SF officials want a ban on goldfish (San Francisco, Folsom: tax, live)

[ubringliten]

I think they need to look into banning dogs first before goldfish...LOL

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Ugh...the mainstream media is eating this story up.

Goldfish sales may be banned in San Francisco - What's Trending - CBS News

The Gothamist explains it better:
The proposal is all part of the commission's push for a pet sale ban in the city, which previously didn't include goldfish, but did include hamsters and other small pets. The goal is to prevent "impulse buys," and to make it harder for puppy and kitten mills to supply pet stores.

Should Goldfish Be Banned?: Gothamist

well after going to church this morning and hearing a serman that was pretty thought provoking and serious, I needed a good laugh: I got it.

Nita

[Happy in Wyoming]

Too many people treat fish and other small aquatic animals as disposable nothings. Fish are certainly self-aware, an obvious necessity given their habits. That means they feel pain and instinctively try to get away from it which means that they must feel fear.

People are likely to live with dogs and cats; too many of the little creatures, however, become nothing more to them than animated decorations.

[nmnita]

Originally Posted by Happy in Wyoming

Too many people treat fish and other small aquatic animals as disposable nothings. Fish are certainly self-aware, an obvious necessity given their habits. That means they feel pain and instinctively try to get away from it which means that they must feel fear.

People are likely to live with dogs and cats; too many of the little creatures, however, become nothing more to them than animated decorations.

and what would you suggest? We turn all the tropical fish loose in the ocean or the lakes? I am sure Goldfish would do very well in the rivers in WY. Well, at least they would be food for other, larger fish.

They are beautiful, they enjoy swimming in an acquarium or they appear to be happy and yes, they are decorative.

[Snort]

Originally Posted by Woundedknee

Does this mean they can't get a Gerbil in SF? Hahahahaha

No, there's an exemption for service animals.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by Happy in Wyoming

Too many people treat fish and other small aquatic animals as disposable nothings. Fish are certainly self-aware, an obvious necessity given their habits. That means they feel pain and instinctively try to get away from it which means that they must feel fear.

People are likely to live with dogs and cats; too many of the little creatures, however, become nothing more to them than animated decorations.

A fishes memory is about 40 seconds or so. They have about 1/4 the nerve endings we have .Anthropomorphism can do strange things to reality.

[Gentoo]

Originally Posted by nmnita

and what would you suggest? We turn all the tropical fish loose in the ocean or the lakes? I am sure Goldfish would do very well in the rivers in WY. Well, at least they would be food for other, larger fish.

They are beautiful, they enjoy swimming in an acquarium or they appear to be happy and yes, they are decorative.

Releasing non natives is never good. Look at the Asian Carp for one example. Not giving you a bad time nita, in fact I'm sort of with you when you say, "what would you suggest?".

[BayAreaHillbilly]

Instead of new laws enforce existing ones.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by Happy in Wyoming

Fish are certainly self-aware, an obvious necessity given their habits.

Yeah - my pleco gets rowdy with me half the time when I try to replace his zucchini (he's a vegetarian). And all my fish know who their meal ticket is.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by bigdumbgod

Whewwww...thought they were talking about those tasty little snack crackers. MMMMM-cheeeese...

They're protected. The proposal now includes any animal that walks, flies, swims, crawls or slithers — unless you plan to eat it.

Only in San Francisco!