S.F. considers banning sale of pets except fish

Sell a guinea pig, go to jail.

That's the law under consideration by San Francisco's Commission of Animal Control and Welfare. If the commission approves the ordinance at its meeting tonight, San Francisco could soon have what is believed to be the country's first ban on the sale of all pets except fish.

That includes dogs, cats, hamsters, mice, rats, chinchillas, guinea pigs, birds, snakes, lizards and nearly every other critter, or, as the commission calls them, companion animals.

"People buy small animals all the time as an impulse buy, don't know what they're getting into, and the animals end up at the shelter and often are euthanized," said commission Chairwoman Sally Stephens. "That's what we'd like to stop."

San Francisco residents who want a pet would have to go to another city, adopt one from a shelter or rescue group, or find one through the classifieds.

The Board of Supervisors would have final say on the matter. But not before pet store owners unleash a cacophony of howling, squeaking and squawking.

"It's terrible. A pet store that can't sell pets? It's ridiculous," said John Chan, manager of Pet Central on Broadway, which has been in business 30 years. "We'd have to close."

'Terrible for our business'
Joe Taylor, bird manager of Animal Connection on Judah Street, called the proposal "ludicrous."

"What difference does it make if you get a parrot at the SPCA or a pet store? If it doesn't work out, in either case, you just bring it back," Taylor said. "This would be terrible for our business."

The idea originated about two years ago, when the commission began looking into a ban on dog and cat sales as a way to discourage puppy and kitten mills. But the city's animal control staff said that excess puppies and kittens are not the problem at the city shelter, thanks to the plethora of rescue groups. In any case, only one or two pet stores in San Francisco sell dogs and cats. The rest stick to small animals.

The hamster problem
The real problem, staff said, is hamsters.

People buy the high-strung, nocturnal rodents because they're under the temporary impression that hamsters are cute and cuddly. But the new owners quickly learn that hamsters are, in fact, prone to biting, gnawing through expensive wiring and maniacally racing on their exercise wheels at 2 a.m.

So the animals end up at the shelter. Just about every species has its own rescue group in San Francisco, but no one seems to want hamsters. Hamsters are the No. 1 animal euthanized at the city's shelter, said San Francisco Animal Care and Control director Rebecca Katz.

"It's definitely a concern," she said. "They're an impulse buy, and we do sometimes get tons of them, especially babies."

Committed owners
On Wednesday, the shelter, which is on 15th Street in the Mission District, had six hamsters, nine rabbits, nine mice, nine rats, two guinea pigs, a bowl of goldfish, two birds, a leopard gecko, a bearded dragon and a hermit crab named Charlie.

But those shelter hamsters almost certainly did not originate at a pet store, said Michael Maddox, general counsel for the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council in Washington, D.C.

Studies by UC Davis and the National Council on Pet Population Study and Policy have shown that only a small fraction of shelter animals were purchased at pet stores, he said. People who buy animals at pet stores are just as committed, emotionally and financially, to caring for their pets as people who procure pets elsewhere, he said.

"This is an anti-pet proposal from people who oppose the keeping of pets," he said. "If their goal is to ban the ownership of pets entirely, then this is a good first step."

The commission plans to listen to testimony from pet store owners, among others, before voting. Among the items it will consider is the impact on small businesses, whether to allow the sale of feeder rodents for snakes and other reptiles, the sale of fish, owner education, penalties and rescue groups that host adoptions at pet stores.

"We're still in the information-gathering phase," said Commissioner Philip Gerrie, who is sponsoring the proposal. "We're trying to get at the problem of people buying these creatures with the best intentions, but then the reality turns out quite different."

Meeting tonight
San Francisco's Commission of Animal Control and Welfare meets at 5:30 p.m. today at City Hall, Room 408, to consider an ordinance banning the sale of pets, except for fish, in San Francisco.

-- For more information, go to sfgate.com/ZJYO.

Euthanized pets in S.F.
13% Percentage of dogs and cats at the San Francisco animal shelter that are euthanized, including aggressive, injured and sick animals.

35% Percentage of dogs and cats in shelters nationwide that are euthanized.

30% Percentage of hamsters, guinea pigs, rabbits and other small animals at the San Francisco shelter that are euthanized.

