Shark fin soup sold in Ireland

RussellTuring

Locust wrote: »

Do whatever we want to them? I dont think that includes multilating them and dumping the half alive corpses...

Well it clearly does, since this is what people do. Why is it not ok for others to do this? Just because you don't like it?

But - Chicken fish beef etc...
Are put there for me to survive/eat/grow and enjoy in a meal.
Not just providing me with vitamins/nutrients for my body but... taste good... and are appetising

Put her by whom exactly? Is the test of your right to eat a food how tasty you think it is?

Guess what - i am a higher form of life and will enjoy consuming them, (repsectfully i appreciate them).

What exactly is it that makes you "a higher form of life"? It's easy to fit criteria that you specify. Other animals have little choice in what they eat but our particular species is at a stage where we can survive without killing. Is it somehow more enlightened to kill out of greed rather than necessity?

I do draw the line with cruelty & wastefulness and the upset/end of a species.
I.e. i would go for coley fish over cod/haddock etc... as cod are over fished - give them a break (coley being a close relative of cod but largely unknown).

Give them a break and then start eating them again when they recover. How noble of you.

Farm sharks??
I'm not really that into eating shark fin soup, the body of the shark is useless for eating (apparently - its a predator fish) so i consider it cruel/wasteful but yeah if we farmed them and there was a purpose/use for them in a dish or somewhere else for them i've no issue with eating them.

But so far its cruel/wasteful - mussels, coley, mackrel etc... are readily available and guess what they just happen make my body stay alive and thrive! why not give the over fished species a break and consume the others!

Here's a novel idea: if they weren't eaten at all we wouldn't have to worry about their numbers recovering.

steddyeddy

knird evol wrote: »

They grow back ffs

jesus thatsa beyond belief, fins are for swimming, sharks need to swim.

steddyeddy

Gummy Panda wrote: »

I got to say, flake (gummy shark) is lovely in Australia. I loved going to the fish & chip shop, that was fishmongers during the day, for some grub.

Austraila tends not to be the the height of human achievment

LighterGuy

I think I can settle this argument :pac:

Its wrong to cut off a sharks fin and toss it back to the ocean still alive.
But its ok to kill a lamb (young/baby sheep) as long as slaghterhouses officially say "we do it humanly"


:pac:

steddyeddy

LighterGuy wrote: »

I think I can settle this argument :pac:

Its wrong to cut off a sharks fin and toss it back to the ocean still alive.
But its ok to kill a lamb (young/baby sheep) as long as slaghterhouses officially say "we do it humanly"


:pac:

whos saying both are right, but it would be definatly wrong to cut off a lambs legs and leave it to die

LighterGuy

Killing is killing when you think about it.
Its like if I am up on trial for klling a guy. But in my defense I did it humanly so he didnt feel a thing.

Theres actually a chinese place in blanchardstown that serves shark lips. Gimme a kiss ya big sexy beast.

steddyeddy

LighterGuy wrote: »

Killing is killing when you think about it.
Its like if I am up on trial for klling a guy. But in my defense I did it humanly so he didnt feel a thing.

Theres actually a chinese place in blanchardstown that serves shark lips. Gimme a kiss ya big sexy beast.

no thanks ill pass on that kiss, in fairness people dont need to kill each other but we do kill for sustanence.

Lab_Mouse

steddyeddy wrote: »

peta arent hands on enough I prefer the animal liberation front

LighterGuy

steddyeddy wrote: »

no thanks ill pass on that kiss, in fairness people dont need to kill each other but we do kill for sustanence.

Not to be all serious but we all know what happened in that real life airplane that crashed that the movie "Alive" was based on.

If chickens, cows and pigs die out we'd turn to another animal. Eventually erase that off too. Human nature I guess.

steddyeddy

Lab_Mouse wrote: »

thats them alright I really dont get their tactics, i saw them in town shouting mink farming was evil the day after they were all released by a mysterious group!

man.about.town

LighterGuy wrote: »

I think I can settle this argument :pac:

Its wrong to cut off a sharks fin and toss it back to the ocean still alive.
But its ok to kill a lamb (young/baby sheep) as long as slaghterhouses officially say "we do it humanly"


