San Francisco - Proposed ban on sales of FISH

[GDawson]

Gresham - I think having a highly informed LFS employee goes a LONG way in developing quality aquarists. Quality pretty much comes with a price and a 15yo getting $10 an hour most likely is not going to be quality.

Amen!


-Gregory

 

[GDawson]

BTW - I just Googled the LFS that sold me the sea horses...it's still there after all these years. Hopefully under new management.

-Gregory

 

[tuberider]

Hmmm, where the heck do you find an unincorporated area in commute distance to SF?

I'm not going to spill the beans, but there's a place that's 1/2 an hour from the city that's pretty cool

 

[nudibranch]

I wonder how many of the politicians that are trying to pass this have actually been to enough fish stores and Fish Hatcheries to actually make a generalization about the majority of the industry? On top of that how many of them know enough about the animal themselves to really be making this sort of decision? Or have they really met enough of the hobbyists to really be making a generalization about them; do they really understand how committed hobbyists are? I understand the thing about goldfish and other cheap fish but why are they extending this stereotype to all branches of the fish hobby?

 

[Coral reefer]

Haha, how Refreshing a young mind can be. Belief that the system can actually work! Too old a jaded to believe anything gets decided by people that actually know anything about what they are deciding on. Lobyists and money take place of knowledge all too often

 

[Thales]

I wonder how many of the politicians that are trying to pass this have actually been to enough fish stores and Fish Hatcheries to actually make a generalization about the majority of the industry? On top of that how many of them know enough about the animal themselves to really be making this sort of decision? Or have they really met enough of the hobbyists to really be making a generalization about them; do they really understand how committed hobbyists are? I understand the thing about goldfish and other cheap fish but why are they extending this stereotype to all branches of the fish hobby?

Because the hobby does it fair share of bad things.

 

[rygh]

I think a key part of this is what goes on at Petco and a couple of other mega stores.

They have these big tanks of "feeder goldfish", that really are a bit disturbing.
A big 50 gallon tank, jam packed with goldfish, where easily 20% are dead, bobbing around.
Grey with crud. Very nasty.
And these big stores get high turnover, so a lot of people see it, including
a lot of little kids and non-fish pet owners.

Not really surprising that there is a backlash.

 

[Thales]

I think we as a hobby marginalize the terribleness of many small independent LFS at our own peril.

 

[sfsuphysics]

I dunno is a tank packed full of feeder goldfish that by definition are used to feed other things really any different than a ranch jammed packed full of cattle or houses full of "free range" chicken? Or is it somehow ethically ok in those instances because it's "feeder fish" for human consumption?

mind you not saying wall to wall chickens is an ok thing. Just think it's quite silly for the city "leaders" to pick these battles because it makes it seem like they're doing something good for the world... or the photo op, or the news article.

 

[Thales]

Mike, I don't think that is why they are pushing this.

 

[sfsuphysics]

Rich, honestly its hard to get a read on why they're pushing anything. Sometimes its one particular business pisses off someone in charge and sweeping legislation goes through (the reason why plastic bags are "banned" from SF is because of this). Whatever the reason, I don't believe for one second that they're doing something which they honestly believe is for the good of all. Or their delusional and like you mentioned, one 6th avenue store which happens to be where their "year of study" revolved around screws it up for everyone.

 

[Thales]

There is more than one 6th ave type store in the city.

 

[anathema]

Actually they could have done MUCH worse than 6th Avenue.

Try going into the store near the cow palace sometime. The store used to be inside SF city limits but moved to avoid these types of laws.

 

[nudibranch]

I wonder how many of the politicians that are trying to pass this have actually been to enough fish stores and Fish Hatcheries to actually make a generalization about the majority of the industry? On top of that how many of them know enough about the animal themselves to really be making this sort of decision? Or have they really met enough of the hobbyists to really be making a generalization about them; do they really understand how committed hobbyists are? I understand the thing about goldfish and other cheap fish but why are they extending this stereotype to all branches of the fish hobby?

Because the hobby does it fair share of bad things.

