> I'm thinking that we are dealing with an issue of semantics.

I think that's the case. Here it's laid out clearly:

> As in the case of domestication, the process of feralization has meant different things to different people. The term "feral" is useful in identifying the origin of any domestic population that is reverting to the wild state. Once the feralization process is complete and the "wild phenotype" is attained, the term "feral" is no longer appropriate; the population is now "wild" and its domesticity has been lost. However, the restored wild phenotpe will not necessarily be identical to that of its wild ancestors.

> Although many attempts to feralize domestic stocks of animals have failed, Baker and Manwell (1981) note that in Australia and New Zealand domesticated animals have been just as successful as exotic wild animals in establishing self-perpetuating free-living populations. Although the scarcity of large predators in these countries (except possibly for the dingo) may account for this observation, the report emphasizes that we cannot unquestionably accept the notion that domesticated stocks of animals are poorly equipped to survive and reproduce in nature.

Price, E. O. (1984). Behavioral aspects of animal domestication. Quarterly Review of Biology, 1-32.

BAKER, C. M. A., and C. MANWELL. (1981). "Fiercely feral": On the survival of domesticates without care from man. Z. Tierzuchtg. Zuchtgs- biol., 98: 241-257. 

             ***********************************************
The BEE-L mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software.  For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html