Animal Studies Journal

[Review] Dinesh Wadiwel. The War Against Animals

Philip Armstrong — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:33:14 PST

Are humans at war with nonhuman animals, either literally or metaphorically? What might it mean for human-animal studies – and for human-animal relations – to say so? Responding to these questions with considerable eloquence and by drawing upon a wide range of references – including 19thcentury theories of war, Continental theory, actor-network theory, and animal rights philosophy – Dinesh Wadiwel produces an argument that surprises, provokes and enlightens.

[Review] Ann-Sofie Lönngren. Following the Animal: Power, Agency, and Human-Animal Transformations in Modern, Northern-European Literature

Henrietta Mondry — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:33:10 PST

This timely book deals with the theme of human-animal transformations in modern literature from Europe’s northernmost part, all of which are structured by power and agency in relation to the Western tradition’s human/animal divide. The figure of transformation simultaneously contains subversive and conservative potential because the transformation can be voluntary and liberating or forced, oppressive and degrading. This means that human-animal transformation in literature is about agency, change and politics. The purpose of the book is to bring out the tension between the anthropocentric and more-thananthropocentric worlds imbedded in the figure of human-animal transformation.

[Review] Annie Potts (ed). Meat Culture

Carol Gigliotti — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:33:07 PST

Annie Potts has curated a particularly strong and essential group of perspectives on ‘meat culture,’ described here as a coherent framework within which exist ‘a wide range of domains of production and consumption of animals.’ Meat Culture distinguishes itself in its clearheaded focus on the centrality of the misery and slaughter of animals without which the culture of eating meat would not exist.

A Practice Theory Framework for Understanding Vegan Transition

Richard Twine — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:33:03 PST

A shift in the social norm of meat consumption is a transition that is repeatedly called for in climate change policy discourse. Yet this rarely sets out practically how such reduction might be achieved and, surprisingly, has yet to look to vegans as a knowledge resource. In drawing upon interview data with 40 UK vegans this article outlines an initial framework toward the greater normalisation of plant-based eating via attentiveness to the elements of vegan practice. These vegan narratives illustrate how the practice is already working for a small section of the UK population. In adopting a practice theory approach, the article offers greater insights into both the obstacles and potential of pro-vegan policy which could have cobenefits across several domains of public health and sustainability.

[Performance Review] Species Blindness: Is There a Role For a Quoll?

Peta Tait — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:33:00 PST

There is an anomaly in responses to some live performance that features animal identities and the human effort to provide sanctuary and protect endangered species. The animals might be central to its purpose and yet receive a perfunctory acknowledgement in reviews or not be mentioned. Reviews reflect audience responses and I first noticed this effect in reviews of Jenny Kemp’s Kitten in 2010 which was strongly concerned with issues of animal survival. I have been noting examples since. One recent example is provided by Hannie Rayson’s Extinction, whereby the tiger quoll seems to be dismissed as a plot device rather than recognized as a character in the human struggle to preserve animal lives. Is there a role for a quoll? This play opens in a wildlife rescue centre and the narrative depicts the ensuing moral compromises of the coal industry funding a quoll preserve, as well as how such a sanctuary has become inseparable from university research.

Condors in a Cage

Camila Cossío — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:32:56 PST

Annie was carried away by a 13,000-lb. elephant during a Circo Hermanos Salamanca performance in Mexico City. Anabella La Bella was a Namibian-born orphaned elephant who had been auctioned off, transported from Southern Africa to the Mexican Valley as special, oversized cargo, and forced to perform among the dirt and the lights and the ¡Órale! of Mexico City. During the Circo Hermanos Salamanca performance, Annie and her sister tried, with exceeding effort, to seem calm as the trapeze artists swung themselves in the air, floating above them with no apparent sense of mortality. Annie remembered the scene in Batman Forever when Robin’s parents were doomed to fall to their deaths at the Gotham City circus. Doña Teresa tried to focus her granddaughter’s attention, squealing: ‘¡Annie, mira!’ Anabella, well-trained Namibian-imported-quasi-Euro-Mexican elephant that she was, automatically turned when she heard the squeal, processing where she thought she had heard the command: ¡Aní mira! To her trainer, Anabella was simply ‘Aní’ when she performed a trick warranting a prize of a cantaloupe covered in syrup. Anabella would eat through the fruit’s rind until she reached the melon-flesh that she savored patiently.

Captive Wildlife at a Crossroads – Sanctuaries, Accreditation, and Humane-Washing

Delcianna J. Winders — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:32:53 PST

We are living through a pivotal moment for captive wild animals in the United States, with increased attention to their wellbeing and major changes by businesses as a result. At the same time, a desire to get up close with wild animals persists and may even be on the rise. These two concurrent phenomena are resulting in a plethora of deceptive claims. Through ‘humane-washing’ – using unregulated terms like ‘sanctuary’ and participating in misleading accreditation programs – captive wildlife facilities are profiting from making consumers feel better. After detailing this state of affairs, this article raises important questions, the answers to which will ultimately determine the extent to which the current moment will yield material differences in the lives of captive wildlife.