So do many other industries and they haven't shut them down. What about the cases were Wal-Mart employees have been payed below minimum wage or have worked under inappropriate conditions and places were pigs are given daily doses of veterinarian anti-biotics producing anti-biotic resistant bacteria that wreak havoc on the world. I just think we just don't have enough people on our side; it's not like we're are Wal-Mart, we don't have a ton of money and we most likely aren't making the goverment as much tax money. We aren't like the pig industry which produces us awesome bacon and food for many people; even though the government knows that pigs can be raised to just the same size without veterinarian anti-biotics being dosed all the time and yet it has not been enforced that the farmers can not use daily doses off veterinarian anti-biotics. I think we are being shut down to please the people who want the government to take action against animal cruelty for with some anecdotal evidence and one-sided statistics they can make us the bad guy make us the new puppy mills and when we are shut down it will seem as if a major accomplishment against animal cruelty has been achieved. Even though in reality just an industry with a few flaws would have been destroyed.

 

[Thales]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-goldfish-20110627,0,6881137.story

 

[Thales]

I wonder how many of the politicians that are trying to pass this have actually been to enough fish stores and Fish Hatcheries to actually make a generalization about the majority of the industry? On top of that how many of them know enough about the animal themselves to really be making this sort of decision? Or have they really met enough of the hobbyists to really be making a generalization about them; do they really understand how committed hobbyists are? I understand the thing about goldfish and other cheap fish but why are they extending this stereotype to all branches of the fish hobby?

Because the hobby does it fair share of bad things.

So do many other industries and they haven't shut them down. What about the cases were Wal-Mart employees have been payed below minimum wage or have worked under inappropriate conditions and places were pigs are given daily doses of veterinarian anti-biotics producing anti-biotic resistant bacteria that wreak havoc on the world. I just think we just don't have enough people on our side; it's not like we're are Wal-Mart, we don't have a ton of money and we most likely aren't making the goverment as much tax money. We aren't like the pig industry which produces us awesome bacon and food for many people; even though the government knows that pigs can be raised to just the same size without veterinarian anti-biotics being dosed all the time and yet it has not been enforced that the farmers can not use daily doses off veterinarian anti-biotics. I think we are being shut down to please the people who want the government to take action against animal cruelty for with some anecdotal evidence and one-sided statistics they can make us the bad guy make us the new puppy mills and when we are shut down it will seem as if a major accomplishment against animal cruelty has been achieved. Even though in reality just an industry with a few flaws would have been destroyed.

While I agree with some of that I think the dangerous part is white washing the problems with the live animal industry, and live MO industry. Its not enough to say that we don't have enough people on our side, we have to ask why we don't have enough people on our side. There are real reasons, they are not secret, and they have not been addressed by the industry in any meaningful way, ever. Like I have written about and talked about before, they go after us because we are very visible (there is a reason animals are not slaughtered where the public can watch) and the hobby's 'problems' are right there for all to see. We are an easy, public target. We ignore that at our own peril. I hope its not too late. Marginalizing the problems in the MO industry - we only have a few flaws, other people have flaws too - is only going to, and has, made it easier to go after us IMO. Seriously, it never works to say 'they are bad too' - it doest work in school or the wider world, you/we have to be responsible for our own actions regardless of what bad things other are getting away with. I also think comparing luxury pets to food animals only serves to make it worse for us - they can stop us easily and feel like something has been accomplished, while stopping or changing the way food animals are raised would be very very difficult.
I think that the number of people that treat animals like fish and corals as disposable far outweigh the number of people that treat them like they are living precious things. The proposed legislation is not necessarily going after hobbyists like us (although watch a bad shipment come in, or watch animals suffer in a bag lot sale, or watch sick animals be tossed in the freezer or flushed or left to get better by themselves instead of treated and you may feel differently), we just happen to be there, on the sidelines, wringing our hands. It's been like that for decades, and it leaves us wide open to legislation like what is being proposed in SF.
I think the base of the issue is that MO/FW livestock is too cheap. It is not cost effective to treat or supply resources to the treatment of fish that cost a couple of bucks, and the industry is wide open to probably justified criticism which the hobby/industry generally ignores because som many are interested in the best deal.

 

[nudibranch]

I know there are places in the Marine and Freshwater hobby that do bad things but why not just tell them they can't sell fish? I mean they are grouping places with employees who know a ton about the reefing hobby and who have great livestock that they won't just sell to anyone with stores whose employees are payed minimum wage who don't know what anything about the reefing hobby and are trained to just say "That will look great in your tank" and whose livestock are kept in poor conditions and inadequate habitats.
Also does anyone know about what is happening with this law right now?

