9 Out of 10 europeans demand end to suffering of fish in aquaculture farms

Fish's capacity to experience pain, stress, and even pleasure has been irrefutably demonstrated by the scientific community. Yet their lives are systematically devalued and their needs ignored. Annually, an estimated 78 to 171 billion fish are slaughtered in aquaculture farms – with an average of 124 billion in 2019 alone. This figure not only far exceeds the already astronomical 80 billion land birds and mammals raised for the same purpose but represents a ninefold multiplication of this horror. This industrialized massacre, largely unfolding in a legal and ethical vacuum, subjects these animals to living and dying conditions that would be considered a public scandal and a flagrant violation of any decency standard if applied to other species we're more familiar with.

Nevertheless, a powerful current of change is beginning to stir the stagnant waters of indifference. A revealing survey conducted by Sapience for Eurogroup for Animals and Compassion in World Farming between March and April 2024, involving 9,197 citizens in nine EU countries (as part of a broader poll of 12,301 people in 12 countries), yielded overwhelming results. 91% of surveyed Europeans firmly believe that the welfare of farmed fish should be protected at the same level (81%) or even higher (10%) than that of other farm animals. This near-unanimous public outcry clashes head-on with the harsh reality of aquaculture farms, where extreme overcrowding, proliferation of debilitating diseases, starvation as a management practice, and barbaric, prolonged slaughter methods are, lamentably, the accepted and legal norm. This is a wake-up call resonating with unavoidable urgency, demanding not only a deep legislative revision but, more fundamentally, a critical reevaluation of our relationship with these sentient aquatic beings.

"What this data reveals is a silent massacre, methodically hidden from a public that would overwhelmingly abhor these practices if they knew the details. Billions of fish, each an individual capable of feeling, are trapped in a system of institutionalized cruelty, and society is barely scratching the surface of this terrible reality," states Aïda Gascón, Director of AnimaNaturalis in Spain, emphatically. "At AnimaNaturalis, we have been denouncing the absolute legal abandonment and inherent cruelty that defines the intensive aquaculture industry. These new public opinion figures only underscore the imperative and urgent need for transformative legislative and social action. The gap between citizen sensitivity and political inaction is unsustainable."

This article delves into the murky, often ignored depths of fish farms, exposing in detail the systematic suffering inflicted there. We will analyze the growing and vehement public demand for radical legislative and ethical change, and chart a viable path towards a future where compassion, respect for all sentient life forms, and moral coherence prevail over apathy, greed, and unchecked exploitation. It is time to listen to their mute cry and respond with determined actions.

Suffering on an Industrial Scale

Facing the grim and often deliberately hidden reality of intensive aquaculture, a beacon of hope is emerging with unstoppable force, driven by a growing and increasingly informed citizen sensitivity. An overwhelming 91% of respondents believe that the welfare of farmed fish should be legally protected to the same extent (81%), or even greater extent (10%), as that of other farm animals like pigs, chickens, or cows.

This figure alone should be a direct torpedo to the waterline of legislative inaction and regulatory complacency that has characterized the treatment of fish in the European Union. Currently, despite scientific advances in understanding fish sentience, there is no specific and comprehensive legislation in the EU addressing the unique biological, ethological, and psychological needs of the various farmed fish species. This absence of a robust legal framework permits, and even sanctions, the persistence of deeply cruel, ethically indefensible, and scientifically questionable practices. The Sapience poll results are not mere opinion; they are a clear and forceful mandate for the European Commission, the European Parliament, and Member States to act decisively, swiftly, and courageously in the comprehensive review of animal welfare laws, including, once and for all, specific, detailed, and binding provisions for fish. Indeed, this demand is reinforced by the fact that 4 out of 5 people surveyed (80%) in the nine countries explicitly support the enactment of legislation that actively promotes best available practices and is based on the latest and most rigorous science to meet the complex welfare needs of farmed aquatic animals.

"The magnitude of the problem is simply overwhelming, and legislative passivity in the face of this barbarity is unacceptable in the 21st century," comments Gascón. "We are talking about billions of sentient lives, each with its own perspective of the world, subjected to an ordeal from their artificial birth to a death that, in most cases, is brutal and terrifying. Society has the right and duty to know this hidden reality to demand systemic and profound change. The widespread ignorance, as demonstrated by the Sapience survey where almost half of European respondents (48%) show low familiarity with aquaculture practices (knowing at most 2 out of 7 statements on the subject), is this industry's best ally." The invisibility of their suffering, magnified by depersonalization in production statistics and the blatant absence of specific and binding legislation, has allowed this industrial cruelty to persist, become normalized, and expand to a scale that defies any basic ethical principle.

