According to the Los Angeles Times in an article dated June 26, 2011, The City of San Francisco is proposing a ban on the sale of all pets. It began as a ban on the sale of dogs and cats, and then it was expanded to include birds and hamsters. It now has been expanded to include all animals-anything that walks, crawls, swims, flies, or slithers, unless it is for human consumption. On February 1, 2011, West Hollywood banned the sale of dogs and cats in local pet stores. Los Angeles Councilman Paul Koretz introduced a proposal for a similar ban. South Lake Tahoe has also agreed on regulations to limit pet sales. This is a dangerous trend for the pet industry, and a result of propaganda machines in high gear.

This proposal was put on hold last year, but is back now. It is called the Humane Pet Acquisition Proposal, and is on its way to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. Rebecca Katz, Director of the San Francisco Animal Care and Control, supports the ban. Well, think about that-they would be exempt from the ban. Less competition if you eliminate pet breeders and pet retailers! Emma Murphy of Take Part says "Proponents of the ban expect to reduce euthanasia rates and overpopulation by only allowing the adoption of rescued or sheltered animals." Phillip Gerrie, co-author of the proposal, states "From Descartes on up, in the Western mindset, fish and other nonhuman animals don't have feelings, they don't have emotions, we can do whatever we want to them. If we considered them living beings, we would deal with them differently."

The pet industry is estimated at between $45-$50 Billion annually. People love their pets and want to be able to purchase the pet of their choice. Have city officials not thought of the loss of sales tax revenue? What about income tax revenue for the state? Is San Francisco's local economy doing so well that they can afford this kind of loss? What about the loss of local businesses, such as the Animal Connection owned by Jonathan Ito-or the loss of jobs and the cost of unemployment with these losses? Retail sales of pet supplies and accessories are sold not only in pet stores, but many retail stores in the city. Mr. Ito says "The animal-rights activists are trying to drive a wedge any way they can in order to get a foothold on changing the ownership of animals. They don't believe they should be bred. They don't believe people are responsible to care for them.... They are about eliminating animals as pets." Representatives of the pet industry call this "the most radical ban we've seen nationwide."

Proponents of the proposal state that it is to reduce the numbers in shelters and to eliminate puppy mills and kitten factories. What they do not say is that the numbers in shelters are an estimated 80% mixed breed and the direct result of irresponsible pet ownership! The shelters are exempted as they "only adopt out animals". Wait a minute-don't they charge a fee for this, and wouldn't this be considered a sale? I don't care what you call the monetary exchange, it is a sale, plain and simple. Folks, this is a trend across the country in pet legislation-shelters, rescues and local humane societies are exempt from the legislation they are screaming for. How better to eliminate your competition? One step closer to no care, contact or control of an animal; one step closer to the "animal rights" agenda of the elimination of animals.