 

[Thales]

I know there are places in the Marine and Freshwater hobby that do bad things but why not just tell them they can't sell fish? I mean they are grouping places with employees who know a ton about the reefing hobby and who have great livestock that they won't just sell to anyone with stores whose employees are payed minimum wage who don't know what anything about the reefing hobby and are trained to just say "That will look great in your tank" and whose livestock are kept in poor conditions and inadequate habitats.

Because there is no way to really tell the difference and there is no money to get it done. Even on this enlightened in the know forum there are some who think 6th ave is an atrocity and some that think its fine. What about the shops that are really in the middle? One way to go is to 'certify' live animal sellers, but that is open to a whole host of problems - who certifies, how, and what kind of follow up is there. All of that costs money and resources and still ends up being subjective. Of course that cost could be put onto the retailers, or passed onto the customers, but the retailers are already running near or in the red, and most consumers don't want to pay more so they won't. Either way, the business prolly close.
Its cheaper to just stop it all and lose a double handful of businesses. Not that I think its a good idea. And again, the idea that this was coming is old. The Vincent Law was an effort to help shops self regulate, but it was ignored after the first month because it was a pain and no one really wanted to do it. Calls for self regulation of the industry have not yielded anything useful.
I don't think this will pass, but who the heck am I?

Also does anyone know about what is happening with this law right now?

The article I posted above is the most current info I can find.


PS - there is very little money in an LFS, and I suspect that most employees are paid minimum wage, or only a little above.

 

[GDawson]

Interesting update:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-goldfish-20110627,0,6881137.story

Snake food was almost exempt from the proposal. After all, pythons have to eat, and they like their lunch alive. But at a heated meeting, Commissioner Pam Hemphill questioned how it could be humane to sell live animals to be fed to other live animals.

"If a snake is caught with a rodent in a box, the rodent can scratch its eye and cause an infection," said Hemphill, who noted that reptiles on display at the California Academy of Sciences eat dead, frozen prey. "The snake can't escape, and the rodent might be stuck for one or two days in the box with the snake because the snake's not hungry right then.

"So it doesn't seem very humane to me," she continued. "And if the frozen [food] works, then I think the killing of the animals to be food is probably more humane."

Humane for the rodent would depend on the mode of death prior freezing wouldn’t it? Rich, can you confirm that they only use frozen rodents for snakes/reptiles?

It is legal in San Francisco to sell live animals for eventual human consumption, and the proposed ban would not stop markets from selling live fish, poultry, turtles or seafood for that purpose.

Thought this was changed a couple of years ago after the China Town exposés on the condition of live animals for food. With this loophole we could sell MOs as really fresh sushi.

Jennifer Scarlett, a veterinarian and co-president of the San Francisco SPCA, notes that only a handful of stores in San Francisco sell animals of any kind and that the effect of a ban would be largely symbolic. But she said that symbolism, and the conversation that it raises, is critical in improving the lives of millions of helpless creatures.

Close down peoples stores….increase their personal debt….force them into the unemployment lines……kick the employees to the street in a crappy economy….but it’s for a symbolic greater good.

 

[Thales]

Interesting update:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-goldfish-20110627,0,6881137.story

Snake food was almost exempt from the proposal. After all, pythons have to eat, and they like their lunch alive. But at a heated meeting, Commissioner Pam Hemphill questioned how it could be humane to sell live animals to be fed to other live animals.

"If a snake is caught with a rodent in a box, the rodent can scratch its eye and cause an infection," said Hemphill, who noted that reptiles on display at the California Academy of Sciences eat dead, frozen prey. "The snake can't escape, and the rodent might be stuck for one or two days in the box with the snake because the snake's not hungry right then.

"So it doesn't seem very humane to me," she continued. "And if the frozen [food] works, then I think the killing of the animals to be food is probably more humane."

Humane for the rodent would depend on the mode of death prior freezing wouldn’t it? Rich, can you confirm that they only use frozen rodents for snakes/reptiles?

Not only, but mostly. I wonder what we feed to aquatic animals that need live food?
Of couse this proposed legislation only applies in the city right? So you can go to daily city for your goldfish.