This article has been shared from The Daily iPad app Download the app for the full interactive experience.

THE BARK STOPS HERE

Pet store ban proposed in San Francisco


  • Image
The fur, feathers and even fins are flying in San Francisco as the city mulls a controversial prohibition on pets.

The city’s ultra-progressive Animal Control and Welfare Commission is proposing an ordinance that would ban the sale of any critter — dog, cat, hamster, even goldfish — that is not a rescue from an animal shelter.

“This is just ridiculous,” fumed Chris Simms, the owner of San Francisco’s Aquatic Central fish store, which, under the proposal passed by the commission last week, would be prohibited from selling a single guppy.

The seemingly draconian measure “requiring the humane acquisition of pets” was defended by the animal commission chairwoman, Sally Stephens.

“We did this to encourage adoption,” Stephens told The Daily. “Pet stores are a major outlet for puppy mills, where dogs are bred repeatedly and kept in horrible conditions with feces all around.”

The would-be ban was extended to small animals to prevent so-called “impulse buys” of hamsters and birds, she said. “A child says, ‘Oh, mommy, mommy, isn’t it cute? Can I have it please, please?’ Then three weeks later, little Suzie has moved on to her next toy and the animal is forgotten and sometimes released.”

Fish were included to discourage subpar breeding conditions and the overfishing of tropical species. “Most fish in aquariums are either mass-bred” under inhumane conditions “or taken from the wild,” commissioner Philip Gerie told the San Francisco Chronicle. That could lead to “devastation of tropical fish from places like Southeast Asia,” he said.

The animal commission is an all-volunteer body that makes recommendations to the city’s Board of Supervisors, which would need to introduce and then pass any ban before it became law.

“Without question, one of society’s greatest ills are goldfish mills,” wisecracked San Francisco supervisor Sean Elsbernd, who called the pet sale ban “inane,” and explained that the animal commission “makes recommendations all the time that go nowhere.”

Among the commission’s failed proposals was a bid to reduce the pigeon population by feeding the winged pests bird seed laced with birth control pills.

But other pet causes of the critter commission have become law, like the ban on declawing cats that passed in 2009.

And this wouldn’t be the first time a pet ban has been passed in notoriously animal rights-oriented California: West Hollywood’s City Council banned the sale of dogs and cats in most pet stores in 2010.

But no pet prohibition has ever been as sweeping as the one under consideration now in San Francisco, a city that already has banned plastic bags — and is even considering a long-shot law against circumcision.

Ironically, some businesses that cater to pets support the ban. Mitchell Bearg, owner of Bow Wow Meow, a store for grooming and pet supplies in San Francisco, said a ban on selling animals actually would lead to better pets.

“No one is saying people shouldn’t have pets,” he said. “It’s just a matter of how they get them. If they have to do it differently than just walking into store, they’ll probably end up with much healthier animals.”

Retailers that would be most impacted by a ban are big chains like Petco, which sell small animals in volume. In 2002, San Francisco sued Petco for keeping animals in unclean conditions, and even leaving carcasses in display cases. Petco paid out a nearly $1 million settlement at that time.
Unsurprisingly, Kevin Whalen, a spokesman for Petco, is adamantly against the ban.

“Banning all pet sales wouldn’t make pet trade go away. It would just drive it underground and out of public view,” Whalen said. “And we don’t think that would be good for the animals.”

Animal commission chairwoman Stephens admitted the chances of the ban becoming law are very slim, but said igniting a debate was part of the goal.

“If nothing else comes out of this, at least people will think twice before buying a pet,” she said.

Aquatic Central owner Chris Simms gave the ban a similarly low chance.

“I’m really not too worried about it,” he said. “And anyway, with the economy how it is,  business sucks anyway.”

Justin.Silverman@thedaily.com