What is Wrong with California

[bimlie80]

In the middle of Californias historic budget troubles while Fish and Game is forced not to replace 31 wardens (meaning more polluting/poaching) California is turning it's back on a major revenue source, ferret legalization. My word people Fish and Game is forced to confiscate ferrets when it could be stopping Abalone poaching. Have any of you ever hunted out of state and seen a Ferret in a duck blind for gosh sakes. Also, why doesn't the Govenor axe the Dept. of Corrections? Oh that's right their Union bought him off. I guess Fish and Game should become affiliated with the CCOP.

Imagine if ferrets were licensed, and a tax was placed on ferret vaccines and care products. We're talking millions.

 

[Grizzledbastard]

I can't stand that. Why are they illegal? Because they are categorized WRONG in CA. That's the only reason. They are classified as non-domestic.

Too bad we are human. Too bad humans are brainwashed so easily. Too bad humans get brainwashed by the news and TV. Too bad the left and libs are in control of that tv and news. Too bad.

 

[RIFLEMAN]

Ferrets are illegal because they are non-native wildlife that the DFG feels will pose a threat to our native wildlife. The current position comes not from the ignorant public, but from DFG biologists.

One of the few positions in the DFG that the state hiring freeze will not affect is the game warden. They are continuing to hire wardens even as we speak.

The question is: does the legalization of the ferret and the potential income it proposes outweigh the possible damage it could cause our state's wildlife resources? DFG thinks so.

I myself like to err on the side of caution.

 

[bimlie80]

Ferrets are illegal because they are non-native wildlife that the DFG feels will pose a threat to our native wildlife. The current position comes not from the ignorant public, but from DFG biologists.

Actually they are not wildlife, they are a domesticated species from the European Polecat. Like domestic dogs came from wolves. I find it interesting you have a quote from Thomas Jefferson, he would have erred on the side of Liberty and not assumed guilt of an entire group of pet owners. Using your logic dogs and cats ashould be prohibited species and guns should be outlawed because of the "Potential" for harm. It's not like we are talking about Water Buffalo, of wait they were just removed as a prohibited species. We are talking a domestic animal, with microchipping and the fact that domestic ferrets can not survive in the wild without out the repeated support of people reintroducing breeding population and providing food (like the wildlife departments in New Zealand did there is no reason this pet should be outlawed and it's owners subject to jail. The reports of feral populations in Washington state are never told to the conclusion, that the populations died out ecause they could not fend for themselves, how many feral cats do you think are in WA? Game departments all over the US were on board with ferret legalization in their states. 20% of ferret related products are sold in California, California has one if not the largest ferret populations in the nation. So show me the problems they have created? ever hunt out of state? Ever see a ferret in the wild? The problem is the "California Uber Alles" mentality that our government and good portion of our citizens have, that California knows best on every issue all the time.
Typical elitist liberalism. I can't wait for Arnold to become Govenor, he's pro ferret and pro hunting, they don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Oh and I have spoken with biologist that are independent of the State and they say ferrets would have no impact on California wildlife other than providing an easy food source for Coyotes.

Oh so you are for removing the Wild Turkey from California lans? They are wild and non native and if you've seen the reports lately they are having an impact on our wildlife. Did you know Fish and Game is looking at it's Turkey Management program to see if they made a mistake?

Ever read Fish and Games report on ferrets and the survey they gave to other game Departments around the Country? It makes my point. Do you know the taxonomy difference between the European Polecat and the Domestic Ferret?

 

[bimlie80]

And let me please apoligize for sounding antagonistc. I have to rememeber a good portion of people in California have never even seen a Ferret let alone interacted with one. I had the luxury of living and hunting in places outside of California that have not only domesticated animals as legal species but wild ones as well (i.e. Sugar Gliders, Prarie Dogs, Cobras, etc.)

If Bill Simon had won, ferrets would be well on their way to legalization and know one would know the difference except maybe in the extra revenue it would have created.

 

[bimlie80]

Hiring Wardens? There is a hiring freeze, the only wardens coming into service are those going through their POST training prior to the feeze anouncement. 31 sworn positions will not be filled and even if they were why waste Fish and Game resources chasing housepets. Overwhelmingly people busted have been turned in by ex girlfriends, husbands, etc. They aren't people walking their ferret down main street soooo....

Would you feel safer if I legally kept Crotalus viridis oreganus (Northern Pacific Rattlesnakes) as your next door neighbor or a couple caged ferrts?

