Brief Summary of Minutes of Annual Meeting

Minutes WCC 204 Animal Bioethics
Portland, Oregon January 3-5, 2002


Chair Davis called the meeting to order at 8:30 am on January 3, 2002. A review of the agenda and brief review of last years meeting and accomplishments were provided. The first day was devoted to a workshop to further advance the committees understanding of the ethical, sociological and scientific components of animal bioethics.


Paul Thompson provided the committee with an introduction to applied ethics methodology. Using an approach published in a paper authored by David Fraser, Thompson broke down philosophical approaches into two general categories, Essentialist and Pragmatist. A discussion ensued with a note that the trends in applied ethics is similar to that in animal welfare science, it is becoming more pluralistic. Gary Tiedeman led a discussion on the sociological perspective including, social constructionism, society, and methods of sociological research. A suggestion was made to have WCC 204 create a set of papers for a session to be held at a sociology conference. Tiedeman will solicit a session and work to recruit more sociologists into our group. Gary Comstock then outlined a proposal to have an Animal Ethics Institute in 2003. This project would most likely be attached to the summer Bioethics Institute. A case study was presented, the group divided and each used methodologies discussed that morning to analyze the case.


The following day the committee worked on the development of a professional code of ethics to be presented to the ASAS Board. Professional codes of ethics from the Society for Range Management, American Fisheries Society, American Veterinary Medical Association and the American Society of Agronomy were reviewed as examples and potential templates. A draft professional code was constructed and Davis, Cherney and Swanson were charged with developing the final draft to send to Ellen Bergfeld to present to the ASAS Board. A discussion concerning the WCC 204 web site ended with a subcommittee appointment of Cherney, Wylie, and Croney will put together a web page. Thompson, Comstock, Varner, Rollin, Tiedeman and Swanson were proposed to develop a primer. The inclusion of a dictionary of philosophical terms, reference list, and links were all discussed as potential components of the website.


Jim Males presented information on the FAIR 2002 research priorities. He indicated that the language developed by the FAIR 2002 effort has been widely adopted by ARS, CSREES and commodities for funding purposes. Our efforts fit under two goals detailed by FAIR 2002. He recommended that WCC 204 develop a national project. The remaining time was spent on identifying areas of collaboration in research, extension and teaching. The following is a summary of the chart developed by the committee.



Collaborative Ideas:


I Teaching
‘ CD-ROM  based on the WCC web page content including
‘ Primer
‘ Presentations
‘ Case studies
‘ Book  a collection of selected readings
‘ Audience?
‘ Multi-author
‘ Use NRC committee model?
‘ Team-teaching efforts
‘ Guest lectures by committee members
‘ Extension sponsored
‘ Use streaming video/pictel
‘ Teaching Guide
‘ Animal Bioethics course
‘ Challenge grant?
‘ Symposia at national meetings
‘ Regional
‘ Local
‘ Bioethics Institute 2003
‘ Virtual field trips
‘ Teaching Methods
‘ Web based course
‘ Streaming video
‘ Interactive teaching, video workbook


II. Extension
‘ Development of the web page
‘ Audience: public, industry, media
‘ Evaluation methods, groups..
‘ Brochure
‘ Animal species (ag communications expertise needed)
‘ White papers
‘ State of the issue
‘ Shortcourses
‘ Animal Welfare certification programs
‘ Fast food
‘ Labeling
‘ Standards
‘ Environmental
‘ Popular press articles (ethics, consumer responsibility)


III. Research
‘ Does denying telos cause suffering?
‘ What constitutes evidence of suffering?
‘ Clarification of terminology
‘ How can scientists contribute to understanding the moral status of animals?
‘ Focus on species
‘ Relate capacity to moral standing
‘ What capacities matter in relation to moral standing?
‘ What do people think matters?
‘ Is there something besides sentience we should consider?
‘ What are the impacts of different production systems on human-animal and human-human relationships and on the community?
‘ Scale of operation
‘ Types of interactions humans have with animals in the system
‘ Is there cognitive dissonance?
‘ What variables affect husbandry systems?
‘ What constitutes a farmer?
‘ A good farmer
‘ Publics definition of a farmer
‘ What is the ultimate impact of acting in a manner that contradicts good husbandry?
‘ Does husbandry count more than technology?
‘ What is husbandry?
‘ Must we re-define for the 21st century?
‘ What would ethically responsible husbandry be?
‘ How do contemporary animal scientists define animal welfare?
‘ How to best instill an animal ethic into students?
‘ What is the difference in the ethics of students focused on food animals versus companion animals?
‘ How do varying formats of animal science education affect the acquisition of ethics?


The business meeting was held on 1/5. Members in attendance were Davis, Kunkle, Bloome, Tiedeman, Weber-Nielsen, Swanson, Cherney, and Croney. Bloome asked members to share their reasons for becoming interested in this project. Bloome captured the responses and will produce a summary. The question of increasing participation and membership resulted in Tiedeman volunteering to recruit more social scientists. A brief description/presentation of the WCC 204 would be useful in recruiting new members. It was decided that a symposium for the PSA meeting in 2002 was not realistic but 2003 is a possibility. Rich Reynnells will be contacted to provide clarification for the suggestion. In June a meeting of the Agriculture Food and Human Values Society will take place in Chicago. It has been recommended by membership as a good meeting for the WCC 204 members to attend or to meet in conjunction. A follow-up will be conducted with Thompson and Stricklin to explore and establish the relationship and perhaps get a spot on the program for a representative of WCC 204 to present our project.


Davis reported that WCC 204 is committed through 2003 to have a Bioethics symposium at the annual ASAS/ADSA meetings. These will be included in the Contemporary Issues Program. Keith Schillo is organizing the 2002 symposium. The symposium this year was approved and programming is moving forward. Speakers have been contacted and secured. The Contemporary Issues committee has agreed to sponsor our symposia until 03 but suggested that we form our own planning committee. A volunteer is needed to organize the symposium in 2003.


The election of officers of WCC 204 resulted in the following: Chair: Deb Cherney
Vice Chair: Janice Swanson, Secretary: Miriam Weber-Nielsen. Chair Davis and Bloome reviewed the obligations and goals set during the meeting. Chair Davis and Harry Kunkle was thanked for their role in bringing the WCC 204 together. The meeting was adjourned.

o A workshop was held to advance the committees understanding of the ethical, sociological and scientific components of animal bioethics.
o A proposal is being prepared for an Animal Ethics Institute in 2003.
o A session of WCC204 papers to be presented at a sociology conference is being pursued.
o A subcommittee is developing a WCC 204 web page.
o A subcommittee is developing a primer.
o The committee is seeking additional social scientists.
o A joint meeting with the Agriculture, Food and Human Values Society is being investigated.
o WCC204 will provide a Bioethics symposium as part of the Contemporary Issues Program at the annual ASAS/ADSA meetings through 2003.