states in Chapter 50 on 'Cruelly to Animals' that any person who cruelly beats, kicks, ill-treats, over-rides, over-drives, over-loads, tortures, infuriates, or terrifies any animal, or causes or procures, or, being the owner, permits any animal to be so used "is guilty of an offense of cruelty and is liable to imprisonment for six months or to a fine of fifty nairas, or to both such imprisonment and fine."

20. ^ "Colombian president offers to grant bullfighting status of cultural heritage".

21. ^ "'Animal crush' video charges dismissed in the first case under new law". POLITICO. 23 April 2013. Archived from the original on 28 September 2013.

22. ^ Zarrell, Matt (25 November 2019). "President Trump signs animal cruelty bill into law, making it a federal felony". ABC News.

23. ^ "Farm Animal Welfare Bill Killed in Legislature". Omaha World Daily. 17 February 2008.

24. Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, "^ Penalty for Cruelty to Animals Archived 23 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine," Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (Chapter 169, Section 3) 15 December 2006

25. Christopher S. Stevenson, Lisa A. Marshall and Douglas W. Morgan ^ Japanese guidelines and regulations for scientific and ethical animal experimentation. Progress in Inflammation Research 2nd Edition 2006 p. 187. doi:10.1007/978-3-7643-7520-1_10

26. Kaohsiung Municipal Institute for Animal Health, "^ Laws and Regulations," Animal Protection Act last amended 11 July 2007.

27. ^ "Carlow man jailed for 'atrocious levels of animal cruelty' loses sentence appeal". 10 April 2019.

28. ^ Scales of Justice: In Zurich, Even Fish Have a Lawyer Archived 22 May 2013 at the Wayback Machine, Deborah Ball. The Wall Street Journal. 6 March 2010

29. ^ The lawyer who defends animals Archived 22 April 2016 at the Wayback Machine, Leo Hickman. The Guardian. 5 March 2010

30. "Hayvanları Koruma Kanunu" (in Turkish).

31. ^ "Turkish parliament approves animal rights bill". Anadolu Agency. 9 July 2021.

32. /^ Graham Robb (2007). The discovery of France: a historical geography from the Revolution to the First World War. W. W. Norton & Company. pp. 167-. ISBN 978-0-393-05973-1. Archived from the original on 2 August 2020.

33. Rothfels, Nigel (2002), Representing Animals, Indiana University Press, p. 12, ISBN 978-0-253-34154-9 . Chapter: 'A Left-handed Blow: Writing the History of Animals' by Erica Fudge

34. ^ Animal Rights by Hilda Kean, 1998, University of Chicago Press. Archived 11 November 2010 at the Wayback Machine

35. ^ "Animal Care and Protection Act 2001 (Qld)" (PDF). legislation.qld.gov.au. Archived from the original on 31 January 2018.

Arluke, Arnold. Brute Force: Animal Police and the Challenge of Cruelty, Purdue University Press (15 August 2004), hardcover, 175 pages, ISBN 1-55753-350-4. An ethnographic study of humane law enforcement officers.

Fiber-Ostrow, Pamela, Lovell, Jarret S. "Behind a veil of secrecy: animal abuse, factory farms, and Ag-Gag legislation." Contemporary Justice Review (2016) 19(2), 230 - 249.

Lea, Suzanne Goodney (2007). Delinquency and Animal Cruelty: Myths and Realities about Social Pathology, hardcover, 168 pages, ISBN 978-1-59332-197-0. Lea challenges the argument made by animal rights activists that animal cruelty enacted during childhood is a precursor to human-directed violence.

Munro H. The battered pet (1999) In F. Ascione & P. Arkow (Eds.) Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, and Animal Abuse. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue University Press, 199-208. ISBN 1-55753-143-9

Tichelar, Michael. "Royalty and Opposition to Blood Sports in Twentieth‐Century Britain: From Imperial Spoils to Wildlife Conservation?." History 103.357 (2018): 588-609.

Mance, Henry (2021). How to love animals : in a human-shaped world (First North American edition ed.). New York. ISBN 978-1-9848-7965-3. OCLC 1226175333

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse, animal neglect or animal cruelty, is the infliction by omission (neglect) or by commission by humans of suffering or harm upon non-human animals. More narrowly, it can be the causing of harm or suffering for specific achievements, such as killing animals for entertainment; cruelty to animals sometimes encompasses inflicting harm or suffering as an end in itself, referred to as zoosadism.

# data[].attributes.headline
How does stereotype affect animal cruelty? 

# data[].attributes.subject
How does stereotype affect animal cruelty? 

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.aspca.org/barred-from-love

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The commercial puppy industry keeps dogs captive in cruel conditions just so they can keep making puppies. It's time for dog lovers to fight back. Watch the video and sign up to learn how you can help make a difference.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.humanesociety.org/resources/animal-cruelty-facts-and-stats

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The shocking number of animal cruelty cases reported every day is just the tip of the iceberg-most cases are never reported. Unlike violent crimes against people, cases of animal abuse are not compiled by state or federal agencies, making it difficult to calculate just how common they are. However, we can use the information that is available to try to understand and prevent cases of abuse.

Who abuses animals?

Cruelty and neglect cross all social and economic boundaries and media reports suggest that animal abuse is common in both rural and urban areas.

Intentional cruelty to animals is strongly correlated with other crimes, including violence against people.

Hoarding behavior often victimizes animals. Sufferers of a hoarding disorder may impose severe neglect on animals by housing far more than they are able to adequately take care of. Serious animal neglect (such as hoarding) is often an indicator of people in need of social or mental health services.

Surveys suggest that those who intentionally abuse animals are predominantly men under 30, while those involved in animal hoarding are more likely to be women over 60.

Most common victims

The animals whose abuse is most often reported are dogs, cats, horses and livestock. Undercover investigations have revealed that animal abuse abounds in the factory farm industry. But because of the weak protections afforded to livestock under state cruelty laws, only the most shocking cases are reported, and few are ever prosecuted.

Organized cruelty

Dogfighting, cockfighting and other forms of organized animal cruelty go hand in hand with other crimes, and continues in many areas of the United States due to public corruption.

The HSUS documented uniformed police officers at a cockfighting pit in Kentucky.

The U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency has prosecuted multiple cases where drug cartels were running narcotics through cockfighting and dogfighting operations.

Dozens of homicides have occurred at cockfights and dogfights.

A California man was killed in a disagreement about a $10 cockfight bet.

The HSUS's investigative team combats complacent public officials and has worked with the FBI on public corruption cases in Tennessee and Virginia. In both instances, law enforcement officers were indicted and convicted.

Correlation with domestic violence

Data on domestic violence and child abuse cases reveal that a staggering number of animals are targeted by those who abuse their children or spouses.

There are approximately 70 million pet dogs and 74.1 million pet cats in the U.S. where 20 men and women are assaulted per minute (an average of around 10 million a year).

In one survey, 71 % of domestic violence victims reported that their abuser also targeted pets.

In one study of families under investigation for suspected child abuse, researchers found that pet abuse had occurred in 88 % of the families under supervision for physical abuse of their children.

To put a stop to this pattern of violence, the Humane Society Legislative Fund supported the Pets and Women's Safety (PAWS) Act, introduced to Congress in 2015 as H.R. 1258 and S.B. 1559 and enacted as part of the farm bill passed by Congress and signed by President Trump in 2018. Once fully enacted, the PAWS Act helps victims of domestic abuse find the means to escape their abusers while keeping their companion animals safe-many victims remain in abusive households for fear of their pets' safety.

