vmazic

=** PETA: Sea Kittens **= toc “Imagine reaching for an apple on a tree and having your hand suddenly impaled by a metal hook that drags you—the whole weight of your body pulling on that one hand—out of the air and into an atmosphere in which you cannot breathe.” (PETA, 2005)

According to People for Ethical Treatment of Animals ([|PETA]) this is what fish endure every time they are hooked by an angler. For a long time it has been disputed that fish are unable to experience pain as they do not have the mental capacity to do so (Kirby, 2003). However modern science has proven through extensive research that fish are in fact capable of experiencing pain just like cats, dogs, and other lovable animals.

PETA has always been on the forefront of protecting animal rights and have just recently launched an online campaign to stop calling fish “fish” and to start referring to them as “sea kittens”. The purpose of this campaign is to help portray fish in a more favorable light and to stop the government support of fishing in the United States.

This campaign has been heavily criticized through online forums, blogs, and social networking sites for its attempt to change the name of fish to sea kittens. Some may see this campaign as being extremely absurd, as others may feel it is a justifiable campaign that is necessary for the protection and well being of the fish species.

This paper will look into the campaign itself, the history behind it, and the potential stakeholders involved in order to obtain a full understanding of this social cause.

**History**
As stated earlier, many individuals still to this day believe that fish are unable to experience pain because they do not posses the mental capacity to do so. A study conducted by Dr. James D. Rose from the University of Wyoming has shown that fish lack an integral part of the brain which deals with pain, the neocortex (Kirby, 2003). According to Dr. Rose, “the facts about the neurological processes that generate pain make it highly unlikely that fish experience the emotional distress and suffering of pain”(Rose, 2004).

However even if this is the case, Dr. Rose’s research has shown that nociceptive stimuli causes the fish to secrete stress hormones which can lead to “undesirable health effects” in fish (Rose, 2004). What this means is that if a fish is hurt or captured, it releases stress hormones as it is aware of what is going on. There have been numerous instances of fish dying shortly after they have been caught and released by anglers as a result of the stress caused by the capture (Associated Press, 2006).

Further research which has been recently conducted has concluded that fish are able to experience pain, contradicting Dr. Rose’s research. Some fish are even able to communicate distress to fellow fish when they are in danger or hurt (PETA). According to research conducted by Dr. Lynne Sneddon from Liverpool University:

//“[The] administration of noxious substances to the lips of the trout affected both the physiology and the behaviour of the animal and resulted in a significant increase in opercular beat rate and the time taken to resume feeding, as well as anomalous behaviours. The results of the present study demonstrate nociception and suggest that noxious stimulation in the rainbow trout has adverse behavioural and physiological effects. This fulfils the criteria for animal pain” (Brown, 2003).//

What this research managed to prove was that fish have the neural hardware to transmit pain messages and are able to experience pain. Around a fish’s mouth, there are 58 receptors which react to pain stimulation. The results from various studies are quite clear, “anatomically, physiologically and biologically, the pain system in fish is virtually the same as in birds and mammals…in animal welfare terms, you have to put fishing in the same category as hunting.”(Animal Aid, 2005)

As a result of these findings, PETA has been very active in spreading the message that fish feel pain and are fighting hard for the rights of fish. In PETAs view, “what happens to fish before they end up on your plate is nothing short of cruelty to animals-whether they’re farmed or pulled from the ocean, fish are treated in ways that would warrant felony charges if other animals were so horribly abused”. (PETA, 2005)

**Sea Kittens Campaign**
The Sea Kittens social cause campaign was launched in January 2009 to show fish in a more endearing way and to give them a new PR image. The specie itself is not the cutest specie known to man and is hard to love as they are not very cuddly or furry like other household pets. “A lot of people don't realize that fish are capable of feeling fear and pain, that they develop relationships with each other, and even show affection by gently rubbing against one another," says Ashley Byrne, PETA’s sea kitten campaign coordinator (Harris, 2009). This campaign is targeted towards the youth and enables teens and children to learn more about fish and their admirable behaviour. The online website allows users to create their own Sea Kittens, and share them with friends. One may choose from 4 different types of Sea Kittens to accessorize and later download or email to friends. The website also has a Sea Kitten stories section and a section where visitors can sign a petition to get the Fish and Wildlife Service to stop promoting fishing as it is cruel and harmful to the animals.

