Animal Protection and Environmentalism: The Time Has Come to Be More Than Just Friends

• Author: Joyce Tischler & Bruce Myers
• Pages: 387-423

387

Chapter 16:

Animal Protection and

Environmentalism:

The Time Has Come to

Be More Than Just Friends

Joyce Tischler and Bruce Myers

I. Two Movements ..................................................................................389

A. Commonalities and Mutual Concerns .......................................... 391

1. Substantive Areas of Shared Interest.......................................391

2. Similar Legal Hurdles ............................................................ 398

3. Similar Practical Barriers ........................................................404

a. Industry and Ideological Opposition .............................. 404

b. Limited Funding and Stang Resources .........................406

4. Similar Internal Debates ........................................................ 406

5. Similar Need to Improve Communication of Problems

and Solutions ........................................................................407

B. Dierences and Areas of Disagreement ......................................... 408

1. Movement-Level Dierences ................................................. 408

2. Issue-Specic Dierences .......................................................409

a. e Role of CAFOs in Climate Change.......................... 409

b. Hunting, Trapping, and Fishing...................................... 411

c. Invasive Species Versus Native and Endangered

Plants and Animals .........................................................413

II. Charting a Shared Course for the Future ............................................. 414

A. e Need for Enhanced Collaboration .........................................414

B. Beyond Collaboration ..................................................................416

1. A New Vision for Systemically Improving the Well-Being

of Animals, the Environment, and Human Beings.................416

2. Future Directions ..................................................................420

Conclusion ................................................................................................... 423

388 What Can Animal Law Learn From Environmental Law?

The animal protection movement and the environmental movement

have historically operated separately and apart from each another.

ey have had dierent objectives, dierent constituencies, and,

often, dierent approaches. A reference to these two movements in the same

sentence is commonly followed by a description of some dispute—perhaps

over invasive species control, hunting, or animal testing. e narrative that

animal advocates and environmentalists are fundamentally at odds is well

established and oft repeated.

is chapter oers a dierent take on the relationship between the animal

protection and environmental movements. Whatever may have been true in

the past, the reality today is that these two movements have a great deal in

common—including in many instances shared a ims, shared constituencies,

and shared approaches.1 Across the many substantive areas where the two

movements and their respective legal and policy frameworks come together

around the same subject matter—from industrial animal agricu lture to spe-

cies extinction to chemical regulation reform and beyond—there is more

common ground tha n reason for discord. And for the law yers who work to

advance the values of animal protection and environmental protection, the

kinship bet ween the movements ru ns even deeper. E ach aims to ensure the

protection of the non-human “other,” be it a tropical ecosystem or a piglet,

deemed by the law to be mere property—and someone else’s property, at

that. In this sense alone, the t wo social movements share a special connec-

tion. Dierences persist, and sometimes they are profound. But, as this chap-

ter a lso will discuss, each movement has its own internal dierences, and

sometimes they, too, are profound.

Why is it important to h ighlight the opportunities for collaboration and

shared reform between these two movements? e rst reason is obvious

and practical: to build broader and deeper collaboration, which adds new

voices and, ideally, new resources to eorts t hat had been pursued by one or

the other movement individual ly. Second, many people who sel f-identify as

environmentalists also care deeply about the welfare of individual animals,

and vice versa. Recognizing where the issue areas overlap and common inter-

ests exist simply ack nowledges where many of the members and supporters

of these movements already are, or may be headed. ird, these overlapping

interests and common aims may point the way to shared legal and policy

reforms that benet animals, the environment, and humans.

Part I of this chapter highlights key commonalities and dierences between

the movements—substantive, procedural, and practical. Part II then exam-

1. Indeed, every chapter in this book identies connections between the two movements.

Animal Protection and Environmentalism 389

ines the prospects for greater collaboration and shared reform eorts. ere is

little doubt that the two movements have become intert wined in importa nt

ways. Given the enormous challenges that each faces in the 21st century,

there is e very reason to not only encourage inter-movement collaboration,

but also think beyond alignment and coalition-building and consider under-

taking mutually benecial reforms based on shared principles.

I. Two Movements

What do the terms “animal protection movement” and “environmental

movement” actually mean? e movements t hat s wirl around t he elds of

animal law and environmental law, and infu se them with their passion and

dynamism, can be hard to dene given the uid nature of social movements

and the intense disagreements that take place within them.

e animal protection movement is comprised of people who believe that

the lives and interests of animals2 matter, if not always to human beings,

then to the animals themselves. Animal advocates support the reduction

or elimination of pain, suering, abuse, and neglect, a s well as eliminating

the exploitation and unnecessary death of animals. is focus on anima ls

includes farmed animals, animals used in research and testing , wildlife and

captive wildlife, a nimals used in entertainment, and companion a nimals.

ough decades younger than the environmental movement, the a nimal

protection movement has gained substantial momentum in the United States

and now has a global reach.

e anima l protection movement has built national and international

organizations, as well as gra ssroots organizations. e movement encom-

passes the work of advocacy and educational organizations, humane societ-

ies and shelters, dog a nd cat rescue groups , sanct uaries for farme d anim als

and captive wildli fe, anti-vivise ction societies, and others who work to

change the way society views and treats anima ls. At the individua l level,

2. As used in this chapter, the word “animal” refers to any mammal, bird, amphibian, or living being other

than a human. It is not intended as a scientic or philosophical denition. See S S. W,

P D. F  B A. W, A L C  M (5th ed. 2014). Whether

the law considers a living being to be an “animal” in a particular context can be quite signicant. For

example, if a court deems the answer to be “no,” then that being may not receive protections oered

by state anti-cruelty laws. e federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA), 7 U.S.C. §2132(g), denes the term

“animal” to specically exclude rats, mice, and birds “bred for use in research,” “horses not used for

research purposes,” and “other farm animals, such as, but not limited to livestock or poultry, used or

intended for use as food or ber, or livestock or poultry used or intended for use for improving animal

nutrition, breeding, management, or production eciency, or for improving the quality of food or

ber. . . .” is exclusion from the denition of “animal” under the AWA has had dire consequences

for the beings listed.