# Blue print for a legal rep show



## stevenrudge

Now that Donny is out of the way,its the right time to talk about our rep shows.
Part of my personnel frustrations with the various posts about this is that its really very simple and this should have been made very clear years ago,and that if this had been done we would not have had all the trouble with the AR 's that we have experienced over the years,yes we would still have had some but we would have been better able to defend ourselves.Another problem is us,what do we want?with some of the replys to posts by some people l'm not sure we all want the same things,but this makes no difference because the Law is the Law,we either stay within it are we take chances and hope we get by,
instead of going though all the legislative detail,l'll can do this latter l'll go through some bullet points as to were our problems are and show how we deal with them.
A. what is currently legal in the UK -what we are aloud by Law.
Private members meetings to sell/ exchange (surplus) animals to each other.
This is for Hobbyist only.
B. what is illegal currently in the UK -what will be challenged by ARs and any Local government or animal welfare organisations
Open one day public pet markets,where animals are openly sold by anybody either private individuals or traders(business animal dealers).this just not only brakes the 1951/and amendments Pet shop act,but also brakes legislation with the HMC.
So with this in mind this is what l'd propose-For Info- only


----------



## stevenrudge

Making us stay legal.
Reptlie shows for the members only,the chair of the IHS have had no input with this,its my input only again for info only
The IHS (society) show is a private members meeting only.
if anybody is not a full 12 month member,no entry-by UK Law this is the current legal view.
No one day entry for any none -members
No affiliated members gaining entry.
Only full 12 month IHS members gain entry for the IHS society private meeting.
This is the only legal view to this
Where we have problems with other society's with affiliated members gaining entry is that we are dealing with live animals,this marks us out to be treated differently to others,we would be vulnerable to any Legal challenge.
The show is a private meeting for IHS hobbyists to sell/ exchange (SURPLUS)animals to each other.
No (traders) licensed or either wise.anybody were it can be shown to be importing for the re-sale at the shows or breeding animals for any unlicensed reptile business,this can easily be checked by Nett/webb pages or forums checks.
This is not to be confused with foreign IHS members bring their own animals for sale at the shows.Full entry
There is no other legal view to this.


----------



## stevenrudge

Making us stay legal
Taking the politics out of the hobby.
The creation of the Fed has brought with it a whole new political agenda to the hobby,for me that has clouded to main issues confronting us,the Fed trys to be all things to all men and this has lead to too many compromises that have not been dealt with that could and should have been dealt with years ago.
Like l've already said that from the past posts its clear that some do not want the kind of shows or type of show that we would not have much trouble in having,they want the situation as it stands the bigger the better shows like the European shows but we all must get our heads round the fact that,that type of show is currently not legal in the UK whether we like it or not.
We have got the legislation that we have got so lets start living within it and move our hobby forward.
The alternative is that if we do not change however good our last show was,the shows will be taken from us.
And this will not be the AR's or the RSPCAs fault but our own


----------



## Herptileeditor

*Not Again*

It's VERY RARE that I respond to these sort of threads but I think now Mr. Rudge, enough is enough. Put you money where your mouth is! Stand for election onto committee of a society and do your mouthing off in the correct place!!!
Various members of the IHS (me included) have battled against the antis for the last 13/14 years to keep YOUR hobby alive, and to maintain the future of the shows and our industry in general. Where have you been in all this time.

Don't spout off on forums and upset people be proactive and take a part if as you say, you care for your hobby!!!


----------



## StuG

Why not start your own shows where you can what you like? 
You dont actually go to the shows so why does it matter to you what happens at them?


----------



## Janine00

Steven.... I have said before and I'll say again that I do occassionally agree with some of your points.... I have in the past encouraged you to put your money where your mouth is and actively do something rather than just posting on here... I believe you now have an offer from Alan that you may wish to consider. 

The only other thing I would like to point out here is that your opinion is not the same as the legal opinion given to the IHS by their solicitors, and without the Federation, the IHS shows would have probably ended a few years ago. We were not the one's who put a political slant on things, it was the AR's, RSPCA and their ilk who interpreted the law to their own ends. 

IMHO, shows were under an even more severe threat of not taking place when they conformed to your version of how they should be than now.

It has been discussed in IHS meetings about the very nice idea of encouraging all truly interested herpers in becoming members of one of the main societies that is affiliated to the FBH. 

We had a members only show at Rodbaston a couple of years ago, and it was not particularly well attended, so this gave some small indication that this may be a difficulty moving forwards. 

I would love to think that this is a way forward that would be accepted by all. BUT.... I posted a poll on here a few weeks ago about how many people would be prepared to join a society if that were the only way to get shows going and it sank like a lead balloon.

Look forward to seeing you at the next IHS AGM.... : victory:.... J


----------



## ian kerr

steven rudge again tsk tsk tsk


----------



## retic lover

Oh go away .........


----------



## shaunyboy

Herptileeditor said:


> It's VERY RARE that I respond to these sort of threads but I think now Mr. Rudge, enough is enough. Put you money where your mouth is! Stand for election onto committee of a society and do your mouthing off in the correct place!!!
> Various members of the IHS (me included) have battled against the antis for the last 13/14 years to keep YOUR hobby alive, and to maintain the future of the shows and our industry in general. Where have you been in all this time.
> 
> Don't spout off on forums and upset people be proactive and take a part if as you say, you care for your hobby!!!


^^^^^
this

also i will be the first to admit i have not read a lot of your threads.....

in fact the first time i come across your name...

you did a thread... personally calling out Chris Newman,on a canadian snake forum who's members had no clue who Chris was

the mod's imo correctly removed your thread from the canadian forum

imo you should really put your money where your mouth is mate

cheers shaun


----------



## AB's

Here we go again!!

In my honest opinion it's people like yourself OP who do more damage to the hobbie than any of the antis, take this thread you started for example http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/snakes/839497-tattoos-snakes.html you are so out of touch with the reptile community... Again just my opinion.

Yours faithfully a skin head male who keeps a Burmese python, has tattoos all over but also works for emergency services and no I'm not he man!


----------



## danaconda

I don't honestly think I've ever come across anyone with their head as far up their own arse as this guy!


----------



## Spreebok

TL;DR. Sounds like it wasn't worth reading anyway.


----------



## Tarron

What annoys me most, Steven, is that I agree with you on some points. But the way you use it as some sort of agenda against Chris is pathetic.

I'm not going to address all the posts, I haven't got the time or inclination at the moment but one that specifically stuck out is your accusation that the 'political side of the hobby' is causing the most damage?
If we didnt have the political side, such as Chris Newman, we would be sitting ducks for the anti pet keeping g brigade. It wouldn't take long for them to dig their claws in and make so.e noise. Or did you assume they would just go away? Do you think they are only in it for the fight?
Look at what's occurring in Europe next week, a massive political conference on what could be the future of the hobby, this hobby, that you claim to love!
As has already been mentioned, if you are not happy, do something yourself, so.thing physical, not just tip tapping away behind a screen.
From what Janine has said, an offer has been made. If you take it, I will have a lot of respect for you. If you truly believe what you are saying, you will grab the opportunity with both hands. If you dont take it, we can only assume you are full of yourself and not willing to follow through.

The bitching and sniping has to stop. Its make or break time Steven. I sincerely wish you the best in your choice.

And before you go off to another thread in a different forum claiming it's the same people jumping on you again, more people are coming out of the woodwork to say they are fed up ofyou, check which responses get the likes and realise you are almost alone I this vendetta.


----------



## scotty667

I think your secrectly working with the other side (just got a weird feeling), some of your posts just seem your against the reptile community.: victory:


----------



## swordfishtrombones

Give your chin a wipe there Steven.


----------



## Uromastyxman

Janine00 said:


> Steven.... I have said before and I'll say again that I do occassionally agree with some of your points.... I have in the past encouraged you to put your money where your mouth is and actively do something rather than just posting on here... I believe you now have an offer from Alan that you may wish to consider.
> 
> The only other thing I would like to point out here is that your opinion is not the same as the legal opinion given to the IHS by their solicitors, and without the Federation, the IHS shows would have probably ended a few years ago. We were not the one's who put a political slant on things, it was the AR's, RSPCA and their ilk who interpreted the law to their own ends.
> 
> IMHO, shows were under an even more severe threat of not taking place when they conformed to your version of how they should be than now.
> 
> It has been discussed in IHS meetings about the very nice idea of encouraging all truly interested herpers in becoming members of one of the main societies that is affiliated to the FBH.
> 
> We had a members only show at Rodbaston a couple of years ago, and it was not particularly well attended, so this gave some small indication that this may be a difficulty moving forwards.
> 
> I would love to think that this is a way forward that would be accepted by all. BUT.... I posted a poll on here a few weeks ago about how many people would be prepared to join a society if that were the only way to get shows going and it sank like a lead balloon.
> 
> Look forward to seeing you at the next IHS AGM.... : victory:.... J[/QUOTE
> :flrt:
> 
> I don't know Steven but I've read a few of his threads, and its obvious that he and Chris Newman have some history, and for this reason I don't want to make assumptions, however I would be interested to know what views of his you do agree with, as I think many of his points that could be relevent will be dismissed out of hand.


----------



## Uromastyxman

Tarron said:


> What annoys me most, Steven, is that I agree with you on some points. But the way you use it as some sort of agenda against Chris is pathetic.
> 
> I'm not going to address all the posts, I haven't got the time or inclination at the moment but one that specifically stuck out is your accusation that the 'political side of the hobby' is causing the most damage?
> If we didnt have the political side, such as Chris Newman, we would be sitting ducks for the anti pet keeping g brigade. It wouldn't take long for them to dig their claws in and make so.e noise. Or did you assume they would just go away? Do you think they are only in it for the fight?
> Look at what's occurring in Europe next week, a massive political conference on what could be the future of the hobby, this hobby, that you claim to love!
> As has already been mentioned, if you are not happy, do something yourself, so.thing physical, not just tip tapping away behind a screen.
> From what Janine has said, an offer has been made. If you take it, I will have a lot of respect for you. If you truly believe what you are saying, you will grab the opportunity with both hands. If you dont take it, we can only assume you are full of yourself and not willing to follow through.
> 
> The bitching and sniping has to stop. Its make or break time Steven. I sincerely wish you the best in your choice.
> 
> And before you go off to another thread in a different forum claiming it's the same people jumping on you again, more people are coming out of the woodwork to say they are fed up ofyou, check which responses get the likes and realise you are almost alone I this vendetta.


I don't know Steven but I've read a few of his threads, and its obvious that he and Chris Newman have some history, and for this reason I don't want to make assumptions, however I would be interested to know what views of his you do agree with, as I think many of his points that could be relevent will be dismissed out of hand.


----------



## ronnyjodes

It's not so much the message he's trying to portray that gets on my tits, more that it's the forum equivalent of somebody writing in red crayon and all the "r"s are backwards.


----------



## Uromastyxman

ronnyjodes said:


> It's not so much the message he's trying to portray that gets on my tits, more that it's the forum equivalent of somebody writing in red crayon and all the "r"s are backwards.


That may be the case, but I'm still interested to know what points he holds that people do agree with. Interestingley enough 2 people on this thread who have said they agree with some of his points, have not come forward and said what they are, even though I've asked them. 

I have absolutely no axe to grind, however, that does makes me wonder what they do agree with and why they wont say what they agree with.
:whistling2:


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Now that Donny is out of the way,its the right time to talk about our rep shows.





stevenrudge said:


> Making us stay legal.
> 
> No (traders) licensed or either wise.anybody were it can be shown to be importing for the re-sale at the shows or breeding animals for any unlicensed reptile business,this can easily be checked by Nett/webb pages or forums checks.
> 
> This is not to be confused with foreign IHS members bring their own animals for sale at the shows.





stevenrudge said:


> Making us stay legal
> 
> We have got the legislation that we have got so lets start living within it and move our hobby forward.


I agree with the points raised above, mostly generic, and on the whole already being carried out by the IHS/FBH. I certainly agree with traders and importers being banned from selling livestock, but this is something that already occurs.



Uromastyxman said:


> I don't know Steven but I've read a few of his threads, and its obvious that he and Chris Newman have some history, and for this reason I don't want to make assumptions, however I would be interested to know what views of his you do agree with, as I think many of his points that could be relevent will be dismissed out of hand.





Uromastyxman said:


> That may be the case, but I'm still interested to know what points he holds that people do agree with. Interestingley enough 2 people on this thread who have said they agree with some of his points, have not come forward and said what they are, even though I've asked them.
> 
> I have absolutely no axe to grind, however, that does makes me wonder what they do agree with and why they wont say what they agree with.
> :whistling2:


As it happens, I dont spend my life on this forum, and work a lot of hours, so I apologise if I havent replied to you request in the allotted time. I am sure Janine is the same.

Rather than picking up on us not replying, how about we all pick up on how steven raises these threads/posts, and then fails to reply to any of the criticism or queries raised?
All I see is him say something, we reply, he dissappears to another thread/forum and whinges about the 'same old people' jumping to the defence.

Come on Steven, at least debate the points raised, in a serious and mature manner, rather than hiding from the flak.


----------



## Uromastyxman

Thanks for replying Tarron,

I know you're all busy, I wasn't having a pop. I know Steven makes a lot of posts and is obviously harbouring something that has annoyed him historically, and he may or may not be justified in those things but I really want everyone to look forward and fix things that need fixing and move forward.

Many keepers have issues with the hobby and shows are just an easy target based on the grey area of legality. This has historically given the antis a chance to attack and mix the legality up with views on husbandry/stress. They will always be around to attack the hobby and the public nature of the shows is where people outside the hobby see us and interpret what happens within it. The shows are a place where the hobby is represented, not just club members, but the entire hobby.

Speaking candidly, the hobby is expanding at a huge rate, this means that there are more breeders and more dealers, importers and shops and many more animals that need to be homed, and the general ambition seems to be to have bigger shows more often, but I do not see responsibility in the hobby expanding at the same rate, I see a lack of education at the entry stage of reptile keeping with people rushing in and stocking up on animals, then coming on to forums a week later not knowing their a from their e, then coming on a week after that and saying their animal's not eating, then a week later they're on saying their animal's lost weight and isn't moving, then they may or may not make a trip to the vet.

This lack of education where the hobby begins does not enforce the true nature of the responsibility that a keeper holds in his hands, and I think this has to change. Setting up shows to sell animals seems to be the top priority among many in the hobby, but I want to see more education for newcomers before they are allowed to wander into a shop or show and buy a monitor or a burm, or even a corn or beardie for that matter. In my opinion this lack of responsibility breeds a culture of degradation and cheapening of the reptiles themselves, and I believe that this is what will really threaten our hobby.


----------



## Carlie

Spreebok said:


> TL;DR. Sounds like it wasn't worth reading anyway.


I can't read - he's on my ignore list. 

Steven seems to have a serious lack of people skills. He's like a chimp trying to fix a PC with a stick.

At the heart of this is the animal. If you want to influence any business regarding the animal, you must first influence the keeper.


----------



## ian14

> *That may be the case, but I'm still interested to know what points he holds that people do agree with*. Interestingley enough 2 people on this thread who have said they agree with some of his points, have not come forward and said what they are, even though I've asked them.


The point that I agree with is the one that I have highlighted below, and this has been an issue that I have been slightly confused over for some time, given previous posts via the FBH. Some time ago when this all flared up, the FBH stated that for a show to be lawful, it had to be members only, and so only members could attend. Yet the FBH show is open to members of the public, not just paid members of societies affiliated to teh FBH. This is the point that was made in the quote below:



> A. what is currently legal in the UK -what we are aloud by Law.
> Private members meetings to sell/ exchange (surplus) animals to each other.
> This is for Hobbyist only.
> B. what is illegal currently in the UK -what will be challenged by ARs and any Local government or animal welfare organisations
> Open one day public pet markets,where animals are openly sold by anybody either private individuals or traders(business animal dealers).this just not only brakes the 1951/and amendments Pet shop act,but also brakes legislation with the HMC.


As you can see from the below (copied from Pet Animals Act 1951), it is clear that private breeders can quite legitimately sell surplus animals including those that were bought by the seller to breed from, but no longer suitable or needed, without a licence:


> Provided that—
> 
> 
> (a)a person shall not be deemed to keep a pet shop by reason only of his keeping or selling pedigree animals bred by him, or the offspring of an animal kept by him as a pet;
> 
> (b)where a person carries on a business of selling animals as pets in conjunction with a business of breeding pedigree animals, and the local authority are satisfied that the animals so sold by him (in so far as they are not pedigree animals bred by him) are animals which were acquired by him with a view to being used, if suitable, for breeding or show purposes but have subsequently been found by him not to be suitable or required for such use, the local authority may if they think fit direct that the said person shall not be deemed to keep a pet shop by reason only of his carrying on the first-mentioned business.


However, this makes it clear that selling at a show that is open to teh public would in fact be illegal. A public place is defined as anyplace to which the public have access on payment or otherwise. This would include a venue such as Kempton which, although a private event with pre-booked tables, is a public place as members of the public ie non members, were able to attend by paying to go in. Add this to the above quote in which it is clear that you can carry out a business of selling animals bred by you, or that you have bought but are no longer required, and I would suggest that the OP is in fact quite correct in what he first said.



> If any person carries on a business of selling animals as pets in any part of a street or public place, [or] [FN1] at a stall or barrow in a market, he shall be guilty of an offence. [FN2]


I would suggest therefore that to avoid future problems, these shows need to be strictly members only, including those that are attending to buy.


----------



## Tarron

Uromastyxman said:


> Thanks for replying Tarron,
> 
> I know you're all busy, I wasn't having a pop. I know Steven makes a lot of posts and is obviously harbouring something that has annoyed him historically, and he may or may not be justified in those things but I really want everyone to look forward and fix things that need fixing and move forward.


Sorry, I didnt mean to sound narky, I had a bad morning, and your last comment got my back up. I'm sure you didnt mean anything by it, as I didnt either.



Uromastyxman said:


> Many keepers have issues with the hobby and shows are just an easy target based on the grey area of legality. This has historically given the antis a chance to attack and mix the legality up with views on husbandry/stress. They will always be around to attack the hobby and the public nature of the shows is where people outside the hobby see us and interpret what happens within it. The shows are a place where the hobby is represented, not just club members, but the entire hobby.
> 
> Speaking candidly, the hobby is expanding at a huge rate, this means that there are more breeders and more dealers, importers and shops and many more animals that need to be homed, and the general ambition seems to be to have bigger shows more often, but I do not see responsibility in the hobby expanding at the same rate, I see a lack of education at the entry stage of reptile keeping with people rushing in and stocking up on animals, then coming on to forums a week later not knowing their a from their e, then coming on a week after that and saying their animal's not eating, then a week later they're on saying their animal's lost weight and isn't moving, then they may or may not make a trip to the vet.
> 
> This lack of education where the hobby begins does not enforce the true nature of the responsibility that a keeper holds in his hands, and I think this has to change. Setting up shows to sell animals seems to be the top priority among many in the hobby, but I want to see more education for newcomers before they are allowed to wander into a shop or show and buy a monitor or a burm, or even a corn or beardie for that matter. In my opinion this lack of responsibility breeds a culture of degradation and cheapening of the reptiles themselves, and I believe that this is what will really threaten our hobby.


Completely agree with your comments on education. The number of posts up about how should I care for an animal I already have, is ridiculous, but it has been happening for many many years, and I doubt very much if it will go away anytime soon.
Most pet shops (Most not all) care more about the profit, if they can see a sale they will take it. It is this area that needs to be sorted in my opinion. Breeders will generally try to ensure anyone purchasing from them will have an idea about the species (generally, I know this has been missed in the past, but from accounts of the last donny, it is being addressed). Any sale, regardless of who is selling (Shops, Breeders, ex owners) should be made to come with care information, and contact details of the seller. That way, any issues buy the purchaser can be addressed quickly.

Certainly, when I eventually get a table at donny (One day, wishing) I will ensure each animal is sold with my contact details, a history of the animals ancestry (as far back as I can manage), I will take the buyers details (for a 2 way communication, you never know if i would need to alert them to something) as well as some general information about the animals/species.

I dont, however, agree with 'members only' meetings. OK, maybe have a majority members only, for the sake of getting people to be members if anything, but there should be open meetings, were new people who havent looked in to joining can see new species, and get a real taste for the real hobby. That may well lead to them becoming members in future to attend the other shows.

I'm no expert, I cant say if that idea would work, but hey, its better than saying ban them all for no reason.


----------



## Tarron

ian14 said:


> Provided that—
> 
> 
> (a)a person shall not be deemed to keep a pet shop by reason only of his keeping or selling pedigree animals bred by him, or the offspring of an animal kept by him as a pet;
> 
> (b)where a person carries on a business of selling animals as pets in conjunction with a business of breeding pedigree animals, and the local authority are satisfied that the animals so sold by him (in so far as they are not pedigree animals bred by him) are animals which were acquired by him with a view to being used, if suitable, for breeding or show purposes but have subsequently been found by him not to be suitable or required for such use, the local authority may if they think fit direct that the said person shall not be deemed to keep a pet shop by reason only of his carrying on the first-mentioned business.
> 
> 
> 
> *However, this makes it clear that selling at a show that is open to teh public would in fact be illegal.*
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think that makes it clear at all. Nowhere in there does it say that, were the public must pay a fee to enter, that becomes a public place, therefore the show will be illegal.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## ian14

Tarron said:


> ian14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *However, this makes it clear that selling at a show that is open to teh public would in fact be illegal.*
> 
> 
> 
> I dont think that makes it clear at all. Nowhere in there does it say that, were the public must pay a fee to enter, that becomes a public place, therefore the show will be illegal.
> 
> 
> 
> If you read the whole of my post rather than picking out one piece you would have seen that a public place is any place to which the public have access on payment or otherwise. To confirm this (from the Police National Legal Database, which anyone can subscribe to):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Unlike the Road Traffic Act 1988, the Criminal Justice Act 1988 does offer a definition of the term "public place". By virtue of section 139(7) of the Act, the expression "*includes any place to which at the material time the public have or are permitted access, whether on payment or otherwise*". It will be noted that section 139(7) does not provide an exhaustive definition of "public place"; the operative word in section 139(7) being "includes".
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Tarron

ian14 said:


> Tarron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ian14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *However, this makes it clear that selling at a show that is open to teh public would in fact be illegal.*
> 
> If you read the whole of my post rather than picking out one piece you would have seen that a public place is any place to which the public have access on payment or otherwise. To confirm this (from the Police National Legal Database, which anyone can subscribe to):
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I picked out that part of your post as you put a quote and then said it shows it is illegal, therefore the insinuation was that that quote showed it was illegal.
> 
> The point at which you gave the definition was not, at the time, referenced to anything so you must excuse me for not accepting it. However, you have now produced an area of law that, on the face of it, agrees with your view, to which I will now go away and process it and read it in full. Thank you.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Banford1

I'm confused


----------



## Uromastyxman

Tarron said:


> I dont, however, agree with 'members only' meetings. OK, maybe have a majority members only, for the sake of getting people to be members if anything, but there should be open meetings, were new people who havent looked in to joining can see new species, and get a real taste for the real hobby. That may well lead to them becoming members in future to attend the other shows.
> 
> I'm no expert, I cant say if that idea would work, but hey, its better than saying ban them all for no reason.


That's interesting, you see I'm not saying ban them, I'm saying educate them, and this goes back to previous posts I've made where I've been flamed to death. I have said previously that the keeping of reptiles requires a basic level of education that can be recognised by sellers and the reptile community in general. When you pass your driving test and you are sent out on the road you're still an inexperienced novice driver, but the government requires you to have a driving licence so that you can be seen to have a standardised understanding of how to drive. And yet in reptile keeping a novice keeper can go and pay £50.00 for a female Burm? This post caused uproar amongs reptile businesses, who say, "This is rubbish it can't be implemented" or "nobody is going to tell me how to educate myself or who I sell snakes to" The truth is that someone should have some credentials showing that they know how to set up a viv and have some basic knowledge before they buy an animal. Reptiles are exotic and they have special needs. Showing a rudimentary knowledge before you are allowed near a reptile is fundamental, and the fact that the reptile community does not have this in place is unbelievable. This unchecked expansion into the mainstream is fine for reptile businesses because they're rubbing their hands together, even pets at home has joined the bandwagon. If the reptile community does not make serious moves to govern and police itself it will be taken out of our hands. A dog is part of our culture, and despite them being put down in their thousands every year, "dog lovers" continue to reject more stringent legislation to regulate who can get them. Reptiles are relatively new into british homes, and if they want to change this they will, if it looks like they're not being looked after, or pose a danger.


----------



## colinm

Make them for F.B.H. club members only .Then there would be no confusion.

The clubs would benefit so would the F.B.H.


----------



## colinm

Uromastyxman said:


> That's interesting, you see I'm not saying ban them, I'm saying educate them, and this goes back to previous posts I've made where I've been flamed to death. I have said previously that the keeping of reptiles requires a basic level of education that can be recognised by sellers and the reptile community in general. When you pass your driving test and you are sent out on the road you're still an inexperienced novice driver, but the government requires you to have a driving licence so that you can be seen to have a standardised understanding of how to drive. And yet in reptile keeping a novice keeper can go and pay £50.00 for a female Burm? This post caused uproar amongs reptile businesses, who say, "This is rubbish it can't be implemented" or "nobody is going to tell me how to educate myself or who I sell snakes to" The truth is that someone should have some credentials showing that they know how to set up a viv and have some basic knowledge before they buy an animal. Reptiles are exotic and they have special needs. Showing a rudimentary knowledge before you are allowed near a reptile is fundamental, and the fact that the reptile community does not have this in place is unbelievable. This unchecked expansion into the mainstream is fine for reptile businesses because they're rubbing their hands together, even pets at home has joined the bandwagon. If the reptile community does not make serious moves to govern and police itself it will be taken out of our hands. A dog is part of our culture, and despite them being put down in their thousands every year, "dog lovers" continue to reject more stringent legislation to regulate who can get them. Reptiles are relatively new into british homes, and if they want to change this they will, if it looks like they're not being looked after, or pose a danger.


Thats another good reason for shows to be for club members only.Then novices would go to a pet shop and hopefully get good advice and the proper equipment from the start.At a show there are far more many livestock sellers than dry good sellers ,so its not always easy to get all of the correct equipment.

As a by product it should also help pet shops.


----------



## Row'n'Bud

How did we all learn in the past with no computers nor tinternet ???....
In an ideal world this would be fantastic but anyone coming on here asking for help or advice as a newbie keeper is doing just that,.... self educating.
True, any store or breeder selling on an animal should at least give a new keeper at least the basics of set ups and care but many buy off here, gumtree, newspaper ads, etc where no advice is often offered.
If getting a new reptile then, yes, by all means do research before purchase but we all make impulse buys in our lives and had to learn new skills along the way from doing so.....common sense will tell most people to find out how to keep the new reptile they just forked out their hard earned cash on, be it from the supplier or off their own backs. 
Yes we as a community can help, as can breeders and retailers and I'm sure any club or society would willingly give out any knowledge requested in these cases but back to the original topic here....

Steven, you got a great offer on this thread mate from the IHS........now use it or lose it before any more malicious threads against Chris, the FBH and all their work for the last few years, remember.....it's better to whisper on the inside than to stand outside screaming in !!!


----------



## Uromastyxman

Row'n'Bud said:


> How did we all learn in the past with no computers nor tinternet ???....
> In an ideal world this would be fantastic but anyone coming on here asking for help or advice as a newbie keeper is doing just that,.... self educating.
> !!!


I don't want to carry on doing things like I did 30 years ago because a lot of animals died because of inexperience and a lack of knowledge. And despite the internet and the hobby becoming huge, and access to books, a huge number of people continue to buy animals without Knowing what they have or how to look after it. Reptilekeeping by experimenation is not something that should be continued, it is not fair to the animals who die in droves and it's not fair to keepers and the hobby in general. Don't you find it amazing that someone can come onto the forum showing of photo's of their new baby burm, but they don't know the first thing about how to set it's viv up properly. This should not happen even once, and yet I see this week in week out because there is no regulation to stop it. It's No wonder we're being constantly attacked when money has become the dominant force in the hobby raher than the welfare of the animals.


----------



## Janine00

Uromastyxman said:


> That may be the case, but I'm still interested to know what points he holds that people do agree with. Interestingley enough 2 people on this thread who have said they agree with some of his points, have not come forward and said what they are, even though I've asked them.
> 
> I have absolutely no axe to grind, however, that does makes me wonder what they do agree with and why they wont say what they agree with.
> :whistling2:


Do you know, I've just come home from work (since 8.25 this morning) and read this, so am going to go outside and have a *** before fully responding. But first, let me just say that some of us have real jobs and work 40 hours plus a week and have to take a lot of stick... particularly as money gets tighter. I arrived at a morning meeting today to be told I need to identify £100K of savings from our annual budget spend by end December. I work in social care, so please excuse me if I take maybe more than just a few minutes to respond to your post. I would also like to see what Steven and other peoples responses are first!!!! :bash:


----------



## Janine00

OK... back now having had 3 ****, cried a river and am now floating down on my own personal raft of caffeine and nicotine so getting calmer by the minute!! Really sorry for having a go :blush: should not have given in to my urge to type before I went outside to have a strop! Apologies.

My personal feelings are that people should preferably become members of any of their local societies that are affilliated to the FBH and thereby (hopefully) have some credebility and background. If people were prepared to do this, then there would be a very real possibility of going down the route of ALL breeders meetings being very much a private affair, and instead of having associate memberships, we may be able to consider things like each member could (if they wanted to) bring a friend who was a non member. This way, we could perhaps begin to acheive a bit of a balance between only members being allowed, to members plus someone they would be willing to 'mentor' being allowed in also. This would also go some way to supporting the 'education' element we would all like to see so much.

BUT, the evidence I have received so far leads me to believe that there are VERY MANY (please note Alan that I am taking a leaf out of your book with regard to capitalisation)! :Na_Na_Na_Na: people who it would appear do not want to take out membership of an established society. They feel they can learn at least as much and often more from books, magazines, or the interwebthingy!! They don't need to travel miles around the country any more, like the herpers of 30 years ago to share information on what works for them and what does not. Not only that... they can get this information for free. Don't matter that possibly over half of this is twaddle spouted by a fair few people who don't have any actual experience in the subject they are spouting on, but have just read it on a forum, so it has got to be right! :blush:

HOWEVER, unless it happens tomorrow that the powers that be decide that the grey area we are all arguing over actually needs to be rectified cos they have nothing better or more pressing to do with their time at the minute, I don't see this becoming a reality. The 'law' moves very slowly on most things, which is really as it should be perhaps?? I am told the last time the IHS got legal guidance on this, they were told that it was legal (IHS or FBH - not sure which one received this guidance). Like all things however, this probably still is going to be open to debate that until there is a judgement on it, will stay a bit of a grey area.

I also agree that there are still a few area's where things maybe 'slip under the radar' or are not how we would ideally like them to be - around the tub sizes, the care sheets, the animals all being left either at the table with the person or in the creche until you are ready to leave, thereby lessening the chance of the animal being bumped about, dropped, squashed etc. But, we are already for the most part working towards improving most of these area's, and not just since the fuss in June, but work is and has been ongoing over a long period of time. None of these things will all be changed at once, especially when nearly everyone on here has something (often conflicting) to say about what THEY think ! :lol2: We are not a police state, and neither are we a herp dictatorship, despite what some would like to make out... :Na_Na_Na_Na: It takes time to change systems and procedures, sometimes lots of it :whistling2:

Oh and by the way (off on yet another tangent)... the bags that were given away free at the last show were to hopefully stop so much of the 'balancing acts' that a number of people do at every show, which can often look a bit naff.... people wobbling around with 6 or 7 rubs (or even worse - cricket tubs) with hatchies etc., plus the odd tub of livefood, does not give over the best impression... lets at least try to improve things a little where we can con (I mean talk) a lovely sponsor into providing some of these things for us!

The advent of t'internet is a wonderful thing in many ways, but a right pain in the jacksy in some others, so we also have to learn about the right way to handle both the good and bad it brings with it.

OK.... on my second glass of wine to top up the coffee now, so think I best leave my ramblings here.... All the best.... J:whistling2:


----------



## stevenrudge

Herptileeditor said:


> It's VERY RARE that I respond to these sort of threads but I think now Mr. Rudge, enough is enough. Put you money where your mouth is! Stand for election onto committee of a society and do your mouthing off in the correct place!!!
> Various members of the IHS (me included) have battled against the antis for the last 13/14 years to keep YOUR hobby alive, and to maintain the future of the shows and our industry in general. Where have you been in all this time.
> 
> Don't spout off on forums and upset people be proactive and take a part if as you say, you care for your hobby!!!


for starters why don't you email me privately like l previously tried to do.secondly why don't you use your own name.it is Alan is it not?do not come the all mighty with me when you were rude enough not to answer my private email to yourself,instead you sent an old friend to tell me to shut up,so do not get all pious with me.thirdly its people like yourself and Mr Newman that have given people like me no option but to ask these questions in public, because you have not responded in private,what is it with people within our society's that think that they are the ONLY ones fighting?l will so no more in public about this but you have always been free to contact me at any time,you have my email address


----------



## johnc79

Janine00 said:


> OK... back now having had 3 ****, cried a river and am now floating down on my own personal raft of caffeine and nicotine so getting calmer by the minute!! Really sorry for having a go :blush: should not have given in to my urge to type before I went outside to have a strop! Apologies.
> 
> My personal feelings are that people should preferably become members of any of their local societies that are affilliated to the FBH and thereby (hopefully) have some credebility and background. If people were prepared to do this, then there would be a very real possibility of going down the route of ALL breeders meetings being very much a private affair, and instead of having associate memberships, we may be able to consider things like each member could (if they wanted to) bring a friend who was a non member. This way, we could perhaps begin to acheive a bit of a balance between only members being allowed, to members plus someone they would be willing to 'mentor' being allowed in also. This would also go some way to supporting the 'education' element we would all like to see so much.
> 
> BUT, the evidence I have received so far leads me to believe that there are VERY MANY (please note Alan that I am taking a leaf out of your book with regard to capitalisation)! :Na_Na_Na_Na: people who it would appear do not want to take out membership of an established society. They feel they can learn at least as much and often more from books, magazines, or the interwebthingy!! They don't need to travel miles around the country any more, like the herpers of 30 years ago to share information on what works for them and what does not. Not only that... they can get this information for free. Don't matter that possibly over half of this is twaddle spouted by a fair few people who don't have any actual experience in the subject they are spouting on, but have just read it on a forum, so it has got to be right! :blush:
> 
> HOWEVER, unless it happens tomorrow that the powers that be decide that the grey area we are all arguing over actually needs to be rectified cos they have nothing better or more pressing to do with their time at the minute, I don't see this becoming a reality. The 'law' moves very slowly on most things, which is really as it should be perhaps?? I am told the last time the IHS got legal guidance on this, they were told that it was legal (IHS or FBH - not sure which one received this guidance). Like all things however, this probably still is going to be open to debate that until there is a judgement on it, will stay a bit of a grey area.
> 
> I also agree that there are still a few area's where things maybe 'slip under the radar' or are not how we would ideally like them to be - around the tub sizes, the care sheets, the animals all being left either at the table with the person or in the creche until you are ready to leave, thereby lessening the chance of the animal being bumped about, dropped, squashed etc. But, we are already for the most part working towards improving most of these area's, and not just since the fuss in June, but work is and has been ongoing over a long period of time. None of these things will all be changed at once, especially when nearly everyone on here has something (often conflicting) to say about what THEY think ! :lol2: We are not a police state, and neither are we a herp dictatorship, despite what some would like to make out... :Na_Na_Na_Na: It takes time to change systems and procedures, sometimes lots of it :whistling2:
> 
> Oh and by the way (off on yet another tangent)... the bags that were given away free at the last show were to hopefully stop so much of the 'balancing acts' that a number of people do at every show, which can often look a bit naff.... people wobbling around with 6 or 7 rubs (or even worse - cricket tubs) with hatchies etc., plus the odd tub of livefood, does not give over the best impression... lets at least try to improve things a little where we can con (I mean talk) a lovely sponsor into providing some of these things for us!
> 
> The advent of t'internet is a wonderful thing in many ways, but a right pain in the jacksy in some others, so we also have to learn about the right way to handle both the good and bad it brings with it.
> 
> OK.... on my second glass of wine to top up the coffee now, so think I best leave my ramblings here.... All the best.... J:whistling2:


That's more like it. I think you have some good points and realistic ideas there Jayne.. I don't need to right a long post after that. I agree!lol


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## stevenrudge

Stu.G said:


> Why not start your own shows where you can what you like?
> You dont actually go to the shows so why does it matter to you what happens at them?


Cheep shot,all l want is for our hobby to be successful,all l want is for our IHS shows to be bullet proof from trouble from the Ar's ,l've watched our shows grow from 4 tables at our IHS meeting to what they have become,l'm been involved within the pet industry for over 30 years,so excuse me if l've mist that last 2 shows,why would l want to put on a show when we have got the IHS?pointless,it would be much better to work with what we have got,just make it humm how shall l say this,Legal!
So OK l've put a few noses out,big deal get over it and let talk properly,lets for get about all the politics, bruised egos, terratory spraying by the so called (Great minds of our Hobby) Quote it was one of their fans that actually said this, rememberer it all our hobby,if l or anybody else thinks that mistakes have been made we have the right to say so


----------



## stevenrudge

Tarron said:


> What annoys me most, Steven, is that I agree with you on some points. But the way you use it as some sort of agenda against Chris is pathetic.
> 
> I'm not going to address all the posts, I haven't got the time or inclination at the moment but one that specifically stuck out is your accusation that the 'political side of the hobby' is causing the most damage?
> If we didnt have the political side, such as Chris Newman, we would be sitting ducks for the anti pet keeping g brigade. It wouldn't take long for them to dig their claws in and make so.e noise. Or did you assume they would just go away? Do you think they are only in it for the fight?
> Look at what's occurring in Europe next week, a massive political conference on what could be the future of the hobby, this hobby, that you claim to love!
> As has already been mentioned, if you are not happy, do something yourself, so.thing physical, not just tip tapping away behind a screen.
> From what Janine has said, an offer has been made. If you take it, I will have a lot of respect for you. If you truly believe what you are saying, you will grab the opportunity with both hands. If you dont take it, we can only assume you are full of yourself and not willing to follow through.
> 
> The bitching and sniping has to stop. Its make or break time Steven. I sincerely wish you the best in your choice.
> 
> And before you go off to another thread in a different forum claiming it's the same people jumping on you again, more people are coming out of the woodwork to say they are fed up ofyou, check which responses get the likes and realise you are almost alone I this vendetta.


l will repeat again that l have no-agenda against Chris,other than he was personally rude in a private email,
What offer has been made?on the forums or private?answer me privately with this Janine


----------



## Uromastyxman

Janine00 said:


> OK... back now having had 3 ****, cried a river and am now floating down on my own personal raft of caffeine and nicotine so getting calmer by the minute!! Really sorry for having a go :blush: should not have given in to my urge to type before I went outside to have a strop! Apologies.
> 
> My personal feelings are that people should preferably become members of any of their local societies that are affilliated to the FBH and thereby (hopefully) have some credebility and background. If people were prepared to do this, then there would be a very real possibility of going down the route of ALL breeders meetings being very much a private affair, and instead of having associate memberships, we may be able to consider things like each member could (if they wanted to) bring a friend who was a non member. This way, we could perhaps begin to acheive a bit of a balance between only members being allowed, to members plus someone they would be willing to 'mentor' being allowed in also. This would also go some way to supporting the 'education' element we would all like to see so much.
> 
> BUT, the evidence I have received so far leads me to believe that there are VERY MANY (please note Alan that I am taking a leaf out of your book with regard to capitalisation)! :Na_Na_Na_Na: people who it would appear do not want to take out membership of an established society. They feel they can learn at least as much and often more from books, magazines, or the interwebthingy!! They don't need to travel miles around the country any more, like the herpers of 30 years ago to share information on what works for them and what does not. Not only that... they can get this information for free. Don't matter that possibly over half of this is twaddle spouted by a fair few people who don't have any actual experience in the subject they are spouting on, but have just read it on a forum, so it has got to be right! :blush:
> 
> HOWEVER, unless it happens tomorrow that the powers that be decide that the grey area we are all arguing over actually needs to be rectified cos they have nothing better or more pressing to do with their time at the minute, I don't see this becoming a reality. The 'law' moves very slowly on most things, which is really as it should be perhaps?? I am told the last time the IHS got legal guidance on this, they were told that it was legal (IHS or FBH - not sure which one received this guidance). Like all things however, this probably still is going to be open to debate that until there is a judgement on it, will stay a bit of a grey area.
> 
> I also agree that there are still a few area's where things maybe 'slip under the radar' or are not how we would ideally like them to be - around the tub sizes, the care sheets, the animals all being left either at the table with the person or in the creche until you are ready to leave, thereby lessening the chance of the animal being bumped about, dropped, squashed etc. But, we are already for the most part working towards improving most of these area's, and not just since the fuss in June, but work is and has been ongoing over a long period of time. None of these things will all be changed at once, especially when nearly everyone on here has something (often conflicting) to say about what THEY think ! :lol2: We are not a police state, and neither are we a herp dictatorship, despite what some would like to make out... :Na_Na_Na_Na: It takes time to change systems and procedures, sometimes lots of it :whistling2:
> 
> Oh and by the way (off on yet another tangent)... the bags that were given away free at the last show were to hopefully stop so much of the 'balancing acts' that a number of people do at every show, which can often look a bit naff.... people wobbling around with 6 or 7 rubs (or even worse - cricket tubs) with hatchies etc., plus the odd tub of livefood, does not give over the best impression... lets at least try to improve things a little where we can con (I mean talk) a lovely sponsor into providing some of these things for us!
> 
> The advent of t'internet is a wonderful thing in many ways, but a right pain in the jacksy in some others, so we also have to learn about the right way to handle both the good and bad it brings with it.
> 
> OK.... on my second glass of wine to top up the coffee now, so think I best leave my ramblings here.... All the best.... J:whistling2:


Thanks for your post Janine, sorry if I sounded like I was having a go, sometimes I needle people a bit to gain a response. And your description of your day sounds a lot like my wife's, almost like she'd written that part of your post herself actually. I think you and I are essentially in agreement. And I don't know what Steven has been offered but I hope he takes it. 

Cheers

Andy


----------



## stevenrudge

where as l have tried to bring attention to problems within our hobby,OK l have been a bit brutal with the FBH with my criticisms but for me they deserve it,most do not agree with me but there you go you cannot please everybody,this had to be said whether people liked it or not for our hobby to move on,and if you look at the views about this on any forum there quite big,people are interested in this debate,problem is people bring to much emotions into this, their in built bias and try to argue from that.
if you read whats in the plan its really not that radical but the status qu,do not like it as it challenges there judgements (step on their toes)or they think that it will damage the show foot fall leading to loss of income for their society's others do not like it because it would undermine their political agenda and take away the need for them.others because they have built up really good markets for their animals at the shows and they see a danger in this now being taken away,
None of this was ever going to make me popular, especially with my personal style,but its for the right reasons for the hobby,and like l've said it really should not have been me saying these unpopular things to make our shows more sustainable long term but for whatever reasons the very people who should have sorted this out years ago chose not to.
l could see the danger of this coming up and l really hope that with the BBC program its still not to late,but l personally fear the worst


----------



## Uromastyxman

stevenrudge said:


> where as l have tried to bring attention to problems within our hobby,OK l have been a bit brutal with the FBH with my criticisms but for me they deserve it,most do not agree with me but there you go you cannot please everybody,this had to be said whether people liked it or not for our hobby to move on,and if you look at the views about this on any forum there quite big,people are interested in this debate,problem is people bring to much emotions into this, their in built bias and try to argue from that.
> if you read whats in the plan its really not that radical but the status qu,do not like it as it challenges there judgements (step on their toes)or they think that it will damage the show foot fall leading to loss of income for their society's others do not like it because it would undermine their political agenda and take away the need for them.others because they have built up really good markets for their animals at the shows and they see a danger in this now being taken
> away,
> None of this was ever going to make me popular, especially with my personal style,but its for the right reasons for the hobby,and like l've said it really should not have been me saying these unpopular things to make our shows more sustainable long term but for whatever reasons the very people who should have sorted this out years ago chose not to.
> l could see the danger of this coming up and l really hope that with the BBC program its still not to late,but l personally fear the worst


I agree with all your points but I don't think it's too late. You might be right in saying that your style of communication gets people's backs up.
You are a bit full on, you even make me look subtle.:lol2: 
I think most of the things you have said will start to be changed for the better. I really hope you take this role/ position you've been offered, whatever that is, I should probably renew my membership to stay in the loop. I often find myself focussing on what I think people have done wrong and sometimes I overlook all the good that they have achieved, and sometimes when I have a closer look I realise that what I feel is wrong is actually relatively small when compared to all the good stuff. Changes do need to be made in the hobby and unfortunately this will cause disagreement, but hopefully solidarity will be reached in the end. People get used to changes, they just moan a lot when it's happening.


----------



## Janine00

Uromastyxman said:


> Thanks for your post Janine, sorry if I sounded like I was having a go, sometimes I needle people a bit to gain a response. And your description of your day sounds a lot like my wife's, almost like she'd written that part of your post herself actually. I think you and I are essentially in agreement. And I don't know what Steven has been offered but I hope he takes it.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Andy


np's Andy... go off like a bottle of pop sometimes... find it does me good to let off steam, otherwise I'd fizz up 'n bost :lol2:


----------



## bladeblaster

Can I bring a little bit of middle ground to this thread?

Steven does come across badly sometimes, however......

I think the point he is making is that shows have become an easy target for a legal argument, partly because of their own success, and partly because people have used them who probably shouldn't.

The legal standing of shows in their current format is quite questionable it has to be said, but it needn't be this way.

Part of the reason I didn't attend Donny, and now probably wont attend others is because clearly I work for Precision Reptiles. I initially didn;t really give it much thought but as recent issues have arrisen I do not want to be in breach of teh rules and put shows at risk for my own selfish reasons. Obviously I breed myself, so probably could sell my own stuff within the rules, but how do I prove what is mine?

So I am staying away to make sure that I am on the right side of the rules.

I am NOT anti-shows, or any organisations, but I think shows need to evolve or they will be taken away.


----------



## Genetic

bladeblaster said:


> Obviously I breed myself, so probably could sell my own stuff within the rules, but how do I prove what is mine?


If you are breeding then you have the parents and maybe the grand parents and so on , you will be incubating eggs or having females give birth and you will have photographic records of it all .

?



Paul.


----------



## StuG

stevenrudge said:


> Making us stay legal
> Taking the politics out of the hobby."The hobby" or shows NEED a political arm to defend them from the AR's groups and apa, without that WE (us who go to shows) are a sitting duck and within a matter of months would be in serious trouble. YOUR naiveity is scary
> The creation of the Fed has brought with it a whole new political agenda to the hobby,for me that has clouded to main issues confronting us,the Fed trys to be all things to all men and this has lead to too many compromises that have not been dealt with that could and should have been dealt with years ago.You obviously believe that if shows were for members only and there was no ambiguity in the law then the animal rights brigade would leave reptile keepers alone. Totally wrong, when we beat groups like apa over our right to attend shows they will move on to another area of the hoby, imports, pet shops whatever. The reason they are attempting to get shows cancelled is they are high profile and a relative easy target, compared to shops
> Like l've already said that from the past posts its clear that some do not want the kind of shows or type of show that we would not have much trouble in having,they want the situation as it stands the bigger the better shows like the European shows but we all must get our heads round the fact that,that type of show is currently not legal in the UK whether we like it or not.
> We have got the legislation that we have got so lets start living within it and move our hobby forward.Every one I have spoken to whilst at a show wants pretty much the same thing, for our shows to continue and grow as they are. It is glaringly obvious that the best protection for us a hobby is that it continues to develop and increase in popularity and heading towards the mainstream.
> The alternative is that if we do not change however good our last show was,the shows will be taken from us.I would go as far as to say that would be a guaranteed certainty if we followed your advice and the path you wish to follow. The real alternative is for people to continue to support the FBH/IHS by attending shows and making donations
> And this will not be the AR's or the RSPCAs fault but our own





Answers in red


----------



## stevenrudge

bladeblaster said:


> Can I bring a little bit of middle ground to this thread?
> 
> Steven does come across badly sometimes, however......
> 
> I think the point he is making is that shows have become an easy target for a legal argument, partly because of their own success, and partly because people have used them who probably shouldn't.
> 
> The legal standing of shows in their current format is quite questionable it has to be said, but it needn't be this way.
> 
> Part of the reason I didn't attend Donny, and now probably wont attend others is because clearly I work for Precision Reptiles. I initially didn;t really give it much thought but as recent issues have arrisen I do not want to be in breach of teh rules and put shows at risk for my own selfish reasons. Obviously I breed myself, so probably could sell my own stuff within the rules, but how do I prove what is mine?
> 
> So I am staying away to make sure that I am on the right side of the rules.
> 
> I am NOT anti-shows, or any organisations, but I think shows need to evolve or they will be taken away.


This is my point,Terry is bang on,l'm not going carry on with this because the points made and proven,(with the people that matter not the forum gobshites)what gets me is peoples reactions to this,its not even that we or they have any chose,were too vulnerable to take the risk,and why should we risk this anyway?So ok it might be bad news for some,but thats life,they will just have to deal with it,l can understand some of the breeders kicking off(they have)and their not the only ones who would like the situation to stay as it is,but like Terry says if we do not evolve the shows quote,l've used stronger langue,sooner or later we will be dead in the water with this.why be hostage to the AR's with this?this is really not that hard a problem to solve,painful to some maybe but better for everyone else


----------



## bladeblaster

Genetic said:


> If you are breeding then you have the parents and maybe the grand parents and so on , you will be incubating eggs or having females give birth and you will have photographic records of it all .
> 
> ?
> 
> 
> 
> Paul.


I do Paul yes, that is true, mind you it wound't exacly be difficult to get Precision to send me some pics and say they were mine.


----------



## eurokeeper

I think simple fact is shows open to public are illegal, however a certain society gets round this by selling a one day or show entry membership on the door, which the local council deeMs legal.

Would more people join a society if the membership was cheaper


----------



## Chris Newman

ian14 said:


> Tarron said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ian14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *However, this makes it clear that selling at a show that is open to teh public would in fact be illegal.*
> 
> If you read the whole of my post rather than picking out one piece you would have seen that a public place is any place to which the public have access on payment or otherwise. To confirm this (from the Police National Legal Database, which anyone can subscribe to):
> 
> 
> 
> The Public Place argument is extraneous to the issue regards to the legality of shows, this would only comes into play in terms of licensing under the Pet Animals Act, which as you will be aware is not possible at the moment because of Section 2!
> 
> Private Members Meetings only open to members of a club or society to attend or purchase is also a red herring and does _not _address the core issue that affects shows today. The fundamental issue is what is or is not a commercial activity.
> 
> I am sure some people will remember back to when we had Private Members Meetings and they were very poorly attended; returning to such events would make the likes of Doncaster, Kempton Park and most others shows unviable.
> 
> The solution is licensing under the Pet Animals Act. The conclusion from the Defra Working Group on Pet Fairs was unanimous in support of licensing. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 set the 1983 Amendment to Pet Animals Act, i.e. Section 2 for repeal, all that is required is the reading of the Enactment Order.
> 
> Regrettably government has been very slow in dealing with matters under the Animal Welfare Act, indeed they seem to have completely lost interest. However, with all the ‘issues’ that have surfaced this year it is back on the political agenda, and I look forward to seeing a conclusion to this issue shortly.
> 
> I will not make any further comments on this thread, but I just wanted to clear up the confusion.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## johnc79

eurokeeper said:


> I think simple fact is shows open to public are illegal, however a certain society gets round this by selling a one day or show entry membership on the door, which the local council deeMs legal.
> 
> Would more people join a society if the membership was cheaper


What about the Kidderminster show then Marc ??


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## bothrops

I know its petty and a bit 'grammar nazi', but it annoys me.

So,



*Aloud* = saying something so it can be heard i.e. 'I read the book aloud'


*Allowed* = given permission to do it. i.e. 'we were allowed to have a show in Doncaster'.


----------



## Mynki

bothrops said:


> I know its petty and a bit 'grammar nazi', but it annoys me.
> 
> So,
> 
> 
> 
> *Aloud* = saying something so it can be heard i.e. 'I read the book aloud'
> 
> 
> *Allowed* = given permission to do it. i.e. 'we were allowed to have a show in Doncaster'.


 
At least it's not as bad as people using the word 'of' instead of 'have'! I've noticed it being used more and more these days. 

Best
Mynki (Fellow grammar nazi).


----------



## CREAKS Society

bothrops said:


> I know its petty and a bit 'grammar nazi', but it annoys me.
> 
> So,
> 
> 
> 
> *Aloud* = saying something so it can be heard i.e. 'I read the book aloud'
> 
> 
> *Allowed* = given permission to do it. i.e. 'we were allowed to have a show in Doncaster'.





Mynki said:


> At least it's not as bad as people using the word 'of' instead of 'have'! I've noticed it being used more and more these days.
> 
> Best
> Mynki (Fellow grammar nazi).



I should of posted this earlier, so I hope I am aloud to just say I agree with both of you.

Regards


----------



## ian kerr

i luffs rfuk! we start out with worries about our future!! and end up with grammer lessons,,,,cee ow u lot get on wiv this!


----------



## KathyM

I'm not really that bothered about spelling or grammar as long as it's clear what's being said. What I find really hard though is reading War and Peace without any visual break. It doesn't have to be perfect paragraphs, spelling OR punctuation, and I would be first to defend the genuinely hard of writing, but putting some space between chunks of text would make some of Steven's posts more understandable.


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

Within a few months this Blue Print post is going to be a lot more relevant than people expected.
it will be case of back to the future
All l'm guilty of was trying to warn people.


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Within a few months this Blue Print post is going to be a lot more relevant than people expected.
> it will be case of back to the future
> All l'm guilty of was trying to warn people.


Steven, as you know, I'm very well aware of what this means now.

I tried to be polite before, but you are still spitting your vitriol at certain people and being very cryptic for no reason than to feel important.

I will tell you that you are setting yourself up for a fall. Don't bother! You are not going to win anything, least of all the respect of your peers.


----------



## AB's

stevenrudge said:


> Within a few months this Blue Print post is going to be a lot more relevant than people expected.
> it will be case of back to the future
> All l'm guilty of was trying to warn people.


Oh, your still here...


----------



## stevenrudge

Tarron said:


> Steven, as you know, I'm very well aware of what this means now.
> 
> I tried to be polite before, but you are still spitting your vitriol at certain people and being very cryptic for no reason than to feel important.
> 
> I will tell you that you are setting yourself up for a fall. Don't bother! You are not going to win anything, least of all the respect of your peers.


Tarron aka FBH police,mate why do you bother replying to very reply post l make if you feel that l do not have any points to make as you imply,some people on this post thought that they were being clever in slagging me off-you being one of them,l'm not trying to win anything as you know,l'm not the one hiding behind a silly name asking questions on pm's without being honest enough to make it clear who l was or who l was asking questions for,l do need or require your respect,nor do l feel the need to try and be impotent,l leave all that nonsense to you guys.
Hows this for being cryptic- 7 day notice


----------



## Gratenkutzombie

The only word that stood out from the last post was 'impotent'.


