Submitted by ANIMAL RIGHTS MALTA’S BLOG

Mr David Borg Cardona’s letter in today’s The Times, entitled “Species of ‘least concern’”, is a very good example of the speciesist prejudice that makes it possible for otherwise rational people to find nothing wrong with the totally unnecessary killing of sentient non-human animals.

Mr Borg Cardona writes:

“The letter (The Times, May 2) by Axel Hirschfeld and David Conlin, Committee Against Bird Slaughter (CABS) on turtle-doves deserves a rebuttal. Here is a typical example. In September 2007 one wounded Lesser Spotted Eagle was picked up locally. CABS arranged a free Air Malta flight to Germany for treatment, designated the bird ‘rare’, named it Sigmar, featured the event on the German TV station ARD and pounced on this unfortunate incident to smear all Maltese hunters hitting at this country in the process”.

Nothing much to comment about so far, except perhaps that the people “hitting at this country” are the hunters who tried to murder Sigmar. However, Mr Borg Cardona goes on to say:

“What CABS did not tell the German public was that all law-abiding hunters condemn such illegalities, that the Lesser Spotted Eagle is listed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) under the taxon ‘Least Concern’, that its population is between 80,000 and 110,000 individuals (2006 census), that one occurs on Malta once in a blue moon, that such a bird is usually a genetically defective straggler, that its loss far from being a threat to European bio-diversity may actually be considered beneficial for the species, and that the fuss and publicity was necessary for CABS to extract more money from a sympathetic and emotional public, unfortunately deficient in technical and ornithological knowledge”.

Putting aside the fact that this species is actually listed as a species of “least concern”, which shows the inherent speciesism in society, a society that gives protection to non-human animals only if they are members of a rare species or if the non-humans cannot be profitably exploited by humans for food, clothing, experimentation or entertainment, let’s see what Mr Borg Cardona is saying here.

Mr Borg Cardona is actually saying that a Lesser Spotted Eagle, who somehow makes it to Malta “once in a blue moon”, is usually a “genetically defective straggler”, (a genetically handicapped bird), and that his loss may actually be considered beneficial for the species. If the same logic were applied to humans, this would translate to the following: “The loss, through killing, of “genetically defective humans”, (the genetically handicapped), may actually be considered beneficial for the human species”. This was exactly Nazi Hitler’s policy for the goal of “racial purity” and the creation and preservation of a supposedly “higher Arian race”, so this repulsive idea is not far-fetched at all.

Now, of course, I am not saying that Mr Borg Cardona is a Nazi, or that he supports human eugenics. I am inclined to believe that he finds the Nazi ideology, and racism in general, as repulsive as I do. However, it is only speciesist prejudice that creates a clear unbridgeable distinction in the case of humans and that of non-humans, justly condemning such an act as the killing of genetically handicapped humans, while suggesting that genetically handicapped non-humans should perhaps be killed, (or their killing tolerated), for the supposed benefit of the species.

Like all humans, all non-human animals are individuals, and not simply numbers in a collective species. All individual animals have physical and mental experiences, and a life that may fare better or worse for them depending on circumstances and the actions of others. All individual animals value their lives in their own way. Every individual matters. The claim that one, or a few, non-human animal may be sacrificed for a “common good” would seem to suggest that likewise, one, or a few, humans may equally be sacrificed for a “common good”. There is no logical reason why there should be a distinction between the case of sacrificed non-humans and that of sacrificed humans. The only thing that creates the false distinction is speciesist prejudice. After all, despite the protestations of those who fail to recognize their own essence, humans are animals too.

Mr Borg Cardona then writes:

“Here the turtle-dove has been always considered, with the quail, as the principal quarry species of hunters. Contrary to CABS’s declaration, both these species are listed on the IUCN Red Data List in the category ‘Least Concern’, meaning they are widespread and abundant species. This information is derived from the 2007 database of the IUCN. But now, in keeping with their promise to do their utmost to ensure that the turtle-dove and the quail ‘are removed as huntable species from Appendix II of the EU Bird Protection Guidelines’, we expect CABS tactics to include putting pressure on the IUCN and other institutions to list both species as declining and threatened”.

Again, it is only speciesism that makes otherwise rational people, assume that just because a species is “widespread” and “abundant”, its members may be murdered with impunity. And while a numerous species may not be threatened with extinction, each sentient individual animal is endangered every time a hunter aims his gun at her, as much as each individual animal is endangered by the actions and purpose of the “animal farmer”, butcher, vivisector, breeder, and other speciesists.

Mr Borg Cardona concludes his letter by writing:

“While CABS proceeds with its fanatical and hysterical smear campaign, our organisation is determined to ensure not only that our birds remain on Annex II, but that other species that are equally abundant and widespread will also be included as huntable species”.

In other words, Mr Borg Cardona is saying that his organization is determined to include more and more sentient non-human animals in the lists of those who may be murdered just because they happen to be members of numerous species, (provided they are not humans), the motivation being that in the year 2008, we still have thousands of people who derive pleasure from killing innocent and sentient animals, as well as the prejudiced assumption that non-humans do not matter at all, just because they are not human.

Speciesism, like racism and sexism, seeks to justify the otherwise unjustifiable, by depersonalizing individuals and by dismissing the plight of “the other”. Speciesism is of the utmost concern, and is the final barrier to all-inclusive moral justice and progress.

Visit 1800blogger to see all of our industry leading blogs.