Why You Should Not Feed Wild Animals Essay

“Those who wish to pet and baby wild animals "love" them. But those who respect their natures and wish to let them live normal lives, love them more,” (Teale). This quote shows that people who keep wild animals as pets do not realize that the native environment provides the wild animals with the necessities they cannot receive as a pet. Permits should not be given to people to own wild and exotic animals as pets because it is inhumane and dangerous.

When people visit public areas, the goal always seems to be: I need a picture, so how close can I get? How do they do that? Food. Enticing wildlife with food is one of the easiest ways to have wildlife come right to you. One problem with feeding wildlife is, they become imprinted that humans always have food to offer. Meaning, they have learned that humans have food and will have easy access to it. Another problem with feeding wildlife is that human food can cause health defects to the animal body. For example, “Angel Wings,” commonly found in ducks, swans, and geese is a deformity in the wings due to the overeating of breads that humans feed them. This affects the structure of the wings and leaves them flightless. Although signs have been posted around parks, that does not stop anyone! It is a hard habit to break for many people. An end to wildlife feed would cause less harm to humans, animals, and to the presumption that we have the upper hand in this world.

Is it ethical for animals to have the same rights as humans? During this paper I will present the views of both sides. I will try my best to give the reader a chance to come to there own unbiased conclusion. I will talk about the key areas of animal ethics. I will present the facts and reasoning behind the arguments over Animal cruelty, testing, hunting, and improper housing. My conclusion will hopefully bring us closer to answering many of the question surrounding “Animal Rights and Ethics”.

Eating animals is normal for any carnivore, but abuse to these animals is unacceptable. There are religions and traditions when it comes to eating and killing animals, usually to be viewed sacred and not like they are nothing. Humans have morals and traditions that separate barriers with farm animals and pets.

Today, the food industry has not just altered the American diet, but it has also had a negative effect within the labor sector as well as the animals meant for consumption and the lack of government oversight. Eric Schlosser in Fast Food Nation, and Jonathan Foer in Eating Animals, illustrate the mistreatment of labor workers as well as the animal abuse that goes unseen within the food industry. Foer gives such examples of employees who work in slaughterhouses giving accounts of what goes on in the kill floors, and stories of employees who have witnessed thousands and thousands of cows going through the slaughter process alive (231). Eating meat does not have to be so inhumane for example, Foer quotes Frank Reese, who does not permit inhumane practices on his ranch that are cruel, and Reese believes that there are other ways of having a sustainable humane animal agriculture instead of the methods of the large corporate meat industry (238). Namit Arora in the article “On Eating Animals”, as well as Michael Pollan in his book The Omnivore’s Dilemma, address some of the issues that animals face once they hit the kill floor. The food industry has transformed not only what people eat, but how the government has neglected the issues of the wellbeing of labor workers and the animals that are processed for consumption.

Today, the discussions about the protection of the animal’s rights have received the attention of many people, many countries in the world. A lot of actions have been made by animal right activists to influence the world. Alex Epstein and Yaron Book, both authors of the “The Evil of Animal ‘Right’,” argue animal right activists use too much violence on their action, which is considered going against the law. Then, the authors give a lot of evidence to prove testing animals are extinct, but using animals for testing gives us new vaccines which make our lives better. Without animals for testing, how can scientists find out the vaccine for diseases? Animal right groups are making many effects to Huntingdon Life Sciences.

Every 60 seconds an animal is abused. Dogs, cats, horses, and many other types of animals are being neglected and tortured everyday, yet resulting in few and minor consequences for the perpetrators. Animal abuse is prevalent in the United States and has been an ongoing issue since the 1970's, and prior to. Society as a whole has chosen to avoid the facts and arguments about animal cruelty, because to some it is seen as acceptable and typical. It becomes much more frowned upon when people actually see the results of the cruelty, especially in the media.