What is an Animal Sanctuary? Evidence from Applied Linguistics

Sabrina Fusari — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:32:50 PST

This paper addresses the meaning of the word ‘sanctuary’ from the point of view of its usage in English, as it emerges from dictionary and corpus sources, in contexts related to nonhuman animals. Specific attention is paid to the semantic prosody (Louw; Stewart) and semantic preference (Sinclair ‘The Search’) of this word, as well as to the relationship between ‘sanctuaries’ and other semantically related lexical items that identify places where nonhuman animals are confined and/or protected (e.g. nature reserves, national parks, animal shelters, zoos). Firstly, the paper provides a general overview of the main theoretical issues behind the nature and use of electronic language corpora for the analysis of discourse, and it reviews how these tools have been used in critical studies on the linguistic and cultural understanding of nonhuman animals and their relationship with humans (Human-Animal Studies, or HAS). Secondly, this methodology is applied to the word ‘sanctuary,’ showing the different kinds of information that can be retrieved about its meaning by using either dictionaries or electronic language corpora: more specifically, the dictionary used for this study is the Oxford English Dictionary, and the corpus source is the British National Corpus. The analysis reveals that corpora are more complete in terms of the amount of contextual information they provide, making it possible to detect the presence of ideologies and other systems of belief that are associated with the animal sanctuary as a site both of protection and of captivity. Findings actually suggest that the most reliable approach to obtain a thorough understanding of the meaning of the word ‘sanctuary’ consists in using both dictionary and corpus resources. Finally, some conclusions and suggestions for future research are offered, based on the strengths and limits of the corpus data used for this study.

Settler Sanctuaries and the Stoat-Free State

Anna Boswell — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:32:47 PST

Aotearoa/New Zealand has forged a contemporary international identity as a leader in the establishment and management of animal sanctuaries. This article treats Aotearoa/New Zealand as a ‘typically exceptional’ or ‘exceptionally typical’ example, seeking to unravel the deeper settler colonial investment in sanctuary as concept and practice. It is especially interested in what animal sanctuaries in Aotearoa/New Zealand might look like from the perspective of the stoat (Mustela erminea), and why such a perspective might matter. Acclimatised by Europeans from the 1880s onwards to help secure agronomic settlement, and more recently named as a so-called ‘animal pest’ to be targeted by the New Zealand government’s ‘Predator Free 2050’ campaign, the stoat discloses a foundational history that yokes sanctuary and settlement. It also reveals ongoing patterns of displacement and persecution. From the stoat’s position outside the perimeter fence, the article proposes, the settler colonial logics of enclosure and ‘deathworlding’ (Rose 12) appear exceptional in the extreme.

Duties to Socialise with Domesticated Animals: Farmed Animal Sanctuaries as Frontiers of Friendship

Guy Scotton — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:32:43 PST

I argue that humans have a duty to socialise with domesticated animals, especially members of farmed animal species: to make efforts to include them in our social lives in circumstances that make friendships possible. Put another way, domesticated animals have a claim to opportunities to befriend humans, in addition to (and constrained by) a basic welfare-related right to socialise with members of their own and other species. This is because i) domesticated animals are in a currently unjust scheme of social cooperation with, and dependence upon, humans; and ii) ongoing human moral attention and ‘social capital’, of which personal friendships are an indispensable source, is critical if their interests are to be represented robustly and their agency enabled in a just interspecies community. I then argue that participation in farmed animal sanctuaries is a promising way to fulfil this duty, lending support to conceptions of sanctuary as just interspecies community.

Captive Wildlife Sanctuaries: Definition, Ethical Considerations and Public Perception

Catherine Doyle — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:27:46 PST

In its truest form, the modern captive wildlife sanctuary offers a lifelong home in a more natural environment for wild animals living in captivity. Tigers, lions, elephants, bears, chimpanzees and other animals are provided relative freedom and autonomy after years spent in zoos, circuses, laboratories, or private menageries. These sanctuaries provide specialized habitats in which wild animals can express more species-specific behaviors and experience a higher quality of life. Though they share some practical issues of caretaking with other forms of captivity – as well as many ethical problems – important distinctions separate them. Research suggests that public attitudes are moving toward a more compassionate and caring view of wild animals, which may be causing more people to gravitate toward captive wildlife sanctuaries and their rescue mission. Consequently, true sanctuaries run the risk of becoming a way for people to normalize and feel better about captivity, rather than acknowledge its inherent limitations for wild animals. True sanctuaries must lead the public to question the connection between their own relationships with wild animals and the role that plays in perpetuating their captivity, with the goal of ending the systems of abuse and exploitation that have created the need for captive wildlife sanctuaries to exist.

