BILL ANALYSIS 1
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES AND WATER
Senator Sheila Kuehl, Chair
2005-2006 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 647
AUTHOR: Koretz
AMENDED: As Proposed to be amended June 27, 2005
FISCAL: Yes HEARING DATE:June 28, 2005
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Jennifer Richard
SUBJECT: Domestic Ferrets
Summary: Allows the ownership of spayed and neutered
domestic ferrets for pets, if the Secretary of the
Resources Agency, in consultation with the Department of
Fish and Game, certifies through a California Environmental
Quality Act review that there is insufficient evidence that
a significant risk to the environment would be created by
legalizing ferret ownership or, in the alternative, if an
environmental impact report is certified and implemented.
Existing Law: Existing law prohibits the importation,
transportation, possession, or release alive into this
state, except under a revocable and non-transferable
permit, certain listed species of wild animal. Included
on the list of prohibited species are any members of the
family Mustelidae, which includes domestic ferrets.
Removal of a species from the list of prohibited species is
considered a project for purposes of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
Proposed Law:
Specifically this measure:
1)Directs the Secretary of the Resources Agency, in
consultation with the Department of Fish and Game,
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, to
prepare and complete, or arrange for the preparation and
completion of, a statewide environmental assessment to
determine the effects of removing the domestic ferret from
the list of prohibited wild animals. Requires this
environmental assessment to be completed by September 30,
2006.
2) Authorizes the Secretary of the Resources Agency to
enter into an agreement to utilize existing resources and
expertise of the Department of Fish and Game, the Office of
Planning and Research, the California Research Bureau, the
University of California, the California State University,
a private firm, or any similar institution or combination
of those institutions, to assist in obtaining scientific
data for the environmental assessment.
3) Prohibits the release of domestic ferrets into the wild
as part of the environmental review.
4) Requires that, if the Secretary, in consultation with
the Department of Fish and Game, concludes that a negative
declaration or a mitigated negative declaration is
appropriate, he or she shall do all of the following:
(A) Provide a copy of the environmental assessment and
any related findings to the Legislature and the
commission.
(B) Publish the environmental assessment and any related
findings on the Resources Agency's Internet Web site.
(C) Within 60 days after the completion of the
environmental assessment, direct the California Fish and
Game Department to hold a public hearing to assess
whether the domestic ferret poses a significant risk to
California's wildlife.
5) Requires that, if the Secretary of the Resources Agency,
in consultation with the Department of Fish and Game,
determines that an environmental impact report is
appropriate, domestic ferrets will not be removed from the
list of prohibited wild life until the environmental impact
report is certified and implemented.
6) Requires that, if ferrets are removed from the list of
prohibited wild life, a permit shall not be required to
import or possess domestic ferrets to be owned as pets
under the following conditions:
(A) The owner of the ferret maintains, and can
produce, documentation showing that the ferret has
been vaccinated against rabies with a vaccine approved
for use in ferrets by the United States Department of
Agriculture and administered in accordance with the
recommendations of the vaccine manufacturer.
(B) All ferrets over the age of six months shall be
spayed or neutered.
(C) Any ferret that is sold or offered for sale shall
be spayed or neutered before the sale.
Arguments in Support: Proponents believe that ownership of
domestic ferrets should be legalized in California. They
do not believe that ferrets pose any risk to California
wildlife. Proponents claim that domestic ferrets cannot
live for more than a few days in the wild because they lack
the instinct to hunt, seek shelter or avoid predators.
They also point to the absence of evidence of substantial
problems in the other states that allow ferrets as proof
that legalization of ferrets in California would not be
detrimental to native wildlife.
Arguments in Opposition: Opposition to this measure has
mostly focused on concerns that escaped ferrets could cause
damage to other wildlife, particularly waterfowl and other
ground-nesting birds. Opponents believe that a full CEQA
analysis of the environmental risks of ferrets must be
completed prior to deciding whether or not to legalize
their possession in California.
Although, the most recent amendments have brought the
environmental review process required by the bill into
alignment with CEQA, the measure does prohibit the release
of domestic ferrets into the wild as part of that review
process. This was done to address concerns from the
proponents that the release of domestic ferret populations
into the wild would be cruel as most would die within a few
days from starvation or predation. Despite recent
amendments bringing the bill into alignment with the CEQA
process this limitation on the environmental review process
may leave the opposition with lingering concerns.
