PLEASE HELP QUICKLY

The friendliest place on the web for anyone with an interest in aquariums or fish keeping!
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Lots of debate on this, and answers will vary based on individuals opinions. But here are three reasonable options:

1. Quick beheading with a sharp knife or massive blunt trauma with a heavy, flat item (such as a mallet). Sounds awful, and it is a bit messy, but it is also lightning quick and about as painless as it gets.

2. Anaesthetic euthanasia using several drops of clove oil in a small cup of water. Takes a minute, and probably irritates a reasonable amount, but it works and is tidy.

3. Drop fish into ice water and place in deep freeze. Seems a bit brutal, but is probably pretty much painless, and with tropical fish, should kill them via shock within a minute or so.
 
If it's small, boiling water kills them instantly...I'm sorry you have to do it; I just had to euth a tetra a few days ago...
 
If its a small fish, feed it to a bigger one. I've got some Oscars that will eat anything as soon as I put it in the tank.

My buddy also has a 15" small mouth bass that eats just about anything.

Quick...easy...no mess...free food.
 
just a thought, instead of playing god and take the dicision of when one must die why not let it live until god makes the choice. I know that many rather not suffer and get it over with but since the fish cannot express thier thoughts how you know he wants to go know or live until it time is really up?
 
kaz said:
just a thought, instead of playing god and take the dicision of when one must die why not let it live until god makes the choice. I know that many rather not suffer and get it over with but since the fish cannot express thier thoughts how you know he wants to go know or live until it time is really up?
Click to expand...

reasons to euthanize:
1. fish could be very ill with little chance of recovery. so pain/discomfort would continue until fish wastes away and dies. examples: would you let a dog that has a fatal disease that couldnt eat/act normally, waste away and die in agony? i know i wouldnt. you could call it playing god, but at a point, someone could argue "mercy killing".

2. danger to other healthy livestock. a fish that has a disease that has no chance of living, could be a very big danger to other inhabitants. one could argue to place dying fish in a QT but what if one doesnt own it?

both are valid imo.
 
I agree it is highly debatable as far as ethics are concerned.
to me putting a fish in a freezer is inhumane and places more stress on the fish.
I prefer a sharp blow to the head or a thump on the bench.

Having said that, an looking at all these other ways, why not simply take the fish out of water?
 
Supernatural questions aside, it's our obligation when we keep a sentient being to end its suffering if there is no hope of recovery, as painlessly as possible. We take on that role when we keep animals captive. If we followed "god's will"...I think we were already messing with that when we took them out of the places "god" put them and installed them in our living rooms.
 
If its a small fish, feed it to a bigger one. I've got some Oscars that will eat anything as soon as I put it in the tank.

My buddy also has a 15" small mouth bass that eats just about anything.

Quick...easy...no mess...free food.
Click to expand...

If the fish is ill, the illness will infect the fish that ingests it. Not exactly the best option.

Euthanasia is a very touchy subject and varying opinions abound. Allowing a fish to suffocate is the most inhumane way to euthanize. Freezing is much better if done correctly.

Place the fish in ice cold water first. This "knocks" out the fish. Then place in bag and place in freezer.
 
The ice water method causes the fish to become unresponsive within seconds. Then allow the fish to freeze as the inital unresponsiveness is more or less a hybernation/comma that fish can naturally obtain in cold climents.
 
I used to have an internal ethical debate about euthanasia to end perceived suffering vs. letting nature take its course. Then I realized that nature taking its course is a sick little fish gets eaten by a bigger fish and its suffering is ended. Since I don't have any big fish (and I wouldn't want to spread disease) I euthanize the terminally ill. I use the cold shock method. Ice cold water kills smaller fish in seconds.
 
Agreed. Temperature shock is the way to go. I've had to euthanize 2 fish that way and it worked very well.

Just a not, this confusion is why I wrote the article about euthansia that is posted as a sticky in the unhealthy fish forum. Please give it a read.
 
I too have had the unforunate and undesirable task of having to euthanize fish. I did my research and do the ice water shock treatment as I found it to be more humane. The hardest part for me is deciding it is time to euthanize.
 
When a bigger fish eats a smaller fish, doesn't the smaller fish usually just get swallowed? I've not seen a fish chew it's food, unless the mouth is too small!!
 
frostby said:
When a bigger fish eats a smaller fish, doesn't the smaller fish usually just get swallowed? I've not seen a fish chew it's food, unless the mouth is too small!!
Click to expand...

Yeah, its more of a "out of sight out of mind" philosophy. But the main difference is, fish eating fish is completely natural even if it is a slower death. Getting flushed alive down a toilet is not natural.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

H
Help please. White slime on oscar.
Replies
3
Views
805
Andy Sager
Andy Sager
D
Peacock Cichlid
Replies
4
Views
237
Aiken Drum
Aiken Drum
A
Unhealthy betta ?
Replies
4
Views
295
Andy Sager
Andy Sager
S
Not eating, breathing faster & red gills
Replies
1
Views
203
Aiken Drum
Aiken Drum
R
New fish owner, please help me
Replies
3
Views
380
Aiken Drum
Aiken Drum

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom