Octopus advocacy must do more than tell people octopuses are intelligent. It must help people recognise them as individuals, connect admiration with moral responsibility, reject every industry built on their exploitation and turn private concern into collective action. This guide covers conversations with friends, family and strangers, as well as campaigns targeting companies, institutions and governments.

Know who you are defending

There are around 300 recognised octopus species. They have three hearts, blue blood and complex nervous systems unlike our own. A large proportion of their neurons are distributed throughout their arms, allowing them to explore, taste, grip and manipulate their surroundings.

Octopuses solve problems, remember solutions, use tools, construct shelters, recognise individual humans and repeatedly escape confinement. Veined octopuses have been observed carrying coconut shells for future use as shelters. Big blue octopuses have been filmed hunting cooperatively with several species of fishes, sharing decisions and responding to the behaviour of different group members.

Their intelligence did not develop along the same evolutionary route as ours. Octopuses are not failed versions of humans. They are a completely different expression of animal consciousness.

The evidence of sentience is also strong. Octopuses learn from painful experiences, respond to injuries, protect wounds and change their behaviour when given pain relief. A UK government-commissioned review considered more than 300 studies before concluding that cephalopod molluscs should be treated as sentient. This led to their inclusion in the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Act 2022. But do not make intelligence the entire case. An animal should not have to open a jar, outperform a child or impress a scientist before their pain counts.

The moral foundation is simpler:

Octopuses are conscious individuals with experiences, interests and lives of their own. They are not ours to use.

Understand the exploitation

Most octopuses killed for food are captured from the wild using pots, traps, nets and lines. They may be beaten, suffocated, cut into or chilled before being killed. Removing an aquatic animal from the water is depriving them of the environment their body needs to survive.

Octopuses are also confined in aquariums, traded as exotic companion animals, used in laboratories and handled in tourist attractions. Each industry offers a different justification:

▫️ Restaurants call killing cuisine.

▫️ Aquariums call confinement education.

▫️ Laboratories call exploitation research.

▫️ Traders call possession companionship.

▫️ Farms call industrial confinement innovation.

Different industries. Same assumption.

The proposed Nueva Pescanova farm in Gran Canaria would have confined and killed around one million octopuses annually. Crowding solitary and territorial animals risked aggression, injuries, cannibalism and substantial mortality. The proposed killing method involved placing octopuses in freezing water or ice slurry. Because octopuses are carnivores, farming them would also require other aquatic animals to be captured and killed for feed. It would not replace one form of exploitation. It would create another layer of it.

Following years of scientific opposition, campaigning, regulatory pressure and more than 43,000 emails to the Port Authority, Nueva Pescanova abandoned the project. That victory demonstrates an important activist principle:

New forms of exploitation are easier to stop before investment, jobs and supply chains make them politically entrenched.

Talking to friends and family

Do not begin with the speech you want to deliver. Begin with the person in front of you. Ask:

“Have you ever thought about what octopuses experience?”

“Did you know the UK legally recognises them as sentient?”

“What do you think makes farming them different from farming other animals?”

“Do you think being intelligent changes how we should treat them?”

“If farming cannot meet their needs, should the industry exist?”

Listen to the answer. Someone may be uninformed, curious, defensive, conflicted or concerned but unsure what to do. Those positions require different responses. If someone already sounds uncomfortable, explore that discomfort:

“What part of it bothers you most?”

Allow their own concern to do some of the work. Do not bury an emerging moral conflict beneath ten prepared facts.

“But octopuses are so alien”

Try:

“Their minds are certainly different from ours. But why should experiencing the world differently make someone’s pain or freedom less important?”

Calling octopuses alien can create fascination, but also distance. They are not visitors from another planet. They are animals with their own form of consciousness.

“They eat other animals”

Try:

“They do, but octopuses need to do that to survive. We do not need to capture and kill them. Their behaviour cannot justify ours when the circumstances are completely different.”

“Wild-caught is better than farmed”

Try:

“Farming creates additional harms, but capturing a free-living octopus still means taking someone from the ocean and killing them. Why should the choice be between two ways of exploiting them?”

Do not let opposition to farming become an advertisement for wild capture.

“Farming could protect wild populations”

Ask:

“If octopuses must be fed other aquatic animals, how does creating another carnivorous farming industry reduce pressure on marine life?”

Farming is often presented as the only answer because not consuming octopuses has been excluded before the conversation begins.

“It is traditional”

Try:

“Tradition explains why a practice exists. Does it decide whether the practice is fair to the individual being harmed?”

Avoid insulting someone’s culture or family. Keep the focus on whether history can turn a sentient individual into a resource.

“There must be a humane way”

Try:

“A less painful death would still be an unnecessary death. The question is not only how an octopus is killed, but why humans are entitled to kill them for a meal.”

The aim is not to become trapped in an endless search for a sufficiently polished method of exploitation.

Talking to strangers

Public outreach gives you less time and less trust. Use one clear opening rather than attempting to explain every form of octopus exploitation at once.

Possible openings include:

“The UK recognises octopuses as sentient, but still allows them to be captured and killed.”