:pac:

my point about shark finning is first and foremostly, many species of sharks are going extinct. its the same reason tigers and rhinos etc are going extinct. its for the ludicrously big and ludicrously insane chinese market that believe these rarities possess status or mystical powers. sheep/chickens/cows etc are bred for consumption and are definitely not in danger of going extinct. it is up to the individual to ensure they eat free range or become a vegetarian.

my second issue with shark fin soup is that its incredibly inhumane and wasteful to butcher a shark and throw it back in alive to die in pain.

thirdly, its also completely unregulated and uncontrolled. (73m a year)

before everyone starts again, i no there is so many things that are wrong in the world as so many people have pointed out such as the way some of our domesticated animals are kept , declining fish populations from over fishing, deforestation of the amazon, global warming etc.. but unfortunately all anyone can do is there part to help in something they feel is wrong. the world has too many problems for one person to tackle them all.

the reason i posted this thread is that i was first shocked to realise a restaurant i frequent served shark fin soup, it is easy for me to avoid this restaurant in the future. i hope some others follow my lead and email them to inform them if this is the reason they refuse to eat there. like wise i wouldnt go to a restaurant that served foie gras. there are several other restaurants serving shark fin soup and like foie gras in ireland but have removed it from the menu as a result of people boycotting them. its only a little gesture but hopefully it will lead to change

ps im far from an animal rights campaigner, it is just a little thing that i can do that makes me feel better and possibly lead to a change

Wibbs

Just jumped back into this...

RussellTuring wrote: »

Yeah it's easy to be critical of other cultures but people in the West are just as bad.

No shít sherlock? Rather than get yourself in a lather of indignation at my first sentence, maybe try reading the full of my post where I point this fact out. Jesus. Why does every debate on cultural diff come out with the "ohhh it's not just X you know, look to yourselves you decadent western bastards you". Yea. Great argument that one. Just because I'm a twat, doesnt negate the idea that you may be one too. I can admit the former, so why does the latter rankle?

Whether you like it or not,

Cheers for working out my moral indignation before the fact. The force is stroooong in you.

fur is a big thing in this part of the world

Eh.... really? Where? If you had said leather I would have trooped in step right behind you. In leather shoes to boot, but fur? I know fcuk all people with fur nor an interest in same. Big thing? Not unlesss you're a Russian oligarch's missus(or the oligarch himself)

and most people who support that

And who supports this exactly?

don't know or care that the animals are raised on horrible conditions and often skinned alive, left to die excruciating
deaths.

Oh FFS. Have you ever tried to skin a carcass? I'm thinking no. On practical terms doing so while said animal is alive is not exactly conducive to efficiency, never mind the moral or even "ick" factor. The clue is in the word of my first sentence on the matter. "Carcass"

You're right in that most people don't have time to campaign for ending animal cruelty but I don't think anyone was suggesting that. At least one person has said that they will no longer give business to a restaurant that sells shark fin soup and there are campaigns to lobby restaurants that serve foie gras. But I'd imagine that the majority if these people will continue to eat the old reliables of beef, pork and chicken, even though they could simply stop, if only they actually cared.

At this point I feel I should have tears running down my manly cheek(well manly is a stretch. Fcuk off Terry, Degsy et al).

I'm not suggesting that everyone go vegan. I know a lot of people don't really care how animals are treated and care more about their own appetites, so I think it's hypocritical to single out particular species you feel it's not ok to eat, just because it's not what you're used to. Either it's all ok or none of it is.

Ah yes the black and white morality of the just formed opinion. Hey, you're on the right track to be fair. Get back to us when the argument has more grey.

Lab_Mouse

steddyeddy wrote: »

thats them alright I really dont get their tactics, i saw them in town shouting mink farming was evil the day after they were all released by a mysterious group!

and the mink went on killed loads of indigneous animals,i know fukked up logic

steddyeddy

Lab_Mouse wrote: »

and the mink went on killed loads of indigneous animals,i know fukked up logic

Some of animal welfare is certainly backlash.

