Are animal ethics and the consumption of honey or other bee products compatible?

Below, I provide a discussion of some of the questions or issues concerning animal ethics when undertaking beekeeping as a hobby/way of life or when purchasing bee products for use or consumption. I am not providing a judgment or opinion on the matter. I have been omnivore, vegetarian, and vegan at various times in my life. I have conducted animal research, and I have also worked to change inhumane animal research policy. I have been involved in organic beekeeping, and I am also a 'creatures great and small'-rights supporter. This discussion is simply for educational purposes. Ultimately, you must make your own decision about whether to consume animals or animal products.

The Relationship between Humans and Other Animals

Views on the human-bee relationship vary widely, as do views on human-animal relationships, in general. We are all interdependent. Our ecosystem is based on a fine balance of roles. Too much messing about on the part of humans, poor weather conditions, and other interference, natural or unnatural, can affect this balance and create the kind of havoc that destroys established species and creates new species. One of the key questions is who or what defines a 'natural relationship'?

One thought is that if the relationship is initiated by one party and not agreed to by the other party, then the relationship is contrived and thus possibly exploitative. In the case of beekeeping, some have argued that bees have been enslaved by humans. The relationship has been initiated by humans, and bees have not agreed to it. This argument works when talking about farm animals and house pets - there is no choice on the part of these animals. Bees, on the other hand, have freedom, and we see this freedom expressed when swarms are formed. A beekeeper can provide a home, but if the home is inadequate, there is nothing stopping them from leaving.

Religious Views

Religion is a great target for blame for almost any of today's issues and problems. In the case of animal ethics and the use of animals to serve human purposes, views vary both across and within religions. There are vegetarian and vegan Christians, Jews and Muslims as well as members of these same groups who run dairy and animal meat farms and who beat their dogs. The same goes for other religions. There are Hindus who worship the cow, and there are Hindus who lead cows under near starvation conditions to provinces of India where they are further brutalized in order to provide leather. There are vegetarian Buddhists, and those that not only eat meat, but who brutalize the very animals that provide it. There is no clear and easy relationship between religion and animal ethics.

Intelligence and the Ability to Reason

Once upon a time, the common view (such as that espoused by Descartes among others) was that animals didn't feel pain. Absolutely no animal ethics existed. Horrible experiments were conducted upon animals in the name of science with complete disregard for the welfare of the animal victims. Darwin contributed greatly to more humane consideration of animals, but most people still maintained that the major difference between the human animal and all the rest was intelligence and the ability to reason. Because of this deep and wide chasm, humans were held superior and animals existed to do the bidding of humans. Still, however, while abuse of animals was becoming more unacceptable, consumption and use of animal flesh and labour, was just part of life.

There has since been a great deal of investigation into the intelligence of animals, and much has been learned. Bees have a complex and highly intelligent society and mode of communication. Gorillas, chimps, dolphins, pigs, and others are behaviourally intelligent.

A few considerations here. Perhaps measuring intelligence is not appropriate for determining appropriate animal ethics and the value of a creature. Does a more complex being deserve more respect than another? And how does this apply to vegetables? Vegans, who will not consume animals or use anything that is derived from animals, will still consume fruits and vegetables. But they are living things, too. They are not 'intelligent' in the way that animals can be. Does the pain argument apply here? Do vegetables feel pain? Where do we draw the line with regard to what we are allowed to consume as humans?

Poverty, Pragmatism and Choice

There are many vegans and animal rights activists in the West. Many of them do fantastic work protecting animals from serious abuses and make changes to accepted, but unethical, practices. They are needed and underappreciated in this regard.

Within the realm of animal and animal product consumption, however, there are some considerations. Many, and possibly most, representatives of animal ethics groups come from privileged classes where the decision to consume animal products is a very much a choice. When you have money, you have freedom. Freedom gives you the ability to choose and to have a stance on human and animal ethics. Most Westerners don't spend 80 to 90% of their income on food, but a fraction of that. If one does not consume animal products, there is a great deal more that is available that will provide needed nutrition. Not only is the West comparatively rich with regard to monetary resources, but it is comparatively rich concerning the ability to grow a variety of edible produce.

