Audubon Society Chided by NPR/Captive Breeding of Condors/Ferret Fac
Ferretnews
This was heard by one of our supporters and may provide some background on
the Audubon Society. Seems as if even regarding their "specialty" they
don't get it right!
Jeanne:
Thanks for the update on AB 363 and its potential move to the floor by
June
5. Here's an interesting bit on the Audubon Society's past performance
concerning California's "biodiversity" I heard this morning on NPR. You
are welcome to post this on AOL for me. Thanks! == MAX ==
==========================================================================
As you consider how to act as AB 363 approaches its floor vote in a few
weeks, here's some information on the Audubon Society--one of several
groups OPPOSED to ferrets in California--and its past efforts on behalf of
California's "fragile ecosystem" and "biodiversity."
A National Public Radio show called "Living On Earth" presented a piece on
Saturday, May 17, 1997, recounting how the Audubon Society battled the
federal government over its plan to capture and remove the last of the
giant California condors living in the San Joaquin Valley to a captive
breeding program.
The condor population, which once boasted huge numbers as it roamed across
the ENTIRE North American continent, had been reduced to a mere 14 birds.
The principal reasons: hunters, power lines, and agricultural poisons
which had been ingested by the small animals upon which the condor feeds.
<<Notice all the connections to HUMANS>>
The federal government's plan called for the safe capture of all remaining
condors and the imposition of a captive breeding program to increase their
numbers and permit their reintroduction into the wild. The Audubon
Society
OPPOSED this plan based on their opinion that it would be impossible for
the condors to be successfully released from captivity.
Well, nearly twenty years later, the captive breeding giant California
condor population is reproducing at SIX TIMES the rate which had been seen
in the wild, and more than 130 have been released from captivity and are
living and reproducing successfully in the wild.
Had the Audubon Society prevailed in its opposition, it is all but certain
that the giant California condor would have been reduced to a watercolor
print in one of John J.'s books. Whatever "science" the Audubon society
relied upon to form its opposition was obviously unsound. Members of the
California Assembly should be CHALLENGED to remember this FACT as they
weigh their vote on AB 363. As the old proverb reminds us: "a leopard
cannot change its spots."
The Audubon Society's OPPOSITION to the legalization of domestic ferrets
in
California on the basis that escaped domestic ferrets will establish
themselves in feral, breeding populations is contrary to all known
research
and actual observations of ferrets in North America which has demonstrated
that DOMESTIC FERRETS CANNOT SURVIVE IN THE WILD.
If you choose to offer your opinion in support of AB 363, please include
this information for your elected representative. He or she deserves to
have the best possible information at hand when deciding the fate of our
beloved fuzzies.
Max H. Herr
(a current non-owner with a "vested interest")
Kevin Quosig
In article <337E58...@ix.netcom.com>, chri...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> Ferretnews wrote:
> >
> > The Audubon Society's OPPOSITION to the legalization of domestic ferrets
> > in
> > California on the basis that escaped domestic ferrets will establish
> > themselves in feral, breeding populations is contrary to all known
> > research
> > and actual observations of ferrets in North America which has demonstrated
> > that DOMESTIC FERRETS CANNOT SURVIVE IN THE WILD.
> Hi!
>
> This is slightly untrue as there are feral colonies in a couple places
> throughout the world. New Zealand TRIED to create a colony of feral
> ferrets (and other predators) to try to curb their exploding rabit
> problem. With a lot of work and several years of funding, they've
> established some feral colonies. Note: they also released actual
> european (I think) polecats which are able to breed with the
> domestic ferret and produce a hybrid...so its unlikely that these
> animals are true domesticated ferrets.
New Zealand and Australia's attempts bombed when the ferrets got killed by
predators as well as the very animals they were sent to prey on! Cases of
"feral domestic ferrets" have thus far proven to actually be European
"Fitch" Polecats, which look a great deal like a dark sable domestic
ferret at first glance (great experience or an autopsy are require to
actually make an accurate assessment).
Remember, California Fish & Game can't even tell the difference between
the native Longtail Weasel and a domestic ferret, so any identifications
by *them* are absolutely suspect.
There is, to the best of the ferret groups's knowledge, NO (as in
absolutely none) feral populations of domestic ferrets, commonly known as
Mustela putorius furo.
There are documented cases of polecats and fitch/ferret mixes surviving in
the wild in Europe, specifically England, but those are in geographically
isolated places, like islands, where "native species descimation" is not
really an issue. I talked to a researcher in England and had him send me
some info, but any "proof" of "domestic" ferrets "going feral" is sketchy
and unproven at best (mostly because that is not what he was actually
focusing on, he was focusing on the possibility of hybird ferret/polecats
in the wild because of the practice of "ferreting").
> Also, an estimated 500,000 ferrets are already in California and have
> yet to establish a colony (just like 48 states that DO allow ferrets
> as pets). It becomes virtually impossible for ferrets to establish
> a colony when you consider that ferrets have been domesticated to the
> point of dependance on humans for care and feeding, all ferrets sold
> in CA are to be sold neutered (per the bill)...so if a ferret
> actually DID manage to eek out a living there would be little chance
> for offspring, IF a ferret did find a prey species to predate upon then
> whatever predator is/was predating on said prey species would have to
> find a new prey species (consider that there are already members of the
> weasel family in California that are proven to outcompete M. furo), etc,
> etc, etc,...
