|
Reptile Forum, Reptile Classifieds - CaptiveBred A site to share your Reptile experiances & ask questions
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Mememe Site Moderator
Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 2141
|
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 11:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Scott W wrote: |
why should they be protected from idiots anymore than say a Rabbit or a Puppy?
|
Well, they shouldn't really have to be (in a perfect world), but their mental health is so delicate, and much less info is available etc.
They also really need to really be kept in groups - that often means breeding, and therefore surplus. I don't want the country overrun with them TBH - as very few poeple can really meet their needs.
I am glad they're off the DWA, but I feel somesort of license is needed for primates. However, DEFINITELY not like the DWA - the purpose of it would be to make sure they reicieve a high level of care (inspected by a specialist that can provide care information etc, rather than a random vet who has no experience) - and not to unjustly drain he bank account.
_________________
No man is an Island. Except the Isle of Man. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
stubeanz Key Member
Joined: 03 Jan 2007 Posts: 350 Location: herts
|
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 11:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
i hope some irresponsable pet shops dont decide to get any of the animals that have come off as there will be people not knowing the husbandry and also people that want to dress the primates up i work at a zoo and the ammount of public that come up and say do you sell these monkeys, im like no were a zoo n they nearly always go ok because id love to dress one up and keep it as a pet! i usualy just walk off by then
stu |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Scott W Site Admin
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 13355 Location: London, England.
|
Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Mememe wrote: | Scott W wrote: |
why should they be protected from idiots anymore than say a Rabbit or a Puppy?
|
Well, they shouldn't really have to be (in a perfect world), but their mental health is so delicate, and much less info is available etc.
They also really need to really be kept in groups - that often means breeding, and therefore surplus. I don't want the country overrun with them TBH - as very few poeple can really meet their needs.
I am glad they're off the DWA, but I feel somesort of license is needed for primates. However, DEFINITELY not like the DWA - the purpose of it would be to make sure they reicieve a high level of care (inspected by a specialist that can provide care information etc, rather than a random vet who has no experience) - and not to unjustly drain he bank account.
|
I agree with what your saying about them being more delicate and less info out there but I'd hate to see some elitest group deciding who can and can't keep such wonderful animals.
I guess I have seen first hand that those involved with granting DWA have NO, I repeat NO useful reptile experiance to be able to give any credible input into the DWA process. Now I can't blame the LA as why would they have reptile experianced staff or why would the vet actually know anything about keeping them (yeah sure vets are great at solving medical problems etc but very few actually know much about husbandary or even natural history...FOUR vets last year were blinded permantly or temporary from tarantula hairs as they didn't have the knowledge to know the dangers).
I would much prefer animals that aren't dangerous to be non licensed but as a compremise I would be happy to have a registration scheme that would mean you would have to register certain animals when you buy them and then could expect an announced visit during your ownership to check the welfare and husbandary etc. again it would have to be carried out be educated inspectors NOT the RSPCA etc _________________
Please DO NOT pm orders for reptiles, send email instead scott@captivebred.co.uk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mwoxy Contributing Member
Joined: 17 Dec 2005 Posts: 148
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 7:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the heads up Scott, don't check the DWAA forum often.
Glad to see the schedule of animals looks pretty much as the last draft.
With regards to the concern for monkeys, I think the AWB will be addressing this. This should be of concern to all.
I believe the wording from the consultation meetings posted on the FBH site, was something along the lines of " we will not be banning primates as this is an enabling Bill......... the care requirements will effectively ban them anyway" ... or words to that effect. If I can find the link I will post it.
regards
Mark |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Scott W Site Admin
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 13355 Location: London, England.
|
Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hi Mark,
Interesting words used there, would love the link if you find it. _________________
Please DO NOT pm orders for reptiles, send email instead scott@captivebred.co.uk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Mwoxy Contributing Member
Joined: 17 Dec 2005 Posts: 148
|
Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 6:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Scott,
Eventually found it, the wording isn't exactly how I remember but I think the message is clear!!