State legislative trends

The HSUS has long led the push for stronger animal cruelty laws and provides training for law officials to detect and prosecute these crimes. With South Dakota joining the fight in March of 2014, animal cruelty laws now include felony provisions in all 50 states.

First vs. subsequent offense

Given that a fraction of animal cruelty acts are reported or successfully prosecuted, we are committed to supporting felony convictions in cases of severe cruelty.

49 states have laws to provide felony penalties for animal torture on the first offense.

Only Iowa doesn't have such a law.

Animal cruelty laws typically cover intentional and egregious animal neglect and abuse.

Changes in federal tracking

On January 1, 2016, the FBI added cruelty to animals as a category in the Uniform Crime Report, a nationwide crime reporting system commonly used in homicide investigations. While only about a third of U.S. communities currently participate in the system, the data generated will help create a clearer picture of animal abuse and guide strategies for intervention and enforcement. Data collection covers four categories: simple/gross neglect, intentional abuse and torture, organized abuse (such as dogfighting and cockfighting) and animal sexual abuse.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Facts, statistics and trends of animal abuse, animal cruelty and abused animals in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.body
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Beauty

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Black Beauty: His Grooms and Companions, the Autobiography of a Horse is an 1877 novel by English author Anna Sewell. It was composed in the last years of her life, during which she remained in her house as an invalid. The novel became an immediate best-seller, with Sewell dying just five months after its publication, but having lived long enough to see her only novel become a success. With fifty million copies sold, Black Beauty is one of the best-selling books of all time.

While forthrightly teaching animal welfare, it also teaches how to treat people with kindness, sympathy, and respect. In 2003, the novel was listed at number 58 on the BBC's survey The Big Read. It is seen as a forerunner of the pony book.

Background (book)

...there is no religion without love, and people may talk as much as they like about their religion, but if it does not teach them to be good and kind to man and beast, it is all a sham...

- Black Beauty, Chapter 13, last paragraph.

Although Black Beauty is looked at as a children's novel, Sewell did not write the novel for children. She said that her purpose in writing the novel was "to induce kindness, sympathy, and an understanding treatment of horses"-an influence she attributed to an essay on animals she read earlier by Horace Bushnell (1802-1876) entitled "Essay on Animals". Her sympathetic portrayal of the plight of working animals led to a vast outpouring of concern for animal welfare and is said to have been instrumental in the abolition of the cruel practice of using the checkrein (or " bearing rein", a strap used to keep horses' heads high, fashionable in Victorian England but painful and damaging to a horse's neck). Black Beauty also mentions the use of blinkers on horses, concluding that this use is likely to cause accidents at night due to interference with "the full use of" a horse's ability to "see much better in the dark than men can."

Background (author)

Anna Sewell was born in Great Yarmouth, England, and had a brother named Philip, who was an engineer in Europe. At the age of 14, Anna fell while walking home from school in the rain and injured both ankles. Through the mistreatment of the injury, she became unable to walk or stand for any length of time for the rest of her life. Disabled and unable to walk, she began learning about horses, spending many hours driving her father to and from the station from which he commuted to work. Her dependence on horse-drawn transportation fostered her respect for horses. Sewell's introduction to writing began in her youth when she helped edit the works of her mother, Mary Wright Sewell (1797-1884), a deeply religious, popular author of juvenile best-sellers.

Anna Sewell never married or had children. In visits to European spas, she met many writers, artists, and philanthropists. Her only book was Black Beauty, written between 1871 and 1877 in her house at Old Catton. During this time, her health was declining, and she could barely get out of bed. Her dearly-loved mother often had to help her with her illness. She sold the book to the local publishers, Jarrold & Sons. The book broke records for sales and is the "sixth best seller in the English language." By telling the story of a horse's life in the form of an autobiography and describing the world through the eyes of the horse, Anna Sewell broke new literary ground.

Sewell died of hepatitis or tuberculosis on 25 April 1878, only five months after the novel was published, but she lived long enough to see its initial success. She was buried on 30 April 1878 in the Quaker burial-ground at Lammas near Buxton, Norfolk, where a wall plaque marks her resting place. Her birthplace in Church Plain, Great Yarmouth, is now a museum.

Plot summary

The story is narrated in the first person as an autobiographical memoir told by the titular horse named Black Beauty-beginning with his carefree days as a foal on an English farm with his mother, to his difficult life pulling cabs in London, to his happy retirement in the country. Along the way, he meets with many hardships and recounts many tales of cruelty and kindness. Each short chapter recounts an incident in Black Beauty's life containing a lesson or moral typically related to the kindness, sympathy, and understanding treatment of horses, with Sewell's detailed observations and extensive descriptions of horse behavior lending the novel a good deal of verisimilitude.

The book describes conditions among London horse-drawn taxicab drivers, including the financial hardship caused to them by high license fees and low, legally fixed fares. A page footnote in some editions says that soon after the book was published, the difference between 6-day taxicab licenses (not allowed to trade on Sundays) and 7-day taxicab licenses (allowed to trade on Sundays) was abolished and the taxicab license fee was much reduced.

Black Beauty is considered to be one of the first fictional animal autobiographies. Originally meant to be informative literature read by adults on the norms of horse cruelty and preventions of these unjust acts, Black Beauty is now seen as a children's book. A novel narrated by the main character, Black Beauty is now read by thousands of children worldwide.

Sewell uses anthropomorphism in Black Beauty. The text advocates the fairer treatment of horses in Victorian England. The story is narrated from Black Beauty's perspective and resultantly readers arguably gained insight into how horses suffered through their use by human beings with restrictive technical objects like the " bearing rein" and " blinkers" as well as procedures like cutting off the tails of the horses. For instance, Ginger describes the physical effects of the "bearing rein" to Black Beauty, by stating, "... it is dreadful... your neck aching until you don't know how to bear it... its hurt my tongue and my jaw and the blood from my tongue covered the froth that kept flying from my lips". Tess Coslett highlights that Black Beauty's story is structured in a way that makes him similar to those he serves. The horses in the text have reactions as well as emotions and characteristics, like love and loyalty, which are similar to those of human beings. Coslett emphasizes that, while Black Beauty is not the first book written in the style of an animal autobiography, it is a novel that "allows the reader to slide in and out of horse-consciousness, blurring the human/animal divide". Dwyer suggests that "by the end of the nineteenth century the concern for animal welfare was often mediated by considerations of utility", implying that these animals (horses) were seen to get the job done by any means rather than the approach that they could be demonizing the animal.

Publications

Published in 1877, in the last years of Anna Sewell's life, Black Beauty sold over 50 million copies worldwide in 50 different languages. This different viewpoint sparked people's interest to speak for horses' well-being and implement legislation. According to Sewell, providing information was her original goal of horse injustice. Although the shift of perspectives was seen as good for some, it was also an issue to others including horse owners and people who sold such equipment for horses (equipment like blinders). For other reasons, Black Beauty became banned in some countries such as South Africa for containing the words "Black" and "Beauty" during its apartheid restrictions on African natives.

