Fish and Game Ferret Petition Internal Email They Never Intended Us to See

Response to documents obtained through the California Public Records Act (PRA)

A newly released Fish and Game ferret petition internal email, obtained through our Public Records Act request, shows that the California Fish & Game Commission had already decided to deny our ferret petition before reviewing the evidence. The email chain reveals staff debating how to justify the denial — not whether the decision itself was correct or supported by science.

This post is part of our ongoing Ferret Files project, where we document how agencies have handled ferret policy in California. It also supports our current petition to finally fix ferret regulations.

What the Ferret Petition Internal Email Says

Here is the key portion of the internal email chain, exactly as it appeared in the PRA production:

Melissa,

For ferrets (2019-018), Ari didn’t want to make a change to his response. His reason for this was because the petition was for FGC to determine that ferrets are not wild animals. But we don’t usually give that as the reason for FGC denying the petition. Are you comfortable with that?

The rationale he provided in the AML is that “FGC did not determine that ferrets are not wild animals.”

The staff recommendation provided to FGC, which FGC adopted, was:
“This item was the subject of petition 2016-008, denied by FGC in Oct 2016. The rationale for that denial is the same here. A copy of the previous memo is provided as Exhibit A6.”

U:\Groups\FGC\Meetings\After Mtg Letters\2019\10 Oct FGC

From: Cornman, Ari@FGC
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 2:21 PM
To: Miller-Henson, Melissa@FGC ; Ashcraft, Susan@FGC
Cc: Kinchak, Sergey@FGC
Subject: RE: October AMLs

Minor edit to the Alton letter – looks good to me now.

From: Miller-Henson, Melissa@FGC <Melissa.Miller-Henson@fgc.ca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 1:02 PM
To: Cornman, Ari@FGC <Ari.Cornman@FGC.ca.gov>; Ashcraft, Susan@FGC <Susan.Ashcraft@FGC.ca.gov>
Cc: Kinchak, Sergey@FGC <Sergey.Kinchak@FGC.ca.gov>
Subject: RE: October AMLs

Thanks, Ari! Would you and Susan please take another look at the Alton ltr? I made a few additional proposed edits.

Susan, need you to take another look at the Wright letter.

I’ve printed and this afternoon will sign the Preston ltr.

From: Cornman, Ari@FGC <Ari.Cornman@FGC.ca.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, November 5, 2019 8:55 AM
To: Miller-Henson, Melissa@FGC <Melissa.Miller-Henson@FGC.ca.gov>
Cc: Ashcraft, Susan@FGC <Susan.Ashcraft@FGC.ca.gov>; Kinchak, Sergey@FGC <Sergey.Kinchak@FGC.ca.gov>
Subject: October AMLs

The following AMLs are ready for approval and signature:

\\HQGroup3.AD.Dfg.Ca.Gov\HQ10\Groups\FGC\Meetings\After Mtg Letters\2019\10 Oct FGC\AML_Pet#2019-013_Falconers and Raptors_Alton, Douglas_101419.docx
\\HQGroup3.AD.Dfg.Ca.Gov\HQ10\Groups\FGC\Meetings\After Mtg Letters\2019\10 Oct FGC\AML_Pet#2019-016 AM 1_Spring Bear_and Pet#2019-017 AM 1_Archery_Bear_Taylor, Preston_101419_sa.docx
\\HQGroup3.AD.Dfg.Ca.Gov\HQ10\Groups\FGC\Meetings\After Mtg Letters\2019\10 Oct FGC\AML_Pet#2019-018_Ferrets_Wright, Pat_101419.docx

Ari Cornman, Wildlife Advisor
California Fish and Game Commission
1416 Ninth Street, Room 1320
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-653-1595

Why This Ferret Petition Internal Email Is So Serious

This is not a casual comment or an offhand remark. It is senior staff discussing how they are going to justify denying a petition in the official record. The Fish and Game ferret petition internal email shows staff focused on the wording of the denial, not on whether the denial is supported by the law or the evidence.

1. The outcome was already decided

The email explicitly states that the rationale for denying our 2019 ferret petition would be the same as for Petition 2016-008. Instead of considering the evidence submitted in 2019, staff simply reached back to a prior denial and reused it.

2. They know the stated reason is not appropriate

Susan Ashcraft writes that Ari’s reason for denial is that the petition asked the Commission to determine that ferrets are not wild animals, but she notes:

“we don’t usually give that as the reason for FGC denying the petition.”

3. This was supposed to be the official explanation to the public

The internal edits were designed to shape the After Meeting Letter (AML)—the public-facing document explaining the Commission’s decision—rather than to reflect an honest review.

What This Internal Email Means for Ferret Policy in California

California remains the only state in the continental U.S. that still treats domestic ferrets as wild animals. Staff did not evaluate the scientific materials we submitted in 2019, including:

• Animal Diversity Web
• Wikipedia
• PETA's “Facts on Ferrets”

All three identify ferrets as domesticated animals.

Why This Fish and Game Email Matters

This PRA release shows a pattern: recycled reasoning, predetermined decisions, and internal editing of public-facing explanations. Petitioners are entitled to a genuine, evidence-based review—not a predetermined outcome.

What Comes Next

We will continue pressing for honest, science-based ferret policy. To learn more, review the expanding Ferret Files archive or track our current petition at Petition 2025-003.