I just have to rant on this one! That instructor really pushes my buttons! Rachel said: >She then takes the gentle "yes-dear-but-I-know-what >I'm-talking-about-and-you-do-not".... Ahhh! Academic condescending censorship! When I get a instructor like that, I make a POINT out of challenging them with questions until I embarrass them. There is no worse academic crime than censoring the exchange of ideas simply because they are new or do not fit in with an instructor's personal paradigm. Rachel added: >even if it were only a period of three months, it would wreak havoc on >black-footed ferret populations. What a maroon! (Not you, Rachel!) I would have asked, "WHAT black-footed ferret populations?" There are NO known natural black-footed ferret populations, and only a few introductions tentatively hanging on by their scientific threads. You can be sure without a doubt that those few and protected introduced BFF populations are carefully isolated and observed and a "feral ferret" would never be allowed to impact them. This is the type of argument that illustrates the person is talking without thinking. It is like saying, "It is only a hypothesis," as if being "an idea under testing" makes it wrong or somehow unreliable. I only hope the hypothesis of gravity being a function of mass holds up -- my God! We could spin of into space! After all, it is only a hypothesis! In science, EVERYTHING is "only a hypothesis," and negative evidence, including "could haves," is not proof. Can you imagine being charged with negative evidence in a court of law? "Members of the jury, you must convict this person of murder because they MIGHT have done it, even though there is NO physical evidence they did--I just SUSPECT they could." COULD in no way means WILL, and the burden of proof is on the instructor to show ferrets CAN go feral and impact BFF populations. But that is not the worst part.... This statement clearly shows the person has no idea of what they are talking about. First of all, California forbids ferrets, NOT Wyoming, Arizona, the Dakotas, Idaho, Montana, Colorado, parts of Canada, etc.--the areas currently used and planned for use to reintroduce the black-footed ferret. There were no populations of black-footed ferrets in California, the current ecology cannot support BFF populations, and they will never be released there. Strangely, in the areas where ferrets are legal, THERE ARE NO FERAL FERRET POPULATIONS despite the niche opened by the eradication of the BFF. Think about the brilliance of this instructor's argument: domesticated ferrets should remain illegal in California because they could impact the black-footed ferret population, even though there were never any BFFs in CaCaLand, they will never be released there, ferrets have never formed feral populations in the USA, and ferrets are legal in areas were BFFs ARE being released and are NOT a problem. This person is a double maroon! You should ask her about her opinions on established feral dog and cat populations in the USA. Or maybe about introduced sports fish, feral pigs, pheasants, quail and other exotic wildlife "regulated" and "conserved" (for sale of hunting & fishing permits) by fish and game departments across the USA. A triple maroon!! They must live where there is a lot on snow, because they have their head in an ice hole. Rachel said; >can anyone point me towards information on the black-footed ferret, >habitat destruction, competitors, etc.? I used to help with this all the time, but it didn't take long to realize I was researching and outlining student papers. Like clockwork, at the start of each new semester I get a rash of requests asking for information on ferrets and I have to ignore them. The problem is that you are a student taking a class, so I can't directly give you references because of academic ethics. You see, it is one thing for someone to ask me to read a paper or argument--already researched and written (even if just preliminary)--and ask I comment on it, and another thing altogether to give out the references needed to write a paper when that is something the student should be learning do on their own. References make the paper, and if I gave the references, that would make me a contributing author--few instructors would accept that; I know I wouldn't -- I'd fail the paper. However, I have no problem pointing you in the right direction and you can use science search engines such as Biological Abstracts to find the references on your own. I would look up a modern edited volume on world mustelid conservation and read what they have to say regarding mink v. polecat competition (you'll probably have to borrow the book using interlibrary loan), find a book on invading species and read a bit on the "rule of 10", and find a kingly book that discusses mustelid natural history (essentially the same as the ferret) and compare those habitats to suitable California environments, THEN look at the competing species you might find in CaCaLand and compare it to what you already learned from reading the mustelid conservation book. One other hint might be to do a search for papers (or web sites) by Johnny Birks, Thierry Lode, P. I. Danilov, Jedrzejewska & Jedrzejewski, V. Sidorovich, and Tamar Dayan (and look at the references therein). Maybe older issues of the FML might be a suitable source; you never know who might have already argued these issues.... If you get something together and ask me to review it, I would drop EVERYTHING to give you a hand. But ethically, I cannot provide a student with references they should be learning to find on their own. Learning to find references is part of a student's academic growth, and I cannot ignore that. Bob C [Posted in FML issue 4421]