Hi all

I hope you all had a great Christmas and will have an even better new year.

I’ve not been online much as you may of guessed for some time now ( I know why go and spoil it now) this is due to a number of things. I’m now doing a course in computer technology/programming.

One of the subjects I have to do in this as well is Academic Skills and for an assignment I was given a statement that I have to discuss on paper, the statement being.

Fishing is cruel as fish feel pain ( I got this as my tutor knows I go fishing).

Now I know there are two main reports out about angling and on fish pain:-

1 being the Medway Report by S.C. kestin of the Bristol University and another that I’m not sure about who or where from.

I’ve spent some time on the internet trying to find copies of these reports but with no luck.

My assignment has to be backed up with facts from both sides of the fence and all I’ve really been able to find is one sided blinkered views that are not fact based but just personal views.

So I really need to find a copy of these two or any other fact based reports for my assignment.

So does anyone here have a copy of these two reports of any other reports that I could have a copy of please?

I’ll be more than willing to pay postal costs or they can be e-mailed to me if you have copies on your computer.

Any help in this will be very grateful

Pete

Guests - this sponsored link will vanish when you log-in. Click here to register for free.

These might help you locate some of the reports you are looking for :

Roslin Claims

Rose report

Hi Tangler, if your tutor is trying to provoke you I should go one step higher and ask him to explain the purpose of getting you to justify your hobby

Seriously though all you need to do is quote the part of the Sneddon report dealing with the injections........this proves conclusively that sticking sharp objects in a fishes face or lips does NOT cause any reaction.

Good luck,

Den

The 36 page Medway report is available from the Director of Scientific Affairs, RSPCA, Causeway, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1HG, UK; 01403 264181, priced £5 pounds

I cant remember where i found this but its Dr Rose's report, very informative, and has some good diagrams

http://www.cotrout.org/do_fish_feel_pain.htm

Hope that helps

Dom

[ 01. January 2004, 05:53 PM: Message edited by: Fishy Dom ]

Pete
I suggest that you e-mail Bruno Broughton for information regarding the two hands of fish and pain.
Bruno has many peer-reviewed papers from around the world on this subject.

If time is of the essence, like next week for hand in, the Rose report has appeared on this site and can be found in the archives somewhere.

[ 02. January 2004, 01:19 AM: Message edited by: phil hackett ]

Ok thanks for the info, I was unable to find the thread on the Rose report but will try again when I'm able.

I'll let you know how I get on and if its ok with Elton will port my assignment on here when its done.

Some reading that you may find of use.


http://www.animalaid.org.uk/news/2003/0305fish.htm


posted 02 May, 2003 08:06 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on behalf of Brian Crawford:

ANGLING AND THE R.S.P.C.A. – Fish and Pain

The Panel of Enquiry into Shooting and Angling set up by the R.S.P.C.A. which sat under the chairmanship of Lord Medway (later the Earl of Cranbrook) between 1976 and 1979 produced their Report in May 1980.

The Medway Panel was established to enquire into practices relating to angling and shooting which might involve cruelty and to make recommendations which might appear appropriate in relation to such practices. While it was not thought necessary to establish the facts of pain-perception in mammals and birds it was considered necessary in the case of fish.

The evidence which appeared to have influenced the Panel decisively was mainly of a pharmacological nature. Section 3 of the Report deals with “the problem of animal suffering” and gives details of neurological and pharmacological research undertaken in relation to pain. As a result of this evidence the Panel came to the conclusion (paragraph 57) that, if vertebrates other than man feel pain, the evidence suggests that all vertebrates (including fish), through the mediation of similar neuropharmacological processes, experience similar sensations to a greater or lesser degree in response to noxious stimuli. (note – this assumption was not new but was expressed in current legislation in the U.K. dating from the 1876 Cruelty to Animals Act). From this stemmed the recommendation that anglers who previously thought there to be no evidence that fish might be capable of feeling pain at all should reconsider their attitudes.

The evidence to support the Panel’s conclusion lies in the discovery of nerve endings in the skin of fish, especially near the mouth and of the discovery in the brain of trout of two pain-related substances: substance P and enkephalin. Substance P is a peptide molecule known to be important for the transmission of pain in man and found in all mammals so far investigated. Enkephalin is an opiate which is believed to function by blocking the release of substance P and would, therefore have a pain quelling function. The Medway Panel thought it reasonable to assume that the presence of these substances known in man to be involved with pain should have a similar function in all vertebrate classes.

However, a scientific group set up by the then National Angler’s Council, whilst accepting the validity of the research establishing the presence of substance P and enkephalin in fish, queried the conclusion drawn in the comparison between fish and higher vertebrates and that the substances found in fish are identical to those found in man and have an identical purpose regarding implications of pain as understood by human beings. The definition of pain presented to the Medway Panel was that of a stimulus perceived by an animal when tissue is damaged (paragraph 38). The sensation of pain experienced by humans is largely a function of the manner in which the nerve fibres are linked within the brain, and there is no evidence that the nervous elaboration within the brain of fish is sufficiently close to that of humans to produce similar sensations however similar the mechanisms for detecting and conduction of stimuli around the body may be.

It was accepted by the Group that the hooking of a fish could be regarded as a stimulus to which the fish will react but the question raised by the Medway Report is whether this reaction constitutes an experience of pain by fish as understood by human beings. There was no evidence to support this, in fact the Medway Report (paragraph 29) refers to the possibility that fish are an example of vertebrates in which many normal responses are of a reflex nature. The implications of this involve the possibility that many reactions on the part of fish to potentially damaging or unpleasant stimuli may be automatic responses free from painful sensations. The Group also considered the numerous occasions when fish, severely damaged by injury or disease in the natural course of events, give no indication that they are experiencing pain. Although massive wounds in fish are not uncommon (as was evident during the outbreak of roach ulcer disease) in many observable cases the fish continued to act in an apparently normal manner.

The National Angler’s Council Scientific Group concluded that the scientific evidence did not show that fish feel pain as commonly understood by human beings. It should be noted that there was nothing in the Medway Report to indicate that the Medway Panel formed any different opinion.

The National Angler’s Council Scientific Group also stated that it could not support any proposal to ban the use of fish as live-bait on the grounds given in the Medway Report but is opposed to the use of more advanced vertebrates, frogs, birds, etc. but recognises that it may be necessary to limit the use of fish as live-bait to restrict the spread of disease from one water to another.

In conclusion, the Medway Report, which cost the R.S.P.C.A. over six million pounds, (in 1980!) failed to produce any substantive evidence that fish have the necessary body functions to experience pain as we understand it when hooked.

Recent research obviously supports this view studied in the late 1970’s.

However, the anti-angling lobby will continue.

Anglers must publicise and follow the recommended angling code of conduct to maintain public support.

Brian Crawford

--------------------

And some more sites.

http://www.agfisch.ch/doku/rose.pdf [Acrobat reader needed for this]

http://sphere.bioc.liv.ac.uk:8080/bio//newsitems/fish

cnn.com/2003/WORLD/europe/04/30...fear/index.html

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/news/articles/217.html


http://aquanic.org/publicat/state/il-in/faq/pain.htm

<small>[ 02. January 2004, 02:11 PM: Message edited by: Nugg ]</small>

HI Nugg

Thanks for that its a big help, I think I must be looking in the wrong places these days as I was unable to find much myself other then the normal rubbish thats put on by the you know what sort of sites.

Pete