----------



## Se7enS1ns

Steven perhaps answer me this; Within this hobby, what would you consider to be your ultimate ambition that you strive to acheive?


----------



## Shellsfeathers&fur

stevenrudge said:


> Tarron aka FBH police,mate why do you bother replying to very reply post l make if you feel that l do not have any points to make as you imply,some people on this post thought that they were being clever in slagging me off-you being one of them,l'm not trying to win anything as you know,l'm not the one hiding behind a silly name asking questions on pm's without being honest enough to make it clear who l was or who l was asking questions for,l do need or require your respect,nor do l feel the need to try and be impotent,l leave all that nonsense to you guys.
> Hows this for being cryptic- 7 day notice


In English!

Why would you need to try and be impotent" Sorry but I think you may have meant important.


----------



## Christophe

stevenrudge said:


> *Hows this for being cryptic- 7 day notice*


That actually comes directly under the definition of 'cryptic'.


----------



## ian14

Chris Newman said:


> ian14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tarron said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Public Place argument is extraneous to the issue regards to the legality of shows, this would only comes into play in terms of licensing under the Pet Animals Act, which as you will be aware is not possible at the moment because of Section 2!
> 
> *Private Members Meetings only open to members of a club or society to attend or purchase is also a red herring and does not address the core issue that affects shows today. The fundamental issue is what is or is not a commercial activity.*
> 
> *I am sure some people will remember back to when we had Private Members Meetings and they were very poorly attended; returning to such events would make the likes of Doncaster, Kempton Park and most others shows unviable.*
> 
> The solution is licensing under the Pet Animals Act. The conclusion from the Defra Working Group on Pet Fairs was unanimous in support of licensing. The Animal Welfare Act 2006 set the 1983 Amendment to Pet Animals Act, i.e. Section 2 for repeal, all that is required is the reading of the Enactment Order.
> 
> Regrettably government has been very slow in dealing with matters under the Animal Welfare Act, indeed they seem to have completely lost interest. However, with all the ‘issues’ that have surfaced this year it is back on the political agenda, and I look forward to seeing a conclusion to this issue shortly.
> 
> I will not make any further comments on this thread, but I just wanted to clear up the confusion.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but I disagree.
> The offence relates to carrying on a business in a PUBLIC PLACE.
> 
> So, very simply, if these events are private events, for members only, then this is a non issue. It is not a public place, so the offence is no longer applicable. Provided the sellers are only selling offspring bred by themselves, or animals bought with the intention of breeding from but no longer needed, then they are not affected by this legislation either.
> To say that this is a red herring is, I would suggest, wrong. The entire argument of commercial activity/carrying on a business, etc, is then immaterial.
> Events to which the public can enter by paying a fee make the place they are being held a public place. And so the offence of selling in a public place becomes complete if it is a business. As you say, the issue here is whether such actiivity is a "business".
> 
> Make them members only private events and this no longer applies, is no longer an issue, and the problem is solved!!
> 
> The second paragraph I highlighted was done so because this should not be a consideration. Unless the organisers are running them purely as a capital venture.
> 
> Surely the main consideration should be to ensure that shows are compliant with relevant legislation, rather than how much money they generate for the organiser.
> 
> EDIT - ignore me, I missed out a vital part about MARKETS!
> 
> This then could be an additional angle to consider, as well as what constitutes a business, what constitutes a market? The dictionary definition would suggest that these shows are exactly that, in fact the definition makes reference to livestock, but no mention of being open to the public. To me, a market is a public event. So, if these were members only, woule they still fit the definition of a market?
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## MoreliaUK

What is it with this Mr RUDGE? I have a little winkie but not even I am that bitter and angry?


----------



## bladeblaster

ian14 said:


> Sorry but I disagree.
> The offence relates to carrying on a business in a PUBLIC PLACE.
> 
> So, very simply, if these events are private events, for members only, then this is a non issue. It is not a public place, so the offence is no longer applicable. Provided the sellers are only selling offspring bred by themselves, or animals bought with the intention of breeding from but no longer needed, then they are not affected by this legislation either.
> To say that this is a red herring is, I would suggest, wrong. The entire argument of commercial activity/carrying on a business, etc, is then immaterial.
> Events to which the public can enter by paying a fee make the place they are being held a public place. And so the offence of selling in a public place becomes complete if it is a business. As you say, the issue here is whether such actiivity is a "business".
> 
> Make them members only private events and this no longer applies, is no longer an issue, and the problem is solved!!
> 
> The second paragraph I highlighted was done so because this should not be a consideration. Unless the organisers are running them purely as a capital venture.
> 
> Surely the main consideration should be to ensure that shows are compliant with relevant legislation, rather than how much money they generate for the organiser.


As I understood it, commercial animal markets are illegal? Regardless who attends the show if animals are sold for commercial reasons then its a comercial market and illegal?


----------



## dr del

I'm guessing that in 7 days the legal challenge ( that he knows *far* too much about to be innocent of connections to the AR lobby in my opinion ) takes place.

I was worried he was acting as a mouthpiece - but for now the overtones of ringpiece happily outweigh his usefulness to our enemies.

Of course it remains possible he is simply a deepy fatalistic, pedantic, worrywart who derives such joy from being percieved as right that the destruction of the hobby is trivial in comparison.

It is all just speculation at this point.


dr del


----------



## ian14

bladeblaster said:


> As I understood it, commercial animal markets are illegal? Regardless who attends the show if animals are sold for commercial reasons then its a comercial market and illegal?


I've edited my last post - I had missed the "market" bit!


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Tarron aka FBH police,mate why do you bother replying to very reply post l make if you feel that l do not have any points to make as you imply,some people on this post thought that they were being clever in slagging me off-you being one of them,l'm not trying to win anything as you know,l'm not the one hiding behind a silly name asking questions on pm's without being honest enough to make it clear who l was or who l was asking questions for,l do need or require your respect,nor do l feel the need to try and be impotent,l leave all that nonsense to you guys.
> Hows this for being cryptic- 7 day notice


Erm, what the :censor: do you think you are calling a 'silly name'? Tarron, as ive mentioned in pm, is my REAL name! Tarron Boon, do a google search, there aren't many of me.

People dont need to slag you off, you make a big enough fool of yourself anyway.

Why do I feel the need to reply to your posts? Because you feel the need to constantly attack a man who has done more for this hobby than you ever will! 
If a thousand people told you you're wrong, you should take the hint. If you dont agree with the way shows are run, shows you dont attend even on invitation, then dont go to them.
Stick to your 'oh so moral' part of the hobby

7days notice to what steven. Oh wait you wo t say anything because of your impotence


----------



## AB's

I think in 7 days he will go to the doctor to sort the impotence... Must be awful!! But like all his ideal threats and promises, nothing but blanks!


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

"OK little Steven you go and tell the RFUK people what's going on whilst mummy and daddy APA supporter do some important things. Run along now!"


----------



## LiamRatSnake

I'm not being rude here, but right now your time would be better spent pulling burgers off your shelves - before you don't have a job. Tesco shares fell by £300 million! They're gonna be making some cuts I reckon.
Considering your attitude and disposition (and just general nuttyness) - don't just assume your job will be safe. It's really not fair on the reptile community if you will have 24 hours a day to think up even more crazy theories, troll the forums and more time to snuggle up to the AR nutters.


----------



## Boa Buddy

is the answer 7 ?????


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

Boa Buddy said:


> is the answer 7 ?????


At least it makes a change from 'Chris Newman'


----------



## Boa Buddy




----------



## KSTBalls

Steven, **************** 
7 days till what? Is it that time of the month?
I've never actually knew of a guy to be hated so much on a forum but you still try and do some crazy things.


----------



## Chris Newman

ian14 said:


> Chris Newman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ian14 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry but I disagree.
> The offence relates to carrying on a business in a PUBLIC PLACE.
> 
> So, very simply, if these events are private events, for members only, then this is a non issue. It is not a public place, so the offence is no longer applicable. Provided the sellers are only selling offspring bred by themselves, or animals bought with the intention of breeding from but no longer needed, then they are not affected by this legislation either.
> To say that this is a red herring is, I would suggest, wrong. The entire argument of commercial activity/carrying on a business, etc, is then immaterial.
> Events to which the public can enter by paying a fee make the place they are being held a public place. And so the offence of selling in a public place becomes complete if it is a business. As you say, the issue here is whether such actiivity is a "business".
> 
> Make them members only private events and this no longer applies, is no longer an issue, and the problem is solved!!
> 
> The second paragraph I highlighted was done so because this should not be a consideration. Unless the organisers are running them purely as a capital venture.
> 
> Surely the main consideration should be to ensure that shows are compliant with relevant legislation, rather than how much money they generate for the organiser.
> 
> EDIT - ignore me, I missed out a vital part about MARKETS!
> 
> This then could be an additional angle to consider, as well as what constitutes a business, what constitutes a market? The dictionary definition would suggest that these shows are exactly that, in fact the definition makes reference to livestock, but no mention of being open to the public. To me, a market is a public event. So, if these were members only, woule they still fit the definition of a market?
> 
> 
> 
> The current court case relates to an individual who the Local Authority aleadge has transgressed Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act 1951. The Pet Animals Act regulates the sale of “pets” to the public, and Section 2 relates to the sale of pets in a street or market:
> 
> *2 Pets not to be sold in streets, etc*
> 
> _If any person carries on a business of selling animals as _
> _pets in any part of a street or public place, [or] at a stall or_
> _barrow in a market, he shall be guilty of an offence_.
> 
> In order to secure a conviction the Local Authority have to prove:
> 
> (A) He sells an animal as a pet
> (B) He is deemed to be running a business, and
> (C) the sale takes place at a market
> 
> The Local Authority has to prove all three parts “beyond reasonable doubt” in order to secure a conviction in the Magistrates Court.
> 
> When the Animal Welfare Act came into effect and set Section 2 for repeal government issued guidance on the 4th of April 2007 which I think negates the Public Place argument. Ultimately we will have to wait and what the Court makes of all this!!
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


----------



## Chris Newman

Defining “commercialism” would challenge the Wisdom of Solomon….!! 

It would be easy to identify either end of the line, from the person who breeds one leopard geckos to the other end where someone breeds 10,000 leopard geckos, but where would you draw the line along that continuum!!

The much simpler solution is to licence the event, then the little gray cells can be rested and we can all live happily ever after…..!!


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> Defining “commercialism” would challenge the Wisdom of Solomon….!!
> 
> It would be easy to identify either end of the line, from the person who breeds one leopard geckos to the other end where someone breeds 10,000 leopard geckos, but where would you draw the line along that continuum!!
> 
> The much simpler solution is to licence the event, then the little gray cells can be rested and we can all live happily ever after…..!!


If someones sole income is from selling reptiles that would have to be commercial surely Chris?

Something needs clarifying, whether it be a license to be able to sell at a show, whether it be a formal definition of 'commercial' be it a value, or a sole income, or a quantity of animals, or whether it be a formal definition of 'market'

The whole reason I am staying away from shows at the moment is that until this is defined literally anyone could be prosecuted, or at least tried, thats a very stressful and expensive business.

For the sanity of all involved the law needs some clear guidelines or definitions.

I am sure you are working on this, but I think a lot of people are burying their heads in the sand, blaming the APA for everything. Sure they are using it against us, but its not surprising its an easy tool to use, if teh law is being broken though something will have to change. Not for the skae of the AR's but for the sake of the hobby and the people in it.


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> If someones sole income is from selling reptiles that would have to be commercial surely Chris?
> 
> Something needs clarifying, whether it be a license to be able to sell at a show, whether it be a formal definition of 'commercial' be it a value, or a sole income, or a quantity of animals, or whether it be a formal definition of 'market'
> 
> The whole reason I am staying away from shows at the moment is that until this is defined literally anyone could be prosecuted, or at least tried, thats a very stressful and expensive business.
> 
> For the sanity of all involved the law needs some clear guidelines or definitions.
> 
> I am sure you are working on this, but I think a lot of people are burying their heads in the sand, blaming the APA for everything. Sure they are using it against us, but its not surprising its an easy tool to use, if teh law is being broken though something will have to change. Not for the skae of the AR's but for the sake of the hobby and the people in it.


I would agree if your sole income is from breeding reptiles then I would conceder that a “commercial” activity, not that means you would need licensing under the Pet Animals Act as breeders are excluded from the Act, but it would be commercial agreed..

The only way forward to protect hobbyist from the Animal Rights Industry is to licence such events, I’m sure it wouldn’t stop them from campaigning against shows, they make far too much money for that! Notwithstanding that it would scupper this particular campaign and give protection to both the hobbyist and the Local Authorities, both currently suffer from sustained bullying from these fanatics! 

I hope this current situation impresses on government the urgency of finalising the repeal of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act, so that particular 'golden goose' can be cooked once and for all…….!!


----------



## stevenrudge

bladeblaster said:


> If someones sole income is from selling reptiles that would have to be commercial surely Chris?
> 
> Something needs clarifying, whether it be a license to be able to sell at a show, whether it be a formal definition of 'commercial' be it a value, or a sole income, or a quantity of animals, or whether it be a formal definition of 'market'
> 
> The whole reason I am staying away from shows at the moment is that until this is defined literally anyone could be prosecuted, or at least tried, thats a very stressful and expensive business.
> 
> For the sanity of all involved the law needs some clear guidelines or definitions.
> 
> I am sure you are working on this, but I think a lot of people are burying their heads in the sand, blaming the APA for everything. Sure they are using it against us, but its not surprising its an easy tool to use, if teh law is being broken though something will have to change. Not for the skae of the AR's but for the sake of the hobby and the people in it.


At last somebody else with an independent unbiased mind-that has seen the danger and you could argue has put his own self legal interest before any self financial gain,not that l need the shows to sell my snakes surplus offsprings,but until this and the problems of one day entry are settled,the shows as they stand right now are to much of a risk for me personally to use,again you have to ask as to why after all these years we're still at this point


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> I would agree if your sole income is from breeding reptiles then I would conceder that a “commercial” activity, not that means you would need licensing under the Pet Animals Act as breeders are excluded from the Act, but it would be commercial agreed..
> 
> The only way forward to protect hobbyist from the Animal Rights Industry is to licence such events, I’m sure it wouldn’t stop them from campaigning against shows, they make far too much money for that! Notwithstanding that it would scupper this particular campaign and give protection to both the hobbyist and the Local Authorities, both currently suffer from sustained bullying from these fanatics!
> 
> I hope this current situation impresses on government the urgency of finalising the repeal of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act, so that particular 'golden goose' can be cooked once and for all…….!!


yes they will of course continue to compaign against them, but thats their right, and is no skin off my nose. My concern is solely with the legal angle, if and when shows are shown to be completely legal then they can campaign as much as they want, they have no legal leg to stand on. at the moment we are giving them ammunition and loading the gun for them.


----------



## essexchondro

Steven, in the opening post on this thread you refer to all the trouble that the anti's have caused us (the hobby) over the years..but a few days ago in a different thread you accused me of "faking a fight that wasn't there" when I suggested that people should donate to the FBH to help defend our hobby and shows from the threat posed by the anti's.

Can you please clarify your stance, Steven; either the anti's are a threat, or they aren't. Which is it?

Many thanks

Stuart


----------



## Tarron

essexchondro said:


> Steven, in the opening post on this thread you refer to all the trouble that the anti's have caused us (the hobby) over the years..but a few days ago in a different thread you accused me of "faking a fight that wasn't there" when I suggested that people should donate to the FBH to help defend our hobby and shows from the threat posed by the anti's.
> 
> Can you please clarify your stance, Steven; either the anti's are a threat, or they aren't. Which is it?
> 
> Many thanks
> 
> Stuart


There may or may not have been a change in his opinion when he began collaborating with an AR Group on things.

I can't account for timeline, I don't know when he got in touch with them, but if he has changed his opinion in that time, there could be an answer.


----------



## helsbels

Tarron said:


> There may or may not have been a change in his opinion when he began collaborating with an AR Group on things.
> 
> I can't account for timeline, I don't know when he got in touch with them, but if he has changed his opinion in that time, there could be an answer.


From his recent posts, alluding to having insider information, it seems that he might, or would like us to think, that he has connections with an AR Group. Do we have any evidence of this or know what that group is? I am a member of several other groups where he has posted, and rather than a witch-hunt, I think it would be good to provide as much proof as possible, because none of these groups would like him to be a member if this is the proven case.


----------



## essexchondro

> There may or may not have been a change in his opinion when he began collaborating with an AR Group on things.
> 
> I can't account for timeline, I don't know when he got in touch with them, but if he has changed his opinion in that time, there could be an answer.


But the anti's openly admit that they are fighting our hobby and want the keeping of reptiles as pets to be banned...so why would any alleged association between Steven and an AR group result in him changing his stance on whether or not there is a threat to our hobby? The change in stance that _should_ accompany that kind of change in allegience is a change from seeing the threat as a bad thing to one of seeing the threat as a good thing, not a change from recognising the threat to not recognising it!

I'm more inclined to think that he's accidentally tripped-up over his own bull :censor: rather than it being anything along the lines of a premeditated tactic or change of opinion.


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

A question to whoever makes the policy for our reptile hobby shows.
As l've noticed that there's some passing the buck at the moment
Theres a big morph breeder who uses the shows to sell their produce both hear in the UK and abroad.
This person do's not have a PSL but its clear to anybody that buys of them and they admit its a business in every sense of the word.
Now this person was done by the Tax authority's in an investigation and got a big fine,this is conman knowledge.
So the Tax authority's view this person as running a business,they pay Tax on their activity's.
So why do our Federation/Society's still let this person entry into our hobby shows knowing that this person pays business tax?
The volume of animals is clearly not from any hobby breeder.
Answer this honestly before we get anymore investigations that can lead to any of us facing a prosecution


----------



## essexchondro

> A question to whoever makes the policy for our reptile hobby shows.
> As l've noticed that there's some passing the buck at the moment
> Theres a big morph breeder who uses the shows to sell their produce both hear in the UK and abroad.
> This person do's not have a PSL but its clear to anybody that buys of them and they admit its a business in every sense of the word.
> Now this person was done by the Tax authority's in an investigation and got a big fine,this is conman knowledge.
> So the Tax authority's view this person as running a business,they pay Tax on their activity's.
> So why do our Federation/Society's still let this person entry into our hobby shows knowing that this person pays business tax?
> The volume of animals is clearly not from any hobby breeder.
> Answer this honestly before we get anymore investigations that can lead to any of us facing a prosecution


You don't need a PSL if you are selling offspring that you have produced yourself... so the person you mention doesn't need a PSL if they are a breeder selling their own produce.


----------



## Tarron

essexchondro said:


> You don't need a PSL if you are selling offspring that you have produced yourself... so the person you mention doesn't need a PSL if they are a breeder selling their own produce.
> 
> However, just because they don't need a PSL, that doesn't mean that they are not breeding for commercial reasons as a business. If a commercial breeder (someone who doesn't require a PSL if they are only selling their own produce) is evading tax on their earnings then it is a matter for the HMRC to deal with...nothing to do with show organisers.
> 
> As usual, Steven, you are confusing different issues in order to suit your agenda.





stevenrudge said:


> A question to whoever makes the policy for our reptile hobby shows.
> As l've noticed that there's some passing the buck at the moment
> Theres a big morph breeder who uses the shows to sell their produce both hear in the UK and abroad.
> This person do's not have a PSL but its clear to anybody that buys of them and they admit its a business in every sense of the word.
> Now this person was done by the Tax authority's in an investigation and got a big fine,this is conman knowledge.
> So the Tax authority's view this person as running a business,they pay Tax on their activity's.
> So why do our Federation/Society's still let this person entry into our hobby shows knowing that this person pays business tax?
> The volume of animals is clearly not from any hobby breeder.
> Answer this honestly before we get anymore investigations that can lead to any of us facing a prosecution


Quite right that a breeder doesn't require a PSL. But even us mere hobbyists are liable to Tax on any earnings. this however, does not mean someone is a business. That is a totally separate issue that, we have already shown, is difficult to pin down. It mainly comes from intent to make a profit, which no one but the tax man can assume.



essexchondro said:


> But the anti's openly admit that they are fighting our hobby and want the keeping of reptiles as pets to be banned...so why would any alleged association between Steven and an AR group result in him changing his stance on whether or not there is a threat to our hobby? The change in stance that _should_ accompany that kind of change in allegience is a change from seeing the threat as a bad thing to one of seeing the threat as a good thing, not a change from recognising the threat to not recognising it!
> 
> I'm more inclined to think that he's accidentally tripped-up over his own bull :censor: rather than it being anything along the lines of a premeditated tactic or change of opinion.


I 100% agree with your first paragraph, which is why i will never now trust a word steven says! He asked me to keep the reasoning quiet, but i'm starting to feel I should say something here.
He's putting everyones hobby, not just the shows, in danger, in my opinion.



helsbels said:


> From his recent posts, alluding to having insider information, it seems that he might, or would like us to think, that he has connections with an AR Group. Do we have any evidence of this or know what that group is? I am a member of several other groups where he has posted, and rather than a witch-hunt, I think it would be good to provide as much proof as possible, because none of these groups would like him to be a member if this is the proven case.


Steven has admitted this in both public and private messages. Evidence can be found on CaptiveBred and my own personal inbox.


----------



## essexchondro

> Quite right that a breeder doesn't require a PSL. But even us mere hobbyists are liable to Tax on any earnings. this however, does not mean someone is a business. That is a totally separate issue that, we have already shown, is difficult to pin down. It mainly comes from intent to make a profit, which no one but the tax man can assume.


Agreed. Evading tax is evading tax; whether or not you're deemed a business is not relevant. Ones status might alter the _*type*_ of tax being evaded (corporation tax rather than income tax, for example) but its still a matter for HMRC to deal with and is a separate issue as to whether on not a PSL is required.


----------



## Chris Newman

stevenrudge said:


> A question to whoever makes the policy for our reptile hobby shows.
> As l've noticed that there's some passing the buck at the moment
> Theres a big morph breeder who uses the shows to sell their produce both hear in the UK and abroad.
> This person do's not have a PSL but its clear to anybody that buys of them and they admit its a business in every sense of the word.
> Now this person was done by the Tax authority's in an investigation and got a big fine,this is conman knowledge.
> So the Tax authority's view this person as running a business,they pay Tax on their activity's.
> So why do our Federation/Society's still let this person entry into our hobby shows knowing that this person pays business tax?
> The volume of animals is clearly not from any hobby breeder.
> Answer this honestly before we get anymore investigations that can lead to any of us facing a prosecution


To address the issues, I am not aware of any passing of the buck, as you so eloquently put it….!!

As for your allegation that a well know hobbyist has been and I quote your words: “done by the Tax authority's” This may or may or not be true, I am certainly oblivious to this matter! Perhaps as you claim this, and I will quote your words again: “conman knowledge” thenwould you be as so kind to furnish me with more information so this matter can be looked into? Clearly if the HMRC have prosecuted a hobbyist for undeclared tax on reptiles he breeds then this is information that we should be aware of as it contravenes our rules for exhibiting at shows. 

I look forward to receiving this information at your earliest convenience.


----------



## stevenrudge

Chris Newman said:


> To address the issues, I am not aware of any passing of the buck, as you so eloquently put it….!!
> 
> As for your allegation that a well know hobbyist has been and I quote your words: “done by the Tax authority's” This may or may or not be true, I am certainly oblivious to this matter! Perhaps as you claim this, and I will quote your words again: “conman knowledge” thenwould you be as so kind to furnish me with more information so this matter can be looked into? Clearly if the HMRC have prosecuted a hobbyist for undeclared tax on reptiles he breeds then this is information that we should be aware of as it contravenes our rules for exhibiting at shows.
> 
> I look forward to receiving this information at your earliest convenience.


who said l was talking to you?l notice that again you highlight my disability so thats something else l'll speak to my Legal team about as l've already asked you to and your friends to get over my dyslexia,says a lot out how you view people.
Your ego with not let go,this question was for the people who run our shows not you,l'll speak to the person involved tonight and see if their ok with others knowing if not thats upto them,
PS Tarron your link with Newman is now obvious,l asked Tarron in a pm after he made your link clear as to why l've seen trade vans unload animals at affiliated shows?he unconvincingly asked for their names yeah right!
Sorry as said before your so far behind the curve its frightening-your way out your depth.or you cannot bring yourself to see and really get involved in making the changes we need.When l want to talk to you again it will be through Lawyers-
cryptic-7 day notice is almost up


----------



## ian kerr

stevenrudge said:


> who said l was talking to you?l notice that again you highlight my disability so thats something else l'll speak to my Legal team about as l've already asked you to and your friends to get over my dyslexia,says a lot out how you view people.
> Your ego with not let go,this question was for the people who run our shows not you,l'll speak to the person involved tonight and see if their ok with others knowing if not thats upto them,
> PS Tarron your link with Newman is now obvious,l asked Tarron in a pm after he made your link clear as to why l've seen trade vans unload animals at affiliated shows?he unconvincingly asked for their names yeah right!
> Sorry as said before your so far behind the curve its frightening-your way out your depth.or you cannot bring yourself to see and really get involved in making the changes we need.When l want to talk to you again it will be through Lawyers-
> cryptic-7 day notice is almost up


Can you tell me...are Maris piper better tasting than king Edwards


----------



## Chris Newman

stevenrudge said:


> who said l was talking to you?l notice that again you highlight my disability so thats something else l'll speak to my Legal team about as l've already asked you to and your friends to get over my dyslexia,says a lot out how you view people.
> Your ego with not let go,this question was for the people who run our shows not you,l'll speak to the person involved tonight and see if their ok with others knowing if not thats upto them,
> PS Tarron your link with Newman is now obvious,l asked Tarron in a pm after he made your link clear as to why l've seen trade vans unload animals at affiliated shows?he unconvincingly asked for their names yeah right!
> Sorry as said before your so far behind the curve its frightening-your way out your depth.or you cannot bring yourself to see and really get involved in making the changes we need.When l want to talk to you again it will be through Lawyers-
> cryptic-7 day notice is almost up


You sounded just like Clifford then – “_I’m not talking to you_” I still have fond memories of that outburst at a Defra meeting….. it was priceless…. 

And when precisely have I ever highlighted your ‘alleged’ disability? For the record I am sure you are aware that I am profoundly dyslectic, so your allegation is deeply offensive!

I am sure it is just an oversight on your part but you have neglected to address issue of why the Animal Welfare Act set Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act for repeal?


----------



## ian kerr

helsbels said:


> From his recent posts, alluding to having insider information, it seems that he might, or would like us to think, that he has connections with an AR Group. Do we have any evidence of this or know what that group is? I am a member of several other groups where he has posted, and rather than a witch-hunt, I think it would be good to provide as much proof as possible, because none of these groups would like him to be a member if this is the proven case.


I don't think ANY group wants him!
He has been restricted by Scott Wilkinson on captive bred 
A first for captive bred!

Well done drudge!...sorry meant rudge!! Lol


----------



## johnc79

stevenrudge said:


> who said l was talking to you?l notice that again you highlight my disability so thats something else l'll speak to my Legal team about as l've already asked you to and your friends to get over my dyslexia,says a lot out how you view people.
> Your ego with not let go,this question was for the people who run our shows not you,l'll speak to the person involved tonight and see if their ok with others knowing if not thats upto them,
> PS Tarron your link with Newman is now obvious,l asked Tarron in a pm after he made your link clear as to why l've seen trade vans unload animals at affiliated shows?he unconvincingly asked for their names yeah right!
> Sorry as said before your so far behind the curve its frightening-your way out your depth.or you cannot bring yourself to see and really get involved in making the changes we need.When l want to talk to you again it will be through Lawyers-
> cryptic-7 day notice is almost up


Legal team lol. You must watch to much LA law kid!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ian kerr

johnc79 said:


> Legal team lol. You must watch to much LA law kid!
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


NO REALLY!! ............The nite shift potato shelf stackers at TESCO use the same legal team as o j Simpson!..........stevenrudge is himself a part time barrister ........or is a barsteward !???? I can't remember which he is!


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> who said l was talking to you?l notice that again you highlight my disability so thats something else l'll speak to my Legal team about as l've already asked you to and your friends to get over my dyslexia,says a lot out how you view people.
> Your ego with not let go,this question was for the people who run our shows not you,l'll speak to the person involved tonight and see if their ok with others knowing if not thats upto them,
> PS Tarron your link with Newman is now obvious,l asked Tarron in a pm after he made your link clear as to why l've seen trade vans unload animals at affiliated shows?he unconvincingly asked for their names yeah right!
> Sorry as said before your so far behind the curve its frightening-your way out your depth.or you cannot bring yourself to see and really get involved in making the changes we need.When l want to talk to you again it will be through Lawyers-
> cryptic-7 day notice is almost up


Im pretty sure that if you are making claims of illegal trading, then I'm well within my right to request evidence of that so I can make a decision. You were unwilling or unable to provide it so my instant thought was 'bull'.

Tell me, if your so convincd of my links, why trust me with a secret that you dont want anyone to know? Unless it was all rubbish and talk?

Ive never lied about my support of chris, though I think you overestimate our link. Ive tried to be a helpful and assistive member of the community, and he has helped me with some stuff for BEMA but thats about it.

I have even said, if you provide clear evidence of any wrongdoing on Chris' part, then I will concede to you. This is also lacking. 

7 day notice isnt almost up, 6 days remain. Only 1 seventh of the period has passed. Thats not almost.


----------



## LiamRatSnake

ian kerr said:


> I don't think ANY group wants him!
> He has been restricted by Scott Wilkinson on captive bred
> A first for captive bred!
> 
> Well done drudge!...sorry meant rudge!! Lol


It's amazing how he succeeded where Viperlover and even edumundblackadder failed.


----------



## **louise**

This thread is so confusing. I have read it all and I think I have an understanding of what's going on here.

Steven is impotent and in love with Chris.

:hmm:


----------



## ian kerr

**louise** said:


> This thread is so confusing. I have read it all and I think I have an understanding of what's going on here.
> 
> Steven is impotent and in love with Chris.
> 
> :hmm:


Well they do say you hurt the ones you luff!


----------



## penfold

can someone just shoot steven (oh shit his lawyers will be on me )i continue to read as i cant beleive the crap that comes out of your mouth nearly your own arse you are so far up it


----------



## Uromastyxman

**louise** said:


> This thread is so confusing. I have read it all and I think I have an understanding of what's going on here.
> 
> Steven is impotent and in love with Chris.
> 
> :hmm:


I'm sorry Steven, I know you and I agree on some things mate, but this is funny. :2thumb:


----------



## truncheon1973

ask yourself this

your apa mates have told you the court case will end up with the guy being prosecuted but what if you lose?

if the guy being prosecuted wins then what?

will that not make you look even more of a doofus than you do now?



stevenrudge said:


> who said l was talking to you?l notice that again you highlight my disability so thats something else l'll speak to my Legal team about as l've already asked you to and your friends to get over my dyslexia,says a lot out how you view people.
> Your ego with not let go,this question was for the people who run our shows not you,l'll speak to the person involved tonight and see if their ok with others knowing if not thats upto them,
> PS Tarron your link with Newman is now obvious,l asked Tarron in a pm after he made your link clear as to why l've seen trade vans unload animals at affiliated shows?he unconvincingly asked for their names yeah right!
> Sorry as said before your so far behind the curve its frightening-your way out your depth.or you cannot bring yourself to see and really get involved in making the changes we need.When l want to talk to you again it will be through Lawyers-
> cryptic-7 day notice is almost up


----------



## Nikkifer

how oh how are you not banned yet? your just causing trouble!


----------



## MoreliaUK

penfold said:


> can someone just shoot steven (oh shit his lawyers will be on me )i continue to read as i cant beleive the crap that comes out of your mouth nearly your own arse you are so far up it


Where's Jerry Cole when you need him :whistling2:


----------



## mike mc

Cant believe this SPUD'S still spouting off


----------



## Mynki

mike mc said:


> Cant believe this SPUD'S still spouting off


He's just working up to his big announcement. Something that others have known about for some time. It will be one hell of an anti climax.


----------



## Mynki

penfold said:


> can someone just shoot steven (oh shit his lawyers will be on me )i continue to read as i cant beleive the crap that comes out of your mouth nearly your own arse you are so far up it


The last box of 20 rounds I bought cost me £36 for Sako Hammerheads. I'm pretty sure Mr Rudge ain't worth the £1.80 to be honest...


----------



## SamWest

stevenrudge, as much as I don't know you (and i hope i never do) you seem like you're the biggest attention seeker going! Why can't you see that this is an internet forum, where people have a (degree of) freedom of speech and just shut up with your rubbish about lawyers and whatnot ?
This may be my last post because Steven may set his crack team of mercenaries on me


----------



## MoreliaUK

SamWest said:


> stevenrudge, as much as I don't know you (and i hope i never do) you seem like you're the biggest attention seeker going !


Surely he cannot be worse than Jerry Halliwell?


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> I would agree if your sole income is from breeding reptiles then I would conceder that a “commercial” activity, not that means you would need licensing under the Pet Animals Act as breeders are excluded from the Act, but it would be commercial agreed..
> 
> The only way forward to protect hobbyist from the Animal Rights Industry is to licence such events, I’m sure it wouldn’t stop them from campaigning against shows, they make far too much money for that! Notwithstanding that it would scupper this particular campaign and give protection to both the hobbyist and the Local Authorities, both currently suffer from sustained bullying from these fanatics!
> 
> I hope this current situation impresses on government the urgency of finalising the repeal of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act, so that particular 'golden goose' can be cooked once and for all…….!!


So unless I'm mistaken, and I know if i am Chris or Tarron will straighten me out.

To clarify, the two main options/ways forward for shows/meetings.

1. Make shows/meetings members only events which means they are no longer public and beyond legal attack from antis as they are perfectly legal breeders meetings, requiring only that people entering the meeting are registered members.

The obvious reason that this is not desirable to people selling animals/dealers is that some people are put off by having to purchase membership to gain entry, resulting in less customers which equals less opportunity to sell, resulting in less money through sales of animals and equipment.

As many of you know, I advocate this as a way forward as a person who is unwilling to invest in paying a relatively small membership charge to gain entry to the meeting is unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place. I believe that there must be some basic investment made by a potential reptile purchaser involving some fundamental grounding in reptile husbandry before they should be allowed to own a reptile. This is based on my desire to protect reptiles, particularly from being sold to people with inadequate knowledge to sustain the animal at the time of purchase. I am less interested in the ability of the breeder/dealer's potential to sell more animals.

2. Repeal section 2 of the pet animals act to allow shows/meetings to be licenced, meaning that shows are legal and making membership of a club unnessessary to gain entry, which means more people coming in and more specifically more people coming in who are just members of the public who want to buy animals but have little or no prior knowledge of reptile husbandry. 

This appears to be what is wanted by the main reptile organisations as it allows more potential to sell animals, meaning more profit. 

While this allows breeders/dealers to make more money, it does so with no restrictions on selling to inappropriate buyers, allowing further animals to be offloaded to the uneducated and impulse buyer. This has the emphasis on sales of animals, with no strategy towards education for entry level reptile keepers above and beyond handing out a photocopy of a caresheet with the purchase of an animal, if they can even be bothered. There is also no regulation or guideline regarding the vetting of a potential buyer by a dealer/breeder. 

While it suits many dealers/breeders to pump more and more reptiles out into the mainstream to expand the hobby and generate more profit for the reptile industry, it has not been and still appears to be the case that the education and regulation of reptile keeping is avoided because this will lessen the flow of potential customers to the market place, despite the fact that it would mean more reptiles being owned by the educated and committed keeper with less reptiles falling into the hands of impulse buyers who can't be bothered to learn about the animals they have and then proceed into the hobby with bad husbandry practices and poorly kept reptiles, resulting in unnessessary suffering and death. I see reptile governing bodies pandering to the industry by pushing sales but not addressing the much needed education and regulation which would protect the actual reptiles themselves, and until governing bodies start addressing this, reptile keeping will remain under attack from antis and the ethical keepers who believe that reptile keeping should be about reptile care and NOT reptile sales will become more and more disalussioned with a hobby that was once about the study and care of reptiles, which has been overtaken by a reptile industry which is about selling reptiles and equipment and the profit that this can bring.


----------



## bladeblaster

Uromastyxman said:


> So unless I'm mistaken, and I know if i am Chris or Tarron will straighten me out.
> 
> To clarify, the two main options/ways forward for shows/meetings.
> 
> 1. Make shows/meetings members only events which means they are no longer public and beyond legal attack from antis as they are perfectly legal breeders meetings, requiring only that people entering the meeting are registered members.
> 
> The obvious reason that this is not desirable to people selling animals/dealers is that some people are put off by having to purchase membership to gain entry, resulting in less customers which equals less opportunity to sell, resulting in less money through sales of animals and equipment.
> 
> As many of you know, I advocate this as a way forward as a person who is unwilling to invest in paying a relatively small membership charge to gain entry to the meeting is unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place. I believe that there must be some basic investment made by a potential reptile purchaser involving some fundamental grounding in reptile husbandry before they should be allowed to own a reptile. This is based on my desire to protect reptiles, particularly from being sold to people with inadequate knowledge to sustain the animal at the time of purchase. I am less interested in the ability of the breeder/dealer's potential to sell more animals.
> 
> 2. Repeal section 2 of the pet animals act to allow shows/meetings to be licenced, meaning that shows are legal and making membership of a club unnessessary to gain entry, which means more people coming in and more specifically more people coming in who are just members of the public who want to buy animals but have little or no prior knowledge of reptile husbandry.
> 
> This appears to be what is wanted by the main reptile organisations as it allows more potential to sell animals, meaning more profit.
> 
> While this allows breeders/dealers to make more money, it does so with no restrictions on selling to inappropriate buyers, allowing further animals to be offloaded to the uneducated and impulse buyer. This has the emphasis on sales of animals, with no strategy towards education for entry level reptile keepers above and beyond handing out a photocopy of a caresheet with the purchase of an animal, if they can even be bothered. There is also no regulation or guideline regarding the vetting of a potential buyer by a dealer/breeder.
> 
> While it suits many dealers/breeders to pump more and more reptiles out into the mainstream to expand the hobby and generate more profit for the reptile industry, it has not been and still appears to be the case that the education and regulation of reptile keeping is avoided because this will lessen the flow of potential customers to the market place, despite the fact that it would mean more reptiles being owned by the educated and committed keeper with less reptiles falling into the hands of impulse buyers who can't be bothered to learn about the animals they have and then proceed into the hobby with bad husbandry practices and poorly kept reptiles, resulting in unnessessary suffering and death. I see reptile governing bodies pandering to the industry by pushing sales but not addressing the much needed education and regulation which would protect the actual reptiles themselves, and until governing bodies start addressing this, reptile keeping will remain under attack from antis and the ethical keepers who believe that reptile keeping should be about reptile care and NOT reptile sales will become more and more disalussioned with a hobby that was once about the study and care of reptiles, which has been overtaken by a reptile industry which is about selling reptiles and equipment and the profit that this can bring.


Reptile keeping has grown to the point where it is now an industry, it will never be 'just a hobby' for people who rely on it for an income. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with that, its just how it is.


----------



## MoreliaUK

bladeblaster said:


> Reptile keeping has grown to the point where it is now an industry, it will never be 'just a hobby' for people who rely on it for an income. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with that, its just how it is.


..and reptile shows do come across more as being reptile markets rather than reptile shows. Does the Doncaster show have a 'most handsome leopard gecko contest' or longest 'Royal contest' or is it just purely commercial?


----------



## loxocemus

this explains how many experienced keepers feel i think, i do not believe some of the people that are fighting legislation etc care about protecting the hobby or even the reptiles, all they care about is the industry and its balance sheet. in fact i think their using the average hobbyist as pawns in their financial games.

the net effect of this seems to be experienced keepers contracting/withdrawing from the hobby either altogether are having greatly reduced collections and connections to the wider community.

rgds
ed

While it suits many dealers/breeders to pump more and more reptiles out into the mainstream to expand the hobby and generate more profit for the reptile industry, it has not been and still appears to be the case that the education and regulation of reptile keeping is avoided because this will lessen the flow of potential customers to the market place, despite the fact that it would mean more reptiles being owned by the educated and committed keeper with less reptiles falling into the hands of impulse buyers who can't be bothered to learn about the animals they have and then proceed into the hobby with bad husbandry practices and poorly kept reptiles, resulting in unnessessary suffering and death. I see reptile governing bodies pandering to the industry by pushing sales but not addressing the much needed education and regulation which would protect the actual reptiles themselves, and until governing bodies start addressing this, reptile keeping will remain under attack from antis and the ethical keepers who believe that reptile keeping should be about reptile care and NOT reptile sales will become more and more disalussioned with a hobby that was once about the study and care of reptiles, which has been overtaken by a reptile industry which is about selling reptiles and equipment and the profit that this can bring.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> So unless I'm mistaken, and I know if i am Chris or Tarron will straighten me out.
> 
> To clarify, the two main options/ways forward for shows/meetings.
> 
> 1. Make shows/meetings members only events which means they are no longer public and beyond legal attack from antis as they are perfectly legal breeders meetings, requiring only that people entering the meeting are registered members.
> 
> The obvious reason that this is not desirable to people selling animals/dealers is that some people are put off by having to purchase membership to gain entry, resulting in less customers which equals less opportunity to sell, resulting in less money through sales of animals and equipment.
> 
> As many of you know, I advocate this as a way forward as a person who is unwilling to invest in paying a relatively small membership charge to gain entry to the meeting is unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place. I believe that there must be some basic investment made by a potential reptile purchaser involving some fundamental grounding in reptile husbandry before they should be allowed to own a reptile. This is based on my desire to protect reptiles, particularly from being sold to people with inadequate knowledge to sustain the animal at the time of purchase. I am less interested in the ability of the breeder/dealer's potential to sell more animals.
> 
> 2. Repeal section 2 of the pet animals act to allow shows/meetings to be licenced, meaning that shows are legal and making membership of a club unnessessary to gain entry, which means more people coming in and more specifically more people coming in who are just members of the public who want to buy animals but have little or no prior knowledge of reptile husbandry.
> 
> This appears to be what is wanted by the main reptile organisations as it allows more potential to sell animals, meaning more profit.
> 
> While this allows breeders/dealers to make more money, it does so with no restrictions on selling to inappropriate buyers, allowing further animals to be offloaded to the uneducated and impulse buyer. This has the emphasis on sales of animals, with no strategy towards education for entry level reptile keepers above and beyond handing out a photocopy of a caresheet with the purchase of an animal, if they can even be bothered. There is also no regulation or guideline regarding the vetting of a potential buyer by a dealer/breeder.
> 
> While it suits many dealers/breeders to pump more and more reptiles out into the mainstream to expand the hobby and generate more profit for the reptile industry, it has not been and still appears to be the case that the education and regulation of reptile keeping is avoided because this will lessen the flow of potential customers to the market place, despite the fact that it would mean more reptiles being owned by the educated and committed keeper with less reptiles falling into the hands of impulse buyers who can't be bothered to learn about the animals they have and then proceed into the hobby with bad husbandry practices and poorly kept reptiles, resulting in unnessessary suffering and death. I see reptile governing bodies pandering to the industry by pushing sales but not addressing the much needed education and regulation which would protect the actual reptiles themselves, and until governing bodies start addressing this, reptile keeping will remain under attack from antis and the ethical keepers who believe that reptile keeping should be about reptile care and NOT reptile sales will become more and more disalussioned with a hobby that was once about the study and care of reptiles, which has been overtaken by a reptile industry which is about selling reptiles and equipment and the profit that this can bring.


Original shows were always open to public admittance before the attacks started by the Animal Rights Industry. Then at one stage they went to being open to members of the relevant society, some may well remember this phase when attended at show was very poor! Some may remember that at one stage there was virtually no shows! Then government responded with some guidance, which states shows can be open to the public and the revival started. 

One of the disappointments is that over the year’s membership to clubs and societies has continued to decrease, today we have more people keeping reptiles than ever, but fewer belong to clubs and societies, this applies across all taxa not just reptiles. The rise of the internet forum is often quotes as one reason fro this, which may or may not be true.

The repeal of Section 2 would remove all ambiguities, give more controlee to Local Authorities and allow hobbyist to pursue there hobby without threat from the fanatics. 

I seem to detect opposition to the fact that the reptile hobby has expanded, I find this slightly curious? Do you have concerns that more people are keeping reptiles than ever before!


----------



## Chris Newman

MoreliaUK said:


> ..and reptile shows do come across more as being reptile markets rather than reptile shows. Does the Doncaster show have a 'most handsome leopard gecko contest' or longest 'Royal contest' or is it just purely commercial?


Breeders meetings are there for hobbyist to meet, display, exchange and sell their surplus livestock. Personally I see little wrong with that!

Over the years ‘showing’ of animals has been tried, but never succeeded in become established, which is curious. Nevertheless I am sure this will happen one day!


----------



## Nikkifer

MoreliaUK said:


> ..and reptile shows do come across more as being reptile markets rather than reptile shows. Does the Doncaster show have a 'most handsome leopard gecko contest' or longest 'Royal contest' or is it just purely commercial?


I dont understand whats wrong with selling them at a show?
its only like taking cattle to a market or horses and stuff, no one bats an eyelid at that

EDIT** as long as the animals are cared for at said show I dont see a problem however I must admit the last Doncaster show I was disapointed with an animal I bought as it was emaciated and was allowed to be sold.
Does Doncaster have rules against stuff like that?


----------



## rach_bd

Nikkifer said:


> I was disapointed with an animal I bought as it was emaciated and was allowed to be sold.
> Does Doncaster have rules against stuff like that?


The main question here is why you bought it, and didn't bring it to the attention of one of the marshalls.


----------



## Nikkifer

rach_bd said:


> The main question here is why you bought it, and didn't bring it to the attention of one of the marshalls.


 I didnt even know their was marshalls. I bought her because I couldnt bear to leave a snake in that condition. Shes now thriving and is a perfect weight so im glad I did.

I never knew their were marshalls that are there.


----------



## Randolf

loxocemus said:


> this explains how many experienced keepers feel i think, i do not believe some of the people that are fighting legislation etc care about protecting the hobby or even the reptiles, all they care about is the industry and its balance sheet. in fact i think their using the average hobbyist as pawns in their financial games.
> 
> the net effect of this seems to be experienced keepers contracting/withdrawing from the hobby either altogether are having greatly reduced collections and connections to the wider community.
> 
> rgds
> ed


[/QUOTE]


Here here!


----------



## MoreliaUK

Chris Newman said:


> Breeders meetings are there for hobbyist to meet, display, exchange and sell their surplus livestock. Personally I see little wrong with that!
> 
> Over the years ‘showing’ of animals has been tried, but never succeeded in become established, which is curious. Nevertheless I am sure this will happen one day!


Why then were professional breeders at one of the other shows recently then if they are for hobby keepers be it only if they were showing (drumming up trade) as opposed to selling?

I see nothing wrong in shows/markets with people selling their surplus offspring (livestock sounds too commercial) either. Its just that they are not my bag as I do not always think that they promote responsible purchasing, encourage impulse buying and many of the sellers lack the back up support and experience you may get when buying from a shop.


----------



## MoreliaUK

Nikkifer said:


> I dont understand whats wrong with selling them at a show?
> its only like taking cattle to a market or horses and stuff, no one bats an eyelid at that
> 
> EDIT** as long as the animals are cared for at said show I dont see a problem however I must admit the last Doncaster show I was disapointed with an animal I bought as it was emaciated and was allowed to be sold.
> Does Doncaster have rules against stuff like that?


Neither do I but it is about time that it is admitted that they are commercial events (no shame in that) and they are MARKETS and not SHOWS.


----------



## Nikkifer

MoreliaUK said:


> Why then were professional breeders at one of the other shows recently then if they are for hobby keepers be it only if they were showing (drumming up trade) as opposed to selling?
> 
> I see nothing wrong in shows/markets with people selling their surplus offspring (livestock sounds too commercial) either. Its just that they are not my bag as I do not always think that they promote responsible purchasing, *encourage impulse buying* and many of the sellers lack the back up support and experience you may get when buying from a shop.


 I think I would have to agree also. Now you put it like this it kinda makes more sense. I like the shows and thinks its a great idea for people to see all kinds of different reptiles and stuff but like you say impulse buying and things like that are the downsides


----------



## Nikkifer

MoreliaUK said:


> Neither do I but it is about time that it is admitted that they are commercial events (no shame in that) and they are MARKETS and not SHOWS.


 Oh yeah definatley Doncaster is a market, 
Shows are for showing off animals and not purchasing, markets are for sales. Agreed definatley.


----------



## gandolfthestray

loxocemus said:


> this explains how many experienced keepers feel i think, i do not believe some of the people that are fighting legislation etc care about protecting the hobby or even the reptiles, all they care about is the industry and its balance sheet. in fact i think their using the average hobbyist as pawns in their financial games.
> 
> the net effect of this seems to be experienced keepers contracting/withdrawing from the hobby either altogether are having greatly reduced collections and connections to the wider community.
> 
> rgds
> ed


[/QUOTE]


Amen!

Also, I always thought (my mistake? unsure) that the Doncaster show was a place for 'private breeders'? Imagine my dismay when I found shops, wholesalers and animal brokers etc vending at the July? show. Not that there is anything wrong with that, but the public or future wannabe IHS members should be made well aware before paying out hard earned money in my book. 

Once an IHS member, not anymore.

Good day to you all!


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> Breeders meetings are there for hobbyist to meet, display, exchange and sell their surplus livestock. Personally I see little wrong with that!


Oh come on Chris, that statement is laughable. It maybe true for a good number of exhibitors, but seriously.

Its a market, it is impossible to argue otherwise.


----------



## bladeblaster

Nikkifer said:


> I dont understand whats wrong with selling them at a show?
> its only like taking cattle to a market or horses and stuff, no one bats an eyelid at that
> 
> EDIT** as long as the animals are cared for at said show I dont see a problem however I must admit the last Doncaster show I was disapointed with an animal I bought as it was emaciated and was allowed to be sold.
> Does Doncaster have rules against stuff like that?


No one (apart from AR's) are saying that there is anything wrong with it other than the fact that it is actually illegal.

I would love them to be made legal, I like going to shows, meeting up with people I don;t see very often, and of course its great for selling my animals. However I am not going to attend while I am under the opinion that it is ilegal to do so.


----------



## Nikkifer

bladeblaster said:


> No one (apart from AR's) are saying that there is anything wrong with it other than the fact that it is actually illegal.
> 
> I would love them to be made legal, I like going to shows, meeting up with people I don;t see very often, and of course its great for selling my animals. However I am not going to attend while I am under the opinion that it is ilegal to do so.


 Can you point me to where I can read about it being illegal? Apologies if its already been posted in here : victory:

Its a shame really as Doncaster was great some real decent people there


----------



## Purple_D

bladeblaster said:


> No one (apart from AR's) are saying that there is anything wrong with it other than the fact that it is actually illegal.
> 
> I would love them to be made legal, I like going to shows, meeting up with people I don;t see very often, and of course its great for selling my animals. However I am not going to attend while I am under the opinion that it is ilegal to do so.


sorry mate,but i think the last sentence is laughable.
The reason you don't have a table at shows is your connection with precision (sp).
Nothing wrong with that,just don't sugar coat it


----------



## localityman

loxocemus said:


> this explains how many experienced keepers feel i think, i do not believe some of the people that are fighting legislation etc care about protecting the hobby or even the reptiles, all they care about is the industry and its balance sheet. in fact i think their using the average hobbyist as pawns in their financial games.
> 
> the net effect of this seems to be experienced keepers contracting/withdrawing from the hobby either altogether are having greatly reduced collections and connections to the wider community.
> 
> rgds
> ed


[/QUOTE]

Shout it from the rooftops!

Right on brother!

You won't catch me at any more reptile shows!


----------



## MoreliaUK

Purple_D said:


> sorry mate,but i think the last sentence is laughable.
> The reason you don't have a table at shows is your connection with precision (sp).
> Nothing wrong with that,just don't sugar coat it


If that were the case then how comes Peter RICE and other pro breeders gained entrance to the same Doncaster show that was Terry's last? I think you will find that getting tables is not the issue.


----------



## Purple_D

MoreliaUK said:


> If that were the case then how comes Peter RICE and other pro breeders gained entrance to the same Doncaster show that was Terry's last?


Thats not the point Im making, Bladeblaster made the choice his self not to attend.


----------



## MoreliaUK

Purple_D said:


> Thats not the point Im making, Bladeblaster made the choice his self not to attend.


Well if that is the case then your point was very poorly put across.


----------



## Purple_D

MoreliaUK said:


> Well if that is the case then your point was very poorly put across.


Not really,as BB made a choice not attend for his connections,Nothing to do with shows being allegedly illegal.
A lot of people decided to stop attending when the anti's played the tax card.


----------



## Chris Newman

MoreliaUK said:


> Why then were professional breeders at one of the other shows recently then if they are for hobby keepers be it only if they were showing (drumming up trade) as opposed to selling?
> 
> I see nothing wrong in shows/markets with people selling their surplus offspring (livestock sounds too commercial) either. Its just that they are not my bag as I do not always think that they promote responsible purchasing, encourage impulse buying and many of the sellers lack the back up support and experience you may get when buying from a shop.


I am not sure how you are defining a “professional breeders” – I assume someone who makes their living breeding reptiles? In which case as the law stands today they could not sell at such events, but could exhibit. 

Some people enjoy Breeders Meeting, some don’t, if they don’t then it’s not compulsory to attend. In terms of encouraging impulse buying, hmmm, I would be interested to see some hard evidence to support that speculation!!


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> Oh come on Chris, that statement is laughable. It maybe true for a good number of exhibitors, but seriously.
> 
> Its a market, it is impossible to argue otherwise.


You may call them what you wish, I define a Breeders Meeting as a place where hobbyist meet to, display, exchange and sell their surplus livestock, and as I said personally I see little wrong with that! 

Do you not support hobbyist keeping and breeding reptiles!


----------



## ian14

Chris Newman said:


> Original shows were always open to public admittance before the attacks started by the Animal Rights Industry. Then at one stage they went to being open to members of the relevant society, some may well remember this phase when attended at show was very poor! Some may remember that at one stage there was virtually no shows! Then government responded with some guidance, which states shows can be open to the public and the revival started.
> 
> One of the disappointments is that over the year’s membership to clubs and societies has continued to decrease, today we have more people keeping reptiles than ever, but fewer belong to clubs and societies, this applies across all taxa not just reptiles. The rise of the internet forum is often quotes as one reason fro this, which may or may not be true.
> 
> The repeal of Section 2 would remove all ambiguities, give more controlee to Local Authorities and allow hobbyist to pursue there hobby without threat from the fanatics.
> 
> I seem to detect opposition to the fact that the reptile hobby has expanded, I find this slightly curious? Do you have concerns that more people are keeping reptiles than ever before!


Chris you cannot compare the old shows to todays markets.

I remember the original Thames and Chiltern Herp group shows - these were open to the public. Club members brought their animals to SHOW to the public. These were educational events, and members were required to provide information on species, habitat, captive needs etc. These were very popular events, with very few animals being sold. Those that were were genuinely surplus young bred by hobbyist keepers.

Perhaps this is why animal rights groups were not interested - they were promoting the proper care of these animals without being an open market for all and sundry, with tables piled high with animals in boxes being picked up and put down almost constantly.

When these shows changed from being essentially educational displays to commercial trading events, the IHS, followed by the FBH with its unelected "committee" ruled that for shows to be legal they would have to be members only. In fact, I remember one group announcing its first show to be openly criticised by you stating that they could only hold a show legally if they were for members only.
Yet the FBH run their own show in the middle of August, the hottest time of the year, open to the public.

I am convinced that if these returned to being members only events ie private events, they would then be fully lawful. They would not be markets, but a gathering of breeders in one place to allow them to exchange/sell/buy animals bred by themselves.

Either these events are organised to facilitate this, in which case make them members only, which would in turn increase membership of herp societies, OR they are being used as a money making opportunity for the organisers, in which case they are, in my mind, illegal in their current format.

Incidentally, what exactly was the ruling made at the court hearing shortly before the Doncaster show? This has never been made public, other than the APA stating that the ruling said the event could go ahead providing no sales were allowed. I haven't seen anything else on that hearing. I was of the impression that that hearing had confirmed that these events were legal yet it appears this may not be the case.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Chris Newman said:


> I am not sure how you are defining a “professional breeders” – I assume someone who makes their living breeding reptiles? In which case as the law stands today they could not sell at such events, but could exhibit.
> 
> Some people enjoy Breeders Meeting, some don’t, if they don’t then it’s not compulsory to attend. In terms of encouraging impulse buying, hmmm, I would be interested to see some hard evidence to support that speculation!!


Plenty of evidence on RFUK for impulse buying, loads of threads over the years after the major shows 'I wasn't going to buy anything but......'

I went to my first show at CREAKS this year, I had decided to go to see for myself what they were like, I thought I had made my mind up before hand that I didn't like them. However I was surprised and quite enjoyed looking around, I did nearly impulse buy a snake (I had only intended to to buy dry goods) However stopped myself and only came back with dry good (and some dubias).

Overall it wasn't as bad as I thought it was going to be, I'll be honest, it did make me feel a little bad when I saw some of the livestock in small tubs, spending the show trying desperatley to get out, without any cover to hide in. And there was a bloke that was just picking up the tarantulas in the tubs roughly and throwing them about (I was suprised they were sold to him actually, the way he was treating them).

But I'd have to agree, the 'shows' do feel more like markets, would we still have issues if they were just for dry good? 

Will I be going to another one? Maybe, but I probably won't be buying livestock.


----------



## Meko

bash_on_recce said:


> Plenty of evidence on RFUK for impulse buying, loads of threads over the years after the major shows 'I wasn't going to buy anything but......'



to be honest though, you could say that about anything. 'i popped into my local reptile shop to buy some crickets, i saw his face and I couldn't resist......... here's my new.....'

-------------------


I agree about the term 'show' though... if i go to a parrot show i'd expect to see them riding bikes or pushing prams but wouldn't expect to buy one. Breeders meeting sounds a lot better.


----------



## Desert Ghost

loxocemus said:


> this explains how many experienced keepers feel i think, i do not believe some of the people that are fighting legislation etc care about protecting the hobby or even the reptiles, all they care about is the industry and its balance sheet. in fact i think their using the average hobbyist as pawns in their financial games.
> 
> the net effect of this seems to be experienced keepers contracting/withdrawing from the hobby either altogether are having greatly reduced collections and connections to the wider community.
> 
> rgds
> ed




Well said!

Mr Rudge might be a t**t but Ed isnt!

The AR nonsense is two political organisations fighting a never ending battle where funding is the key concern above all else, a "win" for either side would result in the implosion of both organisations (and the end of the gravy train). Dont expect that win anytime in the near future! The hobby and the tin rattling will both continue.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Meko said:


> to be honest though, you could say that about anything. 'i popped into my local reptile shop to buy some crickets, i saw his face and I couldn't resist......... here's my new.....'
> 
> -------------------
> 
> 
> I agree about the term 'show' though... if i go to a parrot show i'd expect to see them riding bikes or pushing prams but wouldn't expect to buy one. Breeders meeting sounds a lot better.


I agree, yes it could, but I wouldn't say that was any better. 

Its the threads entitles things like' The offical what you got from Doncaster thread', follow it down and see how many people came back with exotics they had no intention of doing so before hand. For some strange reason, it tends to be more snakes than anything.


----------



## Randolf

Desert Ghost said:


> Well said!
> 
> 
> 
> The AR nonsense is two political organisations fighting a never ending battle where funding is the key concern above all else, a "win" for either side would result in the implosion of both organisations (and the end of the gravy train). Dont expect that win anytime in the near future! The hobby and the tin rattling will both continue.


Here here!


----------



## Jordansearle

Gotta say i've read over all of this with limited knowledge of the shows, OP or any of the people/places you have mentioned in your posts guys. 

And my opinion of it all is..

The way the shows sounded back in the day, education, knowledge and the occasional sale of a rep to an educated person sounds lovely.

The shows now (from what a lot of you seem to have said) Sales, Cramped uncomfortable animals, selling to inexperienced people who have done no prior research and a whole community of hobbyists arguing about basically MONEY makes me think that tbh a lot of the people in these organizations have no respect for the animals in the slightest and are only interested in financial gain.

I bought my royal because i respected her and appreciated the fact she is a beautiful animal, who living in the uk would require a set routine, proper housing and at least a basic knowledge from me in regards to the snakes wellbeing..if people aren't breeding/keeping/selling for these reasons or at least with these ideals I don't personally think they should be able to keep or sell reptiles. AT ALL.

Finally OP i have no idea who you are or what the history is behind your issues, but as has been said i believe on this thread. If you feel this strongly, do something about it! And the post about tattoos and pythons? Really?

That's like saying everyone that drinks Stella beats their wife..wich obviously isn't true.


----------



## fishboy

Meko said:


> to be honest though, you could say that about anything. 'i popped into my local reptile shop to buy some crickets, i saw his face and I couldn't resist......... here's my new.....'
> 
> -------------------
> 
> 
> I agree about the term 'show' though... if i go to a parrot show i'd expect to see them riding bikes or pushing prams but wouldn't expect to buy one. Breeders meeting sounds a lot better.



Exactly, as well as the fact that impulse buying isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as you aren't completely broke, inexperienced, and/or a complete idiot. Looking after the majority of reptiles isn't rocket science and it's usually not a massive shift from one species to the next if you've got a little experience with various different types of set up.


----------



## Blake1990

90% of the people who impulse buy are people buying a species they already keep and can accommodate.

Yes people will impulse buy at shows, and on the rare occasion they might even buy a species they know very little about, but to suggest that this is a regular is quite ignorant. Unless you know somebody's circumstances you cannot assume that they are incapable of providing sufficient care for an animal they did not plan to buy!


----------



## bash_on_recce

fishboy said:


> Exactly, as well as the fact that impulse buying isn't necessarily a bad thing as long as you aren't completely broke, inexperienced, and/or a complete idiot. Looking after the majority of reptiles isn't rocket science and it's usually not a massive shift from one species to the next if you've got a little experience with various different types of set up.


Impulse buying is something that is going to have many different means to different people. To me it means buying an exotic with out having any intention before hand of getting it or not having a set up ready to put it straight into when you have returned home. 

Its not rocket science no, but there's a lot more science to it then people generally think. 

Anyway, this is getting off topic so I shall stop posting now XD


----------



## Blake1990

bash_on_recce said:


> Impulse buying is something that is going to have many different means to different people. To me it means buying an exotic with out having any intention before hand of getting it or not having a set up ready to put it straight into when you have returned home.
> 
> Its not rocket science no, but there's a lot more science to it then people generally think.
> 
> Anyway, this is getting off topic so I shall stop posting now XD


An ignorant assumption.....


----------



## Jordansearle

Blake1990 said:


> An ignorant assumption.....


Couldnt agree more, experienced/long term rep collectors may well have spare suitable vivs rubs to house their impulse bought snake, just because you buy it on impulse doesnt mean your new/inexperienced in keeping?


----------



## bash_on_recce

Blake1990 said:


> An ignorant assumption.....


No, I ment that's what I see by impulse buying. 

Let me clear that up, if you go to a show and buy something that you had no intention of getting, *but* have a set up ready at home, to me that wouldn't come under my deffinition of 'impulse buying'.

Cambridge dictonary's deffinition of to 'Impulse buy' is:

'something that you buy suddenly and without thinking carefully', if you suddenly buy it but have thought carefully about it (and hopfully have a set up ready), then it isn't 'impulse buying'.

Hope I cleared that up.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Blake1990 said:


> An ignorant assumption.....


You may need to read what I put again, I don't think you quite got it the first time


----------



## Meko

I've got twelve 84 litre RUB's, one 64ltr RUB, two 3ft vivs, one 4ft arboreal viv. about 4 spare ceramics, 8 unused heat mats, a 12 inch tube, a 40watt heater plate, two spare theromstats and numerous bowls, caves and rocks etc.

but what i don't have is - as Reece says - 


> Impulse buying is something that is going to have many different means to different people. To me it means buying an exotic with out having any intention before hand of getting it or not having a set up ready to put it straight into when you have returned home.


Just because you have spare equipment doesn't mean you have a setup ready to put it into. If you already had an unused 'viv' that was set up ready for that particular species, then it's hardly an impulse buy!


----------



## Meko

bash_on_recce said:


> No, I ment that's what I see by impulse buying.
> 
> Let me clear that up, if you go to a show and buy something that you had no intention of getting, *but* have a set up ready at home, to me that wouldn't come under my deffinition of 'impulse buying'.
> 
> Cambridge dictonary's deffinition of to 'Impulse buy' is:
> 
> 'something that you buy suddenly and without thinking carefully', if you suddenly buy it but have thought carefully about it (and hopfully have a set up ready, then it isn't 'impulse buying'.
> 
> Hope I cleared that up.


arse!

i was typing the same reply


----------



## Blake1990

bash_on_recce said:


> No, I ment that's what I see by impulse buying.
> 
> Let me clear that up, if you go to a show and buy something that you had no intention of getting, *but* have a set up ready at home, to me that wouldn't come under my deffinition of 'impulse buying'.
> 
> Cambridge dictonary's deffinition of to 'Impulse buy' is:
> 
> 'something that you buy suddenly and without thinking carefully', if you suddenly buy it but have thought carefully about it (and hopfully have a set up ready, then it isn't 'impulse buying'.
> 
> Hope I cleared that up.


In which case its probably not as common as you suggested : victory:

It certainly isn't caused by shows, If somebody is going to buy something without thinking it through this can happen absolutely anywhere. To say that this is a negative impact that the shows have on the hobby would be wrong.


----------



## Chris Newman

ian14 said:


> Chris you cannot compare the old shows to todays markets.
> 
> I remember the original Thames and Chiltern Herp group shows - these were open to the public. Club members brought their animals to SHOW to the public. These were educational events, and members were required to provide information on species, habitat, captive needs etc. These were very popular events, with very few animals being sold. Those that were were genuinely surplus young bred by hobbyist keepers.
> 
> Perhaps this is why animal rights groups were not interested - they were promoting the proper care of these animals without being an open market for all and sundry, with tables piled high with animals in boxes being picked up and put down almost constantly.
> 
> When these shows changed from being essentially educational displays to commercial trading events, the IHS, followed by the FBH with its unelected "committee" ruled that for shows to be legal they would have to be members only. In fact, I remember one group announcing its first show to be openly criticised by you stating that they could only hold a show legally if they were for members only.
> Yet the FBH run their own show in the middle of August, the hottest time of the year, open to the public.
> 
> I am convinced that if these returned to being members only events ie private events, they would then be fully lawful. They would not be markets, but a gathering of breeders in one place to allow them to exchange/sell/buy animals bred by themselves.
> 
> Either these events are organised to facilitate this, in which case make them members only, which would in turn increase membership of herp societies, OR they are being used as a money making opportunity for the organisers, in which case they are, in my mind, illegal in their current format.
> 
> Incidentally, what exactly was the ruling made at the court hearing shortly before the Doncaster show? This has never been made public, other than the APA stating that the ruling said the event could go ahead providing no sales were allowed. I haven't seen anything else on that hearing. I was of the impression that that hearing had confirmed that these events were legal yet it appears this may not be the case.


I quite agree that you can’t compare reptile keeping today how it was back in the 1908’s, between 2004 and 2008 alone the volume of crickets sold each week from 10,000,0000 to 20,000,000…. The growth of the hobby has been truly astronomic.

Ironically the first show licensed under the Pet Animal Licence was held by the Thames & Chiltern Herpetological Society show back in 1985!

In terms of how Animal Rights Groups view this, let me quote from the BBC Inside Out Programme:


BBC Inside Out statement Elaine Tolland​

Richard Daniel, presenter BBC Inside Out

_So to be clear what you want to do is see people banned from keeping these creatures as pets ultimately_…

*Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*

*We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*

There issue is not with shows, it is with people keeping reptiles period!

The legal ruling from the Doncaster case has been well publicised? It was purely a contractual matter, the venue was bullied by the Animal Rights lobby to stop the sale of animals, the High Court upheld out position so the event took place as usual.


----------



## localityman

Desert Ghost said:


> Well said!
> 
> 
> The AR nonsense is two political organisations fighting a never ending battle where funding is the key concern above all else, a "win" for either side would result in the implosion of both organisations (and the end of the gravy train). Dont expect that win anytime in the near future! The hobby and the tin rattling will both continue.



Well said,

I don't even know who Mr Rudge is so I'm not going to judge or comment on his story. He could be a made up name or aliased name for all I know trying to get more attention for the IHS for all I care.

Tin rattle all they want, my money is going to something worthwhile.

Have a nice day!


----------



## bash_on_recce

Blake1990 said:


> In which case its probably not as common as you suggested : victory:
> 
> It certainly isn't caused by shows, If somebody is going to buy something without thinking it through this can happen absolutely anywhere. To say that this is a negative impact that the shows have on the hobby would be wrong.


It can, but I'm willing to bet there's more chance of this happening at shows. Cheaper livestock and a greater range (with the chance that you may not have any of the spcies in the local area) than say one breeder or local pet shops could probably lead to an increased chance of this.

Its only a concern of mine, because I'm fairly new to the hobby (2 years and counting) and every care sheet and every care book I've ever read, talks about the importance of having a set up ready before hand, with the temps checked out. It may be easier for me to say this, most of my set ups are natural (drainage layer, plants, cleaner crews of springtails etc) so throwing together a set up for antyhing I bought from a show really isnt possible and they have to be running for a few days, possibly a week or more xD


----------



## Blake1990

bash_on_recce said:


> You may need to read what I put again, I don't think you quite got it the first time


I'm confident i got it the first time.

Read it again, and for your piece of mind, it still sounds ignorant : victory:

Ironically the same dictionary you used defines ignorance as.

• not having enough knowledge, understanding or information about something

Now you were suggesting that the shows are a cause of impulse buying, based on the fact that there are threads where people are posting that they have bought an animal from a show that they didn't plan to buy.

Going by your definition of impulse buying, do you have enough Knowledge, Understanding, and information to know that they bought the animals without putting any thought into it, or that they don't have a suitable set up waiting for the animal at home. Just because they didn't plan to buy the animal, can you be sure that it was an 'impulse' buy? 

If you can't, them your assumption was ignorant, and i stand by what I said : victory:


----------



## Meko

I'm still not convinced that there is more chance of it happening at shows, but people saying it happened, is more condensed. 
You'll see it multiple times in a small number of threads, whereas all the others will have separate threads or not mention it at all.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Blake1990 said:


> I'm confident i got it the first time.
> 
> Read it again, and for your piece of mind, it still sounds ignorant : victory:
> 
> Ironically the same dictionary you used defines ignorance as.
> 
> • not having enough knowledge, understanding or information about something
> 
> Now you were suggesting that the shows are a cause of impulse buying, based on the fact that there are threads where people are posting that they have bought an animal from a show that they didn't plan to buy.
> 
> Going by your definition of impulse buying, do you have enough Knowledge, Understanding, and information to know that they bought the animals without putting any thought into it, or that they don't have a suitable set up waiting for the animal at home. Just because they didn't plan to buy the animal, can you be sure that it was an 'impulse' buy?
> 
> If you can't, them your assumption was ignorant, and i stand by what I said : victory:


I'm afraid you didn't never mind, this is the snake section after all. But as this conversation really has nothing to do with the thread any more , I wont be carrying it on. To me shows/breeders meetings aren't *that* important to the hobby anyway, so I think its probably better if i unsubscribe from this thread.


----------



## Blake1990

bash_on_recce said:


> I'm afraid you didn't never mind, this is the snake section after all. But as this conversation really has nothing to do with the thread any more , I wont be carrying it on. To me shows/breeders meetings aren't *that* important to the hobby anyway, so I think its probably better if i unsubscribe from this thread.


We're all idiots over here in the snake section I'm afraid :crazy:

For the record my reply was not meant to come across as political as it did, I was trying to make a joke out of it, when I read it back it does seem pretty blunt! Sorry if it came across the wrong way :blush:


----------



## Chris Newman

Blake1990 said:


> 90% of the people who impulse buy are people buying a species they already keep and can accommodate.
> 
> Yes people will impulse buy at shows, and on the rare occasion they might even buy a species they know very little about, but to suggest that this is a regular is quite ignorant. Unless you know somebody's circumstances you cannot assume that they are incapable of providing sufficient care for an animal they did not plan to buy!


Impulse buying is not the issue, its Impulse buying then dumping the animals is the issue! We all impulse buy from time to time weather we admit it or not….. this only become an issue if the animal then goes on to suffer, and if you look at the stats reptiles are one of the least rehomed animals…!!


----------



## Blake1990

Chris Newman said:


> Impulse buying is not the issue, its Impulse buying then dumping the animals is the issue! We all impulse buy from time to time weather we admit it or not….. this only become an issue if the animal then goes on to suffer, and if you look at the stats reptiles are one of the least rehomed animals…!!


Impulse buying and providing insufficient care for the animal, ultimately leading to its death would be equally irresponsible.

The point I was making is that this is exceptionally rare, and cannot be blamed on shows. If anybody IS stupid enough to purchase an animal without knowing weather or not they are capable of caring for it then it is that person who is responsible, not the shows, not the shop, not the breeder, the individual.


----------



## Chris Newman

Can I please just ask that we don’t turn this debate into a “slanging match” that will achieve nothing! People obviously have passion views on the issue of shows and it would be constructive if this was discussed sensibly and without the need to insult each other!


----------



## IceBloodExotics

..........


----------



## bladeblaster

Purple_D said:


> sorry mate,but i think the last sentence is laughable.
> The reason you don't have a table at shows is your connection with precision (sp).
> Nothing wrong with that,just don't sugar coat it


That is exactly right, in part, the reason I chose not to do shows was that it dawned on me that I could be deemed as being a commercial seller, even if I was only selling my own bred animals. As this is clearly against show rules I have not since applied for a table, I do not want to add any ammunition to the antis stock pile.

That said even if I was not working with precision I would still not be attending any shows. The person being prosecuted at the moment is NOT a commercial breeder he is a hobbyist everyone who knows him knows that. If he is open to this then anyone and everyone at a show is, I am not going to stand against a wall for people to shoot at me.

This person has found himself in this position not because of the antis, but from the insistance of some people to try and jump through legal loop holes to let shows go ahead. This person has fallen foul of that through no fault of their own.





Chris Newman said:


> You may call them what you wish, I define a Breeders Meeting as a place where hobbyist meet to, display, exchange and sell their surplus livestock, and as I said personally I see little wrong with that!
> 
> Do you not support hobbyist keeping and breeding reptiles!


Oh Chris I am disspointed in that cheap shot.

Let me address your points.

Define a breeders meeting, your definition is great, however we all know that there are indivuduals at shows selling livestock for whom it is a livelyhood. There are some for who it is their sole income, there are some for who it is a second income, but they buy 'investment' animals and sell the babies for profit. This is not surplus stock, these are animals bred for the sole purpose of supplying a market.

By your definition Tesco isn;t a commercial market, I have a club card so I am a member of thier club, and after all they are just sellign surplus stock.

Do I not support hobbyists keeping and breeding reptiles.

That is a rediculous question, as I am a hobbyist keeping and breeding and selling reptiles. I whole heartedly support the peoples freedom to do this. as far as I am aware the you don;t actually need to attend a show to be able to do this. I haven't attended a show for a faor while now, but I am still managing to keep and breed reptiles.

People may think that it is their god given right to have reptile shows, well its not. As it stands until proven otherwise, without jumping through a number of loopholes, and stretching definitions it is illegal. Whether I agree with that or not is irrelevant, I would like things clarified so that people can exhibit at shows freely without fear of prosecution.

Everyone exhibiting at shows is leaving themselves wide open to prosecution. Until something changes.

I knwo you are working towards this, and myself and lots of other people are very grateful for that. However don't bury your head in the sand, and start believing your own spin.


----------



## ian14

There is another thread on a different section which is relevant to this - quite why Tarron felt the need to hide it away I'm not sure, but here it is:

http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/foru...tevenrudges-dirty-little-secret-new-post.html

It does, perhaps, shed some light on the reasons for this thread, but also shows what appears to be an element of territoriality towards organised shows ie if it isnt approved/organised by the FBH it is wrong.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Blake1990 said:


> We're all idiots over here in the snake section I'm afraid :crazy:
> 
> For the record my reply was not meant to come across as political as it did, I was trying to make a joke out of it, when I read it back it does seem pretty blunt! Sorry if it came across the wrong way :blush:


Thats me included, I post here enough xD

Yeah, I'm sorry I may have come across as an idiot, I'd walked all through the snow for an hour to Uni to find it was closed for the day so I'd retreated to the computer labs, the prospect of walking back seems to have turned me into a right grump :lol2:

I think Chris's post underneath your's is the issue , I wasn't thinking about it properly, I should have said I don't think its the show that causes the impulse buying, we as keepers should be able to say no.


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> Oh Chris I am disspointed in that cheap shot.
> 
> Let me address your points.
> 
> Define a breeders meeting, your definition is great, however we all know that there are indivuduals at shows selling livestock for whom it is a livelyhood. There are some for who it is their sole income, there are some for who it is a second income, but they buy 'investment' animals and sell the babies for profit. This is not surplus stock, these are animals bred for the sole purpose of supplying a market.
> 
> By your definition Tesco isn;t a commercial market, I have a club card so I am a member of thier club, and after all they are just sellign surplus stock.
> 
> Do I not support hobbyists keeping and breeding reptiles.
> 
> That is a rediculous question, as I am a hobbyist keeping and breeding and selling reptiles. I whole heartedly support the peoples freedom to do this. as far as I am aware the you don;t actually need to attend a show to be able to do this. I haven't attended a show for a faor while now, but I am still managing to keep and breed reptiles.
> 
> People may think that it is their god given right to have reptile shows, well its not. As it stands until proven otherwise, without jumping through a number of loopholes, and stretching definitions it is illegal. Whether I agree with that or not is irrelevant, I would like things clarified so that people can exhibit at shows freely without fear of prosecution.
> 
> Everyone exhibiting at shows is leaving themselves wide open to prosecution. Until something changes.
> 
> I knwo you are working towards this, and myself and lots of other people are very grateful for that. However don't bury your head in the sand, and start believing your own spin.


First and foremost we have a “right” to shows that is enshrined in the Human Rights Act, so let’s dispense with that as a matter for discussion! If we pull out of the EU then that might be a different issue, but as its stands today that is not the case.

In terms of who currently can or cannot dispose of livestock at a show is a matter for debate, and ultimately for a Court to arbitrate! This is not a matter that has been tested before and one that is not going to be decided by a magistrates Court. Unless we succeed in getting Section 2 repealed this is a matter that will take years, and number of Courts before we get a definitive ruling. Even this it will not preclude shows, it will simply better define who can or cannot exhibit.

You are quite right not all who breed and sell reptiles attend shows, many don’t. Many traders see show as competing with them and thus they are not in favour of them. Indeed many shops and wholesalers would like to see an end to shows! 

Notwithstanding this I believe shows do for fill an important function and should not be stop merely to placate a tiny handful of fanatics, we should also be mindful if these nutcases had their way and shows stopped, shops would be in the firing line next!


----------



## langerspies

Pheeewww, that was some read, anyway my thought on the impulse buying- I think a lot of the problem lies with the buyer and the seller, I dont just sell any surplus to anyone, i check folk out and if they dont convince me they are able to care for my stuff i wont sell it to them.
Some breeders just care about the bucks in their back pocket and really dont give a damn who they sell to.( I did say some and not all, just want to clarify that) I'm quite happy to keep hold of mine until i find a suitable home, as it is only a few. If you have loads to sell you may want shot of them as soon as possible, and the shows are a platform to do so.


----------



## MoreliaUK

Chris Newman said:


> Some people enjoy Breeders Meeting, some don’t, if they don’t then it’s not compulsory to attend. In terms of encouraging impulse buying, hmmm, *I would be interested to see some hard evidence to support that speculation*!!


"Exhibit A" and there are many many more just like this unfortunately although thankfully not as severe as the case was for this particular keeper.

http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/snake-pictures/895756-donny-haul.html


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> First and foremost we have a “right” to shows that is enshrined in the Human Rights Act, so let’s dispense with that as a matter for discussion! If we pull out of the EU then that might be a different issue, but as its stands today that is not the case.
> 
> In terms of who currently can or cannot dispose of livestock at a show is a matter for debate, and ultimately for a Court to arbitrate! This is not a matter that has been tested before and one that is not going to be decided by a magistrates Court. Unless we succeed in getting Section 2 repealed this is a matter that will take years, and number of Courts before we get a definitive ruling. Even this it will not preclude shows, it will simply better define who can or cannot exhibit.
> 
> You are quite right not all who breed and sell reptiles attend shows, many don’t. Many traders see show as competing with them and thus they are not in favour of them. Indeed many shops and wholesalers would like to see an end to shows!
> 
> Notwithstanding this I believe shows do for fill an important function and should not be stop merely to placate a tiny handful of fanatics, we should also be mindful if these nutcases had their way and shows stopped, shops would be in the firing line next!


To have a 'show' is your right yes, to have a 'market' is NOT, so that argument is not so easily dispensed with.

Nothing that has been put across that has come anywhere close to showing that shows are not simply commercial markets.

I agree that we should not give up on shows to placate the antis, however perhaps we should change the format to abide by the law?

Shows are great, but in their current format we are only helping the anti's. IF the FBH truely is only interested in supporting its members, surely its advice should be to its members that selling at shows is leaving yourself open to prosecution, and the obvious advice would be not to do so until this is clarified. That would be the advice of an organisation that was protecting its members surely?

While we have a right to keep reptiles, antis have a right to try and stop us. They can campaign against reptile shops as much as they want, but it is a legitimate and perfectly legal business, and so ultimately all they can do is sound off.

I am not suggest we roll over and nto fight the antis, or the current legislation, but flaunting the laws seems counter productive to me?


----------



## Chris Newman

MoreliaUK said:


> "Exhibit A" and there are many many more just like this unfortunately although thankfully not as severe as the case was for this particular keeper.
> 
> http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/snake-pictures/895756-donny-haul.html


So out of the large number of shows [hundreds!] over the passed thirty years and tens if not hundreds of thousands of visitors, you have identified one individual case!! Not certain that is persuasive evidence that shows should be banned! Unfortunately there will always be a tiny minority of people, who get over their heads that is not a reason to adversely affect the responsible majority….!!


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> To have a 'show' is your right yes, to have a 'market' is NOT, so that argument is not so easily dispensed with.
> 
> Nothing that has been put across that has come anywhere close to showing that shows are not simply commercial markets.
> 
> I agree that we should not give up on shows to placate the antis, however perhaps we should change the format to abide by the law?
> 
> Shows are great, but in their current format we are only helping the anti's. IF the FBH truely is only interested in supporting its members, surely its advice should be to its members that selling at shows is leaving yourself open to prosecution, and the obvious advice would be not to do so until this is clarified. That would be the advice of an organisation that was protecting its members surely?
> 
> While we have a right to keep reptiles, antis have a right to try and stop us. They can campaign against reptile shops as much as they want, but it is a legitimate and perfectly legal business, and so ultimately all they can do is sound off.
> 
> I am not suggest we roll over and nto fight the antis, or the current legislation, but flaunting the laws seems counter productive to me?


I have no issue with the ‘antis’ trying to stop shows! I have a slight issue with those who claim to support them but then do their best to undermine them!! 

We have all set the self regulations to the best and most appropriate stands we can and enforced them, we are now asking government to step in and take matters further.


----------



## MoreliaUK

Chris Newman said:


> So out of the large number of shows [hundreds!] over the passed thirty years and tens if not hundreds of thousands of visitors, you have identified one individual case!! Not certain that is persuasive evidence that shows should be banned! Unfortunately there will always be a tiny minority of people, who get over their heads that is not a reason to adversely affect the responsible majority….!!


If you really want me to waste lots of time I could and can dredge up many many similar threads and posts? I do not think that your reptile markets should be banned either. I just feel that the reptile trade should be better regulated. Licensing would be a nice start....

Funny how many of your posts are rarely backed up by current supporting facts or evidence.


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> I have no issue with the ‘antis’ trying to stop shows! I have a slight issue with those who claim to support them but then do their best to undermine them!!


agreed, surely that would be people using them as markets, and those turning a blind eye to it?

I am supporting shows by not attending them. I want shows to continue, and I want people to continue enjoying them.

I do find however that the current stance of those who claim to be acting in 'our' the hobbyists best interests slightly odd. Anyone selling reptiles at a show is leaving themselves open to being accused of carrying out a commercial activity and therefore open to prosecution, and yet the message from the FBH is to continue with this until such time as MAYBE this is clarified one way or another?

I also note you are very selctive about which of my points you choose to address.

If I had my way, anyone, including shops, could sell at shows perfectly legally. However that is not the case at the moment, and until it is people should be very careful not to find themselves on the wrong side of the law.

Surely the way forward is it have a format of show that leaves no question as to whether comercial activity is taking place, until such time as the law is clarified and/or tested?


----------



## Desert Ghost

bladeblaster said:


> I also note you are very selctive about which of my points you choose to address.


Sidestepping lucid, relevant, pragmatic posts is a tactic Chris is guilty of using far too often.

The use of emotive quotes from the antis is employed as a diversionary tactic instead.

*Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*

*We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> agreed, surely that would be people using them as markets, and those turning a blind eye to it?
> 
> I am supporting shows by not attending them. I want shows to continue, and I want people to continue enjoying them.
> 
> I do find however that the current stance of those who claim to be acting in 'our' the hobbyists best interests slightly odd. Anyone selling reptiles at a show is leaving themselves open to being accused of carrying out a commercial activity and therefore open to prosecution, and yet the message from the FBH is to continue with this until such time as MAYBE this is clarified one way or another?
> 
> I also note you are very selctive about which of my points you choose to address.
> 
> If I had my way, anyone, including shops, could sell at shows perfectly legally. However that is not the case at the moment, and until it is people should be very careful not to find themselves on the wrong side of the law.
> 
> Surely the way forward is it have a format of show that leaves no question as to whether comercial activity is taking place, until such time as the law is clarified and/or tested?


 
There is quite simply no format of shows that would not draw the attention of the ‘antis’ it is a simple as that! You have admirably [and repeatedly] made your personal point that you believe shows to be nothing else other than, market and of course you are entitled to that view! 

The guidelines have been set for Breeders Meeting and we will stand with those guidelines what have so far stood the test of time, some ten years! If in due course a Court of law finds our interpretation is wrong then we will amend them accordingly, unless of course Section 2 is repealed in the mean time.


----------



## MoreliaUK

I personally would much rather see a ban of wild caught imports. Some species have been imported over the past twenty years (if not longer) and are still not being captive bred in decent numbers either because wild imports are so cheap or simply due to the fact that they just do not adjust well to captivity and die off to be replenished by the next batch of imports.


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> Original shows were always open to public admittance before the attacks started by the Animal Rights Industry. Then at one stage they went to being open to members of the relevant society, some may well remember this phase when attended at show was very poor! Some may remember that at one stage there was virtually no shows! Then government responded with some guidance, which states shows can be open to the public and the revival started.
> 
> One of the disappointments is that over the year’s membership to clubs and societies has continued to decrease, today we have more people keeping reptiles than ever, but fewer belong to clubs and societies, this applies across all taxa not just reptiles. The rise of the internet forum is often quotes as one reason fro this, which may or may not be true.
> 
> The repeal of Section 2 would remove all ambiguities, give more controlee to Local Authorities and allow hobbyist to pursue there hobby without threat from the fanatics.
> 
> I seem to detect opposition to the fact that the reptile hobby has expanded, I find this slightly curious? Do you have concerns that more people are keeping reptiles than ever before!


I don't care how big the hobby gets as long as animals are being sold to people who can demonstrate at least some basic knowledge of reptile husbandry. How education/regulation is implimented is something I feel should be addressed by the reptile organisations and that it should be something that the reptile organisations want to address.


----------



## ian14

Chris Newman said:


> I quite agree that you can’t compare reptile keeping today how it was back in the 1908’s, between 2004 and 2008 alone the volume of crickets sold each week from 10,000,0000 to 20,000,000…. The growth of the hobby has been truly astronomic.
> 
> Ironically the first show licensed under the Pet Animal Licence was held by the Thames & Chiltern Herpetological Society show back in 1985!
> 
> In terms of how Animal Rights Groups view this, let me quote from the BBC Inside Out Programme:
> 
> 
> BBC Inside Out statement Elaine Tolland​
> 
> Richard Daniel, presenter BBC Inside Out
> 
> _So to be clear what you want to do is see people banned from keeping these creatures as pets ultimately_…
> 
> *Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*
> 
> *We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*
> 
> There issue is not with shows, it is with people keeping reptiles period!
> 
> *The legal ruling from the Doncaster case has been well publicised? It was purely a contractual matter, the venue was bullied by the Animal Rights lobby to stop the sale of animals, the High Court upheld out position so the event took place as usual.*


The only outcome that I have seen published was that the court upheld the point that the event had to go ahead as per the contract but that animal sales could not take place. I have seen nothing else to say otherwise. 
Could you point me in the direction of the actual ruling from the court? All I could find were posts from various people full of supposition and rumour but no facts.


----------



## LiamRatSnake

MoreliaUK said:


> I personally would much rather see a ban of wild caught imports. Some species have been imported over the past twenty years (if not longer) and are still not being captive bred in decent numbers either because wild imports are so cheap or simply due to the fact that they just do not adjust well to captivity and die off to be replenished by the next batch of imports.


I agree with this - but it's not really that relevant to shows. The IHS do not allow wild-caught animals at their shows and I imagine the other organisers are the same. Although it's clearly damaging and unethical and to do so nowadays in not necessary.
PS It's nonsense that Doncaster doesn't encourage impulse buying. I went with the no idea what animals I was going to buy. The real problem is when complete newbs and idiots are the ones impulse buying but they're no more likely to do so from a show than they are a pet shop. Infact I imagine 99% of the crowds are already enthusiasts - not enough newbs know about shows to choose them as the place to get their first animals.


----------



## Chris Newman

ian14 said:


> The only outcome that I have seen published was that the court upheld the point that the event had to go ahead as per the contract but that animal sales could not take place. I have seen nothing else to say otherwise.
> Could you point me in the direction of the actual ruling from the court? All I could find were posts from various people full of supposition and rumour but no facts.


The High Court placed no such restrictions on the sale of animals. The Court upheld our application that this was a straightforward breach of contract by the management of the Doncaster Dome. I am sure the judgment will be online somewhere, but I have no idea where. As I said it was very simply and straightforward and any suggestion the Court placed any restrictions is entirely untrue.


----------



## MoreliaUK

ian14 said:


> The only outcome that I have seen published was that the court upheld the point that the event had to go ahead as per the contract but that animal sales could not take place. I have seen nothing else to say otherwise.
> Could you point me in the direction of the actual ruling from the court? All I could find were posts from various people full of supposition and rumour but no facts.


If you know which court the hearing was in you can always contact the courts enquiries office and if you make a request a copy of that ruling then I believe that they are obliged to furnish you with a copy.


----------



## Blake1990

MoreliaUK said:


> If you know which court the hearing was in you can always contact the courts enquiries office and if you make a request a copy of that ruling then I believe that they are obliged to furnish you with a copy.



The local authority involved in the dispute would be obliged to provide you with any information you request under the freedom of information act.

Some of them may ask for a fee for their time : victory:


----------



## blood and guts

going to be a little unpopular here once again but maybe its time we did see a end to shows and started supporting the shops again?
Seen so many instances of poor or no advice at breeder meetings and with other issues in the hobby prehaps its time for a major shift in morals, ethics and thinking across the board?


----------



## Chris Newman

MoreliaUK said:


> If you know which court the hearing was in you can always contact the courts enquiries office and if you make a request a copy of that ruling then I believe that they are obliged to furnish you with a copy.


In due course absolutely everything relating to the Doncaster IHS show will be made public and available to download from the FBH website. This including the massive bundle of information obtained back in October by the FBH under the Freedom of Information Act. This bundle from Doncaster Brought Council makes very interesting reading!! I suspect for legal reason we will not be able to make this public before the conclusion of the current Court case, we have absolutely nothing to hide, although I suspect some other ‘outside agency’ might have a differing view!!


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> I don't care how big the hobby gets as long as animals are being sold to people who can demonstrate at least some basic knowledge of reptile husbandry. How education/regulation is implimented is something I feel should be addressed by the reptile organisations and that it should be something that the reptile organisations want to address.


In due course absolutely everything relating to the Doncaster IHS show will be made public and available to download from the FBH website. This including the massive bundle of information obtained back in October by the FBH under the Freedom of Information Act. This bundle from Doncaster Brought Council makes very interesting reading!! I suspect for legal reason we will not be able to make this public before the conclusion of the current Court case, we have absolutely nothing to hide, although I suspect some other ‘outside agency’ might have a differing view!!


----------



## loxocemus

the "industry" is strongly (and that's an understatement) against any such ban of wild animals, their far too profitable, its a seemingly (to them) bottomless pool of cheap animals for "market", we are the market they desperately want to keep fed. one point that's brought up to support the entire wild reptile importation industry at times, is we wouldn't see anymore wild morphs :gasp:

does anyone think the number of ball morphs is decreasing, anyone, anyone....

but cheap "farmed" gtps that sell at a premium as cb here in the uk are far too profitable to end, baby balls bought by the sack are far too profitable for the ever popular regius market to end.

what the industry wants and what the hobbyist wants are black and white. don't expect anything different from chris newman, industry mouthpieces rarely stray far from the sound bites.

rgds
ed






MoreliaUK said:


> I personally would much rather see a ban of wild caught imports. Some species have been imported over the past twenty years (if not longer) and are still not being captive bred in decent numbers either because wild imports are so cheap or simply due to the fact that they just do not adjust well to captivity and die off to be replenished by the next batch of imports.


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> There is quite simply no format of shows that would not draw the attention of the ‘antis’ it is a simple as that! You have admirably [and repeatedly] made your personal point that you believe shows to be nothing else other than, market and of course you are entitled to that view!
> 
> The guidelines have been set for Breeders Meeting and we will stand with those guidelines what have so far stood the test of time, some ten years! If in due course a Court of law finds our interpretation is wrong then we will amend them accordingly, unless of course Section 2 is repealed in the mean time.


do you not believe that anyone selling at a show is open to prosecution as it stands?

I have nothing against the shows or them being used as markets, but I think people should be aware of their own legal position if they chose to sell at a show.


----------



## Chris Newman

loxocemus said:


> the "industry" is strongly (and that's an understatement) against any such ban of wild animals, their far too profitable, its a seemingly (to them) bottomless pool of cheap animals for "market", we are the market they desperately want to keep fed. one point that's brought up to support the entire wild reptile importation industry at times, is we wouldn't see anymore wild morphs :gasp:
> 
> does anyone think the number of ball morphs is decreasing, anyone, anyone....
> 
> but cheap "farmed" gtps that sell at a premium as cb here in the uk are far too profitable to end, baby balls bought by the sack are far too profitable for the ever popular regius market to end.
> 
> what the industry wants and what the hobbyist wants are black and white. don't expect anything different from chris newman, industry mouthpieces rarely stray far from the sound bites.
> 
> rgds
> ed


Your position is you support a ban on wild caught animals is that correct?


----------



## MoreliaUK

Chris Newman said:


> In due course absolutely everything relating to the Doncaster IHS show will be made public and available to download from the FBH website. This including the massive bundle of information obtained back in October by the FBH under the Freedom of Information Act. This bundle from Doncaster Brought Council makes very interesting reading!! I suspect for legal reason we will not be able to make this public before the conclusion of the current Court case, we have absolutely nothing to hide, although I suspect some other ‘outside agency’ might have a differing view!!


If this information is already available under the freedom of information act (and has already been obtained by your Federation) there should be no reason why it cannot be obtained by any other party and made available forth with no? If it is already within the public realm there should be no reason why it would damage or prejudice any ongoing cases and be made available to all.


----------



## shaunyboy

blood and guts said:


> going to be a little unpopular here once again but maybe its time we did see a end to shows and started supporting the shops again?
> Seen so many instances of poor or no advice at breeder meetings and with other issues in the hobby prehaps its time for a major shift in morals, ethics and thinking across the board?


^^^^^
theres plenty shops out there that give poor advice mate

just because someone opens a shop,it does not automatically make them,ethical or moral

that said,there are plenty good shops out there...

its like most things in life,there's some good and some bad

cheers shaun


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> do you not believe that anyone selling at a show is open to prosecution as it stands?
> 
> I have nothing against the shows or them being used as markets, but I think people should be aware of their own legal position if they chose to sell at a show.


As a test case is being brought we will have to wait and see? As in the last thirty years the law has not change, and all we have done is tight our rules as matter become clearer, and until the High Court challenge and the subsequent payout by Doncaster no prosecutions have ever been brought I am confident we have the right balance. I’m sure it’s purely coincidental the out of court settlement and the prosecution relate to the same event!


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> As a test case is being brought we will have to wait and see? As in the last thirty years the law has not change, and all we have done is tight our rules as matter become clearer, and until the High Court challenge and the subsequent payout by Doncaster no prosecutions have ever been brought I am confident we have the right balance. I’m sure it’s purely coincidental the out of court settlement and the prosecution relate to the same event!


so in the meantime, until this is setlled, what position does that put exhibitors in? Are they open to prosecution or not?

IF they are tried would it be down to each individual defendant to prove that they are NOT a commercial breeder?


----------



## loxocemus

this will probably shock you but hobbyists tend to be animal lovers too, just like the animal rights lot.

i know, amazing, but true.

ed



Chris Newman said:


> Your position is you support a ban on wild caught animals is that correct?


----------



## bash_on_recce

blood and guts said:


> going to be a little unpopular here once again but maybe its time we did see a end to shows and started supporting the shops again?
> Seen so many instances of poor or no advice at breeder meetings and with other issues in the hobby prehaps its time for a major shift in morals, ethics and thinking across the board?


I hope not, I completely go out of my way to avoid shops. Every pet I have bought from a shop has had problems of one kind or another, every pet I have had off a breeder or privite hobbiest has been fine (touch wood). I'd personally like to see and end to shops XD


----------



## Chris Newman

MoreliaUK said:


> If this information is already available under the freedom of information act (and has already been obtained by your Federation) there should be no reason why it cannot be obtained by any other party and made available forth with no? If it is already within the public realm there should be no reason why it would damage or prejudice any ongoing cases and be made available to all.


I suspect there is, much of the information release could/will have a bearing on the case so I suspect would be subjudacy, you can rest assured everything will be made public as the earliest opportunity.


----------



## Chris Newman

loxocemus said:


> this will probably shock you but hobbyists tend to be animal lovers too, just like the animal rights lot.
> 
> i know, amazing, but true.
> 
> ed


Is that a yes or no?


----------



## MoreliaUK

Chris Newman said:


> Your position is you support a ban on wild caught animals is that correct?


I would. I would love a Boelens Python but I will never ever get one as most are either wild caught or labelled as captive farmed which is just a way of laundering wild caught animals and giving hem a higher price tag.

Too many have died over the years in captivity and there are less than a handful of captive breedings recorded. There was the successful breeding last year but breeding them in captivity will not be fully cracked until that breeder or other breeders have regular successes and not just the one offs.

How many more should be exported to feed our needs to die in captivity until we crack their code to get consistent breeding success? If we keep on going on there will be none left in the wild which is where they truly belong and do best.

Just because we can keep things does not mean that we should.


----------



## loxocemus

christ seriously?

that would be a yes, u have obviously feel u have a blistering golden comeback/defense

so make it good

ed



Chris Newman said:


> Is that a yes or no?


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> so in the meantime, until this is setlled, what position does that put exhibitors in? Are they open to prosecution or not?
> 
> IF they are tried would it be down to each individual defendant to prove that they are NOT a commercial breeder?


The unfortunate situation is it leaves exhibiters where the have been for the passed ten years, potentially open to acquisition from certain quarters they are commercial breeders, regardless of what or how many animals they breed? 

What the prosecutor will have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt is the exhibiter is:

(A) selling animals as pets
(B) is proven to be running a business, 
(C) it takes place at a market

If a Local Authority can prove all three beyond reasonable doubt then the exhibiter could be prosecuted. 

It is very unfortunate that this case will most likely not be concluded before the start of the show season due to the procrastination of the prosecuting authority. That will put exhibiters under pressure and they will have to decide if they wish to attend shows or not! 

This will be a tough year!


----------



## loxocemus

indeed, profits may suffer.

ed



Chris Newman said:


> The unfortunate situation is it leaves exhibiters where the have been for the passed ten years, potentially open to acquisition from certain quarters they are commercial breeders, regardless of what or how many animals they breed?
> 
> What the prosecutor will have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt is the exhibiter is:
> 
> (A) selling animals as pets
> (B) is proven to be running a business,
> (C) it takes place at a market
> 
> If a Local Authority can prove all three beyond reasonable doubt then the exhibiter could be prosecuted.
> 
> It is very unfortunate that this case will most likely not be concluded before the start of the show season due to the procrastination of the prosecuting authority. That will put exhibiters under pressure and they will have to decide if they wish to attend shows or not!
> 
> This will be a tough year!


----------



## Jeffers3

loxocemus said:


> this will probably shock you but hobbyists tend to be animal lovers too, just like the animal rights lot.
> 
> i know, amazing, but true.
> 
> ed


I totally agree with you. Many hobbyists will feed their animals before themselves. In this respect, most of us have very similar views to the antis.

What makes us different is that we are:

a) better informed about the requirements for keeping reptiles

b) able to accept other people's wishes to do something that is completely legal

c) not drawn into acts bordering on terrorism

As our mouthpiece we have people who are open, knowledgeable and truthful. The APA have liars and hippocrites leading them. Don't be fooled by the "scientist" status of Clifford Warwick. He is no such thing! A scientist should have scientific qualifications and proper scientific experience / track record. Mr (note - NOT Dr!) Warwick has neither.

The problem is that a typical APA member has the IQ of an amoeba and is completely unable to differentiate between a snake and a "cuddly pussy-cat"! They will, therefore believe anything they are told. One of the brain-washed lunatics once accosted me outside a shopping centre, asking me to support their case to stop dog food manufacturers from breaking dogs legs to see what force was required, as a way of assessing calcium uptake from their products. When I pointed out that they don't do this, he was quite aggressive - and even more so when I stood next to him for about half an hour telling anyone else that he accosted that he was talking rubbish! Fortunately, his aggression was wasted, since I was about twice his size! He packed up and went home!


----------



## Chris Newman

loxocemus said:


> christ seriously?
> 
> that would be a yes, u have obviously feel u have a blistering golden comeback/defense
> 
> so make it good
> 
> ed


I was merely interested in determining your stance, if you are opposed to the trade in wild caught animals that is your prerogative, many keepers are, many traders are…. 

However, if you wish to put forward an advocacy for the wild caught trade I will do so, a good example is the golden mantella, if it were not for the trade in wild caught specimens it will go extinct! So would you rather it be trade as a wild caught animal or would you prefer the species to go extinct?


----------



## loxocemus

to some, opposing wild caught animals, professing welfare above profit makes u the same as the animal rights lot, in fact u may be suspected of being a closet one, an informer or something else just as exotically stupid.

ed






=Jeffers3;10879103]I totally agree with you. Many hobbyists will feed their animals before themselves. In this respect, most of us have very similar views to the antis.

What makes us different is that we are:

a) better informed about the requirements for keeping reptiles

b) able to accept other people's wishes to do something that is completely legal

c) not drawn into acts bordering on terrorism

As our mouthpiece we have people who are open, knowledgeable and truthful. The APA have liars and hippocrites leading them. Don't be fooled by the "scientist" status of Clifford Warwick. He is no such thing! A scientist should have scientific qualifications and proper scientific experience / track record. Mr (note - NOT Dr!) Warwick has neither.

The problem is that a typical APA member has the IQ of an amoeba and is completely unable to differentiate between a snake and a "cuddly pussy-cat"! They will, therefore believe anything they are told. One of the brain-washed lunatics once accosted me outside a shopping centre, asking me to support their case to stop dog food manufacturers from breaking dogs legs to see what force was required, as a way of assessing calcium uptake from their products. When I pointed out that they don't do this, he was quite aggressive - and even more so when I stood next to him for about half an hour telling anyone else that he accosted that he was talking rubbish! Fortunately, his aggression was wasted, since I was about twice his size! He packed up and went home![/QUOTE]


----------



## loxocemus

ah ur mantella gem, the wild caught reptile/phib trade should continue because = mantella.

its exists for one reason and one reason only = £

i was hoping u had something new, like i said, mouthpieces rarely stray from the soundbites.

u may speak for some.

u do not speak for me.

ed



Chris Newman said:


> I was merely interested in determining your stance, if you are opposed to the trade in wild caught animals that is your prerogative, many keepers are, many traders are….
> 
> However, if you wish to put forward an advocacy for the wild caught trade I will do so, a good example is the golden mantella, if it were not for the trade in wild caught specimens it will go extinct! So would you rather it be trade as a wild caught animal or would you prefer the species to go extinct?


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> The unfortunate situation is it leaves exhibiters where the have been for the passed ten years, potentially open to acquisition from certain quarters they are commercial breeders, regardless of what or how many animals they breed?
> 
> What the prosecutor will have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt is the exhibiter is:
> 
> (A) selling animals as pets
> (B) is proven to be running a business,
> (C) it takes place at a market
> 
> If a Local Authority can prove all three beyond reasonable doubt then the exhibiter could be prosecuted.
> 
> It is very unfortunate that this case will most likely not be concluded before the start of the show season due to the procrastination of the prosecuting authority. That will put exhibiters under pressure and they will have to decide if they wish to attend shows or not!
> 
> This will be a tough year!


is up to the prosecutor to prove guilt or the individual to prove innocence though?

All though some believe that we have a fundamental right of being innocent until proven guilty, this is not so in all types of preosecution.


----------



## Chris Newman

MoreliaUK said:


> I would. I would love a Boelens Python but I will never ever get one as most are either wild caught or labelled as captive farmed which is just a way of laundering wild caught animals and giving hem a higher price tag.
> 
> Too many have died over the years in captivity and there are less than a handful of captive breedings recorded. There was the successful breeding last year but breeding them in captivity will not be fully cracked until that breeder or other breeders have regular successes and not just the one offs.
> 
> How many more should be exported to feed our needs to die in captivity until we crack their code to get consistent breeding success? If we keep on going on there will be none left in the wild which is where they truly belong and do best.
> 
> Just because we can keep things does not mean that we should.


That’s a fair enough view point, we could argue the same about many species that are now routinely kept in captivity? Jacksons chameleons being a prime example, thirty years ago they were considered imposable to keep in captivity, today they thrive!

I fully support the concept of Sustainable Utilization, what I think is important is the consumer, and that’s what we are consumers, know the origins of the animals they acquire. Passing off a wild caught animals as captive bred or farmed is totally unacceptable. 

The simple fact is today the trade in wild caught reptiles is very small and declining year by year, if we want to start saving the habitats of some of these species then we might need to start rethinking about issue of wild caught animals.


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> is up to the prosecutor to prove guilt or the individual to prove innocence though?
> 
> All though some believe that we have a fundamental right of being innocent until proven guilty, this is not so in all types of preosecution.


Very clearly the evidential burden rests on the prosecutor………

Our rights are being eroded and reverse burdens of proof implemented, but not in this case, this is very much a matter for the prosecutor to prove beyond reasonable doubt!


----------



## Chris Newman

loxocemus said:


> u do not speak for me.
> 
> ed


I am so pleased to hear that…..


----------



## Jeffers3

loxocemus said:


> to some, opposing wild caught animals, professing welfare above profit makes u the same as the animal rights lot, in fact u may be suspected of being a closet one, an informer or something else just as exotically stupid.
> 
> ed


 
That's a nasty thing to accuse somebody of! :lol2:

I'm not sure what my views are on wild caught. I doubt if a one size fits all approach is appropriate, though. There are examples where wild populations are threatened by the trade, as well as examples where the trade has helped wild populations. What's appropriate in Australia, isn't necessarily appropriate in Europe......


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> Very clearly the evidential burden rests on the prosecutor………
> 
> Our rights are being eroded and reverse burdens of proof implemented, but not in this case, this is very much a matter for the prosecutor to prove beyond reasonable doubt!


thats good news. I do not know exactly in what circumstances reverse burden of proof aplies, hence the question.

So it is possible for exhinitors to be brought to trial, but it seems that it would be difficult for the prosecution to prove.

then yes this case is going to answer a lot of questions, definitions of exactly what constitues a commercial activity are going to be key. I sincereley hope that this goes in the favour of the individual.


----------



## Janine00

bladeblaster said:


> I sincereley hope that this goes in the favour of the individual.


Amen to that brother.... bet he's hoping for the same! : victory:


----------



## Chris Newman

bladeblaster said:


> thats good news. I do not know exactly in what circumstances reverse burden of proof aplies, hence the question.
> 
> So it is possible for exhinitors to be brought to trial, but it seems that it would be difficult for the prosecution to prove.
> 
> then yes this case is going to answer a lot of questions, definitions of exactly what constitues a commercial activity are going to be key. I sincereley hope that this goes in the favour of the individual.


I don’t think this case is going to be quite as definitive as people expect, firstly this case is being held in a Magistrates Court, and its ruling will have no direct bearing on any other case. It will simply rule that the individual has been found guilty on that day of selling an animal as a pet/business. Clearly it would preclude that individual from exhibiting at a show again in Doncaster, but other than that it will have little impact and certainly does not prove the legality of shows one way or the other. It would become some sort of beach mark that perhaps others could be measured by.

If this case is lost in the Magistrates Court then the defendant would have the right of appeal to a higher Court, including all the way up to Strasbourg. Or alternatively the government could view all this as a complete and utter waste of everyone’s time and money sign the commencement order and consign the errant legislation to history…..


----------



## bladeblaster

Chris Newman said:


> I don’t think this case is going to be quite as definitive as people expect, firstly this case is being held in a Magistrates Court, and its ruling will have no direct bearing on any other case. It will simply rule that the individual has been found guilty on that day of selling an animal as a pet/business. Clearly it would preclude that individual from exhibiting at a show again in Doncaster, but other than that it will have little impact and certainly does not prove the legality of shows one way or the other. It would become some sort of beach mark that perhaps others could be measured by.
> 
> If this case is lost in the Magistrates Court then the defendant would have the right of appeal to a higher Court, including all the way up to Strasbourg. Or alternatively the government could view all this as a complete and utter waste of everyone’s time and money sign the commencement order and consign the errant legislation to history…..


Like I said in my previous post, its going to be up to each individual to fight their individual corners, however it is going to give some sort of guidance as to what is or isn;t considered 'commercial'

Like I also said, with this in mind, every single exhibitor should be very cautious and understand exactly what they are opening themselves up to.

As to whether shows are legal or not, this should be secondary to the protection of the people unwittingly caught up in this surely?


----------



## truncheon1973

the thing i dont understand is why is it the one guy that got prosecuted

if they thought they had a case with him then why him alone and not everyone selling animals?

surley if it was wrong they should be prosecuting everyone ?


----------



## bladeblaster

truncheon1973 said:


> the thing i dont understand is why is it the one guy that got prosecuted
> 
> if they thought they had a case with him then why him alone and not everyone selling animals?
> 
> surley if it was wrong they should be prosecuting everyone ?


because he is too 'professional' his web site is too good. Ludicrous reasons.


----------



## Pete Q

MoreliaUK said:


> If you really want me to waste lots of time I could and can dredge up many many similar threads and posts? I do not think that your reptile markets should be banned either. I just feel that the reptile trade should be better regulated. Licensing would be a nice start....
> 
> Funny how many of your posts are rarely backed up by current supporting facts or evidence.


Now your being rude. If you don't like shows or whatever you want to call them then thats up to you, many of us injoy them for many reasons.


----------



## ian kerr

Wot I don't understand is...if people don't agree with wot Chris does .they could always step forward and actually do something about it!
It seems like a hard job to me and something I couldn't do! It's ok to criticise and have different views....but I'm quite happy with the work Chris does!


----------



## Pete Q

bladeblaster said:


> because he is too 'professional' his web site is too good. Ludicrous reasons.


Thats very likely right, or it could be someone within the hobbie, a tell tell.


----------



## bladeblaster

ian kerr said:


> Wot I don't understand is...if people don't agree with wot Chris does .they could always step forward and actually do something about it!
> It seems like a hard job to me and something I couldn't do! It's ok to criticise and have different views....but I'm quite happy with the work Chris does!


I couldn't be prime minister either but it doesn't stop me having an opinon on what he does on my behalf.

honestly mate I have no issue with Chris, or shows for that matter, but people are burying their heads in the sand on this.


----------



## Pete Q

bladeblaster said:


> I couldn't be prime minister either but it doesn't stop me having an opinon on what he does on my behalf.
> 
> honestly mate I have no issue with Chris, or shows for that matter, but people are burying their heads in the sand on this.


I respect that, I don't think I'm burying my head in the sand though, I feel very confident I could stand up in court a prove I have a full time job that funds my hobbie and my snakes cost me a lot of money keep.

Donny shows I'm sure I lose, meals out, film at the pitures, not to mention petrol costs, but I injoy it all for those reasons, a great weekend topped off with seeing many interesting reptiles and people to meet up with.


----------



## ian kerr

bladeblaster said:


> I couldn't be prime minister either but it doesn't stop me having an opinon on what he does on my behalf.
> 
> honestly mate I have no issue with Chris, or shows for that matter, but people are burying their heads in the sand on this.


I understand your views mate...and totally agree with some....I'm a consevative but I don't agree with everything they say...but I'll back them every time.Chris has a thankless job...but he does it well enough for me. I've been worried about these problems for a long time.and worry deeply about the amount of snakes/lizards that are being produced .


----------



## Se7enS1ns

Uromastyxman said:


> As many of you know, I advocate this as a way forward as a person who is unwilling to invest in paying a relatively small membership charge to gain entry to the meeting is unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place. I believe that there must be some basic investment made by a potential reptile purchaser involving some fundamental grounding in reptile husbandry before they should be allowed to own a reptile. This is based on my desire to protect reptiles, particularly from being sold to people with inadequate knowledge to sustain the animal at the time of purchase. I am less interested in the ability of the breeder/dealer's potential to sell more animals.


I'm sorry... what?!

How, pray tell, does one person who is willing to pay a small membership fee suddenly become any more knowledgeable and experienced than someone else who is not? The most experienced and well respected keeper in the world could have some very strong, moral objections to becoming a paid up member of a party he or she politically objects to, yet by your reckoning, should not be "allowed" to own a reptile - and yet on the flip side, anyone who is willing to cough up a tenner can attend and buy what they like yet potentially know nothing about or are unable to cater for. Madness.

The only thing that differentiates those who are willing to pay a fee from those who are not, is that those who are do so purely so they can be "allowed" to attend the shows and purchase animals - it speaks nothing of their experience in reptile keeping or their knowledge of husbandry.

To imply that those who are not willing to become a paid up member of a "governing body" are ill equipped, uneducated or too inexperienced to keep a reptile - or to make sweeping generalisations that they are or will make bad keepers - simply beggars belief, and I see this as nothing more than spinning a line with a dual motive: Force peoples hands from their pockets into a rattle tin, and skirting round the edges of the law so that these events can be classed as members only and not open to the general public. These people are not members - they are ticket holders to a private event.

I do not attend shows (and I use the word loosely) myself for my own reasons, nor do I have any objections towards them, or paying a membership fee for the privilege of the continuations of these shows - what I object to is the implication that anybody unwilling to become a member (for whatever their reasoning) is too inexperienced, or in your own words "unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place". I find that logic ignorant and offensive.


----------



## bladeblaster

Pete Q said:


> I respect that, I don't think I'm burying my head in the sand though, I feel very confident I could stand up in court a prove I have a full time job that funds my hobbie and my snakes cost me a lot of money keep.
> 
> Donny shows I'm sure I lose, meals out, film at the pitures, not to mention petrol costs, but I injoy it all for those reasons, a great weekend topped off with seeing many interesting reptiles and people to meet up with.


 
Most of the shows I have done have cost me more than I have made on the day, and I enjoyed shows for mostly the same reasons as you and many others.

I am not having a go at anyone in particular, but people should be aware that the potential for them to be dragged through the courts is there. Even if you are in the right, and proven to be completely innocent, its a very stressful and potentially expensive experience.

I feel very sorry for the individually currently goign through is and I personally don;t want to see people I thnk are good breeders and good people suffer the same thing.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Se7enS1ns said:


> I'm sorry... what?!
> 
> How, pray tell, does one person who is willing to pay a small membership fee suddenly become any more knowledgeable and experienced than someone else who is not? The most experienced and well respected keeper in the world could have some very strong, moral objections to becoming a paid up member of a party he or she politically objects to, yet by your reckoning, should not be "allowed" to own a reptile - and yet on the flip side, anyone who is willing to cough up a tenner can attend and buy what they like yet potentially know nothing about or are unable to cater for. Madness.
> 
> The only thing that differentiates those who are willing to pay a fee from those who are not, is that those who are do so purely so they can be "allowed" to attend the shows and purchase animals - it speaks nothing of their experience in reptile keeping or their knowledge of husbandry.
> 
> To imply that those who are not willing to become a paid up member of a "governing body" are ill equipped, uneducated or too inexperienced to keep a reptile - or to make sweeping generalisations that they are or will make bad keepers - simply beggars belief, and I see this as nothing more than spinning a line with a dual motive: Force peoples hands from their pockets into a rattle tin, and skirting round the edges of the law so that these events can be classed as members only and not open to the general public. These people are not members - they are ticket holders to a private event.
> 
> I do not attend shows (and I use the word loosely) myself for my own reasons, nor do I have any objections towards them, or paying a membership fee for the privilege of the continuations of these shows - what I object to is the implication that anybody unwilling to become a member (for whatever their reasoning) is too inexperienced, or in your own words "unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place". I find that logic ignorant and offensive.


:flrt:


----------



## bash_on_recce

After hearing about the 'old' style shows, I much prefer the sound of those. What happened? Why did they turn into nothing much bar selling surplus CB stock?


----------



## Se7enS1ns

bash_on_recce said:


> After hearing about the 'old' style shows, I much prefer the sound of those. What happened? Why did they turn into nothing much bar selling surplus CB stock?


----------



## bash_on_recce

Se7enS1ns said:


> image


I guessed that, I was hoping for a really long answer from someone on how modern shows are so much improved etc etc :lol2:


----------



## MoreliaUK

bash_on_recce said:


> After hearing about the 'old' style shows, I much prefer the sound of those. What happened? Why did they turn into nothing much bar selling surplus CB stock?


They used to be awesome as not every table was trying to sell you something; people even used to show you their breeding achievements then and funnily enough not everything had a price tag. The IHS show in Wallsall used to be superb with much much more than Royals and leopard geckos. To top it off you always used to go to Dave Lesters for seconds which was usually better than the main.

Dave Davies was the man in those days that's for sure - legend.


----------



## hogboy

bash_on_recce said:


> After hearing about the 'old' style shows, I much prefer the sound of those. What happened? Why did they turn into nothing much bar selling surplus CB stock?



Things were very different back then
No internet, no forums and all of the shows were in the west midlands –)
You checked out ads in exchange and mart, waited for the IHS newsletter for the new for sale ads, or sent off (by post) for price lists
No quick pm or email, all snail mail or in person
The hobby is so much bigger now, and the old venues would not be able to handle todays volume of visitors.
I sued to get up at stupid o'clock to get a train from london to birmingham to attend the shows :gasp:


----------



## bash_on_recce

MoreliaUK said:


> They used to be awesome as not every table was trying to sell you something; people even used to show you their breeding achievements then and funnily enough not everything had a price tag. The IHS show in Wallsall used to be superb with much much more than Royals and leopard geckos. To top it off you always used to go to Dave Lesters for seconds which was usually better than the main.


Thats what I really missed at CREAKS, somehere to chill and talk to other keepers with a cuppa. Everything was focused on rushing round to see what was for sale. I'll be honest, I got caught up in it. But at the end of the day, apart from some cheap dry good, I just came away feeling i had got very little from it (and not because I hadn't come back with a herp!), I certainly hadn't learnt anything new. I'm not picking out CREAKS, I bet Doncaster would leave me with the same feeling :/


----------



## MoreliaUK

Times change and not always for the good. Like Hogboy says you used to look out. For Wednesdays as that was exchange and mart day. You would also not think twice about driving the length of be country to even see a snake even before the consideration of buying it!

J&G animals on a Saturday to catch up on reptile knowledge and gossip and all was great. This intermerweb has a lot to answer for!


----------



## bash_on_recce

MoreliaUK said:


> You would also not think twice about driving the length of be country to even see a snake even before the consideration of buying it!


I still do that now! :lol2: I have only ever had one exotic through the post and I regret ever doing it. 

But is that it now? There a lot more people in the hobby so this is how shows have to work now?


----------



## Uromastyxman

Se7enS1ns said:


> I'm sorry... what?!
> 
> How, pray tell, does one person who is willing to pay a small membership fee suddenly become any more knowledgeable and experienced than someone else who is not? The most experienced and well respected keeper in the world could have some very strong, moral objections to becoming a paid up member of a party he or she politically objects to, yet by your reckoning, should not be "allowed" to own a reptile - and yet on the flip side, anyone who is willing to cough up a tenner can attend and buy what they like yet potentially know nothing about or are unable to cater for. Madness.
> 
> The only thing that differentiates those who are willing to pay a fee from those who are not, is that those who are do so purely so they can be "allowed" to attend the shows and purchase animals - it speaks nothing of their experience in reptile keeping or their knowledge of husbandry.
> 
> To imply that those who are not willing to become a paid up member of a "governing body" are ill equipped, uneducated or too inexperienced to keep a reptile - or to make sweeping generalisations that they are or will make bad keepers - simply beggars belief, and I see this as nothing more than spinning a line with a dual motive: Force peoples hands from their pockets into a rattle tin, and skirting round the edges of the law so that these events can be classed as members only and not open to the general public. These people are not members - they are ticket holders to a private event.
> 
> I do not attend shows (and I use the word loosely) myself for my own reasons, nor do I have any objections towards them, or paying a membership fee for the privilege of the continuations of these shows - what I object to is the implication that anybody unwilling to become a member (for whatever their reasoning) is too inexperienced, or in your own words "unlikely to be the sort of person who should be buying animals in the first place". I find that logic ignorant and offensive.[/
> 
> I have been attending shows for 25 years. There were periods when it was members only. There were periods when members went in early for an hour and then the doors were open to the public who could then come in and purchase animals without having registered/become a member of a club. I have seen members of clubs who know little about animal husbandry and I have seen non-members who know a great deal. I have also seen people with no idea how to look after a reptile enter a show without membership buy an animal and end up killing it through ignorance. I have also seen people who want to enter a show with a desire to purchase an animal, turn around and return home because they did not want to purchase a £10.00 membership on the door, which they had to have to gain entry. The latter are people who want to purchase animals at breeders meetings but are unwilling to pay the membership fee. This investment on the door has actually put off people who had no idea how to look after a reptile and may have purchased one, condemning it to a slow death. I have not always been a member of a club when I have attended shows and sometimes I have been, and my reptile experience has not diminished simply because my club membership has lapsed. I am simply saying that some people who turn up at a show and get annoyed with a compulsory club membership on the door are sometimes not the most committed/passionate people. It would be stupid to say that club membership is a guaranteed indication of an acceptable level of knowledge/experience, however, when I started going to shows it was exciting and there was a feeling of comradeship among other members who rubbed shoulders with each other in a shared interest that was largely obscure and underground to most of society. And back then joining a club showed some commitment, because it gave you the chance to see new species and learn from more senior members. I have stood behind people in quews at shows who got annoyed at the door because they were asked to join a club, they didn't want to join, they just wanted to come in and take an animal/s home. I could also tell by listening to these individuals that they did not know their arse from their elbow about reptile keeping. These are the sort of people that I come across all too often, a pocketfull of money to buy, but an unwillingness to study the hobby beforehand and I find their resentment at being asked to purchase a £10.00 membership ticket indicative of a lack of commitment to the animals themselves.
> Sorry if my post made it sound as though membership is a requirement to indicate an experienced keeper, of course it can't do that, however required membership before you can go into a meeting and buy animals does and has put some ignorant uncommitted people off, because I've seen it happen, and these are the sort of people I was referring to.


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> In due course absolutely everything relating to the Doncaster IHS show will be made public and available to download from the FBH website. This including the massive bundle of information obtained back in October by the FBH under the Freedom of Information Act. This bundle from Doncaster Brought Council makes very interesting reading!! I suspect for legal reason we will not be able to make this public before the conclusion of the current Court case, we have absolutely nothing to hide, although I suspect some other ‘outside agency’ might have a differing view!!


Sorry Chris, what's this got to do with how reptile organisations like the IHS address the implementation of education/regulation within the hobby?


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> Sorry Chris, what's this got to do with how reptile organisations like the IHS address the implementation of education/regulation within the hobby?


If you read back to the question that elicited this response you will see it was relate to a question about what was happening in relation to the legalities of shows? I don’t recall it making any reference to the issue you have just raised….!! If I am wrong then please direct me to the relevant post and I will endeavour to address the issue.


----------



## langerspies

How do you decide who is breeding just to sell the offspring or who is just selling whats left over from their personal enrichment of their collection?
If say someone goes to nearly every show every year with, lets say 50+ hatchlings, would that not arouse suspisions that they are just breeding to sell, or do you just ask them and depending on their answer you leave it at that. How do you regulate these shows?


----------



## stevenrudge

MoreliaUK said:


> They used to be awesome as not every table was trying to sell you something; people even used to show you their breeding achievements then and funnily enough not everything had a price tag. The IHS show in Wallsall used to be superb with much much more than Royals and leopard geckos. To top it off you always used to go to Dave Lesters for seconds which was usually better than the main.
> 
> Dave Davies was the man in those days that's for sure - legend.


You mean Dave Lester,Dave Davies was not around then?
Horse burgers are del-lish


----------



## MoreliaUK

stevenrudge said:


> You mean Dave Lester,Dave Davies was not around then?
> Horse burgers are del-lish


Dave Lester was at the shop in town and Dave Davies was around then as he was at the shows. I got my first Indigo snakes from him at that show and then the bugger ( the snake, not Dave) decided to escape from his container in the car on my way back down the M40 motorway.
I even had a traffic cop unit helping me search the car for him to no avail. Thankfully he re appeared within the car 2 weeks later!


----------



## stevenrudge

Uromastyxman said:


> Sorry Chris, what's this got to do with how reptile organisations like the IHS address the implementation of education/regulation within the hobby?


very good point,the OP is just trying to divert attention away as usual,look it this easy for any hobby show
One table for each member,
A per register apx list of animals the member expects to take
This would highlight any 'unusual amount' of animals that could be responsibly expected to be produced by any hobby breeder .
A sliding list of price tables for hobby members that breed animals from common pets to high end high value spp or morphs.
No trader members to be allowed to purchase 'stock' towards the end of show when member usually price crash selling prices to 'move'animals

Any problems arising from any conduct from members not adhering to any of the above,face a total ban from any future show.
All very easy and simple and this would show and prove that we take full responsibly for our members conduct and we would prove that we have taken all and any action to stop any 'trade interference' in our hobby shows


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> If you read back to the question that elicited this response you will see it was relate to a question about what was happening in relation to the legalities of shows? I don’t recall it making any reference to the issue you have just raised….!! If I am wrong then please direct me to the relevant post and I will endeavour to address the issue.



On page 19 of this thread you have quoted my comments about reptile organisations addressing the issue of education/regulation in the hobby, and you replied with the above. This may have been a mistake on the quote button, but as it has come up again, what have the reptile organisations being doing thus far to address the issues of inadequately experienced/informed people buying reptiles they are unable to maintain and how will these ideas, if any, progress along in the future as the number of reptiles being made available expands further.

For instance, a simple thing like informing potential buyers at shows about the species they show interest in with a chat and a caresheet and an attempt by the seller to question/vet the buyers should be compulsory to protect the reptiles shouldn't it, and yet it is not. Some dealers do it and some claim to do it but I know many do not.

While a lot of effort seems to be being made by reptile organisations to oil the wheels of reptile selling, any attempt to regulate/educate the dealers and potentially uninformed buyers seems to be being overlooked.

Lots of animals being bred needing to be found homes, prices dropping, no attempt being made to regulate who is selling and who is buying is simply leading to a rough deal for the reptiles themselves.

So what is being done?

Don't forget Chris, I know you continue to do great work in the hobby, but that means that on occasion someone in your roll will be asked questions like this, it goes with the territory.

Regards

Andy


----------



## Blake1990

stevenrudge said:


> You mean Dave Lester,Dave Davies was not around then?
> Horse burgers are del-lish


How are your good friends at the APA going to react when they find out your not a Vegan :gasp:

But then again, I'm sure you would do a much better job of running the APA than they currently do :whistling2:


----------



## truncheon1973

is that what elaine wants then is it:whistling2:





stevenrudge said:


> very good point,the OP is just trying to divert attention away as usual,look it this easy for any hobby show
> One table for each member,
> A per register apx list of animals the member expects to take
> This would highlight any 'unusual amount' of animals that could be responsibly expected to be produced by any hobby breeder .
> A sliding list of price tables for hobby members that breed animals from common pets to high end high value spp or morphs.
> No trader members to be allowed to purchase 'stock' towards the end of show when member usually price crash selling prices to 'move'animals
> 
> Any problems arising from any conduct from members not adhering to any of the above,face a total ban from any future show.
> All very easy and simple and this would show and prove that we take full responsibly for our members conduct and we would prove that we have taken all and any action to stop any 'trade interference' in our hobby shows


----------



## Blake1990

truncheon1973 said:


> is that what elaine wants then is it:whistling2:


Do you think he gets :whip: if he doesn't do as he's told 


:lol2: :lol2: :lol2:


----------



## truncheon1973

Blake1990 said:


> Do you think he gets :whip: if he doesn't do as he's told
> 
> 
> :lol2: :lol2: :lol2:


i think he does and i think he enjoys it:gasp:


----------



## stevenrudge

MoreliaUK said:


> Dave Lester was at the shop in town and Dave Davies was around then as he was at the shows. I got my first Indigo snakes from him at that show and then the bugger ( the snake, not Dave) decided to escape from his container in the car on my way back down the M40 motorway.
> I even had a traffic cop unit helping me search the car for him to no avail. Thankfully he re appeared within the car 2 weeks later!


We must be taking about different Dave Davies


----------



## stevenrudge

truncheon1973 said:


> is that what elaine wants then is it:whistling2:


No mate,but if we act more responsibly and show that we have done all that we can be reasonably expected to do then the people who are against us will have less success in fighting us.
We take their argument away from them


----------



## stevenrudge

Blake1990 said:


> How are your good friends at the APA going to react when they find out your not a Vegan :gasp:
> 
> But then again, I'm sure you would do a much better job of running the APA than they currently do :whistling2:


You either cannot read or do not understand whats been posted.


----------



## sharpstrain

personally I would like to see this thread moved to hobby issues and information as it is not about snakes. it is about politics and personalities and is making me lose the will to live:no1:

if you agree report the thread and ask for it to be moved - if you dont = well I gues I better STFU


----------



## Blake1990

stevenrudge said:


> You either cannot read or do not understand whats been posted.


Your right, sometimes I cannot read your post's.

All depends who is writing them I suppose, One of your personality's seems to have perfect spelling and grammar, whilst the other can barely string a sentence together :whistling2:


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> On page 19 of this thread you have quoted my comments about reptile organisations addressing the issue of education/regulation in the hobby, and you replied with the above. This may have been a mistake on the quote button, but as it has come up again, what have the reptile organisations being doing thus far to address the issues of inadequately experienced/informed people buying reptiles they are unable to maintain and how will these ideas, if any, progress along in the future as the number of reptiles being made available expands further.
> 
> For instance, a simple thing like informing potential buyers at shows about the species they show interest in with a chat and a caresheet and an attempt by the seller to question/vet the buyers should be compulsory to protect the reptiles shouldn't it, and yet it is not. Some dealers do it and some claim to do it but I know many do not.
> 
> While a lot of effort seems to be being made by reptile organisations to oil the wheels of reptile selling, any attempt to regulate/educate the dealers and potentially uninformed buyers seems to be being overlooked.
> 
> Lots of animals being bred needing to be found homes, prices dropping, no attempt being made to regulate who is selling and who is buying is simply leading to a rough deal for the reptiles themselves.
> 
> So what is being done?
> 
> Don't forget Chris, I know you continue to do great work in the hobby, but that means that on occasion someone in your roll will be asked questions like this, it goes with the territory.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Andy


Curious on page 19 there appears to be a double posting? My response was supposed to be addressing the point raised by MoriliaUK, not quite sure why it also appears verbatim on your post…. the mystery of technology!

In the guidance set by the FBH vendors are required to provide care information, original we stated that care sheets must be give out, that prove someone unpopular when a vendor handed a long standing keeper a care sheet! Notwithstanding that they are required to be available. Ironically this appears to be a problem legally!!!!! [to professional!]

Regulating each and ever sale would be nice, but in reality imposable, therefore responsibility is incumbent on the vendor. As you may have seen we now have an independent Animal Welfare Inspector and this is part of his remit is to keep an eye out for anyone selling an animal inappropriately. 

In terms of other education activities, this is a matter that is constantly under review, talks and lectures have been tried and are an abject failure. 

I also think we need to bear in mind what they events are: Breeders Meetings, meetings organised for and on behalf of a club or society for members to dispose of surplus stock!


----------



## langerspies

How do you define surplus stock?


----------



## MoreliaUK

stevenrudge said:


> We must be taking about different Dave Davies


The Welsh one from Swansea.


----------



## SWMorelia

MoreliaUK said:


> The Welsh one from Swansea.


He'll be easy to find, just look in the phone book:whistling2:


----------



## langerspies

langerspies said:


> How do you define surplus stock?


 Anybody have any idea's on this. There are regulations in place as to who is allowed to sell at these shows, but how do you define surplus stock from hobbyist breedings. It seems this is an area where people seem to be saying is not regulated properly at the shows.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

langerspies said:


> Anybody have any idea's on this. There are regulations in place as to who is allowed to sell at these shows, but how do you define surplus stock from hobbyist breedings. It seems this is an area where people seem to be saying is not regulated properly at the shows.


Without knowing every vendors financial situation you cant tell who should be trading and who shouldnt, apart from shops etc

Take me for example; I have a 5 pairs of royals, these were brought with the intent of breeding to eventually get panda and lightening pieds and a few other morphs which we like but cannot buy as the price tag on these is too much . Any offspring that are not needed from the pairings will be sold on. 

I class this as selling surplus.

Breeding to simply cover the cost of keeping and maintaining your snakes I also class as surplus stock.

Breeding for profit I dont class as surplus stock. I think if you make a few extra pounds over what it takes to maintain your collection because of a few extra babies is one thing. Consistently making hundreds of pounds over what is needed then i class this as an income, so there in a business.


I hope that makes sense, it does in my head :lol2:


----------



## ophidianman

langerspies said:


> How do you decide who is breeding just to sell the offspring or who is just selling whats left over from their personal enrichment of their collection?
> If say someone goes to nearly every show every year with, lets say 50+ hatchlings, would that not arouse suspisions that they are just breeding to sell, or do you just ask them and depending on their answer you leave it at that. How do you regulate these shows?


50+ hatchlings could easily be achieved with a trio of Cornsnakes, especially if they double clutch.


----------



## johnc79

Lil_nightmare said:


> Without knowing every vendors financial situation you cant tell who should be trading and who shouldnt, apart from shops etc
> 
> Take me for example; I have a 5 pairs of royals, these were brought with the intent of breeding to eventually get panda and lightening pieds and a few other morphs which we like but cannot buy as the price tag on these is too much . Any offspring that are not needed from the pairings will be sold on.
> 
> I class this as selling surplus.
> 
> Breeding to simply cover the cost of keeping and maintaining your snakes I also class as surplus stock.
> 
> Breeding for profit I dont class as surplus stock. I think if you make a few extra pounds over what it takes to maintain your collection because of a few extra babies is one thing. Consistently making hundreds of pounds over what is needed then i class this as an income, so there in a business.
> 
> 
> I hope that makes sense, it does in my head :lol2:


That is bang on. The way it should be. :no1:


----------



## dr del

stevenrudge said:


> No mate,but if we act more responsibly and show that we have done all that we can be reasonably expected to do then the people who are against us will have less success in fighting us.
> We take their argument away from them


*If* that was their only goal and disagreement with our hobby that idea *might* have some relevance.

But we all know that is simply *not the case* now don't we?

You cannot take an idealogical argument away from someone because it is not based in logic or flexible enough to be changed.


Until they move far enough along their intended path to ty and take away Granny's budgie or cat the daft old sow will keep funding them. This means they will always have more cash for lawyers, and spin doctors, and journalists, which means the "creepy" image of our pets the general public has isn't going to go away.

They will keep attacking us over shows, salmonela, husbandry pratices, escapees or whatever else they can think of.

*That* is why capitulation and appeasement is a bad idea. Ultimately it cannot strengthen our position against the anti's and only cause divisions within our community as we throw parts of it to the wolves in the attempt.


dr del


----------



## langerspies

ophidianman said:


> 50+ hatchlings could easily be achieved with a trio of Cornsnakes, especially if they double clutch.


 What about low yeild snakes? Which is why i asked how do you regulate this?


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Maybe if there was a limit on the number of each species each vendor could bring it could work.

These numbers would have to take into account the average clutch size for each species (not just snakes but other reptiles/inverts also) 

Might also cut down on the number of unwanted animals being bred each year if one of the mediums for selling is limited.


----------



## Pete Q

dr del said:


> *If* that was their only goal and disagreement with our hobby that idea *might* have some relevance.
> 
> But we all know that is simply *not the case* now don't we?
> 
> You cannot take an idealogical argument away from someone because it is not based in logic or flexible enough to be changed.
> 
> 
> Until they move far enough along their intended path to ty and take away Granny's budgie or cat the daft old sow will keep funding them. This means they will always have more cash for lawyers, and spin doctors, and journalists, which means the "creepy" image of our pets the general public has isn't going to go away.
> 
> They will keep attacking us over shows, salmonela, husbandry pratices, escapees or whatever else they can think of.
> 
> *That* is why capitulation and appeasement is a bad idea. Ultimately it cannot strengthen our position against the anti's and only cause divisions within our community as we throw parts of it to the wolves in the attempt.
> 
> 
> dr del


Totally agree, and thats why I cannot believe that the APA are ok with Stevens show idea, they are againest shows because they think they are cruel, the legal arguement is just a side reason for their goal.


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> Curious on page 19 there appears to be a double posting? My response was supposed to be addressing the point raised by MoriliaUK, not quite sure why it also appears verbatim on your post…. the mystery of technology!
> 
> In the guidance set by the FBH vendors are required to provide care information, original we stated that care sheets must be give out, that prove someone unpopular when a vendor handed a long standing keeper a care sheet! Notwithstanding that they are required to be available. Ironically this appears to be a problem legally!!!!! [to professional!]
> 
> Regulating each and ever sale would be nice, but in reality imposable, therefore responsibility is incumbent on the vendor. As you may have seen we now have an independent Animal Welfare Inspector and this is part of his remit is to keep an eye out for anyone selling an animal inappropriately.
> 
> In terms of other education activities, this is a matter that is constantly under review, talks and lectures have been tried and are an abject failure.
> 
> I also think we need to bear in mind what they events are: Breeders Meetings, meetings organised for and on behalf of a club or society for members to dispose of surplus stock!


Now I'm curious, what do you mean about caresheets being available being a legal problem.

I'm also not sure about why an experienced keeper being given a caresheet by another keeper upon sale would cause a problem. And why would this cause a seller to stop handing out more caresheets?

If as you say, all breeders are members, it should not be difficult to expect them to hand out a caresheet and try and gauge whether a potential buyer is knowledgable enough to give the animal basic care after purchase.

I've turned people away in the past when they could not answer a basic question about the required husbandry of the species they want to buy from me. It does not make sense to me that a breeder who cares and nurtures his animals and manages to produce offspring from them, would then sell those offspring to someone who is not equipped with the knowledge to maintain them.
Many shops won't make sales indiscriminately and neither will private sellers.
Many sellers state in advertisements that they will only sell to experienced people so be prepared to be refused a purchase.

If "breeders" at "breeders meetings" can't be compelled to adhere to this most basic attempt at vetting and education at the point of sale by the organisers and the clubs they are members of, it is indicative of a hobby that cannot or will not police itself. 

Getting into a meeting is no indication that a person knows how to set up a viv, or even has a viv to accommodate the animal, let alone all the other equipment and financial resources to support it.

If there is no effort made by "breeders" to sell the animals on to an appropriate home, and the organisers and clubs won't compell them to give caresheets out and ask a person a few questions about temp's and cage size and feeding, just to get an idea that the animal will have a decent chance of survival, it is really no wonder that the anti reptile groups are constantly attacking the hobby.

I think the IHS, FBH and other reptile organisations have to start taking stock and reviewing the ethics and integrity of the hobby. How animals are maintained, housed, purchased, exchanged and why even breeders at breeders meetings, which are being overseen by the organisers and clubs, cannot or will not try and vet a potential purchaser and pass on some information at the point of sale, because this is really a minimum requirement to safeguard the animals isn't it? This isn't a pet shop owner neglecting animals and running an unethical business out of sight, these are breeders at breeders meetings doing their business in plain view of the organisers and clubs. Are sellers too embarrassed to ask, or do they not care enough because the organisers/clubs won't penalise/reprimand them for not following appropriate guidelines. Or do they simply not want to jeopardise a sale? This lackadaisical approach is what makes the hobby look like it can't control itself and that it needs some kind of outside intervention to tighten it up. Sadly a lack of self-regulation at meetings by the breeders and dealers and clubs will end up reflecting badly on all of us because they are carrying out their business in plain sight, which is why the antis attack them. Nobody knows what animals I have in my private collection, or what I breed or how I look after them but eventually this crappy half arsed way that the "regulated" public face of the hobby conducts itself will bring us all under scrutiny.


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

I also think we need to bear in mind what they events are: Breeders Meetings, meetings organised for and on behalf of a club or society for members to dispose of surplus stock!Quote - to other reptile society members!
l note that the last and most impotent part of this statement is missing whats missing is this-to other reptile society members!
As the OP has said Chris's reply do's not make sense.it would make sense if we were publicly selling pets to the public,yes then care sheets would be needed,but we don't do we? because if we did then our hobby show would be illegal.
( what they events are) Breeders Meetings, meetings organised for and on behalf of a club or society for members to dispose of surplus stock!to who Chris?to other hobby breeders?why would they need care sheets,or to the public who would need care sheets.
Sorry but to me this looks obvious ducking and diving around the PSL act,for me its way past the time that somebody within our reptile society's got their act together before it too late and the (show)really will be over


----------



## stevenrudge

dr del said:


> *If* that was their only goal and disagreement with our hobby that idea *might* have some relevance.
> 
> But we all know that is simply *not the case* now don't we?
> 
> You cannot take an idealogical argument away from someone because it is not based in logic or flexible enough to be changed.
> 
> 
> Until they move far enough along their intended path to ty and take away Granny's budgie or cat the daft old sow will keep funding them. This means they will always have more cash for lawyers, and spin doctors, and journalists, which means the "creepy" image of our pets the general public has isn't going to go away.
> 
> They will keep attacking us over shows, salmonela, husbandry pratices, escapees or whatever else they can think of.
> 
> *That* is why capitulation and appeasement is a bad idea. Ultimately it cannot strengthen our position against the anti's and only cause divisions within our community as we throw parts of it to the wolves in the attempt.
> 
> 
> dr del


Are you sane?? what a load of crap,you need to see some one fast-l find it hard to even read this nonsense without feeling sorry for you,please pm me so that we can talk because you need help


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> Totally agree, and thats why I cannot believe that the APA are ok with Stevens show idea, they are againest shows because they think they are cruel, the legal arguement is just a side reason for their goal.


 because you know nothing it easy retaquote rubbish,tell you what pm me and l'll tell you as and why and l'l show you the legislation,l've asked you before to contact me,l'l give you another chance because deep down l think your alright but we need to get things straight.
what have you got to lose
Nothing


----------



## dr del

stevenrudge said:


> Are you sane?? what a load of crap,you need to see some one fast-l find it hard to even read this nonsense without feeling sorry for you,please pm me so that we can talk because you need help


Well that was a well thought out and reasoned response. :whistling2:

Not only am I sane I have watched this fight take place in America with the exact same people against the hobby. In short, you befuddled and misbegotten microcephalic, I have more relevant experience and clarity of thought on this issue than you will achieve if you live to be a thousand years old.

They threw the retic, anaconda, and burm people under the bus in the hope it would appease the anti's.

It didn't work.

It did, however, help create even more infighting within the snake keepers as the keepers of "the big 4" felt betrayed and couldn't think of any reason why they should help defend anyone else.

Divide and conquer.

You, sir, are the dull little putty knife they are using to try and divide us.

We may well lose the fight but I'll be damned if we are going to try surrendering first to see if that helps.

Now go away and let the grown ups talk.


dr del


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> Now I'm curious, what do you mean about caresheets being available being a legal problem.
> 
> I'm also not sure about why an experienced keeper being given a caresheet by another keeper upon sale would cause a problem. And why would this cause a seller to stop handing out more caresheets?
> 
> If as you say, all breeders are members, it should not be difficult to expect them to hand out a caresheet and try and gauge whether a potential buyer is knowledgable enough to give the animal basic care after purchase.
> 
> I've turned people away in the past when they could not answer a basic question about the required husbandry of the species they want to buy from me. It does not make sense to me that a breeder who cares and nurtures his animals and manages to produce offspring from them, would then sell those offspring to someone who is not equipped with the knowledge to maintain them.
> Many shops won't make sales indiscriminately and neither will private sellers.
> Many sellers state in advertisements that they will only sell to experienced people so be prepared to be refused a purchase.
> 
> If "breeders" at "breeders meetings" can't be compelled to adhere to this most basic attempt at vetting and education at the point of sale by the organisers and the clubs they are members of, it is indicative of a hobby that cannot or will not police itself.
> 
> Getting into a meeting is no indication that a person knows how to set up a viv, or even has a viv to accommodate the animal, let alone all the other equipment and financial resources to support it.
> 
> If there is no effort made by "breeders" to sell the animals on to an appropriate home, and the organisers and clubs won't compell them to give caresheets out and ask a person a few questions about temp's and cage size and feeding, just to get an idea that the animal will have a decent chance of survival, it is really no wonder that the anti reptile groups are constantly attacking the hobby.
> 
> I think the IHS, FBH and other reptile organisations have to start taking stock and reviewing the ethics and integrity of the hobby. How animals are maintained, housed, purchased, exchanged and why even breeders at breeders meetings, which are being overseen by the organisers and clubs, cannot or will not try and vet a potential purchaser and pass on some information at the point of sale, because this is really a minimum requirement to safeguard the animals isn't it? This isn't a pet shop owner neglecting animals and running an unethical business out of sight, these are breeders at breeders meetings doing their business in plain view of the organisers and clubs. Are sellers too embarrassed to ask, or do they not care enough because the organisers/clubs won't penalise/reprimand them for not following appropriate guidelines. Or do they simply not want to jeopardise a sale? This lackadaisical approach is what makes the hobby look like it can't control itself and that it needs some kind of outside intervention to tighten it up. Sadly a lack of self-regulation at meetings by the breeders and dealers and clubs will end up reflecting badly on all of us because they are carrying out their business in plain sight, which is why the antis attack them. Nobody knows what animals I have in my private collection, or what I breed or how I look after them but eventually this crappy half arsed way that the "regulated" public face of the hobby conducts itself will bring us all under scrutiny.


Unfortunately the care sheet issues appears to form part of the prosecution so I can’t go into specific detail other than to say if you had tatty photocopied care sheet then that would not be an issue!

As regards to handing out care sheets with _every_ sale, say a very experienced leopard gecko keepers buys a leopard gecko from a fellow breeder, firstly the point of handing him a care sheet is what? Secondly, the experienced leopard gecko breeder is likely to take offence at someone gibing him a care sheet! It is neither reasonable nor proportionate. The rules are you must have them available, that is quite sufficient. 

Tim Wass, the former Chief Officer of the RSPCA is our independent animal welfare inspector, one of the very first things he remarked on was hearing vendors refuse to sell animals to prospective customers, I have been dragged into this when a exhibiter refused to sell and animal to a visitor. The vast over whelming majority of exhibiters care passionately about the animals they breed, they care who buy’s there animals! The whole point of a Breeders Meeting is so that breeders get to meet the perspective purchasers… 

If breeders cannot dispose of there surplus stock at a Breeders Meeting where do they do so? Via the internet, to pet shops? The latter is certainly one of the reasons the reptile industry is largely unsupportive of Breeders Meetings as it directly undercuts their market! 

I think we have very much taken stock of the situation, I think the standards we have imposed over the last ten years have seen standards improve immeasurably. If you visited a show ten years ago the changes you will see today are immeasurable, you won’t see wild caught animals being unpacked under the table as has happened in the passed, you won’t see skinny non-feeding animals for sale, you won’t, or shouldn’t see any animals not fit for sale. Now at every show vets and the animal welfare inspector parole the show before it opens, any animals not up to scratch are removed.

The suggest that self regulation has failed is grossly unfair and unjust, a huge effort has been put into self regulation and it works. As I said standards have improved immeasurably, and we continue to raise the bar. Currently we are reviewing the regulations and improving them. If you have seen the interview on the BBC Inside Out programme the point I made was I would like government now step-in and assist by licensing, that would be the next big step forward. 

Not everyone likes Breeders Meeting, and that is perfectly reasonable, attending is not compulsory! However, thousands and thousands of people do, both as exhibiters and visitors. Are there animal welfare issues at shows today, no, are there human health issues at shows today no, so what is the issue? The issue appears to be _some_ people don’t like them because animals are sold, i.e. it’s about money – really, is that all we care about bloody money is that the real issue!!!


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> Nobody knows what animals I have in my private collection, or what I breed or how I look after them but eventually this crappy half arsed way that the "regulated" public face of the hobby conducts itself will bring us all under scrutiny.


You don’t think reptile keeping is already under scrutiny? Let us not forget that it was not that long ago the RSPCA were calling for a ban on reptile keeping period! Some fanatical Animal Rights organisations [business] are still pushing for this – see quote below.

In the Netherlands this year its government will impose a positive list of reptiles that you are permitted to keep, if it’s not on the list it will be banned for private ownership! The legislation is in place for mammals, you can now legally only keep 42 species of mammals and that includes all the farm animals. How many reptiles will be on the list is unknown at this time!

If the fanatics succeed in stopping shows, do you really think there endeavours will end there? 


*BBC Inside Out statement Elaine Tolland*

Richard Daniel, presenter BBC Inside Out

_So to be clear what you want to do is see people banned from keeping these creatures as pets ultimately_…

*Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*

*We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> Unfortunately the care sheet issues appears to form part of the prosecution so I can’t go into specific detail other than to say if you had tatty photocopied care sheet then that would not be an issue!
> 
> As regards to handing out care sheets with _every_ sale, say a very experienced leopard gecko keepers buys a leopard gecko from a fellow breeder, firstly the point of handing him a care sheet is what? Secondly, the experienced leopard gecko breeder is likely to take offence at someone gibing him a care sheet! It is neither reasonable nor proportionate. The rules are you must have them available, that is quite sufficient.
> 
> Tim Wass, the former Chief Officer of the RSPCA is our independent animal welfare inspector, one of the very first things he remarked on was hearing vendors refuse to sell animals to prospective customers, I have been dragged into this when a exhibiter refused to sell and animal to a visitor. The vast over whelming majority of exhibiters care passionately about the animals they breed, they care who buy’s there animals! The whole point of a Breeders Meeting is so that breeders get to meet the perspective purchasers…
> 
> If breeders cannot dispose of there surplus stock at a Breeders Meeting where do they do so? Via the internet, to pet shops? The latter is certainly one of the reasons the reptile industry is largely unsupportive of Breeders Meetings as it directly undercuts their market!
> 
> I think we have very much taken stock of the situation, I think the standards we have imposed over the last ten years have seen standards improve immeasurably. If you visited a show ten years ago the changes you will see today are immeasurable, you won’t see wild caught animals being unpacked under the table as has happened in the passed, you won’t see skinny non-feeding animals for sale, you won’t, or shouldn’t see any animals not fit for sale. Now at every show vets and the animal welfare inspector parole the show before it opens, any animals not up to scratch are removed.
> 
> The suggest that self regulation has failed is grossly unfair and unjust, a huge effort has been put into self regulation and it works. As I said standards have improved immeasurably, and we continue to raise the bar. Currently we are reviewing the regulations and improving them. If you have seen the interview on the BBC Inside Out programme the point I made was I would like government now step-in and assist by licensing, that would be the next big step forward.
> 
> Not everyone likes Breeders Meeting, and that is perfectly reasonable, attending is not compulsory! However, thousands and thousands of people do, both as exhibiters and visitors. Are there animal welfare issues at shows today, no, are there human health issues at shows today no, so what is the issue? The issue appears to be _some_ people don’t like them because animals are sold, i.e. it’s about money – really, is that all we care about bloody money is that the real issue!!!


 How come after nearly every meeting someone will be on the forum saying" my snake i got from XXXXX show is full of mites" there is an example of animals not fit for sale.
Also if you see this Mr Newman, how do you or the other show organisers regulate who is selling surplus hobby animals and who is trying to sell animals bred for selling. You must have a way of making judgement on this other than someone being a registered trader.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> How come after nearly every meeting someone will be on the forum saying" my snake i got from XXXXX show is full of mites" there is an example of animals not fit for sale.
> Also if you see this Mr Newman, how do you or the other show organisers regulate who is selling surplus hobby animals and who is trying to sell animals bred for selling. You must have a way of making judgement on this other than someone being a registered trader.


Mites are an inherent problem at the moment, if any animals are seen with mites at shows they will be removed from sale. Purchasers should examine closely any animals they are interested in purchasing and if any evidence of mites are found they should (a) reject the animals and (b) inform the show organisers. I would also expect any responsible keeper to quarantine any new livestock before adding it to their collection. 

To answer your question how do we define “trade” [I think that was the point you wanted to make?]:

Traders will be classed as: anyone who normally trades (does business) under an EHA pet shop licence whether from a place of business or private dwelling or is VAT registered in the business of selling livestock.

Incidentally I don’t organise shows…..


----------



## Tarron

Over on captivebred, we had a discussion (I believe it lasted around 40 pages) regarding the difference between a hobbyist breeder and a commercial breeder.

Depsite such a long discussion, we deduced that it is near on impossible to tell. It seems to boil down to intent to make a profit, but how that is determined is still under question.
The only possible way to know for certain, would be for HMRC and other government sectors to determine each seller on their personal situation on a case by case basis.

This would make it very difficult for the IHS/FBH et al to make a decision based o any legal requirement. For this, they came up with a set of rules, based around people have PSL or paying VAT (not 100% on the last one, chris could confirm that though).
As far as the law stands, people with PSL could technically attend with animals they bred I their hobby (as opposed to the business side) but this could cause massive confusion and issues, so the decision to prevent PSL holders exhibiting was taken to avoid grey areas.

I believe this to be a fairly accurate statement but will stand corrected if required.

As for the arguement of impulse buying, I am sure it happens at shows, but I would think anyone that has travelled to show, waited in line for hours to walk round a crowded room, probably has a basicnidea of what they want or what they can care for. Certaunly more so than the average joe who walks in to a local pet shop and sees a cool python so buys there and then. 

Show sellers have passion and care for the animals wellbeing, a lot of (but not all ) pet shops see $$$$ so will sell anyone anything.


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> Mites are an inherent problem at the moment, if any animals are seen with mites at shows they will be removed from sale. Purchasers should examine closely any animals they are interested in purchasing and if any evidence of mites are found they should (a) reject the animals and (b) inform the show organisers. I would also expect any responsible keeper to quarantine any new livestock before adding it to their collection.
> 
> To answer your question how do we define “trade” [I think that was the point you wanted to make?]:
> 
> Traders will be classed as: anyone who normally trades (does business) under an EHA pet shop licence whether from a place of business or private dwelling or is VAT registered in the business of selling livestock.
> 
> Incidentally I don’t organise shows…..


I specifically said not those who ARE traders i want to know how you work out who is a "hobbyist" but breeding and selling nearly all their hatchlings, year after year for tens of thousands of pounds, next to a hobbyist selling 2 or 3 from each clutch from their breedings to breed something they want, not selling whole clutches bred for no reason at all.
So your answer really means, anyone who is not registered because they choose not to, is good enough for you.


----------



## MoreliaUK

The ugly side of reptile shows. Thankfully this was not a British one.



























The greens which were wild caught (or captive farmed) were in a poor state and many had excrement in their water bowls and turds in the substrate that were weeks old.









Emeralds without a perch. The worst was were there were long green and black coloured monitors stuffed into these round boxes too without room to turn.


----------



## langerspies

Tarron said:


> Over on captivebred, we had a discussion (I believe it lasted around 40 pages) regarding the difference between a hobbyist breeder and a commercial breeder.
> 
> Depsite such a long discussion, we deduced that it is near on impossible to tell. It seems to boil down to intent to make a profit, but how that is determined is still under question.
> The only possible way to know for certain, would be for HMRC and other government sectors to determine each seller on their personal situation on a case by case basis.
> 
> This would make it very difficult for the IHS/FBH et al to make a decision based o any legal requirement. For this, they came up with a set of rules, based around people have PSL or paying VAT (not 100% on the last one, chris could confirm that though).
> As far as the law stands, people with PSL could technically attend with animals they bred I their hobby (as opposed to the business side) but this could cause massive confusion and issues, so the decision to prevent PSL holders exhibiting was taken to avoid grey areas.
> 
> I believe this to be a fairly accurate statement but will stand corrected if required.
> 
> As for the arguement of impulse buying, I am sure it happens at shows, but I would think anyone that has travelled to show, waited in line for hours to walk round a crowded room, probably has a basicnidea of what they want or what they can care for. Certaunly more so than the average joe who walks in to a local pet shop and sees a cool python so buys there and then.
> 
> Show sellers have passion and care for the animals wellbeing, a lot of (but not all ) pet shops see $$$$ so will sell anyone anything.


 The last sentance about some pet shops only seeing $$$$$ is the same for some breeders hence why they sell at the " going price" Why does a "hobbyist" breeder who is not in it for the money(otherwise would be a business) sell a snake for £3000 ? surely they could sell it for £1000 and still cover its costs of heating and feeding etc. A hobby is a personal choice you choose to spend your money on, the moment you try to make money back its not a hobby any more as such, you are turning it into a business. OK you need to dispose of surplus but why at set prices if you are not a business. Please dont say you need to recoup the money you spent buying the fancy morphs needed to breed in the first place, i dont think you do if you are a hobbyist. I play golf as a hobby,why do i need to get my money back i spent on all my clubs and gear? I dont because its my hobby and its my enjoyment i pay to be able to do.


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> Unfortunately the care sheet issues appears to form part of the prosecution so I can’t go into specific detail other than to say if you had tatty photocopied care sheet then that would not be an issue!
> 
> As regards to handing out care sheets with _every_ sale, say a very experienced leopard gecko keepers buys a leopard gecko from a fellow breeder, firstly the point of handing him a care sheet is what? Secondly, the experienced leopard gecko breeder is likely to take offence at someone gibing him a care sheet! It is neither reasonable nor proportionate. The rules are you must have them available, that is quite sufficient.
> 
> Tim Wass, the former Chief Officer of the RSPCA is our independent animal welfare inspector, one of the very first things he remarked on was hearing vendors refuse to sell animals to prospective customers, I have been dragged into this when a exhibiter refused to sell and animal to a visitor. The vast over whelming majority of exhibiters care passionately about the animals they breed, they care who buy’s there animals! The whole point of a Breeders Meeting is so that breeders get to meet the perspective purchasers…
> 
> If breeders cannot dispose of there surplus stock at a Breeders Meeting where do they do so? Via the internet, to pet shops? The latter is certainly one of the reasons the reptile industry is largely unsupportive of Breeders Meetings as it directly undercuts their market!
> 
> I think we have very much taken stock of the situation, I think the standards we have imposed over the last ten years have seen standards improve immeasurably. If you visited a show ten years ago the changes you will see today are immeasurable, you won’t see wild caught animals being unpacked under the table as has happened in the passed, you won’t see skinny non-feeding animals for sale, you won’t, or shouldn’t see any animals not fit for sale. Now at every show vets and the animal welfare inspector parole the show before it opens, any animals not up to scratch are removed.
> 
> The suggest that self regulation has failed is grossly unfair and unjust, a huge effort has been put into self regulation and it works. As I said standards have improved immeasurably, and we continue to raise the bar. Currently we are reviewing the regulations and improving them. If you have seen the interview on the BBC Inside Out programme the point I made was I would like government now step-in and assist by licensing, that would be the next big step forward.
> 
> Not everyone likes Breeders Meeting, and that is perfectly reasonable, attending is not compulsory! However, thousands and thousands of people do, both as exhibiters and visitors. Are there animal welfare issues at shows today, no, are there human health issues at shows today no, so what is the issue? The issue appears to be _some_ people don’t like them because animals are sold, i.e. it’s about money – really, is that all we care about bloody money is that the real issue!!!


 Something i have just remembered from the Donny show, remember those Bags at the show, someone said to me that each table had to buy them or they were not allowed to sell their stuff. Is that right Chris, and if it is why?


----------



## Desert Ghost

Chris Newman said:


> *BBC Inside Out statement Elaine Tolland*
> 
> Richard Daniel, presenter BBC Inside Out
> 
> _So to be clear what you want to do is see people banned from keeping these creatures as pets ultimately_…
> 
> *Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*
> 
> *We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*



Mr Newman, a short while ago you described the APA as "an irrelevance", but now you quote Ms Toland in every post like she is the reptile oracle.

What changed?


----------



## Desert Ghost

Tarron said:


> The only possible way to know for certain, would be for HMRC and other government sectors to determine each seller on their personal situation on a case by case basis.


Business is quite a broad word, i think we all know HMRC would class many of our 'hobbists' as businesses if we are being honest with ourselves.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Desert Ghost said:


> Mr Newman, a short while ago you described the APA as "an irrelevance", but now you quote Ms Toland in every post as if she is the reptile oracle.
> 
> What changed?


Don't be daft, hes quoting them because there are actually people out there who believe that you could ever apease the APA, this quote of Toland's is very revelent to this matter.


----------



## Desert Ghost

bash_on_recce said:


> Don't be daft, hes quoting them because there are actually people out there who believe that you could ever apease the APA, this quote of Toland's is very revelent to this matter.


Nothing to do with tugging on peoples heart strings then. :whistling2:

They are irrelevant because no one but Chris takes them seriously anymore.


----------



## Tarron

Desert Ghost said:


> Nothing to do with tugging on peoples heart strings then. :whistling2:
> 
> They are irrelevant because no one but Chris takes them seriously anymore.


Wow, and steven says supporters of the fbh are burying their heads in the sand!

The apa are pretty irrelevant as far as parliament are concerned, but they easily draw unsuspecting members of the public in and are starting to have an effect in europe.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> I specifically said not those who ARE traders i want to know how you work out who is a "hobbyist" but breeding and selling nearly all their hatchlings, year after year for tens of thousands of pounds, next to a hobbyist selling 2 or 3 from each clutch from their breedings to breed something they want, not selling whole clutches bred for no reason at all.
> So your answer really means, anyone who is not registered because they choose not to, is good enough for you.


I am not sure the point you are trying to make! Are you suggesting the FBH should try and regulate the numbers of animals keepers can keep or breed?


----------



## Chris Newman

Desert Ghost said:


> Mr Newman, a short while ago you described the APA as "an irrelevance", but now you quote Ms Toland in every post like she is the reptile oracle.
> 
> What changed?


The APA are like a bout of hemorrhoids, irrelevant in the over all scheme of things, but a real pain in the arse when they are about! The APA are relevant in terms of bulling keepers and local authorities, but politically they are irrelevant!! 

The point of making the posit is some people are gullible enough to believe that if we revert back to members only meeting the APA would live shows alone, anyone who believes that lives in Cloud Cuckoo Land, they also would have a very short memory. The IHS and numerous other societies have run members only meeting in the passed and they were also attacked by the fanatics…..


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> I am not sure the point you are trying to make! Are you suggesting the FBH should try and regulate the numbers of animals keepers can keep or breed?


 I cant see how an educated person has trouble understanding simple questions. How do you make the decisions as to who is what, which you must do at some point or another. I never said anything about you trying to regulate how many animals people keep or breed. People using the shows Chris, how do you define Hobbyist or hobbyist(business on the sly)


----------



## stevenrudge

langerspies said:


> I cant see how an educated person has trouble understanding simple questions. How do you make the decisions as to who is what, which you must do at some point or another. I never said anything about you trying to regulate how many animals people keep or breed. People using the shows Chris, how do you define Hobbyist or hobbyist(business on the sly)


unless the FBH start running shows it none of their business,thats the issue,they try and make anything their business-until it go's all pear shaped and then the buck starts to pass.
its this easy
1 society member 1 table!
why is this so difficult?
its not the IHS 's problem if their members (over-breed) or oversupply animals for the show.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> I cant see how an educated person has trouble understanding simple questions. How do you make the decisions as to who is what, which you must do at some point or another. I never said anything about you trying to regulate how many animals people keep or breed. People using the shows Chris, how do you define Hobbyist or hobbyist(business on the sly)


As it happens I am entirely uneducated, I am profoundly dyslexic left school unable to read or write and have no formal academic qualifications! That aside I do not see that it is for me to decide who is or who is not a hobbyist? 

