Nevada Legislature in uncharted waters when it comes to fish pedicures
CARSON CITY — The fish pedicure industry may be gaining more clout in Nevada.
Or it could simply be that the state is ready to let residents dip their toes into a bowl of hungry doctor fish. Lawmakers will decide this session if fish pedicures are allowed or simply too risky for feet and fish.
On Friday, the Assembly Committee on Labor and Commerce spent the better part of an hour discussing Assembly Bill 158, which would allow fish pedicures in Nevada at cosmetology establishments. That’s more than Sen. Tick Segerblom, D-Las Vegas, got in 2009, when his bill on the subject couldn’t get a hearing.
Eight years later, the spirited debate over letting fish nibble dead skin off human feet continues to rage in the Legislative Building. This time, though, the measure has bipartisan support. Assemblyman Jim Marchant, R-Las Vegas, presented the bill.
Segerblom, a seasoned veteran of the fight for fish pedicures, joked that a Republican carrying the bill is a sign of how far the state has progressed.
Lawmakers heard testimony from Lior Hason and Eran Tsur, two Israeli business partners who want to bring a business dubbed “Dr. Fish” to Las Vegas. They’ve had success in Israel and would import the fish to Las Vegas if the bill passes.
Don’t worry: Pirahnas and other fish don’t qualify.
Instead, a tiny, toothless carp called garra rufa — or doctor fish — native to the Middle East would be used. To get a pedicure, clients stick their feet into a small tub of water with the tiny fish, which feed on dead skin.
“The fish can go on and on,” Hason said, later adding that the company wants them to have a “happy life.”
They’d also get other food. “We do not starve the fish,” he said. “We need them happy, and we need them to work.”
The hearing wasn’t all fish and games. Some lawmakers raised concerns about the possibility of infections or introducing non-native fish into the ecosystem.
Hason stressed efforts to keep the process sanitary, which include filtration, testing fish DNA and not allowing clients with open sores to get a pedicure.
State officials admitted they’re in uncharted waters, at least when it comes to fish pedicures. The state cosmetology board is neutral and awaiting more feedback from state health and veterinarian officials.
Joe Pollack, a deputy administrator with the Nevada Division of Public and Behavorial Health, noted that good regulations are needed, because fish pedicure providers lower in the food chain will cut corners.
“They’re going to cut costs, and they’re going to do it as cheaply as they can,” he said.
If anything, fish pedicures have a potential ally in Assemblyman Ira Hansen, R-Sparks, who said government does not need to be involved in outlawing fish pedicures. Besides, he said, many things besides fish pedicures carry a risk — like when he was sickened after eating sushi.
“It seems odd to me we can eat raw fish, but the idea of using live fish on our feet is a concern,” Hansen mused.
Contact Ben Botkin at bbotkin@reviewjournal.com or 775-461-0661. Follow @BenBotkin1 on Twitter.