One of the most revealing and concerning aspects uncovered by the survey is the profound ignorance that still persists among many EU citizens about common fish farming methods and their direct and often terrible consequences for the animals. In Spain, for example, nearly two-thirds of respondents (an alarming 63%, according to the Eurogroup for Animals press release citing the survey, although page 14 of the Sapience report indicates an average awareness score of 2.2 out of 7 for Spain, the lowest alongside Czechia [2.5] compared to France [3.2] or Germany [3.0]) showed low general awareness of current aquaculture practices. Only a mere 30% of Spaniards, according to the initial press release, were aware that the percentage of fish dying during farming is substantially higher than that of land farm animals (the Sapience report p.14 shows that 66% of Europeans were unaware of this fact, implying that 34% knew it at the EU level). This lack of detailed information is a crucial obstacle, as it prevents the inherent concern and empathy many people feel for animals from translating into more informed, specific, and therefore more effective public pressure on the industry and legislators.

Public Pulse Against Suffering

Despite this veil of ignorance about the industry's specific practices, fundamental empathy towards fish is notable and hopeful. A significant and consistent majority across the EU, 71% of respondents, agreed (45% "totally agree" and 26% "tend to agree") with the statement that fish can feel pain. This percentage rose to 77% in the Czech Republic, the highest of all surveyed countries. Furthermore, 60% of Europeans believe fish feel negative emotions like fear, and another 60% consider them sentient beings. Although there are more doubts about their intelligence (51% agree) or their capacity to feel positive emotions like pleasure (45% agree), the general trend is one of increasing recognition of their internal complexity. This intuitive and increasingly informed understanding of animal sentience transcends species barriers and lays the groundwork for greater ethical demands.

The moment of slaughter, one of the most critical and often most brutal points in terms of animal welfare, also generates deep citizen concern once the harsh reality is exposed. As mentioned, less than half (39%) of all respondents in the EU knew that most farmed fish are not stunned before slaughter. When informed and asked whether legislation should require stunning, a resounding 70% of Europeans stated that stunning (rendering aquatic animals unconscious before slaughter) should be a mandatory legal requirement. This figure represents a massive and clear rejection of current inhumane killing practices, such as prolonged asphyxiation in air or ice, or evisceration and bleeding of fully conscious animals. The citizenry, when presented with the information, does not tolerate this cruelty.

Welfare concerns also extend to other areas, like the sale of live animals. A majority of citizens (61% for fish and lobsters, 60% for crabs) believe the sale of these aquatic animals live directly to consumers should be banned. Support for this ban is particularly high in countries like Germany (70% for fish, 71% for lobsters), Italy (70% for fish, 71% for lobsters), and Poland (69% for fish, 66% for lobsters).

Moreover, European citizens have clear expectations regarding the use of public funds in aquaculture. An overwhelming majority believes that if public money is used to fund this sector, there should be a public record explaining how that money is spent (88%). Even more crucially for animal welfare, 86% believe public money should only support fish farms that ensure a high level of animal welfare, and 79% say it should only go to farms that are sustainable. The demand for public funds to be directed exclusively to farms guaranteeing high animal welfare standards is particularly pronounced in France, Germany, and Italy.

Purchasing decisions, though influenced by multiple factors, also begin to reflect this growing desire for more ethical treatment. An overwhelming majority, 9 out of 10 respondents (93%, adding the 23% who would pay "considerably more", the 45% who would pay "a little more", and the 25% who "would like to buy but couldn't afford extra"), expressed they would like to be able to buy fish raised under better welfare conditions. Only 7% said they would not pay any extra for higher welfare products. Furthermore, more than two-thirds (69%) expressed their desire for fishery products to include clear and understandable welfare labeling that faithfully reflects how the fish was raised and slaughtered. This points not only to an unmet demand but also an opportunity for the industry and regulators to embrace transparency and accountability as fundamental values.

Reineke Hameleers, CEO of Eurogroup for Animals, assessed these findings with hope and urgency: "Despite being farmed in the billions, extensive studies highlighting their sentience, and citizen demand for better protection, fish continue to be overlooked. We hope that the upcoming revision of the EU animal welfare legislation will include species-specific measures that protect their needs and significantly improve welfare conditions in EU aquaculture." For her part, Dr. Natasha Boyland, Senior Research and Policy Advisor (Aquatic Animals) at Compassion in World Farming, added: "Our new survey shows that the overwhelming majority of EU citizens surveyed care about the welfare of farmed fish. However, many are unaware of the cruelty that can be inflicted during rearing and slaughter, and moreover, that all of this happens within the law. Fish, like all animals raised on land, are sentient beings who need legal protection to minimize their suffering. We now urge the European Commission to respond to citizens' concerns and introduce laws specific to fish accordingly."

