Dear all,
Just because a ferret (or any animal for that matter) reacts a certain way
to a certain noise (baby crying) doesn't mean it is a candidate for
ferality.  In my opinion basing a whole argument on this subject is a load
of bollocks.  ( BIG: edit it and call it it crap, or scats or anything if
you like... please not poop).  [Your word is more creative. BIG]
 
I can answer this in two ways; firstly, if we turned the argument around and
said "A baby human (or any animal) is reacting to a ferret noise!  It must
be able to go feral!"... we would be making more than a few wild assumptions
(excuse the pun).  Secondly, if ferrets did hunt babies (yeah right), then
why have we no cases in the feral ferret kingdom (New Zealand), where a
ferret has walked into a house and attacked a child ?
 
>Mr. Lipinski is certain that the response of the ferret in the remote
>bedroom was without a doubt that of a predator going after prey - prey
>in this case being the infant.
 
Why doesn't Mr Lipinski cuddle himself into a little ball and cover himself
in Baby talcom powder and put on some nappys and start whining like a child
to test his theory ?
 
>Consider 1.A ferrets psyche.  One thing here: we don't know if it's inate
>curiosity or a surge to kill that's motaviting the ferret.
 
Drama, drama...
We also don't know if its an urge to call out for pizza, but ferts haven't
mastered how to ask for "pepperoni, hold the anchovies".  In short Mr
Lipinski is speculating wildly.
 
>3.  It will appear that most ferret owners would rather drink vinegar
>than think ill of their pet, and thereby will tend to discount opinions
>that denigrate their emotionally held beliefs and hopes.
 
So they also aren't allowed an opinion that differs to yours, no matter how
rationally, scientifically or realistically they present their argument.
 
>4. We know that a constantly directed evolutionary pressure on any living
>organism will produce survivors who will be better able to adapt and use
>the resources at hand to productively maintain themselves.  WHY SHOULD THE
>FERRET BE EXCLUDED FROM THIS BIOLOGICAL PHENOMENON GIVEN SUFFICIENT TIME
>AND A FAVORABLE ENVIRONMENT?  EVERY FERTILIZATION IS A STEP CHANGE.
 
because, (and to use caps lock) ANIMALS GO EXTINCT.  If an animal can't
adapt to its new environment quick enough, within a few generations it will
die off.  This is assuming it can reproduce, hunt or scavenge enough food,
compete with other predators and survive winter.  Ferrets did survive over
here thanks to our rabbits and more than a few native birds.  The birds
however did not, and I quote, "produce survivors who were better able to
adapt and use the resources at hand to productively maintain themselves"
and are now extinct.
 
>5. some ferrets are much more likely to survive in the wild than I'd
>heretofore thought possible.  Why?  Maybe they are really closer to "the
>wild" than we ever dreamed.  Then, again you may disagree.  Do so.
 
They have gone wild but not because of their ability to hear a baby cry down
the hallway.  I don't believe that basing your whole argument on a small
piece of specualtion is relevant, meaningful or believable.  I hope others
haven't listened seriously to your argument Mr Lipninski
 
Flame me, I love it.
 
Yours rationally
Jim Young
[Posted in FML issue 2258]