Comments: Since 1994, a bill has been introduced every
legislative session to legalize the ownership of domestic
ferrets as pets. Last Session's measure SB 89 (Alpert) was
returned without the Governor's signature. The Governor's
veto message for SB 89 (Alpert) said: "I love ferrets. I
costarred with a ferret in Kindergarten Cop. However, this
bill is far too bureaucratic and it legalizes ferrets prior
to conducting an environmental impact report (EIR). I am
concerned that there has not been proper study to determine
whether ferrets are detrimental to the health and safety of
California citizens and the environment. The EIR should be
completed and evaluated as part of the decision making
process before changing the legal status of ferret
possession."
This bill, as introduced, did not require an EIR and simply
proposed to amend the statute to legalize the possession of
ferrets so long as they have been vaccinated against rabies
and spayed or neutered. As amended in the Assembly Natural
Resources Committee, this bill required completion of an
environmental assessment and a determination and
certification by the Secretary of the Resources Agency that
there is insufficient evidence of a significant risk to
California wildlife before the proposed legalization of the
ferret would become effective. Senate amendments bring
that review process into alignment with the environmental
review process established under the California
Environmental Quality Act.
The domestic ferret is a member of the weasel family and a
subspecies of the European Polecat. The scientific name of
the domestic ferret is Mustela putorius furo. It is
believed that the ferret may have been domesticated for at
least 2,500 years. Ferrets were originally used by humans
as flushers for hunting burrowing animals such as rabbits.
Currently all states except for California and Hawaii allow
for legal ferret ownership. Estimates on the total number
of ferrets living in California vary, but by conservative
estimates at least 160,000 ferrets live in the state of
California despite the ban on importation and ownership.
Whether escaped ferrets, if legalized, could pose a
potential threat to native birds and other native wildlife
continues to be a point of contention. The Department of
Fish and Game and the Fish and Game Commission have
expressed concern that escaped ferrets could cause damage
to other wildlife, especially birds. They point to the
fact that ferrets have become a problem in New Zealand,
where they were introduced 100 years ago to control
rabbits. Ferrets have been found preying on the nests of
wild birds, including the Kiwi, New Zealand's national
bird. Ownership of ferrets as pets has now been prohibited
in New Zealand, which has a climate and landscape similar
to California's. Feral populations of ferrets are also
said to exist in Great Britain and the Island of San Juan
in the State of Washington, although the latter is
disputed.
In 1996-97, the DFG completed a survey of the experiences
of other states with ferrets. Although no states reported
any documented evidence of ferrets breeding in the wild,
three states reported suspected breeding in the past, and
five states reported having documented of free-living
ferrets having survived more than a few days the wild. Two
states (New Mexico and Georgia) reported that sightings of
stray ferrets in urban areas were common and frequent.
However, the survey is of limited value since 86% of the
states reported that they had made no efforts to assess the
status of ferrets in the wild.
A review conducted by the CRB in 1997 concluded that "it
appears improbable that domestic ferrets could establish
feral colonies in California, given the risks of ferrets
themselves becoming prey. While individual ferrets might
survive up to a few weeks in the wild, they are very
unlikely to survive longer than that. Despite the lack of
documented examples, the possibility cannot be excluded
that escaped ferrets might do significant damage to
wildlife, such as ground-nesting birds, and possibly
including endangered species, during a period up to a few
weeks of survival, even without establishing continuing
colonies. Ongoing releases or escapes of domestic ferrets
might replenish the population in the wild, even if the
animals were not reproducing, and this could contribute to
a continuing hazard to wildlife." The report further
pointed out that ferrets would be less likely to pose a
hazard if ferrets were required to be spayed or neutered
and registered to encourage compliance with this
requirement.
SUPPORT (as amended May 26, 2005):
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
California Veterinary Medical Association
Californians for Ferret Legalization
Capitol Ferret Club
Ferrets Anonymous
Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council
Individuals
OPPOSITION (as amended May 26, 2005):
California Waterfowl Association
Defenders of Wildlife
Planning and Conservation League