[Sent in 2 parts -- combined into one.  BIG]
>But let's be very clear on this - not one person on this mailing list has
>even hinted at the REASON why a ferret inflicts biting wounds on an infant,
>as in the Toronto case as well as all the others that history has recorded.
 
Ed, your memory seems to be very selective.  Such discussions were held on
the FML several times, or is it possible that the reason you deliberately
chose not to recall such comments is because they don't fit in with your
theories that ferrets are not "fully domesticated" and prone to feral
attacks on babies?  No one here has ever denied that ferret bites do occur
from time to time.  That is a fact.  Several reasons have been suggested
in the past for why ferret bites occur:
 
-- The ferret was attempting to play with the baby.  We all know ferrets
nip and bite each other multiple times when they play in a rough and
tumble way.  There is also the explanation for multiple bites in one area.
Observe two ferrets playing and you will see multiple play bites delivered
to the same area on the opponent.
 
-- The infant hits or inadvertantly hurts the ferret and the ferret reacts
to the threat in the only way possible.  Since the baby is unable to run
away, it flails its arms continuing the perceived threat to the ferret and
multiple bites occur.
 
-- The ferret is attempting to show dominance over the infant who is a
newcomer into the house.  This is normal ferret behavior.
 
>Those who have attempted to find a reason for the ferret mauling the
>infant in Toronto have cited that oft repeated cliche:
   >It's not the ferrets fault; it's not the infant's fault either.  It's
   >the fault of the adult.
 
>Please note here that the word "reason" is somehow changed by the
>respondents to the word "fault."
 
No, no one other than you is substituting the word "reason" for "fault."
The number one *reason* ferret bites occur on infants is indeed adult human
neglect.  The humans neglect to take the proper precautions to prevent a
very preventable and predictable incident.  It doesn't take an Einstein to
know that infants and any living animal unsupervised in the same location
are not a safe combination.  In almost every infant/ferret bite incident
reported, the infant was left in a room alone with an uncaged, unsupervised
ferret.  Had an adult human been watching over the infant, the ferret, or
both (as they should have been), the bite incident(s) would not have
occurred.
 
The incidents of infant/ferret bites are the direct result of adult human
neglect, and lack of common sense, and nothing more.  They are regretable
and preventable.  But, they are not the result of some dormant feral
instinct to attack and maul infants that is suddenly turned on like a light
switch the moment a ferret first sees/hears/smells an infant.  The common
factors behind every infant/pet bite incident is neglect and/or a lack of
common sense on the part of the adult human responsible for providing a
safe environment for both the infant and the pet.  Every parenting expert
and pet expert will tell the public in no uncertain terms DO NOT leave an
infant and pet together unsupervised.  So yes, we can educate the public on
what it takes to prevent infant/ferret bite incidents.  The answer is
simple, supervise your infant and pets at all times.  Never leave the
infant and ferret in the same room alone together.  Never turn your back
on the infant and ferret even when you are in the same room as they.  Do
those simple things and there will be no ferret/infant bite incidents
again.
 
PART 2
>Also I have to ask, why has not even one individual expressed the desire to
>determine the physical condition of the attacking ferret?  What is there
>about this Toronto ferret that is unique to him (her)?  Is there something
>comparable in this ferret to all the other ferrets that have mauled infants
>that may be discovered by a finely detailed examination of the Toronto
>Terrifier before he is killed, or for that matter, even after he is killed.
 
You assume again that the reason for the incident in Toronto is to be found
physically within the ferret.  That is as logical as trying to determine
what the picture on a puzzle will look like by examining only one puzzle
piece.  You deliberately choose to ignore the common factor between the
Toronto incident and other infant/ferret bite incidents.  Look there and you
will find the answers you claim you are seeking.  That is if you really are
interested in discovering the reasons behind infant/ferret bite incidents.
 
>Thus I return to my point made in the original post, unless questions such
>as I have proposed above are asked and fully answered, there is no
>knowledge to pass on to other ferret owners or the general public as to
>how best protect infants from continued ferret attacks.  How can ferret
>owners who are ignorant, and I'm afraid we are all ignorant in this field
>of ferret behavior, educate the public?  Simple.  We can't.  We are as
>dumb as doorknobs, wouldn't you agree?
 
No, I would not agree.  I am surprised that someone who claims to run the
Ferret Research Institute and have many years of experience with ferrets
can also claim ignorance of ferret behavior.  Ferret behavior is
understandable and even predictable.  Ferrets bite for a number of reasons:
 
-- Ferrets bite in play and need to learn human/ferret social skills to
learn how not to harm the less bite resistant human skin.  Even a well
socialized ferret who has mastered the skill of play biting their adult
human companions is in strange new territory when confronted by a human
infant.  The old rules just don't apply since an infant's skin is more
prone to injury.  This is predictable ferret behavior and can be prevented
by not allowing infant/ferret interaction.
 
-- Ferrets bite out of fear and/or anger.  Infants lack coordinated motor
skills and can easily frighten or injure a curious ferret who is allowed
into contact with the infant (again, either through neglect or lack of
common sense).  The natural ferret behavioral response is to bite at the
source of injury.  This, too, is predictable ferret behavior and can be
prevented.
 
-- Ferrets bite to establish and maintain social dominance.  An infant is a
new member of the established household.  Ferrets do not know that a human
infant is automatically higher on the established social dominance scale of
the household.  This is normal and predictable ferret behavior, and again,
can be prevented.
 
-- Ferrets tend to be more prone to biting when ill or injured.  This is
predictable ferret behavior.  They have so few other methods for
communicating when they are unwell.  Ferret communication -- like most
animal communications -- is complex, and involves, vocalizations, body
language, and even biting.
 
The knowledge on how to prevent infant/ferret/pet bite incidents is
available, and has been available for generations.  My great-grandmother
knew it, and her great-grandmother knew it.  It is rooted in common sense --
do not permit infant/ferret/pet interaction without close, responsible
adult human supervision.  There is no mystery, no deep feral instinct, no
unknown ferret behavioral syndrome.  There is just good, old-fashioned
common sense, or a lack thereof.  The real problem is that so many people
may be just don't use common sense.  They may be too busy, may assume that
the pet has never bitten before, or just plain don't think something will
happen to them.  Accidents and incidents happen, and many of them are
preventable if common sense is employed ahead of time.
 
>Edward Lipinski, who's been there and done that!  Seventy-two inches of
>intestine in the ferret that was necropsied here in my vet's lab.  And
>you know what?  Not one bit of food in the stomach or intestine - only 20
>millimeters of feces just inside the anus.  Does this suggest that this
>ferret that inflicted 47 lacerations of a premature infant's scalp was
>starving?  You tell me.
 
As I said before, the situation as you described was less than credible,
ferrets are not permitted in the Neonatal ward where premature infants are
kept and hospitals do not routinely release premature babies to a home
environment.  But, for argument's sake, if the stomach and intestine
indicated the ferret was suffering from starvation, then once again the one
factor which you continue to ignore comes into play -- human neglect.  The
humans in that household created the conditions which directly led to the
alleged incident.  The causation was external to the ferret and not
internal -- namely, the humans did not feed the ferret.
 
FSG
[Posted in FML issue 2741]