# Conference on Import & Keeping of Exotic Animals in EU



## Chris Newman

*FVE Conference on Import & Keeping of Exotic Animals in EU*

*4-5 October 2012*

Brussels, Belgium
With the support of the Cyprus Presidency of the Council of the EU, FVE (Federation of Veterinarians of Europe) is organising an conference titled: Import and keeping of exotic animals in EU: Existing concerns and risks – Current challenges to meet.
*When:* 4 and 5 October 2012
*Where:* International Auditorium Boulevard Roi Albert II 5, Brussels
The purpose of this event is to:
• Exchange information on the ways that exotic animals enter EU market and end up in the different EU countries;
• Point out the risks for animal health and welfare and their impact on public health;
• Identify critical points of the problem and propose sustainable solutions.

*Agenda*


*BRIEFING*
Keeping of Exotic Animals: Risks & Related Policies


----------



## Geomyda

Thanks for posting these links. I sincerely hope that forum members take time to read these and partake in the important debate that needs to be aired on this subject?


----------



## Tarron

I've only had a skim through of the Eurogroup briefing, but oh my god!

It's quite scary that these people could be taken seriously and cause bad ripples throughout all of Europe!

I'm glad you will be there to speak on our behalf Chris. This is very serious, and, like geomyda, I hope plenty of people see this for what it is and get involved in the discussions and do what they can for their hobby.


----------



## Geomyda

Tarron said:


> I've only had a skim through of the Eurogroup briefing, but oh my god!
> 
> It's quite scary that these people could be taken seriously and cause bad ripples throughout all of Europe!
> 
> I'm glad you will be there to speak on our behalf Chris. This is very serious, and, like geomyda, I hope plenty of people see this for what it is and get involved in the discussions and do what they can for their hobby.


If you notice, the references to % are frequently quoting 70-75%: is this a magic number?
A serious critique of the paper and some investigation of source material is I think required:whistling2:


----------



## Tarron

Geomyda said:


> If you notice, the references to % are frequently quoting 70-75%: is this a magic number?
> A serious critique of the paper and some investigation of source material is I think required:whistling2:


I did notice a pattern like that but wasn't sure if it was just me.

Although I checked the Eurogroup website for their affiliates and 'they' are not there. However, rspca, dogs trust, cats protection and world horse something are.


----------



## Lutra Garouille

Hmmmm. Concerning, but the literature cited mainly in that briefing is internet news sites or not scientific literature. These are therefore not 'proof'. 

We could quite easily write something similar but with scientific references. Is anything like this in the pipe line? Have we got researchers onto getting scientific references to support our position?

We need to refute these 70% numbers etc... with hard science. If it isnt out there then we need to question the scientific basis of those numbers. 

The unknowledgeable keeper issue is there but is also present for cats, dogs, budgies and all kinds of other pets. Information and checking on peoples knowledge should be considered before an outright ban. 

Good luck Chris. :2thumb:


----------



## Tarron

Lutra Garouille said:


> Hmmmm. Concerning, but the literature cited mainly in that briefing is internet news sites or not scientific literature. These are therefore not 'proof'.
> 
> We could quite easily write something similar but with scientific references. Is anything like this in the pipe line? Have we got researchers onto getting scientific references to support our position?
> 
> We need to refute these 70% numbers etc... with hard science. If it isnt out there then we need to question the scientific basis of those numbers.
> 
> The unknowledgeable keeper issue is there but is also present for cats, dogs, budgies and all kinds of other pets. Information and checking on peoples knowledge should be considered before an outright ban.
> 
> Good luck Chris. :2thumb:


Unfortunately, I doubt very much whether politicians actually check the sources cited. They more than likely read it, see they have included a source for the claim, then assume it's fact.

A little off topic, but I was reading a 'paper' by Warwick Steadman and arena (the three amigo:whistling2 and noticed that more than half (in fact, I'll make up a figure of, say, 75%) of the source cited, were other papers written by these three same people, mostly Warwick.

Now I'm no scientist, I never went to uni, and have never had to write a paper that included citations and references, but surely you can not make a claim based on a claim you have previously made.
That's like me writing a paper about Bigfoot being an overgrown toad, and referencing a paper I wrote about Bigfoot being an overgrown toad!


----------



## Row'n'Bud

Hoser's done it for years .....:whistling2:


----------



## colinm

Geomyda said:


> If you notice, the references to % are frequently quoting 70-75%: is this a magic number?
> A serious critique of the paper and some investigation of source material is I think required:whistling2:


And most of the facts are estimates Paul.

I spend most of my working day doing estimates(or quotations) and I know that what two people estimate are wildly different.Otherwise I would get all the estimates that I priced.

A little different here but they need to back up these estimates as they do with the percentages.


----------



## Lutra Garouille

Tarron said:


> Unfortunately, I doubt very much whether politicians actually check the sources cited. They more than likely read it, see they have included a source for the claim, then assume it's fact.
> 
> A little off topic, but I was reading a 'paper' by Warwick Steadman and arena (the three amigo:whistling2 and noticed that more than half (in fact, I'll make up a figure of, say, 75%) of the source cited, were other papers written by these three same people, mostly Warwick.
> 
> Now I'm no scientist, I never went to uni, and have never had to write a paper that included citations and references, but surely you can not make a claim based on a claim you have previously made.
> That's like me writing a paper about Bigfoot being an overgrown toad, and referencing a paper I wrote about Bigfoot being an overgrown toad!


No they probably don't but they should be made well aware of this. 

Quite. This is the problem. There is no scientific evidence for many of the number they 'quote'. They are fabricated or at the very least, unscientifically calculated. Statistics can say whatever you like if you adjust the inputs...

Basically their basis for their 'evidence' needs to be questioned. We need to put their 'science' under scrutiny. If we dont, no-one will. 

I could set up a website, spout on about anything including bigfoot being a toad and you could quote that too... 

The examples they provide which are scientifically valid are examples but they are very few and far between. However, there are far more risks to my health than reptile keeping and these examples really are rare. 

I hope we discuss and refute the lack of scientific evidence as well as defend our hobby. No need for personal attacks or nastiness - just use evidence which is based on fact and not opinion.

When that doesnt work we can then set up our own fake scientists and forge our own evidence.


----------



## Geomyda

my real concern, is that it is not just the politicians whom pick up on these spurious claims but from the recently published article in the Veterinary press, a raft of professional veterinarians seem to have accepted the claims made in these stories. Some, might even seek to claim 75%!!


----------



## Tarron

Lutra Garouille said:


> No they probably don't but they should be made well aware of this.
> 
> Quite. This is the problem. There is no scientific evidence for many of the number they 'quote'. They are fabricated or at the very least, unscientifically calculated. Statistics can say whatever you like if you adjust the inputs...
> 
> Basically their basis for their 'evidence' needs to be questioned. We need to put their 'science' under scrutiny. If we dont, no-one will.
> 
> I could set up a website, spout on about anything including bigfoot being a toad and you could quote that too...
> 
> The examples they provide which are scientifically valid are examples but they are very few and far between. However, there are far more risks to my health than reptile keeping and these examples really are rare.
> 
> I hope we discuss and refute the lack of scientific evidence as well as defend our hobby. No need for personal attacks or nastiness - just use evidence which is based on fact and not opinion.
> 
> When that doesnt work we can then set up our own fake scientists and forge our own evidence.


As I've mentioned, I'm not a scientific man, but would it be possible for us/FBH to create a survey for reptile keepers, asking the questions such as how many animals do/have you own(ed), how old did they get to, etc etc.
It could spread quite quickly through the community via the forums and facebook etc, and witin a few months (so long as everyone is honest) you could have some pretty decent, reliable evidence based on facts, which would be a damn sight more reliable than what the APA come up with. At the end of the day, as a reptile keeper, If i recieved a survey from them, I would not reply, knowing how they are. Therefore, where have they got thier facts from about the 75%

(Note: I say APA here, but I'm being specific, I realise that Eurogroup doesn not seem to affiliate itself with APA, but the sentiment is the same)



Geomyda said:


> my real concern, is that it is not just the politicians whom pick up on these spurious claims but from the recently published article in the Veterinary press, a raft of professional veterinarians seem to have accepted the claims made in these stories. Some, might even seek to claim 75%!!


The fact about the Vets and other notable proffesions grabbing on to this also worried me. I can understand journalists grabbing it as a shock piece of reporting, but veterinarian/science based journals and publications should have a much better idea of how reliable the article is.