The other inherinet difficulty is that jills die if not mated within 2-4
weeks from Aplast anemia (sp?)....further complicating matters (what are
the chances that a jill and a hob meet and mate within that 2-4 week
window when most likely neither of them know how to hunt prey or evade
*being* prey to feral cats or other predators?).
Mark Richardson
In article <Kevin-19059...@ids.vip.best.com>, Kevin Quosig
<Ke...@Quosig.com> writes
(previous posting reference snipped)
>The other inherinet difficulty is that jills die if not mated within 2-4
>weeks from Aplast anemia (sp?)....further complicating matters (what are
>the chances that a jill and a hob meet and mate within that 2-4 week
>window when most likely neither of them know how to hunt prey or evade
>*being* prey to feral cats or other predators?).
It is not strictly true that an unmated jill will die within this time
frame. What happens is that if the jill remains 'on heat' for an
extended period the ferret is weakened through anemia and is more likely
to contract disease. It is not unheard of for a jill to pass through
the mating season unmated.
For the record however I think it unlikely that a feral ferret colony
would survive for the simple reason that the ferret just isn't a
terribly good killer. The ferret has for generations been breed to
flush game (rabbits, rats etc), a ferret able to make it's own kills
under ground was not likely to be bred from.
--
Mark Richardson
Engineering Manager
Newport Technology Limited
441900 602001
Kevin Quosig
In article <WhcoQAAT...@newptech.demon.co.uk>, Mark Richardson
<ma...@newptech.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <Kevin-19059...@ids.vip.best.com>, Kevin Quosig
> <Ke...@Quosig.com> writes
> (previous posting reference snipped)
> >The other inherinet difficulty is that jills die if not mated within 2-4
> >weeks from Aplast anemia (sp?)....further complicating matters (what are
> >the chances that a jill and a hob meet and mate within that 2-4 week
> >window when most likely neither of them know how to hunt prey or evade
> >*being* prey to feral cats or other predators?).
>
> It is not strictly true that an unmated jill will die within this time
> frame. What happens is that if the jill remains 'on heat' for an
> extended period the ferret is weakened through anemia and is more likely
> to contract disease. It is not unheard of for a jill to pass through
> the mating season unmated.
Well, as for that technicality (they are weakened not by disease, but by
the elevated hormone levels, nutrient leaching, etc.), since very few
ferrets in this state would be likely to live, they would then be too weak
to hunt or live through gestation. So that technicality is a moot point
anyway...they are just as dead, technically...
;)
Mark Richardson
In article <Kevin-21059...@ids.vip.best.com>, Kevin Quosig
<Ke...@Quosig.com> writes
(snip my comments about unmated jills)
>
>Well, as for that technicality (they are weakened not by disease, but by
>the elevated hormone levels, nutrient leaching, etc.), since very few
>ferrets in this state would be likely to live, they would then be too weak
>to hunt or live through gestation. So that technicality is a moot point
>anyway...they are just as dead, technically...
You're missing the point Kevin, in an debate such as this you need to be
sure that you're getting the facts right. Sound arguments need to be
put forward for legalisation, if you put forward a flawed argument
saying that unmated jills will die within a month then you will be shot
down and any other points you make will be viewed with as potentially
flawed. Not good for the debate as a whole, technically.
Roger McMillian
> >Well, as for that technicality (they are weakened not by disease, but by
> >the elevated hormone levels, nutrient leaching, etc.), since very few
> >ferrets in this state would be likely to live, they would then be too weak
> >to hunt or live through gestation. So that technicality is a moot point
> >anyway...they are just as dead, technically...
>
> You're missing the point Kevin, in an debate such as this you need to be
> sure that you're getting the facts right. Sound arguments need to be
> put forward for legalisation, if you put forward a flawed argument
> saying that unmated jills will die within a month then you will be shot
> down and any other points you make will be viewed with as potentially
> flawed. Not good for the debate as a whole, technically.
>
It would be better to say that "a high percentage" of unmated jills will
die.
The percentage of unaltered females that survive aplastic anemia
(without veterinary intervention) is very low. Most ferret-wise vets
I've talked to set the death rate as high as 97-99%.
Mark Richardson
In article <33845B...@ripco.com>, Roger McMillian <fer...@ripco.com>
writes
>
>It would be better to say that "a high percentage" of unmated jills will
>die.
>The percentage of unaltered females that survive aplastic anemia
>(without veterinary intervention) is very low. Most ferret-wise vets
>I've talked to set the death rate as high as 97-99%.
>
unmated jills will die, but do your vets say that an unmated jill is
necessarily bound to develop aplastic anemia? I think that we're agreed
that a prolonged state of oestrus is weakening for the ferret, but
97-99% mortality seems rather high.
The only reason I question this is that some years ago I had two jills
which were not mated all season (I was not aware of the dangers at that
time) and both survived and lived quite happily, without any
intervention.
I suspect the mortality rate is dependant on the physical condition of
the jill before coming in season.
(Incidentally this will be my last post on the subject as I am moving
firms and don't have email at the new place - good luck to all the
Californian ferret folk!)