Some info I received on Mpls ferret status responding to "RE: Mpls not FFZ"
from prior FML. I have permission to post excerpts of it. Mainly it is
intact only a little taken out.
 
>The reason animal control will tell you this crap is because either a).
>They really don't know any better and have been told this for so long they
>think it is true.  or  b).  because people will believe it when a person of
>authority tells them something.  If people voluntarilly surrender or remove
>their animals from the city when they are told to it is an easy way for the
>city to accomplish it's goal.
 
>If you ask any public health or animal control officer in MPLS they will
>tell you it is illegal to own a ferret in MPLS, (not true, it is illegal to
>own a wild animal), that if you are walking down the street with your pet
>ferret in a cage any police, public health, or animal control officer has
>the right to immediately sieze and destroy the animal (not true, ferret
>owners have the basic right to due process of law as everyone else), and
>that if your ferret bites it must be killed and tested with no exceptions
>(not true, mpls city code 66.40 c states "any other animal which has bitten
>any person and caused an abrasion or puncture of the skin shall be siezed
>and impounded under the supervision of a licensed veterinarian or at the
>city contract kennel for a period of not less than ten (10) days.  If, after
>a complete examination by a veterinarian; the animal has no clinical sign of
>rabies, the animal may, with the approval of the commissioner of health, be
>released to the owner.)  Unfortuantely, you get people like former
>commissioner of health, Jerry Thelen who make statements like "I don't care
>what the law says this is our policy".  So it is up to Mpls residents to
>bear down and assert and demand their rights.
 
>As for the city classifying ferrets as wild animals, bull!  They can call a
>ferret a wild animal if they want.  They can call a refrigerator a
>helicopter too.  But they's never get it off the ground.  The courts have
>long realized that Man cannot make a law which contradicts natural fact.
>Mpls cannot make a law that says, as of Jan. 1 water will be rquired to run
>up hill and then actually expect to issue tickets to those whose water won't
>cooperate.  You cannot with the stroke of a pen make a wild animal out of a
>man-made breed which does not exist in the wild anywhere in the world.  I
>remember one case... [   snip   ] where the city wrote a ticket to a
>ferret owner for "illegal possesion of a wild or dangerous animal."
>When asked which way they were going to prosecute it, as a wild
>animal or a dangerous animal, they asked what difference it made.
>...It made a difference as to which 200 pages of data would be
>supplied to the defense.  They said they'd get back...  They never did.
>At the pre-trial they offered to drop the whole thing if the ferret owner
>would agree to not have any further "ferret-related" animal control
>violations.  As far as the ordinance being only a guideline: wrong an
>ordinance is the law.  There is a legal term called "black letter law" which
>means something which is specifically written.  This specifically states
>wild animals or dangerous animals which are defined elsewhere.  They have no
>such discretionary powers unles it is written into the law that they exist.
>And I don't find them anywhere.  If you force the issue they will back down
>and admit that they really don't have the authority... [   snip    ]
 
>If the case you describe is the Jennifer Smalley case I am intimately
>familiar with it... [     snip    ]
 
>The judge ordered the animal held the rquired 10 days and that there be a
>hearing to determine if the facts warranted testing the animal...
 
>They filed the next day an emergency order to allow them to proceed because
>of iminent danger to the public health. They convinced the judge to allow
>them to prepare the ferret for testing, not telling the judge that the
>preperation was to decapitate and remove brain samples.  While ... filing
>the appeals Jerry Thelen literally called and ordered the ferret destroyed
>immediately.  He even had to go to an outside vet to have it done.
 
>The Hennepin County Humane Society (and I use the term very loosely in their
>case) is the only Humane Society or Animal Control facility in the twin
>cities metro area that will not work with resue and adoption orgainzations.
>Even Mpls animal control will cooperate with turning over strays as long as
>they haven't bitten.  Hennipen County HS euthanizes ferrets (and by the way
>7 breeds of dogs including great danes) not because the law requires them
>to (there is no such law and such a law has been ruled unconstituttional by
>the Minn. Supreme Court) but because they are unsuitable as pets.  It is my
>belief that these people are not a humane society but rather a selective
>shelter for those breeds they think are politically correct.  I encourage
>animal lovers to think about this before making any donations.  Find out if
>the money you're giving is really doing the kind of work you want.
 
>My advice to ferret owners in Mpls is, (move to St. Paul) When confronted by
>animal control, DON'T surrender the animal.  Unless it has bitten they have
>to legal right to impound.  Inform them that you are aware that only a court
>of law can deprive you of your property and that they are limited to issuing
>a ticket (i believe it is a misdemeanor).  They will first try to bully you
>and tell you ferrets are illegal and that they have the right to confiscate
>and destroy it.  Let them know that you have read and understand the
>ordinance and know they have no such authority.  They will tell you you have
>X-amount of days to get the animal out of the city or they will take
>action.  Tell them to write you a ticket and you'll see them in court.  Then
>contact the local group (MFA).  [     snip      ]
 
 
I know there are people from MN on the list and so thought this might
interest some...
[Posted in FML issue 1403]