AMERICAN FERRET ASSOCIATION STATEMENT ON H.R. 669 (NONNATIVE WILDLIFE
INVASION PREVENTION ACT)

The American Ferret Association (AFA) -- a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit,
all-volunteer membership organization representing both individual
ferret enthusiasts and veterinary practices specializing in ferret and
small animal care -- is the nation's primary advocate for the domestic
ferret. The AFA exists to promote the ferret as a companion animal; to
protect ferrets from anti-ferret legislation, mistreatment, unsound
breeding practices, overpopulation, and needless scientific research;
and to provide up-to-date information about veterinarians, legislative
activities, medical developments, research data, rescue shelters and
other topics of interest to the nationwide community of ferret owners.

The AFA recognizes the desirability of restricting the importation,
breeding, and distribution of genuinely dangerous wildlife, as well as
the good intentions of organizations, such as the Humane Society of the
United States (HSUS), in supporting H.R. 669. In addition, we applaud
section 3(f) of the bill, which will permit animals legally owned prior
to the time the risk assessment process as provided for by the bill is
begun to continue to be possessed, even if such animals are later
prohibited as a result of the risk assessment.

However, in attempting to achieve its goals, the bill is worded in
a way that discriminates against, among other domestic companion
animals, mustela putorius furo, the domestic ferret. Section 14(5)(D)
specifically exempts cats, dogs, rabbits, and goldfish from the bill's
definition of "nonnative wildlife species," but does not mention
ferrets. The subsection concludes as follows: "...or any other species
or variety of species that is determined by the Secretary [of the
Interior] to be common and clearly domesticated." The AFA strongly
opposes having to rely on such an unnecessary and vague determination--
the mechanism for which is not even specified -- when such a
determination has already been made many times, over a period of
many years, throughout the United States and around the world.

The AFA therefore opposes passage of H.R. 669 while the domestic
ferret, mustela putorius furo, is not specifically excluded by name
from the bill's definition of "nonnative wildlife species" along with
cats, dogs, rabbits, and goldfish.

The reasons for the domestic ferret to be excluded from the provisions
of H.R. 669 are clear:

- Ferrets are not wildlife. Ferrets are thoroughly domesticated, are
  bred to be docile companions, no longer exist in the wild, and,
  indeed, cannot even survive in the wild. This is acknowledged by:

- American Veterinary Medical Association

- Canadian Veterinary Medical Association

- American Museum of Natural History

- ASPCA

- Various state departments of wildlife, conservation, natural
  resources, or fish and game

- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (through the inclusion
  of ferrets along with dogs and cats within their rabies preventio
   and control protocols)

- International Species Information System (ISIS), which refers to
  mustela putorius furo as a domestic animal

- Humane Society of the United States -- which supports H.R. 669 --
  yet acknowledges in an official statement and in care guides located
  throughout its website that ferrets are appropriate household pets.

- Ferrets are well-established, commonly accepted, domesticated
  companion animals.

- Ferrets have been companion animals in the United States for many
  decades. However, they were not permitted in many parts of the
  country due to misunderstandings and misinformation about their
  behavior, origins, and domesticity. Since the 1980's, however, they
  have become legal to possess as household pets in one state, county,
  and city after another that had previously banned them, with no
  danger to wildlife, livestock, or human health occurring as a result.

- Ferrets are now legal to own as a household pet in 48 of the 49
  continental states. In 40 of those states, ferrets were never illegal
  to begin with. Not one state that has legalized ferret ownership has
  rescinded its legalization.

- An increasing number of large municipalities such as Minneapolis,
  Minnesota (in 2004); Dallas, Texas (in 2005), and Columbia, Missouri
  (in 2005) has rescinded ferret bans and enacted ordinances legalizing
  ferrets, as city and county councils across the country learn the
  facts about ferrets and in response to overwhelming evidence of their
  suitability as domestic house pets.

- State, county, and municipal codes and ordinances throughout the
  United States either list ferrets along with dogs and cats as
  permitted domestic animals or specifically exclude them from lists
  of prohibited wildlife that include family mustelidae. For example,
  Monroe County, Florida -- home to Everglades National Park and Key
  West as well as three national wildlife refuges and a national
  deer refuge, and arguably one of the most ecologically sensitive
  localities in the United States -- specifically lists ferrets within
  its definition of "domesticated companion animals." The County
  requires proof of rabies vaccination on an equal basis for dogs,
  cats, and ferrets.

- Even in the District of Columbia, where ferrets for many years have
  not been included on the list of permitted animals, the Department of
  Health has in recent years offered, through its Bureau of Community
  Hygiene/Division of Animal Disease Prevention, exemption permits to
  individual ferret owners upon request, acknowledging that ferrets are
  not a risk to public health.

- A visit to any large chain pet store in the United States will reveal
  an increasing amount of space devoted to ferret food, ferret toys,
  ferret cages, and all manner of ferret-related accessories similar
  to what any cat, dog, or rabbit owner will find. The amount of space
  pet stores devote to ferret supplies increases year by year as more
  and more people bring ferrets into their homes throughout the United
  States and accept them as part of mainstream American culture, in
  all types of climates and environments -- again, with no danger to
  wildlife, livestock, or human health occurring as a result.

- Given the above facts, either (1) conducting a risk assessment to
  ascertain whether or not the domestic ferret "will cause or [is]
  likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to other animal
  species' health or human health," or (2) having the Secretary of the
  Interior make a determination that the domestic ferret is "common
  and clearly domesticated," with no mechanism for making such a
  determination provided by the bill, is utterly unnecessary.

The AFA therefore reiterates its opposition to H.R. 669 until such time
as mustela putorius furo is added to the specifically exempted list of
animals within section 14(5)(D) of the bill.

Vickie McKimmey

Just a Business of Ferrets
www.jbferret.com
American Ferret Association
Director of Shows and Special Events
www.ferret.org
Author of Ferrets: An Animal Planet Pet Care Library Series Book

[Posted in FML 6309]