Cheers
Mark
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmstand/a/st060119/pm/60119s05.htm
Column Number: 156
their needs and a temptation for people to see them as something rather exotic and playful that will amuse the children, without having any conception of the difficulties that that might cause later on. For that reason, the Bill must explicitly prohibit the keeping of primates as pets.
Mr. Bradshaw: We all agree that primates do not make suitable pets. They are not allowed in the general pet trade and imports are already limited to zoos, scientific institutions and specialist private keepers. I am sure that hon. Members will be familiar with the work of the International Fund for Animal Welfare on this issue. Some Members may have been lobbied by the fund. On Second Reading, I made it clear that we have sympathy with the aims of the amendments and the new clauses.
The Government have acknowledged the problem. DEFRA’s global wildlife division is considering the feasibility of measures under article 3.2 of CITES to tackle the problem on the basis of conservation. I encourage hon. Members to remember that the Bill is primarily aimed not at banning any particular animal-keeping activities, but at ensuring that the welfare needs of animals are met and, through the introduction of the welfare offence, that someone is responsible for them. Legislation will be backed up by codes of practice and regulations that are appropriate to the types of animals concerned.
I can tell the hon. Member for Lewes and my hon. Friends the Members for Stroud and for Llanelli (Nia Griffith) that, as a priority, the Government intend to develop a code for the keeping of primates. Its likely effect will be to restrict their keeping to zoos, scientific institutions and specialist keepers.
Paddy Tipping: Is the Minister saying his officials have advised him that when the welfare tests are available, the keeping of primates as pets will in effect be banned, that this is enabling legislation and that after it is introduced with regulations, no primates will be kept as pets?
Mr. Bradshaw: Yes, exactly so. I was going to assure the hon. Member for Lewes that the Bill allows us to introduce such secondary legislation |
|
Back to top |
|
|
medusa I've settled in...
Joined: 03 Jun 2007 Posts: 26 Location: Nottingham
|
Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 2:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I had heard that large constrictors were possibly going onto the list, which worried me slightly as I have 2 burmese, a boa and a yellow anaconda. I'm glad to see that isn't the case. Not sure how they could begin to enforce it given the number of large snakes already being kept. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bobby I'm new here...
Joined: 01 May 2007 Posts: 7 Location: mansfield
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
medusa wrote: | I had heard that large constrictors were possibly going onto the list. |
I agree, I have always been led to believe that retics, rock pythons and anacondas would be going on the list for definite. And that they were considering putting Burmese and scrubs on it too, but it was unlikely due to the amount of current owners. It would appear I've been mis-informed or was there substance to those rumours?? anyone know? |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Scott W Site Admin
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 Posts: 13355 Location: London, England.
|
Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2007 11:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The RSPCA was gunning for all boids to be added, hoping to get away with being that unspecific they thought they could close down on dozens of species, lucky nothing the RSPCA pushed for was added.
Infact they even fought for several of the vegatarian mammals (Capybaras) to be left on the list, it was only when someone asked the RSPCA representative what a capybara was (and they had NO idea, even demanding it stay on the schedule ) that it became obvious the RSPCA rep new almost bugger all about all species listed. _________________
Please DO NOT pm orders for reptiles, send email instead scott@captivebred.co.uk |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ailurus Captivebred Communist
Joined: 14 Sep 2006 Posts: 1626 Location: Hertfordshire, England
|
Posted: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
this has been an interesting read, thanks guys.
hmmm coatis and kinkajous hmmmmm wouldn't mind a kinkajou _________________ Tom
Snakes: :Pantherophis: :Coelognathus: :Lampropeltis: :Heterodon: :Antaresia:
Lizards: :Rhacodactylus: :Pogona: :Goniurosaurus:
http://www.youtube.com/user/Ailurus27 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|