Upon publication of the book, many readers related to the pain of the victimized horses, sympathized and ultimately wanted to see the introduction of reforms that would improve the well-being of horses. Two years after the release of the novel, one million copies of Black Beauty were in circulation in the United States. In addition, animal rights activists would habitually distribute copies of the novel to horse drivers and to people in stables. The depiction of the "bearing rein" in Black Beauty spurred so much outrage and empathy from readers that its use was not only abolished in Victorian England, but public interest in anti-cruelty legislation in the United States also grew significantly. The arguably detrimental social practices concerning the use of horses in Black Beauty inspired the development of legislation in various states that would condemn such abusive behaviors towards animals. The impact of the novel is still very much recognized today. Writing in the Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare, Bernard Unti calls Black Beauty "the most influential anti cruelty novel of all time". Comparisons have also been made between Black Beauty and the most important social protest novel in the United States, Uncle Tom's Cabin, by Harriet Beecher Stowe, on account of the strong degree of outrage and protest action that both novels triggered in society.

Characters

Darkie (Black Beauty)/Black Auster/Jack/Blackie/Old Crony - The narrator of the story, a handsome black horse. He begins his career as a carriage horse for wealthy people but when he "breaks his knees" (i.e. develops scars on the fronts of his wrist (carpal) joints after a bad fall) he is no longer considered presentable enough and is put to much harder work. He passes through the hands of a series of owners, some cruel, some kind. He always tries his best to serve humans despite the circumstances.

Duchess (nicknamed "Pet") - Beauty's and Rob Roy's mother, who encourages Beauty to be good from a young age.

Rob Roy - A fellow black horse from Beauty's original farm, who is killed in a hunting incident (along with his rider, Squire Gordon's only son). It is later learned that he was Beauty's half-brother, an older son of Duchess.

Lizzie - A high-strung, nervous mare whom Lady Anne rides one day and is spooked until Black Beauty comes to her aid with his rider.

Ginger - A companion of Beauty's at Birtwick Park, she is named for her chestnut color and her habit of biting, which is often how the spice, ginger, is described. Ginger is a more aggressive horse due to her traumatic upbringing. After being ridden by Lord George in a steeplechase her back is strained. Beauty and Ginger meet for the last time as broken-down cab horses in London, and later a cart carrying a dead horse (whom Beauty believes is Ginger), passes by Beauty.

Merrylegs - A short, dappled grey, handsome pony who is polite to humans and horses alike. He is ridden by the young daughters at Birtwick Park, then sent to live with a vicar who promises never to sell him.

Sir Oliver - An older horse whose tail was docked, to his great annoyance and discomfort.

Rory - A job horse usually paired with Black Beauty. Became a coal carting horse after getting hit in the chest by a cart driven on the wrong side of the road.

Peggy - A hired horse who cannot run very fast due to her short legs. She runs at an odd hopping pace between a trot and a canter when expected to keep pace with other horses at a fast trot. When paired with a faster horse to pull a carriage she often gets whipped for not keeping up. Sold to two ladies who wanted a safe horse.

Unnamed young horse - paired with Beauty after Peggy leaves. Often frightened by things he cannot see as he does not know whether they are dangerous or not.

Captain - A former army horse who witnessed horrific incidents in the Crimean War, although he was well treated and received no serious wounds. He lost his beloved master in the Charge of the Light Brigade. He became a cab-horse for Jerry, where he works with Black Beauty. After a penetrating shoulder injury from a carriage pole due to a collision with a carriage whose driver was drunk, Jerry has him shot rather than send him to work as a cart-horse.

Hotspur - A five-year-old horse bought to replace Captain. Jerry sells him to Grant when he leaves London.

Justice - A calm peaceful horse that Beauty meets at Birtwick Park.

Beauty's owners

Farmer Grey - Beauty's first owner, a good kind man who trains him well.

Mr. Douglas Gordon (Squire Gordon) - A very kind and loving master who was also the squire. Lives in Birtwick Park. Has to sell Beauty and Ginger when he leaves the country because of his wife's illness.

Mr. John Manly - Black Beauty's groom at Squire Gordon's.

Mr. James Howard - John Manly's assistant at Squire Gordon's. He leaves to work as a coachman for Sir Clifford Williams.

Mr. Joseph Greene (Joe) - A kind boy who replaces James at Squire Gordon's hall. Beauty becomes seriously ill after little Joe gives Beauty a pail of cold water to drink and then assumes Beauty does not need a blanket, all after a long, exhausting gallop.

Bill - A boy who keeps thrashing and whipping a pony to attempt to make him jump a fence.

Mrs. Bushby - Bill's mother who is worried when she hears that he fell into a bush.

Earl of W - Purchases Beauty and Ginger from Squire Gordon. Lives in Earlshall Park.

Lady W - Wife of Lord W. Demands that Beauty and Ginger wear bearing reins to hold their heads up high. When York tries to comply with Lady W's order Ginger lashes out, kicking everything around her.

Mr. York - Earl of W's coachman. He treats the horses kindly but is scared to speak for the horses.

Reuben Smith - A first-rate driver who can treat a horse as well as a farrier, due to spending two years with a veterinary surgeon, and being an ostler at an inn. Unfortunately he occasionally drinks heavily. Though York tries to hide this problem, the Earl finds out and fires Reuben. York later convinces the Earl to rehire him. After taking Colonel Blantyre to town Reuben gets drunk in the White Lion, then rides Beauty back to Earlshall Park. Due to a loose nail in Beauty's shoe, which Reuben was too drunk to care about, Beauty's shoe comes off. Reuben then makes Beauty gallop over sharp stones injuring Beauty's hoof and causing him to stumble. Beauty falls and scrapes his knees, while Reuben is flung off Beauty and dies from the impact.

Master of the livery stables - Buys Beauty and hires him out to people in Bath who wish to rent a horse. Some of the people who rent Beauty are good drivers, most are not.

Mr. Barry - Buys Beauty from the livery stables after his friend rents Beauty several times, as his doctor advised him to get more horse exercise. He tries to treat horses well but hires two bad grooms (a thief and a humbug) due to his lack of knowledge on horse care. Decides to sell Beauty at a horse fair.

Mr. Jeremiah (Jerry) Barker - A kind owner and religious man who uses Beauty and Captain as cab horses. After Captain is injured he buys Hotspur to replace him. Refuses to work on Sunday or force his horses to go beyond a 'jog-trot' through London for customers with poor timekeeping. Though he will break these rules for a good cause. One New Year's Eve, Jerry is kept waiting in blizzard conditions by inconsiderate young men who stayed too long playing cards, contracts bronchitis, and nearly dies. Jerry's doctor tells him he must not return to cab work. Jerry takes a job with Mrs. Fowler as her coachman.

Mrs. Polly Barker - Wife of Jerry. Always waits up for her husband.

Mr. Harry Barker - Son of Jerry. Helps his father look after the horses.

Miss Dorothy (Dolly) Barker - Daughter of Jerry. Often brings food to her father.

Mr. (Grey / Governor) Grant - a respected and long-serving cab driver. When Jerry is ill he takes out Hotspur and gives Jerry half the money he makes.

Corn dealer / baker steven- Uses Beauty as a workhorse. Works him fairly but due to the poor lighting in Beauty's stable Beauty nearly goes blind.

Foreman - Has Beauty overloaded so that fewer journeys are required to deliver goods.

Mr. Jakes - A carter who works for the baker. Dislikes overloading Beauty but cannot go against the foreman. Makes Beauty work with the bearing rein up until a lady shows him that Beauty would find it easier to pull the cart without the bearing rein.

Mr. Nicholas Skinner - A ruthless cab-horse owner who charges a high fee for renting cab horses. As a result, the only way the drivers who rent his horse can make money is by overworking the horse, usually by whipping the horse to make it move even when tired. When Beauty collapses from overwork, Skinner plans to send Beauty to a knacker but a farrier convinces him to rest Beauty and sell him at a horse fair. Seedy Sam used to rent horses from him.

