Fish ban stopped by USARK Pet of the Month
🐶 POTM Poll is Open! 🦎 Click here to Vote! 🐰


Fish Crazy
Jan 14, 2021
Reaction score
There is no group I am aware of that defends pet keepers' rights as closely as USARK (United States Association of Reptile Keepers) does. Recently they stopped an animal ban that would have shut down most aquarium keepers in a small town in Iowa - as an example of how diligent they are. It is why I am a member even though I do not keep reptiles. They look out for everyone with pets that aren't just cats and dogs.

If you want to see the one that would have hit fish the most, go to 0:59 in the video:
I love keeping fish but I also love that there are things that protect fish from fish keepers because some people don’t take good care of their pets.
Sure. But the ban they were trying to stop would have prevented anyone from owning more than 6 fish at a time. How do you ethically keep schooling or shoaling species at that point?

The problem with most of the proposed legislation is that it is broadly written and ill considered (plus often proposed, pushed, and advocated for by groups that don't believe humans should keep any animals). Should an individual probably not keep 6 tigers in their home? Seems likely. Should more than 6 cardinal tetras be banned from my 75 gal tank? Feels like a stretch.

Blanket acceptance of ordinances because someone used the terms "animal welfare" or "invasive species" is not going to protect animals or the environment just because they used the right terms. If we let data decide, then the most damaging pet to the environment we keep are cats. Want to help native animals and ecosystems? Cats should be the first pets banned. Yes, before pythons, snakehead fish, etc. Point is, we aren't making our decisions based on the problems we are proportioning to solve, or the places and things we are suggesting we want to protect.


Most reactions