Jump to content


How Does Nanfa Kill A Fish?


89 replies to this topic

#21 Guest_Seedy_*

Guest_Seedy_*
  • Guests

Posted 29 November 2007 - 08:54 PM

Well, it has been pretty well hashed out over the years. Sufficiently so that nobody raises an eyebrow at the thought of "whacking" a fish 8)


It is written into the Code of Ethics as well...

Sick or infirm specimens should be euthanized in a humane manner and disposed of properly.


Thoroughly reading the Code of Ethics is what originally prompted this question...

#22 Guest_iturnrocks_*

Guest_iturnrocks_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 November 2007 - 12:10 AM

Put the fish in a bag and whack it up against the side of the house. Mind you don't get splattered!


I learned a long time ago when I was prekilling rabbits for my python, that if you dont want to get splattered, only hit them once. The first hit often breaks the skin, the second hit will splatter you.

Of course for a softer bodied animal like a fish, you may get splatter in the first hit, but using a bag should protect you for at least one hit.

I generally freeze, turtle, or gar sick and injured fish.

If I freeze them, I can turtle or gar them later.

#23 Guest_Brooklamprey_*

Guest_Brooklamprey_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 November 2007 - 08:45 AM

gar sick and injured fish.


Thats a pretty common disposal for fish around my fish room... Even if the fish is rather nasty diseased, I really do not worry much about a Shorty or a Florida not taking care of it. I would be iffy about doing so with my Tropicals or Cubans but these other two do this well. (Especially the Shortys)

#24 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guest_Irate Mormon_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 November 2007 - 05:13 PM

I'm surprised nobody recommended the Amia calva solution to this.


Ha! I once took a writer to task (I think it was David Sands) for referring to the practice of using live feeders as "barbaric". In the end I decided that he was entitled to his opinion and I wasn't going to change mine. His sentiments are probably more typical of UK readers than american fishkeepers. So while I have no objection to using live feeders, I can't imagine that it's a quick and painless death.

#25 Guest_sandtiger_*

Guest_sandtiger_*
  • Guests

Posted 30 November 2007 - 10:07 PM

I typically just throw the fish hard against something, usually the bathtub. I do it as quick as possable. Grab the fish out of the water and toss it. Smaller injured (never sick) fish get fed to larger fish or the turtle, even if I do kill them first. I tried the freezer method once but I just don't feel right about it. Some say it is humain but many say it isen't.

#26 Guest_jwang_*

Guest_jwang_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 December 2007 - 09:58 PM

knife or screw driver straight through the brain...it is quick, efficient, and not messy

#27 Guest_fishlvr_*

Guest_fishlvr_*
  • Guests

Posted 01 December 2007 - 10:08 PM

knife or screw driver straight through the brain...it is quick, efficient, and not messy


Nice first post. ;)

Welcome to the forum!

#28 Guest_Histrix_*

Guest_Histrix_*
  • Guests

Posted 03 December 2007 - 11:42 PM

The lab where I work euthanizes fish with MS-222, in accordance with university guidelines. However, our director has mentioned that we should probably expose ourselves to it as little as possible, as he read somewhere that it is mildly carcinogenic. I have yet to verify this, however.

I also have been known to freeze fish on occasion. I've been told that it is a relatively painless way for them to die.

#29 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 12:45 PM

I read once somewhere that fish lack the ability to feel pain in the same way that we do, since they lack a neocortex. I'm sure they have some reactive mechanism, however, and stress is certainly another factor. I do like the idea of keeping cortisol levels in mind.

(Please keep in mind that I forget where I read the above, that I am not well versed in fish physiology, and not at all versed in the mechanics of pain reception. Hoping someone with more background in this can chime in)

#30 Guest_iturnrocks_*

Guest_iturnrocks_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 01:17 PM

....a similar question- Whats the best way to kill a fish if you intend to preserve it for genetic material? Also whats the best way to preserve a fish for genetic material?

