>From:    Jason and Holly Harper <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: playing devil's advocate...
 
First of all we have to limit this discussion to genetic deafness for it
to even be an issue.  Non-genetic deafness from disease or accident is
not an issue on whether offspring will be deaf.  Waardenburg syndrome is
genetic and is the issue with ferrets.
 
Second defector handicap.  We are not going to dance about the word.
Deafness is a flaw.  But that does not make a deaf person or ferret a
'lesser' being.  Just one wit h a flaw that they will have to deal with
(both of us wear glasses and are thus also flawed)
 
>Do the same people that feel it's wrong to breed deaf ferrets feel that
>it's wrong for deaf humans to produce offspring?
 
Nope.
 
>I mean after all deafness is a defect, right?
 
Yes.  But no.  Ferrets are domestic animals not people.  It really does
come down to that.
 
People with genetic diseases should consider the implications of their
having children but it is their choice.  They have to make the rational
decisions to the best of their ability.  All humans have rights in areas
that animals do not have (even animal rightists recognize that some human
rights are not bestowed on animals so its not a bash on animal rights in
this case) and one of those is reproductive rights.  Hopefully humans
that have to make the decision for themselves will go through genetic
counseling.
 
Domestic animals do not have the same level of rational thinking.  We
have to make the decision for them.  They can not think through the
implications of spawning more deaf children unlike people.
 
Breeding animals is playing "god", "fate" or "mother nature" or however
you wish to see it because it is we breeders who make the decisions.
 
The issue is not whether deaf ferrets can make great pets.  Of course they
can.  The issue is whether we breeders who are playing this omnipotent
role should purposely breed traits that we know can be problems.  Should
we knowingly breed ferrets that will die from genetic disease at about the
age of two?  No, even though that ferret would make a great pet for those
two short years.
 
>From:    Sukie Crandall <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: blazes; scents
>Waardensburg (sp?)
 
We do believe its Waardenburg though for a long time we put the 's'
in by mistake...
 
>From:    Ron Knipple <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Deaf Ferrets and Breeding
 
Yes there are those of us breeding to imported ferrets.  Swedish, English,
German, Canadian, Australian and Kiwi.
 
We in particular are glad to have ferrets free from Waardenburg as its
getting hard to get clean American ferrets since so many decline to stp
breeding the 'pretty patterns' claiming that since theirs are not deaf
they won't pass it on.  The is specious as the exact expression of the
gene is not inheritible.  A hearing panda can begat a deaf blaze.
 
>From:    MC <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Deaf Ferrets
>Say What?  What discussion on deaf ferrets being bred by Marshall
>(Farms??) I would like to see that.  To my knowledge, they do not breed
>for genetic defects.
 
Unfortunately Marshall ferrets now too can seem to have the Waardenburg
pattern.  With the popularity of them Marshall also bred for the patterns.
They seem to have been present in Path Valley ferrets even longer. <sigh>
 
Our source is personal observation combined with personal contact with a
then representative of Marshall.  We have had a deaf Marshall blaze and
Dr. Bell acknowledged that they kept back unusual patterns for breeding.
She did not in particular acknowledge that Marshall knowingly bred deaf
ferrets.  We do NOT accuse either Marshall or Path Valley of planning on
breeding defects into their ferrets.
 
--
bill and diane killian
zen and the art of ferrets
http://www.zenferret.com/
mailto:[log in to unmask]
[Posted in FML issue 3116]