Willie - Grandson of Farmer Thoroughgood who wants to help Black Beauty when he comes to the market with his grandfather.

Farmer Thoroughgood - A kind owner who cares for Black Beauty when he is at his weakest.

The three ladies - Beauty's final home, where he spends the rest of his days very well treated. The ladies are Miss Blomefield, Miss Ellen, and Miss Lavinia and are most likely sisters.

Joseph (Joe) Greene - Coachman for the three ladies. Recognizes Beauty as the horse that used to belong to Squire Gordon.

Film adaptations

The book has been adapted into film and television several times, including:

Theatrical adaptations

Black Beauty Live (2011), adapted by James Stone and directed by Chris Ford

Black Beauty was adapted for the stage in 2011 by playwright James Stone. The play was performed at the Broughton Hall Estate, North Yorkshire and Epsom Racecourse, Surrey. The production was a critical success and was performed around the UK in 2012.

Influence upon other works

Beautiful Joe was a best-selling 1893 novel about a dog that was directly influenced by Black Beauty and followed a similar path to fame through awareness of cruelty to animals.

The Strike at Shane's: A Prize Story of Indiana is an anonymous American novel that won a monetary award and national publication in 1893 in a contest sponsored by the American Humane Society, and was reprinted several times commercially thereafter. Described in the introduction as a "Sequel to Black Beauty"', it tells the story of good and bad treatment of farm animals and local wildlife, especially songbirds, in the America Midwest. The novel is generally attributed as the first published work of the novelist Gene Stratton Porter, and bears a remarkable textual similarity to her other books.

One of the most popular of the interwar pony stories for children, Moorland Mousie (1929), by 'Golden Gorse' (Muriel Wace), is heavily influenced by Black Beauty.

Phyllis Briggs wrote a sequel called Son of Black Beauty, published in 1950.

The Pullein-Thompson sisters wrote several stories concerning relatives of Black Beauty. They are "Black Ebony" (1975; by Josephine), "Black Velvet" (1975; by Christine), "Black Princess" (1975; by Diana), "Black Nightshade" (1978; by Josephine), "Black Romany" (1978; by Diana), "Blossom" (1978; by Christine), "Black Piper" (1982; by Diana), "Black Raven" (1982; by Josephine) and "Black Pioneer" (1982; by Christine). The book Black Swift (1991) by Josephine is not about a Black Beauty relative. These were published in several compilations as well as some of them being available separately. Each compilation was subsequently republished, sometimes with a change of name.

Spike Milligan wrote a parody of the novel called Black Beauty According to Spike Milligan (1996).

References

1. ^ Merriam-Webster (1995). "Black Beauty". Merriam Webster's Encyclopedia of Literature.

2. The Times on Black Beauty: "Fifty million copies of Black Beauty have been sold in the years since Anna Sewell's publisher paid her £20 for the story." (29 February 2008)

3. ^ Gentle Heart: The Story of Anna Sewell Archived 11 November 2006 at the Wayback Machine, by Jen Longshaw.

4. Anna Sewell, by Prof. Waller Hastings, Northern State University, 2004. Archive.org copy.

5. Wood, Naomi. "Dark Horse: A Life of Anna Sewell." Children's Literature Association Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 4, 2004

6. ^ "CONTRACTORS BULLDOZE ANNA SEWELL'S GRAVE". Boston Globe. Associated Press. 6 September 1984.

7. Libo, Stephanie."Black Beauty: The tale of a Horse that changed the perspective of a Nation". Living Green Magazine. Nov. 30, 2012

8. ^ Ramachandran, Naman (29 July 2020). "Kate Winslet's 'Black Beauty' Adaptation Set For Disney Plus Bow". Variety.

9. ^ "Black Beauty at Broughton Hall, North Yorkshire". Peel Heritage. Archived from the original on 20 October 2014.

External links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Black Beauty: His Grooms and Companions, the Autobiography of a Horse is an 1877 novel by English author Anna Sewell. It was composed in the last years of her life, during which she remained in her house as an invalid.

# data[].attributes.body
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Animal rights is the philosophy according to which many or all sentient animals have moral worth independent of their utility to humans, and that their most basic interests-such as avoiding suffering-should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings. Broadly speaking, and particularly in popular discourse, the term "animal rights" is often used synonymously with "animal protection" or "animal liberation". More narrowly, "animal rights" refers to the idea that many animals have fundamental rights to be treated with respect as individuals- rights to life, liberty, and freedom from torture that may not be overridden by considerations of aggregate welfare.

Many advocates of animal rights oppose the assignment of moral value and fundamental protections on the basis of species membership alone. They consider this idea, known as speciesism, a prejudice as irrational as any other. They maintain that animals should not be viewed as property or used as food, clothing, entertainment, or beasts of burden merely because they are not human. Multiple cultural traditions around the world such as Jainism, Taoism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Shinto and Animism also espouse forms of animal rights.

In parallel to the debate about moral rights, law schools in North America now often teach animal law, and several legal scholars, such as Steven M. Wise and Gary L. Francione, support the extension of basic legal rights and personhood to non-human animals. The animals most often considered in arguments for personhood are hominids. Some animal-rights academics support this because it would break the species barrier, but others oppose it because it predicates moral value on mental complexity rather than on sentience alone. As of November 2019, 29 countries had enacted bans on hominoid experimentation; Argentina has granted a captive orangutan basic human rights since 2014.

Outside of primates, animal-rights discussions most often address the status of mammals (compare charismatic megafauna). Other animals (considered less sentient) have gained less attention- insects relatively little (outside Jainism) and animal-like bacteria hardly any. The vast majority of animals have no legally recognised rights.

Critics of animal rights argue that nonhuman animals are unable to enter into a social contract, and thus cannot be possessors of rights, a view summarised by the philosopher Roger Scruton, who writes that only humans have duties, and therefore only humans have rights. Another argument, associated with the utilitarian tradition, maintains that animals may be used as resources so long as there is no unnecessary suffering; animals may have some moral standing, but are inferior in status to human beings, and any interests they have may be overridden, though what counts as "necessary" suffering or a legitimate sacrifice of interests can vary considerably. Certain forms of animal-rights activism, such as the destruction of fur farms and of animal laboratories by the Animal Liberation Front, have attracted criticism, including from within the animal-rights movement itself, and prompted the U.S. Congress to enact laws, including the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, allowing the prosecution of this sort of activity as terrorism.

For some the basis of animal rights is in religion or animal worship (or in general nature worship), with some religions banning killing of any animal, and in other religions animals can be considered unclean.

Hindu and Buddhist societies abandoned animal sacrifice and embraced vegetarianism from the 3rd century BCE. One of the most important sanctions of the Jain, Hindu and Buddhist faiths is the concept of ahimsa, or refraining from the destruction of life. According to Buddhist belief, humans do not deserve preferential treatment over other living beings. The Dharmic interpretation of this doctrine prohibits the killing of any living being. Ancient Tamil works such as the Tolkāppiyam and Tirukkural contain passages that extend the idea of non-violence to all living beings.

In Islam, animal rights were recognized early by the Sharia. This recognition is based on both the Qur'an and the Hadith. In the Qur'an, there are many references to animals, detailing that they have souls, form communities, communicate with God and worship Him in their own way. Muhammad forbade his followers to harm any animal and asked them to respect the rights of animals.

According to Christianity, all animals, from the smallest to the largest, are cared for and loved. According to the Bible, "All these animals waited for the Lord, that the Lord might give them food at the hour. The Lord gives them, they receive; The Lord opens his hand, and they are filled with good things". It further says God "gave food to the animals, and made the crows cry."

