>Once again, the hostile responses (not the reasonable disagreements) to
>Bob Church's shelter post say more about the respondents than about the
>original post.  Surely we can agree that there are some shelter operators
>that fit my above-mentioned description (and Bob Church's).  And if there
>are, how can it be wrong to broach a discussion on how to solve the
>problem?
 
I have been sitting on the sidelines and watching the shelter discussion
since shortly after it began, and hoping that once the emotions die off a
rational dialogue can develop.  I do have to say that I am not at all
surprised at the hostility with which Bob's original post was greeted.
While his post raised some very good points, it was badly worded.
 
What the hostile responses to Bob's post says about the respondents is only
that the respondents are human beings prone to all the human weaknesses
and strengths that make us such complex creatures.  Even the most self
confident of humans has feelings of insecurity and self doubts.  And an
overly generalized criticism of some unnamed shelters from someone who
enjoys such a high degree of respect from the ferret community can trigger
those normally dormant feelings of insecurity and fan them into angry
responses.  It is normal human behavior for humans to react angrily when
they feel (rightly or wrongly) that they have been accused of doing wrong.
One of the most important things I ever learned in my studies of human
psychology was passed along by a very wise professor -- "Perceptions are
more real than reality." The hostile reactions are a living proof of that
axiom.  Bob's post contained very general observations, and others
perceived his post as a criticism of their practices, resulting in normal
and even predictable reactions.
 
One of the points that has yet been raised yet, is about the use of the
word "shelter" to describe the function in which the various individuals
and groups are involved.  Over the years, as I have gotten to know more and
more shelter operators, I have come to realize that although they may all
call themselves ferret shelters, these different people see their functions
very differently.  I know some shelters who accept only ill, older, or
abused ferrets in order to provide them with a more loving environment, and
proper care.  I know other shelters who try to adopt out incoming ferrets
as quickly as possible.  I even know of a shelter that actively tries to
avoid actually taking ferrets in, preferring to match potential adoptees
with people looking to adopt out their ferrets.  Some shelters refuse to
pay a dime to the people looking to unload their unwanted ferrets, while
other shelters will ransom a ferret in order to give it protection.  Some
shelters are almost flamboyant, while others prefer to stay low key.  Who
is to say which method is right, and which is wrong?  The bottom line is
that the people who start and continue to run shelters all have the best
interests of the ferrets at heart -- as they see it (again, those pesky
perceptions coming into play).  Any discussions of shelter operations needs
to take into account the varied visions of how the shelter operators
themselves see their mission -- and not what we perceive their mission to
be.  I suspect that once that is done, we will just how vague the term
"shelter" actually is.  Perhaps, we need to add some new words to the
ferret community vocabulary to more accurately describe what the various
"shelters" actually do.
 
Scott and the Mustilid Mob
[Posted in FML issue 2519]