LighterGuy

man.about.town wrote: »

my point about shark finning is first and foremostly, many species of sharks are going extinct. its the same reason tigers and rhinos etc are going extinct. its for the ludicrously big and ludicrously insane chinese market that believe these rarities possess status or mystical powers. sheep/chickens/cows etc are bred for consumption and are definitely not in danger of going extinct. it is up to the individual to ensure they eat free range or become a vegetarian.

my second issue with shark fin soup is that its incredibly inhumane and wasteful to butcher a shark and throw it back in alive to die in pain.

thirdly, its also completely unregulated and uncontrolled. (73m a year)

before everyone starts again, i no there is so many things that are wrong in the world as so many people have pointed out such as the way some of our domesticated animals are kept , declining fish populations from over fishing, deforestation of the amazon, global warming etc.. but unfortunately all anyone can do is there part to help in something they feel is wrong. the world has too many problems for one person to tackle them all.

the reason i posted this thread is that i was first shocked to realise a restaurant i frequent served shark fin soup, it is easy for me to avoid this restaurant in the future. i hope some others follow my lead and email them to inform them if this is the reason they refuse to eat there. like wise i wouldnt go to a restaurant that served foie gras. there are several other restaurants serving shark fin soup and like foie gras in ireland but have removed it from the menu as a result of people boycotting them. its only a little gesture but hopefully it will lead to change

ps im far from an animal rights campaigner, it is just a little thing that i can do that makes me feel better and possibly lead to a change

I know what you're saying man. I aint disagreeing with you that its cruel.

Just searched up what foie gras was. I didnt know. For anyone who doesnt know it too watch this insightful documentary: foie gras


My two cents is that this is just man.
We'll make everything extinct and as long as there is profit to be made. The word cruelity doesnt exsist.

RussellTuring

Wibbs wrote: »

Just jumped back into this...

No shít sherlock? Rather than get yourself in a lather of indignation at my first sentence, maybe try reading the full of my post where I point this fact out.

I did read your full text. In it, you said the Chinese can be extremely cruel and that Western nations can be extremely wasteful. I was saying that cruelty exists in all parts of the world. Perhaps you should take the advice you give out and read your own post.

Jesus. Why does every debate on cultural diff come out with the "ohhh it's not just X you know, look to yourselves you decadent western bastards you". Yea. Great argument that one. Just because I'm a twat, doesnt negate the idea that you may be one too. I can admit the former, so why does the latter rankle?

I never said I was better than anyone else and yes, I'm sure everyone comes off as a twat to at least one other person, myself included. My point was that nobody is better than anyone else. We all do bad things. So I don't see how we're in disagreement here.

Cheers for working out my moral indignation before the fact. The force is stroooong in you.

Is there a point to this besides condescension? It was a throwaway comment and I think you read into it more deeply I meant it.

Eh.... really? Where? If you had said leather I would have trooped in step right behind you. In leather shoes to boot, but fur? I know fcuk all people with fur nor an interest in same. Big thing? Not unlesss you're a Russian oligarch's missus(or the oligarch himself)And who supports this exactly?

Pardon me. Fur was the first thing that sprang to mind when I thought of cruelty to animals. I could indeed have picked leather, or bloodsports or animal testing. I wasn't aware that I had to choose one of the more popular forms of cruelty. And it's supported by the people who buy it, but I think this is obvious.

Oh FFS. Have you ever tried to skin a carcass? I'm thinking no. On practical terms doing so while said animal is alive is not exactly conducive to efficiency, never mind the moral or even "ick" factor. The clue is in the word of my first sentence on the matter. "Carcass"

No. There are some things I'd rather not try, even once. And what exactly is your point in your use of the word "carcass"? You brought it up even though I was clearly talking about live animals. Although rare, they can be semi-conscious when skinned.

At this point I feel I should have tears running down my manly cheek(well manly is a stretch. Fcuk off Terry, Degsy et al).

Well, no. Judging by how angry you seem to have gotten at my post, most of which wasn't even addressed to you, I wouldn't expect you to get upset. That wasn't even the purpose of this block of text: the purpose was to highlight what I see as the conflicting attitudes people have towards animals. I'm not trying to make anyone cry.

Ah yes the black and white morality of the just formed opinion. Hey, you're on the right track to be fair. Get back to us when the argument has more grey.

Just formed by whom exactly? And my position is what it is.

man.about.town

LighterGuy wrote: »

I know what you're saying man. I aint disagreeing with you that its cruel.

Just searched up what foie gras was. I didnt know. For anyone who doesnt know it too watch this insightful documentary: foie gras


My two cents is that this is just man.
We'll make everything extinct and as long as there is profit to be made. The word cruelity doesnt exsist.

your right, its just mans greed. barbaric

maninasia

Worztron wrote: »

The method of getting shark fin soup is very disturbing. The poor shark is caught and then dumped back into into the sea after having its fins sliced off, therefore cannot swim or eat any more. Can you imagine what is going through the sharks mind? How can people be so cruel to animals?

