Well... we did all we could, but it passed. Won't go into effect until December 26th, but they did confirm what I've been told. Technically, you have to have an exotics permit to own sugar gliders. If you don't you can be fined or the animals seized. Once the ban passes, they claim they'll give people time to rehome them, but if they're not rehomed, they'll be seized. They also said that it's safe to go to St. Paul vets but I wouldn't trust that too much.
There's a whole lot more I can say about the fine details of the meeting but I don't even want to think about it right now.
So that's what I know.
Re: St. Paul's pet ban Part 2
#437936 12/19/0711:02 PM12/19/0711:02 PM
The video is not up yet...but once it is available it will be at http://www.stpaul.gov/council/mas/council/2007/ under agenda. It was item number 38. Bill Stephensen talked...then us ladies...then some clown from Animal Ark talked...and I was very mad they let someone FOR the ban talk both before and after us. Not fair at all.
They cut off Krissa for talking on other animals...then the AA clown after us was focusing on nothing other that past "trendy" pets. They cut him off...but he still conviently flipped through all the pictures. Rude.
Some of the first words he spoke were Glider University...and I could just see Brenda gag when these words came out of his mouth.
They want to stop the animals becuse of poor care and mis-knowledge...this guy shoveled false knowledge out there! Look at the cage size he found. Sick. And they grow to be a foot long? Last I checked mine fit in my hand. Hmmm. So when was a long tail an issues...cuz my cats and lizzard all have long tails.
Watch Star Trib for another article...someone was there and did take down out names and get some comments. I told them to get in contact with Priscilla Price for an interview and better info as she will willingly provide it.
What a day. Tequila Sunrise tonight to celebrate our bravery of attempting our best with legislature! Yuck!
PS...one person was gone today...but as for the vote it was 6 for and 0 against...it will very likely pass next week when the final meeting takes place.
No, they are talking an out right ban. Supposedly you are supposed to have a permit now...they are banning ownership and sales all together. This gives owners 30 days to get rid of their pets...otherwise if someone reports them...animal control will take them away!
Animal Control knows of certain people with them (and is not granting amnesty either), so those people could be sought out and then if someone repoets their neighbor/friend/relative/etc. , or something along those lines, Animal Control will be a comin' by.
Re: St. Paul's pet ban Part 2
#438009 12/20/0701:52 AM12/20/0701:52 AM
Last night was truly sickening. To hear "Glider University is the number one respected rescue site concerning sugar gliders"...where was this guy getting his information?!! And yup, like Gwen said, I totally got cut off speaking about how do you choose to ban gliders and not other animals, but this guys entire speech was based on the slippery slope theory! Plus the animals he brought up had health hazards...tiny turtles with their salmonella, baby cameins (sp) who can grow big and vicious, plus others that he was only allowed to show pictures of (the big cheater!). He showed pictures of very small cages saying that they were what the local breeders approve of and even showed a slide saying that the same breeders approve of Cage Clean and some magic smell eater spray to keep down scents. Where in the world did he get this info from?!!
One thing I really want to know though is who in the world ruined this for us 1 1/2 years ago by selling gliders at some St. Paul Convention? GRRRRR.
Re: St. Paul's pet ban Part 2
#438133 12/20/0711:41 AM12/20/0711:41 AM
Going to read...but the camera...god I know...I was talking to Dani last night...my chest is ridiculous...I am all chest in the video...good god! I complained PLEANTY to her about my gigantrons....eeek! No good!
***I really hoped for more from the article. I hope thay contact Priscilla!
Last edited by cinnamonstix; 12/20/0706:36 PM. Reason: done reading
I can't believe these people! He compared a TIGER to a sugar glider. When was the last time a sugar glider mauled a person? Try never. And yes, there are some bad owner, who don't do research before they buy them, but the same thing goes with dogs. And people abuse dogs, and cats. And if they think taking away peoples gliders would be sick! These suggies have formed strong bonds with their owners, and taking them away would probably make them depressed. And what are they going to do once they have them? Release them into the wild? Let them get eaten? That'd be so much better for them than letting them have loving owners. (Sarcasm.)
ARRRRRRRRG! I makes me so mad!
And Glider University is one of the worst glider sites!
