Mike Connor wrote:
Your posts are based on the false premise that fish "suffer". This is
physiologically impossible for fish, their brains and nervous systems are
not highly developed enough to allow them to "suffer".


The PHD I quoted disagrees with you. Maybe you think she's a fake. I
guess you think she's wrong about:

"As a neurobiologist, I've done quite a lot of work on cold-blooded
animals. It is an outright myth that they don't feel pain. They do.
I've personally recorded from nerve cells that transmit pain
information to the brain, so I know the pain information is there. An
animal would certainly have a difficult time surviving if it were
unconcerned about bodily injury, so pain pathways are quite necessary
in all animals!"


The PhD you quoted disagrees with lots of stuff, and a quick browse
through his/her website and writings reveals that he/she has lot of
personal issues. I could not find any references whatsoever that he/she
is a practicing neurologist; seems that he/she spends most of his/her
time these days as an activist for Transgendered folks, and trying to
look 'oh, so marvelous'. He/she also has lots of articles about feeling
'oh, so fem' and being 'oh so prejudiced against', so my feeling is
that your hero is someone who likes to throw themselves in front of
trains to make them stop. Posting the initial article to a baitcasting
site was exactly that type of thing: "Oh, listen to MEEEE!" he/she
said, again and again. And guess what; that's all you're saying too!



Besides, you gotta love his/her 'scientific' assurances: everything in
the article was opinion and supposition, colored with pretty blatant
bias. Let me be specific, in all caps so you can find it:

THE ARTICLE STARTED WITH AN EDITORIAL BY THE WEBMASTER/HOST:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

** Those of us who fish have on frequent occasion, wonder to what
extent fish feel pain during the process of catching and cleaning them.



We certainly are concerned with the survival of those species that we
release, taking care to make sure that they swim away to "fight another



day." But what about those that make into our coolers?


What is the most humane way of dealing with the basic living creatures?



For the answer, here are the thoughts of neurobiologist Dr. Sarah Fox,
who has done extensive research into the sensory aspects of fish.

(NOTE: THE WEBMASTER SAYS "EXTENSIVE RESEARCH"...)

By Sarah Fox, Ph.D.
(NOW THIS IS OUR SOUPSANDWICH TALKING)

As a neurobiologist who has done some work with fish,

(NOTE: NOT "EXTENSIVE RESEARCH"..."**SOME** RESEARCH". NOR EVEN A
REFERENCE ABOUT WHAT CAPACITY OF RESEARCH. JUST A PLEA TO "LISTEN TO
MEEEEEEE. I'M AN EXPERT!!")

and as a recent
observer of the fishing/cleaning process, I'm quite concerned at some
practices (not mentioned in the article) that have been time-honored
common practice, at least among sport fishermen. I have a few very well



educated thoughts, and I would appreciate your making your readers
aware of them somehow.

(OH, THIS IS TOO GOOD. A 'RECENT OBSERVER' WHO IS NOW AN EXPERT ON
'TIME HONORED PRACTICES', ONES THAT WEREN'T EVEN MENTIONED IN THE
PREVIOUS ARTICLE. WHY BRING THEM UP THEN?? I MEAN, OTHER THAN FOR A
CHANCE TO SAY...."LISTEN TO MEEEEEE!! I HAVE A FEW **VERY WELL
EDUCATED** THOUGHTS..."

My concern isn't so much how to *clean* a fish as it is how and when to



*kill* it.

(OH, AND NOW ITS NOT EVEN ABOUT WHAT THE INTRO SAID IT WAS ABOUT. "I'D
LIKE TO GIVE YOU MY VERY WELL-EDUCATED THOUGHTS ABOUT SOMETHING YOU
WEREN'T EVEN TALKING ABOUT, AND ABOUT SOMETHING THAT'S NOT EVEN WHAT
I'M TALKING ABOUT. BUT LISTEN TO MEEEEE!!")

I was horrified to watch as one fisherman pulled a live fish


out of a bucket and clumsily started scaling it. When he was done with
the scaling, he cut the head off. He explained that he needed the head
to hold, in order to do the scaling. I pointed to a scaling board (with



a tail clamp) about 3 feet from him, suggesting that he could cut the
head off first, and *then* scale the fish on the board. He didn't want
to do it that way.