Yeah it's distubing, illegal, wasteful and it doesn't even taste like anything (I know I've eaten it before but avoided it for the last few years). It's a real dumb thing to eat.
But remember, each fish you eat has suffocated to death or has had a big hook stuck through it's mouth or body. Sure fish feel no pain...right.

maninasia

EnterNow wrote: »

Yep, the very one who invented shark cages. We may be more intelligent, but then intelligence is relevent isn't it. You don't see sharks/dolphin/whales/bears/tigers/rhinos going around killing each other in the name of different deities, or knowingly destroying their environment. For all our 'intelligence', mankind has a very dumb way of showing it. We're more like a plague if anything, which is unfortunate for the other inhabitants of the planet.

Yep, intelligence can be a curse as much as a blessing. Intelligence is useless without really examining what you are doing and the consequences to others.
In fact if we were really intelligent we'd work together, clean up the planet, figure out a way not to kill most of the animals on it, not bump each other off and think further than next week or our next meal.
Thinking about it a bit, we aren't really so intelligent, we have enough to do a lot of harm but not enough to cop on!

Kold

maninasia wrote: »

Yep, intelligence can be a curse as much as a blessing. Intelligence is useless without really examining what you are doing and the consequences to others.
In fact if we were really intelligent we'd work together, clean up the planet, figure out a way not to kill most of the animals on it, not bump each other off and think further than next week or our next meal.
Thinking about it a bit, we aren't really so intelligent, we have enough to do a lot of harm but not enough to cop on!

Intelligence doesn't really have anything to do with subjective values actually.

Myrddin

maninasia wrote: »

Yep, intelligence can be a curse as much as a blessing. Intelligence is useless without really examining what you are doing and the consequences to others.
In fact if we were really intelligent we'd work together, clean up the planet, figure out a way not to kill most of the animals on it, not bump each other off and think further than next week or our next meal.
Thinking about it a bit, we aren't really so intelligent, we have enough to do a lot of harm but not enough to cop on!

That's essentially the point I was trying to make. I'm not part of either side of this debate really. I don't see a problem with farming animals (chicken curry? Yum! ), animals also kill each other daily in their natural environment too.

What I do have a problem with though, is well two things. If we're going to farm animals, keep them captives, & slaughter them for human cinsumption, well the very very least we can do is to provide a good standard of living for that animal, & also when it's killed, make sure it's as quick and painless as possible. It's about basic respect for life really, after all, we are the most intelligent animals on the planet are we not? Higher intelligence means we have the ability for complex emotions like empathy & compassion. Choosing not to use them, in favour of greed is well, an example of our not so higher-intelligence.

Secondly, the killing of endangered species (such as the type of shark in this case, or whales etc) is completely wrong. Not only because they are endangered, but because these animals are culled in mass numbers, often with young, butchered for whatever it is we want & thrown back into the water often alive & in agony. The endgame of this travesty? So far eastern businessmen can regail each other with stories of their wealth & stature, while dining over such 'delicacies'. This is not farming, not eating to survive, it wouldn't even be half as bad if the bloody animal was killed when it's limbs were being torn off. But to throw it back into the water, pouring blood & unable to swim...is what man is truly capable of.

I can only reason that we certainly have the potential to live up to our title as the most intelligent animal, but our ingrained greed & lust for wealth will overpower that potential every time. We seriously need a wake up call.

Kold wrote: »

Intelligence doesn't really have anything to do with subjective values actually.

Thats the whole point, we use the word intelligence about ourselves far too liberally.

sensibleken

Intelligence is not the same as wisdom

zagmund

I'm sure I saw a BBC nature documentary once where this pride of lions forgot their manners and just laid into a poor oul zebra while he was still alive. Imagine what the zebra was thinking as he was getting lighter by the mouthful . . . "Those fecking lions, don't they know they're supposed to stun me first ?"