Money for Monkeys, and More: Ensuring Sanctuary Retirement of Nonhuman Primates

Erika Fleury — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:27:43 PST

Reputable animal sanctuaries have existed for decades, yet it is only in more recent years that their work has been validated by the oversight of accreditation bodies and sanctuary coalitions. Through these relationships, sanctuaries are able to differentiate themselves from roadside zoos and private owners. Sanctuaries exist solely to provide enriched lifetime care to animals retired or rescued from exploitation or mistreatment, and thus their missions and facility management differ greatly from those of zoos, farms, circuses and other for-profit, entertainment, research and educational institutions. Primate sanctuaries specifically are more in demand than ever before due to the mass exodus of chimpanzees from laboratories and an increase in demand to retire research monkeys, in addition to a heightened public scrutiny of the ways that all nonhuman primate species are utilized by the entertainment, exotic pet trade and biomedical research industries. The sanctuary community has great resources, such as experience and expertise, yet placement efforts can be limited by finances. Requests to provide sanctuary to primates are at an all-time high. Effective collaboration (including financial support) between owners seeking placement of their animals and those able to accept primates into retirement is necessary to ensure the continued services of the sanctuary community. Instead of owners scrambling to procure minimal funding at the time retirement is required, proactive financial planning should begin years ahead of the intended placement. In instances involving the commercialized and industrialized use of primates, such as in laboratory settings (where the highest demand for sanctuary currently originates), this can be accomplished with the inclusion of retirement funding in research grant proposals and strategic plans. Such forethought is the only way to ensure that primate sanctuaries will remain available for the primate retirements that inevitably await in the future.

A Guide for Modern Sanctuaries with Examples from a Captive Chimpanzee Sanctuary

Amy Fultz — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:27:39 PST

As the need for animal sanctuaries continues to grow, and the numbers of species being housed increases, there is a desire from both current and future sanctuaries for guidance. Guidance from those with experience in the sanctuary, ethics, and animal welfare communities is important and helpful to the founders of new sanctuaries as well as current sanctuaries that may struggle with their identity. I will discuss some of the many definitions of sanctuary, and encourage organizations to consider which definition is the best fit for them. The ethos and philosophy a sanctuary embraces are likely to guide best practices, and sanctuaries are encouraged to consider how this affects their daily operations. More broadly, there are many individuals concerned with the best way to care for animals in need of sanctuary and the information contained in the article will highlight some of these issues. I provide examples from Chimp Haven, a large chimpanzee sanctuary in the United States, as to how we approach and struggle with some of these issues as well as considering them in a broader context.

Introduction: Interrogating Captive Freedom: The Possibilities and Limits of Animal Sanctuaries

Elan Abrell — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:25:16 PST

In the last few decades, animal sanctuaries have proliferated around the world as advocates for animals have sought to save them from a wide array of contexts in which they are exploited, harmed, or killed by human actions. Sanctuaries take different forms and employ different approaches to animal care, varying in accordance to the kinds of species they save and the arenas of human animal-use they challenge. A non-exhaustive list of kinds of animal sanctuaries includes sanctuaries for farmed animal (rescued from agricultural contexts), ‘exotic’ animals (such as elephants or big cats, often rescued from being kept as pets or used for entertainment or exhibition), primates (often retired from use in laboratory research), equines (often rescued from use for carriages or in competitive events like racing); and companion animals (for animals like cats and dogs that cannot, for various reasons, be adopted out to individual homes).

Animal Studies Journal 2017 6 (2): Cover Page, Table of Contents, Editorial and Notes on Contributors

Melissa Boyde — Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:25:12 PST

Animal Studies Journal 2017 6 (1): Cover Page, Table of Contents, Editorial and Notes on Contributors.

[Review] Peta Tait. Fighting Nature: Travelling Menageries, Animal Acts and War Shows. Sydney University Press, 2016.

Nigel Rothfels — Sun, 23 Apr 2017 22:33:37 PDT

On October 23, 1903, William Temple Hornaday, the director of the New York Zoological Park, wrote to a Mr C. L. Williams, then responsible for ‘Hagenbeck’s Animal Show,’ which was touring the United States. At the time, the show was to be seen at the Grand Opera House in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but it was missing one of its star performers, the famous lion-tiger hybrid ‘Prince’ who had been part of the show for over a decade, making his debut in the United States as part of Hagenbeck’s exhibit at the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago in 1893. Prince was in New York instead of with the show because he was ill and it was hoped that the relative quiet and expert care available at the zoological park would help him recover. Alas, according to the letter, Prince ‘would require fully another month of convalescence’ before he would possibly be ready to ‘resume his work.’ ‘He yet feels so much under the weather,’ Hornaday writes, ‘that he lies in his den all day and never comes out willingly.’ In the end, Prince died in New York and Hornaday, following instructions from Williams, sent the carcass to a local taxidermist with instructions that the skin should be tanned for the purpose of making a rug, the claws should be removed, and, along with the skin, skull, and bones, sent to Williams, who could then be found at the Empire Theater in Frankford, PA.

