# large snakes



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

hi guys,do you think that large snakes should be part of the dwa.i see an alaconda today and it was a right nasty bit of work.i would hate to think that snake could get into the wrong hands.


----------



## craig8989 (Apr 23, 2008)

possibly but how bog is a large snake? what would happen if you had a baby burm, thats a smal snake until it gets big. maybe annacondas should be, but i have never kept one so i don't know what they are like to keep.


----------



## kieran8143 (Mar 10, 2008)

i think any snake over an adult size of 7ft could be dangerous if it is like a boa etc. if is not use to people and is only being dealt with by one person things could get nasty. its like anything can cause problems in life.... nasty dog etc its just where they have to say enough is enough!


----------



## Thrasops (Apr 15, 2008)

If I was being honest I would probably admit that the largest species of boids probably _should_ be on DWA. There are a lot of venomous on DWA that don't really pose all that much danger to humans, which are included only because the laws cover the entire family, e.g. _every_ species of viper on DWA and _every_ species of elapid is on there... but there are some opisthoglyphs that aren't which can give worse reactions than _some_ elapids and vipers.

Meanwhile, we have things like Retics, African Rock Pythons, Scrub Pythons and Anacondas which are very large and often aggressive snakes easily capable of killing an adult human - and especially a small child - if they have a mind to. Though the likelihood of such an occurrence may be very small, the risk is still there...

You hear such a lot of horror stories about "how my python turned nasty" too...

Whilst we're on the subject, though, what about dogs like Rottweilers, etc. These animals have killed more people than captive snakes. Surely they must therefore be included in the DWA?

(Okay, I know there are a lot more dogs in the country than snakes so the probability of accidents goes up, but I'm sure you see my point).

Also, so many large boids get sold when they're small to inexperienced or unprepared keepers... having some kind of restriction could probably reduce this as only the really serious and die-hard owners would bother to apply for the licence. What does everybody else think?


----------



## kieran8143 (Mar 10, 2008)

eventually im sure somethig will change but at the minute there is nothing that can be down about it! all that can be done is to check who you are selling things to and make sure you belive they are capable of bringing up a snake or this size and temp before handing it over!


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

well the safety record, is very good with large constictors so no real need, although as soon as someone gets seriously injured or killed then they will be put on I recon.


----------



## Thrasops (Apr 15, 2008)

Precisely my point! It's already too late if somebody is killed.

I'm in agreement that, as with DWA venomous, there is a very good safety record in this country. It's just food for thought.

(I'm sure there will be a lot of boid keepers after my blood when they read this...)


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

I know several people that would like to see them put on DWA, people get killed every year in the states.


----------



## craig8989 (Apr 23, 2008)

i agree that once someone gets hurt or killed than SOME large snakes should be on DWA african rock pythons and anacondas particualy as these are very agressive and need alot of pataince to be dealt with, alot of people get these because it is "cool" to have a large snake and dont understand the responceibity and potential danger that is invovled


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

The D.W.A.A was set up to prevent harm coming to the general public NOT the owner so no, I don't think they should be, as they're not gonna get loose, go on a rampage and attack everyone. No deaths in the UK as yet and only 20 in the last TEN YEARS in the US. Pretty much everything else on the planet has a higher human death toll.


----------



## jaysnakeman (May 10, 2006)

Fangio said:


> The D.W.A.A was set up to prevent harm coming to the general public NOT the owner so no, I don't think they should be, as they're not gonna get loose, go on a rampage and attack everyone. No deaths in the UK as yet and only 20 in the last TEN YEARS in the US. Pretty much everything else on the planet has a higher human death toll.


well said :notworthy:


----------



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

the thing that worrys me that someone can go out tomorrow a buy a large snake. we can all read a book for an hour and make out we know what we are doing.i do think that the big boys and girls should be on the dwa.: victory:


----------



## jaysnakeman (May 10, 2006)

bullet tooth t0ny said:


> the thing that worrys me that someone can go out tomorrow a buy a large snake. we can all read a book for an hour and make out we know what we are doing.i do think that the big boys and girls should be on the dwa.: victory:


if an idiot wants something that they shouldnt have there will always be a way for them to get it, but the seller surely has a morale responsibility to check the buyer is up to the job


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

jaysnakeman said:


> if an idiot wants something that they shouldnt have there will always be a way for them to get it, but the seller surely has a morale responsibility to check the buyer is up to the job


one less idiot anyway, after a green condas eaten them:whistling2:


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

Just because hots are on the DWA doesn't stop idiots getting hold of them illegally. There are always people with no scruples out to make money. I'm pretty certain it'd be no different with large constrictors.


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

I dont think they should be DWA, but some kind of lisence, to stop "Anyone" purchasing them...


----------



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

guys i am all for good owners like yourself,that understands the needs of dangerous snakes.you also understand what damage can be done if they was in the wrong hands.i see a large anaconda today and it was a nasty bit of work.i found out you can buy a small one for 225 that wont stay small for long.i also see a guy on reptile trader that had a snake for sale that was 13' jus wanted to give it away cos he was moving.

maybe not a dwa but some paper work that says you are an experience keeper of very large snakes.i am sure a good keeper would have no problem with this.i feel its to easy to get very large snakes.


----------



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

you beat me to it mate.:lol2:


Declan123 said:


> I dont think they should be DWA, but some kind of lisence, to stop "Anyone" purchasing them...


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

bullet tooth t0ny said:


> guys i am all for good owners like yourself,that understands the needs of dangerous snakes.you also understand what damage can be done if they was in the wrong hands.i see a large anaconda today and it was a nasty bit of work.i found out you can buy a small one for 225 that wont stay small for long.i also see a guy on reptile trader that had a snake for sale that was 13' jus wanted to give it away cos he was moving.
> 
> *maybe not a dwa but some paper work that says you are an experience keeper of very large snakes*.i am sure a good keeper would have no problem with this.i feel its to easy to get very large snakes.


You can't get experience without owning your first!

I do see what you're saying, it's just the DWA license doesn't "fit".

Any licensing system would be unworkable and fail like the dog licensing system did IMO. No licenses are required for dogs or horses and these are animals which HAVE killed people (both owners AND public) in the UK. People who sell them just need to choose who they sell to more carefully and not just think about £££££ is all.

Don't get me wrong here, large constrictors are dangerous in the wrong hands, but only for the keeper (assuming no husbandry issues/health for the snake problems).


----------



## xxsassyminxxx (Jan 3, 2008)

Theres laws everywhere now no smoking, no drinking in the streets, the dangerous dogs act is yet another.
The point we all seem to be missing is that whatever laws are in place if people want to be stupid and dangerous then they will do so reguardless of the law.
By putting more laws in place you are just costing those who choose to do things by-the-book, not the actual persons who made the mistakes in the first place.


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

I was thinking like a mini law thing, saying you have to be over 18? like Venomous...?

But dont need a DWA


----------



## Jb1432 (Apr 19, 2008)

Im sure there is a dwa law on large snakes, as alot of shops i've gone into want proof of id and a DWA license for anaconda's,retics,afrocks, burmese basically anything that's going to grow over 15ft.


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

Jb1432 said:


> Im sure there is a dwa law on large snakes, as alot of shops i've gone into want proof of id and a DWA license for anaconda's,retics,afrocks, burmese basically anything that's going to grow over 15ft.



Ive Never known that..... ?


----------



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

i know it must upset you guys the most that keep large snakes,i think that anaconda got into my head a bit to much today.would not like to think if something like that got hold of someone.


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

Older people can be idiots too!

I do get where you're coming from. In an ideal world it'd be great and work well. Sadly idiots will still get them illegally which would only serve to be a pain in the **** for those doing things "by the book" and no doubt some councils would try to price licensing so high in some areas making it unaffordable (like some councils do with hots).

Drugs/guns are illegal yet people still get/have them. Legislation just wouldn't change anything. It's not a massive problem anyhow, I do feel some people blow things out of all proportion.

I rather see a license for parenting! Plenty of irresponsible kid owners out there!:lol2:


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

Jb1432 said:


> Im sure there is a dwa law on large snakes, as alot of shops i've gone into want proof of id and a DWA license for anaconda's,retics,afrocks, burmese basically anything that's going to grow over 15ft.


No there isn't AT ALL.


