3 ms·

You want to snap their necks or bleed them out immediately, if you want them to be fit to eat.

peterwwillis 9y ago
Killing them on the boat makes them less fresh, and a slow death can impart a negative flavor to the meat. The best thing to do is to keep the fish alive on a stringer in the water. You can transport them in a bucket of water to land. When you're ready to clean them, push a thin metal rod into their brain. You can then bleed them without affecting the flavor (bleeding them isn't necessary, it just makes whiter looking meat).
- serf 9y ago
  >Killing them on the boat makes them less fresh, and a slow death can impart a negative flavor to the meat. The best thing to do is to keep the fish alive on a stringer in the water. At the risk of sounding contrarian or argumentative, which I assure you isn't the intended case here : Do you consider there to be a dichotomy between your desire for fresher taste, and your moral considerations about 'catch-and-release' behavior? As a layperson outside the realm of fishermen, and having spent little time thinking about my moral position on fishing -- or researching the impact of catch-and-release, there seems to be a contrast between the two opinions. basically, if you care enough about fish morally to oppose catch-and-release, does your moral positioning on lengthening their period of suffering stem directly from the positive benefit of fresher taste? I'm really trying not to impose a moral judgment through my questioning, If you perceive such (as I said before) it truly wasn't the intention. I am genuinely interested.
  - peterwwillis 9y ago
    No, my interest in how to achieve better flavor doesn't relate to my moral judgement on catch-and-release. Once I decided to kill it I stopped worrying about it suffering. For example, I find lethal injection to be absurd. So the state decides to kill someone. Instead of taking them out back and blowing their brains out (or, if you want to get less gruesome, using that thing that punches a cow's brain out), we make them wait 20 years for death, and then swab their arm with alcohol before giving them an injection which might actually cause them to writhe in agony for an hour. People want something dead, but they aren't willing to face what that means. Anyway, for what it's worth, keeping the fish alive in a stringer or bucket doesn't freak them out. Putting them in a dark bucket keeps them pretty calm. And poking their brain out is the swiftest most painless death they're gonna get.

Killing them on the boat makes them less fresh, and a slow death can impart a negative flavor to the meat. The best thing to do is to keep the fish alive on a stringer in the water. You can transport them in a bucket of water to land. When you're ready to clean them, push a thin metal rod into their brain. You can then bleed them without affecting the flavor (bleeding them isn't necessary, it just makes whiter looking meat).

serf 9y ago
>Killing them on the boat makes them less fresh, and a slow death can impart a negative flavor to the meat. The best thing to do is to keep the fish alive on a stringer in the water. At the risk of sounding contrarian or argumentative, which I assure you isn't the intended case here : Do you consider there to be a dichotomy between your desire for fresher taste, and your moral considerations about 'catch-and-release' behavior? As a layperson outside the realm of fishermen, and having spent little time thinking about my moral position on fishing -- or researching the impact of catch-and-release, there seems to be a contrast between the two opinions. basically, if you care enough about fish morally to oppose catch-and-release, does your moral positioning on lengthening their period of suffering stem directly from the positive benefit of fresher taste? I'm really trying not to impose a moral judgment through my questioning, If you perceive such (as I said before) it truly wasn't the intention. I am genuinely interested.
- peterwwillis 9y ago
  No, my interest in how to achieve better flavor doesn't relate to my moral judgement on catch-and-release. Once I decided to kill it I stopped worrying about it suffering. For example, I find lethal injection to be absurd. So the state decides to kill someone. Instead of taking them out back and blowing their brains out (or, if you want to get less gruesome, using that thing that punches a cow's brain out), we make them wait 20 years for death, and then swab their arm with alcohol before giving them an injection which might actually cause them to writhe in agony for an hour. People want something dead, but they aren't willing to face what that means. Anyway, for what it's worth, keeping the fish alive in a stringer or bucket doesn't freak them out. Putting them in a dark bucket keeps them pretty calm. And poking their brain out is the swiftest most painless death they're gonna get.