Unless things have changed since they first entered the pet market there
have been worse situations reported here in the past involving Triple F
than Marshall Farms.  I hope that has changed and it's entirely possible
that it has since there have been no recent reports; it's not like there's
been any hot news lately.  Whether they are almost as good as MF, as good
as them, or better now I honestly do not know.  Path Valley has always been
clean and responsible for a large breeder, having kits which are loving
but which sometimes have a very chewy time while teething.  (Need those
Cheweasels!)  Steve and I prefer them to MF but have both and love all,
though the RESPONSIBLE small breeders give way better attention than any
large one possibly could, just from time constraints.  The irresponsible
small breeders have been the worst we've learned about, combined with some
kits from an importer who was getting them from a foreign fur farm but the
ASPCA and AHS have gone after that importer for multiple violations and I
haven't heard boo about them in around a year now.  In the early years in
the U.S. there were a number of cases of fur fitch being sold as if they'd
been bred for pet temperment and the reports on those were that they were
harder to train and more likely to grab deeply and hold on (comparable to
what we encountered back then) but haven't read a firm report of that
happening in any large scale for a while.
 
(I am NOT one of the industrious people who do rescue and breeder standards
work; have more on my plate than I can deal with as it is.  I'm a FAN of
the people who actually do this kind of work so I follow the reports for
the obvious reason that these are wonderful, marvelous people doing great
work to make places operate at reasonable standards and to get special care
for the suffering animals which were in terrible conditions.  That said,
there are also some few, rare, but VERY VERBAL noise makers out there who
will harp on one location or another without having hard data or current
data (though they dress up what they have) to back them up simply because
they get stuck in rut and once something gets personal with them they
exaggerate things all out of proportion from a defensive stance.  They
aren't like the REAL rescuers who are actual heros but tend to be modest
about their work, reporting the facts and then getting on with what needs
to be done -- possibly because those folks have more than enough work to do
without spending it all talking and writing and threatening, oh my.)
 
Size is more a matter of how they have been fed, as is prolapse.  Some
distributors and petstores do not use transition foods or they underfeed,
or they don't make sure that the less aggressive kits also get food.  The
way to age accurately while they are kits is by tooth eruption.  If you
have tooth eruption ages which are too low I know someone within MF who
fights their shipping dept.  when this happens and the incidence rate has
been way down since he's been quietly helping this way.  (Yay!) He needs
something firmly reliable like a tooth ageing from a vet to be effective,
though, and then he always follows through.  Some people there aren't good
but there are others who really do care about the critters, like anywhere
large.  That person has also been helping with some adoption programs so
that when they have a kit with problems (like our Scooter who was actually
a freebie from Path Valley in a similar program -- his mom ate off a large
part of one hand when he was born because she was a novice and didn't know
how to groom him safely), and another for retired breeders.  There are good
people and bad everywhere.
 
When there have been surveys of whether the MF ferrets are more prone to
adrenal disease one survey by STAR Ferrets of ferrets in shelters showed
an higher rate, but NO surveys of at-home ferrets showed higher rates for
MFs, nor have there been any others showing any higher rates of any other
illnesses.  Why did the one STAR Ferrets survey look different?  It may
have just been a mathematical glitch with the reporting being uneven enough
to throw it off, or it may really be that MFs in shelter settings are more
prone to adrenal disease.  If the latter is true then the question becomes:
Since we know from multiple home surveys that the MFs in homes do not
appear to have higher rates pure genetics are out as a cause.  Might it be
genetics mixed with some other factor?  That is possible.  It is also
possible that genetic is not playing a factor.  Ferrets which are more
likely to be sold from petstores are also more likely to be owned by people
who do not know what they are doing.  Ferrets which are bought on impulse
are more likely to be mistreated or simply raised in a way which is not
as healthy.  Ferrets which are in shelters are in environments where the
probability of being exposed to viruses/bacteria/parasites borne by other
ferrets is higher, and since they were turned in the chances are higher
that they had stressful and possibly less healthy lives before the shelter,
often with too little exercise and possibly with too little love, maybe
with abuse.  If the shelter is a too busy one for the number of volunteers
they may not have enough exercise or care in the facility, as well.
 
It's still unknown how the numbers mesh for early neuter vs. late vs. non
from what I have seen, but I heard second-hand that some have wanted to
work on this and hope they got the funding to do basic numbers as at least
part of their project.  Don't know if they even got off the ground since I
haven't heard a peep in a while.
 
[Posted in 2 parts and combined into one here. BIG]
 
It would be interesting to see if the MF shelter numbers for adrenal rates
would hold up now when adjusted for the proportions of each, and if now
that there are other large breeders whose ferrets are as likely to suffer a
hard early life, the numbers shift so that those places also have increased
rates.  I have heard that MF has brought in sperm from other strains to
widen their breeding lines but did NOT check on this so do not know if it's
true, if it is and if genetics did play a part then that alone could reduce
the risk IF it was a true risk to begin with.  If the other breeders
selling to pet shops have rates like those that were found (taking into
account that these are NOT scientific surveys and therefore more prone to
perturbations) then it might be that the answers are more likely to be
found in other things which MIGHT contribute to the development of adrenal
disease: disease exposure, stress, diet, too much light exposure, etc.
 
There has been exactly squat showing actual numerical worse rates of
anything else among MFs from what I've seen, and I'm an information junkie
who has been on the ferret scene for at least 16 years.  There have been
people who say they "think" there are worse rates, but nothing at all has
backed that up.  They may be wrong or they may right, or they may be partly
right, or even if they do see worse rates those might reflect background
rather than breeding so these things have to be teased out and better
understood.  Sometime the easy answer is so totally wrong that it leads
folks away from the alternative which will pan out in careful studies.
 
Would we be inclined to be extra concerned about an MF?  No.  Are they as
loving as those form other places?  Yep.  Would we like Marshall Farms to
make more changes in their operation which benefit ferrets?  Yes, they
still have a long way to go but at least they are trying in response to
polite nudging.  For Steve and I those are the bottom lines.
 
Sukie
[Posted in FML issue 2682]