An analysis of wild animals with respect to French Ethics and Law

Before discussing the crux of the matter, it is important to understand what “wild” signifies and the characteristics that define a wild animal. As contrasted to domesticated animals, a wild animal can be defined as an animal living freely in his natural habitat, independently of Man. These animals are only exposed to variations in the biological equilibrium, to the imperatives of their genetic program and live in a habitat that gives them the possibility of expressing it themselves. However, this definition is very narrow as there exist a number of species of wild animals that don’t live freely in their natural habitat. These animals are constrained by Man, who by creating a relationship of dependence, controls them and in turn becomes responsible for their sustenance. In such a situation, their habitat is no more their natural habitat but than which has been imposed on them by Man; such animals are said to be “held in captivity” or even “tamed”. In short, when talking about law and ethics related to wild animals, there are two things to be taken into account: wild animals that live in the wild and wild animals that live held in captivity by Man