# Fishing; is it cruel?



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

Serious thread this.

I used to fish, quite a lot, over the years I got into other things, didn't have time, fell out of love with it, call it what you will.

Lately though, the more I think about it the more I feel that its not a particularly nice sport at all. It can't be very nice for the fish, being hooked through your lip, blind panic and terror until being hauled out, suffocated then chucked back in, knackered, and ultimately purely to fuel someones ego?

That's my take on it, I'm all ears as to why I'm wrong :2thumb:

GO!


----------



## PinklySmooth (Mar 25, 2013)

I fully see your point, but at least most are put back into the water at the end :lol2:


----------



## Pete Q (Dec 4, 2007)

Crownan said:


> Serious thread this.
> 
> I used to fish, quite a lot, over the years I got into other things, didn't have time, fell out of love with it, call it what you will.
> 
> ...


Oh this ones going to get heated.

I often wonder why use humans think we know what and how animals feel, or even can feel.

Do they feel panic ? terror ? or are we talking about instincts that every wild animal has, and needs to have them.

Is the instinct to swim away from danger a feeling or instinct ?

We will then have to talk about pain, another subject that we only think we know based on mainly ourselves getting hooked in the lip.

My first thoughts anyway.


----------



## SilverSky (Oct 2, 2010)

I think it is cruel yes, you wouldn't make a sport out of putting land animals on a rope and dunking them in water, so why is fishing ok?


----------



## PGTibs (Apr 26, 2013)

Fishing can't be cruel, my battered cod never complains when he's served up with some chips


----------



## Pete Q (Dec 4, 2007)

PGTibs said:


> Fishing can't be cruel, my battered cod never complains when he's served up with some chips


That's a pretty good point, I wonder if those against fishing eat fish,:whistling2: if they don't then respect : victory:


----------



## RubyTiger (Dec 12, 2012)

“The question is not, "Can they reason?" nor, "Can they talk?" but "Can they suffer?” - _Jeremy Bentham_

Some sources say they feel pain some don't. Even if they can't though they can still suffer. I wouldn't like to be happily swimming along and then suddenly get dragged in the opposite direction at god-knows-how-many-miles-per-hour, struggle for oxygen, go into a state of shock and then get tossed back just for the sake of some silly apes entertainment.

I wouldn't be surprised if they became stressed after too and become vulnerable either by not eating for a while, still in shock/worn out and therefore a target for predators. I also wonder if the hook would leave them susceptible to fungal/bacterial infection? :S. I'd say it's interfering with nature but most of the time the fish are put there for the purpose of fishing so shut me up. 

So aye, I say leave the fishies alone unless you're at least going to do something productive with them i.e. eat them :2thumb:

note: I do not eat other animals including fish.


----------



## mrkeda (Nov 6, 2012)

Pete Q said:


> That's a pretty good point, I wonder if those against fishing eat fish,:whistling2: if they don't then respect : victory:


I dont like fishing, think its a horrible sport. I refuse to eat fish because of it too.
It does kind of bring about the argument about eating meat though. If you couldn't kill an animal for food should you be eating it? I personally don't think I could so maybe I'm being hypocritical.


----------



## SilverSky (Oct 2, 2010)

Pete Q said:


> That's a pretty good point, I wonder if those against fishing eat fish,:whistling2: if they don't then respect : victory:


I don't eat anything with a face


----------



## Zerox Z21 (Oct 10, 2012)

Complicated issue. Hard to truly answer.
Yes, fish feel pain. But whether it's really comparable to the human experience is debatable. Cruel or not, I'd rather hook a fish lip than a human lip.
Articles here may be helpful: Practical Fishkeeping

Since I like to keep fish in aquaria, always been a bit of a weird one for me. Fish certainly don't favour fishing: fish living in well fished areas learn and thus become harder to catch, obviously avoiding bait, proving that the general fishing experience is a negative to them. You could argue against it on those grounds. But fish are generally simple creatures, so how cruel it truly is may be debatable. I am waffling a bit here; hard to express with words feelings sometimes.
Don't like to call fish stupid, but their mental capacity, particularly in a sentient sense, is certainly not as sophisticated as our own. At the end of the day, no level of science can really reveal what _being a fish_ is truly like, and yet that is the only information that can give a truly definitive idea of what the experience is like for a fish. So ultimately, it will always be a personal decision.
Fighting fish on a line may well be down to alot of instictive behaviour at the simply presence of humans and/or the resistance they feel once hooked. Might not be a direct representation of what the fish is feeling.