----------



## Lutra Garouille

Tarron said:


> As I've mentioned, I'm not a scientific man, but would it be possible for us/FBH to create a survey for reptile keepers, asking the questions such as how many animals do/have you own(ed), how old did they get to, etc etc.
> It could spread quite quickly through the community via the forums and facebook etc, and witin a few months (so long as everyone is honest) you could have some pretty decent, reliable evidence based on facts, which would be a damn sight more reliable than what the APA come up with. At the end of the day, as a reptile keeper, If i recieved a survey from them, I would not reply, knowing how they are. Therefore, where have they got thier facts from about the 75%
> 
> (Note: I say APA here, but I'm being specific, I realise that Eurogroup doesn not seem to affiliate itself with APA, but the sentiment is the same)
> 
> 
> 
> The fact about the Vets and other notable proffesions grabbing on to this also worried me. I can understand journalists grabbing it as a shock piece of reporting, but veterinarian/science based journals and publications should have a much better idea of how reliable the article is.


It would be possible - wether it would be 'scientific' enough or robust enough would be debatable. The problem is that small breeders and owners would likely be honest but who's to say the big importers and breeders would be? It has to be impartial and robust. It could help though - and there was a poll on here a while ago asking just that question. 

It wont be easy but we could do something im sure. As long as we were open about the way we collected the 'data' it could be defended. Theirs can't. 

As for the vets - not many vets really know reptiles. the papers published in journals will have been peer reviewed and therefore the science is there. It shouldnt be the basis for their whole arguement though.

In the news recently was an article by Warren Booth detailing 'virgin' births in many species. There was also something about venomous species being the key to potential treatment for diseases such as cancers etc... Bit off on a tangent i guess but what im trying to say is given a bit of research and access to literature some evidence could be gained to support us. There are positive stories out there. 

As i said before some of the 'stories' detailing diseases they use are factual and happen. However, these are few and far between and shouldnt support a ban. 

:bash: Fake science supporting political agendas.

I wonder if warrick whatever would let us take a look at the data behind his 70 - 75% figures...


----------



## Tarron

Lutra Garouille said:


> It would be possible - wether it would be 'scientific' enough or robust enough would be debatable. The problem is that small breeders and owners would likely be honest but who's to say the big importers and breeders would be? It has to be impartial and robust. It could help though - and there was a poll on here a while ago asking just that question.


I know, i made it :lol2: Though it wasnt very specific so in no way gave any decent information, other than to safely say, the 75% statistic was for the most part, rubbish! 



> It wont be easy but we could do something im sure. As long as we were open about the way we collected the 'data' it could be defended. Theirs can't.
> 
> As for the vets - not many vets really know reptiles. the papers published in journals will have been peer reviewed and therefore the science is there. It shouldnt be the basis for their whole arguement though.
> 
> In the news recently was an article by Warren Booth detailing 'virgin' births in many species. There was also something about venomous species being the key to potential treatment for diseases such as cancers etc... Bit off on a tangent i guess but what im trying to say is given a bit of research and access to literature some evidence could be gained to support us. There are positive stories out there.
> 
> As i said before some of the 'stories' detailing diseases they use are factual and happen. However, these are few and far between and shouldnt support a ban.
> 
> :bash: Fake science supporting political agendas.
> 
> I wonder if warrick whatever would let us take a look at the data behind his 70 - 75% figures...


I think its worth the FBH looking at getting someone to devise a research survey to be disseminated throughout the community, to get statistics on number of owners/number of animals )maybe even species type) CB v WC v CF, mortality rate, etc, etc

I have seen some positive stories, but nothing sticks in the publics mind like a bad story. At least with the science to back up the good story, we've got political backing.

Completely agree with the disease issue. You're more likely to get salmonella from raw chicken than your reptiles.


----------



## Lutra Garouille

Tarron said:


> I know, i made it :lol2: Though it wasnt very specific so in no way gave any decent information, other than to safely say, the 75% statistic was for the most part, rubbish!


 :lol2: Well I was clearly paying attention! :whistling2:



Tarron said:


> I think its worth the FBH looking at getting someone to devise a research survey to be disseminated throughout the community, to get statistics on number of owners/number of animals )maybe even species type) CB v WC v CF, mortality rate, etc, etc
> 
> I have seen some positive stories, but nothing sticks in the publics mind like a bad story. At least with the science to back up the good story, we've got political backing.
> 
> Completely agree with the disease issue. You're more likely to get salmonella from raw chicken than your reptiles.


I agree. It would be worth it just to see. Once the bad stories are shown to be false the public get bored (after the obligatory interest in the car crash of an arguement!!)

Yep :2thumb: I've hed food poisoning many more times than illness from my reps or cats. Although apparently they are sending me crazy... :whistling2:


----------



## Geomyda

Tarron said:


> I know, i made it :lol2: Though it wasnt very specific so in no way gave any decent information, other than to safely say, the 75% statistic was for the most part, rubbish!
> 
> 
> 
> I think its worth the FBH looking at getting someone to devise a research survey to be disseminated throughout the community, to get statistics on number of owners/number of animals )maybe even species type) CB v WC v CF, mortality rate, etc, etc
> 
> I have seen some positive stories, but nothing sticks in the publics mind like a bad story. At least with the science to back up the good story, we've got political backing.
> 
> Completely agree with the disease issue. You're more likely to get salmonella from raw chicken than your reptiles.


SUGGESTION: A survey questionnaire handed out to those whom attend Doncaster this weekend?
This might generate a good poll of hobbyists with a wide variety of experience and catch the mood to make the hobby more transparent. With a significant number of species now virtually domesticated with multi generation offspring the stats for species kept and longevity in captivity might surprise those doubters whom seek to undermine the hobby.


----------



## Lutra Garouille

Geomyda said:


> SUGGESTION: A survey questionnaire handed out to those whom attend Doncaster this weekend?
> This might generate a good poll of hobbyists with a wide variety of experience and catch the mood to make the hobby more transparent. With a significant number of species now virtually domesticated with multi generation offspring the stats for species kept and longevity in captivity might surprise those doubters whom seek to undermine the hobby.


Too late to do this properly. And too specialised to those who go to that one show. One way would be to ask the various groups members to participate. That may be a better way - and you are right - we need to cover all the types of animals kept including the fluffies. :2thumb:


----------



## Tarron

Hmm, maybe something to put together for next years shows, or even as something to be published in magazines, on forums and emailed to society members.

Chris, if you are still reading this, do you have any thoughts on a possible survey to do some actual scientific research into reptile mortality on captivity?

As for furries, I'm the Secretary of the British Exotic Mammal Association, and think its something I, personally, would be interested in finding out information on.


----------



## Chris Newman

Tarron said:


> Hmm, maybe something to put together for next years shows, or even as something to be published in magazines, on forums and emailed to society members.
> 
> Chris, if you are still reading this, do you have any thoughts on a possible survey to do some actual scientific research into reptile mortality on captivity?
> 
> As for furries, I'm the Secretary of the British Exotic Mammal Association, and think its something I, personally, would be interested in finding out information on.


This is an issue that we are currently looking at, it looks likely that we will in fact have several projects looking at this.


----------



## Tarron

Glad it's getting looked at Chris, I think it could be highly beneficial, just to have the info to hand.


----------



## Natrix

Sadly we can't just ask people how long their animals live. 
To do this kind of research properly you need to follow a range of people, both new and experienced, who are keeping a range of newly brought animals, both young and adult from a range of sources (WC, CB, CF).
These people and their pets need to be closely followed for a number of years to get the information required. 

But that is only half the information. Knowing how long the captive animals survive is meaningless unless we have some idea of what the same species of animals life expectancy is in the wild. It's only when you can compare captive life expectancy to wild life expectancy that you can decide which is best. Basically Mr Warwicks 75% captive death rate is meaningless without a wild death rate for comparison.

All this is going to take years and we need answers yesterday.

Gordon


----------



## Geomyda

longevity records in captive Chelonia are fairly well known and amongst members of the various national and regional Chelonia groups. It is not uncommon to see Mediterranean tortoises which have been in captive ownership for more than five or six decades........ Again, captive bred animals are recording regular second and third generation experiences.
In the "wet tortoise" brigade there are also good records of longevity and increasingly successful multi generation breeding.
In the five decades of keeping reptiles and amphibians, I have seen a steady progress in husbandry standards and general improvements in keeping many species from these groups.
I suggest, that those of us whom have kept collections over many years can provide accurate records which disprove these rather turgid claims made in recent publications.
During the coming weekend, there are a number of regular Chelonia group Health checks. One of these, held in Birmingham has the benefit of historic records. Each animal seen, has a passport which records weight, size and photographic evidence. Many of these regular visitors have years of experience documented.
These are just a few areas where factual records and accurate data can be secured.


