| CALIFORNIA - SB 89 PASSED THE WATER, PARKS AND WILDLIFE COMMITTEE! A FIRST! - CLICK HERE for the Pet Manual Forum Home Page |
| John DeGroof |
From: Ferretnews@aol.com
Hello all,
Today our bill passed the Assembly Water Parks and Wildlife Committee
by a 12-1 vote in favor which means it has come the furthest it has
ever come in 10 years. However, we are definitely NOT out of the
woods and faced opposition from Fish and Game, CA Waterfowl, Defenders
of Wildife and the Planning and Conservation League.
Testifying in support was our terrific author Senator Dede Alpert
whose comments were absolutely terrific and on target. Also
testifying support besides Californians For Ferret Legalization were
Mike Dillon for the California Veterinary Medical Association, Kevin
Pedrotti for the Pet Industries Joing Advisory Council, Virginia
Handley from Fund for Animals, and an individual ferret supporter, Jim
March. A big thanks to all of them!
We must still pass the Assembly Appropriations Committee and the full
California State Assembly and the Governor so there are still three
more hurdles to clear before your domesticated pets are granted
amnesty here in California.
The bill as passed would require a one time fee of $75.00 per ferret
and proof that the ferret is spayed/neutered and vaccinated against
rabies. The ferret is then granted an amnesty card. Card carrying
ferret(s) are protected for life. Should this bill pass, I encourage
all of you to pay this fee to guarantee that your ferret is safe from
confiscation, from the threat of a mean and vindictive neighbor,
ex-spouse or ex-employee. I know that those of you with many ferrets
will find this fee a very large burden but keep in mind that each
registered ferret is safe from the hands of Fish and Game. Also keep
in mind that current permit holders pay almost $300.00 per ferret
annually and face inspections!
The majority of your fee, $50.00 will go to a fund to complete an
environmental document and the Fish and Game Commission MUST review
this issue, the environmental document and public testimony in 2006.
In other words, the ball will be rolling to lift this inane ban on
this harmless domesticated pet.
The Committee Members voting in support of our bill were as follows:
Joseph Canciamilla, Chair Dem-11
Tim Leslie, Vice Chair Rep-4
Patty Berg Dem-1
Rick Keene Rep-3
Lynn Daucher Rep-72
Jackie Goldberg Dem-45
Shirley Horton Rep-78
Christine Kehoe Dem-76
Alan Lowenthal Dem-54
Barbara S. Matthews Dem-17
Todd Spitzer Rep-71
Lois Wolk Dem-8
Those opposed:
Nicole Parra Dem-30
Abstaining:
Fran Pavley Dem-41
Rudy Bermúdez Dem-56
Absent:
Dario Frommer Dem-43
Active chapters of all of the California ferret organizations please
mobilize to contact your Assemblymembers on SB 89.
If this will help you in writing your letters, please feel free to use
any or all of it. It was my unedited testimony in front of the Water
Parks and Wildlife Committee today. Remember to let your
Assemblymembers know that in the absense of amnesty, which is long
overdue, no ferret owner in California would pay a fee for an
environmental document!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
The first ferret bill in California was introduced 10 years ago.
Clearly this issue has some staying power.
You can now viisit any CA pet store and there will be a ferret isle
with ferret specific products. Veterinarians can legally treat
ferrets, 20% of all ferret food is sold here, and Ferrets Magazine
sells more copies in California than any other state. Ferrets are
here, they’ve been here in large numbers for well over a decade,
yet, there are not now, nor ever have been any documented feral
populations of these pets either here in California or in the rest of
the country. This fact was confirmed by our Department of Fish and
Game in a 1997 nationwide survey. That’s a distinction not shared by
other domesticated pets.
Since the first ferret legalization bill in 1994, ferret owners in
California have compromised again and again trying to work with the
opposition and allay their concerns, in the end agreeing to the most
restrictive pet ownership bill ever. Why? Because ferret owners crave
the same legal status for themselves and their pets that owners of
domesticated animals, including ferrets, enjoy in the rest of the
country.
Ferret owners in California have had their pets taken away and
sometimes destroyed. They’ve been fined, and in a few cases jailed.
They are subject to blackmail by anyone angry at them for any reason.
An ex-spouse, ex-girlfriend or boyfriend, or ex-employee has an easy
target for their anger. It’s happend time and time again.
