California is poised to ban octopus farming

California is poised to ban octopus farming

California lawmakers have approved a bill that would make it illegal to farm octopuses in state waters or on land, as well as to import them.

The bill, AB 3162, now sits on Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk, awaiting his signature — or his veto.

Proponents of the bill say legislation is needed to position California as a leader in humane aquaculture. They point to a growing body of research showing that the eight-limbed creatures are self-aware and highly intelligent, and that turning them into food production material is cruel, inefficient and detrimental to the environment.

The law prohibits any farming activity involving the “propagation, cultivation, maintenance, or harvest of any species of octopus for the purpose of human consumption.” It would also prevent business owners, retailers and restaurateurs from “knowingly engaging in the sale” of any octopus raised or reared in such fashion.

The bill received unanimous approval on the Senate floor and overwhelming bipartisan support in the Assembly — with 59 voting for the banning of octopus farming, and 10 voting against it.

“This is a key moment, not only in California but around the country, in the effort to protect octopuses from the scale of suffering that other animals already endure on factory farms,” Jennifer Hauge, senior legislative affairs manager for the Animal Legal Defense Fund, said in a statement.

If the bill becomes a law, California would join Washington as the second state to prohibit octopus farming. Legislation has also been introduced in the U.S. Senate and in Hawaii.

“California showed unanimous agreement and foresight in protecting octopuses from mass production,” said Jennifer Jacquet, professor of environmental science and policy at the University of Miami. “We know that what happens in California has an impact on what happens federally. … Americans want to keep octopuses wild.”

A spokesman for the California Aquaculture Assn. had no comment, noting only that the trade association’s board had decided not to engage on the bill.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *