If Fish Could Scream

There is no humane slaughter requirement for the staggering number of wild fish caught and killed at sea

When I was a child, my father used to take me for walks, often along a
river or by the sea. We would pass people fishing, perhaps reeling in
their lines with struggling fish hooked at the end of them. Once I saw a
man take a small fish out of a bucket and impale it, still wriggling,
on an empty hook to use as bait.

Another time, when our path took us by a tranquil stream, I saw a man
sitting and watching his line, seemingly at peace with the world, while
next to him, fish he had already caught were flapping helplessly and
gasping in the air. My father told me that he could not understand how
anyone could enjoy an afternoon spent taking fish out of the water and
letting them die slowly.

These childhood memories flooded back when I read Worse things happen at sea: the welfare of wild-caught fish, a
breakthrough report released last month on fishcount.org.uk. In most of
the world, it is accepted that if animals are to be killed for food,
they should be killed without suffering. Regulations for slaughter
generally require that animals be rendered instantly unconscious before
they are killed, or death should be brought about instantaneously, or,
in the case of ritual slaughter, as close to instantaneously as the
religious doctrine allows.

Not for fish. There is no humane slaughter requirement for wild fish
caught and killed at sea, nor, in most places, for farmed fish. Fish
caught in nets by trawlers are dumped on board the ship and allowed to
suffocate. Impaling live bait on hooks is a common commercial practice:
long-line fishing, for example, uses hundreds or even thousands of hooks
on a single line that may be 50-100 kilometers long. When fish take the
bait, they are likely to remain caught for many hours before the line
is hauled in.

Likewise, commercial fishing frequently depends on gill nets - walls
of fine netting in which fish become snared, often by the gills. They
may suffocate in the net, because, with their gills constricted, they
cannot breathe. If not, they may remain trapped for many hours before
the nets are pulled in.

The most startling revelation in the report, however, is the
staggering number of fish on which humans inflict these deaths. By using
the reported tonnages of the various species of fish caught, and
dividing by the estimated average weight for each species, Alison Mood,
the report's author, has put together what may well be the first-ever
systematic estimate of the size of the annual global capture of wild
fish. It is, she calculates, in the order of one trillion, although it could be as high as 2.7 trillion.

To put this in perspective, the United Nations Food and Agriculture
Organization estimates that 60 billion animals are killed each year for
human consumption - the equivalent of about nine animals for each human
being on the planet. If we take Mood's lower estimate of one trillion,
the comparable figure for fish is 150. This does not include billions of
fish caught illegally nor unwanted fish accidentally caught and
discarded, nor does it count fish impaled on hooks as bait.

Many of these fish are consumed indirectly - ground up and fed to
factory-farmed chicken or fish. A typical salmon farm churns through 3-4
kilograms of wild fish for every kilogram of salmon that it produces.

Let's assume that all this fishing is sustainable, though of course
it is not. It would then be reassuring to believe that killing on such a
vast scale does not matter, because fish do not feel pain. But the
nervous systems of fish are sufficiently similar to those of birds and
mammals to suggest that they do. When fish experience something that
would cause other animals physical pain, they behave in ways suggestive
of pain, and the change in behavior may last several hours. (It is a
myth that fish have short memories.) Fish learn to avoid unpleasant
experiences, like electric shocks. And painkillers reduce the symptoms
of pain that they would otherwise show.

Victoria Braithwaite, a professor of fisheries and biology at
Pennsylvania State University, has probably spent more time
investigating this issue than any other scientist. Her recent book Do Fish Feel Pain?
shows that fish are not only capable of feeling pain, but also are a
lot smarter than most people believe. Last year, a scientific panel to
the European Union concluded that the preponderance of the evidence
indicates that fish do feel pain.

Why are fish the forgotten victims on our plate? Is it because they
are cold-blooded and covered in scales? Is it because they cannot give
voice to their pain? Whatever the explanation, the evidence is now
accumulating that commercial fishing inflicts an unimaginable amount of
pain and suffering. We need to learn how to capture and kill wild fish
humanely - or, if that is not possible, to find less cruel and more
sustainable alternatives to eating them.

Join Us: News for people demanding a better world

Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place.

We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference.

Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today!

© 2023 Project Syndicate