Species justice and harm to animals - Environmental Harm: An Eco-justice Perspective - page 106

• the nature of animals: how animals live, as relected in natural
environments that provide for fresh air, sunshine and natural
vegetation, and that allow them to express their natural behaviour.
While often agreeing in practice, the distinctions do represent views
of welfare that may not necessarily coincide.
A pig farmer using criteria based on biological functioning
might conclude that the welfare of a group of confined
sows is high because the animals are well fed, reproducing
efficiently, and free from disease and injury. Critics using
other criteria might conclude that the welfare of the same
animals is poor because they are unable to lead natural lives,
or because they show signs of frustration and discomfort.
(Fraser, 2010: 48)
Arguments about animal welfare often hinge upon these distinctions.
Debate thus occurs within the welfare sector, as well as between
welfare and rights campaigners. This debate is also reflected in attempts
to reform animal welfare legislation, particularly in regards to mass
farmed animals.
The human-animal relationship is basically constructed around the
notion of animals as property . They are used for private purposes or
commercial purposes, or considered as owned by the state and held in
trust by the people in the case of 'wildlife' animals. Thus, 'The animal
in question is always a pet or a laboratory animal, or a game animal,
or some other form of animal property that exists solely for our use
and has no value except that which we give it' (Francione, 2010: 355).
Be this as it may, there are nevertheless important distinctions in
regards to the functional use of this 'property' and in regards to the
instrumental and affective ties that humans have with animals. For
example, there is a difference in the treatment of animals for personal
'use' value (for example, as an animal companion) and as 'capital' (that
is, to generate profit), and this has an impact on the cultural and social
contexts within which the animal exists. The animal sharing my house
may be 'my' dog, but it has a different ontological status to the dog
which is trained to race or to fight for the purposes of making money
for the owner. Being 'part of the family' means sharing a certain space
within the family, one in which both humans and animals seem to gain
benefit and emotional reward. Affective ties are forged that bond each
to the other; where these do not exist, whether due to instrumentalism
in the relationship between human and animal or lack of empathy on