Freya Lorelei ([info]freyalorelei) wrote,
@ 2009-05-24 23:47:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Current mood: cheerful

Hamstercula.
I seem to have acquired another hamster.

Not the sapphire Winter White I was eyeballing a few days ago (although she is pretty). A female Campbell's bit one of Shade's co-workers hard enough to draw blood, and was deemed too vicious to be sellable. Since I am the unofficial Hamster Whisperer and can tame the meanest hamster, Shade called me to ask if I wanted her.

I expected to find a huge, fat bully; what I saw was a teeny baby girl who didn't so much as nip when I picked her up (although she did a few exploratory nibbles). She's a little nervous, but she didn't bite, wriggle, or try to jump out of my hand. And later, when I carried her around in a small modular console, she sat and ate contentedly, followed by some relaxed grooming (not the quick, hurried grooming animals do to calm themselves when stressed).

Because she was surrendered for drawing blood, I have decided to name her Carmilla. :D She even looks kind of like a little vampire, with red eyes and a mottled "cape."


(7 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]virginia_fell
2009-05-25 04:17 am UTC (link)
That's pretty impressive.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]freyalorelei
2009-05-25 07:25 am UTC (link)
*shrugs* People tend to forget that hamsters are undomesticated prey animals, and as such tend to be nervous fear-biters. This doesn't mean that they're inherently mean or make poor pets; it means that they need to be approached with all gentleness and caution, and handled on a regular basis to keep them tame.

I've also found that the fancier varieties of hamster (such as mottled Campbell's or long-haired Syrians) tend to have greater behavioural issues due to severe inbreeding. Nearly every long-haired Syrian I've ever owned has been intellectually compromised, and mottled Campbell's lean on the neurotic side. It's because after generations of being kept as laboratory animals, and having God knows what bred into them for research purposes, the majority of hamsters available, at least in the States, are genetically unsound, prone to tumours, diabetes, and neurological disorders such as "flipping" (where the animal compulsively performs backflips, all too common in dwarf hamsters).

...and I'll shut up before I get too terribly boring about my area of expertise (although I'm sure it's probably too late for that).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]virginia_fell
2009-05-25 02:42 pm UTC (link)
I don't find it boring at all. I do find it interesting that you seem to have a fondness for animals who've had all the vigor (and much of the brains) bred right out of them. Purebred dogs (particularly the little ones from what I've seen) and hamsters tend to have a ridiculous degree of genetic fuckery wrong with them.

You mentioned that every long-haired Syrian you've ever owned has been a little... touched. Why keep owning them, at that rate? I know that'd be a huge deterrent to me purchasing and getting attached to a pet from either category--knowing that once it hits six months old its legs will go bad or it'll get tumors or its nose will turn inside out (okay maybe not that last one) and I'll probably just have to have it put down.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]freyalorelei
2009-05-25 08:56 pm UTC (link)
I have a Pekingese, which as one of the oldest breeds of dog has remained essentially the same for nearly a thousand years, and I will continue to keep purebred dogs because I enjoy the predictability that comes with purebreds--I know more or less what I'm getting into. And yes, aside from sighthounds, I prefer small breeds for both economical and personal reasons--they are easier to feed, walk, and train. I also know that extensive research is required when looking into getting a purebred dog of any breed, research I did when I bought my dog from a reputable breeder with the intent to show him. Although I was unable to finish him as he grew into some minor faults, he did win several ribbons before retiring and still enjoys excellent health nine years later.

Since leaving my teen years most of my hamsters have been rescues, not purchased from stores. I have not owned a Syrian in at least five years because I prefer the dwarf species, which actually have a wider gene pool and are less genetically compromised.

I have kept hamsters since I was eleven years old and am aware of the genetic faults inherent to the various species primarily from extensive study, not personal experience. None of my hamsters have flipped or grown a tumour, and only one that I am aware of was diabetic. I did have one rescue that developed glaucoma shortly after I adopted him.

