Animal welfare is the topic of discussions among scientists, ethical researchers, veterinarians, and physicians. Prescott and Lidster state that “animal welfare means how it is coping with the conditions in which it lives” (152). Species are in a good welfare status when their nutrition and safety are at a high level, they are free in behavioral approaches and do not feel pain or stress. The assessment concepts for animals’ life conditions provide humanity with options to establish circumstances to minimize harm.
Fish is one of the vital parts of the animal world, yet its welfare is often forgotten to consider due to its significant difference in body and brain functioning. Recent studies proved that aquatic species feel pain via its nociceptors used to detect danger and help them produce painkilling hormones (Seibel et al.). Humans consume many aquaculture species, and their approaches to handling, breeding, and husbanding fish must consider these animals’ welfare status. This paper aims to identify physical indicators of pain in fish and discuss animal welfare concepts’ assessment approaches.
The Five Freedom Concept of Welfare Assessment
The animal welfare standards help scientists in their research and assist farmers and industries in breeding animals properly. One of the approaches to assessing welfare status is the Five Freedoms framework that indicates animals’ life and health conditions. It includes freedom from hunger and thirst, discomfort, pain, injury or disease, freedom to express normal behavior and to avoid fear and distress (Miller et al.). If any of them fail to be applied, the welfare of species worsens and leads them to significant health and environmental problems.
The freedom from pain, injury, or disease in fish is hard to be adequately assessed due to its physical and biological differences from mammals. Nevertheless, the fish industry is enormous in the world as humans keep increasing fish consumption. It develops issues and dilemmas around dealing with the aquatic species under the Five Freedoms standard. The perception of pain by the fish must be examined, and the approaches of breeding such species must apply the nuances to ensure that it is free of distress or suffering.
Physical Pain System of Fish
The way fish reacts to stress is different from mammal species’ because it does not make sounds or mimic expressions, thus it is necessary to consider outer and behavioral abnormalities to detect the pain. Although scientists used to deny that fish perceives pain, recent researches revealed the opposite: nociceptors respond to stressful experiences and make a fish produce painkilling substances in its body (Schroeder). A fish in distress changes its behavior, refuses to eat, and has an unusual appearance. For example, Schroeder claims that “when goldfish were exposed to high-intensity electric shocks, they responded by freezing, then fast escape, which is not their normal swimming pattern” (3). The experience severely influenced the physical and psychological states of the fish that forced it to act abnormally. There are external aspects like rearing environment and water quality, behavioral indicators like feed intake and activity, and details of appearance, such as color, runts emaciation, or fin erosions (Fernö). A fish’s welfare status assessment has to consider and compare its behavior and appearance, which is established as usual with its actual conditions.
Fish Consumption and Industry
Fish is being consumed worldwide because it is an excellent protein source for humans and includes many nutritional benefits. Moreover, fish is used as a pet, experimentation, fishery, and human recreation. These fields include such actions with fish as catching, stoking, transporting, treating, and killing. Industries try different ways of making products cheaper and growing more species in shorter periods. There are risks for welfare like high stocking density and slaughter in aquaculture, fishery causes the injuries for species, petting threatens with low water quality and transportation, and experiments might include painful procedures (Seibel). These implications severely affect the fish welfare, and, considering that they perceive pain, industries should change their assessment of the harm they cause.
Fish industries must consider and keep the excellent welfare status of the animal, thus, it is necessary to educate the working force properly. The staff has to know how particular species behave in their normal conditions, their usual appearance, and the environmental requirements for their welfare (Fernö). If there are any abnormalities, workers must be trained to indicate them quickly and apply instructions effectively to deal with problems or consequences. More than three hundred species are grown and used in the fish industry worldwide, and the requirements to ensure the good status of welfare depend on the particular kind of animal (Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations [FAO]). The staff that works with fish must consider at least three aspects to provide the fish with all five freedoms of welfare: water quality in its physical and chemical parameters, stocking density, and rearing environment (FAO). The workers’ awareness of the optimal conditions and the ability to timely detect abnormalities is crucial for monitoring and assessing the fish welfare.
Dilemmas in Fish Welfare Assessment
The fact that fish perceives and reacts to pain develops dilemmas with animal welfare. Firstly, people consume fish and seafood as it is high in protein, and the dilemma is if humanity is allowed to keep increasing fish consumption (Appleby et al.). Many other protein sources, including plant-based ones, can be the same effective for human health and less harmful aquatic species. Secondly, fish live in stokes, and industries tend to consider the whole crowd’s welfare instead of every animal (Appleby et al.). However, the pain of one can cause the disease for the all, therefore it is more humane to discover ways for more single-oriented monitoring. Lastly, the Five Freedoms might be hard to follow within the industry’s region’s ecological situation. The dilemma is to make out some artificial circumstances for fish or keep it in a more natural yet probably harmful environment.
Ways to improve fish welfare
There are several actions to take for increasing fish welfare by reducing risks of hurt in different conditions. It is necessary to keep stocking density at its optimal level comfortable for species to grow in aquaculture. Fishery and industries need to develop stunning technologies that destroy the brain and prevent pain recognition. Experimental use of fish can use artificial painkillers that do not affect the studies and fish’s overall conditions.
Moreover, the humane approaches have to be developed for killing fish, breeding, and husbanding it so that its life experience will not be painful, and its quality as a product will not worsen. To implement such attitudes, industries have to properly train workforce contacting aquatic species, set up high environmental quality standards, and use technologies that painlessly stun or kill fish. It is also necessary to establish protocols that point to the conditions conducting the best state of welfare for each fish species in accordance with the Five Freedom framework.
Conclusion
Fish perceives the pain and potential harm caused by inappropriate use in industries can be reduced by considering the Five Freedoms standard. Aquatic species have to be well-fed, live in a comfortable water environment, have no risk of injuries or distress, be free to express behavior without obstacles, and avoid mental suffering. Industrials have to consider the pain indicators like appearance, feeding, and activities to recognize pain in the fish and take instant preventative measures.
Works Cited
Appleby, Michael C., et al. Dilemmas in Animal Welfare. CABI, 2014.
Fernö, Anders. The Welfare of Fish. Springer, 2020.
Food and Agriculture Organization of The United Nations. Welfare of Fishes in Aquaculture [PDF Document], 2019. Web.
Miller, Lance J., et al. “Behavioral Diversity as a Potential Indicator of Positive Animal Welfare.” Animals, vol. 10, no. 7, 2020, p. 1211. Web.
Prescott, Mark J., and Katie Lidster. “Improving Quality of Science Through Better Animal Welfare: The NC3Rs Strategy.” Lab Animal, vol. 46, no. 4, 2017, pp. 152-156. Web.
Schroeder, Paul. “Pain Sensitivity in Fish.” Medicine, vol. 7, 2018, pp. 1-8. Web.
Seibel, Henrike, et al. “Fish Welfare – Between Regulations, Scientific Facts, and Human Perception.” Food Ethics vol. 5, no. 1, 2020, pp. 1-11. Web.