No description available.

The human-animal relationship is a peculiar one. On the one hand we, the British public, are often described as a nation of animal lovers, whilst on the other hand, we allow for the use of large numbers of animals in ways that often entail discomfort and death to those animals involved. Seemingly disparate attitudes toward animal use are common. both inter- and intra- individuals and groups (Podberscek, Paul & Serpell, 2000). Yet whilst factors that underlie views on animal use are psychological in nature (Pious, 1993; Serpell, 2004), social scientists have only just begun to explore the origins of these attitudes (Matthews & Herzog, 1997). Existing research has mostly focused on variables such as gender and personality in order to understand the variance in people's attitudes; these accountfor a significant, but small, proportion (around 5-10%) of such variance. Instead, the aims of the present project were to understand the basis and nature of attitudes toward animal use by examining the perceptions and beliefs that underlie these views. Comprising six studies that combine quantitative and qualitative methodologies. samples included laypersons (Studies 1-3), students (Study 4), and those involved with animal use issues: scientists involved with the use of animals for medical research and animal welfare persons (Studies 5 & 6). Findings revealed psychological factors that account for up to 65% of the variance in views on animal use, and confirmed was a causal relationship between belief in the existence of alternatives to using animals and attitudes toward animal use. Most important are beliefs concerning: the benefits of medical research. animal rights, the existence of alternatives, the relative importance of human versus animal needs, equality and social recognition. These factors explain incongruent attitudes held inter- and intra- individuals and groups. Findings from this research will appeal to various communities such as scientists and animal welfare persons wishing to engage laypersons and gain support for their work, and academics interested in attitudes and attitude change.

The interaction between sensory, bodily and emotional factors is shown in this thesis to determine How it feels to hunt in Alaska. Hunters there see themselves as part of a shared landscape with their prey and other nonhuman animals. Within that environment they realise that, as part of the natural rhythms of life, they are not in control. Therefore, there are no expected guarantees of even sighting an animal within range or legal restrictions. I make the argument that both the weather and game animals have agency, contributing to the felt experiences. One aspect of hunting that this can be clearly seen in is materialities. Clothing is not static textile only and, like other things, gains its' relevance in a double manner: how the items are put to use, but also the inevitability that that will introduce situationally dependent sensations and' emotions. Movement, of a garment, an item or a machine plus the motion of the hunter, has the potential to radically rewrite the entire picture of what is felt. The thesis also demonstrates the lived temporalities of hunting. Hunters in Alaska are shown to handle, rather than exploit, time, tuning their bodily time to that of their quarry. Hunts are viewed here as without having specific beginnings and cut-off points. One folds into the next through preparation, anticipation, stories and learning. The emotions related to hunting are put forward as being of varying degrees of intensity depending on what the hunter is immersed in. Each of the major themes of embodiment, engagement, temporalities, sensory interaction with animals, the natural world and spaces of hunts contributes strongly in the making of place for hunters.

The thesis establishes a conversation between Donna Haraway and the work of contemporary UK animal rights groups, in order to develop their - respective - approaches to articulating animal rights issues. To analyse the tactics of these movements a conceptual framework is constructed through combining Haraway's insights with those of Bruno Latour, performative uses of actor- network theory and key concepts from Pierre Bourdieu (such as field, habitus and doxa). Through focusing on the tactics of UK animal rights groups the thesis works to recuperate certain of these practices from the criticisms Haraway levels at animal rights groups more broadly; illustrating contexts where these movements are departing from humanist rights-discourses and developing approaches more suited to the radical critique of anthropocentrism that is central to Haraway's own project. To develop a sense of the disparate approaches taken by these animal rights movements that complement Haraway's arguments, various online and offline tactics are analysed; drawing on a range of lobbying practices undertaken by movements involved in the vivisection debate (such as SPEAK and the BUAV), before focusing on more creative forms of vegan campaigning engaged in by local Nottingham groups (such as Veggies Catering Campaign and Nottingham Animal Rights).

I believe that accounts of the moral considerability of animals can be strengthened in an interesting and novel way if attention is paid to moral risk and epistemic responsibility. In this thesis I argue for a sentience-based account of moral considerability. The argument from marginal cases gives us a reason to prefer accounts of moral considerability that include animals; if we think marginal humans are morally considerable we must accept that animals are too. Moral uncertainty gives us another reason to include animals. When we are making moral decisions we ought to minimise the amount of moral risk we take. I call this the 'cautious approach '. We cannot know for certain which account of moral considerability is correct. Given that we are trying to do what is right we should avoid any course of action that may be wrong. I will argue that accounts of moral considerability that exclude animals are taking an unnecessary moral risk: animals might be morally considerable and if they are most of our current treatment of them is wrong. When assessing risk one of the things that needs to be taken into account are benefits and losses. I will argue that conceding animals moral status will benefit humans. I argue that we should favour a sentience-based account of moral consideration because it is the least risky and most epistemically responsible; this gives us extra reasons to prefer it. I outline respect utilitarianism, which makes provision for protecting individuals. On this account we ought to give the interests of sentient beings (at least all vertebrates) equal consideration. Animals' interests not to be eaten and/or used for testing are sufficiently weighty to dictate that most westerners ought to become vegan and testing on animals should stop.

Welfare for captive animals in laboratory, farm, companion and zoo settings is difficult to assess and subject to interpretation. The perceived needs of animals change over time and according to budget, fashion and policy. The assessment of the value of environmental enrichment for captive animals is hampered by the lack of consistent, quantitative, objective and methodical research. Enrichment devices and other welfare improvement strategies lack long-term assessment or implementation. The concept of cognitive enrichment, or enabling captive animals to use their cognitive abilities to solve problems and meet challenges in their environment, is in the initial stages of development. Preliminary findings indicate that cognitive enrichment seems to be an effective method of improving captive animal welfare. In the research described in this thesis, several welfare measurement techniques including changes in activity budget, stereotypic behaviour and cognitive bias were compared and used to measure the effects of cognitive enrichment upon captive pigeons and dogs in order to obtain a useable cognitive enrichment paradigm that can be extrapolated to many types of captive animals. Key findings were that cognitive enrichment improved captive group-housed pigeon welfare and individually-kennelled dog welfare, indicated by significant changes in activity budget, increases in ‘optimism’, and reduction of stereotypic behaviour in subjects. Subjects used both low-tech and high-tech cognitive enrichments as intended and showed no sign of habituation. It is hoped that these findings will be used to improve captive animal welfare, and that the cognitive enrichment and cognitive bias paradigms developed will add to this field of research.