----------



## Tarron

Natrix said:


> Sadly we can't just ask people how long their animals live.
> To do this kind of research properly you need to follow a range of people, both new and experienced, who are keeping a range of newly brought animals, both young and adult from a range of sources (WC, CB, CF).
> These people and their pets need to be closely followed for a number of years to get the information required.
> 
> But that is only half the information. Knowing how long the captive animals survive is meaningless unless we have some idea of what the same species of animals life expectancy is in the wild. It's only when you can compare captive life expectancy to wild life expectancy that you can decide which is best. Basically Mr Warwicks 75% captive death rate is meaningless without a wild death rate for comparison.
> 
> All this is going to take years and we need answers yesterday.
> 
> Gordon


Gordon, thanks for the Reply,

I understand that scientifically speaking, it's not as simple as a survey. However, a quick survey asking keepers what they keep/kept, age lived to etc could be useful In the short term. You would have to say 'don't count animals you sold or gave away' otherwise you could get duplicate entries.

It would give a basic idea of what's about. And at the end of the day, it's a Damon sight more reliable than anything Clifford came up with. And if he/they tried to play the 'keepers wouldn't be honesty' card, they would be setting themselves up for a fall, as there is no way they could come up with 75% without asking actual keepers.

As a short term answer back, I thinking could be helpful, but as you have said, a proper full long term study would also be required.


----------



## Natrix

Geomyda said:


> longevity records in captive Chelonia are fairly well known and amongst members of the various national and regional Chelonia groups. It is not uncommon to see Mediterranean tortoises which have been in captive ownership for more than five or six decades........ Again, captive bred animals are recording regular second and third generation experiences.
> In the "wet tortoise" brigade there are also good records of longevity and increasingly successful multi generation breeding.
> In the five decades of keeping reptiles and amphibians, I have seen a steady progress in husbandry standards and general improvements in keeping many species from these groups.
> I suggest, that those of us whom have kept collections over many years can provide accurate records which disprove these rather turgid claims made in recent publications.
> During the coming weekend, there are a number of regular Chelonia group Health checks. One of these, held in Birmingham has the benefit of historic records. Each animal seen, has a passport which records weight, size and photographic evidence. Many of these regular visitors have years of experience documented.
> These are just a few areas where factual records and accurate data can be secured.


The problem is that this information is all about the 25% (according to Warwick) that made it past the first year. What we have to do is prove that there wasn't a 75% that died in the first year.

Gordon
FBH VC


----------



## Natrix

Tarron said:


> Gordon, thanks for the Reply,
> 
> I understand that scientifically speaking, it's not as simple as a survey. However, a quick survey asking keepers what they keep/kept, age lived to etc could be useful In the short term. You would have to say 'don't count animals you sold or gave away' otherwise you could get duplicate entries.
> 
> It would give a basic idea of what's about. And at the end of the day, it's a Damon sight more reliable than anything Clifford came up with. And if he/they tried to play the 'keepers wouldn't be honesty' card, they would be setting themselves up for a fall, as there is no way they could come up with 75% without asking actual keepers.
> 
> As a short term answer back, I thinking could be helpful, but as you have said, a proper full long term study would also be required.


The problem is that we aren't trying to prove reptiles live past a year in captivity. Warwick has very cleverly covered that by only saying 75% die in the first year. Any data we provide showing longevity can just be attributed to the 25% that survive past the first year.
What we are trying to prove is that the claimed 75% doesn't exist and it's very hard to prove something doesn't exist because you don't have anything solid to present as evidence. 
The evidence we need has to be gathered by studying what happens to a large number of people, keeping a large number of animals over a several year period.

Sorry if this sounds negative, it's not meant to be but we need to get the correct information to fight these claims. On a positive note, we, the keepers, are the people in the best position to get this information.

Gordon
FBH VC


----------



## Tarron

I think I see what you're getting at, if we say we studied 100 reptiles in thier first year of captive (whether caught or bred) and 80 lived past the first year, they would just say, well that 80 was only 25% of the whole population, instead of 100 there really were 320, we just didn't mention them.

Yeah unfortunately they are quite likely to do that! But that could work to our favour too, in that they would look petty and attempt to change figures to suit them.

I do get what you are saying though, it's a tricky situation and no one wants to dive in and end up looking foolish because of it.

Maybe our best attempt at clearing up the 75% issue is purely by publically asking for the raw data to be provided to independent sources, to be reviewed properly. There is no way they could have do the research properly to come to that conclusion, for the very reasons you have mentioned the fbh can't. Therefore, we would have the evidence (or lack of) to show the article is made up/false/fabricated



This may have gone a little off topic, not sure hornet relates to Eurogroup now lol.

Oh, and the very last line of your post is just the perfect line. It is the keepers, and only keepers, that can provide the evidence and statistics to prove the actual figures.


----------



## Geomyda

Natrix said:


> The problem is that this information is all about the 25% (according to Warwick) that made it past the first year. What we have to do is prove that there wasn't a 75% that died in the first year.
> 
> Gordon
> FBH VC


You miss my point. What I am saying, is there are written records of longevity and indeed, in some species accurate health and welfare information documented.With Tortises for instance some regional groups keep passports for all the animals seen at their regular "health check" which occur in some cases twice a year for the last few decades. These map the progress of animals in all classes and can typically record the growth and progress of a hatchling through to adulthood and on into very old age.
The data from such organisations can clearly refute the nonsense that is espoused by W Clifford et al. 
In other taxa, it should be possible to collect similar data from either hobby groups or private collections too.
Let us consider the situation of "Old world Chameleons". When Mr Warwick, was involved in the trade, these animals they were notoriously difficult to acclimatise, and frequently died within weeks or months of import. We know of course, stress, the lack of availability of commercially bred live insect diet, lack of correct husbandry including correct environmental lighting and parasites caused huge attrition in the imported animals........... perhaps harking back to these dark times was the reason that the Lush campaign was mistakenly presented?
We now have thriving breeding populations of a number of this Taxa, producing multi generation offspring which are seen regularly at the breeder shows, specialist pet shops and are available to hobbyists who have adopted the modern practice of reptile husbandry. In consequence, the life expectancy and quality of care has reduced mortality to very small numbers.
With good care guides, quality diet, new technology habitats and excellent books and Magazines the care and maintenance of reptiles and Amphibians in captivity is something we can be rightly proud of.
Perhaps, those whom criticise and make outlandish and frequently inaccurate statements about our hobby should get a proper education and learn the meaning of the letters they seek to add to their names!:whistling2:


----------



## Natrix

Geomyda said:


> You miss my point. What I am saying, is there are written records of longevity and indeed, in some species accurate health and welfare information documented.With Tortises for instance some regional groups keep passports for all the animals seen at their regular "health check" which occur in some cases twice a year for the last few decades. These map the progress of animals in all classes and can typically record the growth and progress of a hatchling through to adulthood and on into very old age.
> The data from such organisations can clearly refute the nonsense that is espoused by W Clifford et al.
> In other taxa, it should be possible to collect similar data from either hobby groups or private collections too.
> Let us consider the situation of "Old world Chameleons". When Mr Warwick, was involved in the trade, these animals they were notoriously difficult to acclimatise, and frequently died within weeks or months of import. We know of course, stress, the lack of availability of commercially bred live insect diet, lack of correct husbandry including correct environmental lighting and parasites caused huge attrition in the imported animals........... perhaps harking back to these dark times was the reason that the Lush campaign was mistakenly presented?
> We now have thriving breeding populations of a number of this Taxa, producing multi generation offspring which are seen regularly at the breeder shows, specialist pet shops and are available to hobbyists who have adopted the modern practice of reptile husbandry. In consequence, the life expectancy and quality of care has reduced mortality to very small numbers.
> With good care guides, quality diet, new technology habitats and excellent books and Magazines the care and maintenance of reptiles and Amphibians in captivity is something we can be rightly proud of.
> Perhaps, those whom criticise and make outlandish and frequently inaccurate statements about our hobby should get a proper education and learn the meaning of the letters they seek to add to their names!:whistling2:


I totally get your point and I totally agree that these records show how well the species involved are doing in captivity and I'm sure we can use them to to argue with a lot of the points being made by the Anti's but using those records can you tell me how many animals died in their first year in captivity?