----------



## Jb1432 (Apr 19, 2008)

Oh rite i see cheers


Older people can be idiots too!

I do get where you're coming from. In an ideal world it'd be great and work well. Sadly idiots will still get them illegally which would only serve to be a pain in the **** for those doing things "by the book" and no doubt some councils would try to price licensing so high in some areas making it unaffordable (like some councils do with hots).

Drugs/guns are illegal yet people still get/have them. Legislation just wouldn't change anything. It's not a massive problem anyhow, I do feel some people blow things out of all proportion.

I rather see a license for parenting! Plenty of irresponsible kid owners out there!:lol2:


^^ yeah totally agree on the last bit.


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

Fangio said:


> No there isn't AT ALL.


Thought not, every shop ive been to would sell them me...

And ill tell thee, its a few


----------



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

i know the shop i go in would sell a snake like that to just anyone.: victory:


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

bullet tooth t0ny said:


> i know the shop i go in would sell a snake like that to just anyone.: victory:


My "Regulars" do not sell to persons under 16, or must be with an adult.... but ive been a few places that would sell to a 4 year old :lol2:


----------



## bullet tooth t0ny (Apr 24, 2008)

i did mean would not sell.:blush:


bullet tooth t0ny said:


> i know the shop i go in would sell a snake like that to just anyone.: victory:


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

bullet tooth t0ny said:


> i did mean would not sell.:blush:


Lol, id perfer a shop that has rules to Not sell to "Younger" people, to me, i feel the shop owners care more for the animal


----------



## craig8989 (Apr 23, 2008)

i no a shop that has just sold a 12ft burmese to an 11 yr old. all they said was bring a parent to collect it. how rediculus is that! there should deffinatly be some age restriction on large snakes. i agree with that totally and i expect most of you do as well


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

Thats Idiotic in my oppinon, Name and Shame it son....

Or Message me the name

Ta

Dec


----------



## craig8989 (Apr 23, 2008)

no sorry i cant name the shop, but i can tell you that my mate who works there and also keeps large snakes had a good old "word" about the morales with this particular sales assistant lol. but yer it is totally idiotic, i wont be going in there to buy anything for a little while. makes me feel better knowing that the council know and are freating to take there pet shop license


----------



## Rain (Oct 9, 2007)

I dont see why larger snakes should be on DWA, here's my reason, and its a little long winded, so bear with me.


It all comes down to common sense. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out that a big snake is a powerful thing. They crush deer to death for goodness sake! If you handle a big snake, keep someone on hand! Someone who knows how quickly they need to react to getting the snake from around someones neck or arm.
Where as DWA snakes are small! Lets pretend for a second that they didn't have venom. Everyone would have vipers, mambas and cobras because they are relitivly small, and not very strong constrictors.
It's only the venom that makes them DWA, not the agressiveness, or the strength.

The way I look at it is that a few minutes being cuddled by a boa wont kill you, a bite from a cobra will, and I know which one I'd rather have to deal with on a bad day!


----------



## Rain (Oct 9, 2007)

Fangio said:


> You can't get experience without owning your first!


Sorry for the double post.

Just like to point this out in regards to actual DWA snakes.

This isnt a dig at anyone, but when it comes to full blown DWA everyone says to get a mentor, and to learn with someone else showing you, yet no one seems to think they same way about the larger snakes.

If only there were more DWA handlers willing to teach people properly.


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

Rain said:


> Sorry for the double post.
> 
> Just like to point this out in regards to actual DWA snakes.
> 
> ...


On all the threads on here where people have said they wanted burms/retics etc. that I've seen (or at least can remember), people have suggested finding someone with an adult and handling it/learning a bit from them.

The comment I made which you quoted was in reference to a suggested license saying "that you have experience in keeping large snakes". My point being that no new large boid owners could exist that way, as they wouldn't get a license cos they have no experience in keeping them (if that makes sense). I feel here you've taken my words out of context.

