One in Four Americans Say It's Wrong To Eat an Octopus

Scientists and animal welfare activists are in uproar over the planned opening of a commercial octopus slaughterhouse in Spain’s Canary Islands, which reportedly intends to kill up to one million of the animals a year. New research by London School of Economics has shone light on the mysterious creatures, concluding that octopuses are sentient, meaning they can experience both positive and negative emotions, including pain and distress. For this reason, cooping them up in an overcrowded enclosure where they will experience suffering is argued to be unethical.

In the United States, the sole octopus farm known to have been running in the country was shut down in January 2023. It had been operating as a supposed tourist attraction, but was reported to have had ulterior motives including the harvesting of octopus ink and the selling of meat to local restaurants. U.S. lawmakers have since introduced a bill that seeks to ban octopus farms in Washington state.

The following Statista chart shows where U.S. adults stand on eating different species of animals. YouGov asked a sample of 1,000 U.S. respondents whether it is morally acceptable or not to eat a number of animals under normal circumstances. Commonly eaten animals in the U.S., such as salmon, chicken and cows were seen as acceptable to eat by the vast majority. However, the octopus resonated with a slightly larger share of adults, with one in four saying it was unacceptable to eat them. Of the polled animals, chimpanzees crossed the line for most.

In the same survey, YouGov probed further into the moral compass of Americans, asking which species respondents would save in a sinking boat scenario - people or animals. Again, some animals weighed up as more important than others. When given the choice of saving 100 pigs rather than 1 person, 10 percent voted in favor of the pigs and 80 percent the person. In the same situation but with dogs, 23 percent chose the 100 dogs and 61 percent a person.

The reasons most often given by respondents to explain why some species are perceived as more acceptable food options than others included whether the species was rare or endangered (61 percent said this was “very important”), whether or not the animal frequently carries diseases (57 percent), whether the animal is commonly kept as a pet (48 percent) and whether the would have a sentimental attachment to the animal (45 percent).

Less commonly cited, but still very important to around a third of respondents, was the animal’s capacity for pain (34 percent), whether the animal is commonly kept as livestock (33 percent), the environmental impact of farming the animal (32 percent), the animal’s capacity for self-awareness (32 percent) and the level of the animal’s intelligence (31 percent).