Gordon
FBH VC


----------



## Natrix

Tarron said:


> I think I see what you're getting at, if we say we studied 100 reptiles in thier first year of captive (whether caught or bred) and 80 lived past the first year, they would just say, well that 80 was only 25% of the whole population, instead of 100 there really were 320, we just didn't mention them.
> 
> Yeah unfortunately they are quite likely to do that! But that could work to our favour too, in that they would look petty and attempt to change figures to suit them.
> 
> I do get what you are saying though, it's a tricky situation and no one wants to dive in and end up looking foolish because of it.
> 
> *Maybe our best attempt at clearing up the 75% issue is purely by publically asking for the raw data to be provided to independent sources, to be reviewed properly.* There is no way they could have do the research properly to come to that conclusion, for the very reasons you have mentioned the fbh can't. Therefore, we would have the evidence (or lack of) to show the article is made up/false/fabricated
> 
> 
> 
> This may have gone a little off topic, not sure hornet relates to Eurogroup now lol.
> 
> Oh, and the very last line of your post is just the perfect line. It is the keepers, and only keepers, that can provide the evidence and statistics to prove the actual figures.


Basically the bit in red is spot on. We have to find a large number of people (the bigger the number the better) who are all buying a new reptile. They have to note everything about the animal. What it is, where they brought it (breeder, show, pet shop etc) Where it was sourced (WC,CB,CF), It's approximate age, if it's their first animal or if they are experienced.....everything. They then have to tell us how it is at six months old, one year old, two years old etc.

Then some one has to go through the data and work out the death rates and survival rates of the animals involved. 

Also remember we are dealing with animals that mass produce their babies as a way of keeping the species going. There is going to be babies that die because they have genetic faults and they would of died in the wild so we need wild figures as well before we can work out if the death rate we get is better or worse than in the wild.

How ever we do this it is going to take time and effort to get the true figures. Neither of which Warwick has used to arrive at his guestimat. 

Gordon
FBH VC


----------



## Tarron

So why not challenge Warwick to provide the raw data he used? If he provides it, get it independentally verified. If he doesn't, there must be channels through the system to get him struck off or dismissed or whatever happens


----------



## Natrix

Tarron said:


> So why not challenge Warwick to provide the raw data he used? If he provides it, get it independentally verified. If he doesn't, there must be channels through the system to get him struck off or dismissed or whatever happens


We are trying to challenge Warwick, that's why we need some good, solid, scientific evidence to fight him with. The problem with Warwick is that you will never get him to sit down and discuss his findings. 
As for getting him struck off, What are we getting him struck off of? We have yet to find a real qualification owned by the man and he is the director of his own company. I'm guessing he won't sack himself.

Gordon
FBH VC


----------



## Geomyda

Natrix said:


> I totally get your point and I totally agree that these records show how well the species involved are doing in captivity and I'm sure we can use them to to argue with a lot of the points being made by the Anti's but using those records can you tell me how many animals died in their first year in captivity?
> 
> Gordon
> FBH VC


Do wholesale reptile importers keep accurate records of mortality in their imported stock?


----------



## Natrix

Geomyda said:


> Do wholesale reptile importers keep accurate records of mortality in their imported stock?


Yes, along with records relating to total numbers being brought in, so a very useful resource.

Gordon
FBH VC


----------



## Geomyda

With these, I would expect a very powerful source of varifyable information which would refute the claims made that 75% are dead within twelve months?


----------



## Chris Newman

Dear all,

I have just got back from the conference in the coming days a full report will be made available. We recorded the entire conference and will, where appropriate, make a full transcript available. Also as I understand it organisers will be making the presentations available publically from a website. We will make available a full transcript of the representative from the European Parliament as it was, without doubt, the most disturbing speech I have ever witnessed! We will also seek to confirm if the content was made on behalf of the European Parliament, or if they were the private views of the representative, that is critically important issue. 

I have over the years been to many such conferences, but none as troubling as this one, it is crystal clear this meeting has been coordinated and drive by our opponents. There was not one single presentation from a pro trade/keeping speaker, not one. The overwhelming majority of presentations were from a negative perspective; only 2 were what could have been conceded impartial. Considering the title was “Import & Keeping of Exotic Animals” you would have thought they would have invited at the very least one speaker to represent that sector, they did not! It should also be noted delegate representation from the pro keeping/trade bodies was minimal, due I assume to the fact that know one from that side of the event was aware of the conference until very recently! By contrast those opposed to keeping of animals in captivity were well prepared. 

What is also confusing is the organisers of this conference - the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe [FVE] is the same organisation that has been commissioned [funded] be the EU Commission to look at the issue of import and keeping of exotic pets, this project is called CALLISTO. It is a three year study with the first meeting to be held early next month, however, at this meeting FVE delivered its ‘position statement’ in a presentation on the second day? So it appears the FVE already have a position yet the study has only just started, this seems a little odd to me? What also concerns me is the EU Commission have decided there is an issue to be conceded, i.e. the importation and keeping of exotic animals. They are funding a three study by an independent scientific body, however, that body already appears to have reached a conclusion before the study starts? Not only that but key stakeholder, i.e. keepers and traders, have been excluded from participating!!

As a final point the presentation from the representative from the European Parliament conclude that the keeping of all exotic animals should be banned! The day before the conference stated the following report was published and presented to the European Parliament:

*Wild Pets in the European Union*


----------



## Tarron

Thanks for the update and link Chris, I'm going to read and digest it over the next few days so I can fully understand it and the implications.
Although, page 2 "a scientific study in the UK found that 75% of wild caught reptiles die in the first year of captivity"
:hmm:

I can see I will really enjoy this read!


----------



## Jack W

Chris Newman said:


> Dear all,
> 
> I have just got back from the conference in the coming days a full report will be made available. We recorded the entire conference and will, where appropriate, make a full transcript available. Also as I understand it organisers will be making the presentations available publically from a website. We will make available a full transcript of the representative from the European Parliament as it was, without doubt, the most disturbing speech I have ever witnessed! We will also seek to confirm if the content was made on behalf of the European Parliament, or if they were the private views of the representative, that is critically important issue.
> 
> I have over the years been to many such conferences, but none as troubling as this one, it is crystal clear this meeting has been coordinated and drive by our opponents. There was not one single presentation from a pro trade/keeping speaker, not one. The overwhelming majority of presentations were from a negative perspective; only 2 were what could have been conceded impartial. Considering the title was “Import & Keeping of Exotic Animals” you would have thought they would have invited at the very least one speaker to represent that sector, they did not! It should also be noted delegate representation from the pro keeping/trade bodies was minimal, due I assume to the fact that know one from that side of the event was aware of the conference until very recently! By contrast those opposed to keeping of animals in captivity were well prepared.
> 
> What is also confusing is the organisers of this conference - the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe [FVE] is the same organisation that has been commissioned [funded] be the EU Commission to look at the issue of import and keeping of exotic pets, this project is called CALLISTO. It is a three year study with the first meeting to be held early next month, however, at this meeting FVE delivered its ‘position statement’ in a presentation on the second day? So it appears the FVE already have a position yet the study has only just started, this seems a little odd to me? What also concerns me is the EU Commission have decided there is an issue to be conceded, i.e. the importation and keeping of exotic animals. They are funding a three study by an independent scientific body, however, that body already appears to have reached a conclusion before the study starts? Not only that but key stakeholder, i.e. keepers and traders, have been excluded from participating!!
> 
> As a final point the presentation from the representative from the European Parliament conclude that the keeping of all exotic animals should be banned! The day before the conference stated the following report was published and presented to the European Parliament:
> 
> *Wild Pets in the European Union*


Thank you for sharing this Chris. I have a couple of questions to ask:

Obviously the proposed study by the FVE doesn't look promising, is the study actually going to be independent? Is this group staffed by academics, vets or activists?

Apart from donating, which I will be doing very soon (in the next few days, and will be continuing to), and joining groups such as the IHS/ BHS, what else can we as hobbyists be actively doing? Fund raising, researching, social media, lobbying through letters and emails, etc.

Were you able to give your side, the factual side on this argument at the conference?

Do they not realise that banning the captive keeping of reptiles will result in mass euthanasia of animals and the development of a huge underground market that cannot be regulated as the pet trade can?

I have been following these developments for a few months now, and what I am wondering is what are the academic herpetologists and trade doing to help us in this? They have the ability to produce the scientific evidence that we need to ensure the survival of our hobby.

Sorry for the all of the questions. You are doing a great job and I for one am very grateful and appreciative of you and your colleagues efforts. The only reason I haven't donated so far is due to the university holidays, I am a final year undergrad at the moment, I have been pretty broke. Now I am in a better financial position I will be donating as we all should if we can.

Jack


----------



## Jack W

Natrix said:


> We are trying to challenge Warwick, that's why we need some good, solid, scientific evidence to fight him with. The problem with Warwick is that you will never get him to sit down and discuss his findings.
> As for getting him struck off, What are we getting him struck off of? We have yet to find a real qualification owned by the man and he is the director of his own company. I'm guessing he won't sack himself.
> 
> Gordon
> FBH VC


Gordon, I too have seen many meaningless, obscure and changing letters appearing after Warwick's name. Yet, as far as I am aware the man has no PhD, no MSc or even a BSc relating to the subject that he professes to be an expert in. In searches of actual academic articles, through my university collections databases, I find no articles by him in any of the major journals on the subject. He is not affiliated to any universities or zoological institutions. The man is a bluffer and seems to have got by via simply convincing people he is right.

I assume attempts have been made to call him out on this, I mean his research just doesn't stand up to academic standards. The problem is that the EU and other such legislative bodies seem not to pay any attention to this matter as of yet. Hopefully this will change and his credentials will finally be called into question.


----------



## Tarron

Jack W said:


> Gordon, I too have seen many meaningless, obscure and changing letters appearing after Warwick's name. Yet, as far as I am aware the man has no PhD, no MSc or even a BSc relating to the subject that he professes to be an expert in. In searches of actual academic articles, through my university collections databases, I find no articles by him in any of the major journals on the subject. He is not affiliated to any universities or zoological institutions. The man is a bluffer and seems to have got by via simply convincing people he is right.
> 
> I assume attempts have been made to call him out on this, I mean his research just doesn't stand up to academic standards. The problem is that the EU and other such legislative bodies seem not to pay any attention to this matter as of yet. Hopefully this will change and his credentials will finally be called into question.


If only he didn't pull ours of the BBC debate with Chris, that would have been brought up on national television.

I believe Gordon answered some of the questions you asked, earlier in the thread, But it is certainly time we all banded together on this one. This is no just an arguement over the legalities of shows anymore, this is about ensuring the survival of our hobbies, and dare I say, the possible survival of some species?

I too hope someone managed to spake out for the trade, whether or not it was in an official questioning session.


----------



## Geomyda

Chris Newman said:


> Dear all,
> 
> I have just got back from the conference in the coming days a full report will be made available. We recorded the entire conference and will, where appropriate, make a full transcript available. Also as I understand it organisers will be making the presentations available publically from a website. We will make available a full transcript of the representative from the European Parliament as it was, without doubt, the most disturbing speech I have ever witnessed! We will also seek to confirm if the content was made on behalf of the European Parliament, or if they were the private views of the representative, that is critically important issue.
> 
> I have over the years been to many such conferences, but none as troubling as this one, it is crystal clear this meeting has been coordinated and drive by our opponents. There was not one single presentation from a pro trade/keeping speaker, not one. The overwhelming majority of presentations were from a negative perspective; only 2 were what could have been conceded impartial. Considering the title was “Import & Keeping of Exotic Animals” you would have thought they would have invited at the very least one speaker to represent that sector, they did not! It should also be noted delegate representation from the pro keeping/trade bodies was minimal, due I assume to the fact that know one from that side of the event was aware of the conference until very recently! By contrast those opposed to keeping of animals in captivity were well prepared.
> 
> What is also confusing is the organisers of this conference - the Federation of Veterinarians of Europe [FVE] is the same organisation that has been commissioned [funded] be the EU Commission to look at the issue of import and keeping of exotic pets, this project is called CALLISTO. It is a three year study with the first meeting to be held early next month, however, at this meeting FVE delivered its ‘position statement’ in a presentation on the second day? So it appears the FVE already have a position yet the study has only just started, this seems a little odd to me? What also concerns me is the EU Commission have decided there is an issue to be conceded, i.e. the importation and keeping of exotic animals. They are funding a three study by an independent scientific body, however, that body already appears to have reached a conclusion before the study starts? Not only that but key stakeholder, i.e. keepers and traders, have been excluded from participating!!
> 
> As a final point the presentation from the representative from the European Parliament conclude that the keeping of all exotic animals should be banned! The day before the conference stated the following report was published and presented to the European Parliament:
> 
> *Wild Pets in the European Union*


Once again, thanks Chris for the update on this conference which as suspected provides a clear agenda from groups whom are clearly galvanising their efforts to disrupt and potentially abolish across the EU a hobby which is dear to the hearts of people on Fora such as this.
I would encourage all to download and thoroughly read the attached document. The contributors are those we need to address and deal with. ENDCAP, the umbrella organisation should be identified and their stated facts need to be explored are fully verified.
From a brief reading of the document, the familiar ring of quoting statistics with bold references to percentages of 70-75% suggests that their "science" has been drawn from a similar source to that debated on this fora in the past?
Chris, I fully understand the frustration and extreme concern felt by you during this event and I too wonder at what level the EU are represented in these issues?


----------



## Lutra Garouille

Thank You Chris.

It sounds like it was the usual one sided affair we were concerned about. 

I wonder wether the repercussions of this decision have fully been considered by the EU 'man'. Not only will 1000's of pets have to be destroyed and the trade go 'underground' but both vetinary and academic science, pet shops, exo terra etc... Will be affected. This is a huge issue to not just our hobby and i truly fail to see how the government would be able to implement this without devestating impacts upon our economy. 

The study that was commissioned and the 'mission statement' should clearly not be conclusions. This should be a hypothesis that they will be able to prove or disprove at the most. 

Out of interest were there references included? And were you able to ask questions from the talks?

I shall read the attached over this week.


----------



## Chris Newman

I thought this might be of some interest, below is a list of the governmental bodies that attended this meeting:


New Zealand Veterinary Council 
Polish National Veterinary Chamber
Members of the EU Parliament
Permanent Representative of Denmark to the EU
EU Commission
State Veterinary and Food Administration of Slovakia
Federal Ministry of Health, Austria
EU Commission – DG SANCO 
Permanent Representative of Malta to the EU
The Danish Veterinary Food Administration
Permanent Representative of Slovak Republic to the EU
EU Commission DG SANCO – Animal Welfare
CITES
Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, Netherlands
Permanent Representative of Lithuania to the EU
Ministry of Agriculture Republic of Estonia
The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration
Finish Food Safety Authority 
Ministry of Agriculture, Estonia
Permanent Representative of Estonia to the EU
Swiss Federal Veterinary Office
General Veterinary Inspector, Poland
Permanent Representative of Ireland to the EU
Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the EU
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Finland
Cyprus’ Presidency of the Council of Europe
Permanent Representative of Poland to the EU
Norwegian Food Safety Authority
OIE
Swedish Board of Agriculture – Division for CITES and Pet Animals
State Food and Veterinary Service, Lithuania
Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Ireland
European Commission, Belgium
Administration des Services Veteinaries, Luxembourg
Ministry of Agriculture, Croatia
Czech Chamber of Surgeons
EU Commission – DG ENV
Ministry of Cyprus
Permanent Representative of Hungary to the EU
Ministry for Resources and Rural Affairs, Malta
Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency, UK
Food and Veterinary Services of the rep of Latvia
Ministry of Rural Affairs, Sweden
Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the EU
Dutch Food & Consumer Safety Authority
Animal Welfare Division of the Belgium Federal Service
Permanent Representative of Bulgaria to the EU
Ministry of Health, Italy


----------



## Geomyda

Chris Newman said:


> I thought this might be of some interest, below is a list of the governmental bodies that attended this meeting:
> 
> 
> New Zealand Veterinary Council
> Polish National Veterinary Chamber
> Members of the EU Parliament
> Permanent Representative of Denmark to the EU
> EU Commission
> State Veterinary and Food Administration of Slovakia
> Federal Ministry of Health, Austria
> EU Commission – DG SANCO
> Permanent Representative of Malta to the EU
> The Danish Veterinary Food Administration
> Permanent Representative of Slovak Republic to the EU
> EU Commission DG SANCO – Animal Welfare
> CITES
> Ministry of Economic Affairs, Agriculture and Innovation, Netherlands
> Permanent Representative of Lithuania to the EU
> Ministry of Agriculture Republic of Estonia
> The Danish Veterinary and Food Administration
> Finish Food Safety Authority
> Ministry of Agriculture, Estonia
> Permanent Representative of Estonia to the EU
> Swiss Federal Veterinary Office
> General Veterinary Inspector, Poland
> Permanent Representative of Ireland to the EU
> Permanent Representative of Cyprus to the EU
> Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Finland
> Cyprus’ Presidency of the Council of Europe
> Permanent Representative of Poland to the EU
> Norwegian Food Safety Authority
> OIE
> Swedish Board of Agriculture – Division for CITES and Pet Animals
> State Food and Veterinary Service, Lithuania
> Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, Ireland
> European Commission, Belgium
> Administration des Services Veteinaries, Luxembourg
> Ministry of Agriculture, Croatia
> Czech Chamber of Surgeons
> EU Commission – DG ENV
> Ministry of Cyprus
> Permanent Representative of Hungary to the EU
> Ministry for Resources and Rural Affairs, Malta
> Animal Health and Veterinary Laboratories Agency, UK
> Food and Veterinary Services of the rep of Latvia
> Ministry of Rural Affairs, Sweden
> Permanent Representative of the Netherlands to the EU
> Dutch Food & Consumer Safety Authority
> Animal Welfare Division of the Belgium Federal Service
> Permanent Representative of Bulgaria to the EU
> Ministry of Health, Italy


This was either a very quiet period at the EU in Brussels or someone has been very busy lobbying!:gasp:


----------



## Chris Newman

Geomyda said:


> This was either a very quiet period at the EU in Brussels or someone has been very busy lobbying!:gasp:


As much as it pains me I have to commend our opponents for being so organised, there efforts have been outstanding - this has been orchestrated to perfection. The question now is do we have the resolve to address the issue, or do we concede defeat!


----------



## Tarron

Chris Newman said:


> As much as it pains me I have to commend our opponents for being so organised, there efforts have been outstanding - this has been orchestrated to perfection. The question now is do we have the resolve to address the issue, or do we concede defeat!





Winston Chrchill said:


> We shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.


What he said ^^^


----------



## Geomyda

Tarron said:


> What he said ^^^


Churchill also commended the fighters of the RAF whom took on the might of the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain. "Never in the field of human conflict was so much, owed by so many to so few". 
It occurs to me, that we need a force of educated veterinarians and academics to look at the document that forms the basis of the criticism presented at this conference and properly respond to the nonsense that has been levelled at the hobby?
Those Vets who, readily support our captive charges and no doubt earn their living from assisting the good husbandry practice which has developed in the last couple of decades, in the field of captive Reptiles and Amphibians. We need you to stand up and be counted!:2thumb:


----------



## Tarron

Geomyda said:


> Churchill also commended the fighters of the RAF whom took on the might of the Luftwaffe in the Battle of Britain. "Never in the field of human conflict was so much, owed by so many to so few".
> It occurs to me, that we need a force of educated veterinarians and academics to look at the document that forms the basis of the criticism presented at this conference and properly respond to the nonsense that has been levelled at the hobby?
> Those Vets who, readily support our captive charges and no doubt earn their living from assisting the good husbandry practice which has developed in the last couple of decades, in the field of captive Reptiles and Amphibians. We need you to stand up and be counted!:2thumb:


Definitely, we need the real proffesionals, Vets, Zookeepers, Nature Documentary Makers (Steve Backshall, David Attenborough whomever is interseted) to stand up and help. Get the vets/science types to provide the true facts, and then the others to use thier position to bring it to the public and the government.

I notice on that list, there were very few British members invited. Could that stand in our favour? If they havent listened to the drivel, we can lobby them with our side to help them veto any legislation etc.

(I'm not fully aware of how europe works, I'd be happy to see the end of it)

Of course, we also need the full might of the hobby, and the organisations and companies that keep us running, Hagen, Arcadia, Pets at Home (Yes, even them), etc.

I believe that as a collective, we are bigger than our opponents. We also need to coerce with our overseas equivalents in Europe.


----------



## gregmonsta

Chris Newman said:


> *Wild Pets in the European Union*


----------



## Natrix

Jack W said:


> Gordon, I too have seen many meaningless, obscure and changing letters appearing after Warwick's name. Yet, as far as I am aware the man has no PhD, no MSc or even a BSc relating to the subject that he professes to be an expert in. In searches of actual academic articles, through my university collections databases, I find no articles by him in any of the major journals on the subject. He is not affiliated to any universities or zoological institutions. The man is a bluffer and seems to have got by via simply convincing people he is right.
> 
> I assume attempts have been made to call him out on this, I mean his research just doesn't stand up to academic standards. The problem is that the EU and other such legislative bodies seem not to pay any attention to this matter as of yet. Hopefully this will change and his credentials will finally be called into question.


Mr Warwicks qualifications (or lack of) have been looked into a number of times and everyone has come up with the same findings as your self. This information has been passed onto the likes of DEFRA but he always seems able to find another group to impress with his alphabet soup after his name and his fictional claims.

Basically if you present people with a nice glossy report with lots of unresearched claims and a selection of meaningless photos and add a few names at the end with a selection of assorted letters after them, they will happily believe it all without question.

Gordon
FBH VC, AA, Tesco club card, Library pass :whistling2:


----------



## Tarron

Natrix said:


> Mr Warwicks qualifications (or lack of) have been looked into a number of times and everyone has come up with the same findings as your self. This information has been passed onto the likes of DEFRA but he always seems able to find another group to impress with his alphabet soup after his name and his fictional claims.
> 
> Basically if you present people with a nice glossy report with lots of unresearched claims and a selection of meaningless photos and add a few names at the end with a selection of assorted letters after them, they will happily believe it all without question.
> 
> Gordon
> FBH VC, AA, Tesco club card, Library pass :whistling2:


Think you may have started a new signature craze Gordon : victory:


----------



## stevenrudge

Natrix said:


> Sadly we can't just ask people how long their animals live.
> To do this kind of research properly you need to follow a range of people, both new and experienced, who are keeping a range of newly brought animals, both young and adult from a range of sources (WC, CB, CF).
> These people and their pets need to be closely followed for a number of years to get the information required.
> 
> But that is only half the information. Knowing how long the captive animals survive is meaningless unless we have some idea of what the same species of animals life expectancy is in the wild. It's only when you can compare captive life expectancy to wild life expectancy that you can decide which is best. Basically Mr Warwicks 75% captive death rate is meaningless without a wild death rate for comparison.
> 
> All this is going to take years and we need answers yesterday.
> 
> Gordon


 Absolutely right any information that cannot be verified by a third party is meaningless,you might as well say abracadabra the figure is *& %,if Warwick or anybody else comes up with any % if they cannot prove it we should ignore them,the onus is on them they make the claim,they have to prove it,we do not need to counter a lie,just ask them to prove their (science)we know that they cannot.
As for getting hobbyist or professional animal breeders or dealers to give real mortality rates without third party checking,the information would be meaningless and unrealistic.Again we are letting the other side set the agenda


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Absolutely right any information that cannot be verified by a third party is meaningless,you might as well say abracadabra the figure is *& %,if Warwick or anybody else comes up with any % if they cannot prove it we should ignore them,the onus is on them they make the claim,they have to prove it,we do not need to counter a lie,just ask them to prove their (science)we know that they cannot.
> As for getting hobbyist or professional animal breeders or dealers to give real mortality rates without third party checking,the information would be meaningless and unrealistic.Again we are letting the other side set the agenda


I was one of the ones suggesting this, but yes, I can see why it wouldnt work that well. I have a 3 year old beardie, but whats to say she isnt 1, or I have bred my beardies once, whats to say I didnt hide the deaths of half the clutch, etc etc. : victory:

I still think sitting idle isnt the right things to do. We need to publically call out for the evidence. Unfortunately, with Warwick pulling out of the BBC debate, we lost a very good opportunity. Hopefully, another will present itself. Let them tie thier own noose so to speak.