Source: San Francisco Animal Care and Control


found at :
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MN9L1EAT90.DTL

I know it's a long read, but i think it's at least worth skimming through...Only posted it because it will ban the sale of all reptiles (except fish) too

I hardly doubt the main reason for this is hamsters. Everyone knows the dog/cat thing costs every city hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. They wouldn't need so many rescue groups if there wasn't a problem ;)

On another note though, it just bans the sale in the city limits and from my understanding, you could still breed within the city with no fault. You just can't have a storefront. I'm against the goverment regulating if I can purchase a "companion animal", but at the same time, I am tired of animals going to bad homes. A parent will be less inclined to drive to another city just to get an $8 hamster. And if SF is anything like Atlanta, there are very few places to actually get those animals within the city limits. Unfortunately, the good independant stores have all closed down.

I totally agree. I just put the story up to yall to read. Thanks for looking though!!! :P;)

If businesses aren't struggling enough this should put a nail in their coffin!

Fish are more badly abused than hamsters. I don't see this being a popular move. :P

What do you expect, it's SanFran.

Jim Smith

What a joke! These commision board members who are even considering this are obviously mentally ill... They must be closet PETA members...

Why dont you just make animal abuse illegal? Oh wait it already is!

Drugs are illegal in San Francisco, doesnt seem to stop anyone from doing them though... You make pet sales illegal and you will suddenly make basement breeding very profitable, black market hamsters will suddenly flood the city, and I can guarantee their living conditions will be even more atrocious than any commercial breeder!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ham

You make pet sales illegal and you will suddenly make basement breeding very profitable, black market hamsters will suddenly flood the city, and I can guarantee their living conditions will be even more atrocious than any commercial breeder!

---

Not true, the reason that they are a "problem" is because kids see them at the petstores and tell daddy to buy them one. Take the hamster out of the site of the child, then "problem" fixed, eh?

Thats debatable, you dont see many dogs in pet stores and people still buy and abuse alot of them. (but I do see your point)\

Not only that, you are ruining the livliehood of a large number of families, and shutting down buisinesses that help the local economy!

People need to step in and take personal responsibility for the pets they buy, it is not the governments job to run every nuance of our lives. If people abuse these animals than they should be punished, there should not be some arbitrary law that unjustly punishes everyone for the idiocy of others...

These blanket bans will do less to protect these exploited animals than they think...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ham

Thats debatable, you dont see many dogs in pet stores and people still buy and abuse alot of them. (but I do see your point)\

Not only that, you are ruining the livliehood of a large number of families, and shutting down buisinesses that help the local economy!

People need to step in and take personal responsibility for the pets they buy, it is not the governments job to run every nuance of our lives. If people abuse these animals than they should be punished, there should not be some arbitrary law that unjustly punishes everyone for the idiocy of others...

These blanket bans will do less to protect these exploited animals than they think...

---

Agreed.

These laws they are enacting to blanket ban animals are so illogical to me, they are not addressing the root of the problem which is the animal abuse itself (this is supposed to be their reasoning for the laws in the first place)
If the laws that are already in place were enforced more vigorously, than I believe that it would do more to protect pets. Animal Abusers should be rooted out and viciously punished beyond what standard sentencing is today.
In singapore even grafitti is punishable by public caning, this seems more suitable to me than a piddling fine and a few hours community service (which is what most convicted animal abusers receive). Let the punishment fit the crime, if you cause pain and suffering for the creatures under your care than you should suffer the same fate. Thats the way I feel anyway...

just so everyone knows this also includes corals!

San Fran was always one of the most pet friendly cities ever, I guess they're changing that.

People buying pets in other towns isn't a good answer! If people stop buying the companion animals, then they get used to a "non pet home" and that means when HSUS goes for national bans on all pets, they don't CARE. Plus, "Oh it's just San Fran, people can go buy pets elsewhere"? Oh no.. San Fran will be city #1, not the last city this happens in.

My prediction for the last 6 months has been that in ten years, the US won't have pets at all, unless you are super rich and import your dogs or cats from out of country. No matter how hard we seem to try to fight it, they just have more money and more ignorant people and fanatics on their side. Some days I don't feel like anything I can do makes any difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfy-hound

San Fran was always one of the most pet friendly cities ever, I guess they're changing that.

