Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission declared open season on wild iguanas, making it legal for any resident to kill wild iguanas on sight. Wild iguanas are an invasive species, thought to be descended from escaped pets, and demonstrably benefitting from global warming. They are responsible for millions of dollars of roof, plumbing and home damage in the state, and push out native species. However, PETA has spoken out against the agency for “taking a stopgap measure that doesn’t mandate or explain humane methods of killing.” PETA notes that untrained members of the public, including children, are ill-equipped to slaughter iguanas in a manner that causes instant death, and argues that the state should revoke the call to kill immediately.
PETA opposes speciesism, which they define as “the misguided belief that one species is more important than another. Humans use speciesism to try to justify every kind of cruelty imaginable. It is speciesist to treat one animal’s life as more valuable than another’s. All animals deserve equal consideration, regardless of humans’ opinions of them.”
What solution to the iguana problem would be consistent with Elizabeth Andersons’ ethics, and why?
Does Anderson agree with PETA’s philosophical claims? Why or why not?
