Hi Dawn...
 
You wrote:
>Sugar gliders are from Australia.  They were first imported to America
>because of forests being destroyed and most of the gliders were being
>killed.  So American exotic animal breeders bred them and got lots of
>babies and they are widespread today...
 
I'm not 100% sure what you are saying in your mail.  If they are endangered
in Australia, why are they bred as pets in America?  I agree there should
be a captive breeding programme and there are several in Australia.  I
don't think the fact that they are decreasing in numbers in the wild
justifies in any way keeping them as pets.  How do you then stand with
primates, little macaques and monkeys?  They are also endangered in the
wild.  How about a tiger?  I think most people agree that they are
unsuitable as pets.  What makes a sugar glider different?
 
I first saw a sugar glider in Australia, so you might understand my shock
to learn that they were kept as pets.  I didn't know it was as common as it
was in the USA.  So, apologies for my ignorance there...
 
I have recently done my thesis on successful management of the wolverine,
which you might know is the largest mustelid, and I have come to see that
when people design cages and pens for animals they tend to do it from the
animal's body size only.  The behaviour of the animals is equally, if not
more important, and I can't see how a home environment is an adequate
environment for the sugar glider.  It resembles a squirrel in activity
patterns and it requires a lot of space to satisfy their spacial needs.
 
As you said though, this is my opinion and you are totally entitled to
yours.  I am not a big fan of keeping exotic pets at all.  I know ferrets
are referred to as exotic pets, but they are no more exotic than cats and
dogs.
 
It is however a thought that the sugar glider and other small mrsupials
in Australia should be bred to be kept as pets there, as cats, dogs and
rabbits do irreparable damage to the wildlife in the bush.
 
All the best,
 
Brigitte
[Posted in FML issue 3054]