Due to the collaboration of several protectionists, both domestic and wild animals have become of great importance to Argentine society.
Wild animals can inhabit a vast amount of spaces, such as fields, woods, ponds, wetlands, prairies, park, or human yards.
On 25 July 1891, The Senate and the Chamber of Deputies of the Republic of Argentina passed the 2.786 Act,[4] which was a pioneer in fostering animal protection and fair treatment.
On 24 September, 1881, the Argentine Animal Protection Association was created and, thanks to its efforts, a decade later, the aforementioned Act was passed.
On 5 October 1900, the 3.9595 Act of Animal Health Police was passed and it advocated for the rights of cattle in Argentine territory.
This Act is part of the supplementary laws contained in the Argentine’s Criminal Code and it condemns those who treat animals with cruelty.
This act dictated more restrictive norms at national level, and it prohibited, limited, and regulated the exportation and internal trade of wild animals.
It also mentions some species of animals that are considered natural monuments and, as such, they should be completely protected (for example, the Southern Right Whale, the Andean deer and the Yaguareté).
Since the year 2014, there have been many bills that were presented before the National Senate and the Chamber of Deputies aiming at showing more interest in animal rights.
Even though this bill is more detailed and comprehensive than its predecessors (since it aims at prohibiting and preventing the suffering, exploitation and abuse of all kinds of animals that live in Argentina), until today, it has not been passed.
[13] Argentina is projected to have a cattle inventory of 53.2 million animals in 2016, the highest level since 2008 when herds fell dramatically due to low returns and severe drought.
[16] In 2014 an Argentine appeals court recognized the basic legal rights of an orangutan named Sandra who was born in a zoo.
An advocacy group filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus on Sandra's behalf, resulting in the court's declaration that the animal is a "non-human person".