>From:    Edward Lipinski <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: How to take a closer look?
>Should we not want to try to understand this behavior?  Or rather shall we
>try to deny it by all sorts of arguments, such as, "it's not scientific,"
>"sampling number is too, too small," "it just wants a look see," "such
>irresponsible posting of ferret (attacks) is just fodder for the
>Californica Fin and Fur agency,."
 
We should try to understand the behavior.  But quite a few of us already
do.  Not very many people would state that it was a predatory behavior.
 
Disagreeing with you is not irresponsible.  Attacking someone who seems to
have a better graps of ferret behavior does seem more irresponsible.  Taking
a Luddite's approach to science is not helpful.  Abusing the language by
confusing a theory with a hypothesis is not helpful.  You proposed an
internally contradictory hypothesis that this ferret was trying to hunt a
baby human based on sound and sometimes smell.
 
First point that really makes all other moot.  Hunting instinct in ferrets
is not a sign of a lack of domestication.  Ferrets were domesticated
precisely to exploit that instinct.  Precisely and unarguably.  Ferrets
were kept to hunt vermin.  Same as cats.  Same as many dogs.  Coon dogs
still have a hunting instinct.  Our cats are constantly hunting mice in our
fields.  Despite this really ending the discussion lets continue.
 
You describe a single ferret that did not reach the source of the sound.
No ferret seems anxious to eat a diaper (unlike dogs) so we can safely
disregard that portion of your arguments.  Many of us have seen this
behavior in our ferrets regarding squeek toys.  In those cases most ferrets
would take these squeek toys and carefully bring them back to their "nests"
(convienent hidey hole).  This is a maternal behavior not a predatory
behavior.  The exact same behavior can be atteste to by most breeders.  If
you remove a kit from a jill and it cries out the mother will quite often
act the same way.
 
By the end of your post you seem to finally have accepted that it is a
maternal instinct.
 
>Oh, yes; that's already happened to Mr. Lipinski, for he's been forbidden
>to post on the other ferret list moderated by Christine Code: Reason ...
>not in conformance to the rules of etiquette
 
That is a completely different understanding than we have.  Since we are
currently running the ferret-forum for Christine while she is out of the
country, its pretty safe to say we DO understand what she really has said
regarding your posts.  Bill Gruber is far more lenient on flames than
Christine Code.  She for example would never have let you besmirch him on
her list.  We certainly would not have let you either.
 
Individual posts to that list were rude.  It was not a blanket statement
about your ability to post.
 
When you spend the money to run a mail list you get to make the rules.
Christine does pay for that list entirely out of her own pocket.
 
>No controversial subjects allowed.
 
Controversial subjects are allowed.  Posts that the list moderator disagrees
with are allowed.  Just as here.  Bill Gruber decides what is and is not
suitable for the list he now owns.  Christine Code decides for her list (or
one of her assistants while she is out of town and unable to run the list).
 
bill and diane killian
zen and the art of ferrets
http://www.zenferret.com/
mailto:[log in to unmask]
 
[Moderator's note: Speaking of which, Ed Lipinski's comment about the
Ferret-Forum which mentioned "Herrn Josef Goebbels" was brought to my
attention.  I apologize to the FML and to Christine for letting that one
through -- definitely wasn't appropriate.  BIG]
[Posted in FML issue 2263]