As an anecdote, I accidentally hooked a large pike once when I was young, simply trawling a spoon in boredom. I had been very slowly moving this spoon left and right, stood about 5ft up from the water, ontop of a straight wall. I didn't jerk the hook to hook it intentionally or anything, I simply did nothing. The pike just...tried to swim away. Obviously hooked, but no panic or anything. I had to pull it back around, turning it to face me. The pike continued being so strangely calm until help arrived.
Very odd situation. May be an exception, but without a proper hard strike, nor line of sight to me, the pike remained seemingly calm. The hook, alone (which is one of the more argued aspects of fishing) did not seem to cause it all that much discomfort, since it made no action to dislodge the bait, unhook itself, fight...nothing.
Maybe a weird, one off situation, but this makes me guess that the hooking aspect isn't really too problematic...

I am also aware of instances of prey fish trying to escape pike, leaping onto lily pads an deliberately remaining there for a number of minutes before simply flipping back into the water. So being removed from the water, as long as it is not for an extended period of time, and handled with care, cannot be too traumatic if fish are willing it inflict it on themselves for so long.

If nothing else, most good anglers love fish. They care for the fish they catch. They respect the animals, and carefully hold tired fish in flowing streams to allow them to recover before letting them go, rather than just dumping them back in. There are tales of famous fish in popular areas being caught many times over the years, testament to good treatment by anglers and that the act of catching the fish has no lasting negative effects. Barbless hooks are highly popular as the ease the unhooking process, both in potential pain and how quick and easy it is to unhook. If it wasn't for anglers, many wild fish would be in a sorry state; the business of anglers around the world creates revenue for where these fish live, preserving them and their environments and ecosystems, ones which might otherwise have been polluted or dammed with no resistance. In some cases, it is only the caring anglers that have stopped much greater environmental tragedies occurring.
So whether you agree with fishing or not, I believe that it has ultimately improved the situation for fish more than it has harmed it. So even if you disagree yourself...don't be so quick to knock it.


----------



## RubyTiger (Dec 12, 2012)

Zerox Z21 said:


> ...So whether you agree with _fishing _or not, I believe that it has ultimately improved the situation for fish more than it has harmed it. So even if you disagree yourself...don't be so quick to knock it.


"fishing" is too vague. Yes perhaps many fish in the wild and ecosystems alike may be in a sorry state if it wasn't for a particular type of fishing. But "fishing" also includes the fishing which devastates ecosystems in the ocean thanks to overfishing. So I don't think we can say whether we agree with fishing or not in general, perhaps only some parts but for different reasons than those stated. Sharks are also a type of fish and there are some cultures that think it is okay to cut off their fins and toss the bodies back. Surely we can't all be expected to agree with that on the basis that they aren't sentient and can't feel pain in the same way as humans?


----------



## Tops (Apr 26, 2007)

RubyTiger said:


> "fishing" is too vague. Yes perhaps many fish in the wild and ecosystems alike may be in a sorry state if it wasn't for a particular type of fishing. But "fishing" also includes the fishing which devastates ecosystems in the ocean thanks to overfishing. So I don't think we can say whether we agree with fishing or not in general, perhaps only some parts but for different reasons than those stated. Sharks are also a type of fish and there are some cultures that think it is okay to cut off their fins and toss the bodies back. Surely we can't all be expected to agree with that on the basis that they aren't sentient and can't feel pain in the same way as humans?


Except in his post the OP clearly states that he is talking about fishing as a sport. Trawling and fishing are different, hence a different name. No-one sat on a river bank with a rod and line has ever devastated an ecosystem. 
Get off your high horse.


----------



## RubyTiger (Dec 12, 2012)

_I_ know but it sounded like a general term and for those just tuning in it may not have been clear the topic was on one subject. And I wasn't having a go or being rude (but apologies if it came across that way) I was just sort of clearing something up and expressing my opinion which I'm quite allowed to do :? therefore I wasn't on any 'high horse'. There's no need for unkindness.


----------



## mrkeda (Nov 6, 2012)

Tops said:


> Except in his post the OP clearly states that he is talking about fishing as a sport. Trawling and fishing are different, hence a different name. No-one sat on a river bank with a rod and line has ever devastated an ecosystem.
> Get off your high horse.


While you're right about trawling and fishing being two different things I don't see how's she on a 'high horse', she's merely joining in with the discussion.


----------



## Tops (Apr 26, 2007)

Using a discussion about fishing as a sport to have a go about commercial trawlers and Asians cutting the fins off sharks is a bit off topic, its the equivalent of comparing boys shooting BB guns to war.
It's also been shown that in shore fishing helps the Eco system. Take a look at some of the work being done in places like Cornwall.

