Are fish sentient?

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Wed Aug 01, 2018 12:31 pm

http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/07/ ... -says.html

Image

A pod of endangered orcas, native to the Pacific Northwest waters, has been seen floating the body of a dead calf that died over a week ago.

J35, a 20-year-old whale, gave birth to the first baby orca in three years, but the calf died shortly after.

“The baby was so newborn, it didn’t have blubber. It kept sinking, and the mother would raise it to the surface,” said Ken Balcomb, a senior scientist with the Center for Whale Research on San Juan Island, Washington State.

Since its death last Tuesday, the mother has been seen carrying the corpse of her dead calf on her forehead, pushing it to the surface of the water.

But over a week later, Jenny Atkinson, executive director of the Whale Museum on San Juan Island, said that experts now see other members of the pod “sharing the responsibility of caring (sic) this calf,” CBC radio reported.

“They seem to be taking turns.”

Atkinson told The Associated Press earlier that the pod is experiencing a “deep grieving process.”

While at least seven species in seven geographic regions covering three oceans have been documented carrying the body of their deceased young, scientist Deborah Giles with the University Of Washington Center Of Conservation Biology said that grieving for more than 24 hours is a rare occurrence.


The dwindling population of endangered southern resident killer whales has fallen to 75.
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby thrulookingglass » Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:19 pm

As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. “Come, follow Me", Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.” - Mark 1:17

Fish are sentient.

I've fished the waters of Massachusetts since I was a little boy, mostly freshwater. I cannot afford a sturdy vessel for the sea, so I haven't salt water fished much, but have done some surfcasting. When you're a hunter you try and get into the mind of your prey, as a fisherman, much the same. A good fly fisherman shakes a bush near where the river flows to see what shakes, they choose their flies accordingly. I've always admired the fish I've caught. Beautiful beings. I turn back my catch (catch and release as they say). Fish do become very distressed from gouge of the hook, alien abduction. I've read much from those concerned, the less you remove them from their environment, the better chance of survival they have. I live very close to Cape Cod...we might need to call it Cape Plastic soon. :(
User avatar
thrulookingglass
 
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: down the rabbit hole USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Cordelia » Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:56 pm

thrulookingglass » Wed Aug 01, 2018 6:19 pm wrote:As Jesus was walking beside the Sea of Galilee, He saw Simon and his brother Andrew. They were casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. “Come, follow Me", Jesus said, “and I will make you fishers of men.” - Mark 1:17

Fish are sentient.

I've fished the waters of Massachusetts since I was a little boy, mostly freshwater. I cannot afford a sturdy vessel for the sea, so I haven't salt water fished much, but have done some surfcasting. When you're a hunter you try and get into the mind of your prey, as a fisherman, much the same. A good fly fisherman shakes a bush near where the river flows to see what shakes, they choose their flies accordingly. I've always admired the fish I've caught. Beautiful beings. I turn back my catch (catch and release as they say). Fish do become very distressed from gouge of the hook, alien abduction. I've read much from those concerned, the less you remove them from their environment, the better chance of survival they have. I live very close to Cape Cod...we might need to call it Cape Plastic soon. :(


But why traumatize them? (Though I do understand the 'meditative' beauty of fishing and have done the same w/catch & release.)
The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby thrulookingglass » Wed Aug 01, 2018 10:37 pm