The two main philosophical approaches to animal ethics are utilitarian and rights-based. The former is exemplified by Peter Singer, and the latter by Tom Regan and Gary Francione. Their differences reflect a distinction philosophers draw between ethical theories that judge the rightness of an act by its consequences (consequentialism/teleological ethics, or utilitarianism), and those that focus on the principle behind the act, almost regardless of consequences (deontological ethics). Deontologists argue that there are acts we should never perform, even if failing to do so entails a worse outcome.

There are a number of positions that can be defended from a consequentalist or deontologist perspective, including the capabilities approach, represented by Martha Nussbaum, and the egalitarian approach, which has been examined by Ingmar Persson and Peter Vallentyne. The capabilities approach focuses on what individuals require to fulfill their capabilities: Nussbaum (2006) argues that animals need a right to life, some control over their environment, company, play, and physical health.

Stephen R. L. Clark, Mary Midgley, and Bernard Rollin also discuss animal rights in terms of animals being permitted to lead a life appropriate for their kind. Egalitarianism favors an equal distribution of happiness among all individuals, which makes the interests of the worse off more important than those of the better off. Another approach, virtue ethics, holds that in considering how to act we should consider the character of the actor, and what kind of moral agents we should be. Rosalind Hursthouse has suggested an approach to animal rights based on virtue ethics. Mark Rowlands has proposed a contractarian approach.

Nussbaum (2004) writes that utilitarianism, starting with Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill, has contributed more to the recognition of the moral status of animals than any other ethical theory. The utilitarian philosopher most associated with animal rights is Peter Singer, professor of bioethics at Princeton University. Singer is not a rights theorist, but uses the language of rights to discuss how we ought to treat individuals. He is a preference utilitarian, meaning that he judges the rightness of an act by the extent to which it satisfies the preferences (interests) of those affected.

His position is that there is no reason not to give equal consideration to the interests of human and nonhumans, though his principle of equality does not require identical treatment. A mouse and a man both have an interest in not being kicked, and there are no moral or logical grounds for failing to accord those interests equal weight. Interests are predicated on the ability to suffer, nothing more, and once it is established that a being has interests, those interests must be given equal consideration. Singer quotes the English philosopher Henry Sidgwick (1838-1900): "The good of any one individual is of no more importance, from the point of view ... of the Universe, than the good of any other."

Singer argues that equality of consideration is a prescription, not an assertion of fact: if the equality of the sexes were based only on the idea that men and women were equally intelligent, we would have to abandon the practice of equal consideration if this were later found to be false. But the moral idea of equality does not depend on matters of fact such as intelligence, physical strength, or moral capacity. Equality therefore cannot be grounded on the outcome of scientific investigations into the intelligence of nonhumans. All that matters is whether they can suffer.

Commentators on all sides of the debate now accept that animals suffer and feel pain, although it was not always so. Bernard Rollin, professor of philosophy, animal sciences, and biomedical sciences at Colorado State University, writes that Descartes's influence continued to be felt until the 1980s. Veterinarians trained in the US before 1989 were taught to ignore pain, he writes, and at least one major veterinary hospital in the 1960s did not stock narcotic analgesics for animal pain control. In his interactions with scientists, he was often asked to "prove" that animals are conscious, and to provide "scientifically acceptable" evidence that they could feel pain.

Scientific publications have made it clear since the 1980s that the majority of researchers do believe animals suffer and feel pain, though it continues to be argued that their suffering may be reduced by an inability to experience the same dread of anticipation as humans or to remember the suffering as vividly. The ability of animals to suffer, even it may vary in severity, is the basis for Singer's application of equal consideration. The problem of animal suffering, and animal consciousness in general, arose primarily because it was argued that animals have no language. Singer writes that, if language were needed to communicate pain, it would often be impossible to know when humans are in pain, though we can observe pain behavior and make a calculated guess based on it. He argues that there is no reason to suppose that the pain behavior of nonhumans would have a different meaning from the pain behavior of humans.

Tom Regan, professor emeritus of philosophy at North Carolina State University, argues in The Case for Animal Rights (1983) that nonhuman animals are what he calls "subjects-of-a-life", and as such are bearers of rights. He writes that, because the moral rights of humans are based on their possession of certain cognitive abilities, and because these abilities are also possessed by at least some nonhuman animals, such animals must have the same moral rights as humans. Although only humans act as moral agents, both marginal-case humans, such as infants, and at least some nonhumans must have the status of "moral patients".

Moral patients are unable to formulate moral principles, and as such are unable to do right or wrong, even though what they do may be beneficial or harmful. Only moral agents are able to engage in moral action. Animals for Regan have " intrinsic value" as subjects-of-a-life, and cannot be regarded as a means to an end, a view that places him firmly in the abolitionist camp. His theory does not extend to all animals, but only to those that can be regarded as subjects-of-a-life. He argues that all normal mammals of at least one year of age would qualify:

... individuals are subjects-of-a-life if they have beliefs and desires; perception, memory, and a sense of the future, including their own future; an emotional life together with feelings of pleasure and pain; preference- and welfare-interests; the ability to initiate action in pursuit of their desires and goals; a psychophysical identity over time; and an individual welfare in the sense that their experiential life fares well or ill for them, logically independently of their utility for others and logically independently of their being the object of anyone else's interests.

Whereas Singer is primarily concerned with improving the treatment of animals and accepts that, in some hypothetical scenarios, individual animals might be used legitimately to further human or nonhuman ends, Regan believes we ought to treat nonhuman animals as we would humans. He applies the strict Kantian ideal (which Kant himself applied only to humans) that they ought never to be sacrificed as a means to an end, and must be treated as ends in themselves.

Gary Francione, professor of law and philosophy at Rutgers Law School in Newark, is a leading abolitionist writer, arguing that animals need only one right, the right not to be owned. Everything else would follow from that paradigm shift. He writes that, although most people would condemn the mistreatment of animals, and in many countries there are laws that seem to reflect those concerns, "in practice the legal system allows any use of animals, however abhorrent." The law only requires that any suffering not be "unnecessary". In deciding what counts as "unnecessary", an animal's interests are weighed against the interests of human beings, and the latter almost always prevail.

Francione's Animals, Property, and the Law (1995) was the first extensive jurisprudential treatment of animal rights. In it, Francione compares the situation of animals to the treatment of slaves in the United States, where legislation existed that appeared to protect them while the courts ignored that the institution of slavery itself rendered the protection unenforceable. He offers as an example the United States Animal Welfare Act, which he describes as an example of symbolic legislation, intended to assuage public concern about the treatment of animals, but difficult to implement.

He argues that a focus on animal welfare, rather than animal rights, may worsen the position of animals by making the public feel comfortable about using them and entrenching the view of them as property. He calls animal rights groups who pursue animal welfare issues, such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, the " new welfarists", arguing that they have more in common with 19th-century animal protectionists than with the animal rights movement; indeed, the terms "animal protection" and "protectionism" are increasingly favored. His position in 1996 was that there is no animal rights movement in the United States.

Mark Rowlands, professor of philosophy at the University of Florida, has proposed a contractarian approach, based on the original position and the veil of ignorance-a "state of nature" thought experiment that tests intuitions about justice and fairness-in John Rawls's A Theory of Justice (1971). In the original position, individuals choose principles of justice (what kind of society to form, and how primary social goods will be distributed), unaware of their individual characteristics-their race, sex, class, or intelligence, whether they are able-bodied or disabled, rich or poor-and therefore unaware of which role they will assume in the society they are about to form.

