Will Banning the Sale of Pets Cut Down on Animal Shelter Euthanasia?
For years the San Francisco Animal Control and Welfare Commission has argued about different ways to reduce the number of pets that have ended up in their care. In fact in the 70's they managed to get a ban on baby chicken and bunny sales in local pet shops. This ban was put in place because their was a disproportionate amount of chick and bunny drop offs at the city shelter following Easter holidays each year. They are no considering taking the same measures once again.
The city shelter in San Francisco is the only shelter in the city that takes small animals. Right now they are finding that in addition to the influx of cats and dogs they are having brought in due to family financial issues they are also seeing more hamsters, mice, and rats.
The shelter argues that small animals are impulse buys. People buy them because they are tiny not realizing how much work they can really be. So maybe they shouldn't be allowed to buy them at all. This isn't to punish people but to save animals.
Some members of the commission are even arguing for a total ban on pet shop animals, even cats and dogs. The argument is that the cats and dogs often come from pet mills where they are brought up with illnesses and have been bred to behave badly.
So what do you think? Will banning the sale of pets improve the large number of pets that end up in shelters and then euthanized each year? Is this going too far?
July 18th, 2010 at 6:24 pm
I think that this is a great way to prevent the animals from being euthanized. There are just too many people that can’t handle it. If you want to get a pet then you can still get them from the shelter, through a responsible breeder, or even from another city. This will definitely cut down on impulse buys. I hope that more large cities follow their lead.