I'll try to be quick about this.  At the same time I am catching up on
laundry that I couldn't do during a virus, finding something for Steve's
Dad who still isn't watching his fat intake after his by-passes and wound
up in the hospital with a bad gall bladder attack as a result of that fat
intake (but is NOT a good surgical candidate so we are still all trying
to get him to change his behavior), and I am trying to copy something
about the Setauket spies who saved the French fleet during the American
Revolution for a niece who has an injured arm with hopes that her
ancestors' actions will perk her up some.
 
Anyway, some things are just NOT easy calls.  Research is one of those.
First, some types SAVE more ferrets than they lose.  Look at the rabies
shedding research which RAPIDLY saved more than were used in the
experiments.  Was it less humane to provide the research needed, or to try
continued alternative approaches to seek an end to the string of ferrets
killed for post-bite or post-scratch testing?  The only possible answer is
that NEITHER was less humane -- EACH side wanted the SAME result: to end
the string of deaths.  One approach worked faster than the others.  A
person has to follow what is right for him or him individually and respect
differences of opinion.  One example is Troy Lynn on that issue vs.  me on
that issue.  We each UNDERSTOOD that we were on the SAME SIDE -- just that
we differed in approaches.  Because we KNEW that we respected and trusted
each other as friends who each love ferrets we shared information and
therefore helped each other's actions be more effective as well as our own.
 
Yes, some research projects IN GENERAL are horrid and not needed.
Alternatively, some consist of situations in which the animals are treated
marvelously and cherished, or the work done will save more lives than not
doing it will cost.  I worked for some people involved in one of the latter
examples -- the same types of research were even done on the profs and
their grad students and the animals loved with full lives ahead of them.
I have also helped fight against one of the worst examples I have ever
known of among the former (again, see the back issues of the FML since I
absolutely don't have time to trace this old thing down at all).  In that
case the terrible individual actually had at that point changed COUNTRIES
three times trying to conducted awful work.  (What he succeeded in doing,
last I heard, was destroying his own career for an approach which was cruel
and out-dated (so therefore pointless, but he just couldn't move on --
maybe he was burned-out mentally) so fire-fights can work in SPECIFIC
research situations if the facts are hard ones.)  It makes NO sense to
GENERALIZE in relation to research.
 
Another thing which affects conditions is the institution's over-seeing
vet.  A good one places the physical and mental health of the critters
first.  A bad one places the convenience of the staff first.  I have seen
profs (researchers) work hard to remove a vet who placed human ease above
animal well-being.  As you see, this research issue is something of a
Gordian Knot.  It's INDIVIDUALS and INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS which are good or
bad -- NOT an entire category.
 
Similarly complex is the topic of large breeders.  I have read some bad
things about EACH of the large breeders -- every single one.  Just use the
FML search engines to find some yourselves.  Some of them have foundation;
some appear to not have any footing.
 
In addition, one must take into account how business works.  A business
must remain competitive.  Thus, if a one which has well known problems
loses sales to those difficulties becoming public -- while a competitor
which may even be worse is left untouched by public sentiments -- then the
scape-goat could find it's slot filled by a "farm" which has even MORE
wrong with it.  That means that a BALANCE needs to be sought -- something
which forces ALL large breeders to meet better standards -- which improves
the LOT of them.  That way ALL all are improved, rather than simply
replacing one with another which is just as bad or maybe worse.  The only
way to do this is to improve either federal or state laws (or both)
governing pet stores, distributors, shipping and sale ages, etc.  Fire
fights with boycotts have been tried against individual places for over a
decade with no effect.  In comparison I have read of only ONE attempt to
improve federal law to help ferrets by creating tougher standards that all
must meet.
 
Hope this was clear enough and with only a few typos which hopefully aren't
bad ones; I HAVE to dash now!
[Posted in FML issue 2961]