Practicle Application of a Moral value for Animals

After reading Wilson’s understanding of the Kantian understanding of animal rights, I found myself overwhelmingly agreeing with Kants position. As Kant notes there must be a distinction between humans and animals. In his distinction I especially agree with the notion that the free will of humans trumps the will of animals. Although both humans and animals have a choice, we possess a volitional consciousness which enables us to willfully recognize why we do things. I believe that since we naturally possess the ability to understand our role in our environment, we have a position of natural dominance. When it came to Wilsons idea of our responsibility to animals, I was unsure of the ability to practically apply it.
Wilson does not satisfy my question of how this appeal to humanity within each individual can become both percolated through society, and how even such an appeal would result in a sufficient outcome. Taking our nation into consideration we have many different religious and consequently moral beliefs which dictate the decisions of one in their everyday life. How does she intend to generate this appeal to humanity within each person if there is no social repercussion for disregarding this respect for humanity? Further still, how can social repercussions be handed down if animals do not have some sort of rights. I think it would be hard to distinguish between moral rights and legal rights given the close relation our laws have with our moral standard. In recent news, Micheal Vick was sent to prison for two years for his role in a dog fighting ring. Why I believe that sentence was excessive, would Kant think the same thing? By saying that animals do not have the same moral clout as humans do, how can Vick have received such a sentence while another NFL star killed a human in a DUI crash receiving a smaller sentence. In the case of Vicks NFL peer, he settled out of court for a large sum of money. I think that this situation exemplifies the way in which raising the moral status of animals would serve to diminish the moral status of humans. How can we understand the moral value of animals if our moral dealings between humans are not entirely black and white?