FIAPO- Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations’ Post

Animal Ethics funded a newly published study about causes of death, illness, and injury to wild animals in Canada A paper examining causes of morbidity and mortality in wild animals across Canada was recently published in the Journal of Wildlife Diseases, an important journal in its field internationally. This work was funded by Animal Ethics and conducted by researchers at the University of Guelph. There has been very little academic research on the situation of wild animals, which can inform actions aiming at helping them and reducing the harms they suffer. For this reason, promoting this kind of work has been one of Animal Ethics’s top priorities in recent years. To learn more, please check out the article below. https://lnkd.in/ejxxCTxa #animalethics #animals #animalrights #animalwelfare #wildlife #wildanimals #canada #universityofguelph #research

Exciting News! REGISTRATIONS ARE NOW OPEN for the Southern and Eastern and South-Eastern Asia rounds of the World Moot on International Law and Animal Rights (WMILAR). The first 24 teams to register for the competition and each training course have the opportunity to participate in person, at the beautiful NALSAR University of Law, Hyderabad campus, so sign up soon (https://lnkd.in/gMtgyp46)! We hope to see you on 26-28 August (training courses for mooters and coaches) and/or 29-30 August (regional competition). Sign up for our monthly newsletter for more updates! (https://lnkd.in/db5Abqcj) Become part of history and advance this fast-growing field at the intersection of International Law and issues of animal rights, human rights, and the environment. For questions, please email us at enquiries@wmilar.com. Merit-and-needs-based scholarships may be awarded, for which priority will be given in the order in which we receive your registration application. Register here: https://lnkd.in/gMtgyp46 . . . . #animalrights #Internationallaw #animalrightslaw #environmentallaw #environment #humanrights #humanrightslaw #wmilar #worldmoot #mooting #mootcourt #worldmootoninternationallawandanimalrights #NALSAR #animallaw #animallawyers #Asia #lawyers

Hey all, is animal abuse wrong? SPECIESISM: In applied ethics and the philosophy of animal rights, Speciesism is the practice of treating members of one species as morally more important than members of other species; also, the belief that this practice is justified. CARNISM: The invisible belief system, or ideology, that conditions people to eat certain animals. The theory of Carnism suggests a philosophical basis behind the defence and justification of meat consumption. It posits that it is normal, natural, necessary, and nice to consume the flesh of animals. This is why most of us eat cows, pigs, and chickens 🐮🐷🐔 ...but would never dream of eating a dog or a cat 🐶🐱 Why was my response to the comment in the image met with anger?   COGNITIVE DISSONANCE: In psychology, cognitive dissonance is the perception of contradictory information and the mental toll of it related to conflicting beliefs, values, or attitudes. People tend to seek consistency in their attitudes and perceptions, so this conflict causes unpleasant feelings of unease or discomfort. Cognitive dissonance is typically experienced as psychological stress when we participate in an action that goes against one or more of those things. In a time when so many of us are working on shedding limiting beliefs that have been layered on since childhood by ourselves or others, it only makes sense to examine hidden belief systems we've been born into to ensure we're living in alignment with our values. 📷: Comments in response to a mutual's Facebook repost showing a picture of a lobster being put into boiling water, which detailed the pain experienced by lobsters and why, with the caption "We can do better". 👉 I welcome respectful dialogue, however, I won't do the emotional labour of arguing for plant-based or vegan in the comments. I recommend watching docs like Cowspiracy, Earthlings, and Game Changers if you're curious and you'd like to look into this for yourself. "Progress is impossible without change. And those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything." - George Bernard Shaw