In countries where poverty is the norm, there is not such freedom to choose. You eat what is available and you are thankful for it. Meat is not served with a side of animal ethics, so to speak. A few years ago, I spent some time in Cambodia with groups of motorcycle taxi drivers. Many of these men are not able to afford to get married, and must live several to a single room on the meager wages they earn. I sat down to a meal of dog and greens with them once. A cheap and filling meal. Likewise, in Mongolia, where growing conditions are more difficult, the main diet is one that is animal product-heavy. There just isn't much in the way of vegetables, and to import them is not something affordable for much of the population. For other cultures, it is just the norm to eat meat or use animals for a variety of purposes. Like telling a smoker not to smoke, nothing is going to change unless the person/people in question want to change. I lived in Hunan province in China - often, all the dishes listed under the vegetable section are either cooked in animal oil/grease or have chunks of meat in them. It is just a meat-eating culture.

It is difficult for rich Westerners to dictate what the rest of the world should be doing. Still, a question exists - who says we cannot or should not rely upon animals? If we exclude frivolous use of animals, such as scientific experimentation, pet ownership, fashionable clothing production that requires the killing of animals, is it wrong? If we returned to the way earlier cultures, namely our pre-agriculture, prehistoric hunters and gatherers, lived and used only what was necessary and used as much of the animal as possible to be fed, clothed and sheltered, we would actually be healthier and doing what humans have always done - and ethically. The big difference between current meat-eaters, and early nomadic hunters and gathers is that the latter did not hold animals (including bees) captive in order to make use of them.

A few further considerations: there is some argument about whether honey and bee pollen are truly animal products. Some non-vegans have argued that these products are not animal-derived, but I think that while the bulk of the substances are taken from plants, there are enzymes added to them by the bees themselves. Without the enzymes and without the collection by bees, the substance doesn't take the form we know. Thus, if you choose to consume honey or pollen, know that you are consuming an animal product.

Bees as Human Slaves

The relationship between humans and bees is a few thousand years old. There are bad beekeepers, but generally, ethical beekeeping is seen as a symbiotic relationship. Humans act as stewards, providing a safe place for bee homes, and taking care of predator and disease issues that can't be handled by the bees. In return, they take honey from the hive. A responsible beekeeper with a good sense of animal ethics will not take more than the bees need to feed their young, keep a healthy hive, and last through the winter, if there is one. Responsible beekeepers will also refrain from killing off their colonies at the end of the season because of the 'inconvenience' of winter maintenance. They will also avoid using chemicals or placing hives in areas where chemicals are used.

Generally, vegans and other animal ethics and rights activists see commercial beekeeping as bee slavery. It is a valid point of view if you take into account that as much as we know about bees, we probably still don't know what is truly best for them, other than leaving them to their business in complete freedom. We maintain them at our convenience, and we take needed resources from them, thus making them work harder and likely shortening their lives. What if we only take from wild hives for personal consumption like our prehistoric ancestors likely did? If it were truly wrong and unnatural to eat honey, would it not be toxic to humans? What about bears and other predators? If we are equal to other animals with regard to our place in this world, should we not have equal rights as predators? That is what we are essentially - predators. There is an argument that we were not designed to consume animal products, yet we did consume animal products in our primitive years on earth. Animal ethics weren't an issue then because humans ate a wide variety of things, including meat. What has changed such that we are no longer designed for animal product consumption? Perhaps it is that, then, we weren't living in unnaturally large numbers like we are today in strange agriculture-based communities. The natural world cannot support our numbers, so getting our nutrition from animals and bees requires us to cultivate them in captivity. What is the solution to this? It is abandoning farming, beekeeping, and the like?

Conservation Biology

This is an interesting discipline (and in many cases, multi-discipline). Concerned with the management of natural resources, these scientists take into account the economic worth of resources such as animals or water systems and the impact of human use upon dependent ecosystems and biodiversity in order to develop resource management and conservation strategies. Some conservation biologists do adopt an approach that does not put humans at the centre of the picture, while others are more utilitarian in approach (i.e., making decisions that benefit the greatest number). The unfortunate part is inserting the term 'economics' and 'management' into the picture. Business and nature are not supposed to go together. Humans no longer hold the place we are supposed to. We used to share the planet, each taking what it needed and giving back when the time came - now we run it, take from it, and seldom give back anything helpful.

Again, these are considerations. I see several viewpoints, and have sat on different sides of the animal ethics fence. I am against animal cruelty and frivolous use of animals, but I am not necessarily against 'responsible predation' (if that term is even possible anymore)... Where does beekeeping in its many forms fit into this picture?

animal ethics

---

Return to Bees Alive! home from Animal Ethics

Return to Liquid Gold... or Honey from Animal Ethics