The idea is that, operating behind the veil of ignorance, they will choose a social contract in which there is basic fairness and justice for them no matter the position they occupy. Rawls did not include species membership as one of the attributes hidden from the decision-makers in the original position. Rowlands proposes extending the veil of ignorance to include rationality, which he argues is an undeserved property similar to characteristics including race, sex and intelligence.

Prima facie rights theory

American philosopher Timothy Garry has proposed an approach that deems nonhuman animals worthy of prima facie rights. In a philosophical context, a prima facie (Latin for "on the face of it" or "at first glance") right is one that appears to be applicable at first glance, but upon closer examination may be outweighed by other considerations. In his book Ethics: A Pluralistic Approach to Moral Theory, Lawrence Hinman characterizes such rights as "the right is real but leaves open the question of whether it is applicable and overriding in a particular situation". The idea that nonhuman animals are worthy of prima facie rights is to say that, in a sense, animals have rights that can be overridden by many other considerations, especially those conflicting a human's right to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness. Garry supports his view arguing:

... if a nonhuman animal were to kill a human being in the U.S., it would have broken the laws of the land and would probably get rougher sanctions than if it were a human. My point is that like laws govern all who interact within a society, rights are to be applied to all beings who interact within that society. This is not to say these rights endowed by humans are equivalent to those held by nonhuman animals, but rather that if humans possess rights then so must all those who interact with humans.

In sum, Garry suggests that humans have obligations to nonhuman animals; animals do not, and ought not to, have uninfringible rights against humans.

Women have played a central role in animal advocacy since the 19th century. The anti-vivisection movement in the 19th and early 20th century in England and the United States was largely run by women, including Frances Power Cobbe, Anna Kingsford, Lizzy Lind af Hageby and Caroline Earle White (1833-1916). Garner writes that 70 per cent of the membership of the Victoria Street Society (one of the anti-vivisection groups founded by Cobbe) were women, as were 70 per cent of the membership of the British RSPCA in 1900.

The modern animal advocacy movement has a similar representation of women. They are not invariably in leadership positions: during the March for Animals in Washington, D.C., in 1990-the largest animal rights demonstration held until then in the United States-most of the participants were women, but most of the platform speakers were men. Nevertheless, several influential animal advocacy groups have been founded by women, including the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection by Cobbe in London in 1898; the Animal Welfare Board of India by Rukmini Devi Arundale in 1962; and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, co-founded by Ingrid Newkirk in 1980. In the Netherlands, Marianne Thieme and Esther Ouwehand were elected to parliament in 2006 representing the Parliamentary group for Animals.

The preponderance of women in the movement has led to a body of academic literature exploring feminism and animal rights, such as feminism and vegetarianism or veganism, the oppression of women and animals, and the male association of women and animals with nature and emotion, rather than reason-an association that several feminist writers have embraced. Lori Gruen writes that women and animals serve the same symbolic function in a patriarchal society: both are "the used"; the dominated, submissive " Other". When the British feminist Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797) published A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792), Thomas Taylor (1758-1835), a Cambridge philosopher, responded with an anonymous parody, A Vindication of the Rights of Brutes (1792), saying that Wollstonecraft's arguments for women's rights could be applied equally to animals, a position he intended as reductio ad absurdum. In her works The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory (1990) and The Pornography of Meat (2004), Carol J. Adams focuses in particular on what she argues are the links between the oppression of women and that of non-human animals.

Some transhumanists argue for animal rights, liberation, and "uplift" of animal consciousness into machines. Transhumanism also understands animal rights on a gradation or spectrum with other types of sentient rights, including human rights and the rights of conscious artificial intelligences (posthuman rights).

According to sociologist David Nibert of Wittenberg University, the struggle for animal liberation must happen in tandem with a more generalized struggle against human oppression and exploitation under global capitalism. He says that under a more egalitarian democratic socialist system, one that would "allow a more just and peaceful order to emerge" and be "characterized by economic democracy and a democratically controlled state and mass media", there would be "much greater potential to inform the public about vital global issues-and the potential for "campaigns to improve the lives of other animals" to be "more abolitionist in nature." Philosopher Steven Best of the University of Texas at El Paso states that the animal liberation movement, as characterized by the Animal Liberation Front and its various offshoots, "is a significant threat to global capital."

... Animal liberation challenges large sectors of the capitalist economy by assailing corporate agriculture and pharmaceutical companies and their suppliers. Far from being irrelevant to social movements, animal rights can form the basis for a broad coalition of progressive social groups and drive changes that strike at the heart of capitalist exploitation of animals, people and the earth.

R. G. Frey, professor of philosophy at Bowling Green State University, is a preference utilitarian, as is Singer. But, in his early work, Interests and Rights (1980), Frey disagreed with Singer-who in his Animal Liberation (1975) wrote that the interests of nonhuman animals must be included when judging the consequences of an act-on the grounds that animals have no interests. Frey argues that interests are dependent on desire, and that no desire can exist without a corresponding belief. Animals have no beliefs, because a belief state requires the ability to hold a second-order belief-a belief about the belief-which he argues requires language: "If someone were to say, e.g. 'The cat believes that the door is locked,' then that person is holding, as I see it, that the cat holds the declarative sentence 'The door is locked' to be true; and I can see no reason whatever for crediting the cat or any other creature which lacks language, including human infants, with entertaining declarative sentences."

Carl Cohen, professor of philosophy at the University of Michigan, argues that rights holders must be able to distinguish between their own interests and what is right. "The holders of rights must have the capacity to comprehend rules of duty governing all, including themselves. In applying such rules, [they] ... must recognize possible conflicts between what is in their own interest and what is just. Only in a community of beings capable of self-restricting moral judgments can the concept of a right be correctly invoked." Cohen rejects Singer's argument that, since a brain-damaged human could not make moral judgments, moral judgments cannot be used as the distinguishing characteristic for determining who is awarded rights. Cohen writes that the test for moral judgment "is not a test to be administered to humans one by one", but should be applied to the capacity of members of the species in general.

Judge Richard Posner of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit debated the issue of animal rights in 2001 with Peter Singer. Posner posits that his moral intuition tells him "that human beings prefer their own. If a dog threatens a human infant, even if it requires causing more pain to the dog to stop it, than the dog would have caused to the infant, then we favour the child. It would be monstrous to spare the dog."

Singer challenges this by arguing that formerly unequal rights for gays, women, and certain races were justified using the same set of intuitions. Posner replies that equality in civil rights did not occur because of ethical arguments, but because facts mounted that there were no morally significant differences between humans based on race, sex, or sexual orientation that would support inequality. If and when similar facts emerge about humans and animals, the differences in rights will erode too. But facts will drive equality, not ethical arguments that run contrary to instinct, he argues. Posner calls his approach "soft utilitarianism", in contrast to Singer's "hard utilitarianism". He argues:

The "soft" utilitarian position on animal rights is a moral intuition of many, probably most, Americans. We realize that animals feel pain, and we think that to inflict pain without a reason is bad. Nothing of practical value is added by dressing up this intuition in the language of philosophy; much is lost when the intuition is made a stage in a logical argument. When kindness toward animals is levered into a duty of weighting the pains of animals and of people equally, bizarre vistas of social engineering are opened up.

Roger Scruton, the British philosopher, argued that rights imply obligations. Every legal privilege, he wrote, imposes a burden on the one who does not possess that privilege: that is, "your right may be my duty." Scruton therefore regarded the emergence of the animal rights movement as "the strangest cultural shift within the liberal worldview", because the idea of rights and responsibilities is, he argued, distinctive to the human condition, and it makes no sense to spread them beyond our own species.