AND GOD FORBID THAT OUR CLUMSY FISHERMAN COULD DO IT THE WAY HE WANTED.
IMAGINE, HE WAS CLEANING A FISH THAT HE HAD CAUGHT, AND SOME
TRANSGENDERED INDIVIDUAL LOOKING LIKE FRANK N. FURTER STARTED TELLING
HIM HOW TO CLEAN IT RIGHT. I CAN HARDLY IMAGINE THAT OUR GOOD PhD GOT A
WARM RESPONSE....SORT OF LIKE WHAT YOU GOT HERE, EH? I WONDER JUST WHAT
PROMPTED OUR HERO TO WRITE THAT ARTICLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. HEY, JUST
LIKE YOU: HE/SHE GOT A LESS-THAN-WARM RECEPTION, THEN THREATENED TO
TAKE IT TO THE PRESS.

He said the fish didn't feel anything anyway,
because it's a cold-blooded animal.


As a neurobiologist, I've done quite a lot of work on cold-blooded
animals. It is an outright myth that they don't feel pain. They do.
I've personally recorded from nerve cells that transmit pain
information to the brain, so I know the pain information is there. An
animal would certainly have a difficult time surviving if it were
unconcerned about bodily injury, so pain pathways are quite necessary
in all animals!

PAIN AND NEUROLOGICAL SIGNALS ARE NOT THE SAME THING, AND ANY
NEUROLOGIST WITHOUT A "LISTEN TO MEEEEEE" AGENDA KNOWS IT. SURE, FISH
HAVE SENSATIONS. HOW CAN OUR DEAR NEUROLOGIST KNOW THAT THOSE
SENSATIONS ARE IN FACT, PAIN? THE ANSWER: HE/SHE CAN'T, DESPITE HAVING
DONE LOTS OF WORK ON COLD-BLOODED ANIMALS. NOT UNTIL THOSE ANIMALS
LEARN TO TALK.


My friend

"MY FRIEND". OH HOW SWEET. AND GUESS WHAT, "MY FRIEND" IS A SHE. NOT
A SMELLY OLD MEANINE LIKE THAT MAN! HE = BAD AND CLUMSY. SHE = GOOD AND
HUMANE. AND I'M A PhD, LISTEN TO MEEEEEE!!

took a much more humane approach and cut off the head before
doing anything else. However, her cut left just enough of the muscle
behind that I could see the fish (i.e. its head) writhing for a few
minutes thereafter. I had always trusted the folk wisdom that
decapitation means instant death and loss of consciousness. Apparently
that's a myth too.

"APPARENTLY"???? THIS IS A HIGHLY EDUCATED NEUROLOGIST WHO HAS DONE
"EXTENSIVE RESEARCH ON FISH", AND HE/SHE IS REJECTING FOLK WISDOM AND
REPLACING IT WITH 'APPARENTLYS". SORRY, SOUPY, YOUR HERO IS RAPIDLY
LOSING CREDIBILITY AS A SCIENTIST.

This would especially be true in a cold blooded
animal, as its rate of oxygen consumption (hence, suffocation) is quite



low. The head did not die from loss of circulation or neural input. It
slowly suffocated (and almost certainly with a great deal of pain).

"ALMOST CERTAINLY." WHY, OF COURSE...


One thing we did that helped was to "cold-anesthetize" the fish before
killing them. This was very easy: We dumped ice in the fish bucket.
Because the fish are cold blooded, loss of body heat is not distressing



to them, at least in the same sense as it would be to a bird or mammal.


OKAY. SO WHY WOULD SUFFOCATION BE DISTRESSING TO THEM THE SAME WAY AS
IT IS TO A BIRD OR MAMMAL?


There is no thermal setpoint to fight. As the fish cools off, its
metabolism slows too, entering into what would be very similar to a
hibernation state for a mammal. When it stops moving, it's effectively
"anesthetized." In this state, it can be cleaned rather painlessly.
Ultimately, though, there is a suffocation issue for the head. When it
warms back up, it becomes metabolically active again.


