Fish & Pain again

Foxhunting shadow over 'fish feel pain' debate
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
(Filed: 10/04/2006)

The question of whether fish can feel pain is to be considered by Government advisers in a move that will reopen the debate about whether angling is cruel.
Hostilities have raged for decades between anglers and animal rights activists about the inner life of fish and how much they suffer.
"We are starting to look at it," said Sara Nathan, the chairman of the Home Office's animal procedures committee, whose housing and husbandry sub-committee is to look at the scientific literature on the issue. "I have recently written to a fish expert asking him to come on to the group."
Although the remit of the committee is to advise the Home Office on animal experiments, if it eventually concludes that fish can suffer it could make angling go the way of foxhunting.
"There is always bound to be that worry," said Paul Baggaley of the National Federation of Anglers.
He believes that the existing evidence is insufficient to swing the argument one way or the other and the issue "is something that is going to run and run".
Earlier this year, a study at the Queen's University of Belfast showed that goldfish can learn to avoid parts of their tanks where they receive electric shocks and may be smarter than trout.
One of the team, Rebecca Dunlop, said: "This paper shows that pain avoidance in fish doesn't seem to be a reflex response, rather one that is learned, remembered and is changed according to different circumstances. Therefore, if fish can perceive pain, then angling cannot continue to be considered a non-cruel sport."
Not all scientists are convinced. Prof James Rose of the University of Wyoming concluded in 2002 in the journal Reviews in Fisheries Science that awareness of pain requires consciousness, which fish do not possess.

The Telegraph have had some sort of agenda about fishing for a long time, they are certainly not angling friendly for sure. It seems if theres the slightly chance of some bad publicity for angling they are onto it in a shot, I took the Telegraph for a very long time but not any longer.

I've never taken the Telegraph. It's too left wing.

I take the Express!

John Wilson writes for it. The Express is very pro-angling

The Express,on the right, I think not,its a woosey middle of the road.

Hmm have to agree with Ron, the Telegraph do seem to have a slightly left leaning of late making me think that some Champagne socialists just might have infiltrated the editors office.

Can't stand any of the papers anymore, they are all just full of worthless hysteria and drivvle. If I do read anyone its the free Metro news you get on trains and buses, not a bad effort really with no distiguishable political leaning, just tells you whats going on.

As for fish feeling pain, its like horoscopes, they just print the same old rubbish every year hoping someone will pay attention. I personally think fishing just fell behind jump racing in the anti's list of things to ban so we might just get a rest for a while.

Now the pressure is coming off bird flu and 100,000 children dying from it the media are looking for something else to fill their pages with.
The newspapers must have a recyclable out tray full of anti-fishing, anti horse racing anti anti crap, which they dip into when there is no real news to report.

I also think that the Express is middle of the road. Mind you they are always having a go a Blair and Prescott in particular.

Love it.

The Telegraph does have good crossword ....

Thats right Ed, that was one of the reasons that I liked the Telegraph, I loved my crossword, but it used to be a very good and sensible read as well. That changed about 3 or 4 years ago when they moved on to the more sensational type of journalism that I hate, you know the sort, where they try to make the news instead of reporting it. Once they went down that road I stopped having it.

Let me get this straight.
Last week the Presidency was spending my money encouraging ethnic minorities and women to fish,(a good thing).
Now this week they are spending my money to try and find a way of stopping me from fishing,(a bad thing).
Now I am only a simple Northerner and the ways of the great and the good in Westminster,(and Islington) are a mystery to me but..

What the blinking flip is going on?

Ron, know what you mean about the Telegraph, way too wet. Have to take it though, the Express and Mail are full of 'wimmins' stuff, gives the good lady far to many ideas.

Earlier this year, a study at the Queen's University of Belfast showed that goldfish can learn to avoid parts of their tanks where they receive electric shocks and may be smarter than trout.
One of the team, Rebecca Dunlop, said: "This paper shows that pain avoidance in fish doesn't seem to be a reflex response, rather one that is learned, remembered and is changed according to different circumstances. Therefore, if fish can perceive pain, then angling cannot continue to be considered a non-cruel sport."

I posted this to my own thread on this subject. So pain isn't a reflex and the fish knows something is mis rather than being in pain but that awareness counts as pain does it?

Where's the true science in all this?

