Since there are regularly folks wanting to age kits but trying to go from
size (often not reliable), or from how previous kits appeared at reported
ages (also often not reliable) I grabbed the following permanent eruption
calendar from the first J.G.  Fox book (Note that numbers denote a system
which relates to mammals in general so you will find species which typically
lack numbers such as P1.):
 
Upper: 50 days of age for canines (the long conical fangs behind the
incisors); 60 days of age for premolars 2 through 4 (found behind the
canines, two of the premolars are shaped like inverted Vs and the other is a
carnivore-specific slicing tooth behind those); 53 days molar 1 (behind the
premolars, this has a suface extending in toward the center of the palate --
if you feel in your own mouth these are the back teeth you grind with --
humans erupt 2 to 3 of these as permanent teeth in each quadrant of the
mouth.
 
Lower: 50 days canines; 60 days premolar 2; 67 days premolar 3; 74 days
premolar 4; 50 days molar 1; 74 days molar 2.  (See basic info for telling
apart in the section on the upper teeth.)
 
There, now anyone who has this on file, or gets it from someone's file can
age kits more reliably.  This is needed gear for those who are checking on
the sale ages of any breeder's kits as part of their efforts to improve
conditions in relation to any number of backyard and/or mill breeders.  I've
seen kits described as being much younger than their teeth, coordination,
eyes (open), and other features actually say they are, and reliability is
essential for achieving results so reports backed by tooth evidence could
become important to those of you working on this.  (There might well be
federal or state regulations on age of sale -- when we picked up Ashling and
Scooter heard that Path Valley now has to sell them no earlier than 7 weeks
(bellys still touching ground for some time afterward, needing soft food,
teething not done) and had the impression that was a regulation.  Meltdown
had come home at 5 weeks years ago, but that was a special situation.)
 
Learned an interesting thing yesterday from Betty at Path Valley.  Seems the
reason that PV decided originally to NOT have a tattoo is because EVERY
breeder they found who used tattoos also sold to either research or to the
fur industry, or to both.  Since at least several of these are now in or
entering the pet trade (sometimes with animals that are not bred for good
temperments since they were originally bred for their coats only) this is
something to keep in the backs of your minds.  BTW, someone here asked about
the word "fitch" -- some use it as the same as "ferret" (regional), some
seem to use it to refer to the type of polecat-like marking, I use it in yet
another common way in which it refers to animals bred for fur stock.
 
Sukie
[Posted in FML issue 2237]