Conclusion: Noah’s Task

T

his book opens with two questions: Do animals have a place
on the ark? and if so, which animals may come aboard? I
argue that animals deserve a place on the ark, for reasons
that range from economic to ethical to emotional, environmental,
and beyond. At the same time, I argue that our decisions about
fi lling the ark would be easier if we did not, through our actions,
make animals so vulnerable to disasters. In the preceding chapters I
examine this issue of vulnerability through the two related themes.
One theme concerns how the roles we assign to animals position
them along the sociozoologic scale. This position determines ani-
mals’ moral status, which, in turn, infl uences the vulnerability they
face and the resources that we will marshal to rescue them. The
sociozoologic location is malleable. For example, a pet dog, mouse,
or rat would have a place on the ark—under most circumstances.
As Hurricane Katrina showed us, we can keep even these fam-
ily members off the ark when the cost of rescuing them appears
too great. The picture would change if the dog, mouse, or rat were
defi ned as a “research animal.” The sociozoologic scale determines