Snarky Commentary: The Wild Irony of California’s Ferret Classification
Note, we have received the expected demurrer from the Fish and Game Commission. Read it here.
Ah, the majestic California ferret saga—a tale where logic takes a backseat, and irony drives the car. Buckle up, folks, because the Attorney General’s office just dropped some paperwork that’s as contradictory as it gets.
The Wild Domestics
First, let’s talk terminology. According to the California Fish and Game Code, a “wild animal” includes any species “not normally domesticated in this state.” And yet, in their very own defense, the AG’s office repeatedly refers to our furry friends as “domestic ferrets.” Yes, you read that right—*domestic* ferrets.
So, which is it? Are they wild or domestic? It seems our esteemed officials are having an identity crisis on behalf of the ferrets. It’s like calling a house cat a feral predator while it’s lounging on your couch.
Undesirable and Menacing
Section 2118(b) of the Fish and Game Code claims that domestic ferrets are restricted because they are “undesirable and a menace to native wildlife, the agricultural interests of the state, or to the public health and safety.” Really? These are the same creatures that sleep 18 hours a day and can’t survive without human care. Menacing? Only if you’re a sock left unattended.
But wait, there’s more! Petitioner Pat Wright argues that the classification of ferrets as wild was made without “proper hearings, studies, or research.” The response from the AG’s office? A demurrer that dances around the issue without addressing the core contradiction.
Procedural Hoopla
According to the AG’s office, the petition is flawed because it doesn’t specify which decision or regulation it challenges. How about we start with the nonsensical classification that contradicts itself? Maybe if the paperwork stopped tripping over its own definitions, it could find its way to a coherent argument.
They also raise the issue of statute limitations and proper naming conventions. Here’s a thought: instead of nitpicking procedural details, why not address the fact that labeling domesticated pets as wild animals is as sensible as calling a pet goldfish a shark?
The Bigger Picture
This isn’t just about ferrets; it’s about the absurdity of bureaucratic red tape that defies common sense. It’s about a system that would rather cling to outdated regulations than acknowledge that domestic animals, well, aren’t wild. It’s a Kafkaesque nightmare where ferrets are both domesticated and wild, depending on which page of the legal script you’re reading.
Conclusion
So here we are, caught in a legal limbo where “domestic” and “wild” are interchangeable at the convenience of the law. If you ever doubted that the California Fish and Game Commission could outdo itself in the realm of bureaucratic absurdity, doubt no more. As we wait for the next chapter of this ferret fiasco, remember: in the wild world of California regulations, logic is optional, but irony is mandatory.