He accused animal rights advocates of "pre-scientific" anthropomorphism, attributing traits to animals that are, he says, Beatrix Potter-like, where "only man is vile." It is within this fiction that the appeal of animal rights lies, he argued. The world of animals is non-judgmental, filled with dogs who return our affection almost no matter what we do to them, and cats who pretend to be affectionate when, in fact, they care only about themselves. It is, he argued, a fantasy, a world of escape.

Scruton singled out Peter Singer, a prominent Australian philosopher and animal-rights activist, for criticism. He wrote that Singer's works, including Animal Liberation, "contain little or no philosophical argument. They derive their radical moral conclusions from a vacuous utilitarianism that counts the pain and pleasure of all living things as equally significant and that ignores just about everything that has been said in our philosophical tradition about the real distinction between persons and animals."

Tom Regan countered this view of rights by distinguishing moral agents and moral patients.[unreliable source? ]

According to a paper published in 2000 by Harold Herzog and Lorna Dorr, previous academic surveys of attitudes towards animal rights have tended to suffer from small sample sizes and non-representative groups. However, a number of factors appear to correlate with the attitude of individuals regarding the treatment of animals and animal rights. These include gender, age, occupation, religion, and level of education. There has also been evidence to suggest that prior experience with pets may be a factor in people's attitudes.

According to some studies, women are more likely to empathize with the cause of animal rights than men. A 1996 study suggested that factors that may partially explain this discrepancy include attitudes towards feminism and science, scientific literacy, and the presence of a greater emphasis on "nurturance or compassion" among women.

A common misconception on the concept of animal rights is that its proponents want to grant non-human animals the exact same legal rights as humans, such as the right to vote. This is not the case, as the concept is that animals should have rights with equal consideration to their interests (for example, cats do not have any interest in voting, so they should not have the right to vote). A 2016 study found that support for animal testing may not be based on cogent philosophical rationales, and more open debate is warranted.

A 2007 survey to examine whether or not people who believed in evolution were more likely to support animal rights than creationists and believers in intelligent design found that this was largely the case-according to the researchers, the respondents who were strong Christian fundamentalists and believers in creationism were less likely to advocate for animal rights than those who were less fundamentalist in their beliefs. The findings extended previous research, such as a 1992 study which found that 48% of animal rights activists were atheists or agnostic. A 2019 study in The Washington Post found that those who have positive attitudes toward animal rights also tend to have a positive view of universal healthcare, favor reducing discrimination against African Americans, the LGBT community and undocumented immigrants, and expanding welfare to aid the poor.

Two surveys found that attitudes towards animal rights tactics, such as direct action, are very diverse within the animal rights communities. Near half (50% and 39% in two surveys) of activists do not support direct action. One survey concluded "it would be a mistake to portray animal rights activists as homogeneous."

Books and papers are cited in short form in the footnotes, with full citations here. News and other sources are cited in full in the footnotes.

Adams, Carol J. (1996). The Sexual Politics of Meat: A Feminist-Vegetarian Critical Theory. Continuum. ISBN 1501312839

Adams, Carol J.; Donovan, Josephine, eds. (1995). Animals and Women: Feminist Theoretical Explorations. Duke University Press. ISBN 0822316552

Adams, Carol J. (2004). The Pornography of Meat. Continuum. ISBN 9781590565100

Benthall, Jonathan (2007). "Animal liberation and rights", Anthropology Today, volume 23, issue 2, April.

Bentham, Jeremy (1781). Principles of Penal Law. ISBN 1379912326

Beauchamp, Tom (2009). "The Moral Standing of Animals", in Marc Bekoff. Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Greenwood. ISBN 0313352593

Beauchamp, Tom (2011a). "Introduction," in Tom Beauchamp and R.G. Frey (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Animal Ethics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 019935197X

Beauchamp, Tom (2011b). "Rights Theory and Animal Rights," in Beauchamp and Frey, op cit. ISBN 019935197X

Best, Steven (2014). The Politics of Total Liberation: Revolution for the 21st Century. Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137440723. ISBN 978-1137471116.

Clark, Stephen R. L. (1977). The Moral Status of Animals. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0192830406

Cohen, Carl and Regan, Tom (2001). The Animal Rights Debate. Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 0847696626

Craig, Edward (ed.) (1988). "Deontological Ethics" and "Consequentalism." Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

DeGrazia, David (2002). Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University Press.

Francione, Gary (1996). Rain Without Thunder: The Ideology of the Animal Rights Movement. Temple University Press.

Francione, Gary (1995). Animals, Property, and the Law. Temple University Press.

Francione, Gary (2008). Animals as Persons. Columbia University Press.

Francione, Gary and Garner, Robert (2010). The Animal Rights Debate: Abolition Or Regulation? Columbia University Press.

Fellenz, Mark R. (2007). The Moral Menagerie: Philosophy and Animal Rights. University of Illinois Press.

Frey, R.G. (1980). Interests and Rights: The Case against Animals. Clarendon Press.

Frey, R.G. (1989). "Why Animals Lack Beliefs and Desires," in Peter Singer and Tom Regan (eds.). Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Prentice Hall.

Garner, Robert (2004). Animals, Politics and Morality. Manchester University Press.

Garner, Robert (2005). The Political Theory of Animals Rights. Manchester University Press.

Giannelli, Michael A. (1985). "Three Blind Mice, See How They Run: A Critique of Behavioral Research With Animals". In M.W. Fox & L.D. Mickley (eds.), Advances in Animal Welfare Science 1985/1986 (pp. 109-164). Washington, DC: The Humane Society of the United States

Griffin, Donald (1984). Animal Thinking. Harvard University Press.

Horta, Oscar (2010). "What Is Speciesism?", The Journal of Environmental and Agricultural Ethics, Vol. 23, No. 3, June, pp. 243-266.

Hursthouse, Rosalind (2000a). On Virtue Ethics. Oxford University Press.

Hursthouse, Rosalind (2000b). Ethics, Humans and Other Animals. Routledge.

Jakopovich, Daniel (2021). "The UK's Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill Excludes the Vast Majority of Animals: Why We Must Expand Our Moral Circle to Include Invertebrates", Animals & Society Research Initiative, University of Victoria, Canada.

Kant, Immanuel (1785). Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals.

Kelch, Thomas G. (2011). Globalization and Animal Law. Kluwer Law International.

Lansbury, Coral (1985). The Old Brown Dog: Women, Workers, and Vivisection in Edwardian England. University of Wisconsin Press.

Legge, Debbi and Brooman, Simon (1997). Law Relating to Animals. Cavendish Publishing. ISBN 1859412386

Leneman, Leah (1999). "No Animal Food: The Road to Veganism in Britain, 1909-1944," Society and Animals, 7, 1-5.

Locke, John (1693). Some Thoughts Concerning Education.

MacKinnon, Catharine A. (2004). "Of Mice and Men," in Nussbaum and Sunstein, op cit.

Mason, Peter (1997). The Brown Dog Affair. Two Sevens Publishing.

Midgley, Mary (1984). Animals and Why They Matter. University of Georgia Press. ISBN 0820320412

Molland, Neil (2004). "Thirty Years of Direct Action" in Best and Nocella, op cit.

Monaghan, Rachael (2000). "Terrorism in the Name of Animal Rights," in Taylor, Maxwell and Horgan, John. The Future of Terrorism. Routledge.

