Effective Altruism Forum
EA Forum

Hide table of contents
by Tessa @ ALI
3 min read 3

212

Animal welfarePolicyGood things & impact storiesNews relevant to effective altruismUS policy
Frontpage

In 2022, Aquatic Life Institute (ALI) led the charge in Banding Together to Ban Octopus Farming. In 2024, we are ecstatic to see these efforts come to fruition in Washington State. 

This landmark achievement underscores our collective commitment to rejecting the introduction of additional animals into the seafood system and positions Washington State as a true pioneer in aquatic animal welfare legislation. In light of this success, ALI is joining forces with various organizations to advocate for similar bans across the United States and utilizing these monumental examples as leverage in continuous European endeavors. 

2022

Aquatic Life Institute (ALI) and members of the Aquatic Animal Alliance (AAA) comment on the Environmental Impact of Nueva Pescanova before the Government of the Canary Islands: General Directorate of Fisheries and the General Directorate for the Fight against Climate Change and the Environment. 

Allowing this industrial octopus farm to operate could result in serious bio security and biophysical risks with regard to effluents being produced from this facility and discharged to surrounding waterways. There were many issues associated with the information provided by Nueva Pescanova as it relates to the environmental impacts of the proposed project, which we addressed in detail.

Through the launch of Aquatic Life Institute's Octopus Farming Ban Campaign, we exposed the dangers of Nueva Pescanova's commercial octopus farm in Gran Canaria, as well as an octopus farm in Yucatan, Mexico, masquerading as a research facility (Hiding in Plain Sight). 

2023

If permitted to operate, just one farm could potentially produce 1 million octopuses each year. In an attempt to dissuade future development of this unsustainable and cruel farming endeavor,  ALI pushed initiatives via our seafood certification campaign and focused on the certified marketability of this potential seafood “product” through the Aquaculture Certification Schemes Animal Welfare Benchmark. 

ALI expanded on our prior concerns related to impacts on animal welfare, the environment, and public health being priority points of intervention during conversations with seafood certification schemes as a premise for prohibition. As a result, RSPCA published a statement denouncing plans for the world’s first octopus farm and Friend of the Sea provided us with a direct quotation explicitly stating they will not certify this species. If global seafood certifications refuse to create a “price premium” market for this product, perhaps this could serve as an indication to producers and investors that such products will not be welcomed or worth it. These demonstrations of opposition are a testament to our attempts at rejecting a dangerous development before it is an industrial disaster and translates to the prevention of unnecessary suffering for millions of animals.

Through collaborative efforts with members of the Aquatic Animal Alliance (AAA) and the Aquatic Animal Policy focus group (AAP), spearheaded by the Aquatic Life Institute, we actively advocated for HB 1153 in Washington State. Several ALI team members were present during the public hearing for the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee to vote on HB 1153 - Prohibiting Octopus Farming and submitted subsequent written testimony in support. Our extensive communications with decision makers contributed to a series of successful milestones, ultimately resulting in its enactment into law.

2024

February proved to be a fast and furious month as we witnessed history being made:

  • February 6, 2024: HB 1153 is pulled and passes the House Floor.
  • February 14, 2024: ALI wrote to all Washington’s Senate Senators of the Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources & Parks Committee and the hearing sees widespread support for HB 1153.
  • February 19, 2024: HB 1153 is scheduled for an executive session (vote) and the WA Senate Agriculture, Water, Natural Resources, and Parks Committee passes the bill to the Senate Rules Committee.
  • February 23, 2024: ALI wrote to all Senators of the Senate Rules Committee asking to support HB 1153, which passed the Senate Rules Committee.
  • February 27, 2024: HB 1153 passes the Senate with a solid 29-20 vote.

March 14, 2024

Governor Inslee signs HB 1153 into law!

Washington State's leadership in banning octopus farming serves as a precedent for other U.S. jurisdictions. Hawai’i and California are currently echoing this monumental prohibition with similar bills. Assembly member Steve Bennett introduced AB 3162, the California Oppose Cruelty to Octopuses (OCTO) Act, cosponsored by Animal Legal Defense Fund and Social Compassion in Legislation, while legislators in Hawai'i launched HB 2262. Aquatic Life Institute has already engaged in conversations with various legislators and sponsors to enact similar legislative protections for octopus.

The support for a global ban on octopus farming extends far and wide, with hundreds of organizations, concerned citizens, and scientists advocating for the prohibition of these disastrous farms before they are allowed to operate. ALI expresses gratitude to several NGOs, including Pasado's Safe Haven, Animal Rights Initiative, Compassion in World Farming, Mercy for Animals, and others who contributed to making this victory possible. Together, we are forging a path towards a more compassionate and sustainable future. Stay tuned as we hope to announce triumphs for aquatic animals in the near future!

212

7
0
15

Reactions

7
0
15

More posts like this

Comments3


Sorted by
New & upvoted
Click to highlight new comments since:
Sean_o_h7
0
0
3

Huge congratulations, you have made the world better. Thank you.

Reply
Ben Stevenson7
3
0
2

This is a great success story - well done to all involved!

Reply
OscarD🔸7
0
0
2

Woohoo, wonderful news and thanks for your efforts!

