Abstract

Abstract Human-animal studies have taken a “wild turn” because of growing concern that the urgency to preserve or restore native species and ecosystems has led to overlooking the pain and suffering inflicted upon nonhuman animals targeted as threats to that cause. Martha Nussbaum’s capabilities approach is used to examine the case of wild horses in the American West. Federal law protecting them predates amendments requiring managers to regulate their numbers because of conservation. I conclude that the wild horse program meets Nussbaum’s definition of compassion in important respects, and that temporary fertility control, long-term pastures, and adoptions fulfill her criteria of justice, but with important qualifications. The capabilities approach relies on the possibility of rational discourse about the protection of wildlife individuals, but that consensus might apply only to certain species. In addition, “culture wars” plaguing the U.S. threaten the possibility of a consensus about compassion and justice for nonhuman animals.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.