Outcry for Regulatory Change

The current and flagrant absence of specific EU legislation comprehensively protecting the welfare of the over 70 fish species currently farmed commercially is an intolerable legal gap and an ethical disgrace for a bloc that prides itself on high standards. As a recent University of Cambridge study indicates, the vast majority of farmed fish globally lack any specific legal protection at the critical moment of slaughter, and existing "welfare" or "sustainability" certifications cover only an anecdotal and negligible percentage of total production. This situation of absolute abandonment must be reversed immediately through the adoption and, fundamentally, rigorous enforcement of robust, detailed, and species-specific regulations. This includes, as a minimum:

1. Establishment of scientifically based maximum population densities: Drastically reduce current overcrowding to allow essential natural behaviors, decrease chronic stress levels, reduce aggression, and curb the rapid spread of diseases and parasites.
2. Guarantee of optimal water quality and meaningful environmental enrichment: Consistently ensure vital parameters like adequate dissolved oxygen levels, cleanliness (low levels of ammonia, nitrites, etc.), stable and species-appropriate temperature, and sufficient space. Additionally, the inclusion of structures, substrates, or elements allowing fish to express natural behaviors like hiding, exploring, or socializing non-aggressively is crucial.
3. Outright ban on cruel practices and negligent handling: Completely eliminate prolonged and unnecessary fasting (especially if not justified by strict and supervised veterinary reasons), rough handling causing injuries and panic, and any type of mutilation (like fin clipping) performed without adequate anesthesia and analgesia.
4. Mandatory, effective, and immediate stunning before slaughter, followed by a killing method ensuring rapid death while unconscious: Implement and rigorously enforce scientifically validated and species-specific stunning methods (like percussive stunning or electric stunning in water bath under optimal conditions) ensuring immediate and sustained loss of consciousness until death occurs by a subsequent humane method. Explicitly ban inhumane methods like asphyxiation in air or ice, live evisceration, decapitation without prior stunning, or the use of CO2 and salt baths as primary slaughter methods due to the extreme suffering they inflict. 70% of Europeans support this legislative measure.
5. Public and private investment in continuous research on fish welfare: Promote and fund independent scientific research to better understand the needs and capabilities of different fish species, and to develop and validate increasingly humane and respectful breeding, handling, transport, and slaughter methods.
6. Implementation of a clear, honest, mandatory, and easily understandable animal welfare labeling system: Provide consumers with truthful and transparent information directly on the product about how the fish were raised (e.g., density, enrichment, antibiotic use) and slaughtered. 69% of EU citizens want to see information on how the fish was raised and killed on the label of all fishery products. This would allow consumers to make informed purchasing decisions aligned with their ethical values, incentivizing the industry to improve its standards. Currently, knowledge about existing certification labels is poor; for example, regarding the ASC (Aquaculture Stewardship Council) seal, 40% believe it guarantees strict welfare requirements, while a significant 28% simply "don't know" what it implies. Moreover, many citizens (56%) mistakenly associate the term "sustainable" on a fishery product with the fish being kept in conditions allowing it to exhibit all its natural behaviors, and 47% believe it means it was slaughtered quickly and painlessly – associations not always met in reality.

"We urgently and passionately call on all citizens to join our voice and that of millions of Europeans who no longer tolerate this silent cruelty. We urge them to sign our petition at GranjasDePeces.org," emphasizes Gascón vehemently. "With this citizen mobilization campaign, we demand that the European Union and national governments take drastic and unprecedented measures: either initiate a clear process with defined deadlines for the progressive closure of intensive fish farms as we know them today, transitioning towards truly sustainable and low-impact systems, or immediately implement mandatory and rigorously supervised regulations guaranteeing a radically higher level of animal welfare for all fish."

In conclusion, the hitherto silent and drowned cry of the billions of fish suffering and dying each year in aquatic farms has finally begun to be heard by an increasingly aware, informed, and empathetic European citizenry. The overwhelming popular demand for greater protection, more dignified treatment, and real welfare for these sentient beings can no longer be ignored or postponed by our political representatives or the industry. It is imperative and urgent that legislators of the European Union and its member states act with the bravery, determination, and speed that the magnitude of this ethical crisis demands, transforming laws to reflect both the solid scientific evidence on fish sentience and needs and the fundamental ethical values of their citizens.

In parallel, each of us, as individuals and consumers, has the moral responsibility and the wonderful opportunity to actively contribute to this positive change through our daily choices, opting for compassion and coherence on our plates. Only then can we begin to repay the enormous moral debt we owe to the forgotten, abused, and invisible aquatic inhabitants of our planet and advance towards a future where genuine respect for all forms of sentient life is the unquestionable norm, not the reluctant exception.

Action is urgent; the time to raise our voices and act with determination is now. Sign the petition at GranjasDePeces.org and explore the path to a more compassionate diet at Hazteveg.com. Change is in our hands.

References:

1. Information based on the summary of the Cambridge University Press article "Estimating global numbers of farmed fishes killed for food annually from 1990 to 2019" by Mood, A. et al. (2023).
2. Sapience (September 2024). Public attitudes towards aquatic animal welfare. Survey prepared for Eurogroup for Animals and Compassion in World Farming. Slide 3.