The Great Ape Project is an idea, a book, and an organization...

A Simple, Obvious, Ethical Idea. GAP, as The Great Ape Project is often called, begins with the basic principle that there are animals outside the human species who matter as individuals in some of the same basic ways that humans matter as individuals. In the face of contemporary values that deny all nonhuman animals even the most basic protections, GAP asks who are the most obvious candidates for extending the basic moral protections, sometimes called "rights," now granted only to humans? One answer to this question is, surely, gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans, and bonobos. For the members of these species, there is very good science showing how extraordinarily complex these animals are as individuals. This is why these individuals are the focus of GAP.

Some think this simple idea is too radical, for it has profound implications for some widely accepted practices. The idea requires basic changes at some now widely accepted institutions - such as zoos and theme parks - that keep these individuals on display for human entertainment or education. Acceptance of this idea also would eliminate other more recent practices, including experiments in biomedical facilities involving chimpanzees.

Other humans think that this idea is not radical enough. For example, some demand that every animal organization, including GAP, focus on all nonhuman animals. It is true that animals other than the great apes (a category which includes humans, scientifically speaking) also deserve recognition and protection, but as profoundly important as this objection is, it overlooks two important points. First, there is no reason why the kinds of arguments GAP advances on behalf of the nonhuman great apes could not be applied to many other animals. Scientific methods can serve other animals well by showing that their lives involve rich and complex experiences worthy of respect even if they are unlike human experiences.

Second, most modern societies educate young humans to exclude all nonhuman animals from the important set of protections we offer to all humans. At GAP, we refer to this as the moral circle or the community of equals. One way to begin to dismantle such an exclusivist value system, sometimes called speciesism, is to break the barrier by working to bring some nonhuman animals within the moral circle. GAP's strategy is, thus, to challenge speciesism by focusing on those nonhuman animals that can be shown, using available science, to deserve the kinds of protections that most societies reserve to only members of the human species.

The nonhuman great apes provide perfect examples of individuals who have distinctive personalities and live in rich, complex communities with their own traditions. When humans disrupt the lives of such animals by holding them in zoos or a biomedical lab, it is easy to show that the individuals involved suffer terribly.

GAP asserts, on the basis of common sense and science, that now is the time for humans to recognize that killing these individuals, holding them captive, or using them in harmful experiments is, for ethical reasons, wrong. Further, if we are as ethical and intelligent as we claim, we should be capable of honoring the fact that at least some other animals now held captive by humans simply don't belong in captivity. We have already, in our sciences, recognized that some other animals, like us, are so complex mentally and socially that they suffer when in captivity - even if they are kept healthy and well-fed by their keepers. Any continuing failure, then, to recognize at least some nonhuman animals as members of the moral circle is inexcusable, because it means we are ignoring the scientifically valid evidence of the complexity of the nonhuman great apes' lives.

So what is the upshot of accepting this simple idea? We can no longer accept the tradition of killing, holding captive, or intentionally harming any nonhuman great ape simply because it is not a member of our species. GAP's simple idea, then, leads one to insist that each of us must inquire about any animal's life to know whether harming it poses an ethical issue. The Great Ape Project is, thus, a powerful first step away from the speciesism that now affects all nonhuman animals.

The Book. The Great Ape Project: Equality Beyond Humanity, edited by Paola Cavalieri and Peter Singer (New York: St. Martin's Griffin, 1993) offers detailed arguments as to why ethical and scientific considerations lead to these conclusions. The most basic arguments are contained in the GAP's "Declaration on Great Apes," already signed by tens of thousands of people around the world and accessible at GAP's website www.enviroweb.org/gap. The book's materials and other evidence of the day-to-day realities of gorillas, chimpanzees, orangutans and bonobos, lead to one conclusion: it should be deeply troubling when any human kills or holds these animals in captivity or treats such complex individuals as if they were property or mere things.

The Organization. This common sense idea is promoted by The Great Ape Project-International, an all-volunteer organization headed by Peter Singer and directed by an international board of directors. This group assists affiliated national organizations in many countries throughout the world. The national groups attempt, within the context of their own culture and legal systems, to promote GAP's anti-speciesist ideas. Helping nonhuman great apes inevitably takes many different forms, and GAP's work thus has ranged from the support of well-run sanctuaries to helping specific individuals to legislative initiatives. GAP's volunteers also work in educational institutions, spelling out the extent and nature of speciesism and its harmful effects on all nonhuman animals.

You can reach the organization through its website www.enviroweb.org/gap, through its email address gap@envirolink.org, or by sending correspondence to PO Box 19492, Portland, OR 97280-0492