Hello.
 
Two days ago i read Pat Baby's posting; it made me sad, but i believed
that, even if Debbie Scott is not in the list any longer, there would be
other people to respond to this subject. No one did, so here is what i
have to say:
 
First, i want to note that i do not want to "attack" anyone.  It may be
that my poor English, and the fact that i am going to talk about some
real bad thing will upset some readers, although i expect everybody who
has much contact with animals (especially the biting and scratching ones)
to know that getting angry is the wrong way.  I considered to send a
private mail, but because i have the hope that my contribution could make
some people reading it start to think, i decided to do it this way.
 
Question: Why do humans breed animals?
Answer: Because we are egoistic.  There is no other reason - we want
chickens to produce more eggs, we want cows to produce more milk and pigs
to "produce" more meat.  In today's world, there is an additional target:
we just want pets to be as we want them to be.  We want them to have
unusual colours or patterns, shapes and behaviour.  I don't want to curse
breeding, but there are borders that should not have been crossed, things
that should not have happened.  Human ambition created terrible distress
for millions of animals: dogs who cannot walk without pain; rats whose
fate is to die of cancer; and many, many other species suffering similar
or worse problems caused by us.
 
For most of these problems, human impatience is the reason: Simplified, a
breeder looks for the animals (or plants) that suit his ideal as good as
possible, puts them together and restarts this procedure with their
offspring.  Things get worse if he ignores other aspects of the parent
animals - defects like deafness or low vitality are passed on in the same
way as the wanted characteristics; incest even deteriorates these defects
(related individuals often share the same wanted characteristics).
 
I don't think that we need the diversity that we are having or getting -
not for every price.  I stated above that the aim of this message is not
to attack - particularly, i do not make reproaches to animals (it wouldn't
make sense either: i don't believe in animals reading e-mail).  My
criticism goes to the humans - they are responsible for what they do.
 
I believe that Debbie, too, had a comparable intention and was
simply misunderstood.  Maybe this difference is based on different
interpretations, maybe it is based on distinct attitudes - i do not think
that some healthy and happy animals are a justification for a hundred
others suffering; i do not believe that the worth of an animal depends
on the colour or length of its fur, or that it can be measured at all
(neither with money, nor with other things).
 
Greetings to all readers (and regrets to all ferrets getting annoyed
because their humans do strange things with strange machines instead of
playing with you :-)
 
TH from Germany
[Posted in FML issue 3332]