Shark finning is pretty crap by all accounts, it's wasteful by all accounts, but c'mon . . . at the end of the day all sharks are going to end up dieing slowly (or being eaten quickly by kick-ass bigger sharks) as they grow old, lose energy and ultimately, well, die. Life sucks, whether your a human or a shark. Shark finning could be made a little more tolerable if the remaining 99% of the shark wasn't wasted and the killing was done speedily

Many people are under no illusion that the animals that go into their food probably didn't have a great life. Ultimately, they had a pretty effective death and entered a process which ended up with bits of them on a plate. Many people will do what they can to make sure that the 'being alive' bit is as good as it can be, but regardless of it all the animal is going to be slaughtered and eaten.

The alternative to this sort of process (if you are going to eat meat) is to avoid farmed animals and source your meat from the wild. Doesn't matter how much fun the animals had when they were young, frollicking in the fields/streams, they are still going to end up dead in one way or another.

I'm not a big fan of mass-farmed meat but I am realistic enough to accept that if I'm going to eat meat it is the most efficient method of production. Does it upset me that these animals are deemed 'products' ? Not really.

z

steddyeddy

Kold wrote: »

Intelligence doesn't really have anything to do with subjective values actually.

Well i would dispute that actually

Bruthal

zagmund wrote: »

Shark finning is pretty crap by all accounts, it's wasteful by all accounts, but c'mon . . . at the end of the day all sharks are going to end up dieing slowly (or being eaten quickly by kick-ass bigger sharks) as they grow old, lose energy and ultimately, well, die. Life sucks, whether your a human or a shark. Shark finning could be made a little more tolerable if the remaining 99% of the shark wasn't wasted and the killing was done speedily

So because the sharks will die eventually anyway, its fine so to kill them just to have their fins? Why not kill everything we want so and not bother protecting anything as they will all die eventually anyway.

The alternative to this sort of process (if you are going to eat meat) is to avoid farmed animals and source your meat from the wild. Doesn't matter how much fun the animals had when they were young, frollicking in the fields/streams, they are still going to end up dead in one way or another.

And again, because the farm animal is going to end up dead one way or another, why bother treating them properly when they are alive is what you are saying? We will all be dead in some way or another too, so why bother trying to have a good life so?

zagmund

No, the point I was making was that when they die naturally it will likely be slow and painful so no difference there. It doesn't make the practice of finning any better, but neither does it mean that a natural death of old age will be any better.

It's a bit like the lions laying into the zebra - no matter what way you look at it the zebra is not going to go out dreaming of life on the plains. Unless the lions eat him in his sleep.

And the other point I was making was that *if you are going to eat meat*, no matter what you do (unless you live on carrion) the animal is going to be killed. If it's not dead you can't eat it. If it is dead, chances are that its last moments alive weren't very pleasant. Farmed or taken from the wild - same net result. You seemed to miss the main thrust of that point. Meat = dead. Dead = someone or something killed the animal. Animal killed = animal probably didn't enjoy the last few moments.

z

Bruthal

zagmund wrote: »

No, the point I was making was that when they die naturally it will likely be slow and painful so no difference there. It doesn't make the practice of finning any better, but neither does it mean that a natural death of old age will be any better.

Well when they die naturally they have lived their lives. Some animals are extinct because man killed them, them same animals would have each died anyway, but they would of lived long enough to continue breeding, not become extinct. Its complete rubbish to say its ok to kill sharks to take their fins based on the fact they will die eventually anyway. Why not just kill everything we want if thats the case?

It's a bit like the lions laying into the zebra - no matter what way you look at it the zebra is not going to go out dreaming of life on the plains. Unless the lions eat him in his sleep.

Yea but the lions need the zebra to survive, they dont just eat the zebra legs. And are unlikely to send the zebra to extinction.

And the other point I was making was that *if you are going to eat meat*, no matter what you do (unless you live on carrion) the animal is going to be killed. If it's not dead you can't eat it. If it is dead, chances are that its last moments alive weren't very pleasant. Farmed or taken from the wild - same net result. You seemed to miss the main thrust of that point. Meat = dead. Dead = someone or something killed the animal. Animal killed = animal probably didn't enjoy the last few moments.

The main thrust of this is shark fin soup. Kill a shark to take fins? And you say its ok because the shark will die eventually anyway? Again if thats the case why not let everyone kill everything they feel like.