It is important to remember that the animals we are talking about are
legal in the rest of the country. It’s also important to remember
that they domesticated. Every authority including the United States
Department of Agriculture, Museum of Natural History, Humane Society
of the United Sates and over 150 zoos and zoological societies refer
to the ferret as domesticated. Even our own department of Fish and
Game acknowledges this fact, yet, the ferret finds itself in the hands
of a wildlife agency, specifically named in a section entitled the
Importation, Transportation and Possession of Live Wild Animals. This
makes no sense.
Shortly before the introduction of our first bill, the Fish and Game
Commission removed two animals from the prohibited species list, the
Buffalo and Camell, without an environmental document. Why were these
animals removed? The Executive Director of the Fish and Game
Commission confirmed that they were removed because they were
domesticated. They didn’t belong in a list of prohibited wildlife.
Neither does the ferret.
That is the principal reason why Californians routinely break this
law. Ferret owners in California are the same as ferret owners in the
other 48 states. They are not bad people, and they are not breaking
the spirit of any law. The law is what is bad and the process to
correct this law should begin today.
Please support this bill.
Jeanne Carley
Californians for Ferret Legalization
|
|
|
| Brian S. |
well, i pay 10 dollars per year for my permit. The way the permit is written
is that if anything happens to another human because of the ferret i am
liable. i have had him outside plenty of times and a few officers stopped by
and held him and did not say a word about a pernit or anything. But i would
gladly give the small amount to the state for environmental reasons..
wildlife etc.
brian s.
"John DeGroof" <jdegroof@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:8cvfc0llk9cdohob9cd6klfo4et4impusg@4ax.com...
>
> From: Ferretnews@aol.com
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> Today our bill passed the Assembly Water Parks and Wildlife Committee
> by a 12-1 vote in favor which means it has come the furthest it has
> ever come in 10 years. However, we are definitely NOT out of the
> woods and faced opposition from Fish and Game, CA Waterfowl, Defenders
> of Wildife and the Planning and Conservation League.
>
>
> Testifying in support was our terrific author Senator Dede Alpert
> whose comments were absolutely terrific and on target. Also
> testifying support besides Californians For Ferret Legalization were
> Mike Dillon for the California Veterinary Medical Association, Kevin
> Pedrotti for the Pet Industries Joing Advisory Council, Virginia
> Handley from Fund for Animals, and an individual ferret supporter, Jim
> March. A big thanks to all of them!
>
>
> We must still pass the Assembly Appropriations Committee and the full
> California State Assembly and the Governor so there are still three
> more hurdles to clear before your domesticated pets are granted
> amnesty here in California.
>
>
> The bill as passed would require a one time fee of $75.00 per ferret
> and proof that the ferret is spayed/neutered and vaccinated against
> rabies. The ferret is then granted an amnesty card. Card carrying
> ferret(s) are protected for life. Should this bill pass, I encourage
> all of you to pay this fee to guarantee that your ferret is safe from
> confiscation, from the threat of a mean and vindictive neighbor,
> ex-spouse or ex-employee. I know that those of you with many ferrets
> will find this fee a very large burden but keep in mind that each
> registered ferret is safe from the hands of Fish and Game. Also keep
> in mind that current permit holders pay almost $300.00 per ferret
> annually and face inspections!
>
>
> The majority of your fee, $50.00 will go to a fund to complete an
> environmental document and the Fish and Game Commission MUST review
> this issue, the environmental document and public testimony in 2006.
> In other words, the ball will be rolling to lift this inane ban on
> this harmless domesticated pet.
>
>
> The Committee Members voting in support of our bill were as follows:
>
>
> Joseph Canciamilla, Chair Dem-11
> Tim Leslie, Vice Chair Rep-4
> Patty Berg Dem-1
> Rick Keene Rep-3
> Lynn Daucher Rep-72
> Jackie Goldberg Dem-45
> Shirley Horton Rep-78
> Christine Kehoe Dem-76
> Alan Lowenthal Dem-54
> Barbara S. Matthews Dem-17
> Todd Spitzer Rep-71
> Lois Wolk Dem-8
>
>
> Those opposed:
> Nicole Parra Dem-30
>
>
> Abstaining:
> Fran Pavley Dem-41
> Rudy Bermúdez Dem-56
>
>
> Absent:
> Dario Frommer Dem-43
>
>
> Active chapters of all of the California ferret organizations please
> mobilize to contact your Assemblymembers on SB 89.
