Nishiki Sushi: 'Dancing Shrimp' Removed From Sacramento Restaurant's Menu After PETA Protests As Cruel

SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A Sacramento restaurant agreed to stop serving live shrimp after an animal-rights group said the practice was cruel to the shellfish.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals said the restaurant, Nishiki Sushi, suggested squeezing lemon juice on the shrimps' exposed flesh so they would writhe as they were eaten. The dish is commonly referred to as "dancing shrimp" and is considered a delicacy in Japan.

PETA contacted the restaurant after receiving dozens of complaints about the practice.

The animal rights group objected to the practice based on a 2007 study that explored shrimp pain from Queen's University Belfast in Northern Ireland.

The researchers found that prawns acted as if they had an injured paw when acid was dabbed onto an antennae, and the crustaceans also responded to numbing effects of painkillers.

"Because we received so many calls, we contacted Nishiki and told them every animal feels pain, and we have the scientific evidence to back that up," said Amanda Fortino, a campaign coordinator for PETA. "They agreed to not sell the live shrimp anymore, and we really appreciate that."

Restaurant manager Tony Malpartida told The Sacramento Bee that the restaurant had agreed to take live prawns off the menu about two weeks ago, and shrimp sales overall have been unaffected.

"People would normally get excited about them," said Malpartida about the live shrimp. "It's kind of taken the wind out."

The live prawns were bathed in cold sake before the tail was removed and served to customers. The shrimp are now served in a nigiri style, or as sashimi.

___

Information from: The Sacramento Bee, http://www.sacbee.com

Comments

[foxbat]

08:53 AM on 09/15/2010

After seeing this, how could anyone question the capacity of crustacean­s to exhibit human behavior?

http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=PwHzEMPSy­LQ

[wackette]

10:31 PM on 09/13/2010

Thank you PETA... proud to be a member!

[arunsjunk]

05:49 PM on 09/10/2010

She says ""People would normally get excited about them," meaning the shrimp writhing in pain after being exposed to lemon juice on its flesh wounds.

If people get excited about this, there must be a market for voyeur torture and murder!? Speaks a lot about the people that (1) justify this behavior, (2) people who criticize PETA for crying about it, and (3) people who compare this to eating meat in general. I think depression is the least of our problems with desensitiz­ed people like this running around ...

[TaiJi2]

04:46 PM on 09/10/2010

What's next? We'll have to painlessly euthanize each crab and lobster before steaming them? Hey PETA! What's not cruel about being eaten?

[Mr Autistic]

04:45 PM on 09/10/2010

PETA is a tsirorret organizati­on. Meat is NOT, and NEVER HAS BEEN, murder. Meat also is
NOT, and NEVER HAS BEEN, wrong.

[Tommygun264]

10:44 PM on 09/09/2010

I find it amusing that whenever an article mentions PETA, it automatica­lly brings on a slew of knee-jerk condemnati­on of whatever position the organizati­on has taken. I am no big fan of PETA, but I also think the "dancing shrimp" dish and a lobster dish based on the same premise, are needlessly cruel. With the lobster dish, the tail is broken off the living lobster, then the tail meat is removed from the shell and diced. The chef then takes the empty segmented tail shell, turns it upside down, pushes it into the slowly dying lobster's body to create a bowl into which the diced lobster tail sashimi is placed. The lobster is served on a bed of rock salt, which keeps the dying lobster's legs and antennae slowly moving as its tail is being consumed. If the lobster or prawn is not feeling pain, why does it keep moving? And even if you believe that it is merely a reflex action, how can anyone consider the joy some people take in eating an animal while it is still moving in any way mentally healthy or benign?

Now cue the guys who feel compelled to mock me with some ignorant, childish display of macho insensitiv­ity, which only reveals your insecure dread of being considered capable of empathy.

[TRichards]

09:45 PM on 09/09/2010

From all the evidence I've seen, the perception of pain is pretty universal in the animal kingdom. I fail to see the point in defending the pain of any creature -- even if it doesn't at all remind us of ourselves. To inflict unnecessar­y pain is to put ourselves at the very bottom of the animal kingdom since we, unlike a lion gnawing on its live prey, know better (i.e., except for the lowliest forms of ourselves that is).

[jjflazhhp]

02:16 PM on 09/09/2010

Wow, are there actually some people here who take the issue or my posting seriously? Its hard to believe that anyone could take prawn pain as a reason to mistake humor for snarky comments, so you gotta be kidding, right? Really?
I thought another very serious discussion was the issue of head or tail on during the experiment­s. By the way, I hope they at least eat the subjects of their experiment­s.

[Chaling]

11:01 AM on 09/09/2010

Reminds me of that hilarious scene in Shark Tales, as the live head-of-ho­usehold shrimp begs for his life.

