A rough note
Individual narrations in different languages. Language presupposes the narrator or communicator. Of course humans deny (amongst other things) nonhuman animals their languages, since it would make nonhumans visible as narrators in own languages. So humans, who see nature differently in the first place of course don’t see that anyone living “like an animal” in nature would communicate anything else but that tiny weird spot that humans ascribe to nonhumans: signals about offspring, mating, territory, foraging, anything that leaves creative thinking (and thus thought overall) a blank spot. When you hear humans speak about animals, and animals as social communicators, you virtually witness their own lack of insights into any such matters, however instead of admitting that they don’t understand something or them to leave an openness on such an important issue to stand as a careful rule of handling knowledge, approximation and not-fully-knowing, etc., they just push everyone and everything into a simple framework that their consensus deems suitable.
The lack of individual visibility in Human Rights, though basically illogic, stays a core problem, but in Animal Rights humans per category prevent the visibility of and acceptance for the individual, by denying capacity and independent meaning. This is a specific of speciesism or respectively of de-subjectification.
Speech and individuality are the angles you won’t find in a biologists form of animal advocacy, and as sad as it is, one has to highlight this issue. Biologists are the perfect de-subjectifiers on the epistemic levels. On the other hand you have everything an Animal Rights advocate would dream of, with some eco-biologists. So you seriously wonder why some branches of Animal Lib are not satisfied with the Eco-Democracy movements. But we lack various things here. Angles that won’t meet. And these discrepancies, if you look closer at them, should make clearer just how important it is to stop the erosion of „sense“, „meaning“ and „culture“, that we ultimately need for ourselves in the human rights debates and so forth and that we need to approach other angles of live in the larger weltall-ecological philosophical sense with understanding and the proper sensory abilities.
Nothing falls just out of nowhere, human logic isn’t the only highly refined logic, not only humans have philosophical insights that turn their paths into what they are. And with philosophical we are digging into the fields of simply being a friend of thinking, which humans tie to their brain-functions-centered frameworks like the past history would circle around their notion of the role of sun to them.
As long as humans divide the world into a Homo Sapiens and an unthinking, uncreative nature, and above all deny the Animal Sapiens, we sure got a problem with our philosophies in the universe and every broader context.