From The Sierra Club Web Site, If it hasn't been posted already:
 
******************************************************
Why is the Sierra Club Taking a Position on Ferrets?
******************************************************
AB 363 - One of the highest profile, most political hot potatoes to hit the
Legislature this year is AB 363 (Goldsmith), which would remove domestic
ferrets from Department of Fish and Game (DFG) jurisdiction and allow them
to be privately owned.  Ferret fanciers have been trying to legalize these
animals for years, first by lobbying the Fish and Game Commission and then
by backing legislative initiatives.  Though Sierra Club California does not
normally become involved pet ownership issues, we strongly oppose this bill
and urge you to contact your representatives and ask them to block its
passage.
 
Why is the Sierra Club taking a position on domestic pets?  California's
sensitive and unique ecosystems need to be protected from non-native and
potentially invasive species, including ferrets.  We cannot take the risk
that a feral population of an introduced species could become established in
this state.  California has strong public policy restricting the import of
non-native species, and the legalization of ferrets would set a dangerous
precedent for weakening that policy.  Considering the amount of time we
spend trying to repair the damage done by non-native species in fragile
ecosystems, we must try to prevent any further such damage where possible.
Ferret fanciers are a strong lobbying group, and they employ a number of
different arguments on behalf of their cause.
 
Here are some of their arguments and our responses:
 
1) FF: In the 48 states where ferrets are legal, there are no known feral
   communities.
 
SC: Very few studies have been conducted on ferrets in the wild, so it is
not surprising that there have been limited positive results.  A breeding
population was found on San Juan Island in Washington during a 1970s rabbit
study.  Even if there currently are no feral communities, which is unlikely,
we don't want to risk starting one in a state with so many endangered
species and fragile ecosystems.
 
>My E-Mail response:
>This does not prove your point, ferrets are the third most popular
>companion animal in the United States, and if there were the possibility of
>feral populations, as there are with both dogs and cats, we would see feral
>populations in in states where ferrets are legal.
 
>This is not so, Ferrets have not been found in the wild because, the
>DOMESTIC Ferret cannot survive in the wild.
 
2) FF: If they escape, ferrets have no ability to survive on their own.
 
SC: Ferrets are commonly found surviving in the wild, including in southeast
Alaska in the middle of winter.  From 1985 to 1996, 58 stray ferrets were
turned into a DFG facility in Rancho Cordova.  This represents a limited
geographical area during a limited time frame, and not all stray ferrets
found in the Central California area would necessarily be turned into that
facility.  Many ferrets are trained by their owners as househunters or
rabbit hunters, and are therefore skilled at predating on other species.
 
>I know two thousand ferret owners, and am not aware of any who train them
>for hunting.  The American ferret is pampered & loved just like a cat or a
>dog.  They live indoors, usually in cages, and are fed kibble.  I have
>never heard of any of my fellow ferret activist using a ferret to hunt.
>Although, it is done in many other countries, "Ferreting" or using your
>ferret to hunt can be made illegal.  And besides, Dogs are used to hunt,
>even in California.
 
>I really wish you would provide some basis of fact in your argument, you=
>use myth, half truths to prove your point, and then you wonder why you are
>accused of being ignorant.
 
3) FF: AB 363 calls for all ferrets to be spayed or neutered, so under this
   law they could not breed in the wild.
 
SC: That regulation would be very difficult to enforce, and even individual
ferrets could have an impact on certain endangered species.
 
>This is not hard to legislate at all,  In New York, Pet Stores are required
>to sell only Spayed and Nuetered Ferrets.  The result is that even finding
>someone who sells whole ferrets is nearly impossible for the average owner.
>As an animal lover, I fully support this idea, because I have seen it work.
>Not only does it keep >ferrets from being able to breed in the wild, but it
>keeps the back yard breeders from >overpopulating the state with unwanted
>baby ferrets.
 
4) FF: Ferrets pose less a risk to native species than cats and dogs.
 
SC: This may or may not be true, but cats and dogs are already legal.
 
>This is an argument?  I really wish Sierra would stick with air and water.
 
Since the Sierra Club took a positionon this issue, the Sacramento office
and the national office in San Francisco have been the targets of a broad,
often bitter, campaign by ferret enthusiasts.  We have been accused of being
ignorant, prejudiced, and "bought off" by DFG, among other things.
 
Status: AB 363 was on the Assembly floor's inactive file as of last week,
but the author gave notice of intent to remove it from the inactive file
yesterday, May 19.  It will probably come up for vote on the Assembly floor
next week.  Ferret fanciers have generated a lot of support for the bill
with their phone, letter, and email campaign to legislators, and they have
already won over a number of Assembly Members who are usually on our side.
 
Action Needed: Contact your Assembly Members and urge them to protect
California's native species and habitats by voting no on AB 363.  Ask them
not to relent to pressure from ferret advocates, many of whom live out of
state.  Tell them that it is important to you that California maintain its
strong public policy prohibiting the introduction of non-native species.
[Posted in FML issue 1950]