As a lifelong rodent fancier, I am well aware that they have a relatively short lifespan and have accustomed myself to dealing with the loss of my pets many, many times, but I nonetheless appreciate the time I am given.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]virginia_fell
2009-05-25 09:02 pm UTC (link)
I was just wondering why it was worth it to know that you're generally getting animals that are going to have inbred genetic problems, and if your answer is that there is greater predictability (since having more problems is at least predictable if they're always the same problems), then that's all I wanted to know.

I asked because it seems to me like "mutts" would be less of a pain because of what I mentioned earlier, but if you're willing to deal with animals that have more genetic problems for the sake of knowing ahead of time what's coming, then that makes sense.

But I didn't imply that you hadn't done your homework. Considering that half your journal is basically What Freya Knows About Rodents That Nobody Else Does, I would be startled if anybody said it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]freyalorelei
2009-05-25 09:16 pm UTC (link)
Ironically, Cricket the teenydog with oodles of health problems? Is a mixed breed (aka mutt!) adopted from a shelter. She's 3/4 Chihuahua, a little under a third Dachshund, with just a splash of Pug. Being a mixed breed does not make a dog exempt from genetic disorders...it just makes the disorders in question more difficult to predict. And many breeds (like my beloved Whippets) aren't as destroyed by popularity as, say, Cocker Spaniels and Poodles, and have relatively few genetic issues.

And sorry, I just...get kinda defensive when people question why I keep the pets that I do. Hamsters get zilch respect and are looked on as more of a beginner pet, training wheels before moving onto "real" pets like dogs and cats, that no one gives them credit for having truly a fascinating biology and colourful history (the first Syrian hamsters were smuggled into the U.K. inside a scientist's pockets! Trufax).

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Sorry Freya, but I feel the need to mention some things here.
[info]rantingmule
2009-05-25 09:16 pm UTC (link)
I asked because it seems to me like "mutts" would be less of a pain because of what I mentioned earlier, but if you're willing to deal with animals that have more genetic problems for the sake of knowing ahead of time what's coming, then that makes sense.

I call bullshit. :P Buying a purebred dog from a reputable breeder means the dog is less likely to have supprise problems. Here's a thought...buying, say...a Lab puppy from a breeder who tests all their dogs for hip dysplasia means that the puppy is almost totally guaranteed NOT to be dysplastic.

One of the most HEINOUSLY dysplastic dogs I've ever known is a mixed-breed rescue. He was two when I saw him last and so crippled he can barely walk. Mixing breeds doesn't always rule out problems...this mix in particular is a Lab, Shepherd mix, and both breeds are prone to dysplasia. Since he's a mutt-rescue, no conscientious breeder screened his parents for the disorder, cursing him to a lifetime of pain and multiple surgeries.

My own dog is a mixed-breed rescue, a tiny Chihuahua, Dachshund mix. She has broken both of her forelegs, has luxating patellas in both back legs, has a MASSIVE open molera/fontanel (basically a HOLE IN HER SKULL) and has hypoglycemia issues as well as jaw problems and dental problems. She's basically ALL FUCKED UP, genetically...tiny brittle bones, bad jaws, bad legs, and her poor head.

A co-worker has two purebred Chihuahas, both are show-quality and neither has a SINGLE THING WRONG WITH THEM.

Shitty breeders breed shitty dogs. Good breeders breed good dogs. Mutts and rescue dogs are a total roll of the die. I don't get where you get off saying mixed breed dogs have less problems...in my experience (and I work with dogs, I work in a grooming salon, we have to inquire about health problems on all our clients...I see literally hundreds of dogs each month, do you have such wide experience with purebreds versus mixes???) MUTTS often have just as many health and certainly a higher instance of behavioural issues than their purebred counterparts...the ONLY difference is that purebreds? Are as Freya said, more predictable.

This is me being unimpressed, btw. Broad sweeping generalizations about mutts versus purebreds pisses me off.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(7 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…