Reply
More from Tessa @ ALI
119
Banding Together to Ban Octopus Farming
Tessa @ ALI
· · 9m read
12
12
88
Hiding in Plain Sight: Mexico’s Octopus Farm/Research Facade
Tessa @ ALI
· · 4m read
1
1
51
Why Certify? Aquatic Life Institute’s Impact Implementation Via Seafood Certification
Tessa @ ALI
· · 6m read
2
2
View more
Curated and popular this week
LintzA
 ·  · 15m read
 · 
Cross-posted to Lesswrong Introduction Several developments over the past few months should cause you to re-evaluate what you are doing. These include: 1. Updates toward short timelines 2. The Trump presidency 3. The o1 (inference-time compute scaling) paradigm 4. Deepseek 5. Stargate/AI datacenter spending 6. Increased internal deployment 7. Absence of AI x-risk/safety considerations in mainstream AI discourse Taken together, these are enough to render many existing AI governance strategies obsolete (and probably some technical safety strategies too). There's a good chance we're entering crunch time and that should absolutely affect your theory of change and what you plan to work on. In this piece I try to give a quick summary of these developments and think through the broader implications these have for AI safety. At the end of the piece I give some quick initial thoughts on how these developments affect what safety-concerned folks should be prioritizing. These are early days and I expect many of my takes will shift, look forward to discussing in the comments!  Implications of recent developments Updates toward short timelines There’s general agreement that timelines are likely to be far shorter than most expected. Both Sam Altman and Dario Amodei have recently said they expect AGI within the next 3 years. Anecdotally, nearly everyone I know or have heard of who was expecting longer timelines has updated significantly toward short timelines (<5 years). E.g. Ajeya’s median estimate is that 99% of fully-remote jobs will be automatable in roughly 6-8 years, 5+ years earlier than her 2023 estimate. On a quick look, prediction markets seem to have shifted to short timelines (e.g. Metaculus[1] & Manifold appear to have roughly 2030 median timelines to AGI, though haven’t moved dramatically in recent months). We’ve consistently seen performance on benchmarks far exceed what most predicted. Most recently, Epoch was surprised to see OpenAI’s o3 model achi
Dr Kassim
 ·  · 4m read
 · 
Hey everyone, I’ve been going through the EA Introductory Program, and I have to admit some of these ideas make sense, but others leave me with more questions than answers. I’m trying to wrap my head around certain core EA principles, and the more I think about them, the more I wonder: Am I misunderstanding, or are there blind spots in EA’s approach? I’d really love to hear what others think. Maybe you can help me clarify some of my doubts. Or maybe you share the same reservations? Let’s talk. Cause Prioritization. Does It Ignore Political and Social Reality? EA focuses on doing the most good per dollar, which makes sense in theory. But does it hold up when you apply it to real world contexts especially in countries like Uganda? Take malaria prevention. It’s a top EA cause because it’s highly cost effective $5,000 can save a life through bed nets (GiveWell, 2023). But what happens when government corruption or instability disrupts these programs? The Global Fund scandal in Uganda saw $1.6 million in malaria aid mismanaged (Global Fund Audit Report, 2016). If money isn’t reaching the people it’s meant to help, is it really the best use of resources? And what about leadership changes? Policies shift unpredictably here. A national animal welfare initiative I supported lost momentum when political priorities changed. How does EA factor in these uncertainties when prioritizing causes? It feels like EA assumes a stable world where money always achieves the intended impact. But what if that’s not the world we live in? Long termism. A Luxury When the Present Is in Crisis? I get why long termists argue that future people matter. But should we really prioritize them over people suffering today? Long termism tells us that existential risks like AI could wipe out trillions of future lives. But in Uganda, we’re losing lives now—1,500+ die from rabies annually (WHO, 2021), and 41% of children suffer from stunting due to malnutrition (UNICEF, 2022). These are preventable d
Rory Fenton
 ·  · 6m read
 · 
Cross-posted from my blog. Contrary to my carefully crafted brand as a weak nerd, I go to a local CrossFit gym a few times a week. Every year, the gym raises funds for a scholarship for teens from lower-income families to attend their summer camp program. I don’t know how many Crossfit-interested low-income teens there are in my small town, but I’ll guess there are perhaps 2 of them who would benefit from the scholarship. After all, CrossFit is pretty niche, and the town is small. Helping youngsters get swole in the Pacific Northwest is not exactly as cost-effective as preventing malaria in Malawi. But I notice I feel drawn to supporting the scholarship anyway. Every time it pops in my head I think, “My money could fully solve this problem”. The camp only costs a few hundred dollars per kid and if there are just 2 kids who need support, I could give $500 and there would no longer be teenagers in my town who want to go to a CrossFit summer camp but can’t. Thanks to me, the hero, this problem would be entirely solved. 100%. That is not how most nonprofit work feels to me. You are only ever making small dents in important problems I want to work on big problems. Global poverty. Malaria. Everyone not suddenly dying. But if I’m honest, what I really want is to solve those problems. Me, personally, solve them. This is a continued source of frustration and sadness because I absolutely cannot solve those problems. Consider what else my $500 CrossFit scholarship might do: * I want to save lives, and USAID suddenly stops giving $7 billion a year to PEPFAR. So I give $500 to the Rapid Response Fund. My donation solves 0.000001% of the problem and I feel like I have failed. * I want to solve climate change, and getting to net zero will require stopping or removing emissions of 1,500 billion tons of carbon dioxide. I give $500 to a policy nonprofit that reduces emissions, in expectation, by 50 tons. My donation solves 0.000000003% of the problem and I feel like I have f
Recent opportunities in Animal welfare
108
Take action to help insects: UK government consultation [5-10 minutes]
JamesÖz 🔸
· · 3m read
8
8
3
Apply to become a Futurekind AI Facilitator or Mentor (deadline: April 10)
Jay Luong
· · 2m read
0
0
14
New Aquaculture Law in Chile: Now is the time!
Marysabel DyDAnimal
· · 1m read
0
0
View more