Okay, now I am working from memory as one of the people who was
strongly involved in the USDA work from beginning through the end
and some conversations after that, so if I make memory errors about
any specifics then forgive me, but notice the gist of what I write.
The thing that ultimately killed the effort with the USDA when we
were all working to have a minimum age of eight weeks for ferret kit
shipping was the wording of the Animal Welfare Act. Instead of
generalizing, it covers a few specific animals in extra good ways,
animals like dogs. Every UNnamed animal, including ferrets, has lesser
protections only according to that legislation. The USDA actually got
to the point of desiring improvements but were THEN advised by legal
council that the only way to get that would be to have Congress do a
rewrite of the Act, either to include ferrets and some other species,
or to allow modifications without legislation being needed in the
future.
Ultimately, that is needed, and not only for ferrets. So, it has to be
done through Congress because the hands of the USDA are tied by how
the legislation is written.
Now, I do NOT know WHICH OTHER improvements in what the USDA can or can
not do would require legislation, so maybe being better able to affect
Farms would not have to go through something so major.
I agree that the chances are the farm will either break down and make
improvements or will sell stock. Hopefully, that will not be to the
fitch fur industry.
Re your statements on research. Please, do not generalize, especially
with worst assumptions.
What researchers require for animals who are obtained varies greatly
among the researchers and type of research. Decades ago I worked for an
anatomy department with a range of primates. The comfort, happiness,
physical health, and mental health of the animals were paramount in
the minds of the professors with whom I worked. The conditions were
wonderful, even though with potentially dangerous animals having such
large and good places for them does increase the risks of injury for
the people who work with the animals. Luckily, at that time the
university employed a vet who agreed with the priority of placing the
animals first, so, yes, we humans all had a range of injuries on and
off, but the animals thrived. In a later decade when the university
hired a vet who insisted on strain cages the professors I worked with
found new homes for the animals rather than treat any like that and
most of the relocations worked well. So, people must be careful about
generalizing about research because some people and some types of
research are not in any way negligent or painful. The same locomotion
work that was done on the primates was actually done on the staff where
I worked, and the animals had to have a long period btwn bouts of
anesthesia even though that a few times messed up the travel schedules
of people very badly.
There are people who care.
If only all did. One of the chimps who I raised was later destroyed
by someone elsewhere who broke with the contract he had signed when
getting Maynard, violating conditions and what was not allowed to be
done with Maynard. That killed my sweetie. I could understand taking
cautions. Maynard was a grown chimp who did not know them and he could
have easily killed a person and certainly sometimes accidentally
injured us, including jumping down on me in a way that gave me a
concussion and temporary double vision during finals week but what
they did was not cautions for safety and he died.
[Posted in FML 7188]
|
