Well ferret folks, our valient struggle to get AB 363, the CA ferret
legalization bill, ended with the bill remaining in the suspension files of
the Senate Appropriations Committee today.
 
On August 25th the bill was first brought before the Senate Appropriations
Committee by Author and Assemblyman Jan Goldsmith.  Heated debate between
proponents of the bill, Jeanne and Floyd Carley of Californian's for Ferret
Legalization, and the opposition, the CA Department of Fish and Game
centered primarily around the debate over the cost of the bill, which Fish
and Games claims would fall somewhere between 100-180 thousand through 1999.
This sum would only be to cover the cost of the UC Study to prove (or rather
disprove) their theory in regards to feral ferret populations being
established in the wild and their resulting impact on local indiginous
birds, plants and other wildlife.
 
In addition they claim that enforcement costs will increase because "more
people will come out with their ferrets, more ferrets will escape, and there
will be a corresponding increase in the number of calls to the Department
regarding ferrets found at large...".
 
We also heard the Department of Parks and Recreation would encounter a
significant cost in protecting their park goers from any ferrets encountered
in their parks.
 
Well, first, in response to the proposed UC study costs, it had already been
agreed in the Senate Natural Resources and Wildlife Committee hearing of
July 8, 1997 that a surcharge of not more than $5 per ferret would be added
to the licensing fee to cover the UC study.  If, according to DFG 1989
estimates, there were 250,000 ferrets currently residing in CA, then we can
estimate that the bill would bring in somewhere between $250,000 -
$1,250,000, which would cover the proposed costs and then some (one could
even assume these estimates to be higher since we all know that the
popularity of ferrets has continued to increase over the years.  The actual
population of ferrets currently in Ca is sure to be much higher ).
 
Second, in regards to increased enforcements costs, I bring to issue the
fact that in 1995, the Department estimated those costs to be around
$40,000.  If ferrets are licensed with this new bill how can these costs
increase?  Wouldn't it be more reasonable to assume that with licensing
enforcement costs would decrease?  I ask DFG to explain this disparity,
especially since they do not enforce this law in it's present state.  In
addition, one might bear this thought in mind, a driver's license is
required to drive a motorized vehicle in this state, yet you won't find
police officers pulling over every driver they see to check their staus.  It
is ludicrous to assert that DFG would check on every ferret they come across
for their license.  In fact, wouldn't enforcement of licensing would fall
into hands of local animal control agencies, just as is does currently for
dogs, and not DFG?
 
Third, with regards to the Deparments of Parks and Recreation, I have to
wonder where they got this idea.  First, ferrets are no more likely to be
released with the onset of legalization then prior to legalization.  Ferret
owners know that purposeful release of their pets is in fact a death
sentence since the domestic ferret cannot survive in the wild.  And, I ask
Parks and Recreation to ponder this question: do you currently protect your
park goers from other domestic pets?  Additionally, what specific threat
does the domesti c ferret pose that Parks and Recreation felt the need to
come before this committee with these allegations, especially since they
have never appeared before any other committee hearing AB363 until now?
 
With all that said I get back to the bill and it's current status.  When any
bill brought before the Senate Appropriations Committee is estimated to cost
over $100 it is customary to place it in the "suspense file".  Bills may
then be brought "out of suspense" at a later date at the discretion of the
Senate Comittee members, at which time they are either voted on or left in
suspense.  AB 363 was left in suspense.  My understanding at this time is
that when the bill came up Sen.  MountJoy asked that it be tabled until
later in the afternoon.  It was never brought up again.  Why and what does
this mean?  Well, we can only assume Senator MountyJoy (a supporter of our
bill) had some inside information that we did not have the votes needed to
pass this committee and wanted to "save the bill".  Leaving it in the
"suspense file" gave our author the opportunity to make it a two-year bill
and enables is to bring it up again in this same committee next year
(sessions begin again Jan.6, 1998).  Had it been pushed forward for the vote
and voted down, the results would leave us back at square one.  In essence,
we lose time, but not necessarily ground.
 
This is NOT a time to give up and go back into hiding.  NOW is the time we
need to rally and gain support from those Senate Appropriations Committee
members not currently in favor of this bill.  For those who reside in CA,
write or fax your Senator if he resides on this committee and get all your
friends, relatives and co-workers to do the same.  If your Senator is not on
the committee, but supports the bill, write or fax them thanking them for
support and asking for their continued support of this bill.  If they do not
support the bill, write them asking them review their decision.  If we can
get 1000 letters to each of the committee members, we have a much improved
chance of gaining their support and getting this bill through the next time
around.  Remember, each letter written is the equivalent of 100 votes, so
every letter matters.
 
For those who reside out of state, you too can write.  Let Govenor Wilson
know that you have no choice but to spend your vacation dollars in another
state because you can't bring your ferret with you to CA.  If you can
include copies of receipts, all the better.  Let them know the kind of money
you spend attending ferret shows and other ferret events held in other
states.  These are tax dollars Ca is missing out on.  Also, if you couldn't
take a job or promotion or simply want to move to Ca (and increase the state
tax base,) but coudn't due to the status of ferrets here in Ca, let him know.
 
Do remember to be polite in your letters and include your address along with
your name and signature.  If you get a reply, be sure to forward it to
Californian's for Ferret Legalization.
 
Suni Parker
L
[Posted in FML issue 2055]