Introduction

The matter of animal rights and animal welfare is encapsulated in that work concerned with species justice (Benton, 1998; Beirne, 2007). In specific terms, concepts such as speciesism may be invoked. This refers to the practice of discriminating against nonhuman animals because they are perceived as inferior to the human species in much the same way that sexism and racism involve prejudice and discrimination against women and people of different colour to the discriminator (Munro, 2004). Animal rights supporters argue that there are two kinds of animals – human and nonhuman – and that both have rights and interests as sentient beings; they believe, however, that the dominant ideology of speciesism enables humans to exploit nonhuman animals as commodities to be eaten, displayed, hunted and dissected for human benefit.

From the point of view of species justice the kinds of questions that need to be asked include which species are threatened and why. In concrete terms, we need to know why some species are favoured by human communities and some are non-valued. Animals are categorised and utilised by humans in many different ways that range from factory farming through to laboratory animals. Depending upon human use, animal welfare (and rights) is protected differentially depending upon species and circumstance. Animal protection laws operate strongly when it comes to companion animals, for instance, but are much less restrictive in the case of pigs grown for eventual slaughter. Animal rights advocates call for reforms such as the banning of cage production of chickens and the live export trade of sheep, and an end to whale hunting. Groups such as the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (RSPCA), Sea Shepherd, Animal Liberation, the World Wide Fund for Nature (formerly the World Wildlife Fund), American Animal Legal Defense Fund, Animals Australia, Voiceless, People and Animal Welfare Society (PAWS) and People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) are among the prominent supporters of animal welfare and rights.

It has been observed that nonhuman animals are frequently considered in primarily instrumental terms (as ‘pets’, as food, as resources) in mainstream and conservation criminology, and are categorised in mainly anthropomorphic terms (such as ‘wildlife’, ‘fisheries’) that belie the ways in which humans create and classify animals as Other (Beirne, 2007, 2009; Sollund, 2012a).