Hello FMLers,
 
A few days ago there was a post suggesting that our legalization efforts for
the ferret might want to consider other animals such as the hedgehog and
sugar gliders.  I received an e-mail just before that post which asked if
Californians for Ferret Legalization had an interest in legalizing other
"exotic" (his word, not mine) animals.  Here's my reply:
 
      --------------------------------------------------
Hello Dan,
 
Your question about whether I have an interest in legalizing "other exotic
small animals" is one I'm often asked.  First of all, let me explain very
clearly that ferrets are not exotic in the same sense as hedgehogs and sugar
gliders, UNLESS, you wish to broaden the term exotic (which simply means
non-native) to include all animals, wild and domesticated, that are not
native to the U.S.
 
Would it surprise you to know that NO domesticated animals are native to
this country?  Dogs, cats, horses, goats, pigs, rabbits, etc., are
domesticated animals, like the ferret, and all have thier origins, as does
the ferret, in Europe and Asia.  So, applying the term exotic to the ferret
is not appropriate unless it is applied equally to all non-native animals
whether they are wild, or domesticated.
 
As far as the legalization of hedgehogs and sugar gliders, I believe that
wild animals are best left in the wild, for their own good.  Domesticated
species, however, have been literally altered by man to need and depend upon
him.  The ferret, for example, is so dependent that it cannot even survive
on its own outdoors for any length of time.  It has lost its ability to hunt
and avoid predators.  There are no documented feral populations of
domesticated ferrets anywhere in this country.
 
Setting that argument aside for the moment, Californains for Ferret
Legalization believes that the ferret, as a domesticated species is actually
already a legal animal in the State of California.  Its prohibition stems
from the fact that it is mis-classified as wildlife, and finds itself as the
sole domesticated species in a list of prohibited wildlife.  (That's about
as absurd as listing me, or you, in a list of deceased persons, and is why
our arguments will eventually prevail.)
 
In addition, historical legislative intent surveys show that the California
Department of Fish and Game was never intended to regulate, let alone
prohibit, domesticated species.  That limit on their jurisdictional
boundaries probably stems from the fact that domesticated species of animals
are considered private property by our own state constitution, Article 1 ,
Civil Code Section 654, 655.
 
Finally, to answer your question, neither I, nor my organization, have any
interest or intention of including any wild animals in our quest for
legalizing the domesticated ferret.  The same legal arguments cannot be
made, and, in my opinion neither can the same moral or ethical arguments
since wild animals do not depend upon us for their well being.
 
Sincerely....
         -----------------------------------------------
 
I believe that far too many people demonstrate time and time again that they
barely have the capacity to give good care to the animals we've made
dependent upon us.  A look at the numbers of unwanted domesticated pets
still boggles the mind.
 
And to me it is very clear that far fewer of them will give good care to
creatures that are less friendly, perhaps less engaging, or interesting in
the long run, than domesticated pets.  This is simply my personal opinion,
but I am sticking to it.  In any case, as I said in my response, we cannot
make the same legal arguments for hedgehogs that we can for ferrets.  We
cannot claim that they are misclassified as wildlife!
 
While I've come to really like Spike, the little hedgehog that DFG had me
pick up, my heart breaks to see him frightened most of the time.  He
deffinitely perks up when his scrambled egg arrives though and I can also
see the other side of the problem.  When someone has a hedgehog or other
exotic pet legally in another state, is a very good caregiver, and has to
move here, should we break that established bond?  No, I don't think so.  I
think those animals should be grandfathered in.
 
But what's even more important vis a vis our efforts here is the danger of
muddying the waters.  We cannot and do not have the same standing to take
issue with DFG on a wild animal that they've deemed either detrimental or a
welfare case (in the latter, wild animals are banned more because folks
can't take good care of them than because they're considered a pest).  I
most certainly don't want to see our very clear claim on an overstepping of
DFG's mandate muddied by that controversy.
 
Jeanne Carley
Californians for (Domesticated) Ferret Legalization
[Posted in FML issue 1840]