Most Humane Way to Clean Fish

riverman wrote:

I wonder how much pain a fish feels from scaling and being cut up, if
it were decapitated first. Hmph.

lazarus wrote:
Hmm yeah it seems ignorant as well as silly. The fact that a muscle
continues to writhe after decapitation shows nothing about pain. It
shows that muscles continue to writhe (in mammels as well as fish)
after death - a phenomenon that's been noted for many centuries.

I think she meant that since cold blooded animals require less oxygen,
the blood supplied by the muscle that's left attached to the head might
keep them alive to feel the pain of being decapitated, and then they
would experience suffocation, so it's better to have them die of
suffocation before decapitating them. Personally, I'd prefer to
decapitate them before the suffocated, and try not to leave much muscle
or anything behind the head. That might cause them to suffocate faster.
But I definately wouldn't scale the body with the head attached if the
fish was alive, and I'd use the "cold-anesthetize" method.

I also heard that some people hit the fish in the head to knock it out.
I wish SOME kind of humane treatment for fish was regulated. It's
possible that fish suffer about as much as a human would under the same
conditions. But I have a feeling that even if we KNEW that for sure,
people would think it's somehow not as bad because they're just fish.
To me, the main difference is that a fish's faimily probably would
mourn for them as much as a human's family would mourn for a human, but
it's the possible physical pain that bothers me.

Wolfgang wrote:

If fish DON'T feel pain, it's difficult to see how anything done to them can
be construed as cruel; no one has any real reason to be upset by anything
done to them. If they DO, then ALL recreational angling is needlessly
cruel.

I heard the roof of a fish's mouth doesn't have enough nerves to feel
pain from a hook, but I wouldn't recreational fish anyway. I used to
fish a little as a kid, and I was the complete opposite of how I am
now. I once caught a snapper and people on the peir told me to throw it
back if I won't be eating it, but I wanted to see it swim in circles in
my bucket. And I once caught an eel and people were trying to buy it
from me so they could eat it, and they kept raising their price, but I
wanted to bring it home just to show my father. I guess I'm trying to
make up for it by saving their great grandkids.

wrote

. I guess I'm trying to
make up for it by saving their great grandkids.

my guess is that you are more ****ed up than a soup sandwich.

wayno

Wayne Harrison wrote:
wrote

. I guess I'm trying to
make up for it by saving their great grandkids.

my guess is that you are more ****ed up than a soup sandwich.

wayno

How about an explanation? I'm talking about possibly preventing
thousands of cases of horrible pain and suffering per day, and that's
the best response you have?

wrote in message
oups.com...

Wayne Harrison wrote:
wrote

. I guess I'm trying to
make up for it by saving their great grandkids.

my guess is that you are more ****ed up than a soup sandwich.

wayno

How about an explanation? I'm talking about possibly preventing
thousands of cases of horrible pain and suffering per day, and that's
the best response you have?

well, barry, i don't know what to say. that you are so concerned about
the pain of fish in times that thousands of human beings are dying, day by
day, in iraq, and other places, simply overwhelms my ability to relate to
you, on a rational level.

what do you think about the pain that fish feel when they are eaten by
other fish, or birds, or otters, or old age, for that matter? i suggest
that you grab a syringe full of demerol, and patrol the streams in your
locality, searching for fish in pain. inject those who you conclude are in
pain, and move on, comforted by your unctious efforts.

wayno

Wayne Harrison wrote:

that you are so concerned about
the pain of fish in times that thousands of human beings are dying, day by
day, in iraq, and other places, simply overwhelms my ability to relate to
you, on a rational level.

I think the safe answer would be for me to just say that it's easy to
prevent some of the suffering of fish by telling people the relatively
simple way to prevent, or at least reduce the suffering, or by creating
the appropriate regulations. It's worth a shot anyway. It's pretty fast
cheap to just post a message here, and I think it's worth the trouble
even if you can't compare the fish problem to the human problem. An
equivalent effort in time and money to help people in Iraq, by myself
or by the government, wouldn't do very much.

But screw the "safe" answer. One reason it bothers me so much is that I
have no reason to believe that the daily suffering of fish is any less
than the daily suffering of people.

what do you think about the pain that fish feel when they are eaten by
other fish, or birds, or otters, or old age, for that matter?

I think about that too, and it's pretty damn horrible (I usually think
of more furry creatures though). I heard about some animal that's
something like 90% likely to die by a predator attack, and it's not
always a quick kill from a bite to the neck. Because of that, I'm not
an animal conservationist, or whatever they're called. I'd rather not
be born if I knew I was likely to die like that. Maybe it's better to
suffocate on a boat, or die by a hunter, or maybe it's all the same,
but the less painful it is, the better.

i suggest that you grab a syringe full of demerol, and patrol the streams in your
locality, searching for fish in pain. inject those who you conclude are in
pain, and move on, comforted by your unctious efforts.

I'll take the blame for not doing that if everyone else takes the blame
for not even cleaning their own catch humanely.

wrote:

I think the safe answer would be for me to just say that it's easy to
prevent some of the suffering of fish by telling people the relatively
simple way to prevent, or at least reduce the suffering, or by creating
the appropriate regulations. It's worth a shot anyway. It's pretty fast
cheap to just post a message here, and I think it's worth the trouble
even if you can't compare the fish problem to the human problem. An
equivalent effort in time and money to help people in Iraq, by myself
or by the government, wouldn't do very much.

I think every fisherman should be required to carry, and to use, a
battery-powered bass-o-matic. Works for trout, too.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

rw wrote:

I think every fisherman should be required to carry, and to use, a
battery-powered bass-o-matic. Works for trout, too.

I guess all fishermen know that reference, but just in case:
http://snltranscripts.jt.org/75/75qbassamatic.phtml


BJ Conner wrote:

I think you got that one right, check out her website.
http://www.gendernet.org/sarah/
Probably not getting enough hits on her semiporn site so she's over
trolling in roff. I'll bet the PHD is phoney and you have never has a
bottle with enough scotch in it to make you look twice at that.

That's probably a different Sarah Fox, and I'm not either one. It
doesn't say PHD anywhere on that webpage. My website is PoliSource.com.

wrote:
Wayne Harrison wrote:

wrote

. I guess I'm trying to

make up for it by saving their great grandkids.

my guess is that you are more ****ed up than a soup sandwich.

wayno


How about an explanation? I'm talking about possibly preventing
thousands of cases of horrible pain and suffering per day, and that's
the best response you have?

I suggest that you consider not hooking them (i.e., fish) in the mouth
and playing them to exhaustion.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 02:34:27 GMT, rw
wrote:

wrote:
Wayne Harrison wrote:

wrote

. I guess I'm trying to

make up for it by saving their great grandkids.

my guess is that you are more ****ed up than a soup sandwich.

wayno


How about an explanation? I'm talking about possibly preventing
thousands of cases of horrible pain and suffering per day, and that's
the best response you have?

I suggest that you consider not hooking them (i.e., fish) in the mouth
and playing them to exhaustion.

Yeah.. he should bite them (i.e., fish...hmm, on second thought, why
place limits - Barry, you go, girl!) in the ass and ride them like
National Velvet.

wrote:
On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 02:34:27 GMT, rw
wrote:


wrote:

How about an explanation? I'm talking about possibly preventing
thousands of cases of horrible pain and suffering per day, and that's
the best response you have?

I suggest that you consider not hooking them (i.e., fish) in the mouth
and playing them to exhaustion.


Yeah.. he should bite them (i.e., fish...hmm, on second thought, why
place limits - Barry, you go, girl!) in the ass and ride them like
National Velvet.

Irony challenged, as usual.


--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.