Also.....not all DWA snakes are small (depends how you define small I guess) *thinks King Cobra, Bushmaster etc.*


----------



## 400runner (May 15, 2006)

Rain said:


> The way I look at it is that a few minutes being cuddled by a boa wont kill you, a bite from a cobra will, and I know which one I'd rather have to deal with on a bad day!


you'd be dead in those few mins, or close to it, with a big enough boa. you would almost certainly not be dead from a cobra bite in just a few minutes. in this country you'd be unlucky not to still be alive in the time it took to receive av. 
and a boa is a very different thing to a 15 or 16 foot burmese python.
by the way i don't really feel that they should be on dwal


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

400runner said:


> you'd be dead in those few mins, or close to it, with a big enough boa.


Indeed BBC NEWS | World | Americas | Pet boa constrictor chokes owner


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

I personnally think that the main large snakes should be DWA - Anacondas, burms, retics, rock pythons.


----------



## Eric (Feb 26, 2007)

I don't think any snake should be on the DWA list but that's my opinion. : victory:


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Large constrictors were considered during the review on DWA, but never went on. From a practical point of view, what would happen if they did suddenly go onto the DWA list? I am sure there must be thousands of keepers with large constrictors, and as we all know there can be considerable hurdles to obtaining a DWA, as it is basically a postcode lottery in terms of cost etc. Should they go on, it would mean that all keepers would have to apply, and would have to be able to house them in a secure room to DWA standards, with public liability insurance etc etc, not forgetting the cost of the licence and inspection, which, as has been discussed before, can in some areas be truly extortionate.
While I am not saying that these precautions are not already taken by responsible keepers, I am saying that the practicalities would be a nighmare. If you could not afford to get the licence, what happens to the snake? There are only so many zoos in the UK, and I am sure that they would not be in a position to rehome every large boid which can no longer be legally kept. Only options then would be 1. euthanase a perfectly healthy animal; 2. keep it illegally and risk prosecution and seizure of the animal, which would then be put down as it would not be possible to rehome, or 3. release it into the wild, again illegal, and leading to the death of the snake.
Lets not forget the number of big cats that "disappeared" from private keepers when DWAA was first introduced, which are now known to be breeding in small pockets of countryside.


----------



## trueviper (Jan 13, 2008)

Very well said. Some very good points made there I think.


----------



## steveyruss (Feb 19, 2008)

Incubuss said:


> I personnally think that the main large snakes should be DWA - Anacondas, burms, retics, rock pythons.


Are you kidding? Some councils don't use DWA as its supposed to - a tool to protect the public, they use it as a means to completely restrict the public from possessing what they perceive as 'dangerous' by creating ridiculous prices. This is criminal and a suffocation of our freedoms. In the UK Gun crime has actually increased since the banning of hand guns proving that implemented legislation always takes it's toll on the responsible. Criminals will always find ways to break the law. Not only this but only a handful of people die every decade from large constrictors, when you consider the silly number of irresonsible dog and car owners that are not being hounded by pressure group like we do it renders it insignificant. Yes people get bitten, yes people get crapped on and yes I'm sure lots of people with not enough experience are running around with green anacondas but no one has died. Why change the law for the sake of changing it to prevent a few at the expense of thousands? I'm tired of the nanny uber-liberal attitude inside this country of wanting to penalising the public for doing absolutely anything including the right to fill their own damn bins up, own animals and smoke. It's all a con.


----------



## Eric (Feb 26, 2007)

Well speaking from personal experience and observation of friends and family. I have known alot of kids, teenagers, and adults including myself with large constrictors and large monitors. They are all still alive and are not missing limbs or digits. The snakes are only dangerous if your a complete moron governing who can own these snakes will only give the higher ups more control over what we do in our daily lives. It will also just push the hobby underground and most will still own the snakes they love.


----------



## steveyruss (Feb 19, 2008)

Eric said:


> Well speaking from personal experience and observation of friends and family. I have known alot of kids, teenagers, and adults including myself with large constrictors and large monitors. They are all still alive and are not missing limbs or digits. The snakes are only dangerous if your a complete moron governing who can own these snakes will only give the higher ups more control over what we do in our daily lives. It will also just push the hobby underground and most will still own the snakes they love.


Exactly, for everything banned a black market always opens up to satisfy the demand, take a look at the war on drugs it's such a useless waste of tax payers money. If large constrictors are put on the DWA tomorrow I can assure you that I'm not handing over my Burmese python and tens of thousands of people will feel exacly the same.


