Comparing the welfare implications of different slaughter methods used for farmed fish.
Fish slaughter methods represent one of the greatest welfare gaps between terrestrial and aquatic animal production. Methods that would be banned for cattle, pigs, or poultry remain standard practice for billions of farmed fish globally. The regulatory gap reflects historical undervaluation of fish sentience rather than any principled welfare justification. As evidence for fish pain and stress response strengthens, the moral case for applying equivalent slaughter welfare standards becomes undeniable. Consumer and regulatory pressure has driven improvement in salmon but most farmed fish species remain unprotected.