As chair of the Federation of British Herpetologists my role is to work with all affiliated societies and make sure we comply with all legal requirements, part of that role may well be to one day define what defines a hobbies and what defines a commercial breeder, but until that day I keep an open mind and work within the law as it stands.


----------



## langerspies

stevenrudge said:


> unless the FBH start running shows it none of their business,thats the issue,they try and make anything their business-until it go's all pear shaped and then the buck starts to pass.
> its this easy
> 1 society member 1 table!
> why is this so difficult?
> its not the IHS 's problem if their members (over-breed) or oversupply animals for the show.


This is what i am trying find out- someone has made regulations as who can sell at the shows. Is it just anyone that has not put themselves as a trader? An example
1) I have a pair of visual clowns and i breed them because i want some more females for my future breedings. The first year i get 1 female and 4 males,so i keep the female and sell the males. the following year i breed them and get 3 females and 3 males,but only want 2 more females so i sell the others. Question-hobbyist breeder or commercial breeder?
2) I have a pair of visual clowns and i breed them and get 3 males and 2 females which i sell them all,and the following year i breed them again and get 4 females and 2 males and again i sell them all. Question-hobbyist breeder or commercial breeder?


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> As it happens I am entirely uneducated, I am profoundly dyslexic left school unable to read or write and have no formal academic qualifications! That aside I do not see that it is for me to decide who is or who is not a hobbyist?
> 
> As chair of the Federation of British Herpetologists my role is to work with all affiliated societies and make sure we comply with all legal requirements, part of that role may well be to one day define what defines a hobbies and what defines a commercial breeder, but until that day I keep an open mind and work within the law as it stands.


So anyone selling at the shows is open to prossecution as there is no definition apart from a licenced trader? Thats really not the way to run shows is it?


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> So anyone selling at the shows is open to prossecution as there is no definition apart from a licenced trader? Thats really not the way to run shows is it?


It has served well for the passed thirty years! Now for the very first time it is being tested in court, we shall have to wait and see the outcome before we know the facts! It is also precisely why I have been pushing for the law to be clarified……!! We are nine tenths there; let’s hope government puts the final piece in the jigsaw to complete the picture!!


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> It has served well for the passed thirty years! Now for the very first time it is being tested in court, we shall have to wait and see the outcome before we know the facts! It is also precisely why I have been pushing for the law to be clarified……!! We are nine tenths there; let’s hope government puts the final piece in the jigsaw to complete the picture!!


 Thats the trouble with the law. It needs to black and white, no grey ares, which is why with so much grey area why are these shows even giving anybody the chance of bringing prossecutions forward. I see someone on here has stopped selling at the shows because he feels its just too risky. I would have thought the organisers would have done the same till its cleared up instead of putting folk at risk.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> Thats the trouble with the law. It needs to black and white, no grey ares, which is why with so much grey area why are these shows even giving anybody the chance of bringing prossecutions forward. I see someone on here has stopped selling at the shows because he feels its just too risky. I would have thought the organisers would have done the same till its cleared up instead of putting folk at risk.


That is precisely why for the last ten years I have been pushing for the law to be clarified, its loopholes or gray areas that allow the fanatics to attack shows! We are nearly there, one signature on a piece of paper and the loopholes are closed once and for all. No one is force to exhibit at shows and they understand the issues….!!


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> Thats the trouble with the law. It needs to black and white, no grey ares, which is why with so much grey area why are these shows even giving anybody the chance of bringing prossecutions forward. I see someone on here has stopped selling at the shows because he feels its just too risky. I would have thought the organisers would have done the same till its cleared up instead of putting folk at risk.


Why don't you put yourself forward to help Its all right moaning about it,get involved and pass your ideas on:2thumb:


----------



## Tarron

langerspies said:


> So anyone selling at the shows is open to prossecution as there is no definition apart from a licenced trader? Thats really not the way to run shows is it?


Can you define it? Even the government would have to take this on a case by case basis. If a seller has any doubts as to whether they are a hobby or business, they should steer clear of shows. If you are certain of being a hobbyist, as I will be when I breed my geckos, then attend the show. If someone prosecuted me, I would be confident that they could no prove a business beyond any doubt. So im happy taking that risk.

Law has grey areas everywhere, from simple things like driving to more complex things like self defence. People will, and do, act In the grey area until a court makes a defining case. This is no different.

If you want to put yourself up to be on the committee, please do, then you can put forward your ideas and hopefully help.


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> Why don't you put yourself forward to help Its all right moaning about it,get involved and pass your ideas on:2thumb:





Tarron said:


> Can you define it? Even the government would have to take this on a case by case basis. If a seller has any doubts as to whether they are a hobby or business, they should steer clear of shows. If you are certain of being a hobbyist, as I will be when I breed my geckos, then attend the show. If someone prosecuted me, I would be confident that they could no prove a business beyond any doubt. So im happy taking that risk.
> 
> Law has grey areas everywhere, from simple things like driving to more complex things like self defence. People will, and do, act In the grey area until a court makes a defining case. This is no different.
> 
> If you want to put yourself up to be on the committee, please do, then you can put forward your ideas and hopefully help.


 My ideas would be to stay inside the law and not risk things you are not sure about, feel free to use them, but i will look at whats near to me as far as societies go.:2thumb:


----------



## Pete Q

langerspies said:


> This is what i am trying find out- someone has made regulations as who can sell at the shows. Is it just anyone that has not put themselves as a trader? An example
> 1) I have a pair of visual clowns and i breed them because i want some more females for my future breedings. The first year i get 1 female and 4 males,so i keep the female and sell the males. the following year i breed them and get 3 females and 3 males,but only want 2 more females so i sell the others. Question-hobbyist breeder or commercial breeder?
> 2) I have a pair of visual clowns and i breed them and get 3 males and 2 females which i sell them all,and the following year i breed them again and get 4 females and 2 males and again i sell them all. Question-hobbyist breeder or commercial breeder?


Why don't you contact the IHS, they run the shows.


----------



## langerspies

Pete Q said:


> Why don't you contact the IHS, they run the shows.


 I'd like to hear anyones view on this forum, not just the IHS, i would like to know how the average keeper would see it.
Thanks for the advice tho.


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> My ideas would be to stay inside the law and not risk things you are not sure about, feel free to use them, but i will look at whats near to me as far as societies go.:2thumb:


How do you define that,As far as i know the shows are run legally.
no matter what the grudge says


----------



## Pete Q

langerspies said:


> I'd like to hear anyones view on this forum, not just the IHS, i would like to know how the average keeper would see it.
> Thanks for the advice tho.


Oh okay, the way I see it is I'm confident I'm not breaking any laws and I'm a hobbiest, I do think those that have concerns about how they would be seen should not go.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> I'd like to hear anyones view on this forum, not just the IHS, i would like to know how the average keeper would see it.
> Thanks for the advice tho.


The legality of shows is a complex issue, full of gray areas and loopholes, I would strongly suggest that Breeders Meetings as they stand are fully legal, others disagree and the law is to be tested at some stage this year. Notwithstanding that the facts such events have run for over thirty years and there has never been a prosecution is quite persuasive evidence.

Nevertheless as I said the issue is complex. I hope that the moderators on RFUK will not object, but here is a link to the full facts of the matter:

Proposals for primary & secondary legislation

This is the finding of the government Working Group formed under the Animal Welfare Bill (now Act) to look at the issue and make recommendations.


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> How do you define that,As far as i know the shows are run legally.
> no matter what the grudge says


 I dont know,hence why i ask. Its just that so it is said, a council has brought a prosecution against an exhibitor at the Donny show, and i would have thought they would have looked at this very carefully before doing this, so they must have some reason to believe that something is not quite legal. Thats just how i see it logically.


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> The legality of shows is a complex issue, full of gray areas and loopholes, I would strongly suggest that Breeders Meetings as they stand are fully legal, others disagree and the law is to be tested at some stage this year. Notwithstanding that the facts such events have run for over thirty years and there has never been a prosecution is quite persuasive evidence.
> 
> Nevertheless as I said the issue is complex. I hope that the moderators on RFUK will not object, but here is a link to the full facts of the matter:
> 
> Proposals for primary & secondary legislation
> 
> This is the finding of the government Working Group formed under the Animal Welfare Bill (now Act) to look at the issue and make recommendations.


Has there been any developments on this since 2004? or has it just stagnated so to speak.


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> I dont know,hence why i ask. Its just that so it is said, a council has brought a prosecution against an exhibitor at the Donny show, and i would have thought they would have looked at this very carefully before doing this, so they must have some reason to believe that something is not quite legal. Thats just how i see it logically.


So because 1 person may or may not have done something,that makes show illegal.
And don't forget innocent until proven guilty


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Chris I will ask you directly seems I didnt get an answer,

What is the feasibility of limiting the number of each species that a vendor can bring?

It isn't hard to see why an outsider may see a table with 100 corn hatchlings on for example as big ££ signs when in reality it may only be 2 or 3 clutches. 

These numbers would have to take into account the average clutch size for each species (not just snakes but other reptiles/inverts also) which along with _*basic*_ care sheets is also information I think should be available on the FBH's website. 


It may also encourage people to be more selective with what they are breeding and encourage those with rarer snakes to think about coming if they are not up against tables full of 100's of corns/leos/royals.

I think if we have smaller tables, with fewer animals on but more of these tables its going to look less like big commercial breeders and more like hobbiests with a few surplus animals to sell.

I mean lets be honest if you were an outsider (be HMRC/Council officals) and knew nothing about the hobby and saw tables upon tables of 50+ snakes would you not think these people bred for a living?


Also in regards to the people being offended by being handed care sheets, well tough luck. If their *EGO* (cause thats what it boils down to) cant get over being handed a care sheet to comply with IHS/FBH's policies then maybe they shouldn't be purchasing at the shows.

If vendors are unwilling to hand out care sheets to try and make sure that the animals they are selling are cared for correctly then they also should not be selling at said shows.

EDIT: Also i think any animal reported to have mights on should be removed from sale and any vendor who is consistently reported to have mights/other animal issue should be banned


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> So because 1 person may or may not have done something,that makes show illegal.
> And don't forget innocent until proven guilty


 Please read what i posted. Councils are not in the habbit of prosecuting people for a laugh.
So if they have been doing something illegal and the show organisers were aware of what they were doing,but thought it was ok, then yes it would seem the shows are illegal. Then on the otherhand if they have not done anything illegal and all regs were kept to then there wont be a problem.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> because you know nothing it easy retaquote rubbish,tell you what pm me and l'll tell you as and why and l'l show you the legislation,l've asked you before to contact me,l'l give you another chance because deep down l think your alright but we need to get things straight.
> what have you got to lose
> Nothing


You really know how to rub people up the wrong way don't you.


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> Chris I will ask you directly seems I didnt get an answer,
> 
> What is the feasibility of limiting the number of each species that a vendor can bring?
> 
> It isn't hard to see why an outsider may see a table with 100 corn hatchlings on for example as big ££ signs when in reality it may only be 2 or 3 clutches.
> 
> These numbers would have to take into account the average clutch size for each species (not just snakes but other reptiles/inverts also) which along with _*basic*_ care sheets is also information I think should be available on the FBH's website.
> 
> 
> It may also encourage people to be more selective with what they are breeding and encourage those with rarer snakes to think about coming if they are not up against tables full of 100's of corns/leos/royals.
> 
> I think if we have smaller tables, with fewer animals on but more of these tables its going to look less like big commercial breeders and more like hobbiests with a few surplus animals to sell.
> 
> I mean lets be honest if you were an outsider (be HMRC/Council officals) and knew nothing about the hobby and saw tables upon tables of 50+ snakes would you not think these people bred for a living?
> 
> 
> Also in regards to the people being offended by being handed care sheets, well tough luck. If their *EGO* (cause thats what it boils down to) cant get over being handed a care sheet to comply with IHS/FBH's policies then maybe they shouldn't be purchasing at the shows.
> 
> If vendors are unwilling to hand out care sheets to try and make sure that the animals they are selling are cared for correctly then they also should not be selling at said shows.
> 
> EDIT: Also i think any animal reported to have mights on should be removed from sale and any vendor who is consistently reported to have mights/other animal issue should be banned


 
Theoretically we could set any regulation we want, the question is what purpose would it serve? I understand the point you are making that regulating the number of animals that any exhibiter may bring could be used to define ‘commercial’ and ‘non-commercial’, but the practicalities are immense, who is going to decide what value to place on a given species? Would say 50 normal leopard geckos equate to 10 carrot tails? 25 normal’s corns = 10 amels??? With all the vast array of species I really don’t think this would offer any practical solution. It would be an absolute nightmare to organise and enforce, and again for what purpose? All you are looking at is a financial issue, the primary concern is, and should always be the welfare of the animals! Sorry if I sound negative but I really do not think this is a feasible proposition…..!!


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> Has there been any developments on this since 2004? or has it just stagnated so to speak.


Yes substantial, in 2005 government clarified its position that it wanted to regulate shows by licensing where appropriate. The, lets call them ‘antis’, kicked off and simply wanted a ban. The Judicial Review, fiddled at tax payers expense, in 2006 clarified that Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act precluded licensing of shows. In 2007 when the Animal Welfare Bill was published it repealed Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act, thus allowing Local Authorities to once again be able to license shows. The sticking point is the Commencement Order brining the repeal into effect has not been read as yet. The reason this did not happen when the Animal Welfare Act came into force is the then government had committed to secondary legislation in terms of Pet Vending, that has subsequently been shelved so all we now need is the current government to sign the Commencement Oder and we can all get on with enjoying our events.

As regards you comment concerning councils not bring prosecutions just for a laugh, this is very true. I would suggest this prosecution is being brought because the council have been bullied/coerced into doing so by the fanatics….!!


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Chris Newman said:


> Theoretically we could set any regulation we want, the question is what purpose would it serve? I understand the point you are making that regulating the number of animals that any exhibiter may bring could be used to define ‘commercial’ and ‘non-commercial’, but the practicalities are immense, who is going to decide what value to place on a given species? Would say 50 normal leopard geckos equate to 10 carrot tails? 25 normal’s corns = 10 amels??? With all the vast array of species I really don’t think this would offer any practical solution. It would be an absolute nightmare to organise and enforce, and again for what purpose? All you are looking at is a financial issue, the primary concern is, and should always be the welfare of the animals! Sorry if I sound negative but I really do not think this is a feasible proposition…..!!



You misunderstand me, welfare is always my top priority but the issue most people are focusing on at the moment seems to be defining commercial/non commercial.

But i understand your point, was just an idea 

I stand by what i said about the care sheets though : victory:


----------



## Blake1990

Chris Newman said:


> Yes substantial, in 2005 government clarified its position that it wanted to regulate shows by licensing where appropriate. The, lets call them ‘antis’, kicked off and simply wanted a ban. The Judicial Review, fiddled at tax payers expense, in 2006 clarified that Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act precluded licensing of shows. In 2007 when the Animal Welfare Bill was published it repealed Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act, thus allowing Local Authorities to once again be able to license shows. The sticking point is the Commencement Order brining the repeal into effect has not been read as yet. The reason this did not happen when the Animal Welfare Act came into force is the then government had committed to secondary legislation in terms of Pet Vending, that has subsequently been shelved so all we now need is the current government to sign the Commencement Oder and we can all get on with enjoying our events.
> 
> As regards you comment concerning councils not bring prosecutions just for a laugh, this is very true. I would suggest this prosecution is being brought because the council have been bullied/coerced into doing so by the fanatics….!!


Does anybody remember the APA's whistle-blower campaign?

Does anybody remember when Steven Rudge admitted to having conversations with an animal rights group?

Does anybody remember how desperate Steven is to prove his point that the shows are 'illegal'?

Does anybody remember when Steven said he will be proven right in 'a few months'

Has anybody noticed how much of a tool Steven is?

Now now, we shouldn't make assumptions without facts :whistling2:


----------



## ronnyjodes

There's a 50% chance that Steven is an APA stooge.

There's a 100% chance that he's a complete twunt.


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> You misunderstand me, welfare is always my top priority but the issue most people are focusing on at the moment seems to be defining commercial/non commercial.
> 
> But i understand your point, was just an idea
> 
> I stand by what i said about the care sheets though : victory:


Sorry I neglected to address the issue of care sheets. My position is that all exhibiters _must_ have them available and _should_ offer them to perspective customers, I think insisting everyone _must_ take one is a sep to far, pet shops are not required to do this so making it a mandatory requirements at show is a step to far, speaking personally. To an extent you are right this could be down to ego, but it also has a practical side. This rule was implemented at one show and it almost caused a fight! Having them available is a prerequisite, handing them to people should be discretionary. If it became mandatory it would not be good for environment, forgetting the number of trees being cut down to provide the paper, what about all the resulting paper aeroplanes!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Genseric

Regardless of what he is and isn't, we shouldn't be throwing the baby out withg the bathwater!
There are issues here that need to be sorted, and various opinions on how it should be done. 
It would be good if some of the shops/businesses gave us their opinions on this, as I would like to hear any ideas they might have. I know there are many hobbiests that also run businesses, but that does seem to be the crux of this particular issue.


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> Please read what i posted. Councils are not in the habbit of prosecuting people for a laugh.
> So if they have been doing something illegal and the show organisers were aware of what they were doing,but thought it was ok, then yes it would seem the shows are illegal. Then on the otherhand if they have not done anything illegal and all regs were kept to then there wont be a problem.


In stead of guess work and accusations on folk,ie show organisers and the person accused,again innocent untill proven guilty.why not just wait for the out come.
Ps,a council have taken me to court twice(not rep related) and lost the case twice


----------



## Chris Newman

Genseric said:


> Regardless of what he is and isn't, we shouldn't be throwing the baby out withg the bathwater!
> There are issues here that need to be sorted, and various opinions on how it should be done.
> It would be good if some of the shops/businesses gave us their opinions on this, as I would like to hear any ideas they might have. I know there are many hobbiests that also run businesses, but that does seem to be the crux of this particular issue.


What Mr Rudge is talking about is returning to Members only Meetings, these were run back in the early 2000’s and were an abject failure. If I recall correctly the IHS ran some of the first and they were luck to get 200 people attend, compare that to the 3,000 to 4,000 people who attend an IHS Breeders Meeting today?

The IHS are not the only society to try Members only Meetings, several others including ERAC and PRAS have been forced to adopt them at some stage, they were all disasters in terms of attendance! Let us be clear that many clubs and societies need to run show to general funs to keep the society afloat, subs for many clubs do not cover the cost of producing newsletters and journals. 

Now, the FBH have discussed the issue of Members only Meetings incessantly, personally I am quite in favour because they would be an extremely effective enticement to get keepers to join their local society. The fundamental problem is they only way this would work is if every club or society would sign up to this, and that has been they stumbling block, they won’t!

There are many other issues with running Members only Meetings which make them problematic, I think going backwards to running Members only Meetings would be a huge retrograde step, and would afford absolutely no protection, indeed they would be more exposed to attack from the antis, history has shown that and would only repeat its self.

The way forward is to push for the repeal of Section of the Pet Animals Act so shows could once again be licensed, the only issue left standing is that of ‘money’ i.e. is someone breeding animals for a commercial objective, well license the event and that matters is dispensed with. 

Last, but most certainly not least, animal welfare can be far better assured under a licensed and regulated rather than a closed meeting, and that’s a fact! We have nothing to hide, so let’s be open and transparent…..!!


----------



## bash_on_recce

Chris Newman said:


> Sorry I neglected to address the issue of care sheets. My position is that all exhibiters _must_ have them available and _should_ offer them to perspective customers, I think insisting everyone _must_ take one is a sep to far, pet shops are not required to do this so making it a mandatory requirements at show is a step to far, speaking personally. To an extent you are right this could be down to ego, but it also has a practical side. This rule was implemented at one show and it almost caused a fight! Having them available is a prerequisite, handing them to people should be discretionary. If it became mandatory it would not be good for environment, forgetting the number of trees being cut down to provide the paper, what about all the resulting paper aeroplanes!!!!!!!!!


I'd like to point something else out in support of what has been said.

Caresheets are not the be all and end all of exotic keeping, you can't just read one care sheet and expect to gather all the infomation you need to look after a species, an understanding of where the species comes from and its ecology (habitat, yearly pattern of climte, humidity in the natural range etc) is also useful and encouraged.

I keep most of my exotics in living set ups (plants and springtails etc) so my care guides would differ to someone elses and where as living set ups are no stranger to the amphibian side of the hobby and to a certain degree to the lizard side, the idea still lags behind in the snake side of things.

I also tend to keep most of my pets in larger set ups than this 'minimum size' idea that seems to have been snatched out of mid air.

I'm rubbish at getting a point across so what I'm trying to say above, is just because someone hands out a care sheet, doesn't mean its got good information on it.


----------



## langerspies

ronnyjodes said:


> There's a 50% chance that Steven is an APA stooge.
> 
> There's a 100% chance that he's a complete twunt.


Surely this is the sort of behaviour our hobby can do without.
You may think you are clever but it shows the level some people are at.


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> What Mr Rudge is talking about is returning to Members only Meetings, these were run back in the early 2000’s and were an abject failure. If I recall correctly the IHS ran some of the first and they were luck to get 200 people attend, compare that to the 3,000 to 4,000 people who attend an IHS Breeders Meeting today?
> 
> The IHS are not the only society to try Members only Meetings, several others including ERAC and PRAS have been forced to adopt them at some stage, they were all disasters in terms of attendance! Let us be clear that many clubs and societies need to run show to general funs to keep the society afloat, subs for many clubs do not cover the cost of producing newsletters and journals.
> 
> Now, the FBH have discussed the issue of Members only Meetings incessantly, personally I am quite in favour because they would be an extremely effective enticement to get keepers to join their local society. The fundamental problem is they only way this would work is if every club or society would sign up to this, and that has been they stumbling block, they won’t!
> 
> There are many other issues with running Members only Meetings which make them problematic, I think going backwards to running Members only Meetings would be a huge retrograde step, and would afford absolutely no protection, indeed they would be more exposed to attack from the antis, history has shown that and would only repeat its self.
> 
> The way forward is to push for the repeal of Section of the Pet Animals Act so shows could once again be licensed, the only issue left standing is that of ‘money’ i.e. is someone breeding animals for a commercial objective, well license the event and that matters is dispensed with.
> 
> Last, but most certainly not least, animal welfare can be far better assured under a licensed and regulated rather than a closed meeting, and that’s a fact! We have nothing to hide, so let’s be open and transparent…..!!


Obviously, "back in the day" there really was not as much interest as there is today so attendancies would have been lower. Most serious hobbyist would join a society to gain entrance to a legally run breeders show in this day and age if it was sensibly priced and run well. Lets be honest the "pay on the door" one day membership is really just a bit dodgy and just a way to get round things, surely we are better than that.


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> Surely this is the sort of behaviour our hobby can do without.
> You may think you are clever but it shows the level some people are at.


Actually you don't have the most fantastic attitude yourself, you might want to think about this before you criticize others.


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> Actually you don't have the most fantastic attitude yourself, you might want to think about this before you criticize others.


 I'm sorry, so because i try not to be blinkered i have a problem, the people most dangerous to our hobby are those who refuse to see that we ourselves can cause the issues the anti's pick up on.


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> I'm sorry, so because i try not to be blinkered i have a problem, the people most dangerous to our hobby are those who refuse to see that we ourselves can cause the issues the anti's pick up on.


My comment has absolutely nothing to do with your stance towards the shows, it is solely based on the way you conduct yourself.


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> My comment has absolutely nothing to do with your stance towards the shows, it is solely based on the way you conduct yourself.


 So tell me how you think i conduct myself, have i called you names , infact you seem to have a bit of an issue yourself, hence your attack here.


----------



## johnc79

I would not have a problem with a members only show if it was the only way to go. I can not understand why no one would not pay £25 for a family membership that would help clear the grey areas. Problem is what if members wanted to bring none reptile friends or family. Maybe there can be a compromise in the membership for things like this??


----------



## langerspies

johnc79 said:


> I would not have a problem with a members only show if it was the only way to go. I can not understand why no one would not pay £25 for a family membership that would help clear the grey areas. Problem is what if members wanted to bring none reptile friends or family. Maybe there can be a compromise in the membership for things like this??


 As you say, whats £25 for a years family membership? a night down the pub, its nothing really, and if we all want what we say we want with regards to our hobby, £25 is nothing really. No idea on the friends bit though.


----------



## penfold

langerspies said:


> Obviously, "back in the day" there really was not as much interest as there is today so attendancies would have been lower. Most serious hobbyist would join a society to gain entrance to a legally run breeders show in this day and age if it was sensibly priced and run well. Lets be honest the "pay on the door" one day membership is really just a bit dodgy and just a way to get round things, surely we are better than that.


 this is were you are wong rodbaston only shut down 3or 4 years ago the last show was members only and a complete waste of time yet when it was an open show it was very busy ,we travelled from kent to do it


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> So your answer really means, anyone who is not registered because they choose not to, is good enough for you.


Is this what was said?



langerspies said:


> pet shops only seeing $$$$$ is the same for some breeders hence why they sell at the " going price" Why does a "hobbyist" breeder who is not in it for the money(otherwise would be a business) sell a snake for £3000 ? surely they could sell it for £1000 and still cover its costs of heating and feeding etc. A hobby is a personal choice you choose to spend your money on, the moment you try to make money back its not a hobby any more as such, you are turning it into a business. OK you need to dispose of surplus but why at set prices if you are not a business. Please dont say you need to recoup the money you spent buying the fancy morphs needed to breed in the first place, i dont think you do if you are a hobbyist.


Who are you to suggest this?



langerspies said:


> I cant see how an educated person has trouble understanding simple questions. People using the shows Chris, how do you define Hobbyist or hobbyist(business on the sly)


Business on the sly? Who are you to suggest this? When did Chris say he was educated, why did you feel the need to so rude?



langerspies said:


> So anyone selling at the shows is open to prossecution as there is no definition apart from a licenced trader? Thats really not the way to run shows is it?


If you choose to sell at a show it is your responsibility to ensure you do so legally, it has nothing to do with how the show is run.



langerspies said:


> I see someone on here has stopped selling at the shows because he feels its just too risky. I would have thought the organisers would have done the same till its cleared up instead of putting folk at risk.


Absolutely none of your business. Nobody is being forced to be at risk, they are responsible for themselves (hence the decision not to sell at shows being made by the INDIVIDUAL)



langerspies said:


> My ideas would be to stay inside the law and not risk things you are not sure about, feel free to use them, but i will look at whats near to me as far as societies go.:2thumb:


Who's risking what? When was it confirmed that shows were not inside the law?



langerspies said:


> I'd like to hear anyones view on this forum, not just the IHS, i would like to know how the average keeper would see it.
> Thanks for the advice tho.


Sir yes sir!



langerspies said:


> I dont know,hence why i ask. Its just that so it is said, a council has brought a prosecution against an exhibitor at the Donny show, and i would have thought they would have looked at this very carefully before doing this, so they must have some reason to believe that something is not quite legal. Thats just how i see it logically.


Who are you to suggest this?



langerspies said:


> Has there been any developments on this since 2004? or has it just stagnated so to speak.


Basic research would have answered this one.




langerspies said:


> Surely this is the sort of behaviour our hobby can do without.
> You may think you are clever but it shows the level some people are at.


Who are you to suggest this?



langerspies said:


> Obviously, "back in the day" there really was not as much interest as there is today so attendancies would have been lower. Most serious hobbyist would join a society to gain entrance to a legally run breeders show in this day and age if it was sensibly priced and run well. Lets be honest the "pay on the door" one day membership is really just a bit dodgy and just a way to get round things, surely we are better than that.


Most serious hobbyists? who are you to suggest this? Why do you feel the need to display your miserable perspective as fact?




langerspies said:


> I'm sorry, so because i try not to be blinkered i have a problem, the people most dangerous to our hobby are those who refuse to see that we ourselves can cause the issues the anti's pick up on.


who said I was blinkered?


There you go : victory:

To me you are rude, assumptive, demanding and you consider yourself to be rather important.

Why don't you stop whinging about it on a forum and do something about it if you are that concerned : victory:


----------



## langerspies

penfold said:


> this is were you are wong rodbaston only shut down 3or 4 years ago the last show was members only and a complete waste of time yet when it was an open show it was very busy ,we travelled from kent to do it


 Why do you think it changed, because of it being a pay on the day membership instead of a yearly membership?


----------



## penfold

langerspies said:


> Why do you think it changed, because of it being a pay on the day membership instead of a yearly membership?


 no one was an open show for anybody to come to and was rammed full all day the other was a members only show complete boredom scratching our arses leaving early to drive home people do not wish to join a club to go to a show look at past threads about donny etc when people moaned they had to be part of the ihs "im not paying £25"


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> Is this what was said?
> 
> 
> 
> Who are you to suggest this?
> 
> 
> 
> Business on the sly? Who are you to suggest this? When did Chris say he was educated, why did you feel the need to so rude?
> 
> 
> 
> If you choose to sell at a show it is your responsibility to ensure you do so legally, it has nothing to do with how the show is run.
> 
> 
> 
> Absolutely none of your business. Nobody is being forced to be at risk, they are responsible for themselves (hence the decision not to sell at shows being made by the INDIVIDUAL)
> 
> 
> 
> Who's risking what? When was it confirmed that shows were not inside the law?
> 
> 
> 
> Sir yes sir!
> 
> 
> 
> Who are you to suggest this?
> 
> 
> 
> Basic research would have answered this one.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Who are you to suggest this?
> 
> 
> 
> Most serious hobbyists? who are you to suggest this? Why do you feel the need to display your miserable perspective as fact?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> who said I was blinkered?
> 
> 
> There you go : victory:
> 
> To me you are rude, assumptive, demanding and you consider yourself to be rather important.
> 
> Why don't you stop whinging about it on a forum and do something about it if you are that concerned : victory:


I'm sorry but you have wasted your time doing that as where does any of that relate to me being the same as someone calling someone else a twunt.
What is the "who said i was blinkered?" bit about? I think you need to read things properly before shouting off.
I think you seem to think you are rather more important than others from some of your posts. Is that because you have a big list of royals? So whats your background in the reptile world, been keeping for long? many different species?


----------



## Mynki

I've been offline for a few days. Was Steven Rudges plan exposed on RFUK as it was on CB? Or do details need posting here too?


----------



## langerspies

penfold said:


> no one was an open show for anybody to come to and was rammed full all day the other was a members only show complete boredom scratching our arses leaving early to drive home people do not wish to join a club to go to a show look at past threads about donny etc when people moaned they had to be part of the ihs "im not paying £25"


Thats what i tried to say, the shows are not general public shows is that right? So a pay per day membership(on the door) is needed to be legal. So because say people who can only get to Kempton are not going to pay a whole years membership for just Kempton. Do you think cheaper yearly membership is possible if it would attract more members?


----------



## langerspies

Mynki said:


> I've been offline for a few days. Was Steven Rudges plan exposed on RFUK as it was on CB? Or do details need posting here too?


 I think everyones up to speed on it all on here aswell.


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> I'm sorry but you have wasted your time doing that as where does any of that relate to me being the same as someone calling someone else a twunt.
> What is the "who said i was blinkered?" bit about? I think you need to read things properly before shouting off.
> I think you seem to think you are rather more important than others from some of your posts. Is that because you have a big list of royals? So whats your background in the reptile world, been keeping for long? many different species?


I do not think I am more important than anybody, in fact, this is actually what frustrated me about your attitude. Again you have assumed, again you are wrong. 

I currently Keep 6 different species. I have kept 9 so far. I don't see why this is any of you business. 

I have been Keeping for 3 years. Again, I don't see how this is any of your business. In fact, I don't even see how it is relevant?

Am I less of a Hobbyist because I have kept less species than others, or haven't been keeping for as long? I guess this means I don't pay any membership fee's right?


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> I think everyones up to speed on it all on here aswell.


Are you even a member on CB? Or are you just assuming again?

Mynki, No the full details that are posted on CB have NOT been posted on this forum yet : victory:


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> I do not think I am more important than anybody, in fact, this is actually what frustrated me about your attitude. Again you have assumed, again you are wrong.
> 
> I currently Keep 6 different species. I have kept 9 so far. I don't see why this is any of you business.
> 
> I have been Keeping for 3 years. Again, I don't see how this is any of your business. In fact, I don't even see how it is relevant?
> 
> Am I less of a Hobbyist because I have kept less species than others, or haven't been keeping for as long? I guess this means I don't pay any membership fee's right?


No i was just asking out of curiosity and the way you replied is in the same way you have a go at me about. Rude young man.


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> Are you even a member on CB? Or are you just assuming again?
> 
> Mynki, No the full details that are posted on CB have NOT been posted on this forum yet : victory:


 Yes thanks
and we really dont need the CB lynchmob tactics on here, Scott does not run this site so we can speak our own minds over hear, thanks : victory:.


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> No i was just asking out of curiosity and the way you replied is in the same way you have a go at me about. Rude young man.



Dress it up however you like, I Afforded you the exact same level as courtesy as you afford others.


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> Dress it up however you like, I Afforded you the exact same level as courtesy as you afford others.


 So we are doing the same then, glad we agree on that, no need to discuss further then.


----------



## MoreliaUK

langerspies said:


> As you say, whats £25 for a years family membership? a night down the pub, its nothing really, and if we all want what we say we want with regards to our hobby, £25 is nothing really. No idea on the friends bit though.


It bloody well is. It's a missed night down at the pub for starters or four separate nights down the park on the bench with bottle of diamond white cider.


----------



## Blake1990

langerspies said:


> So we are doing the same then, glad we agree on that, no need to discuss further then.


Are we? or are you spouting your opinion as fact, yet again?

However I will agree that there is no need to discuss this further, we are completely off topic.


----------



## langerspies

Blake1990 said:


> Are we? or are you spouting your opinion as fact, yet again?
> 
> However I will agree that there is no need to discuss this further, we are completely off topic.


 At the end of the day you have a hobby of keeping royals and so do i so at least we agree on something.


----------



## ian14

Blake1990 said:


> Are you even a member on CB? Or are you just assuming again?
> 
> Mynki, No the full details that are posted on CB have NOT been posted on this forum yet : victory:


Yes they have - http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/foru...warning-stevenrudges-dirty-little-secret.html


----------



## stevenrudge

langerspies said:


> I'd like to hear anyones view on this forum, not just the IHS, i would like to know how the average keeper would see it.
> Thanks for the advice tho.


Well said that's a big issue,you only have to look at any rep forum in the UK and its very clear that the 'general public' view these shows as pet markets,take a look at all the threads leading to a show,
Whats everybody planing to buy at Donny?
What have people brought at Donny?
Do you have to be an IHS member to gain entry?
Why do you have to be a member?
Why do we have to weight in the none-members qu?
Why can we not just walk in early like the IHS members?
Great show l bought lots of reps!
The show was a great success 1000's turned up? 
take a look and you will see lots of posts almost word for word to these listed.
The rep forum 'general public'or the larger reptile community have no interest in the IHS other than their shows,their only interest is gaining entry to large well stocked animal 'shows' were they can purchase their new pets.These people do not give 2 figs about the legality's of shows,show no interest in any meaningful full 12 membership of the IHS,they just want a quick cheep entry fee to a pet market to- look -buy and go-till the next one.
Just take a few mints to look,its all there.
Some of these people look in horror at our conversations about what all this means to us IHS hobby members,that can see the dangers of were this leads our shows.
Some people look in horror to see were this might leave them,who over the years have sold their animals year in year out and see this conversation as a threat to their market.
Others see this conversation as a threat to their power base,or career,or income.and some all three.
l posted this thread straight after last June Donny show,go back and look at the reaction l got and still get from all the various vested interests that do not like what or where this conversation is going and just ask yourself why do some people react like they do to a really straight forward event.
The IHS Society's Hobby show Breeders meeting.
Where IHS members meet to sell surplus animals to other IHS members.
Key words
Society members
Hobby Show
Surplus animals
Anything other than the Key words makes our show illegal.
its this simple
So why the song and dance


----------



## Chris Newman

What is being talked about by some is returning to what are called Members only Meetings, these were first run back in the early 2000’s, due to attacks on reptile shows (such as the IHS show held at the Alumwell Centre in Walsall) by the antis all subsequent shows run as Members only Meetings were very poorly attended. If I recall correctly they were luck to get 200 attendees, often less, compared to the 3,000 to 4,000 people who attend an IHS Breeders Meeting today?

The IHS are not the only society to try Members only Meetings, several others including ERAC and PRAS have been forced to adopt them at some stage and they were all disasters in terms of attendance! I think it is important to understand that many clubs and societies need to run show to general funs to keep the society afloat; subs for many clubs do not cover the cost of producing newsletters and journals. Open Breeders Meetings also for fill and important function in terms of attracting new members to join a society, nearly all societies are currently struggling with declining memberships.

The FBH have long discussed the issue of Members only Meetings, personally I am quite in favour because they could be an extremely effective enticement to get keepers to join their local society. It should of course be pointed out that _any_ established club or society if perfectly entitled to run a Breeders Meeting if they so choose? Clearly some here have indicated that is what they would like to see a return to such events, and as I understand it at least one Members only Meeting is to be run this year and that fantastic, there could be a niche market for them and it will be very interesting to see how these event are received and if they prove viable for the relevant society. 

One of the fundamental problem with Members only Meetings is they only way they would be sustainable long-term is if every club or society would sign up to this, and that has been they stumbling block, they won’t! Given a choose between running Members only Meetings and open Breeders Meetings the majority would opt for the latter. There are many other issues with running Members only Meetings which make them problematic. Personally I think under the circumstances today going backwards to running Members only Meetings would be a huge retrograde step, and would afford absolutely no protection, indeed they would be more exposed to attack from the antis.

Some people clearly think that returning to running Members only Meetings would mean those organisations (businesses) opposed to reptile shows would leave them alone and not try and stop them, this is living in Cloud Cuckoo Land!! Members only Meetings are much more vulnerable to attack by the antis, history this has been demonstrated that time and time again. Anyone who thinks they can “do a deal” with fanatics is only fooling themselves, sure they might back off short term for political objectives, but long-term they would stab you in the back. You cannot reason with the unreasonable! 

The way forward is to push for the completion of the repeal of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act so that shows could once again be licensed, the only issue left standing is that of ‘money’ i.e. is someone breeding animals for a commercial objective, well dispensed with matter and allow shows to be licensed where appropriates. This would not mean that every show would, or could be licensed, and it certainly would not preclude the running of a Members only Meeting. What it would do is afford protection to hobbyist and close a longstanding loophole that has been exploited long enough! Last, but most certainly not least, animal welfare can be far better assured under a licensed and regulated rather than a closed meeting, we have nothing to hide, so let’s be open and transparent! Who could argue against this as a way forward!!

Finally for anyone still gullible enough to think you can strike a deal with the fanatics like the Animal Protection Agency here is a link to the BBC Inside Out programme aired at the end of last year and its look at the issue of reptile shows, and indeed reptile keeping. Note the statement by Elaine Tolland near the end……!! 


BBC Inside Out - look at reptile shows, 12th November 2012



BBC Inside Out statement by Elaine Tolland

Richard Daniel, presenter BBC Inside Out

_So to be clear what you want to do is see people banned from keeping these creatures as pets ultimately_…

*Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*

*We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*


----------



## Chris Newman

Blake1990 said:


> Does anybody remember the APA's whistle-blower campaign?
> 
> Does anybody remember when Steven Rudge admitted to having conversations with an animal rights group?
> 
> Does anybody remember how desperate Steven is to prove his point that the shows are 'illegal'?
> 
> Does anybody remember when Steven said he will be proven right in 'a few months'
> 
> Has anybody noticed how much of a tool Steven is?
> 
> Now now, we shouldn't make assumptions without facts :whistling2:


Agreed people shouldn’t jump to conclusions……!!


----------



## Chris Newman

bash_on_recce said:


> I'd like to point something else out in support of what has been said.
> 
> Caresheets are not the be all and end all of exotic keeping, you can't just read one care sheet and expect to gather all the infomation you need to look after a species, an understanding of where the species comes from and its ecology (habitat, yearly pattern of climte, humidity in the natural range etc) is also useful and encouraged.
> 
> I keep most of my exotics in living set ups (plants and springtails etc) so my care guides would differ to someone elses and where as living set ups are no stranger to the amphibian side of the hobby and to a certain degree to the lizard side, the idea still lags behind in the snake side of things.
> 
> I also tend to keep most of my pets in larger set ups than this 'minimum size' idea that seems to have been snatched out of mid air.
> 
> I'm rubbish at getting a point across so what I'm trying to say above, is just because someone hands out a care sheet, doesn't mean its got good information on it.


Care sheet are “not the be all and end all of exotic keeping” by they are important and they should be available, another problem of course is agreeing on content for care sheets!


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

l've had to put Mr Newman on my ignore list,because it was pointless trying to read his evasive gibberish so l'l make a guess at how he response's
Firstly there no issue for his FBH affiliated reptile soceitys having entry into other affiliated shows.That the whole and real point of the FBH-in my opinion.
Secondly this affiliation is then used as a excuse for the public to gain entry,do the maths IHS members 800+ all the others 600-800-stated attendance 2500-4000-see RFUK posts.So if every real reptile society member in the country went to any show the figures do not ad up .
Thirdly why do's the Federation and the IHS ti itself up in knots about 'grey areas' with regard to Hobby v commercial breeding, licensed or unlicensed?their supposed to be hobby organisations,thats it pure and simple,1 table each member with a pre-registered list of animals before each show,no commercial or licensed breeders at any cost,The show organizers reserve the right to denie any member from their show,for what ever reason,if they suspect that any hobbyist has moved from being a hobbyist to any form of commercial breeder or animal trader then show them the door.
Why the chair of this Federation consistently trys and confuses basic and straight forward legislation?just read their own threads.
The only reason that l can think of from watching their posts reply and excesses is that their game plan is to tell the Hobby-and the larger pet community what it wants to hear-only.
Just check who replys favorably to their posts,l'm sure its only by coincident their people either connected directly or indirectly or 'hobbyists' that ether own their own forum or have large amounts of 'offsring' to sell
They have a product to sell
And when things go wrong blame everybody else.
This is just my humble opinion
l'm sure people are intelligent to openly look and make their own minds as to whats been going on and why


----------



## penfold

stevenrudge said:


> l've had to put Mr Newman on my ignore list,because it was pointless trying to read his evasive gibberish so l'l make a guess at how he response's
> Firstly there no issue for his FBH affiliated reptile soceitys having entry into other affiliated shows.That the whole and real point of the FBH-in my opinion.
> Secondly this affiliation is then used as a excuse for the public to gain entry,do the maths IHS members 800+ all the others 600-800-stated attendance 2500-4000-see RFUK posts.So if every real reptile society member in the country went to any show the figures do not ad up .
> Thirdly why do's the Federation and the IHS ti itself up in knots about 'grey areas' with regard to Hobby v commercial breeding, licensed or unlicensed?their supposed to be hobby organisations,thats it pure and simple,1 table each member with a pre-registered list of animals before each show,no commercial or licensed breeders at any cost,The show organizers reserve the right to denie any member from their show,for what ever reason,if they suspect that any hobbyist has moved from being a hobbyist to any form of commercial breeder or animal trader then show them the door.
> Why the chair of this Federation consistently trys and confuses basic and straight forward legislation?just read their own threads.
> The only reason that l can think of from watching their posts reply and excesses is that their game plan is to tell the Hobby-and the larger pet community what it wants to hear-only.
> Just check who replys favorably to their posts,l'm sure its only by coincident their people either connected directly or indirectly or 'hobbyists' that ether own their own forum or have large amounts of 'offsring' to sell
> They have a product to sell
> And when things go wrong blame everybody else.
> This is just my humble opinion
> l'm sure people are intelligent to openly look and make their own minds as to whats been going on and why


 i must say reading this your show sounds fantastic:2thumb::2thumb:
for all 3 of you sitting in your venue with your hitleresque rules 
do you really think you would get many venders breeders booking a table or even bothering to come to your show 1 table per person ,so with hardly anyone bothering to book tables where are the other breeders ie customers going to come from as there will be no venders i cant see there being anyone willing to travel more than 10 miles so no customers,again a reason not to book 1 table this post may seem like its going round in circles but thats like all your posts




















do your self a favour give up its getting very boring and you are going to try and organise a very boring show nobody wants your show,hand it over to the ihs who says they even want it bet you they are not the slightest bit interested


----------



## Moshpitviper

A question for Steven Rudge. And I would like a simple answer, I am not at all interested in the variables. 

Who's side are you on exactly?

Lots of love

Dave.


----------



## langerspies

Moshpitviper said:


> A question for Steven Rudge. And I would like a simple answer, I am not at all interested in the variables.
> 
> Who's side are you on exactly?
> 
> Lots of love
> 
> Dave.


 I do think you know the answer to that, just cant work out why you felt the need to ask it TBH.
Steven pretty much says he wants legal shows with legal sellers, why is that a problem with some of you. I find it rather easy to understand.


----------



## Tarron

langerspies said:


> I do think you know the answer to that, just cant work out why you felt the need to ask it TBH.
> Steven pretty much says he wants legal shows with legal sellers, why is that a problem with some of you. I find it rather easy to understand.


Legal show with legal sellers. And the best way to go about that is to organise a show with an animal rights group?

Personally, I would love to see steven step up and run a show for 2 reasons. He will see how hard it is and maybe give the organisers a break and people have been saying to put his money where his mouth is, so it would show some balls. I would quite happily support him in this.
What I dont agree with is running it in line with the ARs. I dont, for 1 second believe they are sincere in the claims they made to steven. Whether steven is in on it or just naive is neither here nor there.
For them to believe it is run properly, they will probably want full details on all sellers, money made, profirs from the show etc. This will only make them think they have the upper hand. Not to mention all the personal details that would be given out.
Its dangerous! Fact!


----------



## langerspies

Tarron said:


> Legal show with legal sellers. And the best way to go about that is to organise a show with an animal rights group?
> 
> Personally, I would love to see steven step up and run a show for 2 reasons. He will see how hard it is and maybe give the organisers a break and people have been saying to put his money where his mouth is, so it would show some balls. I would quite happily support him in this.
> What I dont agree with is running it in line with the ARs. I dont, for 1 second believe they are sincere in the claims they made to steven. Whether steven is in on it or just naive is neither here nor there.
> For them to believe it is run properly, they will probably want full details on all sellers, money made, profirs from the show etc. This will only make them think they have the upper hand. Not to mention all the personal details that would be given out.
> Its dangerous! Fact!


Do you know who these AR's are??


----------



## langerspies

Legal show with legal sellers. And the best way to go about that is to organise a show with an animal rights group

Oh, i dont think i should put a reply to that statement:lol2:


----------



## Tarron

langerspies said:


> Legal show with legal sellers. And the best way to go about that is to organise a show with an animal rights group
> 
> Oh, i dont think i should put a reply to that statement:lol2:


Never be afraid to reply, I wont be offended.



langerspies said:


> Do you know who these AR's are??


As of yet, he has not mentioned who they are. If they are to be of any worth, in his mind at least, then I would expect apa, caps, etc. If they are not one of the top anti reptile groups, ie some local shelter or something, then his plan would be flawed anyway, as its the top groups that speak out against shows the most.


----------



## stevenrudge

Moshpitviper said:


> A question for Steven Rudge. And I would like a simple answer, I am not at all interested in the variables.
> 
> Who's side are you on exactly?
> 
> Lots of love
> 
> Dave.


Dave l'm on our side,check all my none show posts,check my feedback check my addys,check my reptile society memberships,check my friends list,Do they look like l'm an AR fanatic?No because l'm not,if you want l can send you some pm's from people what come to me privately asking questions under fake ids thinking l'm going to say things that might damage me publicly,l can send them and give you their real ids if you like,and have a guess who these people are connected to?starts with a F and ends with a H,and its these very people what have the nerve to insinuate l'm an AR when they use the same tactics 
Steve


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> I do think you know the answer to that, just cant work out why you felt the need to ask it TBH.
> Steven pretty much says he wants legal shows with legal sellers, why is that a problem with some of you. I find it rather easy to understand.


Open Breeders Meetings are perfectly lawful, that I would suggest very clear. Some Animal Rights organisations [business] have claimed otherwise, but know one has every tried to prosecute the organisers of such an event and that is in its self very telling!! If Open Breeders Meetings are unlawful why has a prosecution never been brought? 

The case that _may_ come before the Court this year relates to what the Local Authority believes is a ‘trader’ attending and selling at a Breeders Meeting, that is a very different situations, know one other then the extremist has claimed such shows to be illegal!


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

Just read tampons ready stupid reply.
is this the intellectual level its come to, pathetic,its beyond pathetic.
if anybody cannot see the sense in talking to people that course us grief,just to see if there could be any chance that if we were to make some adjustments they might leave us alone.
Now to try and imply by doing this l would put any hobbyist in any danger is either dishonest,sufers from paranoia or a sign that they have lost the argument so revert to using other peoples paranoia.
Some people are deliberately trying to turn this situation into something its not,again for their own ends

Steven-my own name by the way


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> Open Breeders Meetings are perfectly lawful, that I would suggest very clear. Some Animal Rights organisations [business] have claimed otherwise, but know one has every tried to prosecute the organisers of such an event and that is in its self very telling!! If Open Breeders Meetings are unlawful why has a prosecution never been brought?
> 
> The case that _may_ come before the Court this year relates to what the Local Authority believes is a ‘trader’ attending and selling at a Breeders Meeting, that is a very different situations, know one other then the extremist has claimed such shows to be illegal!


There has been a few people on here saying that there are people Pretending to be Hobbyist breeders selling " surplus" animals at the shows when in fact they are major breeders selling animals bred for selling. Is this so? Or has anyone looked into these claims at all?


----------



## stevenrudge

langerspies said:


> There has been a few people on here saying that there are people Pretending to be Hobbyist breeders selling " surplus" animals at the shows when in fact they are major breeders selling animals bred for selling. Is this so? Or has anyone looked into these claims at all?


 If Open Breeders Meetings are unlawful why has a prosecution never been brought? quote???????
l cannot believe they've said this!
unreal
its not in some people interest to look too hard for obvious reasons,l've got 3 emails from people that have told me that they've seen this at shows and have reported it for nothing to happen
Strange


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

stevenrudge said:


> Just read tampons ready stupid reply.
> *is this the intellectual level its come to*, pathetic,its beyond pathetic.
> if anybody cannot see the sense in talking to people that course us grief,just to see if there could be any chance that if we were to make some adjustments they might leave us alone.
> Now to try and imply by doing this l would put any hobbyist in any danger is either dishonest,sufers from paranoia or a sign that they have lost the argument so revert to using other peoples paranoia.
> Some people are deliberately trying to turn this situation into something its not,again for their own ends
> 
> Steven-my own name by the way


Ah, the irony.

Sorry Steven, but save me scrolling through to try and find the useful posts in here amongst the drivel and bickering, am I right in saying you point of view is merely that reptile shows should be kept to members of a specific club without any business of form involved?

And what is it exactly that put you strongly against the FBH - the fact you claim it is running as a business or something else? Sorry if I'm missing your point.

But would the FBH not serve as an umbrella society that people are beneath that would fit your ideology criteria of the members only visitors but would allow you to go to more than one show?

Harry
(Also my real name, coincidentally.)


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> There has been a few people on here saying that there are people Pretending to be Hobbyist breeders selling " surplus" animals at the shows when in fact they are major breeders selling animals bred for selling. Is this so? Or has anyone looked into these claims at all?


I am sure there are people on here that believe in Farther Christmas and the Tooth Fairy - does that mean they exist? 

The facts as I have endeavoured to make clear before is quite simply this: an extremist organisations has for years been making allegations they believe Breeders Meetings are unlawful. They are entitled to their opinion, just as people are entitled to believe in the Tooth Fairy, or Farther Christmas, opinions are just that opinions.

The simple fact is there has never been a prosecution brought against the organisers of a Breeders Meeting, which is not an opinion that is an undisputable fact!! Now if Breeders Meetings were unlawful do you really think that would be the case? Do you really think the High Court would have upheld the legal action brought against the venue? 

The current case which is expected to come to court this year relates to an individual, not weather Breeders Meetings are or are not lawful. I would suggest this is a test case to define what is or is not a ‘commercial’ breeder, but that is very different to suggesting Breeders Meetings are unlawful.


----------



## ian14

langerspies said:


> There has been a few people on here saying that there are people Pretending to be Hobbyist breeders selling " surplus" animals at the shows when in fact they are major breeders selling animals bred for selling. Is this so? Or has anyone looked into these claims at all?


Perhaps it is perception and image that has caused this belief, rather than this being really true.

If you were not in this as a hobby, and looked at a show as an outsider, what would your first impression be of the many stall holders with banners, business cards, website addresses etc etc? If you were honest, you would, I am sure, immediatley think that those people were businesses.

There was a time when stall holders were using credit/debit card machines! This could hardly be a genuine hobby breeder selling a few surplus animals, and anyone looking in from the outside would see this as a commercial business. I know that PRAS stated in their rules that these machines were not allowed, with sales being cash only, and also that banners with names on them were also not allowed.

If these banners are being allowed at other shows, then this could easily give the perception and impression that commercial breeders are selling at these events. If this is the case, then perhaps, for the sake of the future of shows, banners/posters/website ads etc should not be allowed.
Lets be honest - if you are not breeding animals on a large scale purely to sell on, why would you need to have a website, and brand yourself with a name? This gives the immediate impression that you are acting commerically.


----------



## Desert Ghost

Chris Newman said:


> I am sure there are people on here that believe in Farther Christmas and the Tooth Fairy - does that mean they exist?
> 
> .


Can you not see the irony of this statement also applying to your own deeply held beliefs? (many of which ultimately are just your opinion until proven otherwise) 




Im sure us all keeping pretending that there are no businesses selling animals at the shows makes everyone feel great, but its not going to stand up to any scrutiny is it? 

Income tax paying hobbyists with 100's of snakes selling 75% of production and holding the rest back as future breeders. 

Yeah Right!


----------



## dr del

ian14 said:


> Perhaps it is perception and image that has caused this belief, rather than this being really true.
> 
> If you were not in this as a hobby, and looked at a show as an outsider, what would your first impression be of the many stall holders with banners, business cards, website addresses etc etc? If you were honest, you would, I am sure, immediatley think that those people were businesses.
> 
> *There was a time when stall holders were using credit/debit card machines! This could hardly be a genuine hobby breeder selling a few surplus animals, and anyone looking in from the outside would see this as a commercial business.* I know that PRAS stated in their rules that these machines were not allowed, with sales being cash only, and also that banners with names on them were also not allowed.
> 
> If these banners are being allowed at other shows, then this could easily give the perception and impression that commercial breeders are selling at these events. If this is the case, then perhaps, for the sake of the future of shows, banners/posters/website ads etc should not be allowed.
> Lets be honest - if you are not breeding animals on a large scale purely to sell on, why would you need to have a website, and brand yourself with a name? This gives the immediate impression that you are acting commerically.


