Fishing Cruel? Never!

GrahamM

GrahamM

Managing Editor
Joined
Feb 23, 1999
Messages
9,773
Reaction score
1
Read this story in the <a href=http://www.fishingmagic.com/specart/specart.asp?sp=&v=r>Digital Diary</A> and please let's have your comments about fishing and cruelty.

Am I wrong, or is this proof that fish don't feel pain?
 
C

Chris Bishop

Guest
Multiple captures make you wonder don't they.

I had the same fish in two casts last year, I know a mate had one in the next swim an hour or so after I caught and returned it a couple or weeks ago.
 
W

Wendy Perry

Guest
wow what a good read that's unbelivable that the same fish kept on coming back i thought that once you had caught a fish they are wary for a while but obviously not... and they were nice looking fish Graham and Dave !!
 
G

Gary Knowles

Guest
I've had pike that have thrown the hook at the side of the bank after a long scrap and then just lie doggo in the margins. Then take a bait dropped on its nose, so sometimes hunger or instinct must take over any fear of 'stress' they supposedly endure.

In this case though the pike looked skinny and in poor condition and I have often found that these fish are 'mugs' - in other words very susceptible to repeat captures. Perhaps they are ill in some way, undernutritioned and just desperate for food - that at least would explain how Graham and his mates were capable of catching them.......
 
M

Michael Hall

Guest
Well maybe Gary!! But PETA are just fighting a battle and are killing their own men!! They are saying one thing and then contridicting themselves! Heres one for a laught I was watching TV about 6-7 months ago and it had a report on the news about PETAs so called fight to ban fishing! One guy he must have been about 26 was dressed in a boy scouts outfit! I was rolling on the floor cracking my ribs open!! Now if anyone is going to listen to a 26 year old dressed in a scouts outfit then they want their heads looking at!!
 
M

Martin Wright

Guest
Graham, at the risk of being hung, drawn and quartered by everyone on the forum, I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one - or at least on the conclusion you have come to.

I have also experienced occasional similar incidents in the past, with both Pike and Trout - not the brightest of fish (though never 4 times!). In these instances the fish retake a bait within a few minutes of being caught and then returned - I think they simply have not learnt to equate the bait with getting caught or have already forgotten it.

Remember, most fish will eventually take a bait again after being caught, even it is a few hours or days later. Instinct/hunger/aggression will eventually replace memory of an unpleasant experience - these are simple animals.

I think it is a dangerous tactic to try and defend ourselves fron the likes of PETA by pretending that the fish enjoy it or that they feel no pain or stress when that hasn't been proved one way or the other.

Rather, lets go on to the attack by informing the general public of how the nutty views of PETA will affect them, eg enforced veganism etc.

I must admit though it sounds like you had one helluva thick pike there!
 
GrahamM

GrahamM

Managing Editor
Joined
Feb 23, 1999
Messages
9,773
Reaction score
1
Martin, I stick by my conclusion, and here's why:

Your reference to 'an unpleasant experience' is right, but don't confuse 'unpleasant' with 'pain'. I don't claim the fish enjoy the experience. But on the one hand we have PeTA with a poster showing a dog with a hook in its mouth and, by implication, telling the world that fish feel the same pain as a dog.

I reckon we should start telling the world that such statements/implications are a load of rubbish, and we can go a long way towards doing that by relating incidents like the pike captures that started this thread.

I wouldn't argue with any of the points you make, but it still boils down to this very simple fact:

No creature that feels pain anything like we do, would never, in such a short space of time, repeatedly return for more of the same. A creature that feels a modicum of pain would still have been in too much pain from the first experience to have any desire to feed.

This is the message we need to get across to a general public where the majority soak up Sun-style news like a sponge. Unlike PeTA's message, ours is a truthful one and based on hard evidence, not supposition and bare-faced lies.

The FACT, according to everyday evidence seen by anglers, is that no matter what the motive is for a fish taking a bait, they would not be able to do so repeatedly in a short period if they felt pain.

And that's not scientific evidence, just plain old common sense that even a gullible, non-angling public, would understand.
 
G

Gary Knowles

Guest
Got to agree with the gaffer here.

I've caught small roach and chub that have had massive slashes accross their flanks from previous pike attacks. They have been happily feeding away on maggots when captured. Would a human nip into Mcdonalds for a big mac with half his lower bowel trailing behind him..... I think mot.
 
M

Martin Wright

Guest
Graham, I hear what you're saying but there's a big difference between anecdotal or 'common sense' evidence that fish don't feel pain and hard scientific evidence. As fellow anglers we all (myself included) have this gut feeling that any stress or 'pain' is minimal and acceptable and fish don't suffer in 'human' terms.

The common sense argument may work with non anglers who are sensible and prepared to listen - but a lot of people are swayed by the dramatic one liners and the type of posters that PETA have done. PETA may be nutters but they aren't stupid, they know what they're doing.

I think if our tactics against them is to defend ourselves by saying "well actually we don't think fish feel pain" then we're on to a loser - remember we don't need convincing ourselves and I just don't think you will ever convince most non anglers that sticking a hook into a fish and pulling it out of the water is neither painful or stressfull.

Attack is the best form of defence which is why exposing PETAs loony aims is our best option - Let them try to defend themselves.