I thought the original post was pretty clear. It discusses a fish being hooked, landed and released back into the water. There was no mention of people hacking off body parts or dredging.
Maybe soapbox would have been a better term than high horse


----------



## RubyTiger (Dec 12, 2012)

Fair enough. The cutting off of fins was mentioned because it seemed that some people see fishing with a hook as not cruel and justified because fish are not sentient and can't feel pain but that would mean that finning is okay too but most people still think that's cruel is all that was brought up for. It's fine to disagree with people but you don't have to be nasty about it :/

And while I apologise to the OP (sorry) for aparently taking the thread off topic it seems I should also apologise for taking the bait (lol) and allowing the thread to be ruined by an what appears to be an uneccesary and pointless argument


----------



## kato (May 12, 2007)

Crownan said:


> Serious thread this.
> 
> I used to fish, quite a lot, over the years I got into other things, didn't have time, fell out of love with it, call it what you will.
> 
> ...


Fishing is as cruel as keeping a reptile in captivity.


----------



## DaOG (Jun 6, 2013)

kato said:


> Fishing is as cruel as keeping a reptile in captivity.


They are both cruel but in different ways, we don't stab a lizard through its mouth drag it 20 yards etc etc


----------



## mrkeda (Nov 6, 2012)

DaOG said:


> They are both cruel but in different ways, we don't stab a lizard through its mouth drag it 20 yards etc etc


I'd imagine that would be less stressful than being a newly acquired pet reptile.


----------



## DaOG (Jun 6, 2013)

mrkeda said:


> I'd imagine that would be less stressful than being a newly acquired pet reptile.


What if the fish every time it is hooked gets stressed out because it knows it could be thrown on a fire to be cooked any sec?


----------



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

kato said:


> Fishing is as cruel as keeping a reptile in captivity.


That also crosses my mind regularly.


----------



## kato (May 12, 2007)

Crownan said:


> That also crosses my mind regularly.


I Fish two or three times a week and keep reptiles.

The only Fishing that I do is aimed at catching fish that I am going to eat and I am 99% certain that that I do catch I kill and eat. I only Sea Fish. As humanely as possible I kill the fish and as soon after it is caught. That 1% I release I take the greatest in care of removing the hook and releasing. I also never handle fish I return without wrapping them in a cloth to stop stress and to stop damaging there skin. And I take pride in only using the best hooks, because I use these hooking the fish causes less pain than having an acupuncture needle inserted.

Sadly not all anglers are the same as me.


----------



## Zerox Z21 (Oct 10, 2012)

To clarify, I meant angling with a rod and line. Trawling is a terrible method of commercial fishing, both to the environment and in the amount of waste bycatch that is killed _anyway_. Which I suppose is also the environment. It just...ugh. Not allowed to keep certain fish caught, but they die anyway from being trawled. So...what's the point in not keeping them? Surely that will cause even more dead fish than if they kept everything trawled.
Off topic, just...that really riles me. Ludicrous system, OBVIOUSLY broken, yet it's still there.
I suspect that finning is far more damaging and painful than any hook, particularly if we're talking about sharks where the fin is a thicker tissue/part of the body than the ray fins of, uh, ray finned fish.

I have great respect for your view, kato: despite uncertainty about sport fishing, always respected fishing for food. Nice to hear of someone who does so who gives respect to the creatures involved.


----------



## Long way down (Jul 29, 2009)

*Gone fishing*

You have got to be joking fish get better looked after then fishermens wifes, we use safe rigs, barbless hooks, carp mates which is like a padded body warmer. Their has been issues wheather fishing is cruel or not and I believe its not, after a long battle the fish get safely returned and sometimes kissed and well respected all in a good day


----------



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

Long way down said:


> You have got to be joking fish get better looked after then fishermens wifes, we use safe rigs, barbless hooks, carp mates which is like a padded body warmer. Their has been issues wheather fishing is cruel or not and I believe its not, after a long battle the fish get safely returned and sometimes kissed and well respected all in a good day


Who's joking about what? :crazy:


----------



## ratboy (Jan 10, 2007)

Do fish feel pain when hooked through the lip ? 

apparently not.. Fish cannot feel pain say scientists - Telegraph

If they can't, then it rather kills any cruelty arguments with regard to fishing... unless you count being eaten alive by bigger predatory fish or birds I suppose.


----------



## Zerox Z21 (Oct 10, 2012)

ratboy said:


> Do fish feel pain when hooked through the lip ?
> 
> apparently not.. Fish cannot feel pain say scientists - Telegraph
> 
> If they can't, then it rather kills any cruelty arguments with regard to fishing... unless you count being eaten alive by bigger predatory fish or birds I suppose.