I just wanted to say there is nothing at all stopping me ( as a private individual ) becoming able to do this if I was willing to pay for the service.

If someone made the decision that it would be worthwhile to be able to offer it to anyone purchasing from them then fair play to them I say.

It's the same as paypal - I liked the convenience of it and was happy to eat the fees ( as they *insist* you do in their terms and conditions ) it requires.


dr del


----------



## Mynki

Desert Ghost said:


> Can you not see the irony of this statement also applying to your own deeply held (but ultimately just your opinion until proven otherwise) beliefs?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Im sure us all keeping pretending that there are no businesses selling animals at the shows makes everyone feel great, but its not going to hold up to any scrutiny is it?
> 
> Income tax paying hobbyists with 100's of snakes selling 75% of production and holding the rest back as future breeders.
> 
> Yeah Right!


Can you back up any of that post? Can you give me the name of someone with hundreds of snakes who is selling 75% of the animals they produce and detail the proof you have of this?

Once you've done this can you then explain in detail how they are a commercial enterprise and provide evidence from a relevant party such as HMRC.

Or is this your own assumption and opinion?


----------



## Purple_D

dr del said:


> I just wanted to say there is nothing at all stopping me ( as a private individual ) becoming able to do this if I was willing to pay for the service.
> 
> If someone made the decision that it would be worthwhile to be able to offer it to anyone purchasing from them then fair play to them I say.
> 
> It's the same as paypal - I liked the convenience of it and was happy to eat the fees ( as they *insist* you do in their terms and conditions ) it requires.
> 
> 
> dr del


I agree.I now have a "card machine" for my phone.Mainly used for work but will be used if and when i attend a show.
Also a replie to Ian,a web site and business cards i agree could look like a business,but i see nothing wrong with a banner with your forum name on,easy for people to find you


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> *Just read tampons ready stupid reply*.
> is this the intellectual level its come to, pathetic,its beyond pathetic.
> if anybody cannot see the sense in talking to people that course us grief,just to see if there could be any chance that if we were to make some adjustments they might leave us alone.
> Now to try and imply by doing this l would put any hobbyist in any danger is either dishonest,sufers from paranoia or a sign that they have lost the argument so revert to using other peoples paranoia.
> Some people are deliberately trying to turn this situation into something its not,again for their own ends
> 
> *Steven-my own name by the way*


Nice to see that maturity and civility has triumphed once again Steven.

In all my posts, I try to ensure I use your name, I'm pretty certain I have refrained from called your Grudge, fudge or any other derogatory term, so the fact you would call me Tampon is beyond rude and ignorant.
Also beyond rudness and ignorance, is the fact that on numerous occasions, I have informed you that 'Tarron' is not just a username, but is in fact my Real Forename. A fact which can be googled, as you've been asked to do before.
Please refrain from ignorance Steven, we may not see eye to eye, but that is just rude.

Please, now, point out exactly which part of the statement I made was 'beyond pathetic'.

To date, you have yet to announce which AR Group(s) have said they will be happy with you running a show in the manner you have described.
It is a well known fact that AR Groups, if in receipt of a reptile or general pet keepers address, will go to these people homes and cause criminal damage and harrassment. Animals have been slain in the name of 'Animal Rights', Ironic, isnt it?

So, when you begin taking names for the show, your AR contacts will undoubtedly want to know who is trading. That way, they can keep a tab on any potential 'Traders' for prosecution or whatever they feel necessary. quite frankly, if they didn't I wouldn't consider them a worthy Animal Rights Group (if such a thing exists).

As i've said before, If you wish to run a show, to the standards you have set yourself, Bravo. You will have my full support and I wish you well.
However, whilst you are in contact with ARs, I will be forever sceptic and believe your numbers will be supremely diminshed due to trust issues.

Thanks


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Now please don't all jump on me BUT are the "hobbiests" in the UK who are known for dealing with Ralph Davies (i dont want to name them incase it causes them issues but i think most will know who i mean) classed as hobby breeders, importers or a business?

We brought one of our royals from then 2 yrs back and as i assumed they were a business and were surprised to see them at donny.


----------



## Desert Ghost

Mynki said:


> Can you back up any of that post? Can you give me the name of someone with hundreds of snakes who is selling 75% of the animals they produce and detail the proof you have of this?
> 
> Once you've done this can you then explain in detail how they are a commercial enterprise and provide evidence from a relevant party such as HMRC.
> 
> Or is this your own assumption and opinion?


See you're just going to attempt to find holes wherever they may exist and skip the point aren't you? 

I bought half of my snakes from the person i mentioned, i can count racks, i saw what he produced and what he held back, he advised me that certain snakes would be better sellers ffs. 

The numbers prove its commercial and having dealt with HMRC in the past i KNOW that is how they would view it, have a look at some of HMRC's previous work, they are not going to accept that it isn't commercial because some dude on a forum said so, they are going to say it is because we believe you made £X000 last year, oh and by the way you owe us 22% on that.

Bury your head in the sand all you want. : victory: HMRC could not care less about semantics!


----------



## vetdebbie

ian14 said:


> If these banners are being allowed at other shows, then this could easily give the perception and impression that commercial breeders are selling at these events. If this is the case, then perhaps, for the sake of the future of shows, banners/posters/website ads etc should not be allowed.
> Lets be honest - if you are not breeding animals on a large scale purely to sell on, why would you need to have a website, and brand yourself with a name? This gives the immediate impression that you are acting commerically.


I don't know about other people but we use 'Procorns' because we are proud of the animals we produce, want people to be able to recognise us and our animals easily and promote us as such. It is like a kennel name for dog or cat breeders. No one would question a dog breeder with a kennel name of 'Prodogs' now would they (other than their sanity 'cos that is a rubbish name!). As a dog or cat breeder, if you have a kennel name, people assume you are really serious about your animals, not that you are a business. Of course, they get to go to shows that are actually, well, shows, so that helps!


----------



## Mynki

Desert Ghost said:


> See you're just going to attempt to find holes wherever they may exist and skip the point aren't you?
> 
> I bought half of my snakes from the person i mentioned, i can count racks, i saw what he produced and what he held back, he advised me that certain snakes would be better sellers ffs.
> 
> The numbers prove its commercial and having dealt with HMRC in the past i KNOW that is how they would view it, have a look at some of HMRC's previous work, they are not going to accept that it isn't commercial because some dude on a forum said so, they are going to say it is because we believe you made £X000 last year, oh and by the way you owe us 22% on that.
> 
> Bury your head in the sand all you want. : victory: HMRC could not care less about semantics!


What you need to understand is, these holes you refer too can only be pointed out to your self if they exist.

I asked for proof and evidence. All you've spouted is hearsay and opinion. I deal with HMRC regularly as I own a UK based business and know that they are very interested in facts. Something you don't seem to. So I'll ask you once more to provide real tangible evidence to back up your claims. Over to you.....


----------



## Tarron

Desert Ghost said:


> See you're just going to attempt to find holes wherever they may exist and skip the point aren't you?
> 
> I bought half of my snakes from the person i mentioned, i can count racks, i saw what he produced and what he held back, he advised me that certain snakes would be better sellers ffs.
> 
> The numbers prove its commercial and having dealt with HMRC in the past i KNOW that is how they would view it, have a look at some of HMRC's previous work, they are not going to accept that it isn't commercial because some dude on a forum said so, they are going to say it is because we believe you made £X000 last year, oh and by the way you owe us 22% on that.
> 
> Bury your head in the sand all you want. : victory: HMRC could not care less about semantics!


I'd just like to point out that ALL sellers, whether at shows or selling one gecko a year, should declare the income to HMRC and if necessary pay tax.

However, a hobbyist can pay tax without beaing classed as a business. You don't get some priveliges businesses get, such as claiming against expenditures, etc, but you ARE NOT a business just for paying tax.

Deciding whether you are a business or not is down to HMRC, and can only be done on a case by case basis, as it basically comes down to intent. This is not in the remit of the IHS or any other society. they have devised a method of determination based on 'best guess' whereby PSL holders and VAT Registered people cannot sell, but that is the best they can do.


----------



## Mynki

Tarron said:


> I'd just like to point out that ALL sellers, whether at shows or selling one gecko a year, should declare the income to HMRC and if necessary pay tax.
> 
> However, a hobbyist can pay tax without beaing classed as a business. You don't get some priveliges businesses get, such as claiming against expenditures, etc, but you ARE NOT a business just for paying tax.
> 
> Deciding whether you are a business or not is down to HMRC, and can only be done on a case by case basis, as it basically comes down to intent. This is not in the remit of the IHS or any other society. they have devised a method of determination based on 'best guess' whereby PSL holders and VAT Registered people cannot sell, but that is the best they can do.


Maybe I should spend £300 on a set up for a pair of lizards, another £100 on food and electricity to care for them. Sell the offspring for £50 and then submit a tax return declaring a £350 loss.

Do you reckon I'll get a rebate on the tax I've paid elsewhere?

Ultimately a lot of these posts suggesting tax avoidance are made by people envious of the success of others.


----------



## Desert Ghost

Mynki said:


> What you need to understand is, these holes you refer too can only be pointed out to your self if they exist.
> 
> I asked for proof and evidence. All you've spouted is hearsay and opinion. I deal with HMRC regularly as I own a UK based business and know that they are very interested in facts. Something you don't seem to. So I'll ask you once more to provide real tangible evidence to back up your claims. Over to you.....


Im sorry i didnt realise i was in a court room and you were the judge and jury. :gasp:

The debate about what constitutes a business, what is commerce etc is meaningless.

If you deal with HRMC you will know how they work. Its quite simple, If you sell goods or services and as a result your income or earnings go above certain levels then certain taxes become due.

Once you qualify for those taxes by selling goods or services it will be very difficult to prove that you are not a business. Making or doing things to sell and making a profit is a business by definition. 

Like i said, dress it up however you feel it works in your head but it wont make a jot of difference when the day comes.


----------



## penfold

just shut the shows down sod em no real great loss saves all this grief all the experts that can tell how much people earn ,you really are a bunch of sad twats (most of it is probably you couldnt get a table somewhere ) cant you just enjoy the shows nope you have to moan about every little bit ,part vendetta against chris newman,part some sort of problem against fbh,MAINLY JEALOUSY AS SOME PEOPLE ARE BETTER BREEDERS AND MANAGE TO SELL MORE LIVESTOCK THAN YOU ,


----------



## Tarron

Mynki said:


> Maybe I should spend £300 on a set up for a pair of lizards, another £100 on food and electricity to care for them. Sell the offspring for £50 and then submit a tax return declaring a £350 loss.
> 
> Do you reckon I'll get a rebate on the tax I've paid elsewhere?
> 
> Ultimately a lot of these posts suggesting tax avoidance are made by people envious of the success of others.


Now there's a thought, you wouldn't be making a profit from selling animals, but would be increasing your net income via rebate, haha.

Second point;



Desert Ghost said:


> Im sorry i didnt realise i was in a court room and you were the judge and jury. :gasp:
> 
> The debate about what constitutes a business, what is commerce etc is meangingless.
> 
> If you deal with HRMC you will know how they work. Its quite simple, If you sell goods or services and as a results your income or earnings go above certain levels then certain taxes become due.
> 
> Once you qualify for those taxes by selling goods or services it will be very difficult to prove that it is not a business. Making or doing things to sell and making a profit is a business by definition.
> 
> Like i said, dress it up however you feel it works in your head but it wont make a jot of difference when the day comes.


As already stated, paying tax does not = business.

hobbyists can make some money from their hobby and pay tax without it being a business.

where the line drawn between hobby and business is drawn, is not clear. It is performed on a case by case basis, by HMRC. So if a hobbyist is paying tax legitimately, then HMRC will decide if their hobby has crossed that line.
Until that point is crossed, there is no way a society could make that decision. If you have a particular seller in mind, then mention it to the IHS or even HMRC, see where they go with it.


----------



## Mynki

Desert Ghost said:


> Im sorry i didnt realise i was in a court room and you were the judge and jury. :gasp:
> 
> The debate about what constitutes a business, what is commerce etc is meaningless.
> 
> If you deal with HRMC you will know how they work. Its quite simple, If you sell goods or services and as a result your income or earnings go above certain levels then certain taxes become due.
> 
> Once you qualify for those taxes by selling goods or services it will be very difficult to prove that you are not a business. Making or doing things to sell and making a profit is a business by definition.
> 
> Like i said, dress it up however you feel it works in your head but it wont make a jot of difference when the day comes.


Still no evidence then? 

I'll try and make this as easy as I can for you, by asking you a question :-

Bearing in mind that shows have gone on for years, and that breeders details have been collated by both local authoroties and animal rights fanatics and passed to HMRC, how many people selling at shows have been successfully prosecuted for tax evasion? 

If you answer more than zero, I'd like proof again. Not that you will! :lol2:


----------



## Desert Ghost

Tarron said:


> Now there's a thought, you wouldn't be making a profit from selling animals, but would be increasing your net income via rebate, haha.
> 
> Second point;
> 
> 
> 
> As already stated, paying tax does not = business.
> 
> hobbyists can make some money from their hobby and pay tax without it being a business.
> 
> where the line drawn between hobby and business is drawn, is not clear. It is performed on a case by case basis, by HMRC. So if a hobbyist is paying tax legitimately, then HMRC will decide if their hobby has crossed that line.
> Until that point is crossed, there is no way a society could make that decision. If you have a particular seller in mind, then mention it to the IHS or even HMRC, see where they go with it.


year 3 would be a shitter if you had invested big in ball pythons :whistling2:

I get what you're saying, but, sadly my point is still every bit as valid.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

I think they key word here that is being overlooked is _*PROFIT*_.

How many of the sellers do you think are making a profit taking into account:

Purchase price of Parent snakes.
Electric/food/housing/bedding for how ever long it took to raise said snakes to breeding size.
Possible vet bills/mite treatments
Materials/incubator to incubate eggs
Housing/food/electric/bedding for offspring for however long it takes them to be sold

In the case of shows add to that:

Fuel to get to and from said shows
Table prices
travel containers


Now after all that, how much profit do you really think is left? Not much if any i would say


----------



## Desert Ghost

Mynki said:


> Still no evidence then?
> 
> I'll try and make this as easy as I can for you, by asking you a question :-
> 
> Bearing in mind that shows have gone on for years, and that breeders details have been collated by both local authoroties and animal rights fanatics and passed to HMRC, how many people selling at shows have been successfully prosecuted for tax evasion?
> 
> If you answer more than zero, I'd like proof again. Not that you will! :lol2:


None, yet.  but then, maybe they pay the tax :2thumb:


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> What Mr Rudge is talking about is returning to Members only Meetings, these were run back in the early 2000’s and were an abject failure. If I recall correctly the IHS ran some of the first and they were luck to get 200 people attend, compare that to the 3,000 to 4,000 people who attend an IHS Breeders Meeting today?
> 
> The IHS are not the only society to try Members only Meetings, several others including ERAC and PRAS have been forced to adopt them at some stage, they were all disasters in terms of attendance! Let us be clear that many clubs and societies need to run show to general funs to keep the society afloat, subs for many clubs do not cover the cost of producing newsletters and journals.
> 
> Now, the FBH have discussed the issue of Members only Meetings incessantly, personally I am quite in favour because they would be an extremely effective enticement to get keepers to join their local society. The fundamental problem is they only way this would work is if every club or society would sign up to this, and that has been they stumbling block, they won’t!
> 
> There are many other issues with running Members only Meetings which make them problematic, I think going backwards to running Members only Meetings would be a huge retrograde step, and would afford absolutely no protection, indeed they would be more exposed to attack from the antis, history has shown that and would only repeat its self.
> 
> The way forward is to push for the repeal of Section of the Pet Animals Act so shows could once again be licensed, the only issue left standing is that of ‘money’ i.e. is someone breeding animals for a commercial objective, well license the event and that matters is dispensed with.
> 
> Last, but most certainly not least, animal welfare can be far better assured under a licensed and regulated rather than a closed meeting, and that’s a fact! We have nothing to hide, so let’s be open and transparent…..!!





Chris Newman said:


> What is being talked about by some is returning to what are called Members only Meetings, these were first run back in the early 2000’s, due to attacks on reptile shows (such as the IHS show held at the Alumwell Centre in Walsall) by the antis all subsequent shows run as Members only Meetings were very poorly attended. If I recall correctly they were luck to get 200 attendees, often less, compared to the 3,000 to 4,000 people who attend an IHS Breeders Meeting today?
> 
> The IHS are not the only society to try Members only Meetings, several others including ERAC and PRAS have been forced to adopt them at some stage and they were all disasters in terms of attendance! I think it is important to understand that many clubs and societies need to run show to general funs to keep the society afloat; subs for many clubs do not cover the cost of producing newsletters and journals. Open Breeders Meetings also for fill and important function in terms of attracting new members to join a society, nearly all societies are currently struggling with declining memberships.
> 
> The FBH have long discussed the issue of Members only Meetings, personally I am quite in favour because they could be an extremely effective enticement to get keepers to join their local society. It should of course be pointed out that _any_ established club or society if perfectly entitled to run a Breeders Meeting if they so choose? Clearly some here have indicated that is what they would like to see a return to such events, and as I understand it at least one Members only Meeting is to be run this year and that fantastic, there could be a niche market for them and it will be very interesting to see how these event are received and if they prove viable for the relevant society.
> 
> One of the fundamental problem with Members only Meetings is they only way they would be sustainable long-term is if every club or society would sign up to this, and that has been they stumbling block, they won’t! Given a choose between running Members only Meetings and open Breeders Meetings the majority would opt for the latter. There are many other issues with running Members only Meetings which make them problematic. Personally I think under the circumstances today going backwards to running Members only Meetings would be a huge retrograde step, and would afford absolutely no protection, indeed they would be more exposed to attack from the antis.
> 
> Some people clearly think that returning to running Members only Meetings would mean those organisations (businesses) opposed to reptile shows would leave them alone and not try and stop them, this is living in Cloud Cuckoo Land!! Members only Meetings are much more vulnerable to attack by the antis, history this has been demonstrated that time and time again. Anyone who thinks they can “do a deal” with fanatics is only fooling themselves, sure they might back off short term for political objectives, but long-term they would stab you in the back. You cannot reason with the unreasonable!
> 
> The way forward is to push for the completion of the repeal of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act so that shows could once again be licensed, the only issue left standing is that of ‘money’ i.e. is someone breeding animals for a commercial objective, well dispensed with matter and allow shows to be licensed where appropriates. This would not mean that every show would, or could be licensed, and it certainly would not preclude the running of a Members only Meeting. What it would do is afford protection to hobbyist and close a longstanding loophole that has been exploited long enough! Last, but most certainly not least, animal welfare can be far better assured under a licensed and regulated rather than a closed meeting, we have nothing to hide, so let’s be open and transparent! Who could argue against this as a way forward!!
> 
> Finally for anyone still gullible enough to think you can strike a deal with the fanatics like the Animal Protection Agency here is a link to the BBC Inside Out programme aired at the end of last year and its look at the issue of reptile shows, and indeed reptile keeping. Note the statement by Elaine Tolland near the end……!!
> 
> 
> BBC Inside Out - look at reptile shows, 12th November 2012
> 
> 
> 
> BBC Inside Out statement by Elaine Tolland
> 
> Richard Daniel, presenter BBC Inside Out
> 
> _So to be clear what you want to do is see people banned from keeping these creatures as pets ultimately_…
> 
> *Elaine Tolland, Animal Protection Agency*
> 
> *We want to see a ban exactly on trade and keeping of reptiles as pets and we have huge public and political support to achieve our aims and I am confident we will get there…*


Could you please define/clarify for me what different types of shows/meetings there are please Chris because I'm getting confused.

I'll list what I think they are below, then can you please tell me if I'm right.

1 breeders meetings. Allowing breeders to sell surplus stock to other breeders. Entry allowed only with a membership card of an affiliated club.

2 open breeders meetings. Where only breeders can enter until 10 and then open to the public.

3 public meetings which are attended by anyone who turns up.

Bearing in mind that being a member of a club is not an indicator of being even a keeper, let alone a breeder, and unless I'm mistaken a meeting which is open to the "public" whatever that means, is an indicator that the public may or may not hold membership of a club and may or may not have any knowledge of reptile keeping whatsoever. 

If breeders were literally only selling to other breeders the need for caresheets would be less important anyway. 

If the "public" are flooding through the doors to buy things they weren't expecting to buy and then coming onto the forums asking for care advice this is an indication that caresheets are important at this point because people are going to meetings expecting to be able to "catch up" with their research afterwards, which is a bit late really.

If true breeders only meetings were poorly attended it kind of indicates that there is no demand for the animals among fellow breeders and that the "public"
Are needed through the door to purchase these animals despite the fact they are not club members, and as you have said, also refuse to purchase any kind of membership, whether it be annual or even a day membership.

There appears to be ambiguity surrounding the actual classification of these meetings/shows which has been at the very heart of the antis attacks which has caused many to be closed.

If it is a meeting with card carrying club members who are members of the same club or an affiliated one it is simply a legal breeders meeting.

If it is a meeting which allows people to purchase day membership on the door for only a few pounds more than an entry fee, I fail to see how this constitutes proper membership, or reptile savvy people. The reason I am making a point about caresheets is because these are supposed to be attended by breeders who would have knowledge and experience of what they're buying, while a scan through the forums will indicate that often they do not know how to maintain it before they buy. A pet shop can sell to anyone and many do, however meetings are supposed to be for the passionate and the knowledgable and for people who want to learn aren't they. It's not like someone is buying a chicken to slaughter for Sunday lunch. We are supposed to be reptile enthusiasts/hobbyists and yet 
the public come in and leave with animals.

If it is an open meeting with no restrictions on who can enter then this is simply an illegal (according to currant law) market. 

Why can't these breeders sell privately? Why is it so important that these shows go on if it's not for business purposes. All these little hobbyists with their surplus stock you keep mentioning have to sell at shows because they want to sell to the public, as just selling to other breeders wouldn't get them enough sales. So they actually want new, fresh, often reptile ignorant punters coming in because they have cash on the hip. I have no desire to bring negative attention to breeders/dealers/businesses, however this ambiguity, which I hope you clearly define for me has highlighted the importance of cash over the hobby. 

Please define the different types of shows please Chris, because I'm not sure what's what to be honest.:2thumb:


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> Now please don't all jump on me BUT are the "hobbiests" in the UK who are known for dealing with Ralph Davies (i dont want to name them incase it causes them issues but i think most will know who i mean) classed as hobby breeders, importers or a business?
> 
> We brought one of our royals from then 2 yrs back and as i assumed they were a business and were surprised to see them at donny.


Like most of the issues being debates here there is not a straightforward answer to you question, they could be hobbyist, and they could be ‘a business’!! 

In the UK anyone can import reptiles, either for a commercial purpose (i.e. a business) or as a hobbyist. Some taxa such as fish you are required to have an importers licence, that would I think make you commercial! However, there is no such requirements for reptiles. If I wanted to import some royals from an American breeder, I can do so, if in order to assist with my costs I decided to bring in some extra and dispose then I can also do so. However, at some point you will cross a line between a ‘hobbyist’ and a ‘commercial importer’, now where is that line drawn – who knows!!!!


----------



## Lil_nightmare

You know its bad when searching for "What defines a business" even HMRC comes up empty :whip:

Although i did find this although not sure if it applies:



> *VBNB27000 - VAT Business and Non-Business activities: hobbies*
> 
> People sometimes have hobbies that involve the making of taxable supplies, for example repairing cars or selling stamps. These supplies are not automatically made in the course or furtherance of business. You should apply the business test.
> 
> 
> It is unlikely that hobbies which involve a registered person making minimal supplies are business. However, in some cases the person’s hobby can lead them to make substantial supplies and may grow to become a business activity. Many successful businesses grow out of a hobby or private interest.
> 
> 
> When judging whether a hobby should be seen as a business activity you should consider whether the activity is taxable for income tax purposes.
> 
> 
> 
> The Income Tax (Trading and Other Income) Act 2005, Part 2, Chapter 2, Section 5 states that:
> Income tax is charged on the profits of a trade, profession or vocation.
> This is a similar provision to the VAT definition of business in VAT Act 1994 Section 94(1) which includes “any trade, profession or vocation”.
> 
> 
> VIT VAT Input Tax VIT44000 gives guidance on situations where people feel that tax paid on the costs of their hobbies may have been incurred to promote or advertise their business.


Source; VBNB27000 - VAT Business and Non-Business activities: hobbies


----------



## Desert Ghost

apparently HMRC use these 'badges' when deciding if something is a business or a hobby BIM20205 - Trade: badges of trade: summary 

I think some could apply and some could be debated till infinity, its certainly far from conclusive.

If my hobby was flower arranging or cake baking, and i then invested a lot of money into flowers or cake making equipment, sold plenty of flowers or cakes and paid tax on my profit, i don't think anyone in their right mind would support my claim that i am a hobbyist and not a business. 

I'm failing to see much difference between Ball Pythons, Cakes and Flowers.


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> You know its bad when searching for "What defines a business" even HMRC comes up empty :whip:
> 
> Although i did find this although not sure if it applies:
> 
> 
> 
> Source; VBNB27000 - VAT Business and Non-Business activities: hobbies


And this is absolutely the crux of a matter, defining what is or is not a business?


----------



## Desert Ghost

Chris Newman said:


> And this is absolutely the crux of a matter, defining what is or is not a business?


When (if) the time comes, the judge wont have nearly as much trouble with the conundrum as we are having. :whistling2:


----------



## Tarron

Desert Ghost said:


> apparently HMRC use these 'badges' when deciding if something is a business or a hobby BIM20205 - Trade: badges of trade: summary
> 
> I think some could apply and some could be debated till infinity, its certainly far from conclusive.
> 
> If my hobby was flower arranging or cake baking, and i then invested a lot of money into flowers or cake making equipment, sold plenty of flowers or cakes and paid tax on my profit, no one in their right mind would support my claim that i am a hobbyist and not a business.
> 
> I'm failing to see much difference between Ball Pythons, Cakes and Flowers.


i'm sure someone in the cake making hobby, or flower arranging hobby would think the same thing. However, you are right about the badges of trade. But only HMRC can determine if you fit. Thats not the IHS's job. So they can't determine who is a trader, other than with their set rules, as previously described.
If people don't fall in to the category set by the IHS, and they have not been declared a business by themselves or HMRC, then what right would the IHS have to exclude them?

Genuine question DesertGhost - In your opinion, if someone does not hold a PSL, and is not registered for Tax, how would you determine who is a business and who is a hobbyist?
And to clarify this a little, there should be no talk of 'if he breeds loads of snakes, or makes loads of money', it would need to be a clear concise rule, with numbers, to make it a fair decision.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Chris Newman said:


> And this is absolutely the crux of a matter, defining what is or is not a business?



its a hard one, is it classed as profit straight away or do you have to cover your initial out lay first?

As in if i spend £5k setting up a business does it become taxable profit as soon as £1 is made or would it be the 5001st pound made thats classed as profit?

sorry for the economy lesson...im learning


----------



## Purple_D

Desert Ghost said:


> When (if) the time comes, the judge wont have nearly as much trouble with the conundrum as we are having. :whistling2:


And what is that stupid statement ment to mean


----------



## Mynki

Lil_nightmare said:


> its a hard one, is it classed as profit straight away or do you have to cover your initial out lay first?
> 
> As in if i spend £5k setting up a business does it become taxable profit as soon as £1 is made or would it be the 5001st pound made thats classed as profit?
> 
> sorry for the economy lesson...im learning


It would be £5001. However in reality if you had a good accountant it could potentially be ever more than that. Legally too!


----------



## Desert Ghost

Tarron said:


> If people don't fall in to the category set by the IHS, and they have not been declared a business by themselves or HMRC, then what right would the IHS have to exclude them?
> 
> Genuine question DesertGhost - In your opinion, if someone does not hold a PSL, and is not registered for Tax, how would you determine who is a business and who is a hobbyist?
> And to clarify this a little, there should be no talk of 'if he breeds loads of snakes, or makes loads of money', it would need to be a clear concise rule, with numbers, to make it a fair decision.


I agree its not for the IHS or FBH to decide at all Tarron, they have to take an application at face value so they should take the booking. 

Its a tough one for sure, but i know that the motivation of many of the sellers at the shows is financial from speaking to them, the offical line (as presented by the honourable Mr Newman in the thread) is that the shows are 'breeders meetings' where people sell 'surplus animals', and i do fear people may be treading on thin ice.


----------



## Desert Ghost

Purple_D said:


> And what is that stupid statement ment to mean


It means that if there is ever a HMRC vs X case to decide if they are a hobbyist or a business, the judge is likely to look at things pragmatically, with financial concerns probably being key.


----------



## Tarron

Desert Ghost said:


> I agree its not for the IHS or FBH to decide at all Tarron, they have to take an application at face value so they should take the booking.
> 
> Its a tough one for sure, but i know that the motivation of many of the sellers at the shows is financial from speaking to them, the offical line (as presented by the honourable Mr Newman in the thread) is that the shows are 'breeders meetings' where people sell 'surplus animals', and i do fear people may be treading on thin ice.


Maybe this is where confusion has set in.

People are treading on thin ice, not the shows.

it is down to the individual to decide if they could be seen as a trader, and so they should take any necessary action.

Show organisers do their best, but some may slip through. all we can do is report these possible transgressors, but ultimately, organisers are probably powerless to do anything.

Does this mean shows should be stopped? emphatically No. there are always going to be bad eggs, be it in shows, in pet shops, online classifieds, or even when buying a scarf down the local market. It doesnt mean the facility used is at fault.


----------



## Purple_D

I think theres alot of grudges clones turned up in the last few months.
Plus a lot of assumptions being made by un qualified people with no information on the subject


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Mynki said:


> It would be £5001. However in reality if you had a good accountant it could potentially be ever more than that. Legally too!



Great thanks.


So on that basis, unless everyone has detailed accounts of everything they have spent for every single animal they own including electricity down to the every Kw/Kj (whichever it is)

How can they ever prove that any one is in profit?


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> Could you please define/clarify for me what different types of shows/meetings there are please Chris because I'm getting confused.
> 
> I'll list what I think they are below, then can you please tell me if I'm right.
> 
> 1 breeders meetings. Allowing breeders to sell surplus stock to other breeders. Entry allowed only with a membership card of an affiliated club.
> 
> 2 open breeders meetings. Where only breeders can enter until 10 and then open to the public.
> 
> 3 public meetings which are attended by anyone who turns up.
> 
> Bearing in mind that being a member of a club is not an indicator of being even a keeper, let alone a breeder, and unless I'm mistaken a meeting which is open to the "public" whatever that means, is an indicator that the public may or may not hold membership of a club and may or may not have any knowledge of reptile keeping whatsoever.
> 
> If breeders were literally only selling to other breeders the need for caresheets would be less important anyway.
> 
> If the "public" are flooding through the doors to buy things they weren't expecting to buy and then coming onto the forums asking for care advice this is an indication that caresheets are important at this point because people are going to meetings expecting to be able to "catch up" with their research afterwards, which is a bit late really.
> 
> If true breeders only meetings were poorly attended it kind of indicates that there is no demand for the animals among fellow breeders and that the "public"
> Are needed through the door to purchase these animals despite the fact they are not club members, and as you have said, also refuse to purchase any kind of membership, whether it be annual or even a day membership.
> 
> There appears to be ambiguity surrounding the actual classification of these meetings/shows which has been at the very heart of the antis attacks which has caused many to be closed.
> 
> If it is a meeting with card carrying club members who are members of the same club or an affiliated one it is simply a legal breeders meeting.
> 
> If it is a meeting which allows people to purchase day membership on the door for only a few pounds more than an entry fee, I fail to see how this constitutes proper membership, or reptile savvy people. The reason I am making a point about caresheets is because these are supposed to be attended by breeders who would have knowledge and experience of what they're buying, while a scan through the forums will indicate that often they do not know how to maintain it before they buy. A pet shop can sell to anyone and many do, however meetings are supposed to be for the passionate and the knowledgable and for people who want to learn aren't they. It's not like someone is buying a chicken to slaughter for Sunday lunch. We are supposed to be reptile enthusiasts/hobbyists and yet
> the public come in and leave with animals.
> 
> If it is an open meeting with no restrictions on who can enter then this is simply an illegal (according to currant law) market.
> 
> Why can't these breeders sell privately? Why is it so important that these shows go on if it's not for business purposes. All these little hobbyists with their surplus stock you keep mentioning have to sell at shows because they want to sell to the public, as just selling to other breeders wouldn't get them enough sales. So they actually want new, fresh, often reptile ignorant punters coming in because they have cash on the hip. I have no desire to bring negative attention to breeders/dealers/businesses, however this ambiguity, which I hope you clearly define for me has highlighted the importance of cash over the hobby.
> 
> Please define the different types of shows please Chris, because I'm not sure what's what to be honest.:2thumb:


Broadly speaking I concur with your assessment on how you defining show categories; here is a link to the formal definitions which might help clarify matters further: Proposals for primary & secondary legislation

If it were a members only meeting I do not think you should dispense with care sheets, I might be an experienced keep/breeder of colubrid snakes but impulse buy some salamanders because they take my fancy, therefore the breeder could usefully give me some written care information for a species I have not kept before!

At the day what I am most concerned with is getting clarity, the current situation is simply unacceptable, so let’s get legal clarity and then we will all be happy! Personally I find it astonishing that some people are more interested in the financial side of things rather than our rights to keep animals and enjoy out hobby, each to their own…..!! 

As the biggest issue that concerns so many people is simply money, extraordinary but there you go, so licences shows then that issue is dispensed with. Those are empathic breeding is a commercial will be happy, those who want to attend can, it’s a win, win situation – simples as they say!!!


----------



## Desert Ghost

Tarron said:


> Maybe this is where confusion has set in.
> 
> People are treading on thin ice, not the shows.
> 
> it is down to the individual to decide if they could be seen as a trader, and so they should take any necessary action.
> 
> Show organisers do their best, but some may slip through. all we can do is report these possible transgressors, but ultimately, organisers are probably powerless to do anything.
> 
> Does this mean shows should be stopped? emphatically No. there are always going to be bad eggs, be it in shows, in pet shops, online classifieds, or even when buying a scarf down the local market. It doesnt mean the facility used is at fault.


I agree wholeheartedly :notworthy:

I'm not so sure there is a need for shows in this modern age, i also think they are a terrible advert for the 'hobby'.

I do agree that people should have the right to hold them though, and i think they should be open to anyone to sell at to be honest.


----------



## johnc79

Purple_D said:


> I think theres alot of grudges clones turned up in the last few months.
> Plus a lot of assumptions being made by un qualified people with no information on the subject


There can only be one grudge! No one is as deluded as that fool. I can understand and respect some opinions on shows as there is always to sides to a debate. I can not take grudge serious when i know him and his morals he has made money form importing snakes cheap from Europe then sells them here at a profit. Surely this is going against his argument :whistling2:


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Chris Newman said:


> Broadly speaking I concur with your assessment on how you defining show categories; here is a link to the formal definitions which might help clarify matters further: Proposals for primary & secondary legislation
> 
> If it were a members only meeting I do not think you should dispense with care sheets, I might be an experienced keep/breeder of colubrid snakes but impulse buy some salamanders because they take my fancy, therefore the breeder could usefully give me some written care information for a species I have not kept before!
> 
> At the day what I am most concerned with is getting clarity, the current situation is simply unacceptable, so let’s get legal clarity and then we will all be happy! *Personally I find it astonishing that some people are more interested in the financial side of things rather than our rights to keep animals and enjoy out hobby, each to their own…..!! *
> 
> As the biggest issue that concerns so many people is simply money, extraordinary but there you go, so licences shows then that issue is dispensed with. Those are empathic breeding is a commercial will be happy, those who want to attend can, it’s a win, win situation – simples as they say!!!


I dont think thats fair, I think what people (well at least me)are trying to understand is what the rules, financially are, cause lets face it, if it is deemed that there are people trading illegally or avoiding tax then thats just another nail the AR groups have to put in our coffins


----------



## Desert Ghost

Lil_nightmare said:


> How can they ever prove that any one is in profit?


Its up to you to declare it.

In the event they are prosecuting you for tax evasion they wont work it out to the fine details, they will come up with a ball park figure and it will be upto you to pay or prove you dont owe the figure they come up with.


----------



## Purple_D

johnc79 said:


> There can only be one grudge! No one is as deluded as that fool. I can understand and respect some opinions on shows as there is always to sides to a debate. I can not take grudge serious when i know him and his morals he has made money form importing snakes cheap from Europe then sells them here at a profit. Surely this is going against his argument :whistling2:


As you know,i have asked him about his Business countless times ,without a answer


----------



## Janine00

Lil_nightmare said:


> Great thanks.
> 
> 
> So on that basis, unless everyone has detailed accounts of everything they have spent for every single animal they own including electricity down to the every Kw/Kj (whichever it is)
> 
> How can they ever prove that any one is in profit?


That's the cruncher.... it's not up to them to prove everything you pay out.... it's up to YOU to prove you don't earn enough to pay the tax they deem you to owe.... they work in ball park figures.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Janine00 said:


> That's the cruncher.... it's not up to them to prove everything you pay out.... it's up to YOU to prove you don't earn enough to pay the tax they deem you to owe.... they work in ball park figures.


Well thats just shitty, but then its the government i shouldnt expect any better.


----------



## johnc79

Purple_D said:


> As you know,i have asked him about his Business countless times ,without a answer


I know he sells his offspring to local shops. 

He asked me to bring a load of water snakes back for him from Hamm back in march. He told me they were for him. The week later they were in the classifieds at a lot more than he paid for them. He made a good profit on them. Same happend with someone else in September . Loads of lake Erie water snakes were passed on to him then funny enough a week later mr rudge puts them in the classifieds . Make of that what you will. :whistling2:

Ask him if he has ever been done for tax evasion in his past


----------



## Pete Q

penfold said:


> just shut the shows down sod em no real great loss saves all this grief all the experts that can tell how much people earn ,you really are a bunch of sad twats (most of it is probably you couldnt get a table somewhere ) cant you just enjoy the shows nope you have to moan about every little bit ,part vendetta against chris newman,part some sort of problem against fbh,MAINLY JEALOUSY AS SOME PEOPLE ARE BETTER BREEDERS AND MANAGE TO SELL MORE LIVESTOCK THAN YOU ,


Seems like that doesn't it, if your hobbie is bigger than anothers then " your a business" very silly arguement that cannot be measured.

I have a 4 foot fish tank with guppys and plattys, every 2 months ish I net a few out and sell them to a pet shop for 20p each, bloody hell, I'm a tropical fish dealer / business :gasp: and didn't even know it.


----------



## Janine00

johnc79 said:


> I know he sells his offspring to local shops.
> 
> He asked me to bring a load of water snakes back for him from Hamm back in march. He told me they were for him. The week later they were in the classifieds at a lot more than he paid for them. He made a good profit on them. Same happend with someone else in September . Loads of lake Erie water snakes were passed on to him then funny enough a week later mr rudge puts them in the classifieds . Make of that what you will. :whistling2:


Was going to ask how you knew that.... there's my answer then. :gasp:


----------



## Desert Ghost

Lil_nightmare said:


> Well thats just shitty, but then its the government i shouldnt expect any better.


Its a great system if you're clever with your accounting. :whistling2:


----------



## Janine00

Isn't there now a masters degree in creative accounting???? :whistling2: or is that smoke 'n mirrors??


----------



## penfold

Pete Q said:


> Seems like that doesn't it, if your hobbie is bigger than anothers then " your a business" very silly arguement that cannot be measured.
> 
> I have a 4 foot fish tank with guppys and plattys, every 2 months ish I net a few out and sell them to a pet shop for 20p each, bloody hell, I'm a tropical fish dealer / business :gasp: and didn't even know it.


You should sell them at donny


----------



## johnc79

Janine00 said:


> Was going to ask how you knew that.... there's my answer then. :gasp:


A few of the local shops he sells to I use. . To say he is hypercritical is an under statement really.lol


----------



## bash_on_recce

johnc79 said:


> A few of the local shops he sells to I use. . To say he is hypercritical is an under statement really.lol


That wouldn't be where those water snakes in Holly bush garden centre came from is it?


----------



## johnc79

bash_on_recce said:


> That wouldn't be where those water snakes in Holly bush garden centre came from is it?


It's local to him


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> I dont think thats fair, I think what people (well at least me)are trying to understand is what the rules, financially are, cause lets face it, if it is deemed that there are people trading illegally or avoiding tax then thats just another nail the AR groups have to put in our coffins


The comment was not addressed at you! What has been surprising is some people are more concerned with the financial matters, rather than anything to do with the welfare of the animals and I find that remarkable? These individuals have raised few, if any issues, concerning the welfare of the animals, but are gleeful to make snide comments about ‘business’, I simply find that distasteful. Weather a breeder makes a profit or not is a matter for him and the tax man!! My concern is the welfare of the animals and the keeping being able to enjoy his pastime of keeping and breeding his animals, obviously I am wrong in the eyes of some…..!!


----------



## Pete Q

johnc79 said:


> A few of the local shops he sells to I use. . To say he is hypercritical is an under statement really.lol


Well I would bet more money is made from this than my 4 foot fish tank, he must be a business then.:whistling2:


----------



## johnc79

Where is the little troll tonight any way? I thought he would be on by now with his childish insults to anyone who disagrees with him and suing everyone. I do miss him.


----------



## Desert Ghost

Chris Newman said:


> The comment was not addressed at you! What has been surprising is some people are more concerned with the financial matters, rather than anything to do with the welfare of the animals and I find that remarkable? These individuals have raised few, if any issues, concerning the welfare of the animals, but are gleeful to make snide comments about ‘business’, I simply find that distasteful. Weather a breeder makes a profit or not is a matter for him and the tax man!! My concern is the welfare of the animals and the keeping being able to enjoy his pastime of keeping and breeding his animals, obviously I am wrong in the eyes of some…..!!


I think the comments were prompted by the fact that some of the traders produce amounts of animals that are odds with the 'hobbyist breeder' ethos and nothing more sinister than that.

Im not sure if i was one of those of those making "snide comment", my view is essentially the same as yours i just think the business vs hobby 'issue' that has cropped up in this thread may be a little more clear cut in others eyes than it is in yours, i also pointed out that i think the shows are a terrible advert for the hobby, adult lizards and snakes on display in small boxes is not something i am comfortable with, concern for the animals was at that heart of that particular post i can assure you.


----------



## Pete Q

Desert Ghost said:


> I think the comments were prompted by the fact that some of the traders produce amounts of animals that are odds with the 'hobbyist breeder' ethos and nothing more sinister than that.
> 
> Im not sure i was one of those of those making "snide comment", my view is essentially i just think it may be a little more clear cut in other eyes than it is in yours, i also pointed out that i think the shows are a terrible advert for the hobby, adult lizards on display in small boxes is not something i am comfortable, concern for the animals was at that heart of that particular post i can assure you.


Reptiles like small areas, the smaller the better if your thinking of the stress factor.

The small box concern is usually a lack of understanding on reptile behavour or a animal rights concern.

In the case of most reptiles if we are saying it's stressful then really it's the smaller the better, looks bad for those that don't understand though.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Pete Q said:


> Reptiles like small areas, the smaller the better if your thinking of the stress factor.


No, reptiles prefer cover to hide away in, I'm pretty sure they are stressed out by being in a tiny plastic box with no cover :whistling2: They just appear to be less stressed because they don't have alot of room to move about in.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

OK here is _*MY*_ take on shows and on what _*I*_ think *some* of the rules policies should be, people may not agree or may find fault but this is a discussion so I'm happy for their opinion:

(and I also know many will think "who am I" to say how things should be done. For those people I am someone who enjoys these shows and am passionate about the hobby if you take issue with that well tough : victory

1) I think first and foremost there should be a minimum size for containers, obviously different for each species and should be done for baby, sub adult and adult. I think the should at least be able to turn around. Preferably with at least a piece of kitchen roll to hide under if they so wish ( I know people will say about travel safety but is padding said enclosure out for travel really that much effort?)

2) I think an effort should be made to keep the hall at an ambient temperature especially in the shows later in the year when its freezing.

3) I think there should be a maximum number of animals per vendor (say 20 for arguments sake, not including pre-sold animals) If people complain about the value of some over other, well it is there choice what animals to bring.

4) I think every stall holder *must* have hand gel and/or antiseptic wipes available for before and after handling, just in case a missed RI or the like has got in.

5) I think all store holders should hand out care sheets as standard, even if its on how *they* personally keep their animals. As if the animals are healthy and thriving then there shouldn't be too much issue on the difference between how people keep their animals.

6) I think if any animal is found on the day to not be healthy for whatever reason then that vendor should be asked to remove all animals from sale.

7) any vendor to be found consistently bringing sick or mite infested animals to the shows should be banned.

8) Not sure how it went last time, with pre-sold animals and the creche but I think that should continue if that went well. 

That is all i can think of at the moment, I've probably missed something important but I'm tired.

So feel free to agree/ridicule/argue whatever.


----------



## Pete Q

bash_on_recce said:


> No, reptiles prefer cover to hide away in, I'm pretty sure they are stressed out by being in a tiny plastic box with no cover :whistling2: They just appear to be less stressed because they don't have alot of room to move about in.


We will have to agree to disagree on this, I don't think we can truely understand how stress effects reptiles, we only think we do or know best.

For all we know they live out their lives stressed, living in a box in our homes, thats what animal rights would have everyone believe, if stress is a concern maybe we should not keep them in the first place.


----------



## johnc79

Lil_nightmare said:


> OK here is _*MY*_ take on shows and on what _*I*_ think *some* of the rules policies should be, people may not agree or may find fault but this is a discussion so I'm happy for their opinion:
> 
> (and I also know many will think "who am I" to say how things should be done. For those people I am someone who enjoys these shows and am passionate about the hobby if you take issue with that well tough : victory
> 
> 1) I think first and foremost there should be a minimum size for containers, obviously different for each species and should be done for baby, sub adult and adult. I think the should at least be able to turn around. Preferably with at least a piece of kitchen roll to hide under if they so wish ( I know people will say about travel safety but is padding said enclosure out for travel really that much effort?)
> 
> 2) I think an effort should be made to keep the hall at an ambient temperature especially in the shows later in the year when its freezing.
> 
> 3) I think there should be a maximum number of animals per vendor (say 20 for arguments sake, not including pre-sold animals) If people complain about the value of some over other, well it is there choice what animals to bring.
> 
> 4) I think every stall holder *must* have hand gel and/or antiseptic wipes available for before and after handling, just in case a missed RI or the like has got in.
> 
> 5) I think all store holders should hand out care sheets as standard, even if its on how *they* personally keep their animals. As if the animals are healthy and thriving then there shouldn't be too much issue on the difference between how people keep their animals.
> 
> 6) I think if any animal is found on the day to not be healthy for whatever reason then that vendor should be asked to remove all animals from sale.
> 
> 7) any vendor to be found consistently bringing sick or mite infested animals to the shows should be banned.
> 
> 8) Not sure how it went last time, with pre-sold animals and the creche but I think that should continue if that went well.
> 
> That is all i can think of at the moment, I've probably missed something important but I'm tired.
> 
> So feel free to agree/ridicule/argue whatever.



I do not think there is much wrong with that to be fair. :2thumb:


----------



## Purple_D

Lil_nightmare said:


> OK here is _*MY*_ take on shows and on what _*I*_ think *some* of the rules policies should be, people may not agree or may find fault but this is a discussion so I'm happy for their opinion:
> 
> (and I also know many will think "who am I" to say how things should be done. For those people I am someone who enjoys these shows and am passionate about the hobby if you take issue with that well tough : victory
> 
> 1) I think first and foremost there should be a minimum size for containers, obviously different for each species and should be done for baby, sub adult and adult. I think the should at least be able to turn around. Preferably with at least a piece of kitchen roll to hide under if they so wish ( I know people will say about travel safety but is padding said enclosure out for travel really that much effort?)
> 
> 2) I think an effort should be made to keep the hall at an ambient temperature especially in the shows later in the year when its freezing.
> 
> 3) I think there should be a maximum number of animals per vendor (say 20 for arguments sake, not including pre-sold animals) If people complain about the value of some over other, well it is there choice what animals to bring.
> 
> 4) I think every stall holder *must* have hand gel and/or antiseptic wipes available for before and after handling, just in case a missed RI or the like has got in.
> 
> 5) I think all store holders should hand out care sheets as standard, even if its on how *they* personally keep their animals. As if the animals are healthy and thriving then there shouldn't be too much issue on the difference between how people keep their animals.
> 
> 6) I think if any animal is found on the day to not be healthy for whatever reason then that vendor should be asked to remove all animals from sale.
> 
> 7) any vendor to be found consistently bringing sick or mite infested animals to the shows should be banned.
> 
> 8) Not sure how it went last time, with pre-sold animals and the creche but I think that should continue if that went well.
> 
> That is all i can think of at the moment, I've probably missed something important but I'm tired.
> 
> So feel free to agree/ridicule/argue whatever.


I think thats basicly how the shows are run,except a couple of points.
Size of container i believe was addressed at last show.
No of animals is difficult.For example,i breed two boa's,each drops 30 young,only 4 of the young are the morph Im looking for, why should i be limited to 20 animals,when i have 50+ surplus .and thats just 2 snakes,add in 3 royals,4 corn snakes and a couple of burms


----------



## ian14

dr del said:


> I just wanted to say there is nothing at all stopping me ( as a private individual ) becoming able to do this if I was willing to pay for the service.
> 
> If someone made the decision that it would be worthwhile to be able to offer it to anyone purchasing from them then fair play to them I say.
> 
> It's the same as paypal - I liked the convenience of it and was happy to eat the fees ( as they *insist* you do in their terms and conditions ) it requires.
> 
> 
> dr del


Of course. The point I was trying to make, perhaps not as well as I had hoped, was that, in many cases, the perception that an issue exists is bigger than the issue itself. For example (and totally unrelated but it serves to highlight what I am trying to say), many people are worried about becoming victims of crime. Their perception is that crime is rife, there's a mugger waiting on every street corner, and every other person walking past is waiting to burgle you. Yet the reality is very different. 
The same, I believe, could well be the case with the "trader vs hobbyist" issue at shows - are shows really being used by large numbers of traders OR is the reality that this just isnt the case, but that many hobbyists, in an attempt to give the right impression, give the impression that they are commercial breeders. Given that "commercial" has yet to be legally defined in relation to these events, and with an apparent prosecution looming for someone for just this reason, is it not right to take steps to avoid being accused of being a commercial trader? And to Joe Public (or the local authority!) seeing people selling animals at shows with card readers, big banners, company-esque names, etc etc, this will all point to commercial breeding, not a keen reptile keeper with some hatchlings he/she has bred that they are selling on.
Given that everyone seems to be in agreement that the one sticking point is the meaning of "commerical" within the Pet Animals Act, as acknowledged by Chris Newman, I fail to see why these steps should not be considered.


----------



## colinm

Mos of those conditions are already in place at the shows,except the two most controversial ones.For example:

I have a friend who sells captive bred amphibians at shows.Typically he sells them at £10 or £20 each.If he were only to be allowed to sell twenty this isn`t fair to him when a Royal Python breeder can sell one snake for more than that.He`s not a trader or in it for the money but it will cost him the thick end of £150 in petrol and table fees to go to Doncaster.Why should he do this and not sell them on the internet?not everyone breeds high value animals.

It would be difficult to regulate the size of container as each species has different needs.Our shows are far better than the foreign shows and I think that the clubs do a good job here.You only have to go to Hamm or Houten to see this.


----------



## bash_on_recce

Pete Q said:


> We will have to agree to disagree on this, I don't think we can truely understand how stress effects reptiles, we only think we do or know best.
> 
> For all we know they live out their lives stressed, living in a box in our homes, thats what animal rights would have everyone believe, if stress is a concern maybe we should not keep them in the first place.


You disagree that a herp is less stressed in a set up with no cover than in one with plenty of cover and hiding spaces? :/

I agree that we don't know enough, I disagree that we will ever truly understand, we just need more people with a *real* scientific background to do more research into it.

On a basic level (and i mean educated guess basic level) stress leads to illness and can shorten a species lifespan, when you have species in captivity living healthy lives for 15-20 years, that must mean something.


----------



## penfold

bash_on_recce said:


> You disagree that a herp is less stressed in a set up with no cover than in one with plenty of cover and hiding spaces? :/
> 
> I agree that we don't know enough, I disagree that we will ever truly understand, we just need more people with a *real* scientific background to do more research into it.
> 
> On a basic level (and i mean educated guess basic level) stress leads to illness and can shorten a species lifespan, when you have species in captivity living healthy lives for 15-20 years, that must mean something.


 look at it this way if there is a hide how many times a day will that hide be asked to be moved by potential customers upsetting the animal everytime ,when in a small container these things are never totally transparent the animal sees his boundrys and settles down never gets upset by the hide being moved every 5 minutes


----------



## penfold

and just for the record i do beleive in hides everyone in my shop gets somewhere to hide away:2thumb:


----------



## carpetjohn

*shows*

i wish chris newmann got his facts right before puting them on the forums,i was one of the helpers at the first iihs shows,lets get the facte right yes they were members only but we had over 1000 coming to shows not 300 as chris said,and he should know this as he had a table at these shows.


----------



## bash_on_recce

penfold said:


> look at it this way if there is a hide how many times a day will that hide be asked to be moved by potential customers upsetting the animal everytime ,when in a small container these things are never totally transparent the animal sees his boundrys and settles down never gets upset by the hide being moved every 5 minutes


I saw plenty of animals at CREAKS pushing againest the front of their tubs, there was a Gargoyle gecko that spent pretty much the *whole* show doing this, everytime I walked past the table he was doing it, he certianly wasn't settled.

I understand this is very much my own opinion, I don't want to come to blows about it as this is not the thread to talk about this and I don't want to further take the topic off course, only say if shows stopped tomorrow, It wouldn't effect me one bit.

However it is something to bear in mind if espeically since the welfare aspect of shows has poped up a few times here.


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

For those with a memory longer than a goldfish, Do's any remember when Chris owned the Reptilian mag when Chris was proclaiming the end of the hobby, he still saying the same things, funnily enough 20 odd years later we are still here, except we have lost most of our shows, despite his expert advice.
if this was any other 'organisation' with a track record like that the chair would be shown the door.


----------



## Pete Q

bash_on_recce said:


> You disagree that a herp is less stressed in a set up with no cover than in one with plenty of cover and hiding spaces? :/ quote
> 
> No, what I'm saying is we cannot tell, of coarse a reptile will feel more comfortable with a hide, it's their instint to hide.
> 
> But many reptiles that are kept in draw systems these days don't have hides at all, are they stress ? don't know, or even as you say a stress free life might add to a longer life, would I like to live a long painful life to 120, or leave this world when I should, are they going through any pain living their longer life ? we don't know, but a longer life doesn't always mean a happy one.
> 
> All I'm saying is we don't know enough about the subject, for all we know stress might be an important feeling for them, in the wild they would need to have stress, it keeps them alive, maybe they need that feeling ?
> 
> Anyway, box size, I agree to small might be not good, but also to big could also be not good.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> For those with a memory longer than a goldfish, Do's any remember when Chris owned the Reptilian mag when Chris was proclaiming the end of the hobby, he still saying the same things, funnily enough 20 odd years later we are still here, except we have lost most of our shows, despite his expert advice.
> if this was any other 'organisation' with a track record like that the chair would be shown the door.