Aren't we barking up the wrong tree? I have no problem with the fact that fish may be able to feel pain. In fact, I'd be surprised if they couldn't. Nature's not stupid and gives all creatures the ability to experience unpleasant sensations in order to persuade them to avoid things which are potentially harmful. In my opinion, fish are there for us to hunt, eat and make use of. That's what being a top predator (which humans are) is all about.

I would suggest to Laurie that he buys this month's Coarse Fisherman, and finds out what took me four months research and much correspondence with Professor James Rose, to discover that he couldn't be much further from the truth as far as what abilities nature gives creatures, especially fish.

The giveaway with the Belfast report is the word seem. That is not proof or evidence, merely conjecture. What part of a fishes brain is perceiving pain? It also ignores detailed research that has proved what IS happening in fishes brains. It is yet another misguided attempt to use circumstantial and subjective views as so called proof. It also fails to understand unconscious learning, something that all creatures do.

Not entirely on topic, but I feel fairly relevant. I think the press will be highlighting the animal rights activists/movement in some fine detail over the next few days and none of it will be good publicity for them. The 4 activists who did the grave robbing of the guineapig breeders elderly relative have today been found guilty and are now awaiting sentencing, with recommendations of up to 12 years imprisonment each. The body has still to be recovered, I wonder if that ladies family felt pain, I think so, and I hope that the sentence that is given is of the utmost severity permissable.

they should get an extra year in jail,for every day that they fail to give the location of the deceased womans body.
with regard to fish feeling pain,i`ve returned pike to the water,only to have then take another bait within seconds of returning to the water.if humans carried some of the wounds that preyfish get from an unsuccessful predator attack,they`d probably die of shock from the pain and severity of the wounds.yet fish carry on feeding and most often survive,unless they get nabbed by another predator or catch an infection.

Mark, your research was mentioned by Keith Arthur today on BBC Radio Norfolk during a discussion on this subject.
I must say I was most impressed with RN's handling of the programme and the subsequent phone-ins. It was extrememly well balanced and the presenter didn't take sides but gave Keith and one of the researchers (can't remember his name) from Belfast University a fair crack of the whip to put over their views. The researcher did say that their intention was purely to produce information for the Home Office Animal Procedures Committee and not to support a ban on fishing. His view was that it should be up to the individual angler to decide if the research was conclusive enough for him/her to stop fishing. He also acknowledged and agreed with Keith's comments regarding the huge contribution that angling and anglers make to the environment.
Also almost every call from listeners supported angling and so at least on this particular programme angling actually won the day.

The general public have no radical views about anglers, unfortunatley the general public are not the problem.
The problem is a tiny minority of people who wish to make everyone else abide by their opinions, regardless of what they may think. This tiny minority of people will and do support various strange causes that have no impact upon them personally, in their basic form I suppose that they are anarchists.
Their aim seems to be the disruption of 'normal' day to day living, perhaps the legalisation of drugs, the trippling of DHSS payments and a government order that dreadlocks must be worn will win them over.....I doubt it, its time the B******s were exterminated before they do some real harm.

Feel you may have missed my point, Mark. I believe it is silly for us to try to defend ourselves by adopting the "fish don't feel pain" argument. One day, it is quite possible that someone may conclusively prove that they do and then we'll all be made to look very stupid and put on the defensive.

Also, I think we should be more honest with ourselves. Many of us don't like to think of ourselves as deliberately causing pain to another creature. So we comfort ourselves by saying, "Oh, it's OK. They don't feel it anyway".

As far as I'm concerned, I enjoy fishing. I don't set out to be gratuitously cruel and I do all the usual "good practice things (unhooking mat, wet hands, etc, etc), but ultimately, I'm a member of the species at the top of the food chain and I make no bones about it. If I want to fish, I will. No arguments, no attempts to justify myself to politicians, antis or anyone else. If they don't like it, that's unfortunate.

We Must be robust. It's no use being defensive or trying to sell our position to anyone. Humans have fished since the beginning of time, both for pot and pleasure. It's our right and that's the end of it.

It's our right and thats the end of it?

Tell you what Laurie we don't have rights anymore. The only people who have 'rights' are little hoodie thieves who the law seems to do more to protect than stop.

Decent people who lead blamless lives lose any rights they have unless they fight for them. When a minority takes your fishing away from you because they don't think it's nice I'd review that statement if I were you.