Okay, now I am working from memory as one of the people who was strongly involved in the USDA work from beginning through the end and some conversations after that, so if I make memory errors about any specifics then forgive me, but notice the gist of what I write. The thing that ultimately killed the effort with the USDA when we were all working to have a minimum age of eight weeks for ferret kit shipping was the wording of the Animal Welfare Act. Instead of generalizing, it covers a few specific animals in extra good ways, animals like dogs. Every UNnamed animal, including ferrets, has lesser protections only according to that legislation. The USDA actually got to the point of desiring improvements but were THEN advised by legal council that the only way to get that would be to have Congress do a rewrite of the Act, either to include ferrets and some other species, or to allow modifications without legislation being needed in the future. Ultimately, that is needed, and not only for ferrets. So, it has to be done through Congress because the hands of the USDA are tied by how the legislation is written. Now, I do NOT know WHICH OTHER improvements in what the USDA can or can not do would require legislation, so maybe being better able to affect Farms would not have to go through something so major. I agree that the chances are the farm will either break down and make improvements or will sell stock. Hopefully, that will not be to the fitch fur industry. Re your statements on research. Please, do not generalize, especially with worst assumptions. What researchers require for animals who are obtained varies greatly among the researchers and type of research. Decades ago I worked for an anatomy department with a range of primates. The comfort, happiness, physical health, and mental health of the animals were paramount in the minds of the professors with whom I worked. The conditions were wonderful, even though with potentially dangerous animals having such large and good places for them does increase the risks of injury for the people who work with the animals. Luckily, at that time the university employed a vet who agreed with the priority of placing the animals first, so, yes, we humans all had a range of injuries on and off, but the animals thrived. In a later decade when the university hired a vet who insisted on strain cages the professors I worked with found new homes for the animals rather than treat any like that and most of the relocations worked well. So, people must be careful about generalizing about research because some people and some types of research are not in any way negligent or painful. The same locomotion work that was done on the primates was actually done on the staff where I worked, and the animals had to have a long period btwn bouts of anesthesia even though that a few times messed up the travel schedules of people very badly. There are people who care. If only all did. One of the chimps who I raised was later destroyed by someone elsewhere who broke with the contract he had signed when getting Maynard, violating conditions and what was not allowed to be done with Maynard. That killed my sweetie. I could understand taking cautions. Maynard was a grown chimp who did not know them and he could have easily killed a person and certainly sometimes accidentally injured us, including jumping down on me in a way that gave me a concussion and temporary double vision during finals week but what they did was not cautions for safety and he died. [Posted in FML 7188]