Why not let the poachers kill the rhino`s for their horns, or the elephants for their tusks. Its no different really, after all, the rhino or elephant will eventually seccumb to nature and it might be a slow death, so the poacher killing them now will save them from that years in thier future.

zagmund

zagmund wrote: »

No, the point I was making was that when they die naturally it will likely be slow and painful so no difference there. It doesn't make the practice of finning any better, but neither does it mean that a natural death of old age will be any better.
z

Ok then I'll kill you since you woulda died anyway :cool:

tropics

There is nothing positive about shark fining. It is a destructive and wasteful process. Sharks have a very slow reproductive system, and they grow slowly. Females and juveniles are regularly caught.

People are being exploited by this process also, I have experienced fishing practices in 3rd world countries that are beyond belief. Some fishermen go out into large swells in tiny canoes to catch shark. Many end up injured or drowned. They are forced into this practice as the local fish stocks are being depleted by large trawlers from all nations. The money they get from selling fins is very small but it helps feed families.

Another Asian delicacy is the sea cucumber, which lives its life buried in the sand. Fishermen dive down and bring them up. problem is they are hard to get to and a lot of guys get killed foraging for them in deep water either using faulty scuba gear or free diving.

My point is that when a species get exploited it has knock on effect.
It hurts local communities, By either endangering themselves in pursuing the catch or by the removal of tourism money which comes from people who want to see sharks/lion/zebras in the wild.

Myrddin

zagmund wrote: »

It's a bit like the lions laying into the zebra - no matter what way you look at it the zebra is not going to go out dreaming of life on the plains. Unless the lions eat him in his sleep.

It's nothing like the lion/zebra example. Your missing the point.

Are the lions feeding on prey in order to survive & ensure the survival of the pride?

OR

Are the lions feeding on prey because they think zebra meat will make them last longer in bed with mrs. lion?

If it's the first reason, welcome to the natural world. If it's the second reason, if they're eating for a completely idiotic & untrue reason, fair enough, but at least don't let the poor thing suffer & die a hiddeous death into the bargain ffs.

zagmund

To the zebra/shark it's all the same, no matter what the motivation of the perpetrator.

Agreed - shark finning is wasteful, shark finning is cruel, No debate there.

z

p.s. have you never seen a cat playing with a mouse/bird it has caught ? I've seen them keep a paw on them for minutes at a time, then lift the paw up, let the creature think it's getting away and then just pounce on it again a few seconds later and go through it all again. Is this behaviour designed to survive or just to play at the expense of the prey ? I'm not sure about that.

zagmund

Incidentally, I agree with the sentiments of th OP and would be prepared to boycott Wongs or any other restaurants which served shark fin soup. As it happens I don't think I've ever been to Wongs and am unlikely to be there in the future, but I *would* choose somewhere else if given a preference.

z

Myrddin

zagmund wrote: »

To the zebra/shark it's all the same, no matter what the motivation of the perpetrator.

How exactly do you know this? I know they won't be aware of the reasons etc, but are you saying that everything non-human is mindlessly unaware of what's happening?

zagmund wrote:

p.s. have you never seen a cat playing with a mouse/bird it has caught ? I've seen them keep a paw on them for minutes at a time, then lift the paw up, let the creature think it's getting away and then just pounce on it again a few seconds later and go through it all again. Is this behaviour designed to survive or just to play at the expense of the prey ? I'm not sure about that.

I have seen that behaviour. Cats are predatory animals, & like all animals have thousands of years of instict ingrained into them. Maternal cats will often hunt prey, debilitate it, & return it to it's young in order for them to learn to hunt, & ultimately fend for themselves. While domestic cats don't have this problem, the instincts are nevertheless still there. In domestic cats, returning a wounded mouse or even a dead one to it's owner is generally thought to be a social occurance, much to the disgust of the owner lol. As I said before, animals do speak, we just don't understand them.

The grander point though is that for all of our higher intelligence, it's still overshadowed by greed & vanity no matter what the example used is.

double GG

┌∩┐[o_o]┌∩┐ Ramsay.

Worztron

The method to get shark fin soup is horrendous. The poor sharks are dumped into the ocean to bleed to death and end their lives in agony. :mad:

How can people be so cruel and callous to animals?

http://www.stopsharkfinning.net/boycott-ireland.htm

Batsy

Shark fin soup is delicious. I've had it loads of times. You can buy it at the Sainsbury's in Bolton.

In fact, now that this thread had reminded me of it, I might buy a tin of it later.

Batsy

Einhard wrote: »

Don't kid yourself, man.about.town. If a shark ever got the chance, he'd eat your arms and the arms of everyone you care about!