Looking at this situation in perspective of an animal that is raised strictly for the reason of slaughtering for food, it would kind of be like that animal is tied to a tree somewhere in the woods and the hunter puts his blind up within range of the animal. The hunter kills the animal, without the animal even having a chance to run. Not allowing the animal to use any sense that it was born with to get out of the situation. Was that a fair chance to survive? No, the animal had no choice but to stay at the tree completely vulnerable to any danger that may

Animals are being mistreated by people not giving the right amount of food, water or housing, which is causing the animals to dehydrate or starve. Animals are also being mistreated by humans committing violence toward them. Some people leave their animals outside all winter long without proper shelter for them. Some even leave their animals in the 100 degree weather without fresh water every day or a shelter to be under when it’s too hot outside. That’s a sign of neglect because the animal is suffering from heat exhaustion.

About a year ago, I asked myself a question why am I not a vegetarian? After all, I am one of the green kids. I grew up with my vegetarian dad in a small town. I even joined a club called “Tree Huggers”. I knew that eating a mere hamburger a day could increase my risk of dying by a third. I knew that the 10 billion animals we raise each year for meat are raised in factory farmed conditions that we hypocritically wouldn’t even consider for our own cats, dogs and other pets. I knew that I was not alone, we as a society are eating twice as much meat as we did in the 50s. So, what was once the special little side treat now is the main course much more regular. What if I told you, that we can change our world through our food choices. The fact

The United States prides itself on being an advanced society and helping both its citizens and foreign nations. However, some of the biggest problems facing the world today stem from sources often overlooked or even purposefully neglected by the American government. One of these sources is animal agriculture. Animal industries such as those which produce meat, dairy, seafood, and eggs are some of the main contributors to environmental decay, health epidemics, and even world hunger issues. Although proof of this is abundant, it continues to be ignored. Instead, we continue to go around the main problem and struggle to find alternate solutions only to arrive at inefficient and costly attempts. If we want our nation to truly represent its values, however, something must be done. In order to help solve issues regarding health, hunger, and the environment not only in America but in the world, the mass production of animal products should be outlawed.

Many people are attracted to keeping wild animals as pets. They believe the wild animals to be interesting and exciting. At a young age, the animals may seem easier to tame, but the older these animals get, the more aggressive they tend to become. Many problems can develop from keeping a wild animal as a pet. Wild animals have specific needs that have to be met, in order for them to prosper. “Only the most exceptional zoos and wildlife centers provide a living area that somewhat resembles the natural habitat of these animals, but it is virtually impossible to provide sufficient space for larger species”(CFHS). In captivity animals do not lose their wild instincts. They can be extremely unpredictable, and if provoked they can cause severe harm to people. Some wild animals, such as reptiles and hedgehogs can actually carry bacteria called salmonella, which is very easily transmitted to humans. Exotic animals can be very social, and need to have a companion of the same species living with them. If the animal is kept isolated from its kind, then it can suffer psychologically (CFHS). Many wild animals that are kept as pets often get abandoned because the owner was not able to meet of its needs. Others try to

Argument for Animal Rights The argument for animal rights assumes that animals posses their own lives and deserve to be assigned rights in order to protect their wellbeing. This view insists that animals are not merely goods utilised only to benefit mankind and they should be allowed to choose how they want to live their lives, free from the constraints of man. But if animals are given absolute rights, then surely they shouldn’t be allowed to kill each other, as this would be a violation of these rights.

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.

Non-human animals are given rights only because of their interactions with human beings. Without involvement with humans, animals do not deserve rights. It is through this interaction with humans that animals are even given moral consideration. We do not give rights to a rock simply because it is a creation of Mother Nature, similarly non-human animals do not have rights unless it is in regards to humans. As pointed out by Jan Narveson "morality is a sort of agreement among rational, independent, self-interested persons who have something to gain from entering into such an agreement" (192). In order to have the ability to obtain rights one must be consciously able to enter into an agreement, non-human animals are