Graham, I hope that you realise that I'm not necessarily disagreeing with the conclusion you have formed from your experience - just on whether that should form the basis of defending ourselves from the likes of PETA.

Food for thought - you may of course think I'm talking b------s.

Gary - I wouldn't nip into Macdonalds for s big mac under any circumstances. a horrible American import - just like PETA.
 
R

Ron Clay

Guest
I also have to go along with Graham here.

Anecdotal evidence is often far more valuable than what is termed "hard scientific facts".

I know this because my job involves decisions which are based on gut feeling and emperical evidence. If I were to make decisions based on hard scientific facts, much of what I have achieved would never have come to fruition.

We used to have a Ph.D was always telling us it couldn't be done. Then He left and I told the people concerned that it could be done; and it was so.

Sorry but I don't think much of what are called "hard scientific facts". Such things are often created by soulless university types with little imagination or foresite.

Let's keep hard scientific facts where they belong - often in the dustbin!!

Anecdotal evidence can be so valuable.
 
GrahamM

GrahamM

Managing Editor
Joined
Feb 23, 1999
Messages
9,773
Reaction score
1
I'm not saying that what I've said above should form the basis of our attack against anti-anglers, I'm saying that it should form just another line of defence/attack.

And there are some non-anglers that will listen to reason, common sense and logic, for I've used the argument when I've been confronted by them from time to time. Most of them, at least, have gone away with food for thought, which is one step nearer to having them on our side than they were before.

Of course, there are plenty who will never be convinced that fishing is not cruel, no matter what you say or what evidence, scientific or otherwise, you present. They've already made their minds up and that's an end of it for them.
 
M

Martin Wright

Guest
I really hope you're right Graham. PETA will not go away and our defence must be spot on.

I took my 4 year old boy fishing on the canal for the first time this year(see face it photo - 3 gudgeon, 2 perch and a roach!) and I'd be devastated if fishing was banned and his fishing future was taken away.
 
I

Ian Whittaker

Guest
Fishing is only as cruel as the angler!
Same as keeping pets is cruel if the owners are irresponsible.
If angling in general has its house in order then I don't see that PETA can have any ammo.
The likes of Messrs. Taylor/Nudd/Arthur should think about the things they put into print or they may have to try other branches of journalism.
 
M

Mark Seal

Guest
i think their is too many people minding other peoples buissness
 
R

Richard Barrell

Guest
I feel as angler's that we care more about
the countryside & the species which we fish
for then any other susposed animal lover.
As PETA say they are
 
M

Mark St Jefferson

Guest
I would agree with you on the whole there Richard, as would most of the anglers that visit this site (or so I would hope).

But ---- and it is a big but--- it is the few others that don't care that will always be the thorn in our side. We all know the ones, the ones that willingly thumb their noses at rules, happily leave their rubbish on the bank and line in the trees, the ones that will catch a fish that doesn't appeal to them and throw it up the bank.

I recently had a trip to the Rother, where on my pre-fish walk of the bank I found a Pike , half rotted lying on it's side a good 20ft from the bank, at first I reckoned there could be other reasons for it being there, but not when I saw the large hook still in it's mouth...

As Ian said: Fishing is only as cruel as the angler, unfortunatly it only takes one PETA member to find something like this and take a photo and all our arguments are shot to hell.

I don't know how we police our own and keep them in order, but it seems to me that at the end of the day it is up to us to do it, or lose the battle in the long run.

As I've said before, the war for us is realy on two front's, PETA and bad anglers. For, for every 100 good deed, or enviromentaly freindly stories we come out with. One picture of a bird strangled on fishing line or a maimed fish by bad practice will wipe the lot.
 
R

Rodney Wrestt

Guest
I have caught the same pike three times in the same day as well, and how many times have carp with names been caught in a week, month or year, if fish felt pain as some people would have us believe they experience it they wouldn't be so quick to repeat the action which caused the effect.
 
GrahamM

GrahamM

Managing Editor
Joined
Feb 23, 1999
Messages
9,773
Reaction score
1
Mark, you're right of course, but the problem isn't exclusive to fishing. Every sport has a bad minority element that the tabloid press love to pick up on and splash all over the front page. Football hooligans are a case in point, and no matter what the authorities do there will always be this element that either doesn't give a toss or deliberately goes out of its way to cause trouble.

Of course, that doesn't mean we should ignore the problem, and do our best to reduce it as much as possible, but it does mean we should understand that this minority will always be there, scattering litter around and worse, with a hungry press and PeTA ready to tell the world.

We must keep fighting it, just as you say, but our representatives must also be ready to counter bad press caused by this mindless minority. And we should make the most of stories like the repeat pike captures that started this thread to make positive points about fishing, pain and cruelty.
 
D

Dan Hartburn

Guest
Anyone think that the Rod Licence should be earnt following a compulsory tuition course? This might be a good starting point in the battle to quash the Anti's arguments.
A lot of the cruelty is caused by teens who are bored during their summer holidays (and a few idiotic adults all year round). Perhaps this will reduce the number of bad apples giving us a bad name?
 
R

Rodney Wrestt

Guest
Dan,
An exam wouldn't change peoples outlook or character, people still drink and drive etc. They do it when they get the licence and take a chance, if it's in their nature they will do it, untill they recieve a good slapping they will see no wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top