That sounds like a harsh judgment. I don't fish much at all anymore. One reason was because it used to be one of the only things my father and I could do together without wanting to kill each other. I also used to have a friend I'd go with, but our relationship fell apart. My grandfather(s) helped to teach me how to fish when I was very young. It's the only memories I have of them now. People hunt for sport, eat meat and go to war. Humanity is prepared to destroy all life on earth in a few minutes. No one appreciates the beauty of the smallmouth, largemouth bass I might catch more than I if I do go. Money from the purchase of a fishing license go towards wetlands preservation. Over the years I've seen developers eat up wetlands areas for profit, watching water qualities greatly decline. It's one of the few times I get to see the wilderness and marvel at its beauty. I've watched eagles and falcons pluck fish from streams and ponds. I've seen a fish eat a frog and a frog eat a fish in the same day. I've learned the names and characteristics of almost all fresh water species of fish, frogs, turtles, learned about water qualities, thermocline, invasive species of aquatic plants as well as the disastrous effects of eutrophication. I've seen plenty of ducks and assorted waterfowl on the water too. Been sent off by a few duck hunters who told me to buzz off which is a nice way to share public resources. My catches are treated with as much kindness the situation can offer. To me it's a back to my ancestral roots survival skill. And with all that said I do feel guilty about harming the fish sometimes. You know what most of my guy friends think about their catches? Nothing at all. Watch the grace of a fly fisherperson on a Montana stream sometime. I know how to fly fish and it ain't easy at all. I've learned all sorts of knots and can tie my own flies. Sometimes it's not fishing, it's just casting, meaning I don't catch anything at all. Fish are smart, sometimes aggressive, and fabulously beautiful. I take only pictures. They all get put back in the water quickly with me. I've even caught what might have been the Massachusetts state record sized smallmouth bass and let her go. People fish to survive where I live. And while we're at it, perhaps ALL living things are sentient. My yoga teacher would read poems about the trees speaking to us saying, "where you going so fast?" Where are we headed anyway? When the pilgrims came to Plymouth there were times of the year when you couldn't swim because the waters were too thick with fish. There's actually old daguerreotypes of this. It's not like that anymore. What have we done to our majestic Earth mother?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVlDSzbrH5M
I've been learning this on my acoustic lately. It's a pretty accurate tale of my kinfolk around here.
User avatar
thrulookingglass
 
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: down the rabbit hole USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Cordelia » Thu Aug 02, 2018 8:23 am

^^^Meant as a question, not a judgement.

And while we're at it, perhaps ALL living things are sentient.


I agree. And about trees, up-thread...

Are Trees Sentient Beings? Certainly, Says German Forester

By Richard Schiffman • November 16, 2016

In his bestselling book, The Hidden Life of Trees, Peter Wohlleben argues that to save the world’s forests we must first recognize that trees are “wonderful beings” with innate adaptability, intelligence, and the capacity to communicate with — and heal — other trees.


:praybow

Image
The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Cordelia » Sat Aug 11, 2018 4:30 pm

Pele'sDaughter » Wed Aug 01, 2018 3:31 pm wrote:
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2018/07/ ... -says.html

Image

A pod of endangered orcas, native to the Pacific Northwest waters, has been seen floating the body of a dead calf that died over a week ago.

J35, a 20-year-old whale, gave birth to the first baby orca in three years, but the calf died shortly after.

“The baby was so newborn, it didn’t have blubber. It kept sinking, and the mother would raise it to the surface,” said Ken Balcomb, a senior scientist with the Center for Whale Research on San Juan Island, Washington State.

Since its death last Tuesday, the mother has been seen carrying the corpse of her dead calf on her forehead, pushing it to the surface of the water.

But over a week later, Jenny Atkinson, executive director of the Whale Museum on San Juan Island, said that experts now see other members of the pod “sharing the responsibility of caring (sic) this calf,” CBC radio reported.

“They seem to be taking turns.”

Atkinson told The Associated Press earlier that the pod is experiencing a “deep grieving process.”

While at least seven species in seven geographic regions covering three oceans have been documented carrying the body of their deceased young, scientist Deborah Giles with the University Of Washington Center Of Conservation Biology said that grieving for more than 24 hours is a rare occurrence.


The dwindling population of endangered southern resident killer whales has fallen to 75.


She was spotted again on Thursday, still carrying her calf.

Tahlequah: An orca has carried her dead calf for at least 17 days and 1,000 miles


The stunning, devastating, weeks-long journey of an orca and her dead calf

by Avi Selk August 10 at 3:47 PM Email the author

A grieving orca was spotted off the coast of Washington state Thursday, carrying her stillborn calf through the Pacific Ocean for the 17th day in a journey that has astonished and devastated much of the world.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/ani ... 87ff4d275c
The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Mon Aug 13, 2018 8:42 am

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-ne ... dead-calf/

[....]
“J35 frolicked past my window today with other J pod whales, and she looks vigorous and healthy,” Ken Balcomb, founding director of the Center for Whale Research, wrote in an email to The Seattle Times. “The ordeal of her carrying a dead calf for at least seventeen days and 1,000 miles is now over, thank goodness.”

J35, also known as Tahlequah, is part of the critically endangered southern-resident killer-whale population. Balcomb said J35 probably has lost two other offspring since giving birth to a male calf in 2010.