“Would you support stopping octopus farms before the industry becomes established?”

“Octopus farming means killing other aquatic animals to feed captive octopuses. Who benefits from that?”

A simple outreach sequence is:

1. Ask what the person already knows.

2. Share one relevant fact.

3. Connect the fact to the individual octopus.

4. Ask a reflective question.

5. Offer one achievable action.

Graphic footage can reveal hidden practices, but distress without agency can cause avoidance. When showing capture, confinement or killing, immediately provide a route forward: a campaign, corporate target, petition, event or personal commitment.

Do not measure outreach only by how many leaflets disappear. Record meaningful conversations, contact details, commitments, campaign sign-ups and later actions.

Campaigning against companies

Begin with power, not publicity.

Ask:

▫️ Who captures, imports, distributes or sells octopuses?

▫️ Who authorises the decision?

▫️ Which company is vulnerable to customer, investor or reputational pressure?

▫️ What exact change can that decision-maker make?

▫️ How will we know whether they have made it?

A restaurant campaign might demand:

“Remove all octopus products permanently and publish a commitment not to sell wild-caught or farmed octopus in future.”

An aquarium campaign might demand:

“End the acquisition and display of octopuses and commit not to replace those currently held.”

A retailer campaign might demand:

“Stop selling octopus across every store, brand and online platform, including products supplied by third parties.”

Make the demand specific enough that the company cannot respond with vague language about sourcing, sustainability or reviewing standards.

Escalate deliberately

A corporate campaign can progress through:

1. Researching the company and decision-makers.

2. Sending a private evidence-based request.

3. Publishing the company’s response or refusal.

4. Building a coalition.

5. Gathering signatures and supporter stories.

6. Coordinating emails, calls and public comments.

7. Contacting journalists and relevant experts.

8. Demonstrating at strategic locations.

9. Approaching investors, partners, landlords or regulators.

10. Maintaining pressure until the company makes a verifiable commitment.

Do not ask every tactic to do every job. A petition demonstrates support. Emails create administrative pressure. A protest attracts attention. Media coverage raises reputational costs. Negotiation secures the commitment. Target places connected to the decision, such as company headquarters, flagship premises, shareholder meetings or industry events. A busy street is not automatically a strategic location.

Never harass individual employees, fabricate claims or encourage false reviews. Pressure should be persistent, accurate and directed towards those with institutional power.

Changing wider society

Individual choices help establish new norms, but institutions shape millions of choices at once. Campaign demands could include:

▫️ Prohibiting commercial octopus farming before another project appears.

▫️ Banning the import and sale of farmed octopus.

▫️ Ending public funding for octopus farming research.

▫️ Removing octopus from public-sector procurement.

▫️ Ending the capture and display of octopuses by aquariums and tourist attractions.

▫️ Replacing harmful octopus research with non-animal methods.

▫️ Strengthening marine protections against destructive fishing, pollution and abandoned fishing equipment.

▫️ Moving from legal recognition of sentience towards enforceable rights.

Policy campaigns need a defined decision-maker. “Protect octopuses” expresses a value. “Ask this minister to introduce legislation prohibiting commercial octopus farming and imports” creates a campaign.

Petitions are most useful when attached to an achievable decision, a named target and a wider strategy. Signatures alone are not power. They become powerful when combined with political relationships, public visibility, media pressure and sustained organising.

Change the social meaning

Long-term advocacy must change how octopus exploitation is understood.

Octopus should no longer evoke only recipes, novelty and tourism. It should evoke a sentient individual whose body and freedom have been taken.

Expose the language that hides them:

“Octopus meat” is an octopus’s body.

“Harvesting” is capture and killing.

“Aquaculture innovation” may mean industrial confinement.

“Sustainable” does not mean just.

“Educational display” still means captivity.

“Research model” means a living individual used as an instrument.

The goal is to move society from:

“Would I personally eat octopus?”

to:

“Why are businesses and institutions permitted to profit from exploiting octopuses?”

What success looks like

Not every conversation will produce an immediate transformation. Progress may look like:

unaware → curious

curious → concerned

concerned → refusing octopus

private refusal → public opposition

public opposition → organised pressure

organised pressure → corporate commitment

corporate commitment → industry norm

industry controversy → legal prohibition

An advocate should be uncompromising about the octopus while remaining intelligent about how humans change.

Listen before diagnosing. Ask before assuming. Make the individual visible. Connect information to injustice. Give concern somewhere to go. Target those with power. Measure real outcomes. Keep organising after the attention moves elsewhere. Octopuses do not need better exploitation. They need us to reject the entitlement beneath it.

They belong in the ocean, not on plates, in tanks, in laboratories, on farms or in our hands. They are not ours.

Subscribe now

Share

This guide draws on a decade of advocacy and lessons learned from former staff and organisers across PETA, The Humane League, Animal Justice Project, Anonymous for the Voiceless, the Save Movement and Challenge22.

If you value this kind of practical, evidence-led advocacy, become a paid subscriber and help Herbivore Club keep creating resources that make animal advocates more effective.

HERBIVORE CLUB

The Octopus Advocate’s Guide