People buying pets in other towns isn't a good answer! If people stop buying the companion animals, then they get used to a "non pet home" and that means when HSUS goes for national bans on all pets, they don't CARE. Plus, "Oh it's just San Fran, people can go buy pets elsewhere"? Oh no.. San Fran will be city #1, not the last city this happens in.

My prediction for the last 6 months has been that in ten years, the US won't have pets at all, unless you are super rich and import your dogs or cats from out of country. No matter how hard we seem to try to fight it, they just have more money and more ignorant people and fanatics on their side. Some days I don't feel like anything I can do makes any difference.

---

wolfy keep your hopes up.
in the end all governments eventually fail

is there any updates on this?

i found a new article posted today

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...entry_id=67477

must read it clearly says they want to ban all pets

there is also another one on banning of all cats in S.F.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nixer

is there any updates on this?

i found a new article posted today

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...entry_id=67477

must read it clearly says they want to ban all pets

there is also another one on banning of all cats in S.F.

---

They don't want to ban owning pets, just selling them in pet shops... I live in San Francisco, so I'd know if that was happening!! We already have so many restrictions here in terms of sales, it's really not going to change much. Only a few pet shops still sell live animals, and we're talking guinea pigs, parakeets and hamsters. There is one shop in the business of selling reptiles (colubrids only), so they will be affected quite badly. No biggie for me, since Daly City & SSF are only 5-10 minutes away - and already where I go for my pet needs & feeders. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ham

Drugs are illegal in San Francisco, doesnt seem to stop anyone from doing them though...

---

P.S. Marijuana is basically legal in San Francisco (all you need is a "prescription," which anyone & their mother can get for $90), so that might not be the best example. :rofl: I get your point though, LOL.

SF is freaking crazy...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jfreels

On another note though, it just bans the sale in the city limits and from my understanding, you could still breed within the city with no fault. You just can't have a storefront.

---

That's basically how I understand it... animal control generally doesn't care what you keep in your home, they only care about what's sold in stores. And like I said above, they already have many restrictions on that - you can't sell pythons, boas, gerbils, hedgehogs, ferrets, ASFs, and probably more that I don't even know about.

Quote:

---

I'm against the goverment regulating if I can purchase a "companion animal", but at the same time, I am tired of animals going to bad homes. A parent will be less inclined to drive to another city just to get an $8 hamster.

---

That's not so true around here, since we're the type of metro where everyone drives from town to town... most people live & work in different places, usually commuting from the Peninsula to the city (I did the opposite for years). So for us, it's really commonplace to live in San Francisco and shop in Daly City or Colma/SSF - they have all the good shopping anyway, since SF is very anti-big-box store. :colbert: There are only three Petcos and one Petsmart in SF city limits, and they rarely even have mice for sale.

Quote:

---

And if SF is anything like Atlanta, there are very few places to actually get those animals within the city limits. Unfortunately, the good independant stores have all closed down.

---

Yup. And you'd be really hard-pressed to find dogs & cats in a pet shop, since that's been passe for YEARS... only one left is Serramonte Pet Shop, and they deal with protests and complaints on a regular basis. For good reason too, since their dogs are total puppy-mill products. :( It's sad that independent shops are scarce, but I'm not sad about the lack of live animal sales.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AaronP

SF is freaking crazy...

---

Yes, we are all crazy here... and darned proud of it too!! :rolleye2:

the logic behind the ban seems rushed and not thought out.

The logic behind the ban is easy to see. It's a 'feel good' thing to pass, since the legislator type folks can say it's to help prevent animal abuse, to protest the pets from being an impulse buy, etc. No matter that there's laws againt animal abuse and neglect already.
The ban will only hurt the stores, and set a precident for banning all sales of pets for not only San Fran but for other cities in California, then other parts of the country. Don't make a mistake of thinking that these types of bans and legislation hasn't been well planned and well thought out.

Plus, San Fran doesn't allow some animals already, including pythons. They will confiscate and/or arrest/fine you for owning them also, even if it's rare that it happens. All it takes is a complaint from anyone and you're busted.

I'm never setting foot within San Fran. I'm officially declaring my San Fran tourism boycott.

I with mainbutter!!! Boycotting...but then again they are boycotting AZ...sooo:rolleyes:

In a time where the economy is a mess and ppl are barely surviving...lets go ahead and cause more small businesses to close....oye. :colbert: Don't deal with the puppy mills and the animal abuse....just stop selling and that should take care of it. :rolleye2:

Drives me nuts!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_h_smith

What do you expect, it's SanFran.

