# DWA list



## dober-girl (May 16, 2009)

Having only limited experience with DWA animals (Wolves and Hyenas), I am slightly in the dark in regards to the DWA species. Out of personal interest I have just read the current list and was very suprised to see certain animals on there. I can understand why some would not be suitable for public ownership (size and at risk species) but am interested if anyone has any opinions on whether certain animals should be classed as DWA (excluding the obvious ones of course).

Am I also correct in assuming the DWA list does include animals simple becasue they are endangered and not becasue the are 'dangerous'. For example the zebra and tapir are listed on there, and while they could certainly deliver a nasty bite or kick, surely a captive breed one would pose no more risk than say a shire horse.


----------



## Talk To The Animals (Jan 10, 2008)

I think the list is only for those animals which are considered dangerous, hence the name!

And horses have been domesticated for years, so while one could do you a nasty injury with a kick, it would not be unpredictable in the way a zebra or tapir would be. You could say much the same thing about wolves and dogs - in fact, if you didn't know any better and looked at news reports and so on, dogs kill many more people in this country than wolves do, therefore you might conclude that dogs should be on the list and wolves shouldn't.


----------



## dober-girl (May 16, 2009)

In case you haven't seen the DWA list:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-cou...animallist.pdf 

Aside from being 'wild' animals, any of which could be classed as unpredictable, not all of these would be dangerous in the sense that a Cobra, Tiger or Elephant would be.

For example the Red Panda, Wooly Monkey, Tapir and Non European Otters are all included on the DWA list. Non of these could do any more damage than a pet dog yet are included on the list. Obviously these are protected animals, which I am assuming, is why the are included. But theoretically any of these could be kep by private owners, providing they could contribute to breeding programs and could provide a suitable enviroment, nutrition and vetinary attention. I'm not of course saying I think any of these animals should be kept be outside of zoos or wildlife parks, BUT theoretically they could. 

I notice from your signature that you have skunks, now correct me if I am wrong but have they not only been recently domesticated? Now how (apart from being highly endangered and slightly specialised in husbandry) how is keeping a red panda cb for a few generations more dangerous than keeping a skunk? 

Don't get me wrong I'm not be pedantic here, it's more a personal interest in regards to others opinions on the list.


----------



## Talk To The Animals (Jan 10, 2008)

Maybe that's why the list is updated every now and then, to remove things no longer considered dangerous.

You could be right about things being on there because they are endangered, as a form of protection.

Theoretically, you could, with enough money, space, and the right dodgy contacts, keep pretty much anything you liked!!

Perhaps it's more to do with the damage they could potentially do if they escaped or were handled by people who didn't know what they were doing.


----------



## Agkistrodon (Dec 12, 2008)

I believe zebras can do many times more damage than a domestic horse. They're much stronger, more aggressive, and they often bite for the eyes. This is the thing - these are dangerous WILD animals - things that aren't like dogs that have been domesticated and trained. Often big african stuff like that has an instinct to panic and attack or go mental ingrained into it, due to all the nasty predators in their habitat.


----------



## snowgoose (May 5, 2009)

Animals are on the DWA list if they are considered a risk to the public. The DWA list was first introduced to control the fashions of having exotic pets and such and causing public safety. So anything considered a risk to the public is put on the list.


----------



## reptismail (Nov 15, 2008)

centipede's arent


----------



## dober-girl (May 16, 2009)

Ah, but Zebra have in the past been domesticated and kept as pets. I have a lot of experience around horses and know first hand exactly how much damage a big horse can do when it freaks out, a zebra is substantially smaller than a 17hh cob x and a no where near as strong yet they are kept as pets across the world. 

Can you really class a small primate as dangerous, I suppose it can deliver a nasty bite and could also claw at your eyes but a scared cat can do just as much damage.

Also people are keeping racoons and skunks as pets now, recently domesticated and still retaining most of their wild instincts. Either of which could do a lot of damage to the public...

Once again I'm not suggesting any of these animals should be kept as pets as most are endangered or classed as 'at risk' and the pet trade would have a devestating effect on there numbers. This is simply a hypothetical debate.


----------



## photographymatt (Mar 6, 2006)

not one for Controversy(sp?) but the dwa is maybe just a £25-2000(depending on the council) bonus for councils rather than a matter of safety? discuss;-)

why was the mangrove snake on the dwa and isnt now, is that admitting they were wrong? or that it was a deadly venomous snake and now the same level as a corn snake(in the eyes of the powers that be I mean).

were dingos just different kind of dog before, cute and fluffy and now they are deadly animals?


----------



## chondro13 (Aug 18, 2008)

photographymatt said:


> not one for Controversy(sp?) but the dwa is maybe just a £25-2000(depending on the council) bonus for councils rather than a matter of safety? discuss;-)
> 
> why was the mangrove snake on the dwa and isnt now, is that admitting they were wrong? or that it was a deadly venomous snake and now the same level as a corn snake(in the eyes of the powers that be I mean).
> 
> were dingos just different kind of dog before, cute and fluffy and now they are deadly animals?



Boiga dendrophilia was on the DWAL because they essentially mistook it for a krait!

I feel that shows just how clued up the authorities are :whistling2:


----------



## photographymatt (Mar 6, 2006)

chondro13 said:


> Boiga dendrophilia was on the DWAL because they essentially mistook it for a krait!
> 
> I feel that shows just how clued up the authorities are :whistling2:


easy mistake  I once mistook a bosc monitor for a tokay gecko ;-)


----------



## Azemiops (May 1, 2008)

photographymatt said:


> not one for Controversy(sp?) but the dwa is maybe just a £25-2000(depending on the council) bonus for councils rather than a matter of safety? discuss;-)


With regards to this comment, yes, the councils who charge ridiculous sums (anything over say £300) may look at it is as getting a bonus or a way to put people off getting a license. However, there are also decent environmental health officers, who might not neccessarily know a lot about DWA, but are willing to put the effort in. You cant tar everyone with the same brush because youve heard of a few bad accounts from certain councils.


----------



## dober-girl (May 16, 2009)

photographymatt said:


> not one for Controversy(sp?) but the dwa is maybe just a £25-2000(depending on the council) bonus for councils rather than a matter of safety? discuss;-)
> 
> why was the mangrove snake on the dwa and isnt now, is that admitting they were wrong? or that it was a deadly venomous snake and now the same level as a corn snake(in the eyes of the powers that be I mean).
> 
> were dingos just different kind of dog before, cute and fluffy and now they are deadly animals?


Dingos are decended from 'tame' early dogs taken to Australia by South Eastern fishermen between 6000 and 3500 years ago if my history is correct. Unfortunatly Dingos can be very dangerous as they have no fear of humans.

Personally I think the cost of the DWA is a very good thing. If you can afford it, all the equipement and the modifications to bring a 'hot room' or a secure enclousure up to standard, you should in theory be serious about keeping DWA animals. If it were cheaper you'd have any old idiot buying these animals and not only putting themselves and everyone around therm at risk but eventually destroying the hobby for all private owners.


----------

