Lisa, then Mel wrote:
>>I think disqualification is a little harsh for genetic malformations and
>>genetic problems - the owners may be unaware (first time show folks) and
>>the standards for judging should be in place for not rewarding bad
>>ribcages, crooked/malformed noses and jaws, etc.
 
>I don't think there's anything harsh about listing standards of health
>for show ferrets.  If the owners are unaware that their ferret doesn't
>conform, or has a serious fault, then bringing them to the ring will tell
>them as such.  There's no need to be nice about it.
 
Sukie responded:
>I think that when there are possible disqualifications if there is a vet
>present, then the vet should be asked for her/his opinion by the judges,
>then the people should kindly be told why the ferrets are being
>disqualified so that they can improve care and/or cull some breeding lines.
 
The problem that I see with disqualification is this: the conformation
standards already set for the ring will prevent this ferret from placing.
I don't like the idea that a show judge can disqualify an entrant based on
a 'defect' - where do you draw the line?  Disqualify for a kinked or fused
tail?  Crooked nose - well, *how* crooked is too crooked?  Small ribcage
or light bone mass - this is a serious problem, but a good judge will see
it.  Small eyes or dissimilar sizes -- is this worthy of scratching a
ferret from a ring?  Who gets to choose what is and isn't grounds for
disqualification?  That worries me.
 
I have never disqualified a ferret - but I came close with two:
One had a flea infestation -- and I had the owner remove it from the ring;
and the second was a kit that had a bit of a tantrum while I was judging
her and she bit me four times (drawing blood on all 4 bites).  I didn't
disqualify - instead I docked points - effectively not rewarding either
person.  I think this is much more effective than arbitrarily removing a
ferret from a ring - and why judges should be available after the ring is
finished to answer questions from any of the exhibitors.
 
I believe that leaving the Waardenburg pattern specialty classes in place
is fine - but in the Championship rings, penalize those ferrets that meet
the pattern - but again - this involves having knowledgeable, trained
judges.  Roaning is not WS - but a stray white toe and knee patch are.  I
agree with Linda about that its time to revamp and revisit our standards
for colors and patterns - but out in the open, not in private -- and that
*all* have at least a say in what is and isn't 'best'.
 
Linda also wrote:
>ISSUE THREE: Is there a way to define colors that allows as much inclusion
>as possible without having to define special colors that may favor certain
>breeders?  Is warm or cool tinted undercoats a reason to score a ferret
>higher or lower?
 
This will be a sticky problem.  Especially black sable and sable, where
some color standards specifiy that they must be 'cool' undertones.  What
makes a sable with warm undertones more or less desirable than one with
cooler?  What really is a black sable - is it the black nose leather and
hood, or is the color of the underfur?  Is it both?  Is one more desirable
than the other?  Too many specialty colors create chaos and confusion when
entering specialty rings - thats why shows will often run certain rings
together - Siamese (point), sable, chocolate and black sable can be a
nightmare on show day - switching ferrets from one to the other and trying
not to hit the maximum number of entries per ring.
 
I am very willing to help revamp any shows standards - or give my 2c worth
as an owner, shelter and judge.
 
Lisa Leidig, Head Ferret
The Ferret Haven "By-the-Sea"
http: www.ferrethaven.org
Want to help The Ferret Haven By-the-Sea? Register at iGive.com
by cutting and pasting this link:
http://www.iGive.com/html/ssi.cfm?CID=1236&MID=854
[Posted in FML issue 3218]