FERRET-SEARCH Archives

Searchable FML archives

FERRET-SEARCH@LISTSERV.FERRETMAILINGLIST.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Bob Church <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 8 Feb 1997 02:58:29 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (73 lines)
No, I'm not staying up all night figuring out ways to bore you.  I've
actually been writing these in one of the most boring classes I've ever had
the pleasure to proctor and uploading them later.  I'm bored, so I thought I
might share the wealth.
 
It was kind of weird sending the "what species is the ferret?" post the
other day, then getting my copy of the _Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature_
53(4)(1996).  I usually get it somewhat late.  On pages 286-289 is a paper
titled "Comments on the proposed conservation of usage of 15 mammal specific
names based on wild species which are antedated by or contemporary with
those based on domestic animals." The paper is actually four comments from
Old World zoologists in favor of the resolution (which, as I understand it,
would effectively return the binomial _Mustela furo_ to the ferret due to
its domesticated status).
 
Some excerpts:
 
Elizabeth A. Voigt (South Africa): "Unless there is a uniform usage of
specific names so as to identify domestic forms there will be considerable
confusion in the literature with regard to domestic animals...."
 
A. V. Abramov (Russia): "I agree with the proposal....to conserve the usage
of separate specific names for wild and domestic mammals."
 
Henry Gee (Great Britain): "[If you subsumed a domestic form within a
non-domesticated form].....but this would --I think wrongly-- ignore the
well-known differences bewteen wild and domestic forms."
 
Alan W. Gentry (Great Britain): "The inconsistency in the nomenclature of
species from which domesticated forms have been derived has led to ambiguity
in academic studies and administrative difficulties in wildlife legislation
and customs documentation.  It is deeply undesirable to allow a situation to
continue in which workers are confused by the use of names.  ....Success of
this application will also produce, as far as any outside change can, better
conditions in which nomenclature for domestic animals can be systematized."
 
The nomenclature of the ferret is basically the heart of the problem, not
just in California regarding ownership, but also the basic problems with
rabies testing, local anti-ferret laws, etc.  Because the domesticated form
has the same name (binominal) as the wild form, it is easy to misunderstand
and confuse the two as one.  This is precisely (well, excluding politics and
ego) what is happening in California.  Which is why it is so important to be
precise when we discuss the ferret, using "domesticated" rather than
"domestic," and "_Mustela furo_" instead of "Mustela putorius furo_."
Domesticated gives the impression of a completed process, something that is
finished or done, while domestic can be interpreted as an ongoing process,
or even something that lives locally.  For example, I could accurately say
"The black-footed ferret is the only domestic ferret in the United States,
but _Mustela furo_ is the only domesticated ferret." Confusing?  Just
remember domestic refers to something relating to home, and domesticated
refers to something changed to exist within the home.  In other words, all
domesticated animals are domestic, but very few domestic animals are
domesticated.
 
The binominal _Mustela furo_ may be somewhat technically inaccurate, but its
use has precedence, and helps to illustrate the difference between the wild
and domesticated forms.  Besides, isn't it fun to occasionally thumb your
nose at the establishment?  Didn't Ma Bell once say, "Let your fingers do
the talking?"
 
I was recently privately flamed about the implication that the CaCa Fish and
Gestapo should be included among the Suidae.  I should have explained the
Suidae includes wild and domestic pigs.  The objection wasn't actually that
I didn't explain what Suidae meant, but was that I included the Fish and
Gestapo within an honorable and intelligent group of mammals.  I don't want
to ham it up nor boar you with the details--lets just say I was taken to
tusk over the remark as I rooted around for excuses--but I hearby promise to
refrain from going hog-wild grunting my slanderous offerings in order to
prevent bacon under future flames.
 
Mo' Bob and 18 Mo' Poopmeisters (In Memory of Gus)
[Posted in FML issue 1839]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2