----------



## Geomyda

Tarron said:


> Definitely, we need the real proffesionals, Vets, Zookeepers, Nature Documentary Makers (Steve Backshall, David Attenborough whomever is interseted) to stand up and help. Get the vets/science types to provide the true facts, and then the others to use thier position to bring it to the public and the government.
> 
> I notice on that list, there were very few British members invited. Could that stand in our favour? If they havent listened to the drivel, we can lobby them with our side to help them veto any legislation etc.
> 
> (I'm not fully aware of how europe works, I'd be happy to see the end of it)
> 
> Of course, we also need the full might of the hobby, and the organisations and companies that keep us running, Hagen, Arcadia, Pets at Home (Yes, even them), etc.
> 
> I believe that as a collective, we are bigger than our opponents. We also need to coerce with our overseas equivalents in Europe.


Not sure I would use the word "coerce". However, I have corresponded with friends in Belgium, Germany,Italy and Spain. From initial feedback, they too are very concerned about the content and context of the recent conference. In Germany, the national reptile group DGHT has something close to 6000 paid members and the organisation has a full time staff. Hopefully, the wake up call has been heard and Europe's hobby keepers will realise that there is much to defend and deal with?


----------



## Natrix

Tarron said:


> stevenrudge said:
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely right any information that cannot be verified by a third party is meaningless,you might as well say abracadabra the figure is *& %,if Warwick or anybody else comes up with any % if they cannot prove it we should ignore them,the onus is on them they make the claim,they have to prove it,we do not need to counter a lie,just ask them to prove their (science)we know that they cannot.
> As for getting hobbyist or professional animal breeders or dealers to give real mortality rates without third party checking,the information would be meaningless and unrealistic.Again we are letting the other side set the agenda
> 
> 
> 
> I was one of the ones suggesting this, but yes, I can see why it wouldnt work that well. I have a 3 year old beardie, but whats to say she isnt 1, or I have bred my beardies once, whats to say I didnt hide the deaths of half the clutch, etc etc. : victory:
> 
> I still think sitting idle isnt the right things to do. We need to publically call out for the evidence. Unfortunately, with Warwick pulling out of the BBC debate, we lost a very good opportunity. Hopefully, another will present itself. Let them tie thier own noose so to speak.
Click to expand...

Guy's

You are both right in what you are saying, the problem now is that a large number of very influential people (EU wise) were at that meeting and now believe they know the truth about the Exotic pet trade. While we don't need to fight the Anti's directly, we do now need to provide the EU with good solid counter claims backed by good solid evidence, if we are to save our hobby from a total ban. 

Gordon


----------



## Natrix

Geomyda said:


> Not sure I would use the word "coerce". However, I have corresponded with friends in Belgium, Germany,Italy and Spain. From initial feedback, they too are very concerned about the content and context of the recent conference. In Germany, the national reptile group DGHT has something close to 6000 paid members and the organisation has a full time staff. Hopefully, the wake up call has been heard and Europe's hobby keepers will realise that there is much to defend and deal with?


Sometimes it takes a good hard kick up the back side to get people moving and hopefully this conference has been the size 12 boot all the hobbies have needed to get everyone working together towards the same goal.

Gordon


----------



## Tarron

I've just seen the EUARK pamphlet "Reptiles and Amphibians as companion animals: The Facts"

I have to say, I was very impressed with it. Simple, factual and easy enough for the general public to get their heads around.
Not to mention, it has an actual referencing system that can be traced to sources, proving facts! Lol

Is there any plan to distribute this on a wide scale st the moment?


----------



## MCEE

Calm down everybody. Let's not get all upset about this yet. This was merely conference discussing the pros and cons (mainly cons by the sounds of it) of importing and keeping exotic pets. It was not primarily about lizards, snakes and frogs but the whole spectrum of the exotic pet industry and hobby. Nobody is making any laws just yet.
The conference was organised by those with "concerns" for those with "concerns" and such conferences are places to make your point as loud as you can in the hope that the right people will be listening. There is nothing wrong with that. Also, there are no rules that say conference organisers should invite anyone to speak who may throw a spanner into their agenda and the fact that no pro-exotic pet representative was invited to speak at this conference was rather telling.

Just because the anti-exotic pet brigade have "concerns" about us keeping exotic pets does not mean it is will be the end of our hobby, wiping exotic pets from our homes completely. In fact to suggest this is absurd and slight scaremongering to say the least. For a start the exotic pet trade, Europe wide, is huge and getting bigger all the time. It would be foolhardy for any Parliament, let alone the European Parliament, to remove this trade completely. OK, so there are some restrictions of the exotic pet trade that even the legitimate exotic pet industry and hobbyists would be more than happy to support and I would not mind betting there are a large percentage of herp keepers who would never buy wild caught animals for reasons of environmental impact and animal cruelty, so would support stricter regulation of this. 

Remember, this conference was only about making a loud noise. Maybe the the European exotic pet industry and the organisations that try and protect our hobby ought to make a louder one. After all, there should be enough support Europe wide to do so, shouldn't there? At the moment it seems that it is the antis who are the ones being proactive and the exotic pet industry and representatives of hobby are just being reactive. How about turning the tables?
For a start if Warwick is as bogus as everybody says he is, get the evidence and "out" him. Surely it cannot be that hard for Chris Newman to do this with all his contacts. So, OK, Warwick is just a small twig on the tree but you start whittling long enough at the tree it will soon fall down, especially if you use many knives.



Chris Newman said:


> As much as it pains me I have to commend our opponents for being so organised, there efforts have been outstanding - this has been orchestrated to perfection. The question now is do we have the resolve to address the issue, or do we concede defeat!


The hobby's opponents are well organised because they have very little to fight against. It is about time that representatives of the industry and the hobby start gathering their army and organise an efficient attack rather than worrying about how to defend. After all, he who has to defend needs to ensure he is at the top of a hill. As it stands, attack is the only viable option because the exotic pet industry and hobby still has to much clibming to do to make even a half decent defence.


----------



## Geomyda

In June this year, a serious threat of a ban to an important International Herpetological Society "breeder show" took place in Doncaster. The local authority had been persuaded by the representation of elements of the "Animal rights coalition" to effect a potential closure to the event.
It was only the hard work, and an expensive high court injunction that allowed the FBH to win the day and put down this attack. The stewardship of a few in the FBH has been rightly commended for their effort and diligent work.
The fact is, the local authority sought to break a written contract with the organisers of the show for fear that recently published "Scientific" paper was presenting credible evidence that the practice of "breeder shows" was a significant risk to animal welfare and human health.
Of course the reality, is the published paper, was a rather sensational and highly inaccurate document that had been concocted to create maximum headlines with little or no empirical evidence. 
This latest Conference in Europe, is sadly using the same sources to make wild and outlandish claims, which appeal to EU Government administrators who made up much of the delegate audience at the conference.
These published, "peer reviewed" papers need to be studied and the nonsense espoused in them exposed!


----------



## Elmodfz

Lutra Garouille said:


> Hmmmm. Concerning, but the literature cited mainly in that briefing is internet news sites or not scientific literature. These are therefore not 'proof'.
> 
> We could quite easily write something similar but with scientific references. Is anything like this in the pipe line? Have we got researchers onto getting scientific references to support our position?
> 
> We need to refute these 70% numbers etc... with hard science. If it isnt out there then we need to question the scientific basis of those numbers.
> 
> The unknowledgeable keeper issue is there but is also present for cats, dogs, budgies and all kinds of other pets. Information and checking on peoples knowledge should be considered before an outright ban.
> 
> Good luck Chris. :2thumb:


It just so happens that I am writing my final dissertation on the Importing and Keeping of Reptiles in the UK for my last uni year. So I will be putting together as much scientific fact and references as possible in order to try and prove that much of what is being said is rubbish. It's early days yet but I'm gathering what information I can at the moment ready to analyse it all.

I will be involving as many of the reptile community as possible as well, because I really want to try and prove many of those statistics wrong.