Did you know it is legal to keep most native snakes in California (with the exception of some Zonata and Charina localities) but illegal to release them? That is to prevent disease from let's say a locality in Plumas County from transfering to a locality population in Amador County. I have snakes from all over California legally that could if they escaped spread diseases imperiling native species. If you know anything about herps you'll know that escape is inevitable. So why not ban reptiles keeping? There is also no law against creating hybrid snakes. If these escape we could be in big trouble. This is an issue of turf rather than science or house pets. The liberals (such as Willy Brown and Burton) have surpressed this issue for years. It's time to say enough is enough with encroaching governemnt.

 

[RIFLEMAN]

First and most importantly, you mistake my understanding of the motivation for DFG's position as my opinion on the subject; do not be so quick to jump on somebody's statements that you lose sight of what they are saying. You wasted much of your efforts, words and empty comparisons of my site profile for nothing. I understand that this is an important issue to you, but keep in mind that your aggressive and knee-jerk approach will alienate those who might be inclined to support your position. Something to think about...

To respond to other portions of your posts...

The California public largely supports the legalization of ferrets here. Some recent polls indicate the approval rate to be as high as 80%. Though there are some influental organizations (LA Zoo, Sierra Club and Audobon Society) that do not approve of legalization, it is the opposition of the DFG that remains the most influential. Until they reclassify the ferret from "non-native wildlife" to a "domestic animal", they will not support the legalization here. Until DFG changes their position, the Legislature may not decriminalize the ownership of ferrets.

Arnold will not become Govenor in my opinion; he has too much in his closet that would eliminate him from consideration.

A friend of mine from high school has a pair of ferrets. I have found them to be intelligent, curious and fascinating creatures. They endear themselves to people very quickly and garner support readily.

Don't know where you got your information on the hiring freeze for wardens. I have the word of Bob Hight and the DFG website to back my claim that it is relatively exempt from the freeze and they will continue to educate-to-hire through the state's troubled times.

 

[MrRee]

whats wrong with California???

It has not fell off in the ocean yet!! ????
just kidding

 

[bimlie80]

First I said sorry for the antagonsitic tone, and I say it again. I have to temember not every one is as interested in ferrets (and in some cases the bigger issue of Liberty) that I am.

For years Fish and Game mistakenly classified Domestic Ferrets as Mustela putorius(the European Polecat) rather than Mustela putorius furo (Domestic Ferret) This is like classifying dogs as Wolves.
Now the Department understands it's mistake and instead claims it has the right to regulate domestics. If this is the case why aren't cats banned we can all agree they have a wicked impact on native species. This issue is more about power than anything else. Fish and Game argues that ferrets MIGHT escape from peoples homes and establish feral colonies (despite world wide evidence). That is convicting people before there is even a crime, evidence, or due process. So let's take peoples firearms away, we all know the potential they have. Can you see why to me this is bigger than ferrets (which I don't own btw)?

As for the reports on Fish and Game cuts, my mother in law works for the state senate and knows the inividual cuts the different departments (some cuts haven't even been released such as in the AG's office).
There have been atleast two reports of the Fish and Game cuts, one in the Sacramento Press and one in the SF Chronicle. The Chronicle article was written by Tom Stienstra and I think someone may have posted it here, Jesse I think. Regardless is it a good use of resource to have those sworn to protect us from poacher and polluters to be chasing pet owners and their pets?

And what about the cuts to other Department programs? Are the Games departments from 120 countries every Canadian Province and Mexican state as well as 48 US states wrong and California right? In Countries were there are supossed ferret problems they are not ilegal to keep as pets (AUS and NZ).

Arnold the womanizer may have to much in his closet but does that matter in America any more and more specificaly California? He gets some votes for just being married into the Kennedy clan.

I think this quote from Mr. Franklin makes my point.
"They that...give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither..." -Franklin, 1759
The state takes away our freedom to protect us from what might or might not happen. Freedoms seems to be a dying thing these days.

Please don't take this as a personal assualt, the questions I am asking are meant more as a general "what the heck" get your attention kinda thing.

