The Albany City Council is considering a proposal that would prohibit pet stores from selling animals, including mammals, birds, fish, and reptiles.

This sweeping ban would eliminate regulated, responsible sources for pets and push consumers toward unregulated alternatives, including online marketplaces and out-of-state sellers, where oversight is limited and protections are weaker. It would also lead to an increase in wildlife trafficking.

While supporters claim these bans improve animal welfare, similar policies in other cities have not reduced demand for pets. Instead, they shift that demand into less transparent channels and create unintended consequences for consumers, animals, and small businesses.

The groups pushing these local bans are hoping they will create momentum for a statewide ban in California for all pet sales. We need your help to ensure Albany rejects this anti-pet ordinance.

Take Action Today

Contact Albany City Council members before their meeting on Monday and urge them to oppose a retail pet sale ban and focus on practical, effective solutions that support animal welfare, consumer protection, and responsible pet ownership.

What Are Pet Bans?

Pet bans don’t ban pets outright, but they make it harder to get one. Typically, these laws ban stores from selling dogs, cats, and rabbits. Increasingly, these laws ban guinea pigs and other pets, too. A recent law in D.C. bans the sale of mammals, reptiles, amphibians, and birds. 

Advocates claim these laws help pets, but it’s the opposite: They actually hurt pets.

Here’s how these laws hurt pets:

Better Solutions

People are rightly seeking to ensure the welfare of animals sold through stores. The way to do this is to address animal welfare directly. Banning stores from selling animals only creates a black market where there is less protection for animals. After all, Prohibition didn’t stop moonshiners–it helped them. 

Effective solutions include:

Ready To Help?

Tell your legislators to oppose pet bans!