The articles in the link I posted present a more in depth and detailed account of the studies. I also do not think that returning to normal behaviour shortly after being hooked and released is a particularly good way of saying the pain is not there.
Not strictly saying I agree one way or the other as it is, as said, a grey area. I've simply read more persuasive and detailed articles arguing the other (from the PFK website mainly), and it's obvious that fish feel 'pain', or at least negative stimuli from the environment. The important factor is their perception of it. Don't think that article is worded too well. Fish DO feel pain, that much is obvious, but their _experience of it_ is what seems to be being debated by the research. Obviously since it's a mainstream newspaper, it's hardly going to present the research in a particularly detailed way.


----------



## ratboy (Jan 10, 2007)

Zerox Z21 said:


> The articles in the link I posted present a more in depth and detailed account of the studies. I also do not think that returning to normal behaviour shortly after being hooked and released is a particularly good way of saying the pain is not there.
> Not strictly saying I agree one way or the other as it is, as said, a grey area. I've simply read more persuasive and detailed articles arguing the other (from the PFK website mainly), and it's obvious that fish feel 'pain', or at least negative stimuli from the environment. The important factor is their perception of it. Don't think that article is worded too well. Fish DO feel pain, that much is obvious, but their _experience of it_ is what seems to be being debated by the research. Obviously since it's a mainstream newspaper, it's hardly going to present the research in a particularly detailed way.


You keep stating that fish do feel pain followed by questioning what their experience of pain is ?

The article, although obviously presented for the layman (like me), clearly states that fish do not posses the part of the brain required to feel pain in the way that we understand it... so why do you repeatedly say they DO feel pain when you seem to agree with that statement ?

Without knowing what it is they feel, one cannot state what it is that they do feel... if that makes any sense.


----------



## Zerox Z21 (Oct 10, 2012)

ratboy said:


> You keep stating that fish do feel pain followed by questioning what their experience of pain is ?
> 
> The article, although obviously presented for the layman (like me), clearly states that fish do not posses the part of the brain required to feel pain in the way that we understand it... so why do you repeatedly say they DO feel pain when you seem to agree with that statement ?
> 
> Without knowing what it is they feel, one cannot state what it is that they do feel... if that makes any sense.


That's true. I just have an issue with the layman's presentation because whatever the results suggest is more complicated than 'fish don't feel pain', which is a statement they use repeatedly. I worry that silly people will take that at face value and assume that fish don't feel much of anything at all, which obviously isn't the case. They still respond to negative stimuli.
I'm not sure whether I agree or not, I just have an issue with newspaper presentation of scientific issues like this, because it's frequently poor or written badly for the sake of being more sensational.

I suppose I'm generally defining pain sometimes as any response to negative stimuli that shows they are aware of it, whereas others are defining pain as a specifically sophisticated experience of that negative stimuli like what we experience rather than an innate response, if that helps.
If I'm saying "fish do feel pain, but maybe not like us" and someone else says "fish don't feel pain, but respond not negative stimuli" we're saying basically the same thing but we've defined the words differently. Not very helpful I know.
I think I also have a bad habit of overcomplicating my points and dragging them out.
Like this.


----------



## Big Red One (Oct 17, 2007)

Fishing - when practiced 'properly' does no long term harm to a fish..... Fact.

Fishing - when practiced 'badly' can do long term harm and also short term harm up to and including the death of the hooked fish.

Is it cruel? If practiced properly I strongly believe not. If practiced badly then 'perhaps' dependent on your definition of cruel.

I would suggest that the deaths of poorly maintained captive reptiles would be causing far more 'cruelty/suffering' than any fish that could ever be caught on rod and line. I'd also suggest that if morally you can be happy in keeping a captive reptile (ie be on this forum), you should be morally 'happy' to allow a fish to be caught by someone doing it properly.


----------



## benjo (Oct 31, 2007)

i fished for many years as my father runs a fishing club. Fishing is not cruel if done correctly, but like any hobby / activity it can also be done wrongly and can cause unnecessary suffering / pain. Every single thing in the world can be done badly, walking through a town centre seems a easy common thing.. but some people will barge into you, be rude walk sideways ect. "Normal" things we do are also done wrong by others. Its basically the same debate and same answers in any situation.


----------



## Khonsu (May 20, 2009)

I don't fish as much as I used to do, great pity I feel but when I do fish I don't fish for sport, I fish for food, I can't say if it's cruel or not, fish don't talk back to me, if they did say it's cruel I'd say I'm sorry it hurt but nevermind it won't happen again & go home for a fish supper.

I can't see the point of sitting by a canal all day then throwing anything you've caught back in.


----------

