Cruelty or conservation? Fish ‘silently suffering stress’ in Britain’s aquariums

Seahorses, the ethereal, graceful creatures that children love to draw, are an important link in food chains, consuming tiny fish and plankton, and being consumed by larger ones. Thanks to human intervention – mostly catching them faster than they can reproduce – yep, you guessed it, their numbers are thought to be in decline. In the UK, most of us never see one.

But Stevie (not their real name) first encountered them in Britain while working at an aquarium – and was in for a shock.

“A colleague asked me to clean out the big-belly seahorse tank, an approximately 1.5-square-metre, hollow cylinder that had a viewing point for children in the centre,” Stevie recalls.

“I noticed that many of the individuals were pregnant. I queried, with what was an already busy tank, what the plan for the seahorses’ young would be. I was told that a large proportion of the offspring would be surplus to requirements. Specifically, they would be scooped up in a net and thrown out as if they were rubbish.

“In the wild, the number of potential offspring could range between 300 and 700 per adult male; the aquarium had a clear lack of space and capacity to house and care for them. Yet the aquarium touted a supposed captive breeding programme of big-belly seahorses, which is marketed as ‘a plan to help ease the pressure on the wild populations’.”

The former employee adds: “I couldn’t help but think to myself that it was merely ‘stock management’: breeding these animals to ensure ‘stock security’ (and a continuation of their exhibit) under the misnomer of ‘conservation’, before heartlessly discarding the individuals that were surplus and unwanted.” Stevie’s testimony sheds light on a new investigation by animal protection campaigners, which found that the vast majority, 91.7 per cent, of fish species in Britain’s aquariums are not classified as threatened in the wild by the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

And only 4.8 per cent of individual fish in aquariums are classed as endangered or critically endangered, according to the study.

“Our argument is that these figures clearly show that public aquariums are not centres of conserving wild populations of fish, but rather nothing more than public entertainment venues that cause great suffering to animals who should be living free in the wild,” says Sam Threadgill, of the Freedom for Animals protection group, which carried out the investigation.

“We believe these findings blow the industry’s claims that such businesses are necessary for conservation efforts out of the water.”

Collectively, we humans love gawping at fish in tanks. They live and breathe in ways we never could. They have no facial expressions, cannot communicate to us, sleep with their eyes open, and may change the colour of their body or even their shape.

Take the pufferfish, for example, which, as its name suggests, can inflate itself into a ball several times its normal size to scare off predators and is hundreds of times more poisonous than cyanide.

open image in gallery

At first glance, many fish appear rather stupid to us – because their expressionless faces make them seem uncommunicative and unintelligent. No wonder they don’t get much sympathy.

But in the past two decades, science has repeatedly undermined the common idea that fish do not suffer as animals do, proving, on the contrary, that they are sentient – that is they can suffer and feel pain and distress. Some studies have even proven that, in their own way, fish may feel emotions, including fear, and have sufficient intelligence to learn to adapt to new circumstances, such as finding their way around a maze. Cichlid fish have been observed building intricate sandcastle “love nests” to attract a mate, demonstrating levels of attention to detail many humans would envy.

But while the public is increasingly questioning the reasoning for keeping animals in zoos, the same cannot be said of fish in the nation’s aquariums. Threadgill says: “Zoos are rightly receiving much greater scrutiny recently, while fish and other marine animals are also suffering in aquariums in many similar ways but without the same level of advocacy or awareness.”

Over four weeks in May and June, Freedom for Animals investigated seven public aquariums in England, finding what it says is convincing evidence of the creatures suffering. Many species, including rays, pufferfish, filefish and smooth-hounds, displayed stereotypic behaviour, known as zoochosis, such as pacing, circling, surface-breaking and spiralling – all caused by the stress of confinement, just as is seen in land animals kept in cramped conditions.

The investigators say they found a tigerfish kept with five other fish, despite being solitary animals, and as a result displaying “obvious signs of mental distress”.

Two rays were said to have open wounds, while others had been debarbed. “It would have been a human who debarbed the rays to avoid getting stung whilst handling them, including for use in touch pools. We don’t have any evidence of how or why it was done, only that it was,” says Threadgill.

The report’s findings are disputed by the umbrella group for aquariums, saying it shows “a lack of understanding of the behaviour of aquatic animals”. Nevertheless, observers say what they saw were clear signs of “zoochosis”, and in one case an octopus even launched itself against the glass of its tank to try to escape.

“A lionfish was seen floating sideways in a very abnormal position, without moving much at all,” their study says. “There were six lionfish in the cylindrical tank, estimated very roughly to be 2m x 4m. This fish’s distress may have been caused by the fact that lionfish are generally solitary animals in the wild.”

At a different attraction, a guitar shark was seen surface-breaking while circling its tank, while at a third “an unidentified fish was observed with severe damage to their head and side. The majority of scales were missing from the head and a few further patches of exposed raw flesh were visible on their side.”

Marc Bekoff, professor emeritus of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado, Boulder, said fish used for display almost always display stress signals. “These sentient beings, who often are transported thousands of miles, routinely exhibit stereotypic behaviour – repetitively circling or ‘pacing’ up and down – signs that they are psychologically and physically suffering simply to entertain humans,” he says.

But one aquarium manager told The Independent: “We do valuable conservation work. Our fish get all their nutritional needs met. We wouldn’t be doing this if we thought it was cruel.”