The loss of the most recent calf “may have been emotionally hard on her,” Balcomb said. “She is alive and well and at least over that part of her grief. Today was the first day that I for sure saw her. It is no longer there.”

J35 showed no signs of “peanut head,” a condition that betrays malnutrition in an orca, as cranium bones begin to show. “She’s been eating,” Balcomb said.

People around the world were moved by the plight of the southern residents as Tahlequah carried her dead baby, a female, day after day.

Another member of the population, a 4 ½ year-old known as J50, also is ailing. Biologists were working over the weekend to monitor her condition.

The Lummi Nation also is standing by to feed J50 live salmon, possibly as soon as Sunday.

A veterinary review of J50 on Thursday night encouraged veterinarians and biologists who said her condition is better than they expected. But she remains terribly thin and severely malnourished.

Lack of food also has been linked to the southern residents’ failure for three years now to produce offspring.

“The reason J35 lost her baby and the others are losing their babies is there is not enough salmon,” Balcomb said of the whales’ primary food source. “Hopefully we will do something about that.”
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Can non-humans file negligence suits against humans?

Postby Cordelia » Tue Aug 14, 2018 8:29 am

A horse was neglected by its owner. Now the horse is suing.

Story by Karin Brulliard August 13, 2018

ESTACADA, Ore.

Justice is an 8-year-old American quarter horse who used to be named Shadow. And when he was named Shadow, he suffered. At a veterinarian’s exam last year, he was 300 pounds underweight, his black coat lice-ridden, his skin scabbed and his genitals so frostbitten that they might still require amputation.

The horse had been left outside and underfed by his previous owner, who last summer pleaded guilty to criminal neglect. And now Justice, who today resides with other rescued equines on a quiet wooded farm within view of Oregon’s Cascade mountains, is suing his former owner for negligence. In a lawsuit filed in his new name in a county court, the horse seeks at least $100,000 for veterinary care, as well as damages “for pain and suffering,” to fund a trust that would stay with him no matter who is his caretaker.

The complaint is the latest bid in a quixotic quest to get courts to recognize animals as plaintiffs, something supporters and critics alike say would be revolutionary. The few previous attempts — including a recent high-profile case over whether a monkey can own a copyright — have failed, with judges ruling in various ways that the nonhumans lacked legal standing to sue. But Justice’s case, the animal rights lawyers behind it contend, is built on court decisions and statutes that give it a stronger chance, particularly in a state with some of the nation’s most progressive animal protection laws.

“There have been a lot of efforts to try to get animals not only to be protected but to have the right to go to court when their rights are violated,” said Matthew Liebman, director of litigation at the Animal Legal Defense Fund, which filed the suit in Justice’s name. Those “haven’t found the right key to the courthouse door. And we’re hopeful that this is the key.”

These efforts have been made amid broad growth in legal protections and advocacy for animals. Three decades ago, few law schools offered courses in animal law; now, more than 150 do, and some states have created animal law prosecutorial units. All 50 states have enacted felony penalties for animal abuse. Connecticut last year became the first state to allow courts to appoint lawyers or law students as advocates in animal cruelty cases, in part because overburdened prosecutors were dismissing a majority of such cases.

These developments count as progress, animal rights lawyers say, in persuading lawmakers and courts to expand the traditional legal view of animals — as property — to reflect their role in a society in which dog-sitting is big business and divorces can involve cat custody battles.

“Our legislature acknowledged that people care a lot about animals, and that’s something that’s evolving and increasing,” said Jessica Rubin, a University of Connecticut law professor who serves as an advocate in that state’s cruelty cases. “The law, hopefully, is catching up to where our morals are.”

MORE...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/nat ... _term=.b6c
The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Sep 21, 2018 5:52 pm

Scientists Gave MDMA to Octopuses—and What Happened Was Profound
Ryan F. MandelbaumYesterday 11:00am
GIF: Jim Cooke (Gizmodo)
When humans take the drug MDMA, versions of which are known as molly or ecstasy, they commonly feel very happy, extraverted, and particularly interested in physical touch. A group of scientists recently wondered whether this drug might have a similar effect on other species—specifically, octopuses, which are seemingly as different from humans as an animal can be. The results of their experiment, in which seven octopuses took MDMA, were “unbelievable.”

Just think about an octopus—other than their impressive intelligence, they have little in common with humans. We’ve been heading along different branches of the evolutionary tree for 500 million years. Rather than one localized brain with a cortex, or a highly folded outer layer like our brains have, an octopus’s decentralized nervous system includes control centers for each arm in addition to a brain.