Nah. Only a very few species of shark are maneaters.

There are are 400 species of shark, but only 40 species will attack people.

Batsy

RussellTuring wrote: »

it's seen as ok to kill,

It is okay to kill an animal for food.

Humans are natural meateaters. Humans killing animals for food is what nature intended, so spare us all the unnatural hippy, vegetarian, Greenpeace nonsense.

steddyeddy

Batsy wrote: »

RussellTuring wrote: »

it's seen as ok to kill,

It is okay to kill an animal for food.

Humans are natural meateaters. Humans killing animals for food is what nature intended, so spare us all the unnatural hippy, vegetarian, Greenpeace nonsense.

The point is a lot of the animal is wasted. Its not only cruel its an insult to the million starving in the world.

Locust

Batsy wrote: »

Shark fin soup is delicious. I've had it loads of times. You can buy it at the Sainsbury's in Bolton.

In fact, now that this thread had reminded me of it, I might buy a tin of it later.

Sharkfin soup is bland and doesn't taste of anything mate...

It is okay to kill an animal for food - yeah absolutely. Thats fine, but when you only take a tiny useless bit - that is of no nutritious value - and throw the rest of the animal away? Just for hot soup?!?

As someone said its a bit like sawing the paws off a lion and leaving the animal to bleed out on the plains in agony...

Thats nothing to do with eating another animal to survive - thats cruelty mate. Your also f**king with the oceans ecosystem by pointlessly removing lots of good natural predators in an area... God knows what that will upset in years to come...


But yeah off you go to Sainsbury's and enjoy your soup...

Batsy

steddyeddy wrote: »

The point is a lot of the animal is wasted. Its not only cruel its an insult to the million starving in the world.

If you want to see what REAL waste is you should go out with the EU fishing fleets.

Thanks to one of the many bizarre EU rules (its fishing quota system), 1 MILLION tons of fish are thrown back dead into the North Sea each year. Unlike those sharks, no part of those fish are eaten at all.

Countries such as China fishing for sharks for their fins is much less wasteful than what the Eu does when it catches fish.

Batsy

Locust wrote: »

Sharkfin soup is bland and doesn't taste of anything mate...

That's just a matter of opinion. I personally like it.

Thats fine, but when you only take a tiny useless bit - that is of no nutritious value - and throw the rest of the animal away?

The shark fin is not useless. It is used to make shark fin soup.

bronte

It's a disgusting barbaric practice.
I'm no fan of Ramsey but have to hand it to him for drawing attention to this cruelty.
Had no idea Sainsbury's stocked it. Won't be going there any time soon.
Gonna check other supermarkets.

Mr Benevolent

Meh too many namby-pamby greenie Independent readers here. Everyone ignores the 1m+ tons of fish dumped around the Irish coast to whinge on about a few sharks in China. Perspective would be a nice thing.

steddyeddy

Batsy wrote: »

Locust wrote: »

Sharkfin soup is bland and doesn't taste of anything mate...

That's just a matter of opinion. I personally like it.

Thats fine, but when you only take a tiny useless bit - that is of no nutritious value - and throw the rest of the animal away?

The shark fin is not useless. It is used to make shark fin soup.

Would you chop of a dogs legs and let him bleed to death.

Batsy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Would you chop of a dogs legs and let him bleed to death.

I would if dogs' legs were considered a delicious delicacy.

Unfortunately, outside of Korea they aren't.

I like oxtail soup, too.

maximoose

steddyeddy wrote: »

Would you chop of a dogs legs and let him bleed to death.

Depends, Is Dog's Leg Soup tasty?

steddyeddy

Batsy wrote: »

steddyeddy wrote: »

Would you chop of a dogs legs and let him bleed to death.

I would if dogs' legs were considered a delicious delicacy.

Unfortunately, outside of Korea they aren't.

I like oxtail soup, too.

Cutting of a dogs legs and leaving it to die . Please god dont have children.

Batsy

steddyeddy wrote: »

Cutting of a dogs legs and leaving it to die . Please god dont have children.

I WOULD eat a dog if I was starving.

steddyeddy

Confab wrote: »

Meh too many namby-pamby greenie Independent readers here. Everyone ignores the 1m+ tons of fish dumped around the Irish coast to whinge on about a few sharks in China. Perspective would be a nice thing.

Are those fish definned and left to bleed to death.