ETHICAL, ENVIRONMENTAL AND EPISTEMOLOGICAL ISSUES UNDERLYING INTERVENTION TO HELP WILD ANIMALS.

Abstract: This article analyzes some arguments in favor of helping animals who suffer in nature in the light of abolitionist environmentalism. According to several authors, wild animals should be recipients of moral consideration. This reasoning is indisputably correct, and several pro-intervention arguments are quite rich on a philosophical level. However, many arguments that seek to refute the ecological risks underlying intervention to help these animals are either digressive or lack solid ecological/scientific foundations. Population dynamics present shocking figures about lives whose existence is brief and full of suffering. But it also unveils the complexity inherent to ecological processes and the possible unforeseen consequences of intervention in nature, including potentially speciesist practices. Most natural ecosystems today have already undergone a high degree of anthropogenic disturbance. This makes the outcomes of interventions even more unpredictable. Epistemological issues are also addressed, including the alleged dichotomy between moral agents and moral patients and the anthropocentric bias underlying intervention. Therefore, it is suggested that positive rights for wild animals be strengthened through greater investment in existing welfare practices, along with other cutting-edge ideas such as granting them property rights. A new legislation, law enforcement and animal abolitionist education play a key role in this paradigm shift.