The campaign is still in a very early stage of deployment but marketing experts like Allen Adamson believe that the strategy is very savvy in the way it appeals to children (Harris, 2009).

He states that “deer are often a nuisance but because of the Bambi image, they get a better ride than a lot of other animals. Whatever you can do to make the cause come to life and allow people to emotionally connect to it will make (the message) more effective" (Harris, 2009).

**Stakeholders**
There are many stakeholders when it comes to the success or failure of this campaign. Depending on the outcome of the campaign, various groups will be affected in a range of ways. Below are the three key stakeholders in this campaign:


 * Fish**: The fish that occupy the world’s oceans and lakes are the biggest stakeholders when it comes to the success or failure of this campaign. Depending on the outcome, their very existence and well being will be affected by the result of this campaign. For example, if the campaign sees great success, there will be a decrease in sport fishing, and fish consumption. If all goes well, eventually there will be an overall decline in fishing thus saving the lives of millions of fish. If the campaign is not successful at changing the societies perception of fish and fishing, things will remain the same and the world’s fish population will continue to decline as it currently is (Harris, 2009).


 * Anglers:** Anglers who fish for sport are another group of key stakeholders which this campaign can affect. If this campaign obtains great success, the sport of fishing may become frowned upon for the harm it brings to innocent fish. Anglers may be forced to stop fishing by their kids, nephews, or even governments. The Canadian/US governments can step in and put restrictions on sport fishing if fish become treated like any other animal since they experience pain in the same ways. On the other hand, if this campaign doesn’t pick up steam, everything will be normal and fish will continue to suffer and die as a result of sport fishing.

As one may see, the success of this campaign can greatly affect the key stakeholders involved.
 * Fishermen:** Fishermen will probably be the most affected stakeholders if this campaign is successful. The campaign could change society’s perception of fish/fishing and cause a decrease in the demand for fish and fish products. If this were to occur, fishermen would loose revenue and some may even find themselves jobless. Furthermore the success of this campaign could bring about government restrictions and have a sever impact on the fishing industry. On the other hand, if this campaign does not obtain success, things will not change at all for fishermen and they will continue business as usual.

**References**
Animal Aid (2005). Animal Aid: The Fish Business. Retrieved February 1, 2009 . Associated Press (2006). Hundreds of Wis. Bass Found Dead After Meet. Retrieved February 1, 2009. < http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/24/ap/tech/mainD8J2I95G4.shtml>. Brown, Stuart (2003). Science.com: Do Fish Feel Pain? The science behind whether Fish Feel Pain. Retrieved January 28, 2009. < http://www.firstscience.com/home/perspectives/editorials/do-fish-feel-pain-the-science-behind-whether-fish-feel-pain-page-1-1_1818.html>. Harris, Misty (2009). Canada.com: PETA fishing for sympathy for ‘sea kittens’. Retrieved January 28, 2008 . Kirby, Alex (2003). BBC News: Fish do feel pain, scientists say. Retrieved February 2, 2009. . PETA (2005). PETA: Fishing Hurts. Retrieved January 26, 2009 http://www.fishinghurts.com/ PETA (2009). PETA: Save the Sea Kittens! Retrieved January 26, 2009 . Rose, James (2004). University of Wyoming: Do Fish Feel Pain? Retrieved February 1, 2009. .

//The images of sea kittens used in the graphics on this page belong to [|PETA].//

It gets worse. Check out this site! http://oceans.greenpeace.org/en/the-expedition/news/shark-fin-mystery G. Fagioli