Im just inserting these questions because I dont want to start a whole series of topics on how to kill a fish.

#31 Guest_Irate Mormon_*

Guest_Irate Mormon_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 05:21 PM

I read once somewhere that fish lack the ability to feel pain in the same way that we do, since they lack a neocortex. I'm sure they have some reactive mechanism, however, and stress is certainly another factor. I do like the idea of keeping cortisol levels in mind.

(Please keep in mind that I forget where I read the above, that I am not well versed in fish physiology, and not at all versed in the mechanics of pain reception. Hoping someone with more background in this can chime in)


While it can't be said with 100% certainty whether they perceive pain as we do, fishes at least ACT as if they feel pain, and some evidence suggests that they actually do "hurt".

#32 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 05:46 PM

To answer iturnrocks (personally, imambolikecrazy), for genetic research fish should be killed quickly with some agent like MS-222 and immediately placed in 95% ethanol or 50%-plus isopropanol.

And to answer Martin, fishes are vertebrates like ourselves with the same basic central nervous system. They have very similar cellular structures and neurochemistry, so it's hard to imagine that they don't have the same sensory perceptions when something goes wrong which is what pain is all about. I've always been amazed by the twists and contortions many people go through to convince themselves and others that "Naw, fish can't feel no pain". You don't have to be a PETA supporter to disagree. Does that mean I don't go fishing, or that I live among the houses of the holy with the vegans? No. I would say it's simple physiological reality.

No, thank you!

#33 Guest_Seedy_*

Guest_Seedy_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 05:55 PM

The lab where I work euthanizes fish with MS-222, in accordance with university guidelines. However, our director has mentioned that we should probably expose ourselves to it as little as possible, as he read somewhere that it is mildly carcinogenic. I have yet to verify this, however.


Well...Here's the Material Data Safety Sheet for MS-222

http://www.wchemical...August15,07.pdf

It is listed as an "irritant"...

I don't see anything about it causing cancer...but then again isn't everything "mildly carcinogenic" :D I don't think I'd handle it or concentrated solutions of it without taking some precautions though...(skin/eyes)

The Surgeon General announced today that saliva has been found to cause cancer....



....but only when swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.



#34 Guest_tglassburner_*

Guest_tglassburner_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:07 PM

The Surgeon General announced today that saliva has been found to cause cancer....



....but only when swallowed in small amounts over a long period of time.

But only in the State of California.

#35 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:13 PM

Ah... Here is the article I heard about a couple years ago. I don't have access to it now, though:

James D. Rose. The neurobehavioral nature of fishes and the question of awareness and pain. Reviews in Fisheries Science, vol. 10 (2002) pp. 1-38.

Publisher: Taylor and Francis Ltd

Abstract:
This review examines the neurobehavioral nature of fishes and addresses the question of whether fishes are capable of experiencing pain and suffering. The detrimental effects of anthropomorphic thinking and the importance of an evolutionary perspective for understanding the neurobehavioral differences between fishes and humans are discussed. The differences in central nervous system structure that underlie basic neurobehavioral differences between fishes and humans are described. The literature on the neural basis of consciousness and of pain is reviewed, showing that: (1) behavioral responses to noxious stimuli are separate from the psychological experience of pain, (2) awareness of pain in humans depends on functions of specific regions of cerebral cortex, and (3) fishes lack these essential brain regions or any functional equivalent, making it untenable that they can experience pain. Because the experience of fear, similar to pain, depends on cerebral cortical structures that are absent from fish brains, it is concluded that awareness of fear is impossible for fishes. Although it is implausible that fishes can experience pain or emotions, they display robust, nonconscious, neuroendocrine, and physiological stress responses to noxious stimuli. Thus, avoidance of potentially injurious stress responses is an important issue in considerations about the welfare of fishes.
Keywords: pain; nociception; stress; awareness; anthropomorphism

#36 Guest_iturnrocks_*

Guest_iturnrocks_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:14 PM

There was a news story just recently that said working the night shift causes cancer.