Murray, L. (2006). "The ASPCA-Pioneers in Animal Welfare", Encyclopædia Britannica's Advocacy for Animals.

Nash, Roderick (1989). The Rights of Nature: A History of Environmental Ethics. University of Wisconsin Press.

Nibert, David (2013). Animal Oppression and Human Violence: Domesecration, Capitalism, and Global Conflict. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0231151894.

Nussbaum, Martha (2006). Frontiers of Justice: Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Belknap Press.

Posner, Richard and Singer, Peter (June 15, 2001). Posner-Singer debate, Slate.

Rachels, James (2009). "Darwin, Charles," in Bekoff, op cit.

Redclift, Michael R. (2010). The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Regan, Tom (1983). The Case for Animal Rights. University of California Press.

Regan, Tom (2001). Defending Animal Rights. University of Illinois Press.

Rollin, Bernard (1981). Animal Rights and Human Morality. Prometheus Books.

Rollin, Bernard (1989). The Unheeded Cry: Animal Consciousness, Animal Pain, and Science. New York: Oxford University Press.

Rowlands, Mark (2009) [1998]. Animal Rights. A Defense. Palgrave Macmillan.

Ryder, Richard (2000) [1989]. Animal Revolution: Changing Attitudes Towards Speciesism. Berg.

Scruton, Roger (1998). Animal Rights and Wrongs. Claridge Press.

Singer, Peter (April 5, 1973). "Animal liberation", The New York Review of Books, Volume 20, Number 5.

Singer, Peter (1990) [1975]. Animal Liberation. New York Review Books.

Singer, Peter (2000) [1998]. Ethics into Action: Henry Spira and the Animal Rights Movement. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.

Singer, Peter (2004). "Ethics Beyond Species and Beyond Instincts," in Sunstein and Nussbaum, op cit.

Singer, Peter (2011) [1979]. Practical Ethics. Cambridge University Press.

Stamp Dawkins, Marian (1980). Animal Suffering: The Science of Animal Welfare. Chapman and Hall.

Stucki, Saskia (2020) "Towards a Theory of Legal Animal Rights: Simple and Fundamental Rights", Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 40:533-560.

Sunstein, Cass R. (2004). "Introduction: What are Animal Rights?" in Sunstein and Nussbaum, op cit.

Sunstein, Cass R. and Nussbaum, Martha (2005). Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195305108

Taylor, Angus (2009). Animals and Ethics: An Overview of the Philosophical Debate. Broadview Press.

Taylor, Thomas (1792). "A Vindication of the Rights of Brutes," in Craciun, Adriana (2002). A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on Mary Wollstonecraft's A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Routledge.

Vallentyne, Peter (2007). "Of Mice and Men: Equality and Animals" in Nils Holtug, and Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen (eds.) (2007). Egalitarianism: New Essays on the Nature and Value of Equality. Oxford University Press.

Waldau, Paul (2011). Animal Rights: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press.

Walker, Stephen (1983). Animal Thoughts. Routledge.

Weir, Jack (2009). "Virtue Ethics," in Marc Bekoff. Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Greenwood. ISBN 0313352593

Williams, Erin E. and DeMello, Margo (2007). Why Animals Matter. Prometheus Books.

Wise, Steven M. (2000). Rattling the Cage: Toward Legal Rights for Animals. Da Capo Press.

Wise, Steven M. (2002). Drawing the Line: Science and the Case for Animal Rights. Perseus.

Wise, Steven M. (2004). "Animal Rights, One Step at a Time," in Sunstein and Nussbaum, op cit.

Lubinski, Joseph (2002). "Overview Summary of Animal Rights", The Animal Legal and Historical Center at Michigan State University College of Law.

"Great Apes and the Law", The Animal Legal and Historical Center at Michigan State University College of Law.

Bekoff, Marc (ed.) (2009). The Encyclopedia of Animal Rights and Animal Welfare. Greenwood.

Best, Steven and Nocella II, Anthony J. (eds). (2004). Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? Reflections on the Liberation of Animals. Lantern Books

Chapouthier, Georges and Nouët, Jean-Claude (eds.) (1998). The Universal Declaration of Animal Rights. Ligue Française des Droits de l'Animal.

Dawkins, Richard (1993). Gaps in the mind, in Cavalieri, Paola and Singer, Peter (eds.). The Great Ape Project. St. Martin's Griffin.

Dombrowski, Daniel (1997). Babies and Beasts: The Argument from Marginal Cases. University of Illinois Press.

Favre, David S. (2018). Respecting Animals: A Balanced Approach to Our Relationship with Pets, Food, and Wildlife. Prometheus. ISBN 978-1633884250.

Foltz, Richard (2006). Animals in Islamic Tradition and Muslim Cultures. Oneworld Publications.

Franklin, Julian H. (2005). Animal Rights and Moral Philosophy. University of Columbia Press.

Gruen, Lori (2003). "The Moral Status of Animals", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, July 1, 2003.

_________ (2011). Ethics and Animals. Cambridge University Press.

Hall, Lee (2006). Capers in the Churchyard: Animal Rights Advocacy in the Age of Terror. Nectar Bat Press.

Linzey, Andrew and Clarke, Paul A. B.(eds.) (1990). Animal Rights: A Historic Anthology. Columbia University Press.

Mann, Keith (2007). From Dusk 'til Dawn: An Insider's View of the Growth of the Animal Liberation Movement. Puppy Pincher Press.

McArthur, Jo-Anne and Wilson, Keith (eds). (2020). Hidden: Animals in the Anthropocene. Lantern Publishing & Media.

Neumann, Jean-Marc (2012). "The Universal Declaration of Animal Rights or the Creation of a New Equilibrium between Species". Animal Law Review volume 19-1.

Nibert, David (2002). Animal Rights, Human Rights: Entanglements of Oppression and Liberation. Rowman and Litterfield.

Nibert, David, ed. (2017). Animal Oppression and Capitalism. Praeger Publishing. ISBN 978-1440850738.

Patterson, Charles (2002). Eternal Treblinka: Our Treatment of Animals and the Holocaust. Lantern.

Rachels, James (1990). Created from Animals: The Moral Implications of Darwinism. Oxford University Press.

Regan, Tom and Singer, Peter (eds.) (1976). Animal Rights and Human Obligations. Prentice-Hall.

Spiegel, Marjorie (1996). The Dreaded Comparison: Human and Animal Slavery. Mirror Books.

Sztybel, David (2006). "Can the Treatment of Animals Be Compared to the Holocaust?" Ethics and the Environment 11 (Spring): 97-132.

Tobias, Michael (2000). Life Force: The World of Jainism. Asian Humanities Press.

Wilson, Scott (2010). "Animals and Ethics" Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Animal rights is the philosophy according to which many or all sentient animals have moral worth independent of their utility to humans, and that their most basic interests-such as avoiding suffering-should be afforded the same consideration as similar interests of human beings.

# data[].attributes.headline
How did human cruelty impacted the world?

# data[].attributes.subject
How did human cruelty impacted the world?

# data[].attributes.headline
How humans’ treatment of animals affects the world.  

# data[].attributes.subject
How humans’ treatment of animals affects the world.  

# data[].attributes.headline
Ways humans are cruel to animals and the reasons why. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Ways humans are cruel to animals and the reasons why. 

# data[].attributes.headline
How human’s treatment of animals impact the world?

# data[].attributes.subject
How human’s treatment of animals impact the world?

# data[].attributes.headline
How did treatment of animals I impacts the world?

# data[].attributes.subject
How did treatment of animals I impacts the world?