This thread is on CaptiveBred as well so perhaps keep an eye on that one too for updates


----------



## Geomyda

*CALLISTO Project*

CALLISTO
Companion Animals multisectoriaL interprofessionaL and Interdisciplinary Strategic Think tank On zoonoses


Project Acronym: CALLISTO

Title of project: Companion Animals multisectoriaL interprofessionaL and Interdisciplinary Strategic Think tank On zoonoses

Project Call Identifier: FP7-KBBE-2011-5

Project Number: 289316

Project Officer (DG/Dir/Unit): RTD/E/04

Project Abstract:

Since more and increasingly different species of animals are kept as companions one has to face the fact that apart from the well documented positive effects of human-animal interaction there are negative consequences as well. CALLISTO will focus on the risks of zoonotic infectious diseases associated with companion animals. To do so, we will form a multidisciplinary, multisectorial and interprofessional network of experts representing the major relevant stakeholders. In a 3 year program we will provide an overview of the current situation with regard to the role of companion animals as a source of infectious diseases for people and food animals. We will identify knowledge and technology gaps for the most important zoonoses and will propose targeted actions to reduce the risk of zoonotic diseases transferred via companion animals. Furthermore, we will keep our stakeholders and the general public informed of our results in order to contribute to the uptake of the proposed actions and to promote risk-awareness in healthy human-animal relationships. To this purpose, CALLISTO will install a total of seven Expert Advisory Groups (EAG), consisting of experts in complementary fields of interest that will meet at regular intervals in order to exchange perspectives, knowledge and ideas and to produce expert documentation that serves as input from the specific EAG to the CALLISTO Conferences. The following EAGs will be installed: EAG User Community, EAG Policy Actions; EAG Zoonotic Viral Infections; EAG Zoonotic Bacterial Infections, EAG Zoonotic Parasitic Infections, EAG Epidemiology and underlying factors, and EAG Sociology and Welfare. The CALLISTO Synthesis Conferences are the center stage of the project, where experts from all EAGs come together to engage in discussions with each other and with other representatives from outside the network. Results from the Conferences will be widely disseminated.

Contact Person: Jan	Vaarten

Project Officer: Anne Sophie	LEQUARRE


Sent from my iPad


----------



## colinm

Well as one of my old teachers used to say this smells of bovine droppings.

"They" are really putting pressure on the E.U.through the zoonosis front the the invasive species front and the importing of wild animals.In my opinion these are more of a threat to our hobby than the closure of the odd show and this is where I believe we as a community should be putting our efforts.


----------



## Janine00

Tarron said:


> I've just seen the EUARK pamphlet "Reptiles and Amphibians as companion animals: The Facts"
> 
> I have to say, I was very impressed with it. Simple, factual and easy enough for the general public to get their heads around.
> Not to mention, it has an actual referencing system that can be traced to sources, proving facts! Lol
> 
> Is there any plan to distribute this on a wide scale st the moment?


 I blooming well hope so..... : victory:


----------



## Janine00

MCEE said:


> Calm down everybody. Let's not get all upset about this yet. If not us, who? If not now, when?? (with apologies to John Lewis)
> 
> For a start if Warwick is as bogus as everybody says he is, get the evidence and "out" him. Surely it cannot be that hard for Chris Newman to do this with all his contacts. So, OK, Warwick is just a small twig on the tree but you start whittling long enough at the tree it will soon fall down, especially if you use many knives.
> 
> The hobby's opponents are well organised because they have very little to fight against. It is about time that representatives of the industry and the hobby start gathering their army and organise an efficient attack rather than worrying about how to defend. After all, he who has to defend needs to ensure he is at the top of a hill. As it stands, attack is the only viable option because the exotic pet industry and hobby still has to much clibming to do to make even a half decent defence.


I'd really love to know what you think societies like the IHS, BHS, TCHG and others as well as the FBH have been doing all these years.... sitting on their hands?



Geomyda said:


> In June this year, a serious threat of a ban to an important International Herpetological Society "breeder show" took place in Doncaster. The local authority had been persuaded by the representation of elements of the "Animal rights coalition" to effect a potential closure to the event. Despite years of the IHS telling them about some of the stupid tricks that the Anti's use to stop shows where they were listening.
> The fact is, the local authority sought to break a written contract with the organisers of the show for fear that recently published "Scientific" paper was presenting credible evidence that the practice of "breeder shows" was a significant risk to animal welfare and human health.
> Of course the reality, is the published paper, was a rather sensational and highly inaccurate document that had been concocted to create maximum headlines with little or no empirical evidence.
> This latest Conference in Europe, is sadly using the same sources to make wild and outlandish claims, which appeal to EU Government administrators who made up much of the delegate audience at the conference.
> These published, "peer reviewed" papers need to be studied and the nonsense espoused in them exposed![/QUOTE] *Not ignored and made out to be of no consequence because its 'up to them to prove they are true'!!! They don't have to prove anything... they have got the politicians listening as they are telling them that they are credible scientists.*
> 
> 
> 
> Elmodfz said:
> 
> 
> 
> It just so happens that I am writing my final dissertation on the Importing and Keeping of Reptiles in the UK for my last uni year.
> I will be involving as many of the reptile community as possible as well, because I really want to try and prove many of those statistics wrong.
> 
> This thread is on CaptiveBred as well so perhaps keep an eye on that one too for updates
> 
> 
> 
> Whilst this is a great initiative and I applaud you for it :no1:, and people on the forums should be able to help to some degree,there is no way that we are going to be able to use the 'word' of people who are enthusiasts in any really credible way to counter their claims. What you need to lean most heavily in my opinion on a book and scientific paper review to counter the claims being made, and to find out where, if anywhere, we can gain the actual meta stats from to name the cause of the majority of the cases they are spouting on is mostly NOT reptile related. *So come on folks.... get your thinking caps on regarding where we may be able to pull some of this meta data from?????*
> 
> 
> 
> Geomyda said:
> 
> 
> 
> CALLISTO
> Companion Animals multisectoriaL interprofessionaL and Interdisciplinary Strategic Think tank On zoonoses
> 
> 
> Project Acronym: CALLISTO
> 
> Title of project: Companion Animals multisectoriaL interprofessionaL and Interdisciplinary Strategic Think tank On zoonoses
> 
> Project Call Identifier: FP7-KBBE-2011-5
> 
> Project Number: 289316
> 
> Project Officer (DG/Dir/Unit): RTD/E/04
> 
> Project Abstract:
> 
> Since more and increasingly different species of animals are kept as companions one has to face the fact that apart from the well documented positive effects of human-animal interaction there are negative consequences as well. CALLISTO will focus on the risks of zoonotic infectious diseases associated with companion animals. To do so, we will form a multidisciplinary, multisectorial and interprofessional network of experts representing the major relevant stakeholders. *In a 3 year program* we will provide an overview of the current situation with regard to the role of companion animals as a source of infectious diseases for people and food animals.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They don't need three years.... from the attitude at the conference, it seems to be fairly clear that they have already made up their minds!
> 
> 
> 
> colinm said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Well as one of my old teachers used to say this smells of bovine droppings.*
> 
> "They" are really putting pressure on the E.U.through the zoonosis front the the invasive species front and the importing of wild animals.In my opinion these are more of a threat to our hobby than the closure of the odd show and this is where I believe we as a community should be putting our efforts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You got it in one friend! :2thumb:
> 
> But don't worry.... there's no point us panicking about it.... Maybe we need to employ someone (or the trade assosciations do) to fight their corner.... Maybe us hobbyists need to find someone who can give a rallying call and keep us informed in order to try to help give us a voice..... OH WAIT.... *Chris.... where are you???......* we've got a whole new load of volunteers who know a whole lot about everything and who have got loads of *NEW *ideas... :whistling2: Bit like me and the IHS really?!?!?!?!?!??!!!!!! (ask any committee member, they will understand the joke).... J
Click to expand...


----------



## colinm

Tarron said:


> I've just seen the EUARK pamphlet "Reptiles and Amphibians as companion animals: The Facts"
> 
> I have to say, I was very impressed with it. Simple, factual and easy enough for the general public to get their heads around.
> Not to mention, it has an actual referencing system that can be traced to sources, proving facts! Lol
> 
> Is there any plan to distribute this on a wide scale st the moment?


I have just seen it,what a good ,factual,statement it is.

When the time is right hopefully Tony or chris will put a copy on here.


----------



## Tarron

It pretty much covers everything that is needed to be focussed on right now. Get them mailed to the EU Parliament officials that were there, hell post one through number 10 if needs be.

I really liked the look of it. Its the kind of thing that could be handed out at [email protected] and other places like that, maybe every pet/exotic store there is.

There I go, blowing things out of proportion again. sorry everyone!


----------



## BelfastScorpion

This is very concerning indeed. I don't keep reptiles but I do keep scorpions. I assume scorpions will be included in this.

Is there any further update? Is it likely to be an all out ban or just have certain restrictions for example an amended DWA act?

Very worried about the future of my hobby!


----------

