Hello Everyone,
 
First I'd like to say thanks to everyone who has sent in a donation in the
last few weeks.  I'm behind in my thank you's but I've been trying to get a
little more sleep lately.  I think I caught Jan Goldsmith by surprise though
when he called a little over an hour ago and found me in the office at 9:00
P.M.!  I really don't want to get sick, there's so much to do!
 
Anyway, there was a very generous surprise from a real savior in Michgan.  I
don't know how to thank her but her generosity will keep us in stamps for a
while.  Generous donations also came in from Kentucky and Alaska and I'm
always touched by support from people out of state, though given poor Kodo's
plight and the love for ferrets that we all have, that shouldn't suprise me.
 
 
Here, for what it is worth, is CFL's response to the Sierra Club.  Please
keep the letters coming (or going) to them and the Audubon Society.  If any
of this information helps, use it!
 
Jeanne
Please keep your fingers crossed for us, our bill will be heard on or before
June 6th.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
May15, 1997
 
Sierra Club
California Legislative Committee
1414 K Street, Suite 300
Sacramento, CA  95814
 
Dear Committee Members,
 
A simple error in classification made over 60 years ago in California landed
one domesticated pet in a list of prohibited wildlife.  That error today
causes hundreds of thousands of underground ferret owners to have their own
classification nightmare: they are considered criminals for simply choosing
one domesticated pet over another.  While California was not the only state
to make this mistake, it is the only one whose wildlife agency has fought
the public's legitimate request for a correction.
 
As part of our extensive research on the ferret issue, we asked the
Legislative Intent Service in Sacramento if the Department of Fish and
Game's mandate included domesticated animals.  We also asked this service to
find out if ferrets were mentioned specifically as a problem at the time of
the originating statute in 1933.  Their research revealed the answer to both
questions: no!
 
In fact, of all of the domesticated pets to choose from, the ferret is one
of the most environmentally sound.  It is strictly an indoor pet, and has
demonstrated an inability to survive and multiply in the wild.  A national
survey of all 50 State Departments of Fish and Game documented no feral
ferrets anywhere in the U.S.  Recently, a 3 year study entitled "Harmful
Non-Indigenous Species in the United States" published by the Office of
Technology Assessment in 1993 documented no less than eight domesticated
animals as feral: the cat, dog, horse, goat, pig, sheep, rabbit, and burro.
Ferrets weren't even listed in this comprehensive 400 page report despite
the fact that they've been kept as pets or as working animals in this
country for well over a century.
 
A look at the inability of an endangered wild relative, the Black-footed
ferret, to re-establish itself in the wild can shed some light on the
question of the domesticated ferret's survivability outdoors.  The U.S.
Fisheries and Wildlife Service has spent well over 1 million dollars in its
attempt to breed and release the Black-footed ferret into some of its
original habitat, the high plains areas of Wyoming and Montana.  Sadly,
after 10 years of cage rearing, this intelligent predator has lost its
instincts for hunting and predator avoidance.  Thus far, attempts at
reintroduction have failed due to predation and starvation.  Domesticated
ferrets have been cage reared for centuries.  There aren't enough wild
instincts left in this animal to allow it to last a week outside let alone a
lifetime.  And, without the ability to reproduce (AB 363 mandates
sterilization), the possibility of a feral population is non-existent.  Fish
and Game estimates of illegal ferrets in California exceeded 500,000 animals
as long ago as 8 years, yet there is no feral population of ferrets in
California, nor is there in any other state, few of which have spay/neuter
requirements.
 
AB 363 does not set a precedent for the ownership of non-native wild
animals.  Nor does it weaken any policy against importing non-native wild
animals.  In fact, it follows a precedent set centuries ago by English law,
and codified in our own State Constitution and Civil Code, which designates
domesticated animals as private property and wild animals as property of the
State.  The sole intent and mission of AB 363 is to remove a domesticated
animal from a wildlife list in which it cannot belong.  The large number of
illegal ferrets already here in California is powerful testimony to the
public's regognition of that basic inconsistency.
 
One precedent that AB 363 does set is one the Sierra Club should support.
If successful, California would pass the first state-wide mandatory
spay/neuter policy for a domesticated pet.  Clearly AB 363 has the potential
to open the door on much needed spay/neuter mandates for other domesticated
animals which do go feral and impact our environment, or suffer needless
euthanasia due to overpopulation.  AB 363 is the kind of responsible animal
legislation that other domesticated pet owners should be encouraged to adopt
and support for their companion animals.
 
We understand the Sierra Club has expressed a concern about the ability to
regulate the spay/neuter clause.  Thankfully 95% of the pet trade alters
ferrets prior to sale.  For health and odor reasons (female ferrets die if
left in heat for extended periods and unaltered male ferrets are stinky
company), ferrets not purchased in pet stores will be routinely altered by
their owners as they are in other states, but we believe it is best for the
ferret to put that requirement into law.  As with any reasonable law, we
expect a reasonable level of compliance.  How would a mandatory cat or dog
neutering law be any different?  Should other organizations and individuals
who wish to eventually see spay/neuter for these domesticated pets abandon
the idea as unenforceable?
 
Please review the enclosed letters from all 50 State Departments of Fish and
Game documenting an absence of feral ferrets in this country.  You will also
find a photocopy of the cover, title pages and index of the Office of
Technology study referred to earlier.  If there are any questions about the
ferret's status as domesticated, you will find several letters from major
agencies classifying the ferret as a domesticated species including letters
from the United States Department of Agriculture, Smithsonian Institute and
Museum of Natural History.
 
We hope you will re-evaluate your position on AB 363.  This bill recognizes
the true nature of the ferret as a domesticated animal, legalizes it as an
option to other domesticated pets which have demonstrated an impact on the
environment, and is a watershed bill with the first state-wide spay/neuter
mandate ever in California.  It also will decriminalize 250,000 Californians
who have already chosen a ferret as a pet, and who see the California
Chapter of Sierra Club's opposition to AB 363 as a serious, unjustified and
unfair threat to their personal freedom and liberties.
 
Thank you for your time and consideration.
 
Sincerely,
 
Jeanne Carley
[Posted in FML issue 1941]