>It saddened me, disappointed me but did NOT surprise me to read most of the
>posts answering the Anonymous Post about the unlicensed shelters.  How
>the Hell are you EVER going to get anyone in California to listen to a
>word o f sense when people within their own "ferret community" respond
>with attack s to a problem like that, and one of law!
 
Julie,
 
Ease up on that righteous indignation a little.  No one responding to the
Anonymous Poster suggested the law should be ignored.  At least one
response did suggest that the Anonymous Poster turn in the unlicensed
shelter operator if they knew where the unlicensed shelter was located.
There were no "attacks" against the Anonymous Poster at all.  Yes, I did
suggest the Anonymous Poster question the motivation of his/her dilemma,
because the opening of his/her post was centered around the publicity
garnered by the other shelter.  It was a reasonable question, not an
attack.  It is always healthy for one to question their motives before
taking action with serious implications.
 
As for how one is to get anyone in California to listen to a word of
sense -- that is done by speaking in a calm, rational, and well-informed
manner.  Ranting only serves to alienate listeners.
 
One problem is that the Anonymous Poster admitted he/she doesn't know for a
fact what the conditions in the supposedly unlicensed shelter(s) actually
are.  He/she based those conclusions on second-hand reports.  Since the
Anonymous Poster hasn't been in contact with the unlicensed shelter(s),
he/she doesn't know whether the shelter operator(s) is/are aware that
he/she/they should be licensed or what procedures to follow to get
licensed.  Most reasonable people would agree that it is a wise idea to
know the facts before making allegations against another.
 
>People couldn't even be bothered to suggest compromising on both sides:
>turn them in and take the ferrets.
 
Are you sure compromise is the word which you wanted?  A compromise
consists of both sides giving something in order to reach an accord or
agreement.  Your solution was for the unlicensed shelter to turn over all
the ferrets.  That is not a compromise -- that is surrender.  Again, until
the true facts are known, the demand that the unlicensed shelter surrender
all the ferrets in their care in premeture.  Once the facts are known, it
may be necessary to seek that solution.  But then again, it may turn out
that the conditions in the shelter are not nearly so intolerable as
described in second hand reports, and the shelter(s) in question are simply
unaware of the need or procedures for licensing.  Several compromises were
offered in the suggestions that the Anonymous Poster offer the unlicensed
shelters advice on how to get licensed, maintain high standards, and care
for the ferrets properly.
 
I hope the Anonymous Poster does the right thing and gets all the facts
first in order to make an intelligent decision.  But since you brought it
up -- have you been turning in the people in California that you know of
who own ferrets?  They are breaking the law, and as you yourself said --
"The law is the law." Somehow, I doubt you have been turning in illegal
ferret owners or "shelters" in California.  So let's not take a hard stance
with "The law is the law" argument.
 
The bottom line is: Before making allegations against anyone else, even
anonymously, a responsible person makes sure that all of the allegations
are factual and accurate.  There are at least two sides to every story, and
it is a good idea to know the facts behind each before becoming indignant
or making allegations.
 
Scott
[Posted in FML issue 2601]