Sounds like you really do have a vendetta after all.


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> OK here is _*MY*_ take on shows and on what _*I*_ think *some* of the rules policies should be, people may not agree or may find fault but this is a discussion so I'm happy for their opinion:
> 
> (and I also know many will think "who am I" to say how things should be done. For those people I am someone who enjoys these shows and am passionate about the hobby if you take issue with that well tough : victory
> 
> 1) I think first and foremost there should be a minimum size for containers, obviously different for each species and should be done for baby, sub adult and adult. I think the should at least be able to turn around. Preferably with at least a piece of kitchen roll to hide under if they so wish ( I know people will say about travel safety but is padding said enclosure out for travel really that much effort?)
> 
> 2) I think an effort should be made to keep the hall at an ambient temperature especially in the shows later in the year when its freezing.
> 
> 3) I think there should be a maximum number of animals per vendor (say 20 for arguments sake, not including pre-sold animals) If people complain about the value of some over other, well it is there choice what animals to bring.
> 
> 4) I think every stall holder *must* have hand gel and/or antiseptic wipes available for before and after handling, just in case a missed RI or the like has got in.
> 
> 5) I think all store holders should hand out care sheets as standard, even if its on how *they* personally keep their animals. As if the animals are healthy and thriving then there shouldn't be too much issue on the difference between how people keep their animals.
> 
> 6) I think if any animal is found on the day to not be healthy for whatever reason then that vendor should be asked to remove all animals from sale.
> 
> 7) any vendor to be found consistently bringing sick or mite infested animals to the shows should be banned.
> 
> 8) Not sure how it went last time, with pre-sold animals and the creche but I think that should continue if that went well.
> 
> That is all i can think of at the moment, I've probably missed something important but I'm tired.
> 
> So feel free to agree/ridicule/argue whatever.


Thank you for posting this, these matter are far more constructive than incessant arguing what is or is not a business, hopeful that argument will be put to bed once licensing is in place.

So to address the point your raise:


container size/type, this is without doubt the single biggest issue debated each years when the regs are debated. This is where licensing could really help us! It is important to understand currently such regs are set by committee, each society affiliated to the FBH has representation and a view!! I would like to be more prescriptive on container size and type, but we can’t get consensus, and it is a hugely complex issue when you conceder all the species concerned. Overall the standards we have now are good, but introducing Model Standards as we have for pet shop licensing would be an improvement.

this is already a requirement, as is providing heating where appropriate for animals. We did have one issue last year and that has now been addressed. 

interesting suggestion, what purposes served by limiting the number of animals an exhibiter might have? There are no limits on the number of animals anyone can keep, so would it be appropriate to limited the number an exhibiter might take? Personally I don’t think this is reasonable or proportionate? 

this is already a requirement and if people turn up without such then they have to buy on the day, show organisers have stocks available.

this point we will have to agree to disagree, I understand you point but again I don’t think that is reasonable or proportionate. It is a requirement exhibiters have them, but not that they _must_ be given with each sale. Now of course if this was a condition of the licence, well that would be a different matter!

that is already in place and vigorously enforced, any animal considered not fit for sale my either the independent animal welfare inspector, attending vet/s or show organisers _will_ be removed from the table. 

again this is already in place and a number of people have been banned from attending shows. If someone is banned from attending one show they are now banned from attending _all_ shows! 
I hope that know one feels the needs to ridicule your suggestions, but constructive criticisms is always welcome!


----------



## Chris Newman

bash_on_recce said:


> You disagree that a herp is less stressed in a set up with no cover than in one with plenty of cover and hiding spaces? :/
> 
> I agree that we don't know enough, I disagree that we will ever truly understand, we just need more people with a *real* scientific background to do more research into it.
> 
> On a basic level (and i mean educated guess basic level) stress leads to illness and can shorten a species lifespan, when you have species in captivity living healthy lives for 15-20 years, that must mean something.


What you have to bear in mind is this is ‘temporary’ accommodation, not how the animal will be kept long term. This matter has been discussed, with veterinary advice and the consensus is that providing hid’s at a show is likely to stress the animals more. Very often smaller is better, does not always apply but is a good rule of thumb. Now what I would say is if anyone sees an animals that is stressed report to the show organisers if you have any concerns! 

On the needs for more research on stress in reptiles I couldn’t agree more, but lets have this looked at by scientists, not charlatans!!


----------



## Chris Newman

carpetjohn said:


> i wish chris newmann got his facts right before puting them on the forums,i was one of the helpers at the first iihs shows,lets get the facte right yes they were members only but we had over 1000 coming to shows not 300 as chris said,and he should know this as he had a table at these shows.


If you let me know the venue and year I will look at the IHS records and confirm attendance for you.


----------



## Chris Newman

Pete Q said:


> Sounds like you really do have a vendetta after all.


Pete you are such a cynic!


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Chris Newman said:


> Thank you for posting this, these matter are far more constructive than incessant arguing what is or is not a business, hopeful that argument will be put to bed once licensing is in place.
> 
> So to address the point your raise:
> 
> 
> container size/type, this is without doubt the single biggest issue debated each years when the regs are debated. This is where licensing could really help us! It is important to understand currently such regs are set by committee, each society affiliated to the FBH has representation and a view!! I would like to be more prescriptive on container size and type, but we can’t get consensus, and it is a hugely complex issue when you conceder all the species concerned. Overall the standards we have now are good, but introducing Model Standards as we have for pet shop licensing would be an improvement.
> 
> 
> this is already a requirement, as is providing heating where appropriate for animals. We did have one issue last year and that has now been addressed.
> 
> 
> interesting suggestion, what purposes served by limiting the number of animals an exhibiter might have? There are no limits on the number of animals anyone can keep, so would it be appropriate to limited the number an exhibiter might take? Personally I don’t think this is reasonable or proportionate?
> 
> 
> this is already a requirement and if people turn up without such then they have to buy on the day, show organisers have stocks available.
> 
> 
> this point we will have to agree to disagree, I understand you point but again I don’t think that is reasonable or proportionate. It is a requirement exhibiters have them, but not that they _must_ be given with each sale. Now of course if this was a condition of the licence, well that would be a different matter!
> 
> 
> that is already in place and vigorously enforced, any animal considered not fit for sale my either the independent animal welfare inspector, attending vet/s or show organisers _will_ be removed from the table.
> 
> 
> again this is already in place and a number of people have been banned from attending shows. If someone is banned from attending one show they are now banned from attending _all_ shows!
> I hope that know one feels the needs to ridicule your suggestions, but constructive criticisms is always welcome!


Thanks Chris,

I have only been to 2 of the shows both in when in the Dome so im not up on the policies and changes that are in the new place.

Like i said this is just what I think and if most of them are all ready in place then fantastic 

As for the tub issues just tell them all to stop being a pain in the butt and agree :lol2:


----------



## Chris Newman

Lil_nightmare said:


> Thanks Chris,
> 
> As for the tub issues just tell them all to stop being a pain in the butt and agree :lol2:


If only, we are going thought this process as we speak and it’s very tough. Experienced keepers tend to have very entrenched views, and that’s not unreasonable. So when you have twenty experienced keepers in the same room trying to agree something its’ a challenge? In fairness 90% they will agree on, it’s the remaining 10% where its gets interesting shall we say!!! 

Its very much a matter off::whip: :bash::2wallbang::jump::gasp: but hopfully in the end:2thumb:


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> For those with a memory longer than a goldfish, Do's any remember when Chris owned the Reptilian mag when Chris was proclaiming the end of the hobby, he still saying the same things, funnily enough 20 odd years later we are still here, except we have lost most of our shows, despite his expert advice.
> if this was any other 'organisation' with a track record like that the chair would be shown the door.


So, 

1) Chris claims, in a magazine, that the AR groups are trying to end our hobby

2) So far, many shows have ceased to occur (though you fail to specify why? Poor attendance, closure of society, poor amenities?)

3) you think the reason some shows, not all, have failed is because Chris has done a poor job?

In my view, all you have do e is point out that, despite efforts by ARs to end the hobby, we are still here. And who do we have to thank? Everyone! Chris has do e a brilliant job spearheadi g our defense, but despite your belief, he is not the only person In the fbh or hobby, so everyone deserves some credit.

I thank you all for putting time and effort I to preventing ARs from destroying the hobby I love.


----------



## Natrix

stevenrudge said:


> For those with a memory longer than a goldfish, Do's any remember when Chris owned the Reptilian mag when Chris was proclaiming the end of the hobby, he still saying the same things, funnily enough 20 odd years later we are still here, except we have lost most of our shows, despite his expert advice.
> if this was any other 'organisation' with a track record like that the chair would be shown the door.


Steven

Your glass appears to be half empty, now lets try the same statement but this time I’ll give you a glass that is half full.

For those with a memory longer than a goldfish, Doe's any remember when Chris was the Editor of the Reptilian mag and allerted everyone in the hobby to the work being done by the Societies (including the IHS and BHS) in their attempts to set up the FBH. The hobby was under attack from several AR groups and shows were being stopped all over the country. Well despite the best efforts of several AR groups and thanks to the input of the FBH and Chris (now Chairman of the FBH) we are still all here 20 odd years later and while we have lost some shows we have gained a few new ones and despite (or perhaps because of) the AR fanatics we are in a much better position to keep the hobby going. 
if this was any other organisation, with a track record like that the chair would be given a large bonus for all his efforts.

Steven,

I do try and see eveybodies point of view and accept that every one has a right to their own view point but you seem to have gone beyond common sense in your continued attacks on Chris and the FBH. 

*Here’s my question for Steven.*
Steven,
if your so good at what you do, why did Tesco’s let you go?

Gordon Glasson
FBH VC


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply as rquested*

Sorry Scot l never saw your question in the first place,
.What would be your criteria for who is allowed to attend and sell at YOUR organised show.
if it were an IHS show it would be 1 table for 1 member,each application with have to be judged in it own merit,how many animals would be for sale.No automatic right to a table
As already stated-no traders,each application would have to be checked for any trading activity,like forum usage of adverts,webb and nett sits,this would not exclude any high value animal breeder,as with the 1 table cap any excessive numbers .
Each table holder would have to sign a opt out form,legally signing that they are not trading, licence or unlicensed-this would exempt the society show from any litigation if this was not the case.
By making these small steps would show that the society would have done everything reasonably possible to insure that their shows were hobby shows only.


----------



## Purple_D

stevenrudge said:


> Sorry Scot l never saw your question in the first place,
> .What would be your criteria for who is allowed to attend and sell at YOUR organised show.
> if it were an IHS show it would be 1 table for 1 member,each application with have to be judged in it own merit,how many animals would be for sale.No automatic right to a table
> As already stated-no traders,each application would have to be checked for any trading activity,like forum usage of adverts,webb and nett sits,this would not exclude any high value animal breeder,as with the 1 table cap any excessive numbers .
> Each table holder would have to sign a opt out form,legally signing that they are not trading, licence or unlicensed-this would exempt the society show from any litigation if this was not the case.
> By making these small steps would show that the society would have done everything reasonably possible to insure that their shows were hobby shows only.


copy and paste,.
who is this steven today:whistling2:


----------



## Blake1990

Purple_D said:


> copy and paste,.
> who is this steven today:whistling2:


The one who can't string a sentence together :lol2:

But yea i did notice this on CB :whistling2:


----------



## Desert Ghost

Chris Newman said:


> What you have to bear in mind is this is ‘temporary’ accommodation, not how the animal will be kept long term. This matter has been discussed, with veterinary advice and the consensus is that providing hid’s at a show is likely to stress the animals more. Very often smaller is better, does not always apply but is a good rule of thumb. Now what I would say is if anyone sees an animals that is stressed report to the show organisers if you have any concerns!
> 
> On the needs for more research on stress in reptiles I couldn’t agree more, but lets have this looked at by scientists, not charlatans!!


Regardless of how temporary it is, or how stressed the animal may get, do you think it is a good advert for the hobby?


----------



## Natrix

Desert Ghost said:


> Regardless of how temporary it is, or how stressed the animal may get, do you think it is a good advert for the hobby?


It’s not about what looks good to the rest of the world, it’s about what works best for the animal. There is no animal related hobby where temporary accommodation and more importantly travelling accommodation is provided on a large scale. 
What has more room, a cat in a cat box or a hatchling corn in a plastic tub? Do horse owners transport horses in field size boxes or horse size boxes?
Take a walk around a bird show and take a look at the size of the show cages or the small holding pens at rabbit shows or pigeon shows. Even fish are shown in small tanks.
The simple fact is that vets will tell you that an animal feels safer in a confined space when travelling or at a show.

Also reptiles feel safer when they can touch the sides of their hide. A small tub gives them the illusion of being in a small hide. Given this fact what is likely to cause most stress, being in a small tub on view but with little disturbance or in a larger cage with a hide but constantly taken out of the hide so that they can be seen.
We are not choosing show cages to make non keepers like us, we are choosing cages to suit the temporary needs of the animals going into them and in doing this we need to consider the type of animal and its needs and not what we think would be nice from a human point of view.

Gordon Glasson
FBH VC


----------



## Janine00

Purple_D said:


> copy and paste,.
> who is this steven today:whistling2:


Not only copy and paste, but from another forum too.... or did Scott ask the question on this forum as well????


Nice to see the positive glass half full side of things Gordon :2thumb: That is usually the side I prefer : victory:

Wonder if Tesco's give their managers bonuses.... or is that called profit sharing or a percentage off their shopping??? Every little helps.... :whistling2:


----------



## Tarron

johnc79 said:


> I know he sells his offspring to local shops.
> 
> He asked me to bring a load of water snakes back for him from Hamm back in march. He told me they were for him. The week later they were in the classifieds at a lot more than he paid for them. He made a good profit on them. Same happend with someone else in September . Loads of lake Erie water snakes were passed on to him then funny enough a week later mr rudge puts them in the classifieds . Make of that what you will. :whistling2:
> 
> Ask him if he has ever been done for tax evasion in his past


In another thread on another forum, Steven accused John of the same thing, and categorically stated that he does not buy snakes and sell them on. Nor does he sell on forums or classifieds. He asked for conclusive evidence that he does.

So, ladies and gentlemen, without further ado;

For Sale Lake Erie Water Snakes - CaptiveBred Reptile Forums, Reptile Classified, Forum

Here is the evidence. Not only is it a species John mentioned, but in the post he claims he bought them but is 'overpopulated' with this species.

Why buy them then? only to sell on soon after? :whistling2:


----------



## Genseric

They are a nice wee species them.. sorry, Off Topic


----------



## langerspies

Natrix said:


> It’s not about what looks good to the rest of the world, it’s about what works best for the animal. There is no animal related hobby where temporary accommodation and more importantly travelling accommodation is provided on a large scale.
> What has more room, a cat in a cat box or a hatchling corn in a plastic tub? Do horse owners transport horses in field size boxes or horse size boxes?
> Take a walk around a bird show and take a look at the size of the show cages or the small holding pens at rabbit shows or pigeon shows. Even fish are shown in small tanks.
> The simple fact is that vets will tell you that an animal feels safer in a confined space when travelling or at a show.
> 
> Also reptiles feel safer when they can touch the sides of their hide. A small tub gives them the illusion of being in a small hide. Given this fact what is likely to cause most stress, being in a small tub on view but with little disturbance or in a larger cage with a hide but constantly taken out of the hide so that they can be seen.
> We are not choosing show cages to make non keepers like us, we are choosing cages to suit the temporary needs of the animals going into them and in doing this we need to consider the type of animal and its needs and not what we think would be nice from a human point of view.
> 
> Gordon Glasson
> FBH VC


 Who actually told you these amazing facts about reptiles?? Because as much as i try my snakes dont talk back to me, so unless you have talking lizards or snakes you are just assuming you know what they do or dont like.


----------



## Tarron

They are indeed Genseric.

the question we must pose, I suppose, is;

Were these snakes bought, with the intention of selling on or did Steven 'impulse buy' them, and then realise he couldn't keep them?

If they were bought with the intention to sell on, then it could be assumed that under the pet animals act, he would need a license.

so Steven, could you clarify this point please?


----------



## Chris Newman

Desert Ghost said:


> Regardless of how temporary it is, or how stressed the animal may get, do you think it is a good advert for the hobby?


I am not minded to compromise animal welfare for the sake of public perception? It might also be pertinent to point out these events whilst open events are not aimed at the ‘pubic’ they are for ‘keepers’ who are likely to be better informed than members of the general public!


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> Who actually told you these amazing facts about reptiles?? Because as much as i try my snakes dont talk back to me, so unless you have talking lizards or snakes you are just assuming you know what they do or dont like.


One usefully might conceder why do reptiles hide under logs and in holes etc to find an answer to that question! We might also evaluate why some reptiles, notably snakes but also some lizard species, feed better in confined spaces?


----------



## Desert Ghost

If i took the lid off, would they choose to stay?


----------



## Purple_D

Desert Ghost said:


> If i took the lid off, would they choose to stay?


no,but if you left a 6ft viv open would they stay put?:whistling2:


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*



Purple_D said:


> no,but if you left a 6ft viv open would they stay put?:whistling2:


ERrrr No?
Your point is?


----------



## Purple_D

stevenrudge said:


> ERrrr No?
> Your point is?


in regards to the quote, alot more valid than any of yours.
You do keep spouting for a reptile business,buys and sells from shows to forum members,against evrything you preach


----------



## langerspies

[Somebody else's adverts removed]



Tarron said:


> They are indeed Genseric.
> 
> the question we must pose, I suppose, is;
> 
> Were these snakes bought, with the intention of selling on or did Steven 'impulse buy' them, and then realise he couldn't keep them?
> 
> If they were bought with the intention to sell on, then it could be assumed that under the pet animals act, he would need a license.
> 
> so Steven, could you clarify this point please?


I see you like to look into peoples selling histories etc, could you take a look at these and let me know what you make of it. Anyone else feel free to take a look. Oh there is lots more but way over the limit to add to this post


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> I see you like to look into peoples selling histories etc, could you take a look at these and let me know what you make of it. Anyone else feel free to take a look. Oh there is lots more but way over the limit to add to this post


difference is,he doe's not dispute his selling history,un like your mate the grudge,nor is Scott on a crusade/vendetta against C Newman and the FBH


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> difference is,he doe's not dispute his selling history,un like your mate the grudge,nor is Scott on a crusade/vendetta against C Newman and the FBH


 No but he sells at shows, so how do you evaluate his selling history?? Trader/commercial or just surplus hobbyist??


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> No but he sells at shows, so how do you evaluate his selling history?? Trader/commercial or just surplus hobbyist??


without knowing how he funds his hobby,who knows.he may just a big hobbiest,plus a lot of snakes doe's not make a business


----------



## langerspies

langerspies said:


> No but he sells at shows, so how do you evaluate his selling history?? Trader/commercial or just surplus hobbyist??


 Also would like to ask Chris. I have heard that the person referred to in my last 2 posts is on the FBH commitee, is this right??


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> without knowing how he funds his hobby,who knows.he may just a big hobbiest,plus a lot of snakes doe's not make a business


No but breeding to sell does, go read all the ads properly


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> Also would like to ask Chris. I have heard that the person referred to in my last 2 posts is on the FBH commitee, is this right??


why not ask him direct,i take it you're on CB


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> why not ask him direct,i take it you're on CB


 Yeah but its so slow on there, might as well do it here,and the mods are not directly involved on here either.: victory:


----------



## johnc79

Tarron said:


> In another thread on another forum, Steven accused John of the same thing, and categorically stated that he does not buy snakes and sell them on. Nor does he sell on forums or classifieds. He asked for conclusive evidence that he does.
> 
> So, ladies and gentlemen, without further ado;
> 
> For Sale Lake Erie Water Snakes - CaptiveBred Reptile Forums, Reptile Classified, Forum
> 
> Here is the evidence. Not only is it a species John mentioned, but in the post he claims he bought them but is 'overpopulated' with this species.
> 
> Why buy them then? only to sell on soon after? :whistling2:


Where was the thread he acused me? I must of missed it. 

Oh you missed this one, funny enough not long after Hamm in march. http://www.reptileforums.co.uk/forums/snake-classifieds/823463-diamond-backed-water-snakes.html

I've got the recipt somewhere i will dig it out incase he gets me done for "slander" lol


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> Yeah but its so slow on there, might as well do it here,and the mods are not directly involved on here either.: victory:


you could PM on here or CB


----------



## Desert Ghost

Purple_D said:


> no,but if you left a 6ft viv open would they stay put?:whistling2:


Im not sure i follow the connection, keeping a snake in 6ft viv is a great advert for the hobby!


----------



## Purple_D

Desert Ghost said:


> Im not sure i follow the connection, keeping a snake in 6ft viv is a great advert for the hobby!


so is making it feel secure for transport:2thumb:


----------



## stevenrudge

Originally Posted by Purple_D 
difference is,he doe's not dispute his selling history,un like your mate the grudge,nor is Scott on a crusade/vendetta against C Newman and the FBHQuote
Actually its Mr Rudge to you,you know what l find it funny that some people talk of 'crusades/vendettas' just because l've ask some questions,you can check all my selling history on the forums as l use my own name.
just to recap we have some people using our hobby shows for some 'suspect activity' and you do not like the questions about this?
Are you actually a member of anything?
Because if not its nothing to do with you


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> you could PM on here or CB


 No, thats fine thanks I have asked, no need to ask again.
Anyway getting back to my earlier post, is that the best answer you can come up with when a few water snakes or whatever is enough to incriminate someone.


----------



## Purple_D

stevenrudge said:


> Originally Posted by Purple_D
> difference is,he doe's not dispute his selling history,un like your mate the grudge,nor is Scott on a crusade/vendetta against C Newman and the FBHQuote
> Actually its Mr Rudge to you,you know what l find it funny that some people talk of 'crusades/vendettas' just because l've ask some questions,you can check all my selling history on the forums as l use my own name.
> just to recap we have some people using our hobby shows for some 'suspect activity' and you do not like the questions about this?
> Are you actually a member of anything?
> Because if not its nothing to do with you


Mr grudge,now you've done your shelve stacking you have time to post.I have checked your selling history on forums,selling on forums that you say you don't do.
And yes I am a member of a few things,and while you are speaking to anti's and trying to throw a spanner in the works of shows and the hobby,it's every thing to do with me.
MR Purple D.
PS, have you registered your business with the tax man yet


----------



## Purple_D

langerspies said:


> No, thats fine thanks I have asked, no need to ask again.
> Anyway getting back to my earlier post, is that the best answer you can come up with when a few water snakes or whatever is enough to incriminate someone.


plus corn snakes,mice ,etc.In numbers


----------



## stevenrudge

Also would like to ask Chris. I have heard that the person referred to in my last 2 posts is on the FBH commitee, is this right??
l can predict a 'more press issues moment' or 'bigger fish to fry' Quote any time now.
its like when l ask him to explain why l saw a known trader right next to his stand at one of the shows.


----------



## johnc79

Purple_D said:


> plus corn snakes,mice ,etc.In numbers


I forgot about the mouse selling he does....:whistling2:


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> plus corn snakes,mice ,etc.In numbers





johnc79 said:


> I forgot about the mouse selling he does....:whistling2:


Thats all well and good, but what about the person i asked you all to look at. Its all there in the posts.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> Also would like to ask Chris. I have heard that the person referred to in my last 2 posts is on the FBH commitee, is this right??


The committee of the Federation of British Herpetologists is complied from members of affiliated clubs and societies, they and only they have voting rights, thus the ability to set federation policy. In addition we have various invited guest, non-executive members who have no voting rights but are invited to participate in relating to there area of expertise. The position of the FBH is to be inclusive, not exclusive. Herpetology covers a very broad spectrum of interest. I trust that answers you question satisfactorily!


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> The committee of the Federation of British Herpetologists is complied from members of affiliated clubs and societies, they and only they have voting rights, thus the ability to set federation policy. In addition we have various invited guest, non-executive members who have no voting rights but are invited to participate in relating to there area of expertise. The position of the FBH is to be inclusive, not exclusive. Herpetology covers a very broad spectrum of interest. I trust that answers you question satisfactorily!


 No, it does not,really


----------



## stevenrudge

Purple_D said:


> Mr grudge,now you've done your shelve stacking you have time to post.I have checked your selling history on forums,selling on forums that you say you don't do.
> And yes I am a member of a few things,and while you are speaking to anti's and trying to throw a spanner in the works of shows and the hobby,it's every thing to do with me.
> MR Purple D.
> PS, have you registered your business with the tax man yet


l have not sold anything on any forum for ages,and when l did it was the odd pair,if you really believe what you've just said 'TBH l do not think you do' your either stupid,l do not think you are or your just mouthing off trying to impress others.
if anybody with any intelligence was to read my post and reply's can see that l'm working to save the hobby shows.its the people who use our shows that are the most vocal against this for obvious reasons
Feel free to report me to the Tax Man,unlike some l have nothing to hide l'm sure theirs people on the forums that would appreciated the attention that would bring
FFS check my addys and then compare to most others
As with most you do not know what your mouthing off at


----------



## Purple_D

stevenrudge said:


> l have not sold anything on any forum for ages,and when l did it was the odd pair,if you really believe what you've just said 'TBH l do not think you do' your either stupid,l do not think you are or your just mouthing off trying to impress others.
> if anybody with any intelligence was to read my post and reply's can see that l'm working to save the hobby shows.its the people who use our shows that are the most vocal against this for obvious reasons
> Feel free to report me to the Tax Man,unlike some l have nothing to hide l'm sure theirs people on the forums that would appreciated the attention that would bring
> FFS check my addys and then compare to most others
> As with most you do not know what your mouthing off at


So mr saviour of the rep hobby,September last year,just after hamm show,and march last year,just after hamm show,is not ages to me.
And un like you and your clones ,I don't need to impress any one


----------



## penfold

johnc79 said:


> I forgot about the mouse selling he does....:whistling2:


 is that the one when he was picking up van loads of frozen rodents then bringing them back here to sell was this a declared income ?


----------



## langerspies

langerspies said:


> Also would like to ask Chris. I have heard that the person referred to in my last 2 posts is on the FBH commitee, is this right??





Chris Newman said:


> The committee of the Federation of British Herpetologists is complied from members of affiliated clubs and societies, they and only they have voting rights, thus the ability to set federation policy. In addition we have various invited guest, non-executive members who have no voting rights but are invited to participate in relating to there area of expertise. The position of the FBH is to be inclusive, not exclusive. Herpetology covers a very broad spectrum of interest. I trust that answers you question satisfactorily!


 Sorry to trouble you again Mr Newman, but i think you misread my question, i did not ask the in and outs of committee members, i asked if a certain person was on the FBH committee? To save your time a straight yes or no would suffice.


----------



## johnc79

langerspies said:


> Thats all well and good, but what about the person i asked you all to look at. Its all there in the posts.


I do not know that person and I'm not really into that argument. My point was against the deluded Rudge attacking everyone when he is just as bad or worse. I do not keep royals or high end stuff so it does not really affect me.


----------



## stevenrudge

langerspies said:


> Thats all well and good, but what about the person i asked you all to look at. Its all there in the posts.


l do not keep any mice??? l got rid 2 years ago!FM you upto speed an events!
tell you what next time you import some snakes from Hamm,give DEFRA an email and you can copy me in as well 
This is how debased this conversation has got to,people are asking if l run an unlicensed business on the back of some old adds when the very same people are import animals illegally
You could not make this up-Honestly


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> No, it does not,really


You surprise me - you asked a question and received an answer?


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> You surprise me - you asked a question and received an answer?


 Maybe if you answer the question that was actually asked i might be able say " ok thats fine, thanks Chris"
Not being funny but do you have genuine trouble understanding what people write?


----------



## johnc79

stevenrudge said:


> l do not keep any mice??? l got rid 2 years ago!FM you upto speed an events!
> tell you what next time you import some snakes from Hamm,give DEFRA an email and you can copy me in as well
> This is how debased this conversation has got to,people are asking if l run an unlicensed business on the back of some old adds when the very same people are import animals illegally
> You could not make this up-Honestly


So are you saying snakes I bring back for me or on behalf of friends is against the law? What was that large box of frozern you brought for someone at the april IHS meet? Was that a freebie then. You make me laugh .


----------



## langerspies

johnc79 said:


> I do not know that person and I'm not really into that argument. My point was against the deluded Rudge attacking everyone when he is just as bad or worse. I do not keep royals or high end stuff so it does not really affect me.


 Its not all about you though is it ? Its about our hobby.


----------



## Purple_D

stevenrudge said:


> l do not keep any mice??? l got rid 2 years ago!FM you upto speed an events!
> tell you what next time you import some snakes from Hamm,give DEFRA an email and you can copy me in as well
> This is how debased this conversation has got to,people are asking if l run an unlicensed business on the back of some old adds when the very same people are import animals illegally
> You could not make this up-Honestly


Can you back up the illegal part,if not i may have to get my legal team involved,and have you for slander:hmm:


----------



## Lil_nightmare

Maybe if we ignore him he will go away?

Im starting to think this applies:


----------



## johnc79

langerspies said:


> Its not all about you though is it ? Its about our hobby.


You seem to like an argument.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> Sorry to trouble you again Mr Newman, but i think you misread my question, i did not ask the in and outs of committee members, i asked if a certain person was on the FBH committee? To save your time a straight yes or no would suffice.


I most certainly did not misread you question, I gave you a straight answer! If you requite me to simplify the answer no Mr Wilkinson is not a committee member, he is an invited guest, I thought you would understand the different functions, I apologise if this has caused confusion….!!


----------



## Mynki

langerspies said:


> I see you like to look into peoples selling histories etc, could you take a look at these and let me know what you make of it. Anyone else feel free to take a look. Oh there is lots more but way over the limit to add to this post


I think you're very envious of a very good, successful breeder who's got where he is by being damned good at what he does.


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> I most certainly did not misread you question, I gave you a straight answer! If you requite me to simplify the answer no Mr Wilkinson is not a committee member, he is an invited guest, I thought you would understand the different functions, I apologise if this has caused confusion….!!


 Thats all i asked, thanks for making it clear.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> Maybe if you answer the question that was actually asked i might be able say " ok thats fine, thanks Chris"
> Not being funny but do you have genuine trouble understanding what people write?


As you are aware I am profoundly dyslexic and entirely uneducated, you will I am sure, be sympathetic to any misunderstanding! Notwithstanding this (I hope) that I have endeavoured to clarify the situation in my preceding post. If you require further clarifications do not hesitate to ask!


----------



## langerspies

johnc79 said:


> You seem to like an argument.


 I seem to like doing what everybody else is doing to other people


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> As you are aware I am profoundly dyslexic and entirely uneducated, you will I am sure, be sympathetic to any misunderstanding! Notwithstanding this (I hope) that I have endeavoured to clarify the situation in my preceding post. If you require further clarifications do not hesitate to ask!


 So does this affect the way you read and answer things?


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> So does this affect the way you read and answer things?


Inevitably…!!


----------



## langerspies

Mynki said:


> I think you're very envious of a very good, successful breeder who's got where he is by being damned good at what he does.


 I hate to dissapoint you, but I'm afraid you are wrong.


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> Inevitably…!!


 So when you go to these big pow wow's to save our hobby etc, do you actually know what is being said or what you are replying ?
All sounds a bit risky to me.


----------



## Lil_nightmare

langerspies said:


> So when you go to these big pow wow's to save our hobby etc, do you actually know what is being said or what you are replying ?
> All sounds a bit risky to me.



That is very callous of you and shows just how ignorant you are.

Dyslexia is an impairment that affects the persons ability and comprehension in reading, writing and spelling. Not in the spoken word and is not indicative of someones intelligence


----------



## Mynki

Chris Newman said:


> As you are aware I am profoundly dyslexic and entirely uneducated, you will I am sure, be sympathetic to any misunderstanding! Notwithstanding this (I hope) that I have endeavoured to clarify the situation in my preceding post. If you require further clarifications do not hesitate to ask!


Chris, he / she isn't worth your time. It's just a troll with nothing better to do with its life. Stick it on ignore.


----------



## langerspies

Lil_nightmare said:


> That is very callous of you and shows just how ignorant you are.
> 
> Dyslexia is an impairment that affects the persons ability and comprehension in reading, writing and spelling. Not in the spoken word and is not indicative of someones intelligence


I'm only going by what Chris has told me, and big meetings usually have loads of info on paper. For your information if i am ignorant blame Chris.


----------



## langerspies

Anyway chaps, i have a late shift to start at 10 and i'm pushing it to get their on time. Catch up tommoz.


----------



## penfold

langerspies said:


> So when you go to these big pow wow's to save our hobby etc, do you actually know what is being said or what you are replying ?
> All sounds a bit risky to me.


Your a peice of shit you are , how rude are you may I suggest anyone with an ounce of decentcy ignore this man


----------



## Lil_nightmare

langerspies said:


> I'm only going by what Chris has told me, and big meetings usually have loads of info on paper. For your information if i am ignorant blame Chris.


No the only person to blame for ignorance is yourself. You could have easily asked Chris if it was difficult at these meetings due to his Dyslexia but instead you chose to add a snide little comment indicating he was not up for the job.

Dyslexia isn't indicative of someones intelligence but this thread and your last few replies are certainly indicative of yours.


----------



## Natrix

langerspies said:


> I'm only going by what Chris has told me, and big meetings usually have loads of info on paper. For your information if i am ignorant blame Chris.


Just a few facts re dyslexia from the US dyslexia society



It is estimated that 1 in 10 people have dyslexia
Over 40 million American Adults are dyslexic - and only 2 million know it
Dyslexia is not tied to IQ - Einsten was dyslexic and had an estimated IQ of 160
Dyslexia in not just about getting letters or numbers mixed up or out of order
80% of people associate dyslexia with some form of retardation - this is not true
Dyslexia is a language-based learning disability or disorder that includes poor word reading, word decoding, oral reading fluency and spelling
Dyslexia occurs in people of all backgrounds and intellectural levels
Dyslexia has nothing to do with not working hard enough
20% of school-aged children in the US are dyslexic
With approriate teaching methods, dyslexica can learn successfully
Over 50% of NASA employees are dyslexic
Dyslexia runs in familes; parents with dyslexia are very likely to have children with dyslexia
Dyslexics may struggle with organizational skills, planning and prioritizing, keeping time, concentrating with background noise.
Dyslexis may excel at connecting ideas, thinking out of the box, 3D thinking, seeing the big picture
People with dyslexia excel or even gifted in areas of art, computer science, design, drama, electronics, math, mechanics, music, physics, sales and sports
Many famous people are dyslexic including: Orlando Bloom, Whoopi Goldberg, Stephen Spielberg, Kiera Knightley. Albert Einstein and Patrick Dempsey


----------



## Purple_D

penfold said:


> Your a peice of shit you are , how rude are you may I suggest anyone with an ounce of decentcy ignore this man


I have a feeling that this person is a recently banned member from CB.
The rantings and tone are a tad calmer,but sounds like them to me


----------



## penfold

That does sound about right


----------



## Mynki

Purple_D said:


> I have a feeling that this person is a recently banned member from CB.
> The rantings and tone are a tad calmer,but sounds like them to me


It's inevitable that Ediie will surface here and on CB at some point. You could well be right...


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> l have not sold anything on any forum for ages,and when l did it was the odd pair,if you really believe what you've just said 'TBH l do not think you do' your either stupid,l do not think you are or your just mouthing off trying to impress others.
> if anybody with any intelligence was to read my post and reply's can see tha l'm working to save the hobby shows.its the people who use our shows that are the most vocal against this for obvious reasons
> Feel free to report me to the Tax Man,unlike some l have nothing to hide l'm sure theirs people on the forums that would appreciated the attention that would bring
> FFS check my addys and then compare to most others
> As with most you do not know what your mouthing off at


How can you say 'it was ages a go'? It was 4 months at most. Thats not ages steven. 



Natrix said:


> Dyslexia is not tied to IQ - Einsten was dyslexic and had an estimated IQ of 160


This is why we dont have time travel! It was supposed to be M=CE squared!



Purple_D said:


> I have a feeling that this person is a recently banned member from CB.
> The rantings and tone are a tad calmer,but sounds like them to me


Yup! Said banned person was also fixated on Intelligence.


----------



## Chris Newman

langerspies said:


> So when you go to these big pow wow's to save our hobby etc, do you actually know what is being said or what you are replying ?
> All sounds a bit risky to me.


That actually is a little offensive, I am profoundly dyslexic, I left school in 1975 unable to read or write and I have subsequently managed to get to the level that I have today by perseverance. I am acutely aware my spelling and grammar is atrocious, but I try. My media is an orator, not a writer, I fight my (our) corner with vigour, sure I struggle with the written word and I am well aware that its an impediment, but ridiculing some for that is that is unnecessary. I am not perfect, I have never clam to be, I do the best that I can to represent ‘our’ interest….!!


----------



## bothrops

I was going to lock this thread (I still might).


It has been left open so no parties can accuse us of favouring one over the other and to allow all of us with a vested interest in this hobby of ours to discuss the issues maturely and sensibly.



Unfortunately some members are unable to cope with this and instead resort to personal attacks and cheap shots.


Anything further that does not involve simple and mature discussion of the facts will be deleted and the poster runs the risk of gaining infraction points, if this proves to be too difficult then I will be left with no choice but to close the thread for good and delete and infract anyone choosing to start new threads to continue bitching.



You have been warned - now play nice.


----------



## Chris Newman

bothrops said:


> I was going to lock this thread (I still might).
> 
> 
> It has been left open so no parties can accuse us of favouring one over the other and to allow all of us with a vested interest in this hobby of ours to discuss the issues maturely and sensibly.
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately some members are unable to cope with this and instead resort to personal attacks and cheap shots.
> 
> 
> Anything further that does not involve simple and mature discussion of the facts will be deleted and the poster runs the risk of gaining infraction points, if this proves to be too difficult then I will be left with no choice but to close the thread for good and delete and infract anyone choosing to start new threads to continue bitching.
> 
> 
> 
> You have been warned - now play nice.


Apologies if my comments were inappropriate…


----------



## Pete Q

langerspies said:


> Anyway chaps, i have a late shift to start at 10 and i'm pushing it to get their on time. Catch up tommoz.


Sorry slightly off topic, but have you ever seen blackadder ? :whistling2:


----------



## bothrops

Chris Newman said:


> Apologies if my comments were inappropriate…


Your comments have been professional and calm throughout.


----------



## bash_on_recce

I think overall this thread has been insightful on many levels and apart from a few slip ups seems to have remained above board for 52 pages, most pthreads on the snake forum would have turned *really* nasty about 50 pages ago XD


----------



## stevenrudge

langerspies said:


> Thats all i asked, thanks for making it clear.


Sorry but something is wrong with this,Because Scott on C/B makes it clear that he is on the main FBH committee,it make no difference to me either way,but you either know who's on you main committee or you do not.
As usual l already know the answer,l'm just asking you to be open and honist.
is Scott the forum owner of C/B on your main FBH committee
YES
No
That all the answer l need


----------



## johnc79

stevenrudge said:


> Also would like to ask Chris. I have heard that the person referred to in my last 2 posts is on the FBH commitee, is this right??
> l can predict a 'more press issues moment' or 'bigger fish to fry' Quote any time now.
> its like when l ask him to explain why l saw a known trader right next to his stand at one of the shows.


You don't do to shows remember :lol2:


----------



## Lil_nightmare

stevenrudge said:


> Sorry but something is wrong with this,Because Scott on C/B makes it clear that he is on the main FBH committee,it make no difference to me either way,but you either know who's on you main committee or you do not.
> As usual l already know the answer,l'm just asking you to be open and honist.
> is Scott the forum owner of C/B on your main FBH committee
> YES
> No
> That all the answer l need


I could make it clear I'm hand maiden to the queen, doesn't make it true though :whistling2:


----------



## Natrix

stevenrudge said:


> Sorry but something is wrong with this,Because Scott on C/B makes it clear that he is on the main FBH committee,it make no difference to me either way,but you either know who's on you main committee or you do not.
> As usual l already know the answer,l'm just asking you to be open and honist.
> is Scott the forum owner of C/B on your main FBH committee
> YES
> No
> That all the answer l need


Steven,

I have been a MAIN committee member for about twelve years now and the Vice Chairman of the MAIN committee for about ten years. In that time I have attended a number of committee meetings each year and read and replied to several hundred committee e-mails each year. In all that time at no point has Scott ever been listed as a MAIN committee member.

However durring most of that time Scott has been a very strong supporter of the FBH and has for many years made his knowledge and experience freely available to the committee. For this reason Scott and several other equally valued people/breeders have been invited to take part in FBH meetings and e-mail discussions. 
Infact over the years a lot of people with specialist knowledge have taken part in FBH meetings and e-mail discussions and have provided us with invaluble help and advice.

So to reiterate what Chris has already told you 

*NO* (I think that's the word you are looking for) Scott Wilkinson is not a Main committee member, he is a valued, invited guest who attends meetings and takes part in discussions.

Gordon Glasson
FBH Vice Chairman
and MAIN committee member


----------



## langerspies

Chris Newman said:


> That actually is a little offensive, I am profoundly dyslexic, I left school in 1975 unable to read or write and I have subsequently managed to get to the level that I have today by perseverance. I am acutely aware my spelling and grammar is atrocious, but I try. My media is an orator, not a writer, I fight my (our) corner with vigour, sure I struggle with the written word and I am well aware that its an impediment, but ridiculing some for that is that is unnecessary. I am not perfect, I have never clam to be, I do the best that I can to represent ‘our’ interest….!!


I suposse i could of wrote that a bit better, but i was just asking if you could get the gist of everything after you said written stuff gave you problems,as meetings normally have a lot of written stuff,and just thought it was a bit risky. I never said you was stupid but i wish you would just answer a straightforward question with a straightforward answer. It really was not meant to offend you,


----------



## langerspies

Purple_D said:


> I have a feeling that this person is a recently banned member from CB.
> The rantings and tone are a tad calmer,but sounds like them to me


 I hate to dissapoint you, but you're wrong. Sorry about that.


----------



## stevenrudge

Natrix said:


> Steven,
> 
> I have been a MAIN committee member for about twelve years now and the Vice Chairman of the MAIN committee for about ten years. In that time I have attended a number of committee meetings each year and read and replied to several hundred committee e-mails each year. In all that time at no point has Scott ever been listed as a MAIN committee member.
> 
> However durring most of that time Scott has been a very strong supporter of the FBH and has for many years made his knowledge and experience freely available to the committee. For this reason Scott and several other equally valued people/breeders have been invited to take part in FBH meetings and e-mail discussions.
> Infact over the years a lot of people with specialist knowledge have taken part in FBH meetings and e-mail discussions and have provided us with invaluble help and advice.
> 
> So to reiterate what Chris has already told you
> 
> *NO* (I think that's the word you are looking for) Scott Wilkinson is not a Main committee member, he is a valued, invited guest who attends meetings and takes part in discussions.
> 
> Gordon Glasson
> FBH Vice Chairman
> and MAIN committee member


You know what l like Gordon,he is the only one that l have any respect for from that Fed,he is honest,he answers pm's,and he do's not hid,he makes his position clear,l respect that,and out of that respect l'm send him a pm and l'll Waite for his response


----------



## Pete Q

Purple_D said:


> I have a feeling that this person is a recently banned member from CB.
> The rantings and tone are a tad calmer,but sounds like them to me


It is the same person, it doesn't take a APA scientist to figure it out, both use the word "folk " both have interests in pieds, E pastels and talk about future breeding and hold backs, I'm sure both have said they don't have any interest in Xmas day being any different than any other day, and both totally disrespectful.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> You know what l like Gordon,he is the only one that l have any respect for from that Fed,he is honest,he answers pm's,and he do's not hid,he makes his position clear,l respect that,and out of that respect l'm send him a pm and l'll Waite for his response


Oh thats good, maybe your listen to him.


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> Oh thats good, maybe your listen to him.


he is the only one worth listening to,he is wasted on them.
its gone very quite tonight,l wounder why :whistling2:


----------



## Mynki

stevenrudge said:


> he is the only one worth listening to,he is wasted on them.
> its gone very quite tonight,l wounder why :whistling2:


You've sent everyone to sleep???


----------



## Blake1990

stevenrudge said:


> he is the only one worth listening to,he is wasted on them.
> its gone very quite tonight,l wounder why :whistling2:


There is nothing left to say, everything you have said has been proven to be fabricated. 

Your are a hypocrite, a liar and a moron (amongst other things) and your pathetic little crusade has reached its inevitable stagnation.

It's all damage limitation now Steven, nobody is ever going to take you seriously: victory:


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> he is the only one worth listening to,he is wasted on them.
> its gone very quite tonight,l wounder why :whistling2:


Yeah I think he's great to, he should be able to put you right on loads of stuff, listen to him very carefully.


----------



## Uromastyxman

langerspies said:


> So when you go to these big pow wow's to save our hobby etc, do you actually know what is being said or what you are replying ?
> All sounds a bit risky to me.


Regardless of all our differing viewpoints, and we will all differ to some degree in our perspectives, it is not necessary to stoop to taking such nasty personal shots. Chris has always been very open about his dyslexia, which I think is quite ballsy and courageous in itself. I can be quite uncompromising in the way I put my points over, but I don't think I would be brave or confident enough to share something like this about myself on a public forum. Regardless of whether there is confusion about shows or tax or businesses/breeders, Chris's achievements/contributions to the hobby have been considerable over a long time, made more remarkable by his dyslexia. Your comments about Chris's dyslexia have lost you credibility on this forum, so while you can try and back peddle and retract your statement, it is a clear indication of the type of person you are, and people will not forget what you've said.


----------



## langerspies

Uromastyxman said:


> Regardless of all our differing viewpoints, and we will all differ to some degree in our perspectives, it is not necessary to stoop to taking such nasty personal shots. Chris has always been very open about his dyslexia, which I think is quite ballsy and courageous in itself. I can be quite uncompromising in the way I put my points over, but I don't think I would be brave or confident enough to share something like this about myself on a public forum. Regardless of whether there is confusion about shows or tax or businesses/breeders, Chris's achievements/contributions to the hobby have been considerable over a long time, made more remarkable by his dyslexia. Your comments about Chris's dyslexia have lost you credibility on this forum, so while you can try and back peddle and retract your statement, it is a clear indication of the type of person you are, and people will not forget what you've said.


 So i put things a bit bluntly and tell it how it is which some of you dont like. But one thing about me is I dont LIE or am a fraud, now you can all guess about who that applies to but I'm sure most of you know anyway.
There really is no point in trying to point out things with some of you as you wont accept what certain people are up to.


----------



## langerspies

Pete Q said:


> It is the same person, it doesn't take a APA scientist to figure it out, both use the word "folk " both have interests in pieds, E pastels and talk about future breeding and hold backs, I'm sure both have said they don't have any interest in Xmas day being any different than any other day, and both totally disrespectful.


 If you look at things and want them to be the same you will tell yourself it fits, but fella you are way off, go through all 96,000 members on here and see how many could be the same people.Good job you are not a PI, or are you?


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> It is the same person, it doesn't take a APA scientist to figure it out, both use the word "folk " both have interests in pieds, E pastels and talk about future breeding and hold backs, I'm sure both have said they don't have any interest in Xmas day being any different than any other day, and both totally disrespectful.


A bit of a check TBH-'it do's not take a Scientist' to figure out the vested interests that are so very vocal against any discussion about either hobby shows or the FBH.
Its funny how people can be at the very same time patronizing and disrespectful while at the very same time pointing this out in others.
So PeterQ,is it ok for people to only be respectful to people they like and to be disrespectful to people they do not like?
Because you like the replys that others have made about someones dyslexia while at the same time say nothing about the same people who have taken the piss with others who have the same disability?
or is that ok because your personally do not like them?
Back to topic l see do not see any response????


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> A bit of a check TBH-'it do's not take a Scientist' to figure out the* vested interests that are so very vocal against any discussion about either hobby shows or the FBH.*
> Its funny how people can be at the very same time patronizing and disrespectful while at the very same time pointing this out in others.
> So PeterQ,is it ok for people to only be respectful to people they like and to be disrespectful to people they do not like?
> Because you like the replys that others have made about someones dyslexia while at the same time say nothing about the same people who have taken the piss with others who have the same disability?
> or is that ok because your personally do not like them?
> Back to topic l see do not see any response????


You keep bringing up this 'vested interest' thing, and have even aimed it at me a few times. I'm pretty sure I've told you what little connection I have to others, but I would love to hear how you have deduced that I have a 'vested interest' in shows?

I'm assuming that the lack of replies is either down to you having people on ignore or people having decided that, actually, your whole premise is flawed beyond comprehension, and so you are not worth the effort to reply to. You are merely a bitter man with issues, and your attempt at a show will fail. So it's pointless to respond?
hmm.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> So PeterQ,is it ok for people to only be respectful to people they like and to be disrespectful to people they do not like?
> Because you like the replys that others have made about someones dyslexia while at the same time say nothing about the same people who have taken the piss with others who have the same disability?
> or is that ok because your personally do not like them?


Steven, any kind of insult or piss taking over someones disability is wrong, not exceptable.

But I can see why it happens, it's not to difficult to understand that when someone, well youself, comes onto a forum and starts disrespecting people that we know and respect your going to get some back lash.

If you had the same level of respect from myself and others then maybe they would be coming to your aid abit more when your under attack. 

You come under attack for your manner, the way you continue to go after those that work hard to protect the hobbie, not your disability, though it has happened but it's mainly because people think your out of order.


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> Steven, any kind of insult or piss taking over someones disability is wrong, not exceptable.
> 
> But I can see why it happens, it's not to difficult to understand that when someone, well youself, comes onto a forum and starts disrespecting people that we know and respect your going to get some back lash.
> 
> If you had the same level of respect from myself and others then maybe they would be coming to your aid abit more when your under attack.
> 
> You come under attack for your manner, the way you continue to go after those that work hard to protect the hobbie, not your disability, though it has happened but it's mainly because people think your out of order.


Trouble is Peter that if you were to pm me like l've asked you,twice,just like l did before l came to the forums to the 'movers and shakers and great mind of our hobby' others quotes not mine,l went privately with my concerns,its was their private attitude that lead me to start asking public questions,it was their attitude and their fans attitude,the very same fans on both forums that has lead to the tone descending down.So sorry l do not except your response about personal disability nor do l except your response about others public attitude or mine.
if the very people you claim that l 'go after' were from the start to behave with the honesty and transparency that they claim to up hold they we would not still be hear trying to have an honest and open debate would we.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> Trouble is Peter that if you were to pm me like l've asked you,twice,just like l did before l came to the forums to the 'movers and shakers and great mind of our hobby' others quotes not mine,l went privately with my concerns,its was their private attitude that lead me to start asking public questions,it was their attitude and their fans attitude,the very same fans on both forums that has lead to the tone descending down.So sorry l do not except your response about personal disability nor do l except your response about others public attitude or mine.
> if the very people you claim that l 'go after' were from the start to behave with the honesty and transparency that they claim to up hold they we would not still be hear trying to have an honest and open debate would we.


From what I've seen and been told Steven is that right from the very start you have asked forum users to pm you,that is correct, clicking on your personal page to do so they would be meet with the messege, " don't donate to the FBH pm me why " so looks like there is more to this than your saying.

I have know need to pm you as I'm a supporter of the FBH and Chris.


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> From what I've seen and been told Steven is that right from the very start you have asked forum users to pm you,that is correct, clicking on your personal page to do so they would be meet with the messege, " don't donate to the FBH pm me why " so looks like there is more to this than your saying.
> 
> I have know need to pm you as I'm a supporter of the FBH and Chris.


The FBH post was a reaction to some of the most stupid pms that anybody could wish to receive,that were not there at the beginning,same as the apa posts,they both have now severed they purpose l'l take them down when l'm ready
I have know need to pm you as I'm a supporter of the FBH and Chris.[/QUOTE]????
This just the kind of statement that l was talking about!
l support the hobby only,l see no reason why people would imply that not supporting a person and his Federation means l'm against the hobby,this statement imply that both are without criticism,Sorry nobody is without any criticism,and by your own statement you imply a bind faith in a person,that is something that l cannot do


----------



## Khonsu

Ladies & Gentlemen, I’ve persevered & read this post from start to finish so far. 

First of all let me say I do not know any of the more frequent posters, I am a member of the HIS, have bought reptiles from a number of differing UK reptile organisations breeders meeting/shows/markets (delete as suits your own perspective) sold a number of times from a table at Doncaster since 2006, three times purchased & transported my reptiles from Hamm solely for my own delight & bred intermittently & for personal gratification for the last five years or so, bred reptiles have been sold however if I balance money brought in against expenditure the bank, were I a business, would I think declare me bankrupt, simply put I would therefore consider myself a relatively typical member of the reptile hobbyist community with no allegiances to any particular faction or individual so far so I think I am able to comment on what has been said with a reasonable degree of impartiality.

Since the first show I sold at in 2006 the Doncaster event has changed considerably, considerably bigger & busier, some would say for the better, some to the determent of the hobby, certainly it has a far more professional look than I’ve seen previously. Conscious that I too wish to be viewed as reliable/knowledgeable/contactable/professional etc in the event of a buyer requiring more information I have recently purchased “business” cards with my contact details on rather than scrawled on bits of paper, I don’t think makes me a trader, just a responsible hobbyist. I have thought that some of the sellers at these meetings give the impression of being “the trade” however all this takes is a couple of business cards & a banner, remember the adage “fur coat & no knickers” if you’re trying to sell then you do want to look as if you know what your talking about so a few quid on a strip of plastic & a few bits of cards can make a big difference.

Trying to sieve out the fiction from the fact it would seem, in my humble opinion, that the meetings currently held are within the law but there are vagaries concerning what is a trader etc & therefore there is a perceived knock on to the legalities of selling at said meetings. If I read Mr Newman’s posts correctly however this would all be resolved if the reported rubber stamp required to repeal the erroneous section of the Pet Animals Act was carried out, why therefore instead of incessant flag waving & at times crude personal attacks do we all not gather under the banner of a single organisation, the FBH for instance, to convince the responsible authorities into doing so.

I think that posters on both sides of the fence have made some interesting & pertinent comments however over the course of the previous 50+ pages as well as backtracking to other posts on RFUK & in deed other forums I have, again in my humble opinion, come to the conclusion that Mr Rudge does have some level of personal grievance against Mr Newman & along with others has overstepped the mark by some considerable distance.

I would like Mr Rudge to do me the courtesy of answering the following; various comments etc have been made that you are to organise a breeders meeting in the midlands area, an endeavour to which I genuinely wish you good luck, I also appreciate you may wish to do this “in competition” with other reptile groups & devoid of support of the FBH as you are perfectly entitled to do, however the allegations that you are doing this in league or with the cooperation of an organisation(s) fundamentally apposed to the captive keeping of reptiles is quite frankly, again in my opinion, disturbing. For many years I have unfortunately encountered illegal activities of such organisations in their objections to rural sporting activities, I also have some family knowledge of this type of organisations activities relating to animal testing & to put it simply I would sooner collaborate with turd on the heel of my shoe than these people who allegedly care for my beloved reptiles welfare. 

