Joint Letter Opposing Proposed Ban on the Retail Sale of Pets

May 5, 2026

On behalf of national and local pet-specialty retailers, including the undersigned, as well as the greater responsible animal care community, we respectfully urge you not to adopt the ordinance that would prohibit the sale of live animal pets within [CITY]. While we appreciate that nonprofit adoption events would be allowed to continue, a blanket, species sales ban will have unintended and serious consequences for the animals it is looking to protect, as well as consumers and local businesses. 

Some of our key concerns, include, but are not limited to: 

1. The Human–Animal Bond & Community Well-Being 

Pets of all kinds enrich lives—supporting mental health, social connection, and family stability. In-person, controlled retail environments are the safest way for families to learn husbandry requirements, assess temperament or compatibility, and receive education from trained staff before bringing an animal home. Eliminating regulated retail removes these safeguards and the consumer protections (documentation, veterinary records, return policies and warranties where applicable) that help ensure positive outcomes for both consumers and the animals they are bringing home. 

2. Overbroad Policy vs. Targeted Solutions 

Rather than a blanket prohibition, we encourage narrowly tailored measures that raise standards and strengthen enforcement against bad actors (e.g., record-keeping, disclosures, sourcing/licensing requirements, inspections, and penalties for misrepresentation or illicit broker activity). 

3. Reduced Access to Responsible Sources & Increased Risk of Bad Actors 

Demand for pets, including small animals such as birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish, will not disappear with a ban. Limiting the ability for pet stores to offer pets may have unintended consequences. When regulated retail channels close, buyers turn to unregulated online sellers and informal networks, where there is no transparency, welfare standards, protection or accountability for the care of pets. 

4. Negative Economic Impact on Local Stores, Workers, and Services 

Live-animal departments support good local jobs and anchor related services in our local stores including veterinary clinics, grooming, training classes, aquatic water-testing, boarding, and education. A categorical prohibition would force significant operational changes, reduce foot traffic, and jeopardize services that thousands of residents rely upon—particularly for aquatics and herptiles, where humane care, equipment, and ongoing guidance are critical. Those impacts reverberate across local suppliers and community partners. 

We would welcome the opportunity to collaborate with the city to craft a balanced framework that protects animals while preserving safe, transparent access for residents who responsibly keep fish, birds, reptiles, and small mammals. 

We respectfully ask the Council to reject or substantially amend the ordinance and convene a stakeholder working group—including city staff, animal-welfare organizations, veterinarians, specialty-pet retailers, and experts—to develop targeted, enforceable solutions that address genuine welfare risks without driving sales into the shadows. 

Thank you for your consideration and for your dedication to animal welfare and consumer protection. 

SIGN THE LETTER