Killing fish

[Worms]

Unfortunately the world isnt so black and white and in order to eat the way we want to and to be able to afford to eat we must let someone else do the killing. I have work to do so I cant be chasing a cow round a field trying to bash it on the head for my tea tonight and then spending hours skinning, gutting and butchering it. As such I must allow someone else to do it for me. How they choose to do it is pretty much out of my control so I am happy to eat it regardless. I do try to eat things that have been looked after as much as possible though. Double standards work both ways. You say you should kill the animal humanely. If you eat turkey or chicken that certainly doesnt happen. I used to work on a turkey/chicken farm over the christmas period and the stun doesnt last long. They then slit the throat and let the bird die slowly. Humane?? So you are saying your fine with that as much as the person who takes a chance on survival. Both sides in this argument are subject to double standards.

You obviously haven't met Denzil, my chicken and egg supplier...he'd leave you in no doubt that those birds haven't got a clue what's hit them, no stunning and live plucking involved...those birds are dead, dead, dead!

 

I'm lucky, I don't have to rely on supermarkets for all of my meat or any of my fish...oi'm a country boy see!

Edited August 22, 2012 by Worms

[Worms]

Also if I see a landrover heading toward me with sea fishing gear or cane rods in it I should get out of the way asap.

 

 

The morality side of the debate could literally rage on and on as no one side would ever concede and rightly so. I have enjoyed the discussion either way though but feel there is very much a viscious circle developing so will respectfully bow out.

Definitely no viciousness from this 'side' ATS....and none intended.

[Phone]

Sportsman,

 

I just bet you are not being true to yourself. Could you not make decisions in a triage situation? Who dies who doesn't?

 

I'm comfortable (within sensible parameters) killing fish for pleasure and livestock for food. I think, as a class, "city folks" are desensitized to the role death plays in what we eat. They all need to take a few lessons in "chicken choking".

 

Oddly, certain religions try to achieve the same goal by dictating how to kill blessed animials. I can't tell any difference myself.

 

Phone

PS there is a certain skill to making sure they (the dead ones) go out of sight - thus out of mind. Nobody likes a floater.

[Sportsman]

Sportsman,

 

I just bet you are not being true to yourself. Could you not make decisions in a triage situation? Who dies who doesn't?

 

I'm comfortable (within sensible parameters) killing fish for pleasure and livestock for food. I think, as a class, "city folks" are desensitized to the role death plays in what we eat. They all need to take a few lessons in "chicken choking".

 

Oddly, certain religions try to achieve the same goal by dictating how to kill blessed animials. I can't tell any difference myself.

 

Phone

PS there is a certain skill to making sure they (the dead ones) go out of sight - thus out of mind. Nobody likes a floater.

 

Phone

I am being very true to myself.

I have made decisions in a triage situation.

I spent many years training others to make triage based decisions.

I have killed, prepared and butchered my own meat for most of my adult life. I always tried my utmost to ensure that my quarry died quickly and painlessly.

What I have the problem with is people who don't take responsibility for their actions.

[Emma two]

What I have the problem with is people who don't take responsibility for their actions.

 

 

That sums it up for me too. The anglers get the fish into the fix it is in, pushing a badly damaged one back into the water leaving it to its fate and walking away isn't taking responsibility.

[barry luxton]

I'm lucky, I don't have to rely on supermarkets for all of my meat or any of my fish...oi'm a country boy see!

 

 

Ere Nick don't forget us this year when the venison is being dolled out, tell 'em i have some nice succulant conger steaks for swapsies.

[AddictedToScopex]

That sums it up for me too. The anglers get the fish into the fix it is in, pushing a badly damaged one back into the water leaving it to its fate and walking away isn't taking responsibility in my opinion.

There fixed that for you

[Sportsman]

There fixed that for you

 

I thought it was correct the first time

[Nicepix]

In the UK the Animal Welfare Act 2006 deals with this issue. If you believe that an animal is suffering then it is your duty, no one else's, to minimise that suffering. That could mean treating it yourself in an emergency, calling a vet if applicable, or in the extreme putting it out of its misery. Killing an animal in that case would be a defence against allegations of cruelty.

 

It is a grey area though and there are all sorts of scenarios that might lead to challenges, but if you are sure of your position then legally there is no reason not to kill an injured fish and quote the Act as your reason; i.e. minimising distress or suffering with no logical options.

 

Those who fish for the pot should take some means of killing their catch. Letting it suffocate isn't acceptable, legally or morally. A priest is the traditional and acceptable option. But, if you find yourself in a position with an injured fish and no priest, then as Barry has suggested, a knife through the brain is a good option. That is the one I use.

 

A second option is to lance the gills. This might be easier with bigger fish and is something American kayak anglers do with fiesty fish such as halibut before bringing them aboard.

[Emma two]

I thought it was correct the first time

 

 

It was!

 

It should be the case that when someone writes something that it goes without saying that it is in their opinion. Why do we have all this IMHO. IMO nonsense, one can see whose opinion it is in by looking at the authors name.