Environment is not Ethics

Obviously! Ethics in general is about relations between people, and between societies. Some may call the latter politics. Our relationship to the environment and nature is on a different scale. In the first instance it is between society as a whole and chaotic extinction. If this world does not preserve a minimal viable environment there will be nothing to be moral about. What this signifies is that all and any society, that has the wit to nurture nature, will also nurture a general concept of care. It might be said that any society which hopes to survive must have at least a mechanical concept of welfare.
Within society, in relation to absolute end-values. The environment stands apart in some degree such that attitudes to it might be at variance with the end-values as they relate to human beings.
A Tyranny does not value the individual as other than a cog in the machine, and so the environment and nature would be even more a mere tool. There might be some odd philosophy that worships creatures above human beings, the vagaries of 'religion' are well known.
For the Anarchist society, if it is consistent and extends the same principle to nature. There would probably be little concern for farm animals, or their 'rights.' they being the property of autonomous families. For the natural world proper, a concept of autonomy might well be extended to its denizens. Providing a right for nature to exist sustainably within its proper reserves.
Altruist society, not narrowly limited to human concern, would extend value to all creatures within the limits of mutual welfare. And according to their level on the tree of life towards 'human consciousness'. A malignant virus being a minimal life form and a present danger to humanity, would have short shrift. Farm animals would be accorded 'rights' presenting an almost insuperable problem in defining the level of those rights, such that many people would opt out and become vegetarians.