Re: St. Paul's pet ban Part 2
#440785 12/28/0704:26 PM12/28/0704:26 PM
WEll thats not good why is a banned animal in one part of minesota a problem when their still legal elsewhere that really isnt a good thing .I cant believe that they dont see that dogs and cats are treated the same way and dumped just like the trash are they going to band them too .And as with any animal they all take alot of care .And some have to have special needs but that doesnt make them not a good pet.If they were to outlaw them everywhere theyd have a boycott on their hands i sure wont give mine up without a fight .
Having Faith and Hope that some day soon.That all the world will come to see that all of gods babies deserve love and affection.
Dr Hedges does emergency...rember Dani...from your wellness check and when we brough in hogwart (Zero) to get his face looked at cuz he had that big ol nasty on his face? Yeah...New Brighton does Emergency.
Best to contact the city and see...but I think passing through animals are supposed to be fine...
Jan 1st 2009 (yes...2009...NOT 2008!) gliders will have to be permitted in Mpls. I found this info online. They are not illegal...but you will have to have a permit to keep them without issue.
As for my picture of my Meeko baby and I...here is what it looked like. I am attaching it below since it is all gone. My little guy has gotten so big! He was OOP 4-22-07 and from GliderLove.
Anyone...if anyone is UP to it...how would we propose to ST Paul to legalize ownership with permit required...but ban all sales? Would be worth a shot...I know they just passed the ban...or maybe they could look into grandfathering in any glider owners...dunno. Thoughts on this are welcomed.
Ok ladies you did a wonderful job. Please take what I say with a grain of salt it's only meant to help. I've taken on town's and won before you have to be methodical not emotional. The facts from the CDC and the Australian permit were excellent that is what these people want. First you shouldn't have gone as a group this way one of you could have rebutted what was said after the other side had their say. You need facts, petitions are great but facts are better.
In the beginning it appeared that one man was on your side but you lost him somewhere you need meticulous notes and if they start interupting you can ask for the clock to be stopped. What you're going to say should have visuals that's what the guy after you did he put imprints in their minds and reminded them of past things that's where a second person would have come in handy to remind them these are not trendy pets and have been in the US for years. As far as NYC banning them it's only the city and the city has a ban on a lot of animals due to it's overpopulated areas and small living areas. It has nothing to do with them being hazardous to society so that arguement could've been fought because that seemed to weigh heavy that hey if NYC banned them then they must be bad. Well lots of animals are banned in NYC so that's not neccesarily the case.
I loved your personal stories about your pets but seriously they looked at you guys like wonderful and knowledgeable owners but nothing more than a minor percentage of what's out there. You have to figure out the arguement against having them to be able to fight for the right to have them and have more facts. Your notes should include solid concrete facts, visuals, and be committed to memory and read like a speech that's what these people know.
Now I know it's too late now but if they did it there then there's no saying it won't happen in another town. Next time go there with letters from reputable breeders showing how they trace lineage and that the gliders being sold have 10+ years in this country, your CDC notes were excellent keep those, if you find something someone is saying that you need to rebute then take notes on top of your papers and address those first before they leave your memory. Why did it take them 2 weeks to catch a glider? There was a great arguement missed. It took them that long because that glider was under a great deal of stress and scared and in the process it didn't endanger anyone or harm anything. Your arguements about all animals needing cleaning was great but needed more elaboration. Like how much cleaning, feeding, playing and then you could show that it needed less attention then say a dog which I know I have to walk mine at least 6 times a day which makes up for over an hour of my day just walking not including feeding and brushing him where a glider may take on a cleaning day 45 minutes with feeding counting play time it would be more but although I walk my dog I do play with him for what seems like hours outside of walking him so if you do play with them for an hour that's still less care time than a dog.
All animals have different diet requirements if you had maybe brought that out more saying this animal requires this and that animal requires that then maybe their diet wouldn't seem so far fetched to someone not animal savy. Anything that needed more elaboration than time would allow you should've had flyers and just skimmed the surface of what the flyers were about and let them read the facts. The more facts and less emotion you can give them that's what will win.