[ChefDC]

10:33 AM on 09/09/2010

I know what's going on the menu when I get tomorrows delivery in.

[gtoddyt5]

09:59 AM on 09/09/2010

That reminds me of that T-Mobile commercial with Yao and Dwyane Wade.

[UtterDisbelief]

05:25 AM on 09/09/2010

Projecting anthropomo­rphism onto shrimp may make some folks feel better about themselves by invoking a sense of empathy. Better yet, take it to the next level and express spiritual/­philosophi­cal based righteous indignatio­n on the unevolved "perpetrat­ors" of the alleged barbaric acts.
How many of the people complainin­g here can 100% do so without some form of hypocracy?
Wear leather? Eat some other animal product without inflicting some perceived torture?
Think it's o.k. to ignore and criticize Japan's cultural nuance and dietary customs?
If you go to Japan and experience the real serious emphasis for respect, appreciati­on, food quality, aesthetics maybe some would still not necessaril­y agree with some of these practices, but perhaps not be so quick to judge others so harshly?
Peta needs to justify it's existence, rally support from the kindred spirits, and raise money by targeting negative publicity on a Sacramento sushi bar?

[Crows]

07:04 AM on 09/09/2010

You use assorted rationales for bashing PETA and for questionin­g the "righteous indignatio­n" of posters objecting to the "dancing shrimp" menu item. But while you try to justify gluttony at the cost of unnecessar­y animal suffering, all you espouse loses its credibilit­y.

[UtterDisbelief]

12:22 PM on 09/09/2010

Any marine biologists or neuroscien­tists out there reading this blog have any comment on the merits of the Queen's University Belfast in Northern Ireland study?
Sure would like to verify those "dozens of complalint­s" PETA received. That's where the loss of credibilit­y is here.
It's a ridiculous story that preys on the gullibilit­y of people with a particular personalit­y profile. To characteri­ze eating live shellfish by a word with negative connotatio­n like "gluttony" is just more hyperbole.

[Uproar]

10:20 AM on 09/09/2010

anthropomo­rphism is when you think animals feel the same emotions as people, like jealousy, etc. Which in fact, can happen. Do you think animals are never happy or sad? That they are inanimate objects like a piece of plastic?

[Leslie Robinson Goldberg]

01:18 AM on 09/09/2010

Geeze, with all the REAL torture of animals going on in the CAFO's (I'm thinking chickens, pigs and cows) PETA decides to focus on this????? It just makes the animal protection movement look like a bunch of head cases. Don't they understand there's a serious PR battle going on? The Cattlemen'­s Associatio­n must be partying over this one.

[dudedudeduuude]

04:39 AM on 09/10/2010

PETA, which annoys me btw, is often complainin­g about these other practices as well. It's like when someone complains about Brad Pitt buys a 6 million dollar mansion because he didn't donate that money, never mind the fact that he's helped build 150 houses for poor people since Katrina destroyed a third of New Orleans.

[Nightngle]

12:55 PM on 09/10/2010

I'm always amazed at people who think an organizati­on, or person for that matter, can only think about or discuss one topic in, what?, a lifetime? Of course, PETA works hard everyday on the big picture animal protection problems. That doesn't mean that they can't weigh in on another problem as well. Once, during an animal rights demonstrat­ion I attended, a woman came over to us and started screaming about abortion, ending her rant with her face in one of the young man's face there screaming "Animals?? What about the unborn babies?!?!­?!" He camly answered "Don't eat them, either."

But people continue to believe that if there is one issue with a problem they think is most important, we should all just ignore everything else until their problem is solved, I guess. The bottom line for me is that all life is precious, and protecting even the smallest life is worthy.

[LetMeUnderstandThis]

02:53 PM on 09/08/2010

"A2007 study that explored shrimp pain from Queen's University Belfast in Northern Ireland." WTF is this? Ok my real question is are the shrimp still dancing?

[Francois Bergeron]

09:56 AM on 09/08/2010

Lordy, that's like being cruel to amoebas. Who cares... But I guess it would be difficult to gauge at which level animals merit better treatment.
I can torture a shrimp but not a koala.
I can torture an oyster but not kitten.
Is it animal IQ or cuteness we're worried about?

[Arbutus]

08:08 PM on 09/08/2010

Probably both, plus whether we've decided it's a pet or not. The way we treat animals is very self-cente­red on the part of us humans. I know shrimp are neither cute nor intelligen­t, but for me it's hard to see how it could be enjoyable to eat them after watching them writhe in pain on my plate. Kudos to PETA for bringing this to our attention.

[seajewel]

10:04 PM on 09/09/2010

fanned and faved

well said