🌍 𝙐𝙣𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙩𝙖𝙣𝙙𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝘾𝙪𝙡𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙖𝙡 𝘿𝙞𝙛𝙛𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙣𝙘𝙚𝙨: 𝙎𝙤𝙪𝙩𝙝 𝙆𝙤𝙧𝙚𝙖 𝘽𝙖𝙣𝙨 𝘿𝙤𝙜 𝙈𝙚𝙖𝙩 𝘾𝙤𝙣𝙨𝙪𝙢𝙥𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 🐶 In a significant move towards animal welfare, South Korea's parliament has recently passed a bill to ban the breeding and slaughter of dogs for consumption. The consensus view is that the law effectively puts an end to the controversial practice of eating dog meat. However, the law appears to have wiggle room. This decision comes after years of intense debate and reflects a shift in consumer habits within the country. The bipartisan support for this bill is a testament to the changing attitudes towards eating dog meat in South Korea. As the nation underwent rapid industrialization, there has been a growing recognition of the need to protect animal rights and promote a more compassionate society. This legislation marks a remarkable milestone in that journey. The new law not only prohibits the distribution and sale of food products made or processed with dog ingredients, but it also imposes penalties on those involved in the industry. Slaughtering a dog for food can now result in up to three years of imprisonment or a fine of up to 30 million Korean won (approximately $23,000). Additionally, breeding dogs for consumption or participating in the trade of dog meat carries its own set of penalties. While this development is undoubtedly a step in the right direction for animal welfare, it's important for us to approach cultural differences with sensitivity and respect. South Korea has a complex cultural history, and for many, the consumption of dog meat has been deeply ingrained in their traditions. As global citizens, we must strive to understand and appreciate diverse cultural practices, even if they differ from our own. As we discuss this issue, it's crucial to ask ourselves: Should the penalties for violating these new laws be harsher? This is a question that invites thoughtful debate among individuals who are passionate about animal rights and ethical treatment. Striking a balance between addressing the concerns of animal welfare activists and respecting cultural traditions is a delicate task, but one worth exploring. Let us use this moment to reflect on the power of dialogue and understanding. By engaging in open conversations, we can bridge gaps, challenge preconceptions, and foster empathy. Together, we can encourage positive change while respecting cultural diversity. 👉 Stay tuned for more unique insights and discussions. Follow me, Theon on this journey of engaging the LinkedIn Community. #SouthKorea #AnimalRights #CulturalDifferences #IAmTheon a member of #LBFAlumni and #SkyHighTower

In 2022, I began collaborating with NGOs across the country to support their work in conservation from a veterinary perspective. The Turtle Survival Alliance is one such organization, dedicated to protecting key stakeholders of riverine systems, including 19 freshwater turtle species, crocodiles, gharials, and dolphins. We provided veterinary assistance to TSA by posting veterinarians to assist them in maintainaing assurance colonies and assistance in triage and treatment during mass confiscations of illegally smuggled turtles. Through this collaboration, we gained valuable insights and decided to share our findings with the world, leading to this paper. Soft shell turtles, one of the largest but most elusive species in riparian systems, are particularly vulnerable to water pollution, which can lead to high mortality rates. Our work in Assam involved identifying a suitable and safe location to draw blood for analysis in these aggressive animals. This paper details our findings. We offer a paid internship for veterinarians aspiring to work with reptiles, placing them with this organization for six months and helping them produce a paper that benefits turtles and science. Interested? Write to us at conservationcareersindia@gmail.com. Read the abstract here: https://lnkd.in/dza-2_g3

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - In a surprising turn of events this Monday, a local dog named Buster has claimed the moral high ground after devouring his owner’s philosophy homework. The incident, which took place in the quiet suburban home of college sophomore Tim Jacobs, has sparked a range of reactions from amused to philosophical across the community. According to Buster, a three-year-old Labrador mix, his actions were not only justified but carried a deeper ethical message. “It’s about challenging the human-centric worldview,” Buster explained through a dog-to-human translation app. “Why should human academic pursuits weigh more heavily than the instinctual needs and actions of a canine?” Tim Jacobs, the victim of this existential predicament, was less amused. “I spent all night working on that paper about Kant’s moral imperatives, and Buster just ate it like it was his dinner,” lamented Jacobs. “I guess he took ‘treat others how you would like to be treated’ to a whole new level.” Philosophy professors at the local university have found themselves unexpectedly involved in the debate. Dr. Helen Fray, a tenured professor at the university, commented, “While Buster’s critique of humanism is rudimentary, his method of delivery—literally consuming the material—is quite avant-garde. He poses an interesting question: what is the value of philosophy if it cannot withstand the scrutiny of a dog’s digestive system?” Neighbors and fellow dog owners are divided. Some applaud Buster’s bold statement against the prioritization of human tasks over animal rights. Others, like Mrs. Clara Benton, next door, believe Buster is simply “a bad dog.” “Just because he’s a dog doesn’t mean he should go around eating homework. What’s next? Cats refusing to chase mice because it's stereotyping?” The incident has also stirred a philosophical dialogue among the canine community. A local dog park meet-up turned into an impromptu forum on the ethics of eating one's owner’s possessions. Opinions ranged from supportive barks to confused tail wags, with no consensus reached. As for Tim Jacobs, he is now facing the immediate and practical repercussions of Buster’s philosophical appetite. “My professor won’t believe me,” Jacobs worried. “How do you cite ‘my dog ate my homework and then justified it with a critique on human-centered ethics’ in APA format?”

