>She has taken in two little girls that, she says, look different from any
>ferret she has ever seen.  She says they have ears that are more pointed
>than round, and wonders if they could be part "wild" or fitch, as she has
>been told.  We know that "wild" ferrets do not really exist in the US, but
>says these two look different enough from other ferrets she has seen ...
 
A: Sure. My best idea is to never dance nekid with the ferrets. Ever.
 
I wouldn't take a chance to guess the genetic heritage of a ferret by the
shape of it's ears unless I first found some high-powered papers showing a
relationship.  I might be brash, often a wise ass, and frequently a bore,
but I've never been accused of being foolish.  At least not to my face.
Well, not in the few days, anyway.
 
One of my monsters has slightly-pointed Vulcan ears.  Chrys was almost
"Spock" because of them, and I know his heritage lacks much of a wild side.
I've seen a few pointy-eared ferrets in my travels; never very many.  Too
tell the truth, I've not seen *any* polecats with pointed ears, and doubt if
many exist.  In the last year, I've inspected every black-footed ferret,
polecat and (sad to say) ferret pelt and skeleton I could find, from Los
Angeles to the Smithsonian, and not one had pointed ears that I can
remember.
 
My guess is the ears are just a family trait and probably not related to
their particular heritage.
 
(The following is not a flame, nor is it directed to the people having these
supposed hybrids.  It is an opinion directed at any *FUTURE* ideas of
hybridization of polecats and ferrets.)
 
As for the "wild" blood in ferrets, I really don't know why anyone in the
USA (where ferret hunting is illegal almost everywhere) would even want a
ferret that was part polecat.  Ferrets are domesticated, polecats are not,
and those differences are what allow ferrets to become good pets.
Hybridization tends to dilute those traits, resulting in a ferret that could
have wild behaviors; not desirable in any pet unless you *love* skin grafts.
Domestication of the ferret has been so successful that many hunters have
back-bred ferrets with polecats to help increase their aggressiveness and
hunting instincts.  They do not have a primary purpose of cuddling with the
little beasts, so some nasty behavior is accepted in the hopes of more
rabbit for the dinner plate.  When I bring a ferret up to my nose, I expect
the nose to stay where is is, and not try and find it in the poopie several
hours later.
 
All mustelids are inherently tameable.  I've read accounts centuries old
that speak of pet otters, weasels, fishers, skunks, etc., and I'm sure
polecats are similar, else they would have never been selected for
domestication in the first place.  But in each case (and I can tell you from
experience) the tameness is directed towards a particular person or people,
but rarely to strangers.  Why introduce possible negative traits into an
animal that already has a nasty (and undeserved) reputation?  You are not
going to gain any benefits in health, robustness, fur, or coloration that
you wouldn't have gained simply from introducing genes from already
established domesticated lines.
 
Lets work on cleaning up our existing problems without introducing new ones.
Besides, if you think ferrets are sometimes destructive to property, try an
animal that's twice as smart and three times stronger.  As for me, the only
wild animal I'll allow in my house has to be wearing red and doesn't mind
listening to Metalica played loud enough to make your ears bleed.
Hummmmm...... pointy ears would be nice.
 
Bob C and the 20 Round-eared Carpet Monkeys
[Posted in FML issue 2160]