 

[jmabbott888]

Bimlie80, funny you should mention the Northern Pacific, I had 1 for a couple years before going into the Navy. The 1 I had was about a 3 1/2 footer that was "fixed" by Al Robbins here in Bakersfield before he died. In Bakersfield city limits it was illegal to keep the rattlers but in the county it was legal, or so I was told. Best part about that snake was when people came over & heard his rattle they would stop cold in their tracks lol

 

[doghouse95]

I like ferrets, there are lots of them in California. The DFG does not have a handle on
them. There is a vet in every city that works on them on a regular basis.
Now rattle snakes are another story. As long as I don't see them, they don't have a
problem.
I have a Ruger Single Six I bought just for the snattle rakes I find. 22 mag bird shot
works just great off of a horse. Snakes are the only thing I will shoot off of my horses.
Some years we find 3 or 4, and some years we find 30 or more. I've never been able to
figure out why.

 

[RIFLEMAN]

No problem; things got off to a bad start I suppose. There are many things I believe in so strongly that I will go on a rant at the slightest hint of instigation too.

If you look at DFG's opposition from the case they've made that it is the European Polecat (regardless of whether or not you, me or anyone else agrees with them), then I don't think that it has anything to do with liberty. That would be a long stretch in my opinion.

However, looking at it from the perspective that DFG now realizes their mistake, but asserts that they can regulate the domestic ferret anyway would absolutely support your position that this issue is about liberty.

BUT, no matter which way you look at it, you cannot compare ferret ownership to firearms ownership. Nowhere is the right to keep ferrets protected among our civil liberties. Nowhere in the writings of our forefathers do they state strongly that the ownership of ferrets is essential to our nation's well-being.
A more appropriate comparison would be ferrets and matches for example. To compare ferrets to firearms is a discredit to your otherwise logical and valid argument.

I agree with you 100% about cats; I have no problems with the extermination of feral cats and make no qualms when they are accedentally caught by houndsmen while out hunting for other game.

I don't think that Arnold's womaniziing will get him anywhere in the GOP. Now, if he was a Democrat, that would be accepted and even expected. But I think that it would do his campaign far too much harm. Then again, maybe not. I guess I am hopeful that the citizenry will find some values somewhere along the way.

Don't worry; I am not taking this as a personal attack. Rather, I enjoy good dialogue and a well-presented argument. I only wanted you to understand that my initial post was intended to give some insight into the motivations of DFG, not my own opinion of whether or not ferrets should be legal.

 

[bimlie80]

Rifleman, Yeah I started right into a rant, think ferrets get's me bothered try talking about gun restrictions and Abortion, then you'll see smoke comming out of my ears. Here is something I lfted off a ferret legalization site.

"The inclusion of a single domesticated species in a list of prohibited wildlife clearly violates Article 1 of our State Constitution which protects Californians' right to private property. Civil Code sections 654 and 655 define private property to include all domesticated animals"

I only link ferrets and the gun issue together in the way the mentality exsist that says" You need to be protected from yourself". I think the ferret issue is a due process issue because they are domestic and are private property, thus confiscation without due process is wrong by both California and US Constitutional Standards. Problem is who has the money to fight this to the finish, there is no NRA for housepets.

I have to admit that having lived, hunted and fished in other parts of the country I have a hard time fitting into the uniquely Californian way giving up freedom. The liberalism out here is so much different than the North East. It seems almost facist on occasion.

I think the California GOP so wants a win that they'd vote for Bill Clinton if he had a "R" next to his name.
Let's hope not.

 

[RIFLEMAN]

Like I said, I have been known to "go off" on somebody with only a slight hint of provocation too. It happens to us all about one issue or another.

The ideology of protecting the citizens from themselves is far too rampant! Seat belt and helmet laws are two perfect examples of this.

If the DFG still maintains that the ferret is wildlife and not domestic, then the arguments based on the state constitution, Civil Code sections 654 and 655 and due process are off the mark. The agency is mandated to see to the interests of our native wildlife. The strategy would be to force the domestication and taxonomic distinction down their throats.

However, once they do admit that it is a domestic species, I cannot think of any justification for the continued criminalization.

I abhor "ballot box wildlife managment" and am not necessarily encouraging it in this case, but I am curious; has there never been an effort to put ferret legalization on the ballot?

I know what you mean about the California mentality. It seems that most people here are willing to give up their freedoms so long as they can have their SUV, cellphone and latte'. It seems that all anyone wants is to ensure monetary or material wealth, not wealth of liberty.

 

[bimlie80]

I am hesitant about Fish and Game legislating at the ballot box. There is a reason we are a Representative Republic rather than a Direct Democracy. The Mountain Lion issue continues to tweak me to no friggin' end. On the other hand we are talking about a domesticated species over 80% of Californians support the legalization and so do the majority of Assemblymembers and State Senators, only the most liberal and those in AG areas are against it.