Jim Smith

---

Um, what he said.

Frisco is a sad state of affairs, much like the rest of California.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

I'm never setting foot within San Fran. I'm officially declaring my San Fran tourism boycott.

---

I'm sad for you then.... you're missing out on one of the greatest cities in the WORLD, and I'm saying that as somebody who's literally traveled the world. But seriously, we have enough tourists already, so we're not missing anything by losing a few. :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BrandonsBalls

Um, what he said.

Frisco is a sad state of affairs, much like the rest of California.

---

How so? I don't think we're any worse than the rest of the country, at least not at this time... and things should improve even more after November's election. :cool: We do some things a little wacky in this city, but we also do many things right - hence the reason I returned after 10 years away, seeing what else the US has to offer. None of the other places I've lived compared to SF, but I guess to each his/her own.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BPelizabeth

I with mainbutter!!! Boycotting...but then again they are boycotting AZ...sooo:rolleyes:

---

Our government officials are boycotting, not the people... unlike some of you here, I wouldn't "boycott" an entire state (or even a city) based on their government legislation. Heck, if that were the case, I'd never be able to visit a red state! And that would be a problem, since I visit family & friends in red states on a regular basis. :oops:

I mean really?? Not saying you should all come visit tomorrow, but it's pretty silly to write off a place based on one law that's not even passed. Do you know how many ridiculous laws are proposed every day? Most don't even make it to City Hall, and I doubt this one will go much further either. Look through the proposed laws over the years in your town, and I bet there will be a few that make you cringe or laugh.

Quote:

---

In a time where the economy is a mess and ppl are barely surviving...lets go ahead and cause more small businesses to close....oye. :colbert: Don't deal with the puppy mills and the animal abuse....just stop selling and that should take care of it. :rolleye2:

Drives me nuts!!

---

I don't think it would actually cause much harm, since as I said earlier, there are very few live animals sold in SF pet stores... I can only think of one or two that would be affected, and they could easily switch gears to selling only supplies instead. Even those 1-2 stores don't seem to sell many animals, and probably make 75-80% of their profit in supply sales.

Only in the PRK :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lolo76

They don't want to ban owning pets, just selling them in pet shops... I live in San Francisco, so I'd know if that was happening!! We already have so many restrictions here in terms of sales, it's really not going to change much. Only a few pet shops still sell live animals, and we're talking guinea pigs, parakeets and hamsters. There is one shop in the business of selling reptiles (colubrids only), so they will be affected quite badly. No biggie for me, since Daly City & SSF are only 5-10 minutes away - and already where I go for my pet needs & feeders. :P

---

did you read the link i posted? obviously not!

it clearly says that they support a total ban and there is also a bill to ban all cats in S.F., but if you read that article you would know that also

Well.. obviously, it's fine to ban pet sales.. because you'll just go to antoher city to get your stuff. Then what if Daly City and SSF also follow SF's lead? Then anywhere in California? Heck.. let's just have that rule everywhere!

Then it'll be only USDA facilities can breed animals. That's already being proposed too, you know? Haven't you seen those? That sounds great, only licensed breeders can breed! They'll be inspected, etc. Wonderful, excpet that only large scale operations are able to do the volume and the permit fees, etc.. so only the biggest will still be able to breed animals.

Oh.. guess what? Those "big breeders" that are to be the USDA licensed ones? They already have been labeled puppy mills, or kitten mills, or snake mills. Once they're shut down with some more feel-good legislation.. no more pets bred or sold in the US. Bingo. HSUS is happy.

Do you REALLY think that HSUS doesn't have a long term plan to get rid of all pets and animal agriculture? They state it themselves with their "one generation and gone" goals. They are not STUPID. They have plenty of funds, and the attitude of "As long as it doesn't directly affect me" is how they will win. Congrats. Euthanize your pets before PeTa gets them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nixer

did you read the link i posted? obviously not!

it clearly says that they support a total ban and there is also a bill to ban all cats in S.F., but if you read that article you would know that also

---

I did read that article, thankyouverymuch... in fact I read it TWICE, and it says nothing about banning ownership and cats. Maybe you need to read it again? Here's the only part that even mentioned pet ownership, and I don't see how you interpreted this as banning cats & dogs. :confused:

"And while it was admittedly wrenching testimony, the average pet owner probably wanted to know if he would be able to buy a puppy at a local pet store. As commission Chairwoman Stephanie Stephens said, no one wants to see an animal mistreated, but what about the responsible pet owner who keeps an animal in good condition and forms a mutual bond of trust an affection?