>
>
> If this will help you in writing your letters, please feel free to use
> any or all of it. It was my unedited testimony in front of the Water
> Parks and Wildlife Committee today. Remember to let your
> Assemblymembers know that in the absense of amnesty, which is long
> overdue, no ferret owner in California would pay a fee for an
> environmental document!
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
>
>
> The first ferret bill in California was introduced 10 years ago.
> Clearly this issue has some staying power.
>
>
> You can now viisit any CA pet store and there will be a ferret isle
> with ferret specific products. Veterinarians can legally treat
> ferrets, 20% of all ferret food is sold here, and Ferrets Magazine
> sells more copies in California than any other state. Ferrets are
> here, theyâ?Tve been here in large numbers for well over a decade,
> yet, there are not now, nor ever have been any documented feral
> populations of these pets either here in California or in the rest of
> the country. This fact was confirmed by our Department of Fish and
> Game in a 1997 nationwide survey. Thatâ?Ts a distinction not shared by
> other domesticated pets.
>
>
> Since the first ferret legalization bill in 1994, ferret owners in
> California have compromised again and again trying to work with the
> opposition and allay their concerns, in the end agreeing to the most
> restrictive pet ownership bill ever. Why? Because ferret owners crave
> the same legal status for themselves and their pets that owners of
> domesticated animals, including ferrets, enjoy in the rest of the
> country.
>
>
> Ferret owners in California have had their pets taken away and
> sometimes destroyed. Theyâ?Tve been fined, and in a few cases jailed.
> They are subject to blackmail by anyone angry at them for any reason.
> An ex-spouse, ex-girlfriend or boyfriend, or ex-employee has an easy
> target for their anger. Itâ?Ts happend time and time again.
>
>
> It is important to remember that the animals we are talking about are
> legal in the rest of the country. Itâ?Ts also important to remember
> that they domesticated. Every authority including the United States
> Department of Agriculture, Museum of Natural History, Humane Society
> of the United Sates and over 150 zoos and zoological societies refer
> to the ferret as domesticated. Even our own department of Fish and
> Game acknowledges this fact, yet, the ferret finds itself in the hands
> of a wildlife agency, specifically named in a section entitled the
> Importation, Transportation and Possession of Live Wild Animals. This
> makes no sense.
>
>
> Shortly before the introduction of our first bill, the Fish and Game
> Commission removed two animals from the prohibited species list, the
> Buffalo and Camell, without an environmental document. Why were these
> animals removed? The Executive Director of the Fish and Game
> Commission confirmed that they were removed because they were
> domesticated. They didnâ?Tt belong in a list of prohibited wildlife.
> Neither does the ferret.
>
>
> That is the principal reason why Californians routinely break this
> law. Ferret owners in California are the same as ferret owners in the
> other 48 states. They are not bad people, and they are not breaking
> the spirit of any law. The law is what is bad and the process to
> correct this law should begin today.
>
>
> Please support this bill.
>
>
> Jeanne Carley
> Californians for Ferret Legalization
>
|
|
|
| ZPL |
Nice job!
"John DeGroof" <jdegroof@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:8cvfc0llk9cdohob9cd6klfo4et4impusg@4ax.com...
>
> From: Ferretnews@aol.com
>
> Hello all,
>
>
> Today our bill passed the Assembly Water Parks and Wildlife Committee
> by a 12-1 vote in favor which means it has come the furthest it has
> ever come in 10 years. However, we are definitely NOT out of the
> woods and faced opposition from Fish and Game, CA Waterfowl, Defenders
> of Wildife and the Planning and Conservation League.
>
>
> Testifying in support was our terrific author Senator Dede Alpert
> whose comments were absolutely terrific and on target. Also
> testifying support besides Californians For Ferret Legalization were
> Mike Dillon for the California Veterinary Medical Association, Kevin
> Pedrotti for the Pet Industries Joing Advisory Council, Virginia
> Handley from Fund for Animals, and an individual ferret supporter, Jim
> March. A big thanks to all of them!
>
>
> We must still pass the Assembly Appropriations Committee and the full
> California State Assembly and the Governor so there are still three
> more hurdles to clear before your domesticated pets are granted
> amnesty here in California.
>
>
> The bill as passed would require a one time fee of $75.00 per ferret
> and proof that the ferret is spayed/neutered and vaccinated against
> rabies. The ferret is then granted an amnesty card. Card carrying
> ferret(s) are protected for life. Should this bill pass, I encourage
> all of you to pay this fee to guarantee that your ferret is safe from
> confiscation, from the threat of a mean and vindictive neighbor,
> ex-spouse or ex-employee. I know that those of you with many ferrets
> will find this fee a very large burden but keep in mind that each
> registered ferret is safe from the hands of Fish and Game. Also keep
> in mind that current permit holders pay almost $300.00 per ferret
> annually and face inspections!
