Vote for BP.Net for the 2013 Forum of the Year! Click here for more info.

» Site Navigation

» Home
 > FAQ

» Online Users: 633

0 members and 633 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 47,180, 07-16-2025 at 05:30 PM.

» Today's Birthdays

None

» Stats

Members: 75,909
Threads: 249,108
Posts: 2,572,135
Top Poster: JLC (31,651)
Welcome to our newest member, KoreyBuchanan
  • 04-03-2006, 01:31 PM
    cassandra
    Re: Restrictive Bill effecting sale of animals in California (Please read)
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by frankykeno
    But rats are able to impregnant as early as 5 weeks of age??? So are they saying that a pet store must keep these rats till 8 weeks of age prior to being able to put them out for sale? I can see this becoming a problem unless all pet store employees are carefully seperating male/female rat siblings or there's going to be a lot of preggo young female rats around during that 3 weeks.

    There is language in the proposed law that says rodents must segregated by gender at a very young age (can't remember age it said, but it's in there).

    In my opinion, the language was clearly written with attacking the kitty and puppy farms in mind and getting better treatment in general for all animals in pet stores, which is a noble thing to do. It just seems that they didn't even consider feeder animals when defining the approach for rodents.

    Something interesting that was mentioned on the cornsnakes forum discussion is that the law doesn't talk about fish at all - how about them tanks of hundreds of feeder fish? =P

    This reminds me; was gonna call PetCo headquarters and ask them what they as an organization are doing against this proposed law.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v4.2.1