Given how different we are, Gül Dölen and her colleague Eric Edsinger wondered whether the chemistry behind human social behaviors—the system controlling the serotonin molecule—also existed in the solitary, asocial octopus. They began by analyzing the octopus genome, and found that octopuses, too, have genes that seem to code for serotonin transporters, proteins responsible for moving serotonin molecules into brain cells. Serotonin is the molecule generally considered to be responsible for feeling good. When humans take MDMA, it binds to serotonin transporter proteins and changes the way serotonin travels between brain cells, likely producing the warm and fuzzy high and perhaps the increased extraversion that the drug is known for.

The fun began when the researchers gave MDMA to seven Octopus bimaculoides octopuses inside laboratory tanks. They hoped to test whether the animals behaved more socially after receiving a dose of MDMA—a sign that the drug bound to their serotonin transporters.

After hanging out in a bath containing ecstasy, the animals moved to a chamber with three rooms to pick from: a central room, one containing a male octopus and another containing a toy. This is a setup frequently used in mice studies. Before MDMA, the octopuses avoided the male octopus. But after the MDMA bath, they spent more time with the other octopus, according to the study published in Current Biology. They also touched the other octopus in what seemed to be an exploratory, rather than aggressive, manner.


A member of the Octopus bimaculoides species
Photo: Tom Kleindinst
The scientists took this to mean that despite our vastly different brains, social behavior is built into the very molecules coded by our DNA, Dölen explained.

“An octopus doesn’t have a cortex, and doesn’t have a reward circuit,” Dölen, assistant professor of neuroscience at Johns Hopkins University, told Gizmodo. “And yet it’s able to respond to MDMA and produce the same effects, in an animal with a totally different brain organization. To me, that means we really need to appreciate that the business end of these things is at the level of the molecule.”

You’re probably curious: did the octopuses freak out? The scientists didn’t discuss such behavior in the paper, because it’s hard to quantify without anthropomorphizing the octopuses—Dölen warned me that the following is anecdotal evidence and not scientific observation. But yes, the octopuses acted like they took ecstasy. At first, when they received a little too much MDMA, they breathed erratically and turned white. But on lower doses, one animal “looked like it was doing water ballet,” swimming around with outstretched arms. Another spent part of the time doing flips, and another seemed especially interested in minor sounds and smells.

“This was such an incredible paper, with a completely unexpected and almost unbelievable outcome,” Judit Pungor, a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Oregon not involved in the study, told Gizmodo. “To think that an animal whose brain evolved completely independently from our own reacts behaviorally in the same way that we do to a drug is absolutely amazing.”

There are limitations to the study, of course. Dölen pointed out that seven octopuses isn’t a large enough sample size to show differences between how males and females react to MDMA. She’d like to further test the changes in behavior, as well as what happens if they block the serotonin transmitter before giving the MDMA. Such a test would convince Dölen that she was really seeing the affects of MDMA on serotonin transporters. Pungor also wanted to test whether the drug would have different effects on octopuses of varying ages, or whether an octopus’s upbringing changed its sociality.

It’s clear that psychoactive drugs like MDMA, LSD, and magic mushrooms are going through a scientific renaissance—they’re being studied as potential treatments for depression and PTSD—and as their stigma decreases, scientists are more open to studying them, and more research funding becomes available. This could be important for our understanding of animal and human brains.

“People are beginning to recognize that these drugs are powerful tools for understanding how the brain evolved,” Dölen told Gizmodo. “They’re such strong activators of these behaviors. It’s not subtle.”
https://gizmodo.com/scientists-gave-mdm ... 1829191638
Mazars and Deutsche Bank could have ended this nightmare before it started.
They could still get him out of office.
But instead, they want mass death.
Don’t forget that.
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 32090
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Pele'sDaughter » Tue Oct 09, 2018 4:15 pm

https://www.iflscience.com/plants-and-a ... elligence/

Image
For the first time, a species of fish has demonstrated evidence of possible self-awareness by passing the famous mirror test.

In a series of experimental observations conducted by Japanese researchers, bluestreak cleaner wrasse – a petite coral reef fish – were able to recognize that their reflection represented their own body.

