Under Penalty of Catapult

Rabbits are an interesting animal, economically speaking. Humans tend to strictly segregate “companion” animals from “livestock,” yet rabbits straddle the line. Farmers raise meat rabbits. Industrial farms breed rabbits for meat and fur. Some folks keep domesticated rabbits in backyard hutches. Others keep “house” rabbits the same as dogs and cats. Regardless of one’s views on animal rights, the economic truth is that humans domesticate animals to fulfill their needs, whether it’s for food or because they want a cute, furry repository for their unmet emotional needs.

There’s an understandable tension between different factions of rabbit-keepers. If you keep house rabbits, the idea of adorable bunnies raised and slaughtered in massive factories no doubt sickens you. Conversely, many folks view rabbits as a form of vermin no different than rats; rabbits may be cute but they also pose an ecological threat if not properly controlled.

In Canada, there’s recently been problems with feral rabbit colonies. These exist when domesticated rabbits are abandoned by their human owners. These rabbits then reproduce like Tribbles and overrun public spaces. Animal rights groups have organized to save the rabbits from being culled — hunted down — by local government officials seeking to gain control of the situation. I read a plea from one such group recently who wanted to relocate a feral rabbit colony to a special “rabbit sanctuary” — at the cost of about $130 per rabbit.

Some folks would say that’s a waste of money. I spoke to one person, a veterinarian, who suggested it would be better to trap and kill the bunnies and use the meat to feed carnivorous animals in local zoos. He noted that if this were a group of squirrels, instead of rabbits, nobody would talk about setting up an expensive “sanctuary.” But, of course, bunnies are cute.

On some of the Canadian news reports I read, commenters were similarly outraged that a source of cheap meat for people who might be hungry would be so cavalierly disregarded. Rabbit is a lean protein, after all, and given the reproductive rate of the species, you can theoretically produce a lot of it quickly.

But then we have our animal-rights friends who just can’t fathom the idea. Surely, we would never consider eating cats or dogs! Which raises an interesting point. Most companion animals kept by humans are predators. Even though we’ve selectively bred cats and dogs, for the most part, to be cute and adorable, these animals are descended from predatory species like wolves. They are meat-eaters, after all. Rabbits are herbivores and, by natural evolution, prey animals. They live to reproduce quickly because they have a short lifespan and high mortality rate.

Humans keep other small prey as pets, such as gerbils. But those tend to be animals you can easily keep in a small vivarium or cage. As any rabbit lover will tell you, a pet rabbit needs quite a bit more space. Keeping a rabbit in an outdoor hutch is basically torture. You’re confining a prey animal without providing any means of sanctuary or escape. Many outdoor “pet” rabbits die of fright at the mere sight of a predator.

So ideally, you keep a pet rabbit indoors where he has as much space as is practical. Rabbits also have special dietary requirements. They’re social creatures — it’s commonly suggested a person own at least two rabbits to ensure constant companionship — yet they generally don’t like to be handled as aggressively as a dog or even a cat. Again, that’s a function of their nature as prey animals.

The problem is that because house rabbits require so much in terms of resources from humans, they’re more prone to being abandoned than dogs or cats. Most pets, especially when children are involved, are impulse acquisitions. And since rabbits fall between the line separating companions from livestock, people seem to have less inhibitions about simply abandoning rabbits in a public park than a dog or a cat.

In the Canadian cases I reviewed, the problem seems to be that these rabbits are abandoned on public (government-owned) land, so there’s no property owner who can take charge of the situation. When a feral rabbit colony emerges, it becomes a political question pitting animal groups against other residents who view the rabbits as a pest. If I own a piece of land and someone dumps rabbits on it without my consent, that’s a form of trespassing, and I should have the right to compensation from the owner if the rabbits multiply and cause damage to my property. And, yes, I certainly have the right to kill the rabbits to prevent them from causing more damage or, even worse, attracting predators like coyotes to my property.

Likewise, if animal groups want to privately finance and organize “rescues” for these animals, more power to them. Let the market sort things out. I don’t think the pro-rabbit folks should feel bad if they prefer to put their money into saving rabbits over other social causes. I would just note, as my veterinarian friend pointed out, that other animals have a need to survive as well, and they would benefit from the rabbit meat. What larger purpose is really served by saving rabbits from fulfilling their natural function as prey? I recognize that feral rabbits are the offspring of animals expressly domesticated by humans. But if there’s clearly excess supply, isn’t it better that the excess support other wildlife populations as opposed to consuming scarce human veterinary resources?