[Review] Robert Garner and Siobhan O’Sullivan (eds). The Political Turn in Animal Ethics. Rowman and Littlefield, 2016.

Will Kymlicka — Sun, 23 Apr 2017 22:27:51 PDT

In the 40 years since Peter Singer’s Animal Liberation, philosophers have developed a rich and sophisticated literature on the ethics of how we treat animals. Much of this literature has implicitly assumed that our ethical duties to animals are a matter of public responsibility, not merely personal ethics. While modern societies operate with a division of moral labour – leaving some ethical responsibilities to individuals while others fall upon the state – animal ethicists have typically assumed that our most important ethical responsibilities to animals are indeed a legitimate matter for public regulation and state law.

The Australian Animal Use Industry Rejects Anthropomorphism, But Relies on Questionable Science to Block Animal Welfare Improvements

Malcolm Caulfield — Sun, 23 Apr 2017 22:27:42 PDT

Public interest in and concern for the welfare of farm animals is increasing. This has been reflected in changes by food retailers and others whereby products are sourced from suppliers which keep animals in improved conditions. Examples include bans on eggs from hens kept in battery cages, or on pork from pregnant sows kept in sow stalls. Those who use farm animals for profit have sought to resist consumer and public pressure for change, arguing that people’s views are based more on emotion than science. This paper presents a review of the way in which those responsible for developing farm animal welfare legislation in Australia use science to arrive at their recommendations. The evidence indicates that where science is used it is misused, either by being selected to suit the cause of industry or by being interpreted likewise. The paper uses sow stalls, time off feed for bobby calves, mulesing in sheep and caustic paste disbudding in cattle as examples. The analysis shows that the development process relies on questionable science, selectively refers to studies which support the industry stance and misstates the actual scientific position. It is clear that the current Australian legislation development system is inadequate, and results in laws which are not based on a proper evaluation of the science. It should be replaced by an independent body which can objectively assess the relevant science.

Painting with Horses Towards Interspecies Response-ability: Non-human Charisma as Material Affect

Madeleine Boyd — Sun, 23 Apr 2017 22:23:41 PDT

Leading up to the 2014 Melbourne Cup three communication modes were employed by unrelated horse welfare activists to raise awareness of cruelty in the racing industry. The intention to increase empathy with horses ties together these efforts, which are characterised as written, visual and immersive. This paper uses the lens of Jamie Lorimer’s three types of non-human charisma to consider the potential for each communication mode to achieve the goal of change towards interspecies response-ability. Charisma is considered in this paper to be a form of material-affect within new materialism that offers a more complex tool for analysis than the broad brush of ‘empathy’. A subjective case study describing the three communicative modes opens up dialogue on attentiveness to potential interactions towards their intended goal, or conversely towards alienation of the broader public. Of Lorimer’s three categories of charisma, aesthetic and ecological are considered to rely on pre-existing anthropocentric preferences. Corporeal charisma offers potential for a more transformative experience through sharing perspectives with a non-human species. The author recounts the experience of delivering a workshop on ‘painting with horses’ as a case study. Evidence is given that facilitated creative interspecies activities have the potential to stimulate transformation towards interspecies empathy by enabling corporeal charisma.

We Are Not Equals: Socio-Cognitive Dimensions of Lion/Human Relationships

Marcus Baynes-Rock et al. — Sun, 23 Apr 2017 22:08:13 PDT

This article documents a peaceful, albeit tense relationship between Ju/’hoan and lions in the Nyae Nyae region of the Kalahari during the 1950s.1 Unlike contexts where lions kill livestock and people and are persecuted in return, the Ju/’hoan and lions of the Nyae Nyae shared waterholes without conflict. The recorded and oral histories, and cultural traditions of the Ju/’hoan suggest that this peaceful relationship had evolved over centuries. Lions were recognised as powerful creatures but unlike hyenas and leopards in the region, they were not killers of humans. Lions were seen as social superiors, and addressed with respect but this was as much a social obligation steeped in tradition as an act of self-preservation. This social engagement of lions and Ju/’hoan redraws the lines around human social groups, not only challenging who it is that constitutes the social ‘we’ but reconfiguring the evolution of human social intelligence as a multispecies affair.