Until now, the only non-human animals that have passed the test – regarded among behaviorists as the benchmark for higher level cognitive capacity – have been a handful of mammals (several apes, elephants, orcas, and dolphins) and birds in the crow family. (A controversial study suggests that ants may have passed too)

However, several recent studies have "reveal[ed] that the perceptual and cognitive abilities of fish often match or exceed those of other vertebrates, and suggest the possibility that the cognitive skills of fish could more closely approach those found in humans and apes," the authors wrote in the pre-publication version of their study, currently posted on bioRxiv.

During a mirror test experiment, the animal in question is placed in front of a mirror after a colored mark, typically a sticker, is placed on a prominent part of its body. If the animal then tries to examine and/or remove the mark from that part of itself, but does not attempt to do so in the absence of a mirror or in response to an invisible mark, the creature is considered to understand the nature of reflections, and is thus capable of understanding a concept of self.

Though cleaner wrasse – selected by the team due to past evidence of complex cognition – do not have hands or beaks with which to investigate and try to remove a mark with, they do show a specific behavior wherein they scrape parts of their body against rocks and other materials in order remove irritants and parasites from their scales. This was used as the pass/fail cue for 10 cleaner wrasse subjects, all housed in separate tanks.

In a preliminary experiment, the researchers first observed the animals’ behavior in front of a mirror before adding marks into the mix. Seven of the wrasses passed through all three stages of a behavior pattern that past research has identified in self-recognizing animals. First, the fish reacted to their reflection as if it was another individual, next they performed unusual behaviors not typically seen without the mirror, and third, the fish began to gaze at and closely examine their reflection.

Moving on to the true mirror test, the team injected a colored gel right under the surface of the skin of eight of the wrasses, creating a mark resembling an external parasite. Three of four wrasses marked on their throats showed repeated scraping in that area yet exhibited no response to a non-marking injection and did not scrape when the mirror was absent.

Three of four marked on the head engaged in significant head scraping when the mirror was present, but the authors did not base their conclusions off these individuals as they were seen head scraping at other times too.
Image
“The results we present here will by their nature lead to controversy and dispute, and we welcome this discussion,” the authors wrote. “We do not consider that the successful behavioural responses to all phases of the mark test should be taken as evidence of self-awareness in the cleaner wrasse, but rather that these fish come to understand that the mirror reflection represents their own body.”

They conclude by noting that their findings could lead to two distinct paradigm shifts in the field: Either we start to entertain the possibility that fish, previously believed to be unintelligent animals, are self-aware because they passed the same test as ‘higher’ animals, or we conclude that these behaviors are based on a cognitive process other than self-recognition.

“If the former, what does this mean for our understanding of animal intelligence? If the latter, what does this mean for our application and interpretation of the mark test as a metric for animal cognitive abilities?”
Don't believe anything they say.
And at the same time,
Don't believe that they say anything without a reason.
---Immanuel Kant
User avatar
Pele'sDaughter
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 11:45 am
Location: Texas
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Cordelia » Fri Apr 12, 2019 7:31 am

Fish aren’t covered by animal abuse laws, so man’s charges dropped, NC prosecutor says

By Noah Feit
April 09, 2019

The North Carolina man who was arrested on multiple counts of animal abuse after he abandoned his pet fish had the charges against him dropped Tuesday, the district attorney said.

New Hanover County District Attorney Ben David said he had to drop the charges against Michael Ray Hinson because “fish are not protected under the statutes relating to the cruelty to animals or misdemeanor abandonment charges,” WWAY reported.

“We take a very dim view of anyone who would abuse any creature great or small and appreciate their enforcement of the laws to protect vulnerable animals,” David said, according to Port City Daily. “Fish are not included in this statute, however, so my office is dismissing these charges.”

The 53-year-old Hinson was accused of abandoning his pet Oscar fish after he was evicted from his New Hanover County home March 22, WECT said. When the fish was found by sheriff’s deputies March 25, it was “was in poor health and swimming in a dirty tank,” the TV station reported.

https://www.thestate.com/news/state/nor ... 48964.html


Walmart is well known for their cruelty to fish...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e4Q6BGG7JlU

The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby Cordelia » Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:23 am

Came across this after listening to a cooking podcast. Given a choice, would a lobster prefer to be shocked, lobotomized, or stoned before being boiled alive?