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

it wouldnt bother me tbh, id just add them to my DWA :whistling2::whistling2:


----------



## jaysnakeman (May 10, 2006)

SiUK said:


> it wouldnt bother me tbh, id just add them to my DWA :whistling2::whistling2:


thats not the point si


----------



## Declan123 (Dec 29, 2007)

Lol Si, :2thumb:


----------



## Eric (Feb 26, 2007)

It wouldn't bother me personally but I'd feel for those it did affect. I'm lucky to live in a state that has not passed any laws concerning exotic snakes venomous or non. Hopefully it stays that way but with Ar groups pushing bans I feel our hobby is endanger from Housewife's that have nothing better to do than stick their noses in everyone else's business. 

The funny thing is there is rarely an incident concerning venomous or non venomous snakes. So with all the keepers across my state and no laws there are still no incidents. What's that tell you? Maybe the laws are pointless!


----------



## jaysnakeman (May 10, 2006)

Eric said:


> It wouldn't bother me personally but I'd feel for those it did affect. I'm lucky to live in a state that has not passed any laws concerning exotic snakes venomous or non. Hopefully it stays that way but with Ar groups pushing bans I feel our hobby is endanger from Housewife's that have nothing better to do than stick their noses in everyone else's business.
> 
> The funny thing is there is rarely an incident concerning venomous or non venomous snakes. So with all the keepers across my state and no laws there are still no incidents. What's that tell you? Maybe the laws are pointless!


i agree eric its mainly people totally unafected by snakes that are pushing for these new laws and restrictions


----------



## The Wanderer (Sep 14, 2007)

Fangio said:


> The D.W.A.A was set up to prevent harm coming to the general public NOT the owner so no, I don't think they should be, as they're not gonna get loose, go on a rampage and attack everyone. No deaths in the UK as yet and only 20 in the last TEN YEARS in the US. Pretty much everything else on the planet has a higher human death toll.


 That's sense : victory:


----------



## Greenphase (Feb 9, 2008)

As a keeper of Burms i can understand what people are saying but i think there are a few things to consider when deciding if large snakes should be put on the D.W.A.

Firstly what would you call large snakes.Some rat snakes etc have the capability to reach 9-10 feet in length should they go onto D.W.A?They are a larger snake but have a much smaller girth to them.

Secondly what happens to all the burms,boas,retics and condas that people already own but refuse to pay for the license or are not given the license for what ever reason?

Thirdly what is to stop any owner then selling offspring to just anyone what so ever as they can not find enough licensed peopleto sell to.

Look at firearms.You can get a license at pretty much any age.3 under 16's have been awarded the license in my area lately.Granted they are members of a firearms club BUT what is the illegal gun trade like at this present time?

Finally if they were to license large snakes where would it all end?Lets face it an iguana can do you a hell of a lot of damage if it is upset the same as a bosc monitor etc.License one would make way for the possibility of licensing more and more which i think would be extremely detrimental to our hobby.

Just my thoughts on this situation but definately something to seriously think about as this is a real possibilty within the reptile community.


----------



## steveyruss (Feb 19, 2008)

Boas n Burms said:


> As a keeper of Burms i can understand what people are saying but i think there are a few things to consider when deciding if large snakes should be put on the D.W.A.
> 
> Firstly what would you call large snakes.Some rat snakes etc have the capability to reach 9-10 feet in length should they go onto D.W.A?They are a larger snake but have a much smaller girth to them.
> 
> ...


That's easy, they'd either pressurise the petshops to stop selling large frozen prey or ban breeding so they all eventually die off. Also nearly all petshops these days take the new owners names and addresses when specimens are bought. It would be easy for the government to step in and cause problems, fortunately there are many holes around it, personally I'd go to the Butchers and order a few rabbits that way. I know somepeople who have been looking after big snakes for 20 or 30 years, I'd be offended if I were one of those people who were suddenly told that they are incapable of raising such anaimals without a piece of paper.


----------



## Viper (May 10, 2008)

Personally i dont think large snakes should be DWA, as many people know what they are getting themselves into before they buy.

Obviously they are certain exceptions to the rule !!!


----------

