Wildlife management requires the manipulation of individuals or populations of wild animals to control negative impacts of unwanted wildlife, increase numbers of endangered species, or maximise the harvest of game species. Such management engenders a wide range of responses with opponents raising both ethical and animal welfare questions.

Unlike farm and pet animals, no obvious “duty of care” applies to wild animals except in a conservation sense of care for populations. Although, there is an argument that any interference by humans should be subject to the same duty of care. Nevertheless society expects that whenever we undertake pest control it should be done humanely. However, the more challenging issue is whether we should be controlling wild animals at all. Is it right, for example, to control one population in order to preserve another or to kill sentient animals to protect non-sentient plants? Indeed a growing number of people find it difficult to support vertebrate pest control, particularly because of their negative perceptions of killing.

To develop a sound ethical basis for managing unwanted wildlife an ethical framework needs to be implemented. It needs to incorporate a balance between biocentric or ecocentric, animal rights, and anthropocentric ethics. In this, it differs from the approach to ethical issues with our treatment of domesticated animals, where the environment (and hence its interests) does not have to be confronted. We advocate a pluralistic approach with the acceptance of both environmentalism and concern for the individuals, recommending a shift in emphasis from one to the other depending on the situation. We also advocate immediate action in the operational consideration of animal welfare in wildlife management rather than further delay as the ongoing debate about whether and how the interests of animals intersect with those of the environment and humans continues.