>
>
> The majority of your fee, $50.00 will go to a fund to complete an
> environmental document and the Fish and Game Commission MUST review
> this issue, the environmental document and public testimony in 2006.
> In other words, the ball will be rolling to lift this inane ban on
> this harmless domesticated pet.
>
>
> The Committee Members voting in support of our bill were as follows:
>
>
> Joseph Canciamilla, Chair Dem-11
> Tim Leslie, Vice Chair Rep-4
> Patty Berg Dem-1
> Rick Keene Rep-3
> Lynn Daucher Rep-72
> Jackie Goldberg Dem-45
> Shirley Horton Rep-78
> Christine Kehoe Dem-76
> Alan Lowenthal Dem-54
> Barbara S. Matthews Dem-17
> Todd Spitzer Rep-71
> Lois Wolk Dem-8
>
>
> Those opposed:
> Nicole Parra Dem-30
>
>
> Abstaining:
> Fran Pavley Dem-41
> Rudy Bermúdez Dem-56
>
>
> Absent:
> Dario Frommer Dem-43
>
>
> Active chapters of all of the California ferret organizations please
> mobilize to contact your Assemblymembers on SB 89.
>
>
> If this will help you in writing your letters, please feel free to use
> any or all of it. It was my unedited testimony in front of the Water
> Parks and Wildlife Committee today. Remember to let your
> Assemblymembers know that in the absense of amnesty, which is long
> overdue, no ferret owner in California would pay a fee for an
> environmental document!
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++
>
>
> The first ferret bill in California was introduced 10 years ago.
> Clearly this issue has some staying power.
>
>
> You can now viisit any CA pet store and there will be a ferret isle
> with ferret specific products. Veterinarians can legally treat
> ferrets, 20% of all ferret food is sold here, and Ferrets Magazine
> sells more copies in California than any other state. Ferrets are
> here, theyâ?Tve been here in large numbers for well over a decade,
> yet, there are not now, nor ever have been any documented feral
> populations of these pets either here in California or in the rest of
> the country. This fact was confirmed by our Department of Fish and
> Game in a 1997 nationwide survey. Thatâ?Ts a distinction not shared by
> other domesticated pets.
>
>
> Since the first ferret legalization bill in 1994, ferret owners in
> California have compromised again and again trying to work with the
> opposition and allay their concerns, in the end agreeing to the most
> restrictive pet ownership bill ever. Why? Because ferret owners crave
> the same legal status for themselves and their pets that owners of
> domesticated animals, including ferrets, enjoy in the rest of the
> country.
>
>
> Ferret owners in California have had their pets taken away and
> sometimes destroyed. Theyâ?Tve been fined, and in a few cases jailed.
> They are subject to blackmail by anyone angry at them for any reason.
> An ex-spouse, ex-girlfriend or boyfriend, or ex-employee has an easy
> target for their anger. Itâ?Ts happend time and time again.
>
>
> It is important to remember that the animals we are talking about are
> legal in the rest of the country. Itâ?Ts also important to remember
> that they domesticated. Every authority including the United States
> Department of Agriculture, Museum of Natural History, Humane Society
> of the United Sates and over 150 zoos and zoological societies refer
> to the ferret as domesticated. Even our own department of Fish and
> Game acknowledges this fact, yet, the ferret finds itself in the hands
> of a wildlife agency, specifically named in a section entitled the
> Importation, Transportation and Possession of Live Wild Animals. This
> makes no sense.
>
>
> Shortly before the introduction of our first bill, the Fish and Game
> Commission removed two animals from the prohibited species list, the
> Buffalo and Camell, without an environmental document. Why were these
> animals removed? The Executive Director of the Fish and Game
> Commission confirmed that they were removed because they were
> domesticated. They didnâ?Tt belong in a list of prohibited wildlife.
> Neither does the ferret.
>
>
> That is the principal reason why Californians routinely break this
> law. Ferret owners in California are the same as ferret owners in the
> other 48 states. They are not bad people, and they are not breaking
> the spirit of any law. The law is what is bad and the process to
> correct this law should begin today.
>
>
> Please support this bill.
>
>
> Jeanne Carley
> Californians for Ferret Legalization
>
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