Britain’s aquariums keep an estimated 70,500 fish. Most major seaside resorts, from Blackpool to Brighton, are home to such attractions. Activists are concerned not just for the welfare of individual creatures, but also question the claim by attractions to support conservation in the wild.

“We are encouraged to believe that aquariums act as almost sanctuary-like havens for marine life,” says Stevie. “I, for one, owe part of my affiliation toward marine environments to the experiences I had when I was younger – living in a coastal city, with one of the UK’s biggest aquariums on my doorstep.”

The worker-turned-whistleblower recalls how, in pursuing a career in marine conservation after graduating, they got a position as a “trainee aquarist”. “The role was originally marketed as a combination of animal husbandry and welfare, with opportunities to engage in conservation and conservation awareness activities with the public. I quickly discovered that the latter was limited (if at all) to a few sentences in regurgitated speeches, muddied by the spectacle of daily feeds and the routine information that ensued.

“It didn’t take long to find out that the organisation had no involvement in breeding programmes with reintroduction plans, research or any influence on external conservation efforts.”

Interaction with the animals was largely “stock management”, Stevie says – a term widely used in the industry, “one which immediately didn’t sit right with me when talking about the thousands of individuals held there”. Stevie goes on: “The first hint of the animals being deemed as stock was evident during my first week; an aquarist listed what new species had recently been purchased – a statement that could initially be considered fairly innocuous, although it was said with a kind of enthusiasm to suggest they are no more than an ornamental commodity.

“The concept of these animals being sourced and bought specifically for this kind of institution felt inherently wrong. Not just because of the quality of life the animals are destined for, but also considering such resources could be utilised to help endangered species.”

Vet Dr Emma Milne agrees. “For too long establishments that profit from captive animals have claimed it is for conservation. As this investigation proves, this is far from true,” she says. “It is my view that aquariums simply can’t provide for the most basic welfare needs of the animals. The signs of ill health and the stereotypic behaviour are clear markers of this. A tank, no matter how big, will never replace freedom.”

But overcrowding in tanks cannot be entirely blamed on aquarium bosses. The attractions often have to step in when private owners cannot cope.

Stevie says: “The ‘Amazon’ tank was a feature derived solely from ‘donations’ of fish and turtle species from exotic pet owners and suppliers who had underestimated the size the animals could grow to. The suppliers included local garden centres that sold young stingray species, some of which would quickly grow to over a metre wide, resulting in those fish being dumped on the aquarium.

“At face value, it was a noble addition to the aquarium and a huge part of me was extremely relieved to know these animals were rescued from potential death or poor conditions. But once again, the way in which the aquarium managed this exhibit left me feeling frustrated. With the tank holding 12 different species, all of whom could grow into (by the institution’s own admission) sizable individuals that needed a large amount of space, it was plain to see that the tank was already too densely populated.

“Before my arrival, the aquarium had already begun rejecting ‘donations’ and started a campaign stating ‘Pet fish are for life, not until they outgrow their tank’. While this was positive, so much more could be done, leaving me feeling frustrated once again. It was the perfect opportunity to highlight the devastation that the exotic pet trade has on individuals and species alike; a platform to educate, raise awareness and call for greater restrictions on the capture, breeding and sale of exotic animals.

“I couldn’t help feeling that the donation tank, despite the grave problems it caused the aquarium and the abandoned animals, was just another marketing ploy – another feature, driven by profit, to boast about. There was no real push for conservation and conservation awareness initiatives, which is often the sole argument for the existence of aquariums.” The law requires aquariums to meet certain provisions under the Zoo Licensing Act, including conservation measures.

The government’s new Animal Sentience law will cover fish (but not octopuses, crabs or lobsters), long neglected in law and regulations, although it seems unlikely aquariums will have to make significant changes.

Aquariums may voluntarily buy membership of the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums (Biaza), which sets standards including “a high level of animal welfare”, participating in managed breeding programmes and demonstrating conservation activities. Licences, as for zoos, are renewable every six years after inspection by a government-appointed expert, with periodic inspections at least every three years. But Biaza says member aquariums adhere to standards that go above and beyond the zoo licensing system.

The association says aquariums and zoos are the world’s third largest funder of conservation.

Jo Judge, chief executive of Biaza, said: “Biaza is happy to work with any organisation to improve the lives of animals, that is what we are all about. We take any complaint of poor animal welfare seriously. However, this investigation shows a clear lack of understanding of the behaviour of aquatic animals and methods used to assess their welfare.

“Biaza represents the very best zoos and aquariums. Informed by the important work of and the expertise found in our aquariums in welfare, conservation and natural science, we are calling for the government’s Animal Sentience Bill to be strengthened to include some beloved aquarium animals. If you want to support the highest animal welfare, effective conservation and a love of the natural world, you should support good aquariums.”

But the Freedom for Animals research found that only 36 per cent of aquariums were members of Biaza – and even then, some concerns were found at member attractions.

Stevie quit the job after just a few eye-opening weeks. “My resultant, swift departure left me with thoughts for all the animals that were unable to do the same. The experience reinforced my belief that such organisations need far greater and more stringent governing, along with continuous assessment, in the hope that eventually all aquariums – including those that are profit-driven leisure attractions – will be entirely phased out.”