<p>The aim of this article is to study theoretical interactions and practical implementation of three approaches, past and present, to assess their future potential insecuring animal rights proper (i.e., fundamental rights, hereinafter “rights”) protection. On this basis, recommendations can be made regarding how and when to employ each approach, and to what degree and in what combinations. In the first substantive section, starting from the premise that abolitionism should be the ultimate end of animal rights protection, we examine interactions between these three approaches to determine whether instrumentalism and welfarism promote or hinder abolitionism, and to what extent they influence it at all. In other words, are the dichotomies between these approaches real or overstated? This section studies their objectives, priorities, and implications for their positioning relative to one another. The second section considers these approaches in practice. First, it traces their historical evolution in the context of animals. Then, it examines present-day implementation in legislation and jurisprudence. In the third section, we briefly outline further considerations that might inform strategic use of these approaches. The fourth and final part, including concluding remarks, seeks to answer how we should proceed with animal rights protection efforts from societal, political, and legal perspectives.</p>