Nope, testified the bird advocate, they shouldn't have a pet either. (Is that what confused you? It's just something random a "bird advocate" said, not a law that was being considered.)

In a town where it is often said that dogs outnumber children, that's going to be a tough sell." (And as it indicates here, most people in SF would scoff at the idea of not owning pets.)

Ah, I see what you were reading now... it was a "newsflash" in one of the comments, which had no outside link for reference. I did some further research on that comment, and can't find anything regarding this issue. The board of supervisor members who supposedly "proposed a ban on all cats in SF" have only proposed a ban on declawing cats: http://www.aolnews.com/article/san-f...awing/19260543
These same people also were instrumental in the ban on plastic bags (stores can only use them if they pay a fee), so I guess the commenter on your link got a little confused - as it also mentioned bagging cats, or something like that. Funny!

Challenging or questioning a reference librarian (myself), you've gotta provide actual sources - or I'll find them for you, LOL. ;)

I would hope this is a pie in the sky type bill, but with this being SanFran, it could become law. What I don't understand is how the people of the city would let this become law? Where are the people and why are they not outraged by this?

Jim Smith

Well, look right in the thread at Lolo who lives in SF and apparently thinks it's just fine to have such a ban. Obviously to me at least, if the reptile hobbiests don't care, why should the rest of the city? Of course, they'll probably all howl when it ban crops up in other nearby cities and they suddenly can't just drive a short ways to get supplies or pets.. but then it'll be too late.

Lolo, do you reside in SF?

Are ball pythons legal to have there?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfy-hound

Well, look right in the thread at Lolo who lives in SF and apparently thinks it's just fine to have such a ban. Obviously to me at least, if the reptile hobbiests don't care, why should the rest of the city? Of course, they'll probably all howl when it ban crops up in other nearby cities and they suddenly can't just drive a short ways to get supplies or pets.. but then it'll be too late.

---

I never said it was fine... I just said it won't make a huge difference, since there aren't many live animals sold here already. :cool: Do I agree with the ban? Only partially, as I think small animals (rodents, birds & reptiles) should be allowed - cats and dogs, on the other hand, should NOT be sold in pet shops. Does anyone disagree with that?

As for the reptile restrictions, I completely disagree with those... so I definitely do care!! I'm actually looking into getting those laws repealed, or at least modified to allow small boids.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

Lolo, do you reside in SF?

---

My profile says "Bay Area," and I'd like to keep it at that... ;)

Quote:

---

Are ball pythons legal to have there?

---

No, all pythons and boas are illegal in the city of San Francisco... it's rarely enforced unless you're selling them, but on the books nonetheless.

US Government..PFFFT..pretty soon there will be the US version of the Berlin Wall around the entire country. We will all be wearing tracking collars, everyone will work the exact same hours so they can force us off the streets at 10pm wich afterwords will be patrolled by armed enforcers in armored vehicles. Everyone will be assigned a watcher that does nothing but watch your every move by sattalite. Then there will be people like me living in the desert trading goat skins and scrap metal for goods.

This is after the constitution has been destroyed by a giant robot with a flame thrower by order of the overlord..I mean president.
Damn robots ! :soapbx:

Funny how most of us love to talk about how terrible pet store's are and that people shouldn't buy animals at them, and only from good breeders. But then throw a fit when the city of SF agrees with that!

I live just across the bridge from SF, so I've been keeping tabs on this a bit. They aren't trying to ban owning animals. Anyone that is coming to that conclusion obviously isn't reading much into this. Lolo is right; the restrictions in SF are already pretty tight. Not much will actually change. Honestly, the only problem I have with this is that it will put some pet store owners out of business. But most in sf these days make all their money from pet supplies and don't really sell any live animals except a some fish and a few rodents and such. So yeah, this won't really affect a whole lot, and most likely people won't even notice.

