Support San Francisco's Efforts to Promote Pet Adoption Rather Than Pet Sales

 Please sign our petition and if you are an SF resident, please make a quick phone call to your supervisor indicating your support...the phone calls REALLY matter!!!  They need to hear from their constituents.

Find district Supervisors here: http://gispub02.sfgov.org/website/nuviewer/monsmap.asp?bhiw=1371&bhih=938

Find district Supervisor's email addresses here: http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=1616
_________________________________________________________________
San Francisco is a city of animal lovers, both wild and domestic.  Named after the patron saint of animals, our City has the opportunity to continue our national leadership in animal welfare by promoting a culture of humane pet acquisition, where it is standard practice that our citizens%u2019 adopt their pets before anything else.

Unfortunately, pets are suffering on many fronts:

1)   There is a dramatic %u201Coversupply%u201D of animals in the system, leading to millions of adoptable animals being euthanized each year - it is estimated that approximately 3.7 million animals were euthanized in the nation%u2019s shelters in 2008.

2)   Large-scale, commercial breeding operations add millions of animals to the system.  These animals are sold for profit, leading to many documented humane issues such as: overcrowded living conditions, lack of socialization, over-breeding, in-breeding, poor veterinary care, and poor quality of food and shelter.

3)   Exotic birds, reptiles, and fish continue to be imported, legally and illegally, while threatening native species.

These issues are in direct conflict with the compassion that San Francisco shows to our animals.  However, each time San Franciscans purchase an animal for a pet, they are unknowingly contributing to the problem.  They leave an adoptable pet in a city shelter or rescue group, and they create demand for potentially inhumane and irresponsible mass breeding.

The %u201CHumane Pet Acquisition Proposal%u201D is designed to align the values of San Franciscans towards animals with the way we acquire pets, allowing us to 1) own a pet or multiple pets, 2) help address the adoptable animal overpopulation problem, and 3) ensure that our animals are treated humanely before they join our families and that we are prepared to continue their humane treatment throughout their lives.

The Proposal recommends that San Franciscans can acquire pets of all species through any of the following methods:

    * Pet store adoption events
    * Pet store permanent adoption centers/partnerships
    * Adoption from Animal Care and Control and SPCA
    * Adoption from the numerous animal rescue organizations in the city (e.g., animal-specific groups, breed-specific groups)

Methods that fall outside of those listed above would not be permitted, and this will only be reconsidered when there are no adoptable animals in San Francisco. Note that the Proposal applies to live animals of all species, including: dogs, cats, %u201Csmalls%u201D, all birds, reptiles, amphibians, and aquarium fish.

Animals Win

    * More adoptions and less euthanasia[1] - all animals are adopted before any new animals are %u201Ccreated%u201D and sold
    * Animals that are bred are done so with a focus on animal welfare rather than profits
    * Animals will be in happier homes - less likely to be given up for adoption

Pet Owners Win

    * This does not mean no pets in San Francisco; it does mean more adopted pets
    * Healthier animals with fewer behavioral problems
    * Increase awareness and understanding of the needs and requirements of the animal, leading to fewer surrenders and/or outright releases (e.g., birds)
    * Healthier pets are less likely to have diseases that can be transferable to humans (zoonotic)

Pet Stores Win

    * Shelters and rescue groups would enthusiastically refer interested people to pet stores that do not sell live animals or that have an adoption program
    * Allows pet stores to focus on where the vast majority (85%) of their revenue comes from: food and supplies
    * Existing pet stores will be provided a grandfathering period to allow them to adjust to the new proposal

San Francisco Wins

    * Increased sense that we are %u201Cliving our values%u201D by not contributing to profit at the expense of animals
    * Decreased costs for animal control and welfare as a result of fewer surrenders and euthanasias
    * Volunteer dollars and time freed up to focus on other issues in the City
    * Will be seen as a leader in animal welfare - other localities have focused only on certain animal species (e.g., dogs and cats)

The Commission has engaged many stakeholders.  In addition to messages of support, the Commission has heard of several concerns.  We wish to be open and transparent about these issues, as well as provide a response to each.

This proposal infringes on people%u2019s right to own pets

This Proposal does not seek to limit pet ownership; it seeks to ensure that those pets that are acquired in San Francisco are acquired in a manner that is humane.  The Proposal should result in an increase in adoptions and a decrease in euthanasia.