Graveyard shift work tabbed as carcinogen

#37 Guest_fundulus_*

Guest_fundulus_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:21 PM

Ah... Here is the article I heard about a couple years ago. I don't have access to it now, though:

James D. Rose. The neurobehavioral nature of fishes and the question of awareness and pain. Reviews in Fisheries Science, vol. 10 (2002) pp. 1-38.

Publisher: Taylor and Francis Ltd

Abstract:
This review examines the neurobehavioral nature of fishes and addresses the question of whether fishes are capable of experiencing pain and suffering. The detrimental effects of anthropomorphic thinking and the importance of an evolutionary perspective for understanding the neurobehavioral differences between fishes and humans are discussed. The differences in central nervous system structure that underlie basic neurobehavioral differences between fishes and humans are described. The literature on the neural basis of consciousness and of pain is reviewed, showing that: (1) behavioral responses to noxious stimuli are separate from the psychological experience of pain, (2) awareness of pain in humans depends on functions of specific regions of cerebral cortex, and (3) fishes lack these essential brain regions or any functional equivalent, making it untenable that they can experience pain. Because the experience of fear, similar to pain, depends on cerebral cortical structures that are absent from fish brains, it is concluded that awareness of fear is impossible for fishes. Although it is implausible that fishes can experience pain or emotions, they display robust, nonconscious, neuroendocrine, and physiological stress responses to noxious stimuli. Thus, avoidance of potentially injurious stress responses is an important issue in considerations about the welfare of fishes.
Keywords: pain; nociception; stress; awareness; anthropomorphism

I would say that "physiological stress responses to noxious stimuli" is the same as pain. You need a cerebral cortex to be self-aware and have an intellectual experience about feeling pain. But I would disagree that that's necessary to simply experience pain. And I'd say that many of us pretty much accept that fish feel pain, otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion, just as a funny thought.

#38 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:24 PM

Right, which is why I said that they apparently don't feel pain in the same way we do.

(Dang it, why can't the keyboard get my inflections right?)

#39 Guest_Seedy_*

Guest_Seedy_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:43 PM

I would say that "physiological stress responses to noxious stimuli" is the same as pain.


I think the above statement is exactly the kind of "anthropomorphic thinking" that the abstract leads me to believe the paper tries to dispel.

So, are we all the victims of this "anthropomorphic thinking" in trying to "kill fish humanely" ? Is it our pathos or logos that tells us that "fish feel pain"? Are we anthropomorphizing the "knee jerk" reactions of these creatures and interpreting them as pain? If a creature has no self awareness, do cortisol levels (or any other measure of stress) really matter when one is going to destroy the animal in question?

Now...let us not forget that just because it was published in an academic paper...it is not fact. Fish not feeling "pain" is still an opinion based on those authors research...

#40 Guest_nativeplanter_*

Guest_nativeplanter_*
  • Guests

Posted 04 December 2007 - 06:51 PM

I think the above statement is exactly the kind of "anthropomorphic thinking" that the abstract leads me to believe the paper tries to dispel.

So, are we all the victims of this "anthropomorphic thinking" in trying to "kill fish humanely" ? Is it our pathos or logos that tells us that "fish feel pain"? Are we anthropomorphizing the "knee jerk" reactions of these creatures and interpreting them as pain? If a creature has no self awareness, do cortisol levels (or any other measure of stress) really matter when one is going to destroy the animal in question?

Now...let us not forget that just because it was published in an academic paper...it is not fact. Fish not feeling "pain" is still an opinion based on those authors research...


I certainly do think that measures of stress matter when one is putting an animal down, even one that we do not think is self aware. Since we have no direct way of understanding what it feels like to be the critter in question, it is necessary (in my view) to be as gentle as one can. Stress may not be pain in the way we feel it, but stress still has the potential to be rather uncomfortable.



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users