Chicken of the sea, other fish, recast as cats

VICTORIA BARBER

November 26, 2008 at 11:16AM AKST

Animal rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has decided that the high volumes of fish that continue to be caught and consumed each year are the result of a marketing problem for the species, and have given fish new name: sea kittens.

“When your name can also be used as a verb that means driving a hook through your head, it’s time for a serious image makeover,” states PETA’s “Save the Sea Kittens” Web site, which the group launched as part of a campaign to discourage people from killing and consuming fish. PETA believes that fish are as intelligent and sensitive as dogs or cats, can feel fear and pain, and therefore should not be caught, killed or eaten.

The colorful Web site, full of Disney-like depictions of sea kittens chasing underwater balls of yarn and wearing kitten costumes, includes a petition that users can sign requesting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to stop promoting the “hunting of sea kittens (otherwise known as ‘fishing’),” a build-your-own sea kitten game, and “Sea Kitten Bed Time Stories” such as the following:

“Tara the Tuna is frisky and playful, and she loves to squeeze herself into tight spaces and snuggle up close to her Sea Kitten pals. But conditions on the Sea Kitten factory farm where she lives is too cramped even for Tara. With no room to swim and no chance of escape, Tara looks forward to the end.”

The Dutch Harbor Fisherman, “The Dutch Harbor Sea Kitten Killer” in PETA-speak, spoke with PETA campaign manager Ashley Byrne, who was on the road taking “Save the Sea Kittens” campaigns to schools in the Lower 48, to talk more about the unusual campaign.

Where did the whole “sea kitten” concept come from?
It was something a couple people at PETA thought of when they were thinking about the fact that more fish are killed for food each year than all other animals combined, but they just don’t receive the same sympathy that dogs and cats receive.
Since there’s so much in a name, it seemed like what needed to happen was a name change.

Has campaigning to prevent fishing always been a part of the PETA’s mandate?
PETA has been campaigning to create empathy for fish for some time. People are compassionate and don’t like to see animals suffering. Of course, fish are probably some of the last animals that are beginning to get this recognition. But the more people learn the more they begin to care about animals that are less cute and cuddly.

Why cats? It’s seems odd, given that cats eat fish.
The idea was more the way that people identify with cats. Most people would never dream of hurting a cat or a kitten. I’m sure sea puppies would have been a pretty adorable name too.

Do you think it’s insulting to fish to assume that the only way to make them sympathetic is to identify them with another species?
I think that when it comes down to it, fish benefit more from having this comparison if it’s going to create compassion and empathy for them. It would be absolutely wonderful if right now fish on their own were garnering the sympathy that cats and dogs do, and I think they’re starting to and it’s only a matter of time before we see a lot more natural empathy to fish.

At first the site looks like it’s meant for children. Who are you trying to reach with the “Save the Sea Kittens” site?
We definitely see a target audience in children and adults. Part of this campaign has been taking this campaign to kids. Children are so interested in animals in general that they are enthusiastic about learning these new facts.

Some of the “facts” are obviously opinions, such as that fish are smarter and cuter than the President of the United States. Is there any concern that children will take this to be an educational site, and believe these things have been factually proven?
I don’t think we’re too concerned about some of the more tongue-in-cheek “facts” being mistaken for real facts.
I also think that most kids, if they knew more facts about what they’re eating would be horrified. Most farm fish suffer chronic cases of sea lice, where their faces are eaten down to the bone. If kids knew facts like that, if they knew they were eating fish sticks made from ground-up sick sea kittens, they would lose their lunch.

When they were designing this campaign, was PETA aware that many people would find the whole idea of calling fish “sea kittens” in order to stop fishing absurd?
I don’t think that part came as a surprise.

How will PETA tell if this campaign is successful? Is it going to be if less fish are caught?
The interest in the campaign, the visits to Web site (have) been terrific since the campaign started.
Since the real goal is to create empathy for fish and preventing cruelty and encouraging people not to kill fish … it’s a little harder to gauge things like that, it’s not something you can track like hits to a Web site. It’s just something you see over time from meeting people and talking with people and speaking to the public, I certainly get to see results.

Many fish, such as pollock, are carnivorous or cannibalistic. If fish eat fish, why is it morally wrong for people to eat fish?
There’s just such a huge difference in fish eating one another on a small scale, one fish eating another, and a giant commercial trawler going through the ocean and vacuuming up everything in its wake.
Also, we as humans have alternatives. Fish and other animals can’t just go to the grocery store and decide whether they feel like choosing a vegetarian meal or another fish. But we are able to make decisions every day with every meal that affect our own health, affect animals and the environment. Anyone can go the store now and choose from a wide range of delicious vegetarian options. It’s so easy to be a vegetarian no matter where you live.

Does that apply to traditional Native subsistence users of fish, or Alaska residents who live in remote communities where produce, fruit and other non-meat options are either not always available or prohibitively expensive?
Obviously the bulk of campaign is aimed at average people who have resources available to us that most of us have.

So “Save the Sea Kittens” is aimed at average Americans … It doesn’t apply to Native or rural Alaskan communities?
We are always against killing, exploiting or abusing animals in any way.
We encourage absolutely everyone to make compassionate choices when they can. I think that in the 21st century, most of us are in the position to choose not to cause pain to an animal when we’re deciding what to eat.

If it’s not a question of opting out, if one’s survival depends on it is it then is it cruel to kill an animal for consumption?
Looking at these kinds of theoretical situations is missing the point that we can make simple decisions every day to do the right thing.

It seems like a lot of people say, “I’m a vegetarian … except I eat fish.” Were statements like these part of the reason PETA started the campaign?
It’s certainly something we’ve all heard before, and I think that was a factor when we decided to change the way that people were thinking about fish. You have people who obviously care about animals and see a problem with eating animals but they are still eating fish, and it makes you wonder if it does comes down to a marketing problem.

How much of an imaginative leap did PETA make in stories that describe fish going mad with grief, having psychological disorders, appreciating irony or feeling bitterness?
I don’t know that those specific terms would apply. But I know that the stories are based on science. These stories are going to be worded differently than a scientific report, because the wording in a scientific report wouldn’t be as interesting or kid-friendly, but the premise behind each story is based on fact.

What would you say to a community where their entire industry is based on fishing?
As times have changed and as our sense of what is ethical evolved, we’ve had to make major shifts in different industries. Child labor used to be a major part of society and economy. Obviously that is now unthinkable.
Losing demand for one thing we eat creates demand for another thing, which creates new jobs, sources of income, and opportunity.

So crab fisherman could go on to become parsnip farmers?
There have been so many times in our history where we’ve had to adjust as things that were major parts of our society have become things we’re ethically not comfortable with anymore.

Do you ever get violently negative reactions when you go into communities and talk about fishing?
I’ve been very pleasantly surprised at what a positive reaction we almost always tend to get when we go to these communities. Even people who don’t necessarily hear our message have been very receptive and talk about what our different viewpoints are.

Any plans on visiting Dutch Harbor with your campaign?
We definitely want to come to Alaska. I don’t know exactly where we’ll be going, but I know that it’s on our list.

Victoria Barber can be reached at 907-348-2424 or 800-770-9830, ext. 424.