....Switzerland put a ban on boiling lobsters alive this year. Instead, Swiss chefs are encouraged to sedate the lobsters by electrocuting them or stabbing them in the eyes before throwing them in the water—neither of which option sounds terribly humane. A 2013 study also suggested lobsters and crabs experience pain.


A Chef in Maine Is Literally Hotboxing Lobsters So They Die a Happier Death

The many miracles of marijuana.

By Sarah Rense Sep 19, 2018

A chef in Maine is getting her lobsters high with marijuana before cooking them in hopes of giving them a more humane way to die. As you may know, lobsters are traditionally boiled alive. This method still doesn't change that, but rather attempts to get the lobsters so stoned they won't really give a damn. PETA won't be impressed, but cannabis users might get excited to blaze and boil it.

Charlotte Gill is the owner of Charlotte’s Legendary Lobster Pound in Maine. She's also a licensed medical marijuana caregiver. Despite owning a lobster restaurant for seven years, she told the Mount Desert Islander that she felt bad when lobsters showed up to be killed with "no exit strategy." So she picked out a lobster named Roscoe and literally hotboxed him. He chilled out. He didn't snap his claws. He seemed relaxed. Now, Gill's restaurant will have a hotboxing tank to sedate more lobsters, with a pump to infuse the water with pot smoke. (Roscoe was thanked for his service and released back into the ocean.)

And if you're a not-chill person who wants their lobster to die the old-fashioned way? Gill will still serve lobsters that were never under the influence. But she says the marijuana never gets to the diner.

"THC breaks down completely by 392 degrees, therefore we will use both steam as well as a heat process that will expose the meat to 420 degree extended temperature, in order to ensure there is no possibility of carryover effect (even though the likelihood of such would be literally impossible)," she said.

She also swears the hotbox lobsters' meat becomes even more delectable.

MORE: https://www.esquire.com/food-drink/food ... ay-to-die/


fwiw: a demonstration on how to get to the meat (viewer discretion advised :wink: )


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BVwDUvg4uAs

(Gastronomic disclosure; while growing up, visits w/my maternal relatives included lobster feasts. My mother was under 100 lbs. 5 feet, and soft-spoken, but in a kitchen w/live lobsters she became a hungry, aggressive predator. A lobster debauch--not unique to lobsters, I realize--was long, labor intensive, exhausting and bloodlessly barbaric; cleaning up the dining area was more like cleaning up a crustacean abattoir than a family picnic. Ripping apart a whole lobster was not as methodical as shown in the video; the meat was never rinsed and the only implement was a claw cracker; thank god nobody figured out using the rolling pin on the claws technique).

An article from 2004 on the annual Maine lobster festival, written by David Foster Wallace (published in Gourmet Magazine)...

The greatest sin is to be unconscious. ~ Carl Jung

We may not choose the parameters of our destiny. But we give it its content. ~ Dag Hammarskjold 'Waymarks'
User avatar
Cordelia
 
Posts: 3697
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Location: USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby liminalOyster » Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:29 pm

Cordelia » Tue Jun 04, 2019 10:23 am wrote:
A Chef in Maine Is Literally Hotboxing Lobsters So They Die a Happier Death


This is the greatest story I've seen in forever. Up next, DMT butter sauce.
"It's not rocket surgery." - Elvis
User avatar
liminalOyster
 
Posts: 1873
Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby stickdog99 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 12:52 pm

What's next? Fried chicken?
stickdog99
 
Posts: 6303
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 5:42 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Are fish sentient?

Postby thrulookingglass » Tue Jun 04, 2019 1:21 pm

Man was appointed by God to have dominion over the beasts, and everything a man does to an animal is either a lawful exercise or a sacrilegious abuse of an authority by divine right. - CS Lewis


Its divine right to leave animals in tiny cages, pour shampoo in their eyes, the proverbial 'veal pen'. If man is cruel to animals it comes from the top down rule of God. Drown those fuckers who won't follow your rule. Animals are beasts, yet you won't see one refine anthrax into a weapon and mail it to opposing senators and newspersons. Of course that's just scenery, we all know its the filthy Muslims who did that. Welcome to Animal Farm. That damn emu was penning proclamations of anarcho-socialist agendas again. Dominion over animals...be more delicious chicken! Thank God for vegetarians/vegans! We only harm plants. Predation is natural, cruelty isn't.
User avatar
thrulookingglass
 
Posts: 877
Joined: Thu May 19, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: down the rabbit hole USA
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 37 guests