Great article: A new paper on animals and longtermism published with funding by Animal Ethics. Humans and the Earth cannot survive long term without protecting and saving the animals. Be Loving, so Be Vegan!!! https://lnkd.in/gvGNA94u

📃Editorial of the issue n.244 of the "Flash-e news" EAAP #newsletter, written by the Secretary General, Andrea Rosati: "Navigating the Ethical Landscape of In Vitro Meat Production "🧫🥩 Read it here👇 "The discourse surrounding the production of In Vitro Meat (IVM) encompasses various facets, including social, environmental, economic, and moral considerations. While experts ponder the potential advantages of IVM, such as its capacity to reduce environmental harm and enable cruelty-free meat production, moral apprehensions take centre stage when interacting with individuals lacking specialized knowledge. It is imperative to explore the main moral concerns, even within the constraints of this editorial's brevity. Cultured meat is frequently perceived as a humane alternative, as it does not entail the slaughter of animals. Animal rights activists regard its development as a moral imperative, with organizations like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) offering incentives for its advancement, and philanthropic groups lending support to IVM research. However, a critical caveat emerges: if IVM displaces traditional meat production, it could profoundly diminish or potentially eradicate livestock populations. This could create societal and cultural upheavals, particularly in regions where animal husbandry has social and economic significance. We do not endorse this scenario, but it aligns with the aspirations of many animal rights activists. To contest their proposals, we must show the impracticality of their strategy. Animal rights advocates assert that IVM will not sever our connection to animals. If we value this connection beyond meat production, it should endure even if animals are no longer kept for consumption. Nevertheless, this raises queries regarding why animals should be bred if they lack commercial value. It is also worth noting that cultured meat may never be entirely devoid of animal involvement, as cell sourcing remains a requisite for its production. We contend that animal husbandry, deeply rooted in human history for millennia, is perceived as an integral facet of our relationship with nature and animals. Critics argue that the "logic of the larder," which suggests that humans confer a benefit upon animals by raising and consuming them, is invalidated by poor rearing conditions. Furthermore, the moral obligation toward non-existent beings is a metaphysical dilemma. IVM also engenders practical and religious quandaries. In conclusion, IVM represents moral progress compared to conventional meat, but its real-world implications transcend animal rights perspectives. As this innovation progresses, we anticipate that more comprehensive exploration of its moral dimensions will be necessary, rendering this conclusion provisional. " #invitro #culturedmeat #research #innovations #animalscience #europeanresearch

I’m incredibly proud and happy to share my first publication with you! The people who know me, know that I’m a law student as well as an #animalrights activist who can’t wait to finish law school and start a career in a field where I can combine those two passions. After centuries of exploiting animals for the benefit and pleasure of humans, it is time to shift away from the anthropocentric way humans treat animals. Over the last couple of months, I dove deep into the field of global animal laws only to find out that no matter how good the laws of animal welfare are, they will never be enough to protect animals as equal living (and sentient!) beings. During a Summer School on #humanrights and #globalhealth Challenges, Brigit Toebes and her colleagues introduced the other participants and me to the #OneHealth concept which is all about the interconnectedness of human, animal, and environmental health. My friend Josephine Götze and I realized that in order to improve the health of humans as well as the general state of our environment, we need to improve the health of animals. In our opinion, this is only possible if we stop exploiting animals to use them for their commodities and instead provide them with an own set of rights: global animal rights. In our two-part article, we show the causal link between how humans treat non-human animals and some of the major health threats, we are currently facing. The second part focuses on the human right to health which supports and necessitates the introduction of global animal rights. PART 1: https://lnkd.in/dtZN5snJ PART 2: https://lnkd.in/dtirbb5g A huge thank you to Dominique Mollet, Monique van Cauwenberghe, and Anja Hoffzimmer who edited our article and provided useful feedback! To my German network: If you are interested in a German translation of this article, feel free to reach out to us :) #lawstudent #humanrights #humanhealth 🐶🐧🐮

Check out our latest #WolfStories interview with Dr. David Fraser! In this interview, we explore the history of animal ethics, complicated management decisions around #conservation and #animalwelfare, and how we might resolve such conflicts. "The principle of protecting the natural balances and processes of nature is fundamental to both [conservation and animal welfare], as well as to the welfare of people." https://lnkd.in/gw6YsvzE