If you go to the Fish and game link and read up on the issue you'll find the agencies own 1996 reports refutes what they say. You'll also note they consider domestic Ferrets as furo which makes them the domestic subspecies of a the European Polecat, like dogs are the domestic subspecies of wolves. Note on the Fish and Game site the links to many of the "ferret in the wild" sites are non longer up. you'll see how ferrets are wild in New Zealand but there will be no explanation that it happened with the constant reintroduction of breeding ferrets and that man had to interfer by offering food to suplement the ferrets diets for generations.

http://www.dfg.ca.gov/hcpb/species/nuis_ex...et/survey.shtml

 

[bimlie80]

I have to comment on the Killing of Crotalus Viridis Oreganus (Western Rattlesnake) in California. Can you say Hanta Virus? Reptiles serve an extremely important roll in eating those damn dear mice that spread the disease that is 100% fatal. You can get that disease while hunting if you should com into contact with dust from an area Deer mice have urinated. The Hanta Virus is airbrorne and 100 times more danegerous than the Aids Virus. I suggest trying to get around those rattlesnakes, my experience handling them is that you have to do something to get bit, The only time I've ever even seen one strike is after I pinned it with a snake hook.

 

[doghouse95]

bimlie80
Rattle snakes are hard on my stock dogs. We also have lots of king snakes to eat the
mice.....
We find snakes in our hay barns, and my kids play there.
Sorry, rattle snakes and I just don't coincide too well.

 

[RIFLEMAN]

Bimlie80,

Glad to hear you say that you are hesitant about legislating wildlife management at the ballot box. I agree with you 100%.

With such a strong argument behind ferret fanciers, I cannot help but think that things will be changing in the next year or two.

I have also handled live rattlesnakes in the wild without incident. It takes a lot to get them to strike in my experiences too.

 

[bimlie80]

Actually lampropeltis getulus californae (California Kingsnake) is more of a lizard eater. Normally in areas where there are Kingsnakes, Rattlesnake populations are small (juvenilel Rattlesnakes are a prey item)and when field collecting herps we generally know what is Rattlesnake habitat and range and what is Kingsnake, this is not so true in the Deserts of California. Pit Vipers like Rattlesnakes have a pretty sophisticated adaptation that makes them extremely efficent mammal eaters.

I bet those buggers are hard on your dogs, especially if you are in So. Cal. Up North we only have c.v. oreganus (Northern Pacific Rattlesnakes) and their venom is only a hemotoxin affecting tissue, down south they have Mojave's their toxin is a neurotoxin affecting the nervous system. What is scary is that either through evolution or interbreeding some c.v. oreganus are developing neurotoxins in their venom.

My uncle lost a few good cattle dogs down in AZ thanks Rattlesnakes, he could never keep them away from them.

 

[DKScott]

I don't know beans about ferrets, but this topic seems to be veering into rattlesnake country, so I'll throw my 2 cents in. I took my GSP pup to a snake avoidance clinic in September. Now, I had planned to do it anyway, but over the summer I ran into two people who had their dogs bit. It cost one guy over $1,000 and the other one $2,200. I have since heard a bunch more stories of recent bitings, including one about a couple months ago in the same place I run my dog in the evening (cost: about $1,000). Then other thing that surprised me was the long recuperation. You can pretty much forget using the dog for a good bit of the season: 6-10 weeks of rest and inactivity was typically prescribed. Apparently there can be considerable tissue damage.

All of these incidents were single bites to the foot or nose and happened in an area where excellent vet care is easily available 24/7 and the dogs were treated promptly.

I was astonished at the cost. I used to keep anti-venin on hand years ago and it was cheap. One of the things I was told is that the reason these folks are paying through the nose, is that anti-venin is becoming very scarce and expensive, apparently due to some PETA-related insanity. In outlying areas, it may be flat unavailable.

So my advice is that folks should take their dogs to a snake avoidance clinic (they say a periodic refresher is also wise). $50 is cheap insurance. And give some thought to how you will handle a snake bite in a given location or situation. I have actually seen a dog detect and avoid a snake (hidden under a bush) a good year after she had the training.

These clinics are offered thoughout the spring and summer, usually through Quail Unlimited or similar groups. With hunting season winding down and snake season coming up, its a good time to locate a clinic and get some protection for your dogs. My thoughts, FWIW.

Scott