Samenvatting

Control methods are applied worldwide to reduce predation on livestock by European red
foxes (Vulpes vulpes). Lethal methods can inflict suffering; however, moral debate about their use is
lacking. Non-lethal methods can also inflict suffering and can unintentionally lead to death, and yet
both the welfare consequences and ethical perspectives regarding their use are rarely discussed. The
aim of this study was to investigate the animal welfare consequences, the level of humaneness, the
ethical considerations and the moral implications of the global use of fox control methods according
to Tom Regan’s animal rights view and Peter Singer’s utilitarian view. According to Regan, foxes
ought not to be controlled by either lethal or potentially harmful non-lethal methods because this
violates the right of foxes not to be harmed or killed. According to Singer, if an action maximises
happiness or the satisfaction of preferences over unhappiness or suffering, then the action is justified.
Therefore, if and only if the use of fox control methods can prevent suffering and death in livestock in
a manner that outweighs comparable suffering and death in foxes is one morally obligated t