A number of San Francisco produce vendors take pride in offering customers “live” options for fish and seafood, butchering on-site when an order comes in. But a new investigation by a vegan activism group claims that a number of shops are storing and slaughtering animals in cruel and improper ways, breaking local laws without oversight or enforcement.
The group Animal Outlook went undercover in 18 live animal markets around the Bay Area in September 2024, collecting video evidence of several grisly incidents that suggest illegal and unethical behavior at shops that include three located in SF’s Chinatown. (Gazetteer was unable to reach any of the local markets for comment.)
Animal Outlook’s video, released online on Sunday and first reported by the Daily Mail, shows frogs being beheaded without prior stunning, and fish being clumsily bludgeoned to death. Other scenes include seemingly dead fish in the corner of a tank, a live fish gasping while sitting on ice, a pile of live frogs stuffed into a storage bin, live animals being sold in plastic bags, and a turtle still moving its limbs while being cut into pieces.
State live market laws prohibit any animals from being “dismembered” or “cut open” while still alive, and from being stored or displayed in a manner “likely to result in injury, starvation, dehydration, or suffocation.”
Ben Williamson, executive director of Animal Outlook, told Gazetteer SF that the new investigation is a follow-up after its 2022 report that examined the same 18 shops. Little has changed, despite the nonprofit passing evidence to local authorities, including San Francisco Animal Care and Control, Williamson said.
“There are proven methods of stunning and rendering an animal insensible. They don’t always work, and that’s one of the things we try to expose,” Williamson said. “But it’s quite clear that when you’re decapitating a live frog, it’s not being stunned and it’s likely to cause suffering. The live animal market laws in California exist specifically to care for these vulnerable animals.”
Williamson claims that the city has only written a single citation for a live-market infraction since his group’s report in 2022.
“Our frustration has been that we have been talking to the SFACC for the last two years, and we haven’t seen much action on this. There’s been sympathy and concern, but not much action. This kind of thing is happening day in, day out,” he said. “We redid the investigation to show that this is continuing to happen, and there’s been inadequate action on behalf of the city.”
Amy Corso, deputy director of SFACC, told Gazetteer in an email that the department is aware of Animal Outlook’s newest investigation, but declined to confirm whether any citations had been issued.
“San Francisco Animal Care and Control has reviewed the videos in question, which appear to show potential violations of the laws governing Live Animal Markets under California Penal Code 597.3,” Corso wrote. “It is important to note that violations of these laws are classified as infractions. Animal Control Officers only cite for infractions when they witness them directly; they do not cite for infractions based on video evidence. SFACC does not have the authority to close or regulate a live animal market.”
Corso noted that in the last fiscal year, ACC officers responded to “over 10,000” service calls.
“While we prioritize responding to public complaints and emergencies, limited resources mean we are not able to conduct routine inspections proactively,” she added.
Jared Gleckel, staff attorney for Animal Outlook, says the group has asked the ACC why it can’t use third-party video evidence to pursue citations, but has not received a formal response. He also believes that the city has the power to levy misdemeanor charges against live market operators who violate California's general animal cruelty laws.
But Williamson also acknowledged the challenges of enforcing live-market laws and cracking down on what are primarily Asian-owned small businesses, often frequented by immigrant clientele. There is an amount of cultural context and sensitivity necessary to understand differing norms on slaughtering animals for consumption, he said.
Still, given the substantial evidence that fish and reptiles can feel pain, he argues that compromises and change are necessary. And indeed, some historically cultural methods of slaughter have acknowledged the harm of animal suffering: Consider the example of ikejime, a Japanese technique designed to kill a fish in a single blow to the brain and limit the release of stress hormones.
Beyond harm to animals, there are concerns that unsanitary conditions and improper storage of live animals is a health hazard to humans. Last May, an investigation found bird flu in two asymptomatic chickens at a live market in SF. A recent study also suggests the COVID virus was transmitted to humans at a live market in Wuhan, China.