OH, THIS IS TOO PRECIOUS. A DECAPITATED HEAD, SEPARATED FROM ITS BLOOD
SOURCE AND WITH A SEVERED SPINAL COLUMN WILL REMAIN IN SUSPENDED
ANIMATION UNTIL IT IS WARMED UP, THEN IT WILL GO THROUGH DEATH THROES
AND FEEL PAIN. I WOULD LOVE OUR HERO/HEROINE TO SHOW SOME
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR THIS WILD CLAIM. HMMMM, SOUNDS LIKE A JOB FOR A
NEUROLOGIST. ANYONE SEEN ONE?

However, there is no question that there would very little pain this
way.

NO QUESTION AT ALL... I GUESS.....DOES ANYONE KNOW WHAT OUR PhD WAS
TALKING ABOUT HERE?? JUST A SECOND AGO, HE/SHE SAID IT WOULD FEEL
PAIN FROM HAVING ITS HEAD CUT OFF.

OH, AND HERE COMES THE RASH OF OPINION. "HIGHLY EDUCATED OPINION"
THOUGH. "LISTEN TO MEEEEEEE"


Commercially, fish are flung out of the water and allowed to suffocate
in the air. While this may seem a difficult fate, it is perhaps a more
humane one.

"...PERHAPS..."

If suffocation is inevitable, either before or after
decapitation, then why not suffocate before decapitation and not have
to endure the pain of being scaled and cut up? Some fishermen have a
practice of pulling their catch out of the water and throwing it
directly into an ice chest. This is a method of cold anesthesia, which
when combined with suffocation, is probably more humane still.

"...PROBABLY..."

Perhaps

"...PERHAPS..."

the ultimate technique in humane fishing would be to throw the catch
into a bucket of ice water, where it can still breathe, but where it
will quickly be anesthetized.

EXCEPT FOR THOSE FISH THAT ACTUALY LIVE IN ICE WATER. AND OUR
EVER-SO-EDUCATED NEUROLOGIST FORGOT TO MENTION THE PAIN OF SALT WATER
FISH BEING IMMERSED IN FRESH WATER.

Then throw it on ice, where it will
suffocate slowly during a prolonged state of anesthesia.

AND NOW, THE SERMON. THE PETA COMES OUT.

It is invitable that we must kill something to live, whether it is a
cow or a chicken or a fish or a vegetable. These are all life forms
that have their own right to life, just like ours. Inevitably, we can't



all live, so one creature must inevitably be consumed by another. None
of us should have any problem with that. However, there is no reason,
as smart as we are, that we cannot be merciful in the way we gather our



food. That is the least we can do for the creatures that lose their
lives to sustain ours.

LISTEN TO MEEEEE. AND CHECK OUT MY SIG....I'M COOL!

Peace,
Sarah Fox, Ph.D.

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

Anyway, soupsandwich, you're backing a strange horse here. I don't see
that Sarah Fox, PhD has any more credibility beyond that of an
anesthetised fish, and that his/her entire post on that fishing page
was an effort to push his/her own opinionated and unsubstantiated
agenda. Flashing credentials for credibility in the name of science is
the worst crime a scientist can commit, so forgive me if I think Sarah
Fox, PhD is full of ****. If folks think you are her/him, it might be
because you are doing the same "listen to meeeeee" thing here, with the
same message.

As it has been explained to you a half dozen times, we have given more
thought to how fish are treated than you ccan possibly know...we
analyze how we handle them to release them, if we keep them I would say
we almost universally use a priest to kill (not stun; KILL) them
outright and quickly, and we give every effort to resuscitate them
carefully when we do release them. No, we don't care about Sarah Fox
PhD or her solution. We don't really care if fish feel pain, because we
pretty universally conclude that they don't, for the sake of our
'sport'. We aren't an industry, and we could care less about industry
standards; we are pretty good at analyzing and debating it ourselves,
thanks. The solution that Sarah Fox PhD proposes (using an ice chest to
cold-anesthetize them) is so impractical to us as to be gaggingly
idiotic, and your insistence that we keep "Listening to youuuuuuuu" is
similarly idioticly gagging. Go home now.

Oh, and for the edification of all of us, I'd love to know where and
how you came across that article in the first place that so inspired
you to repost it in several newsgroups. Or are you just practicing your
own version of standing in front of trains, saying "listen to meeeeee"?

--riverman