This will impact people%u2019s right to own a certain breed of animal

There are numerous breed-specific rescue groups devoted to placing rescued animals in good homes.  This should be the first stop for someone seeking a specific breed.

This is bad for San Francisco%u2019s small businesses/this will result in pet stores going out of business

Approximately 85% of pet store revenue comes from the sale of food and toys/ancillary items, while only ~11% comes from the sale of live animals.  There are many successful models for pet stores in the Bay Area that do not rely on the sale of live animals (Pet Food Express, For Other Living Things, Andy%u2019s).  In San Francisco, only 4 stores sell dogs, none sells cats, and 10 sell other live animals. Approximately 30 stores in SF sell only pet supplies.

People will just go outside of the city to buy their pets

The Proposition is designed to give San Francisco residents access to pets through adoption rather than purchase.  Residents will continue to have hundreds if not thousands of animals to choose from.  There won%u2019t be a need to drive anywhere else.  Additionally, the City has set a precedent for taking action on issues of principal regardless of a fear of people leaving the city for their purchases (e.g., limiting access to cigarettes in certain retail establishments).

Other issues should receive priority %u2013 like the economy, jobs, MUNI, etc.

The City of Saint Francis should consider the welfare of animals we call pets a priority.  If the breeding and selling of animals is inherently cruel, and we have adoptable animals that are being euthanized, we cannot ignore this issue, and it can be pursued in parallel to other issues.

Education and/or setting standards of care is all that%u2019s needed

Legislated education and standards are quickly forgotten and not enforced, so education is clearly not enough by itself.  For example, with access to cigarettes and composting/recycling, San Francisco was required to take action in addition to education efforts to meet stated goals.

There is not a problem in San Francisco with euthanasia/overpopulation

 While San Francisco has a relatively high live release rate from shelters, ACC has to put down hundreds of animals each year, and the impact can fall disproportionately on certain animals (e.g., small animals).  This high release rate requires significant volunteer resources that could be directed elsewhere.  Lastly, most animal deaths go unreported.  Many are lost or released into %u201Cthe wild%u201D only to die quickly from starvation and predators.

Pet stores don%u2019t contribute to overpopulation/most dogs and cats don%u2019t come from pet stores

The demand for pets from pet stores contributes to overpopulation as each purchase likely means one less animal adopted from a shelter or rescue.  Most of the animals surrendered to ACC (with the exception of dogs and cats) likely have come from pet stores and commercial breeders rather than from small personal breeders.

The pet industry already strongly endorses adoption of animals

While this may be true in isolated instances, the fundamental business model of the pet industry is to breed and sell animals for profit rather than encourage adoption (no profit).  SF residents would welcome the pet industry%u2019s efforts to promote adoption rather than purchase.

Most pet stores do a good job of caring for animals and educating buyers, even the large chains

There is strong evidence that animals live in inhumane conditions in pet stores.  In addition, pet store sales staff do not have the same amount of time as shelter volunteers to get to know each pet, their unique personalities, their care requirements, and to find an appropriate home.

Why is it not species-specific?  Why not just dogs and cats?

There is strong evidence that all animals that are bred on a large scale are housed in conditions that deny them basic rights and comforts.  Many %u201Cexotic%u201D animals are taken illegally.  The issue is not species-specific %u2013all animals are worthy of humane treatment.

This is in direct violation of the commerce clause (10th Amendment)

Previous court cases have ruled that establishing local laws for the humane treatment of animals is not in violation of the commerce clause.

This is %u201Cbig government%u201D telling us what we can and cannot do

SF has undertaken other efforts that define the rules of engagement so that society%u2019s interests are not sacrificed for the benefit of a small group of people:

    * Limitations on rabbits and chickens sold in San Francisco (1970s)
    * Mandatory composting and recycling; compostable take-out containers
    * Limiting the use of plastic bags
    * Limiting the retail channels for cigarettes
    * No smoking in bars and restaurants
    * Same-sex marriage

Pet breeding and sales will move underground

By encouraging and promoting adoption, the Proposal will help inform residents about the negative consequences of buying from an underground breeder (which unfortunately exists).

Pet stores provide educational opportunities for kids

Kids can visit animal shelters and even choose to volunteer and socialize with the animals.  This is better than them getting the message that animals are an expendable product sold for profit.