The reason for why fish welfare is lagging behind so much is that, for centuries, it was assumed that fishes simply could not feel pain or suffer. Hence laws, regulations, and morality excluded fishes from animal welfare standards.
Photo by Milos Prelevic on Unsplash
Despite recent increases in the interest towards bird and mammal
protection, less attention is paid to the suffering experienced by fishes in
the fishing industry. Following a logical acceptance of the fact that
inflicting needless suffering is wrong, and the follow-up moral obligation
not to do so, researchers from Pace University studied the current situation
faced by fishes caught commercially. After all, without a morally relevant
difference between aquatic and land animals, the same moral obligations
should apply to fishes and other aquatic animals, too.
International efforts to preserve sustainable populations of marine species
are seemingly failing, as shark populations are declining rapidly, while
tuna and mackerel populations have plummeted during the last 40 years. The
research group informs that these rapid decreases are a result of
“overfishing,” bycatch, and the effects climate change has on marine
ecosystems. Similarly, at the national level, while the U.S. has attempted
to incorporate conservation considerations into fisheries management
practices, nothing has been done towards protecting wild-caught fishes from
inhumane treatment. Since current fishing practices do not prioritize
‘humane’ practices, increases in mortality correlate to an increase in fish
suffering, too. Aquatic biodiversity studies show that if business carries
on as usual, the fishes used for food could be eradicated as soon as 2048.
The reason for why fish welfare is lagging behind so much is that, for
centuries, it was assumed that fishes simply could not feel pain or suffer.
Hence laws, regulations, and morality excluded fishes from animal welfare
standards.
Read more at Fishes, Sentience, And The Law
Return to Fishes