What is Predator-Prey Abolitionism?

Predator-prey abolitionism represents one of the most provocative and fiercely debated corners of modern animal ethics. It begins with a stark moral premise: the act of being chased down, torn apart, and eaten alive is an experience of extreme agony. If we have a moral reason to prevent a human child or a domestic pet from being mauled by a predator, we must also have a moral reason to prevent a wild rabbit from being mauled by a fox. To dismiss the rabbit's pain simply because the fox must eat to survive is, according to abolitionists, to prioritize biological mechanics over conscious suffering.

Of course, the immediate objection is ecological. Predation is a keystone process that prevents prey populations from exploding, which would lead to overgrazing, habitat destruction, and massive starvation. Predator-prey abolitionists do not dispute this ecological reality; they do not advocate for simply shooting predators and leaving the ecosystems to collapse. Instead, they look toward emerging biotechnologies. Philosophers like David Pearce, author of The Hedonistic Imperative, argue that we will eventually possess the tools—such as CRISPR gene editing and synthetic biology—to safely redesign the biosphere.

The proposal is not to wage war on carnivores, but to act as compassionate genetic engineers. Just as we have domesticated wolves into dogs, we could theoretically use gene drives to transition obligate carnivores into herbivores or use advanced population management to replace the brutal cull of predation with humane fertility control.

Critics argue that this proposal is a form of supreme ecological hubris that risks destroying the natural world. They contend that predation is an essential, beautiful, and defining characteristic of many wild species, and that to erase it is to destroy the very essence of what makes these animals what they are. This debate exposes a deep philosophical division: is our ultimate moral duty to preserve the authentic, wild identities of species, or is it to minimize the real, subjective suffering of individual conscious minds?

If you found this valuable, consider supporting our work.