culling chicks...

[bobbi-j]

I used to do just that. I figured he was so getting the better end of this marriage deal, he should be the one to dispatch things, right?

But, then I decided to run an incubator and thought I should put on my big girl panties and take care of it myself. I cried the whole time, but got the job done.

Well, yeah! That's why mine gets to do it! Actually, he knows if he doesn't, I'd still try to "fix" them and just prolong the inevitable. When the time comes for me to put on my big girl panties, I'll cry the whole time, too.

 

[ShockValue]

I've heard that the C02 method is not as humane as people intend it to be. I'm NOT an expert and haven't done any culling myself, but just would suggest a little research on the pros and cons.

As tiny chicks it's very easy to just pop the head off with a quick squeeze, if you have the stomach to do it. (I'm not sure I do....)

Interested in this subject because we plan on letting our broody hatch out some eggs and don't intend to keep the cockerels.

 

[HCB]

This thread is old, I know. But today I had occasion to kill a fresh-hatched chick and wanted to pass along information I had gained and, instead of posting another thread, I thought I'd search and append to one which was on point. This thread was on point.

Please read the information that donrae posted a link to (third reply to the OP). It's more detailed than I could be. Basically, it involves killing the animal via CO2 asphyxiation. I had first read about it at www.waldeneffect.org but several links on that site don't work and it seems to have fallen out of routine maintenance (just my take on things) so I wanted to promote the info here. This thread does 98% of my work.

Basically, I put a small container inside a slightly larger container, placed some baking soda in the smaller container, placed the chick outside the smaller container but inside the larger container, poured vinegar in the smaller container on the baking soda to produce CO2 and lightly placed the lid on the larger container (loosely so that the off-gassing reactants had a place to disburse the O2-laden air inside the container). Less than 1 minute later, the chick was dead.

Read the info that donrae posted a link to; it covers this in more detail including the concentrations of CO2 which may be painful to the chick and how much of each component could be used (I'm sure, having done this before reading this thread, that I used too much baking soda and vinegar and probably achieved a concentration which was painful to the animal).

But, the principle is sound and the idea works and, while any killing is unpleasant, it's better than letting the bird, which was failing to thrive, die slowly over the next few days or weeks.

FWIW.

--HC

 

[rebrascora]

If we are talking young chicks, it is a lot quicker than one second, let alone one minute, to snip off their head with a pair of kitchen shears. People use the CO2 method because it is easier for them, rather than easier for the animal, in my opinion.

 

[Maeschak]

If we are talking young chicks, it is a lot quicker than one second, let alone one minute, to snip off their head with a pair of kitchen shears. People use the CO2 method because it is easier for them, rather than easier for the animal, in my opinion.

Kitchen scissors are perfect for newly hatched chicks.

 

[rebrascora]

I would like to add that whilst I sound quite tough and matter of fact about it, the odd time I have had to euthanize a chick or even a sick hen, I have,. as the sadly missed donrae put it, "donned my big girls pants" and then cried like a baby. Scissors are quick and effective for chicks. I use the broomstick method of cervical dislocation for older birds.

 

[bobbi-j]

I still have my hubby do it...

 

[HCB]

If we are talking young chicks, it is a lot quicker than one second, let alone one minute, to snip off their head with a pair of kitchen shears. People use the CO2 method because it is easier for them, rather than easier for the animal, in my opinion.

Well, I meant to do the best for the animal. After reading your post I'm re-thinking my approach. However, I wonder if it's easier (less painless) to suffocate versus being beheaded. That's probably a great, nasty can of worms. The French, I believe, invented the guillotine. I think there's some question to the "humaneness" of that. A vet I respect once said about animals in general, "they don't have the pain receptors we have". Well, nuts, more questions than answers. While they may seem to be deceased faster, I wonder how long their brains function after decapitation and, therefore, their ability to feel something. Again, questions, not answers.

I will freely say, however, that it *appears* more peaceful and that cutting its head from its body is more gruesome. Yes, that's my problem. I'll have to ruminate on this for awhile. However, next, we'll talk religion, abortion, and politics and make *everybody* angry.

Thanks, all, for the replies.

--HC

 

[rebrascora]

However, next, we'll talk religion, abortion, and politics and make *everybody* angry.

Errr..... Let's not .

The concept of gruesome is a human feeling though and it is this fear of blood and violence which makes people want to find an easier way, where they don't get their "hands dirty". But you are right we really don't know what receptors still fire after death.
Before the guillotine there was an executioner with an axe, who might not always make a clean and accurate first chop..... the French invention surely had to be an improvement on that!