I commend you all on what you did these are just some pointers should you ever have to do this again. First and foremost always find out what the opposition is thinking go to anti-glider sites and figure out the fight so you can counter anything they have to say. Secondly always have someone in the wings in case there's opposition (which 9 times out of 10 there is) this way any ridiculous things they say can be countered. Sadly it's a game they play and the right person doesn't always win. Now keep in mind I kept hearing about that licensing thing is that for the whole state or just that area? If it's for the whole state then I would go and get your licenses in order because don't believe for one moment that someone isn't looking into that right now. I went to another state to help a friend fight her town when they wanted to ban Siberian Huskies a complete other state. Gave my name and address and lo and behold animal control showed up looking for my license for my dog 2 weeks later. Thankfully all my ducks were in a row and I had it but I'm worried for you 3 if you need licenses you might have someone at your door so please find out what you need to do and get them if it's a law for the state.
Remember again I can't emphasize this enough those 15 minutes are YOURS not thiers so when they begin to speak ask them to stop the clock you are allowed to do that but they will not tell you. Remember they have their own agenda's and some realize that by cutting into your time that you won't have enough time to touch on all your bases and also that they may slip you up and get you to forget what you were saying. We have an old lady here who goes to nearly every meeting for one reason or another and man if they say 1 word she yells stop the clock and boom off it goes. She's funny to watch but man I learned a ton from her. She usually gets her way too but she said to me once it took her years of screwing up to get it right. It also sometimes makes you stronger if when you get up there that you remember these people work for you and are paid for by you so when they kept referring to the money animal control has to spend that's your money they are talking about not theirs. Heck if you have to do it again tell me and if it's at a time where I can afford to I'll come and help. You ladies are to be applauded though it's not easy getting up there and I'm sure all your nerves were shot doing it.
If you are going to try and push for them allowing licensing I have a thought. The concern there seemed to be the cost for animal control to go check every house. What if you propose that instead of having animal control check it out that each person who applies for a license needs proof of adequete caging (a receipt), and good health of the glider (a letter from a vet). This way the cost arguement is gone if the owners are made to provide all that is needed. Every year could be a new licensing and a new letter from the vet that either the animal is healthy or under the care of the vet and being properly treated whatever the case may be. Now here would be the kicker that they would love they could charge for the license nothing hefty but with enough people doing it then it would increase revenue for the city. Now from animal controls arguement that people just won't get the licenses well here's the counter animal control once aware of unlicensed ownership gives the owners 30 days to comply and get a license failure to do so would incur a fine and removal of said animal. Now again making revenue for them either way. Now is it perfect no we'd like to own our pets for free without giving the government more money but there has to be an incentive there for them to want to go along with it and that incentive is usually cash.
Re: St. Paul's pet ban Part 2
#441186 12/29/0701:05 PM12/29/0701:05 PM
i don't know if you heard but St Paul Minnesota just banned the owning of sugar gliders. there reasons are they smell bad make a lot of noise and require too much care.
...and you HAVE met my HUMAN KIDS right!?!
Well they could say the same for some children but that doesn't make us want them any less. It is all in the Parents ability to DO RIGHT by their babies fur or skin. The law doesn't make life any better for the the gliders and that is what they need. Laws to make their life BETTER. We need t push for minimum standards so these bans will not be the only option the towns think they have.
Contrary to how all the newspaper articles have made it sound, in the meeting, I felt like the banning was due to animal welfare. As in "oh how can we make sure people take care of their gliders?". How about the same way you make sure people take care of any other animal?
Re: St. Paul's pet ban Part 2
#443738 01/02/0803:02 PM01/02/0803:02 PM
That's the way I read it Krissa - it was because they are "high needs" animals, and it couldn't be guaranteed that people would care for them properly.
Wow - guess they'll be banning all pets now, right? Since, the same can be said of any pet. Oh, and kids. Oh, and anyone with a handicap of any kind. Oh, and the elderly. Come to think of it... I have many needs myself. That pesky eating thing ... food and shelter. Darnit! Guess I'm banned, too!
Alden "Animals can communicate quite well. And they do. And generally speaking, they are ignored." Alice Walker
Mom to Valhalla; 6 cats; 1 macaw; 2 hedgehogs; and very many great gliders!
(plus the 2 skin kids) valkyriegliders.com
Kyrie, nothing will ever fill the hole you left in my heart.