So where do the pets come from? Where do you buy a pet other than fish? Not talking about dogs and cats, but other human companion pets?

Jim Smith

Hell this doesn't seem like that huge of a change, yes its a bit upsetting but if this starts moving city to city then state by state the US is done for with animals. And why bash California because of one law? Im from California, born and raised in San Leandro.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_h_smith

So where do the pets come from? Where do you buy a pet other than fish? Not talking about dogs and cats, but other human companion pets?

Jim Smith

---

Like what, birds and rabbits and such? Craigslist from local breeders.

We always push for people to buy reptiles from reputable breeders. Why shouldn't we advise the same for other species of animals? Most people that buy those kind of animals usually just purchase on a whim because they see it and think, "aweee, that's so cute!" Then end up getting rid of it once they get bored with it or realize birds are loud or some other various reason. Sounds like the kind of thing this bill is trying to prevent since they won't just be buying random animals on a whim just because they saw it in a pet store... I have no problem with that personally, since those that still want to get an animal will still be able to do so, and it will most likely be healthier and better quality. I'm not a big fan of pet stores for the most part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tonyaltn

US Government..PFFFT..pretty soon there will be the US version of the Berlin Wall around the entire country. We will all be wearing tracking collars, everyone will work the exact same hours so they can force us off the streets at 10pm wich afterwords will be patrolled by armed enforcers in armored vehicles. Everyone will be assigned a watcher that does nothing but watch your every move by sattalite. Then there will be people like me living in the desert trading goat skins and scrap metal for goods.

This is after the constitution has been destroyed by a giant robot with a flame thrower by order of the overlord..I mean president.
Damn robots ! :soapbx:

---

At least I have a backup plan.

BWCA MN and nowheresville Ontario.. I'm well practiced on subsistence living, all I need is a few supplies to get me started, or at least a good axe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonym

Like what, birds and rabbits and such? Craigslist from local breeders.

---

So, let me get this straight. Buying from Craigslist is buying from responsible breeders? Buying from some backyard breeder that can't sell animals anywhere else other than Craigslist is the answer to S.F. issues?

Okay, I guess with that, I can see where this bill came from.

Jim Smith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mainbutter

At least I have a backup plan.

BWCA MN and nowheresville Ontario.. I'm well practiced on subsistence living, all I need is a few supplies to get me started, or at least a good axe.

---

The state of Montana has many times in the past suggested that they will succeed from the union. I am planning to own a piece of property there before they do.

Jim Smith

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j_h_smith

So, let me get this straight. Buying from Craigslist is buying from responsible breeders? Buying from some backyard breeder that can't sell animals anywhere else other than Craigslist is the answer to S.F. issues?

Okay, I guess with that, I can see where this bill came from.

Jim Smith

---

Are you saying people should be buying low quality mass bred pets from a store over a small breeder that usually has a genuine interest in the animals they breed? Would you rather start buying ball pythons from petco? I'm not really getting what you're trying to insinuate? I'm still not seeing the upside to a pet store.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by anthonym

Are you saying people should be buying low quality mass bred pets from a store over a small breeder that usually has a genuine interest in the animals they breed? Would you rather start buying ball pythons from petco? I'm not really getting what you're trying to insinuate? I'm still not seeing the upside to a pet store.

---

Why do you think all pet stores sell "[B}low quality mass bred pets[/B]? I have many pet stores in my area that sell top shelf animals. Your small breeder is many times the same backyard breeder that you're so afraid of. How many of these back yard breeeders really know what they're doing?

What makes you think a small breeder has a genuine interest in anything but selling that 8 week old puppy or that ball python that hasn't eaten yet?

The upside to a good quality pet store is the owner has knowledge of what they are selling and that they do buy from a quality breeder because they know that their name is on the sales receipt and they don't want any problems with a returned animal. Why would you think most pet store owners want to sell "junk"? Maybe they do things differently in S.F. ( I can't believe I said that), but a pet store in my area wouldn't last no time if they sold poor quality animals.

Do you honestly think that most pet store owners are interested in selling defective animals? Do you think that pet stores would continue to do business this way?

If you can't see where pet sores fall in the scheme of things, either you haven't seen a good quality pet store or your a different breed than me.

Jim Smith

Umm, isn't it against Craigslist rules to sell pets? Don't people flag those ads down? Am I thinking of some other selling website?