I respond to Sherman Dorn of Vanderbilt University, who last weekend in this
forum that I <did not respond to the substance of [his] remarks> critical of
our appeal for funds to support our Federal Court appeal on ferrets and
ferret-owners' rights, and then stated that <supporting an appeal of a
constitutional defense of ferret-owners' rights at the moment is a very risky
strategy, and that the money of those interested in legal issues will
probably be better spent elsewhere>.
 
We disagree. In the first place, if we do not appeal this case, we have made
bad case law on the books. Precedents are what most legal decisions are based
upon. The decision will eventually be used against other ferret-owners across
the country who get into legal disputes over their ferrets. Secondly, now is
when we must appeal this decision, because by law we have 30 days to file a
Notice of Appeal or we forfeit our right to appeal. We would have won this
case if we had not gotten a biased judge, and therefore it would be a shame
to let it stand.
 
Since Mr. Dorn tells me in a separate e-mail that he is neither an attorney
nor law professor, and he did not even request a copy of the decision to read
what it said, I find it offensive that he continues this dialogue seemingly
for the purpose of interjecting his personal opinions about the merits of our
legal strategy just to be contentious. We have an attorney who specializes in
constitutional law. We don't need Mr. Dorn's advice who tells ferret-owners
their donations toward legal issues might be better spent elsewhere, but
suggests nothing in its place. I find Mr. Dorn's comments destructive and
hope they will now cease.
 
Again, I hope ferret owners will support our efforts to overturn the NY legal
classification of ferrets as wild and dangerous, because it is wrong and it
can ultimately be used against ferret owners elsewhere.
 
Gary Kaskel
Bill Apple Ferrets legal fund
P.O. Box 268-Gracie Station
New York, NY 10028
[Posted in FML issue 1142]