To the point therefore Mr Rudge can you categorically & simply confirm if this is true. I ask this question not to then ridicule or castigate but so I know that should such an event take place whether I could attend as a seller or buying member of the public as obviously in view of my opinion of such people I could not support such an event with my presence. Obviously should you choose not to address this matter, as is your prerogative, then I must assume it is the case.

Regards to All

Aimo


----------



## Tarron

Khonsu said:


> Ladies & Gentlemen, I’ve persevered & read this post from start to finish so far.
> 
> First of all let me say I do not know any of the more frequent posters, I am a member of the HIS, have bought reptiles from a number of differing UK reptile organisations breeders meeting/shows/markets (delete as suits your own perspective) sold a number of times from a table at Doncaster since 2006, three times purchased & transported my reptiles from Hamm solely for my own delight & bred intermittently & for personal gratification for the last five years or so, bred reptiles have been sold however if I balance money brought in against expenditure the bank, were I a business, would I think declare me bankrupt, simply put I would therefore consider myself a relatively typical member of the reptile hobbyist community with no allegiances to any particular faction or individual so far so I think I am able to comment on what has been said with a reasonable degree of impartiality.
> 
> Since the first show I sold at in 2006 the Doncaster event has changed considerably, considerably bigger & busier, some would say for the better, some to the determent of the hobby, certainly it has a far more professional look than I’ve seen previously. Conscious that I too wish to be viewed as reliable/knowledgeable/contactable/professional etc in the event of a buyer requiring more information I have recently purchased “business” cards with my contact details on rather than scrawled on bits of paper, I don’t think makes me a trader, just a responsible hobbyist. I have thought that some of the sellers at these meetings give the impression of being “the trade” however all this takes is a couple of business cards & a banner, remember the adage “fur coat & no knickers” if you’re trying to sell then you do want to look as if you know what your talking about so a few quid on a strip of plastic & a few bits of cards can make a big difference.
> 
> Trying to sieve out the fiction from the fact it would seem, in my humble opinion, that the meetings currently held are within the law but there are vagaries concerning what is a trader etc & therefore there is a perceived knock on to the legalities of selling at said meetings. If I read Mr Newman’s posts correctly however this would all be resolved if the reported rubber stamp required to repeal the erroneous section of the Pet Animals Act was carried out, why therefore instead of incessant flag waving & at times crude personal attacks do we all not gather under the banner of a single organisation, the FBH for instance, to convince the responsible authorities into doing so.
> 
> I think that posters on both sides of the fence have made some interesting & pertinent comments however over the course of the previous 50+ pages as well as backtracking to other posts on RFUK & in deed other forums I have, again in my humble opinion, come to the conclusion that Mr Rudge does have some level of personal grievance against Mr Newman & along with others has overstepped the mark by some considerable distance.
> 
> I would like Mr Rudge to do me the courtesy of answering the following; various comments etc have been made that you are to organise a breeders meeting in the midlands area, an endeavour to which I genuinely wish you good luck, I also appreciate you may wish to do this “in competition” with other reptile groups & devoid of support of the FBH as you are perfectly entitled to do, however the allegations that you are doing this in league or with the cooperation of an organisation(s) fundamentally apposed to the captive keeping of reptiles is quite frankly, again in my opinion, disturbing. For many years I have unfortunately encountered illegal activities of such organisations in their objections to rural sporting activities, I also have some family knowledge of this type of organisations activities relating to animal testing & to put it simply I would sooner collaborate with turd on the heel of my shoe than these people who allegedly care for my beloved reptiles welfare.
> 
> To the point therefore Mr Rudge can you categorically & simply confirm if this is true. I ask this question not to then ridicule or castigate but so I know that should such an event take place whether I could attend as a seller or buying member of the public as obviously in view of my opinion of such people I could not support such an event with my presence. Obviously should you choose not to address this matter, as is your prerogative, then I must assume it is the case.
> 
> Regards to All
> 
> Aimo


Quite possibly the best post in this whole debate!

I don't claim to be whiter than white in this debate, far from it I would say, but Aimo has grasped, what is, a difficult topic and looked at it reasonably from an objective viewpoint. Nothing has been said above, that can be argued with.


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

l've answered this so many times on C/B but so l'll do this again and for the last time on RFUK

n competition” with other reptile groups & devoid of support of the FBH as you are perfectly entitled to do, however the allegations that you are doing this in league or with the cooperation of an organisation(s) fundamentally apposed to the captive keeping of reptiles is quite frankly, again in my opinion, disturbing.
Firstly l have never been in league with anyone other than the IHS.
Secondly if this event go's anywhere it would be a society event,in conjunction with other shows not in any competition,this is not needed or wanted
Thirdly in any communication l have had with any Ar group it is on the understanding that this is a working forward agreement that its first and foremost aim is to improve animal welfare in the UK.
Even if this communication to get a show fails,as now looks likely-thanks,if people saw any benefit to continue then there is a possibility to continue a link-between us hobbyists and animal rights and welfare groups.
Fourthly.it has been made clear to me that despite any official stance by various AR groups that they understand that the captive reptile hobby is established and thriving,is never going to be banned and providing that we hobbyist stay within UK legislation they have no fight with us.Some of them have come to the conclusion that the best way to improve animal welfare is to establish links with responsible animal Hobbyist.
it has been made clear to me that their fight is not against animal hobby enthusiasts but the pet industry or the trader in a living commodity.
At first l wanted to establish how much interference l'd get from any AR group while trying to get a show organised.
No underhand motive


----------



## Mynki

stevenrudge said:


> l've answered this so many times on C/B but so l'll do this again and for the last time on RFUK
> 
> n competition” with other reptile groups & devoid of support of the FBH as you are perfectly entitled to do, however the allegations that you are doing this in league or with the cooperation of an organisation(s) fundamentally apposed to the captive keeping of reptiles is quite frankly, again in my opinion, disturbing.
> Firstly l have never been in league with anyone other than the IHS.
> Secondly if this event go's anywhere it would be a society event,in conjunction with other shows not in any competition,this is not needed or wanted
> Thirdly in any communication l have had with any Ar group it is on the understanding that this is a working forward agreement that its first and foremost aim is to improve animal welfare in the UK.
> Even if this communication to get a show fails,as now looks likely-thanks,if people saw any benefit to continue then there is a possibility to continue a link-between us hobbyists and animal rights and welfare groups.
> Fourthly.it has been made clear to me that despite any official stance by various AR groups that they understand that the captive reptile hobby is established and thriving,is never going to be banned and providing that we hobbyist stay within UK legislation they have no fight with us.Some of them have come to the conclusion that the best way to improve animal welfare is to establish links with responsible animal Hobbyist.
> it has been made clear to me that their fight is not against animal hobby enthusiasts but the pet industry or the trader in a living commodity.
> At first l wanted to establish how much interference l'd get from any AR group while trying to get a show organised.
> No underhand motive


Steven

You may or may not believe this but I take no joy what so ever in pointing this out to you, but you cannot realistically have "responsible animal hobbyists" without people who trade in "living commodities". I'm pretty certain that the AR mob are well aware of this. So your entire argument falls down here. 

You also fail to understand that shows are in competition with each other. Not through a deliberate competitive challenge between them and not with any malice, but realistically there will always be a finite amount of travel that the reptile keeping community will be prepared to undertake. Sure, you may pick up a few locals, but the majority of people travel some distance. I hope you can understand the point I'm making. 

It is a genuine shame that your enthusiasm, drive, focus and energy wasn't put to use in a way that would have genuinely benefited the hobby.


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> l've answered this so many times on C/B but so l'll do this again and for the last time on RFUK
> 
> n competition” with other reptile groups & devoid of support of the FBH as you are perfectly entitled to do, however the allegations that you are doing this in league or with the cooperation of an organisation(s) fundamentally apposed to the captive keeping of reptiles is quite frankly, again in my opinion, disturbing.
> Firstly l have never been in league with anyone other than the IHS.
> Secondly if this event go's anywhere it would be a society event,in conjunction with other shows not in any competition,this is not needed or wanted
> Thirdly in any communication l have had with any Ar group it is on the understanding that this is a working forward agreement that its first and foremost aim is to improve animal welfare in the UK.
> Even if this communication to get a show fails,as now looks likely-thanks,if people saw any benefit to continue then there is a possibility to continue a link-between us hobbyists and animal rights and welfare groups.
> Fourthly.it has been made clear to me that despite any official stance by various AR groups that they understand that the captive reptile hobby is established and thriving,is never going to be banned and providing that we hobbyist stay within UK legislation they have no fight with us.Some of them have come to the conclusion that the best way to improve animal welfare is to establish links with responsible animal Hobbyist.
> it has been made clear to me that their fight is not against animal hobby enthusiasts but the pet industry or the trader in a living commodity.
> At first l wanted to establish how much interference l'd get from any AR group while trying to get a show organised.
> No underhand motive


Perhaps if you were more forthcoming as to who this group is that you have contacted, we may be willing to move this conversation forward. Would hey be willing to either come online and discuss their thoughts/motives etc? Maybe calm a few fears?
Would they be willing to talk to societies and the fbh to begin negotiating where each side stands and where we may have similar objectives?
Are they a complete AR group, or is this a subset of a particular group who have more liberal views?

Please answer this, or could someone ask similar in case steven has me on ignore.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> The FBH post was a reaction to some of the most stupid pms that anybody could wish to receive,that were not there at the beginning,same as the apa posts,they both have now severed they purpose l'l take them down when l'm ready
> I have know need to pm you as I'm a supporter of the FBH and Chris.


And your reaction to such statements is what I'm talking about, over the top.

It is not blind faith, I see the hobbie better than it's ever been, always room to improve, but year on year we go from strength to strength, the more the antis knock us the stronger we get.

This is mainly down to everyone pulling together, FBH and other reptile clubs working together as a team, what I see from you is divide and apart from the way you come across at times I think this is the main reason you get the reaction you do.


----------



## Horny Toad

stevenrudge said:


> it has been made clear to me that their fight is not against animal hobby enthusiasts but the pet industry or the trader in a living commodity.


I hate to be dragged into public posting, I have my thoughts much of which I keep private or at most discuss with my colleagues within the IHS and FBH. But the above quote shows the level of niavity from the poster, the various AR groups have always made it clear that they intend to target the "trade" - if they are ever successful it then effectively stops the hobbyist in their tracks. If they were to stop the Peregrines, Euroreps, Monkfields of the world (or for that my own wholesale business Zoo Logic) who all sell a "living commodity" there would be no easy supply of Livefood, frozen food, and no development of new products (or for that matter a supply of existing products) - all gone in one step. Obviously the detriment to Animal Welfare would be severe, there would be 10's of thousands of starving, cold herptiles, but to the AR's that matters not a jot. They have won their argument, they get so wrapped up in their own personal feelings they don't care about what they appear to be passionate about.

So, what I say to this poster is, please think a little about what is happening here. 

What I say to everyone following the posters threads is, remember the AR groups will, and have in the past, try many differing methods and angles in their quest. This I firmly believe is a new tactic, but never the less their aim is the same - to stop said private hobbyists in their tracks - if you want to maintain your right to keep herptiles don't be drawn into their web of deceit.


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> And your reaction to such statements is what I'm talking about, over the top.
> 
> It is not blind faith, I see the hobbie better than it's ever been, always room to improve, but year on year we go from strength to strength, the more the antis knock us the stronger we get.
> 
> This is mainly down to everyone pulling together, FBH and other reptile clubs working together as a team, what I see from you is divide and apart from the way you come across at times I think this is the main reason you get the reaction you do.


l agreed the hobby is in good place at the moment, despite what a pressure group have been trying to scare us hobbyists for years about,and my main concern you cannot have it both ways,you cannot say for years that our hobby is under attack and needs funds 'given in good faith'and then when it suites turn round and then say 'the hobby is in a better place than every before' its either under attack and in danger or it is not.
its plain to see that our weak point is our shows, and surprise surprise that is where we get the most trouble and they get their most success against us.
THB all this is getting pointless,on C/B l've got 'a' FBH committee member that just happens to own his very own forum that just by pure coincidence is also a very successful snake breeding 'hobbyist' and again l sure just a coincidence trying to argue that by taking say 600 Leopold geckos or snakes to a show that in no way do's this show that or prove that any person acting like this A. deliberately breeding to sell at shows.explain who and why 600 animals could be classed as any hobby 'surplus'
B.not trading.
Anybody either a HMCA/court/Local authority would not except that explanation and would take action.
So people please can you explain your reply and your open hostility given that one of our own members have had an investigation and could face a prosecution for illegally trading at one of our hobby shows if as you keep trying to say that there's nothing wrong with our shows,As l warned back in May last year that we would be vulnerable.
PS,by now l think most people looking at all of this can see that most of the hostile replys are from either people connected to the FED or are large'hobby breeders' that do not appreciate this conversation and the attention that it brings to them.


----------



## Khonsu

Mr Rudge, many thanks for your reply, first off however I have at no time in my post suggested any underhandedness between yourself & any group in opposition to the reptile hobby, I simply wish to establish for my own benefit the facts of the matter so that I, as one who has not particularly been involved in repeated bantering both on this forum & elsewhere, can make an informed decision based on actualities rather than hearsay & gossip hence my request for clarification of your position.

If I have therefore read your response correctly, & please correct me if I have interpreted it incorrectly, there has been discussion between yourself & what can be described as an “anti” reptile group towards resolving the current animosity between reptile hobbyist keepers & the “anti” brigade to the extent of a collaboration between the two to hold a reptile breeders meeting to which both parties would be satisfied that it is operating within the existing UK legislation, further, if this meeting were not to occur for whatever reason you do see further dialogue between the two as beneficial to the hobby.

I have to be honest I am sceptical of their comments to you regarding the stated their _“__fight is not against animal hobby enthusiasts but the pet industry or the trader in a living commodity” _Please note this is scepticism of their comments, not your reporting of said comments, in my own experiences this does somewhat fly in the face of the attitudes I have encountered, no matter however I can appreciate that whilst I personally think it may be wasted energy on face value you appear to have admirably entered into discussion with such persons with the best intentions of the hobby.

May I ask a further question Mr Rudge, do you believe that offending section of the Pet Animals Act will ever be repealed & if so would this allow you to work within the existing FBH framework with existing reptile enthusiast organisations.

I also have a question for Mr Newman, what do you consider is the likelihood of section 2 of the Pet Animals Act being repealed in say the next 12 months & what can I, as a member of herptile keeping fraternity do to push this matter towards the necessary repeal other than being a member of the likes of the IHS.

Finally to both Mr Rudge & Mr Newman if section 2 of the act was repealed do you consider that the “anti” organisations would refrain from opposing breeders meetings.

Regards

Aimo


----------



## penfold

v-max said:


> I hate to be dragged into public posting, I have my thoughts much of which I keep private or at most discuss with my colleagues within the IHS and FBH. But the above quote shows the level of niavity from the poster, the various AR groups have always made it clear that they intend to target the "trade" - if they are ever successful it then effectively stops the hobbyist in their tracks. If they were to stop the Peregrines, Euroreps, Monkfields of the world (or for that my own wholesale business Zoo Logic) who all sell a "living commodity" there would be no easy supply of Livefood, frozen food, and no development of new products (or for that matter a supply of existing products) - all gone in one step. Obviously the detriment to Animal Welfare would be severe, there would be 10's of thousands of starving, cold herptiles, but to the AR's that matters not a jot. They have won their argument, they get so wrapped up in their own personal feelings they don't care about what they appear to be passionate about.
> 
> So, what I say to this poster is, please think a little about what is happening here.
> 
> What I say to everyone following the posters threads is, remember the AR groups will, and have in the past, try many differing methods and angles in their quest. This I firmly believe is a new tactic, but never the less their aim is the same - to stop said private hobbyists in their tracks - if you want to maintain your right to keep herptiles don't be drawn into their web of deceit.


 well said lets hope this sinks through his thick head


----------



## johnc79

penfold said:


> well said lets hope this sinks through his thick head


Don't hold your breath!


----------



## Poxicator

Bye bye Dave and Edmund


----------



## Blake1990

Langerspies was in fact the infamous EdmundBlackadder.

For somebody who doesn't care if he gets banned from forums he sure does have a chip on his shoulder! :lol2:


----------



## Blake1990

Poxicator said:


> Bye bye Dave and Edmund


Beat me to it :Na_Na_Na_Na:


----------



## Tarron

Purple_D said:


> I have a feeling that this person is a recently banned member from CB.
> The rantings and tone are a tad calmer,but sounds like them to me





Tarron said:


> How can you say 'it was ages a go'? It was 4 months at most. Thats not ages steven.
> 
> 
> 
> This is why we dont have time travel! It was supposed to be M=CE squared!
> 
> 
> 
> Yup! Said banned person was also fixated on Intelligence.





langerspies said:


> I hate to dissapoint you, but you're wrong. Sorry about that.





langerspies said:


> So i put things a bit bluntly and tell it how it is which some of you dont like. But *one thing about me is I dont LIE or am a fraud*, now you can all guess about who that applies to but I'm sure most of you know anyway.
> There really is no point in trying to point out things with some of you as you wont accept what certain people are up to.





langerspies said:


> If you look at things and want them to be the same you will tell yourself it fits, but fella you are way off, go through all 96,000 members on here and see how many could be the same people.Good job you are not a PI, or are you?





Poxicator said:


> Bye bye Dave and Edmund


You can't make this up, you honestly can't :lol2:

Am I being thick, who's Dave?


----------



## johnc79

I had a feeling it was that Edmund ! That is sad!lol 

Who's Dave though?


----------



## Blake1990

johnc79 said:


> I had a feeling it was that Edmund ! That is sad!lol
> 
> Who's Dave though?


Perhaps its one of Edmunds alter egos :hmm:


----------



## Mynki

Tarron said:


> You can't make this up, you honestly can't :lol2:
> 
> Am I being thick, who's Dave?


I'd assume Dave Balls. 

Ed will probably have numerous other accounts on here already. If not he'll be back.


----------



## Tarron

Mynki said:


> I'd assume Dave Balls.
> 
> Ed will probably have numerous other accounts on here already. If not he'll be back.


Didnt notice anybody else really, oh well.

Im surebhe will be back, no doubt already viewing. Wont be long before he starts having a go again and will soo be found out.


----------



## Shellsfeathers&fur

He called himself Langerspies - if you type Langer Urban Dictionary into Google I think it will be show what an apt username it was!


----------



## Chris Newman

Khonsu said:


> I also have a question for Mr Newman, what do you consider is the likelihood of section 2 of the Pet Animals Act being repealed in say the next 12 months & what can I, as a member of herptile keeping fraternity do to push this matter towards the necessary repeal other than being a member of the likes of the IHS.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Aimo


That is a very good question! Due to matters that have arisen in Doncaster I think it’s a racing certainty the Commencement Order for the repeal of Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act will be read, weather this will be in 2013, 2014 or even 2015 is the question? There are three critical meetings (four if you include the first court hearing) scheduled over the next couple of months which will impact on this.

As you are aware the Animal Welfare Act set Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act for repeal, the reason the commencement of the repeal did not take place when the AWA was enacted was due to the them Labour government committing to secondary legislation in terms of Pet Vending, scheduled to be in place by 2010. 

Unfortunately none of the promised secondary legislation transpired under the Labour government and when the coalition came to power they made it clear no such legislation would take place in this parliament. The meeting with the incoming minister at the time was useful but fruitless, they were very sympathetic but viewed that events were taking place and therefore the repeal of Section 2 was not a priority.

However, now in view of the debacle last year in Doncaster and the pending prosecution I firmly believe this will the catalyst needed to get things moving. I have little doubt that there is one matter that will need taking care off first, which is likely to take six to eight months (no I’m not saying what that matter is) then I believe there will be no impediment of reading of the commencement order. Unfortunately political wheels turn very slowly, whilst this matter does not require parliamentary time, I am cynical matters will be dealt with expediently.

The one thing that I can promise is this year is going to be a very interesting year! And do I think the extremist would back when the repel is finalised, it would be nice to think so but unlikely, unless they choose to find another target such as fish keepers….


----------



## Mynki

Chris Newman said:


> The one thing that I can promise is this year is going to be a very interesting year! And do I think the extremist would back when the repel is finalised, it would be nice to think so but unlikely, unless they choose to find another target such as fish keepers….


The aquatics industry is pretty good in terms of self regulation. The BIAZA driven big fish campaign is a good example of this. 

Do you think they could make any headway against aquarists though? I believe Joe Public don't have some of the stereotypical prejudices against fish like they do with snake etc.


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> I don't know Steven but I've read a few of his threads, and its obvious that he and Chris Newman have some history, and for this reason I don't want to make assumptions, however I would be interested to know what views of his you do agree with, as I think many of his points that could be relevent will be dismissed out of hand.


My attention was drawn to this comment earlier today, sorry I did not address your comment earlier. Until Mr Rudge launched his vitriolic attack on myself, and the FBH a few months ago, I had never heard of him and to the very best of my knowledge have never meet him – it is not inappropriate to say that I will not be disappointed if that remains case!


----------



## Natrix

stevenrudge said:


> l agreed the hobby is in good place at the moment, despite what a pressure group have been trying to scare us hobbyists for years about,and my main concern you cannot have it both ways,you cannot say for years that our hobby is under attack and needs funds 'given in good faith'and then when it suites turn round and then say 'the hobby is in a better place than every before' its either under attack and in danger or it is not.


Sorry but these two things are very different subjects. The hobby......ALL of the hobby, has been under attack from the AR brigade for nearly twenty years. These attacks have nothing to do with the state of the hobby or indeed the legality of what people do within the hobby. The AR brigade want an end to all pet keeping. Not just reptiles but all animals that are kept as pets. They have chosen to concentrate their attacks on the reptile hobby because most of the people in the UK have a general dislike of reptiles and don’t understand them. To achieve their aim, they have lied and caused false health scares to the public, schools, councils and the Government and threatened violence against reptile keepers, show organisers and show venues. 
Having failed to destroy our hobby in the UK they have now turned to the EU in an attempt to finish us off. 
The threat to the whole hobby is very real and every attack now requires legal action to defend our rights and legal action costs money, hence the constant request for donations.
I would just add at this point that all FBH committee members work voluntarily and all monies donated go straight into the fighting fund.
Despite all the attempts by the AR brigade to destroy the hobby, the FBH has in the main managed to keep things going and indeed achieved a lot of positive legislative improvements by working with the Department of the Environment Food and Rural Affairs. (DEFRA) during the recent Animal Welfare Bill (now Act). One of these improvements was a complete rethink on how shows were to be controlled and licensed. Sadly this change has yet to be activated.
Aside from this the FBH have also worked with hobbyists, breeders, manufacturers, importers, traders and whole sale suppliers. While there is still a lot to do improvements have been made in all areas and the result of this is that the hobby is in a much better situation now than it was a few years ago.
The FBH has also collected and collated a lot of data relating to the hobby and trade. This is now helping in the fight against the activities of the AR groups by allowing the FBH to supply Governments with proven facts when faced with the AR lies. 




stevenrudge said:


> its plain to see that our weak point is our shows, and surprise surprise that is where we get the most trouble and they get their most success against us.


Totally correct, shows are currently a weak spot. This is because the changes to the regulations about shows have yet to be updated by the Government. The AR brigade currently force local councils to act on the old regulations to cause trouble at our shows. Once the agreed changes are activated by the Government this loop hole will be closed down and the AR’s will have to look for some other way to cause problems but you can guarantee they won’t go away.
Given that we have already got Government commitment to change the regulations the last thing we want to do now is start putting on half baked shows just to keep the odd AR group happy. Now more than ever is the time to push the current Government to stamp and sign the changes required.
Mr Rudge may well remember the fight that stores like Tesco’s took part in to get Sunday opening made legal. They didn’t shut their stores on Sundays, they opened them and found ways around the existing legislation to embarrass the Government into changing the law. Back then I was working in retail DIY. At the time it was legal to sell vegetables on a Sunday. As a result I spent several Sunday’s selling carrots. If you brought a carrot you got your DIY products free. For example a £50. Carrot came with a free ladder. We stood there selling carrots in front of council officials who couldn’t do anything as long as we gave the DIY goods away. It was totally stupid but lots of companies did it and it worked, we now have Sunday trading.



stevenrudge said:


> THB all this is getting pointless,on C/B l've got 'a' FBH committee member that just happens to own his very own forum that just by pure coincidence is also a very successful snake breeding 'hobbyist' and again l sure just a coincidence trying to argue that by taking say 600 Leopold geckos or snakes to a show that in no way do's this show that or prove that any person acting like this A. deliberately breeding to sell at shows.explain who and why 600 animals could be classed as any hobby 'surplus'
> B.not trading.
> Anybody either a HMCA/court/Local authority would not except that explanation and would take action..


I think the person in question is quiet able to answer for himself on this if he wants to, though I would just question 
a) your figures? I’m not aware of anyone attending a show with 600 animals. In fact I don’t think I have ever seen a breeder with animals numbering into the hundreds. I will do some counts at the next show.
And b) How do you know this when you say you don’t go to shows?



stevenrudge said:


> So people please can you explain your reply and your open hostility given that one of our own members have had an investigation and could face a prosecution for illegally trading at one of our hobby shows if as you keep trying to say that there's nothing wrong with our shows,As l warned back in May last year that we would be vulnerable.


I’m not going into this case because of the current situation. 
I have tried to word something here but can’t without saying to much so the best I can do is say that Stevens theory of what is happening is wrong and has far more to do with the bad wording of the current old legislation than it does with the activities of one of our fellow hobbiests.
I I’ve probably said too much even now.




stevenrudge said:


> PS,by now l think most people looking at all of this can see that most of the hostile replys are from either people connected to the FED or are large'hobby breeders' that do not appreciate this conversation and the attention that it brings to them.


Or is it because they have as much right to legally take part in this hobby as every one else and you are constantly trying to make out any kind of selling, breeding and trading they are involved with is illegal.
This hobby is a bit like one of those stacks of cards. All parts of it are essential, if you pull one section away the rest will slowly collapse.

Gordon Glasson
FBH VC


----------



## Uromastyxman

Chris Newman said:


> My attention was drawn to this comment earlier today, sorry I did not address your comment earlier. Until Mr Rudge launched his vitriolic attack on myself, and the FBH a few months ago, I had never heard of him and to the very best of my knowledge have never meet him – it is not inappropriate to say that I will not be disappointed if that remains case!



Really, that makes it even more strange and intriguing then.


----------



## Chris Newman

Uromastyxman said:


> Really, that makes it even more strange and intriguing then.


Indeed it is most curious, perhaps Mr Rudge would care to state his position publically? I am very comfortable to offer Mr Rudge indemnity from any legally retribution from what he has to say – so fire away Mr Rudge and lets us all see what you have to say, your issues are….?


----------



## Tarron

Chris Newman said:


> Indeed it is most curious, perhaps Mr Rudge would care to state his position publically? I am very comfortable to offer Mr Rudge indemnity from any legally retribution from what he has to say – so fire away Mr Rudge and lets us all see what you have to say, your issues are….?


I will see if I can find the quote, but im sure I read steven say that his opinions and thoughts o you and the fbh are based on the words of someone he used to work with.
I got the image this person was well known I the hobby but has since passed away. It is he that informed steven of the issues he currently raises about you.
I'll try and find the post, it may help to clarify things.


----------



## stevenrudge

Or is it because they have as much right to legally take part in this hobby as every one else and you are constantly trying to make out any kind of selling, breeding and trading they are involved with is illegal.
This hobby is a bit like one of those stacks of cards. All parts of it are essential, if you pull one section away the rest will slowly collapse.

Gordon Glasson.
interesting reply,l make out nothing of the sort, hobbyist have a legal right to sell their surplus offspring at shows,that is not what my point is,the point is what defines a hobby surplus?what can be a reasonably be expected and what might have to be defended
The 600 animals quote was from another post,l to have never seen 600 animals from one person at any show,the OP was using that figure not me,they were using this figure to try and makes a point that even if anybody was sell this volume of animals that,it could still be classed as a hobby surplus which is nonsense and could not be defended by anybody.
You last response is pure nonsense 'stacks of cards' all parts are essential?just another nonsensical quote that looks more like an excuse for the status quo not to face obvious problems and deal with them,even if that might 'upset' a few for the benefit of the many.
Sorry l've never said that a hobbyist selling surplus offspring at a hobby show was illegal,the point is and this aplys to everybody whether their a FBH 'committee member' or Joe Bloggs IHS member,as much as we do not like it,its there plan and simple,all we have is hobby shows to sell surplus offspring to other hobby members,some people within our society's use our hobby shows as a cover to sell animals that are specifically bred by unlicensed business that have grown out of a personal hobby.Not only that but they even advertise large order imports just like any legal pet business might.These people need our hobby shows for their business plan.Take my challenge l will walk with you at any of our shows and l'll point them out to you.You can see their activity on the forum adverts,webb .Nett sites facebook pages you name it.
These are the people that damage us hobbyist with regard to our hobby shows,these are the people that you need to deal with before these people loss us our hobby shows,quite why people start using the infamous grey area exploitation excesses to defend them is beyond me


----------



## stevenrudge

riginally Posted by Chris Newman 
My attention was drawn to this comment earlier today, sorry I did not address your comment earlier. Until Mr Rudge launched his vitriolic attack on myself, and the FBH a few months ago, I had never heard of him and to the very best of my knowledge have never meet him – it is not inappropriate to say that I will not be disappointed if that remains case!
All very convenient,Sorry another nonsense rentaquote.
Just so people get the facts straight,l did not at first attack anybody,l politely asked a private reasonable question,l got a very rude response.
Then for over a year l just watched all the posts/conversations on the forums and l noticed a pattern.
Seeing this pattern emerge l looked at the other rep forum C/B and this convinced me to try and start a conversation openly on the forums.
All l can say that from the moment this started it was make clear that my questions were not appreciated to say the lest,and it was all down hill from then.
l openly admit that at times my conduct has not be very good and l wish that l had handled some posts and replys better than l have,but there it is and theres nothing l can do about this now.
But its also a two way street and sometimes you get what you give.
l attack Mr Newman and his FBH with questions that l personally feel need a straight answer and seeing that He uses the open forums for his use's l cannot see why he and anybody connected with him or his fans have any problem with this.if he would have been straight from the start instead of being evasive/hiding/acting like a victim then l would have had my answers and we could all move on


----------



## johnc79

So why don't you go to a show and point these issues out? You had the chance last year for a meeting twice and you did not turn up. This is why no one will ever take you seriously Steven. We both know how hypocritical you are been with your mice selling and selling on snakes for profit so you can not claim to be the perfect hobbyist as you try to make out .
I do feel sorry for you because you used to be alright but you seem blind to how silly you look and you can not accept other people's views 

Let's be honest Steven, you have no intention of coming from behind your keyboard and really do something positive for the hobby or visit a show and show people "your " points as you have not actually been to a Show for years.

Are you bitter that you don't get recognition like other hobbyists do ? Does it matter if people are more successful than you. 

I bet it will be the same in 12 months time. You still gobbing of on a forum (if not banned) at anyone who does not agree with you.

Think you need to take a good look at your self and get a grip.


----------



## Khonsu

Mr Rudge, on page 55 of this thread i asked the following, see below, mr Newman has responded, i would be pleased to here your thoughts on the matter.

Regards

Aimo

_"May I ask a further question Mr Rudge, do you believe that offending section of the Pet Animals Act will ever be repealed & if so would this allow you to work within the existing FBH framework with existing reptile enthusiast organisations.

I also have a question for Mr Newman, what do you consider is the likelihood of section 2 of the Pet Animals Act being repealed in say the next 12 months & what can I, as a member of herptile keeping fraternity do to push this matter towards the necessary repeal other than being a member of the likes of the IHS.

Finally to both Mr Rudge & Mr Newman if section 2 of the act was repealed do you consider that the “anti” organisations would refrain from opposing breeders meetings."_


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> l attack Mr Newman and his FBH with questions that l personally feel need a straight answer and seeing that He uses the open forums for his use's l cannot see why he and anybody connected with him or his fans have any problem with this.if he would have been straight from the start instead of being evasive/hiding/acting like a victim then l would have had my answers and we could all move on


Right Steven, what you need to do is look at the above look at yourself in the mirror, everything you have said YOU do yourself.

You come here attacking the people that defend our hobbie, people here then start to ask questions about you and your experience, then you youself start hiding and acting the victim when things go wrong, it's almost to the point it's childish,( well he started it ) kind of talk.

You keep telling us you have been open and honest but this is not true, example, which AR groups have you been in contact with and okay your show idea ? 

You never have been able to grasp that there are many things that are best left private and not for an open forum and because of this we have this madness, you say you have regrets ? well stop then before there are more, it does look very childish, please don't say it's a two way thing or he started it you must know how that looks.


----------



## Natrix

stevenrudge said:


> Gordon Glasson.
> interesting reply,l make out nothing of the sort, hobbyist have a legal right to sell their surplus offspring at shows,that is not what my point is,the point is what defines a hobby surplus?what can be a reasonably be expected and what might have to be defended
> 
> Sorry l've never said that a hobbyist selling surplus offspring at a hobby show was illegal,the point is and this aplys to everybody whether their a FBH 'committee member' or Joe Bloggs IHS member,as much as we do not like it,its there plan and simple,all we have is hobby shows to sell surplus offspring to other hobby members,some people within our society's use our hobby shows as a cover to sell animals that are specifically bred by unlicensed business that have grown out of a personal hobby.


Steven

It seems to me that you are not totally clear on what is legal and what isn't and much of your argument is about things that don't make the slightest difference from a legal point of view.

The legislation related to shows was never meant for shows. The plan was to stop street market sales of animals, out in all weathers. The AR's and local councils are trying to make this legislation fit our shows but it is a bad fit made worse by lack of definition of the terms used.

If it helps;

It doesn't matter how many animals a breeder has with him.
It doesn't matter how much value is on the table.
It doesn't matter how many tables a breeder has.
It doesn't matter how much money a breeder makes a year.
It doesn't matter how many animals a breeder keeps.
It doesn't how a breeder sell or advertises his animals.


What matters is, does the person selling represent anything proffesional as in does he/she have a pet shop licence, buy in and sell on 
and for what purpose is he selling the animals on.

There is also some discussion as to what represents a public place as most definitions would include pet shops (no membership required and open to the public without an entrance fee) which would make them more illegal than a show (membership required and public pay to enter).

To put it simply, the things you are questioning aren't the problem and the things that are the problem will take far more than a two table limit to put right.

The Government have accepted this and have set things up for change. They just have to rubber stamp the changes and the AR brigade are stuffed on shows and will have to come up with some other problem to whine about.

Gordon

Steven,
I'm now leaving for the hospital (you know why) will be back when I'm a Grandad

Gordon


----------



## Pete Q

Mynki said:


> The aquatics industry is pretty good in terms of self regulation. The BIAZA driven big fish campaign is a good example of this.
> 
> Do you think they could make any headway against aquarists though? I believe Joe Public don't have some of the stereotypical prejudices against fish like they do with snake etc.


I think your right, but didn't the APA have a go resently, something about if guppys got into uk ponds they would take over, something silly like that.


----------



## Purple_D

Just a few silly ideas
Lets find a venue,lets say a race course.
Get a society to run the show, I don't know maybe the IHS or affiliated clubs.
Allow members of IHS and affiliated clubs book tables.
Members of above clubs gain early entrance.
Associated members get entrance later,say 30-45 mins later.
No PSL holders or people with vat registered companys (reptile related) allowed to sell live stock.
All have a good day and meet some like minded good people
:2thumb::2thumb::2thumb:


----------



## Mynki

Pete Q said:


> I think your right, but didn't the APA have a go resently, something about if guppys got into uk ponds they would take over, something silly like that.


Guppies can certainly withstand lower temperatures than many tropical fish but it was -2c in my back garden this morning. I'm pretty sure that would kill themoff pretty quickly...

It's a massive 'if' I know but if the UK does ever leave europe then I guess the entis are well and truly stuffed.


----------



## Mynki

Purple_D said:


> Just a few silly ideas
> Lets find a venue,lets say a race course.
> Get a society to run the show, I don't know maybe the IHS or affiliated clubs.
> Allow members of IHS and affiliated clubs book tables.
> Members of above clubs gain early entrance.
> Associated members get entrance later,say 30-45 mins later.
> No PSL holders or people with vat registered companys (reptile related) allowed to sell live stock.
> All have a good day and meet some like minded good people
> :2thumb::2thumb::2thumb:


Genius mate, absolute genius. After spending months thinking about the subject I'm surprised Steven didn't come up with such an amazing and workable idea!


----------



## johnc79

Purple_D said:


> Just a few silly ideas
> Lets find a venue,lets say a race course.
> Get a society to run the show, I don't know maybe the IHS or affiliated clubs.
> Allow members of IHS and affiliated clubs book tables.
> Members of above clubs gain early entrance.
> Associated members get entrance later,say 30-45 mins later.
> No PSL holders or people with vat registered companys (reptile related) allowed to sell live stock.
> All have a good day and meet some like minded good people
> :2thumb::2thumb::2thumb:


What a dirty secret! You kept that idea to yourself all this time!


----------



## Purple_D

Mynki said:


> Genius mate, absolute genius. After spending months thinking about the subject I'm surprised Steven didn't come up with such an amazing and workable idea!





johnc79 said:


> What a dirty secret! You kept that idea to yourself all this time!


Just thought of it, does anyone think it will work:lol2:


----------



## johnc79

Purple_D said:


> Just thought of it, does anyone think it will work:lol2:


Not sure, think we need to run it past our most experienced show organiser , Mr Rudge. He always knows best.


----------



## stevenrudge

Purple_D said:


> Just thought of it, does anyone think it will work:lol2:


Not specifically to Jonhc79 but with him in mind.
Could anyone explain where in the hobby show surplus requirement do's it allow for the import of reptiles from Europe and the USA for the re-sale in our hobby shows?
l'm sure that these imports are re-sold at a loss just in-case the 'hobbyist' is accused of buying and selling animals for profit at our hobby shows.

Wrong again Mr Johnc79,l've talked to lots of people about this for months,l would have included you until you started to behave strangely,as you have shown l could not have trusted you to be indiscreet.
PS thanks for your support and yes some people do think that some of the ideas might work and seeing that we might not soon have any shows thanks to the movers and shakers and great mind of our hobby getting a fundamental point wrong.Did not action reform as and when it was needed,they and nobody else have put all our shows future in doubt.
Thanks great work


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Not specifically to Jonhc79 but with him in mind.
> Could anyone explain where in the hobby show surplus requirement do's it allow for the import of reptiles from Europe and the USA for the re-sale in our hobby shows?
> l'm sure that these imports are re-sold at a loss just in-case the 'hobbyist' is accused of buying and selling animals for profit at our hobby shows.
> 
> Wrong again Mr Johnc79,l've talked to lots of people about this for months,l would have included you until you started to behave strangely,as you have shown l could not have trusted you to be indiscreet


Importing snakes purely to sell on is not allowed. However, if these were bred with the intention of breeding or as pets, then for some reason became surplus to requirements, they can be sold on. Unlime someone, say, buying some snakes from hamm and then selling them a few weeks on?
And if someone is importing snakes and selling at a loss, they are clearly not a business, or at least wont be one for long. Thats thenmost ridiculous thing ive heard from you, which is saying a lot.


----------



## johnc79

stevenrudge said:


> Not specifically to Jonhc79 but with him in mind.
> Could anyone explain where in the hobby show surplus requirement do's it allow for the import of reptiles from Europe and the USA for the re-sale in our hobby shows?
> l'm sure that these imports are re-sold at a loss just in-case the 'hobbyist' is accused of buying and selling animals for profit at our hobby shows.
> 
> Wrong again Mr Johnc79,l've talked to lots of people about this for months,l would have included you until you started to behave strangely,as you have shown l could not have trusted you to be indiscreet


Lol so are you saying I important from Europe then sell at shows for profit now? Funny how I've only ever had a table once at a show. I'm sure the records will show that. You have Talked to lots of people about this? What the little people in your head? 

Just stop it now Steven you just look silly. It's a shame how you have turned out but it's there to be seen by all.


----------



## Mynki

Steven, I doubt you'll answer this question but I'll ask you it anyway...


What have you achieved other than to alienate yourself from the hobby over the last few months? Please list all the positives you've managed to achieve in your opinion...


----------



## helsbels

Khonsu said:


> Mr Rudge, on page 55 of this thread i asked the following, see below, mr Newman has responded, i would be pleased to here your thoughts on the matter.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Aimo
> 
> _"May I ask a further question Mr Rudge, do you believe that offending section of the Pet Animals Act will ever be repealed & if so would this allow you to work within the existing FBH framework with existing reptile enthusiast organisations.
> 
> I also have a question for Mr Newman, what do you consider is the likelihood of section 2 of the Pet Animals Act being repealed in say the next 12 months & what can I, as a member of herptile keeping fraternity do to push this matter towards the necessary repeal other than being a member of the likes of the IHS.
> 
> Finally to both Mr Rudge & Mr Newman if section 2 of the act was repealed do you consider that the “anti” organisations would refrain from opposing breeders meetings."_


Hello Steven,

It does not fill any readers of this thread with confidence about your planned show if you do not answer the question, very politely put, by Aimo. In fact, your refusal to answer would put off anyone who might agree with your idea in theory. Anyone looking to attend your theoretical show would want to know what the ''anti's'' stance would be if section 2 was repealed, and also would want to know what Anti organisations you have been talking to regarding such a show. I, for one, would not want to attend a show which has links to, or has been sanctioned by, an organisation which has been involved in threats against any other person or organisation, or has carried out acts damaging other people's property. 

Are you able to tell everyone which groups you have been in discussions with about a possible show, and also what the Anti's stance would be if Section 2 was repealed? It would be very helpful if we could have an answer because silence speaks volumes. 

I am not a breeder, I do not know any of the other people on this thread, I have no affiliations with any reptile organisation. I would just, I imagine like most people reading this thread, like to know so that I can make up my mind if I would ever want to attend such an event as you have proposed.

I look forward to your response, and thank you.


----------



## Chris Newman

Mynki said:


> The aquatics industry is pretty good in terms of self regulation. The BIAZA driven big fish campaign is a good example of this.
> 
> Do you think they could make any headway against aquarists though? I believe Joe Public don't have some of the stereotypical prejudices against fish like they do with snake etc.


I have just noticed on the APA facebook page they are indeed having a pop at the aquatics trade.....


----------



## Donnie76

Steven, can I just ask you one very simple question? Will you ever answer any of the questions that have been directed to you in this thread or any other thread?


----------



## stevenrudge

*reply*

Going back over 20 years ago when we had reptile shows that included all forms of traders and pet business's the ARs started to have success in closing them down (because it could be shown that our reptile shows were open pet markets)which as we all must know by now is illegal.
So back we come with what we are allowed by law to have,private members breeders meetings to sell surplus animals to other hobby members,this excluded any form of animal trading either licensed or unlicensed.
Over the years our remaining shows started to grow from these smaller events to much bigger shows and as they grew so did some hobby breeders,so much so that some rival in variety in animal numbers professional licensed business that where excluded from our hobby shows,to put it bluntly they filled the gap.
This now leaves them with a problem-were do they now go,do they stay as just hobby breeders,or do they now go legit,to go legit they loss their market,no entry to our hobby shows,so some go legit,some try and imply that their still just hobby breeders,these people want the best of both worlds.
As l see this situation our society's and the FBH have just stood back and have not taken any reforming action needed to keep our shows legal.
This hands us on a plate to people who are against us.
if you look at some of the people who are involved with the Federation,their very presence would exclude any chance of the reforms needed,to put it bluntly it is not in their interests to make the changes needed,and for me it asks the question as to why these people are needed in the first place.
in sort we have some people on the forums that have no interest in these issues being resolved.plus we have some people who are incapable either by will or capacity to deliver the changes before its too late,and this issue is resolved by the state


----------



## johnc79

stevenrudge said:


> Going back over 20 years ago when we had reptile shows that included all forms of traders and pet business's the ARs started to have success in closing them down (because it could be shown that our reptile shows were open pet markets)which as we all must know by now is illegal.
> So back we come with what we are allowed by law to have,private members breeders meetings to sell surplus animals to other hobby members,this excluded any form of animal trading either licensed or unlicensed.
> Over the years our remaining shows started to grow from these smaller events to much bigger shows and as they grew so did some hobby breeders,so much so that some rival in variety in animal numbers professional licensed business that where excluded from our hobby shows,to put it bluntly they filled the gap.
> This now leaves them with a problem-were do they now go,do they stay as just hobby breeders,or do they now go legit,to go legit they loss their market,no entry to our hobby shows,so some go legit,some try and imply that their still just hobby breeders,these people want the best of both worlds.
> As l see this situation our society's and the FBH have just stood back and have not taken any reforming action needed to keep our shows legal.
> This hands us on a plate to people who are against us.
> if you look at some of the people who are involved with the Federation,their very presence would exclude any chance of the reforms needed,to put it bluntly it is not in their interests to make the changes needed,and for me it asks the question as to why these people are needed in the first place.
> in sort we have some people on the forums that have no interest in these issues being resolved.plus we have some people who are incapable either by will or capacity to deliver the changes before its too late,and this issue is resolved by the state


Again you do not attend or have been to any shows for years so what puts you in a position to judge how shows are now? 

Don't forget to address why you said I import reptiles to sell at shows when you know I clearly do not. Is it to deflect from your own selling history ?


----------



## johnc79

stevenrudge said:


> Going back over 20 years ago when we had reptile shows that included all forms of traders and pet business's the ARs started to have success in closing them down (because it could be shown that our reptile shows were open pet markets)which as we all must know by now is illegal.
> So back we come with what we are allowed by law to have,private members breeders meetings to sell surplus animals to other hobby members,this excluded any form of animal trading either licensed or unlicensed.
> Over the years our remaining shows started to grow from these smaller events to much bigger shows and as they grew so did some hobby breeders,so much so that some rival in variety in animal numbers professional licensed business that where excluded from our hobby shows,to put it bluntly they filled the gap.
> This now leaves them with a problem-were do they now go,do they stay as just hobby breeders,or do they now go legit,to go legit they loss their market,no entry to our hobby shows,so some go legit,some try and imply that their still just hobby breeders,these people want the best of both worlds.
> As l see this situation our society's and the FBH have just stood back and have not taken any reforming action needed to keep our shows legal.
> This hands us on a plate to people who are against us.
> if you look at some of the people who are involved with the Federation,their very presence would exclude any chance of the reforms needed,to put it bluntly it is not in their interests to make the changes needed,and for me it asks the question as to why these people are needed in the first place.
> in sort we have some people on the forums that have no interest in these issues being resolved.plus we have some people who are incapable either by will or capacity to deliver the changes before its too late,and this issue is resolved by the state


This is a copy n paste job, it's the same on CB . Irelivent to recent posts and recent questions asked to you . The way it is written is different To your normal style. Not saying ARs have wrote this but it's not you. Not so much bad grammar ect. :whistling2:


----------



## Tarron

WHICH ANIMAL RIGHTS GROUP HAVE YOU SPOKE TO ABOUT HOLDING A SHOW IN THE WEST MIDLANDS? 
ARE THEY SPEAKING FOR HE WHOLE OF THEIR ORGANISATION OR ARE THEY A BREAKAWAY GROUP WITH NO RIGHTS TO SPEAK FOR ALL AR'S?

WHO ARE THEY?


Is that clear enough?


----------



## Khonsu

Mr Rudge, I'd would actually still like an answer to the question below however I also have a further question;

If, & yes I appreciate this is currently hyperthetical, if Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act is repealed, would this bring to a end any collabaration between yourself & the anti brigade.

Regards

Aimo



Khonsu said:


> Mr Rudge, on page 55 of this thread I asked the following, see below, mr Newman has responded, i would be pleased to here your thoughts on the matter.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Aimo
> 
> _"May I ask a further question Mr Rudge, do you believe that offending section of the Pet Animals Act will ever be repealed & if so would this allow you to work within the existing FBH framework with existing reptile enthusiast organisations._
> 
> _I also have a question for Mr Newman, what do you consider is the likelihood of section 2 of the Pet Animals Act being repealed in say the next 12 months & what can I, as a member of herptile keeping fraternity do to push this matter towards the necessary repeal other than being a member of the likes of the IHS._
> 
> _Finally to both Mr Rudge & Mr Newman if section 2 of the act was repealed do you consider that the “anti” organisations would refrain from opposing breeders meetings."_


----------



## Chris Newman

stevenrudge said:


> Going back over 20 years ago when we had reptile shows that included all forms of traders and pet business's the ARs started to have success in closing them down (because it could be shown that our reptile shows were open pet markets)which as we all must know by now is illegal.


This is not an entirely accurate or factual summation of events. The argument as to weather such events constituted a ‘market’ did not arise until 2002, when Animal Aid sort a legal opinion from Mark Love in January of that year. Prior to this many events, such as the IHS events held at the AlumwellCentre in Walsall, were licensed by the Local Authority. 

I appreciate that you are not well informed in this matters so I thought it might be pertinent to provide you with a potted history of reptile shows in the UK. 


*History *​



1970 the first International Herpetological Society (IHS) show took place 

1985 the first show licensed under the Pet Animal Licence (PSL) was held by the Thames & Chiltern Herpetological Society show 

1987 the IHS show moved to the AlumwellCentre in Walsall and ran under a PSL

1996 the first reported incident of an attack against a reptile show was in. A group called "Campaign for Reptiles" picketed the Avon IHS show claiming it was illegal

1998 the Captive Animal Protection Society (CAPS) launched a campaign against reptile shows, and to a lesser extent bird, shows/fairs

2001 the IHS September show was cancelled and the society forced out of the AlumwellCentre Walsall due to pressure from Animal Rights campaigners 

2001 the IHS show was held in Bradford Dudley Hill Social Club, venue threatened with violence by Animal Rights activist (also 2002) 

2001 the Chartered Institute of Environment Health (CIEH) issue a directive to its members. The directive unashamedly used Animal Aid’s documentation verbatim to state show were illegal

2002 the FBH challenged this direct and the CIEH reissued guidance to its members retracting some of the 2001 guidance on shows

2003 DEFRA held a meeting at Page Street on the matter of shows in respect of the proposed Animal Welfare Bill. Government position was to clarity licensing of such events

2003 the IHS launched legal action against Bradford City Council for refusal to issue a PSL in respect of there breeders meeting this challenge was unsuccessful 

2004 the Animal Welfare Bill set to clarify law on pet fairs and license as appropriate

2006 a Judicial Review (Haynes v Stafford) clarified the law and concluded shows could not be licensed due to Section 2 

2006 the Animal Welfare Act published and set Section 2 for repeal [commencement order not as yet read]


----------



## Chris Newman

_I just found this a bit more history that might help, a summation of events up to 2004…_

*Summary of events regards to reptile shows *

Reptile shows/fairs have been in existence for some twenty years, commencing in the very early nineteen eighties, such events flourished and ran unhindered until the late nineteen nineties. I am uncertain as to who held the first show/fair, but as far as I can ascertain the first licensed show was held by Thames & Chiltern Herpetological Group in 1985/6.

The first reported incident of an anti attack against a reptile show was in 1996. A group called "Campaign for Reptiles" picketed the Avon International Herpetological Society show quoting Clifford Warwick and claiming the show was illegal.

Around 1998/9 the Captive Animal Protection Society (CAPS) launched a campaign against reptile, and to a lesser extent bird, shows/fairs. The campaign launched by CAPS was quickly taken up by Animal Aid (AA) a larger, more belligerent animal rights’ extremist organisation. It is worthy of note that both AA & CAPS are not charities but are commercial enterprises which derive revenue by running campaigns pertaining to animal related matters. It should also be noted that Clifford Warwick does not hold a doctorate from Copenhagen University, as is often claimed. Also the claim in 2003 that he was a researcher at Leeds Medical School, as per a letter to Norwich area Health Authority, has been emphatically denied by the dean of the aforementioned institution.

The International Herpetological Society (IHS) have within the reptile show/fair circuit been the prime target of AA, and although they have targeted most other reptile events the ferocity and energy expended at disrupting IHS events is unparalleled. The first major show to be canceled by the activities of the antis was the spring IHS fare held by the Kent branch of the IHS in April 2000, this subsequently followed by disruption of the autumn show in September. 

The IHS 2001 September show was cancelled and the society forced out of the AlumwellCentre, Walsall. This show was seen as the flagship of reptile events and had been in residence at the Alumwell for over twelve years. Subsequently other shows have been affected or canceled, in particular entrepreneurial events, such as those held at Dagenham and Stockport have been eliminated. The only society event which has remained unaffected, despite heavy pressure, is the Eastern Herpetological Society Show in Norwich which has run licensed for over ten years and continues to do so.

The original tenet of the attack by the antis was on the grounds of human health, i.e. the spread of salmonella, but the strength of this argument soon waned in favor of the legality of such events in terms of sales and the Pet Animals Act (1951). The main legal argument raised by the antis centres on section 2 of the Act, which prohibits the sale of pets in a street or public place, or at a stall or barrow in a market, the argument being that a show or fair constitutes a market. (_see attached Legal Opinion drafted for Animal Aid_) 

Animal Aid lobbied the Chartered Institute of Environment Health (CIEH) to issue a directive to its members, Environmental Health Officers (EHO), that such events were unlawful. As a result, Andrew Griffiths, assistant secretary of the CIEH, issued such a directive in late 2001 to all Local Authorities (LA). I would suggest that it is very clear Andrew Griffith’s sympathy lies with Animal Aid and their kin, in his 2001 directive he unashamedly used Animal Aid’s documentation verbatim. (c_opies of all Animal Aid documentation available upon request_) 

The Federation of British Herpetologists (FBH) commissioned its own Legal Opinion and wrote to Andrew Griffiths pointing out various errors of his original directive. Subsequently in February 2002 Griffiths reissued his directive altering and clarifying some of the deficiencies, especially regarding private members’ meetings. It is interesting to note that Griffiths has met with AA on several occasions, usually at AA headquarters, but to my knowledge he has never meet with any representatives from the animal keeping societies.

The 2002 directive from the CIEH whilst clarifying, to some extent, the legalities of the situation failed to clarify the legal situation pertaining to shows which were held under a Pet Shop License (PSL). Both directives issues by the CIEH have been used very successfully by AA in disrupting or closing events, but opinion from LA’s has continued to varied. Some LA’s have conceded to AA’s view and refused pet shop licenses, other have not. Others have changed their opinion and refused licenses but allowed private members meetings and others, such as Bradford, have decided that private members meetings are also illegal.

Subsequent to the start of the issue of shows/fairs the government, in the form of DEFRA, have announced proposed new legislation in the form of the Animal Welfare Bill (AWB) This new legislation will effectively merge and up-date all existing animal welfare legislation, including the Pet Animals Act which governs the issuing of licenses for pet shops etc. DEFRA have held several consultation meetings with both the hobbyist and industry during 2002.

In 2001 the organizer of the Creepy Crawley event held at Newton Abbot Racecourse took the LA to magistrate’s Court for refusing to issue a PSL, the event having run under licence in previous years. The action was unsuccessful and they largely concluded that the matter was too complex for such a court to hear. Had the magistrates’ court found in favor of the event and overturned the decision not to issue a license this would not have been binding for other events as one magistrates’ court ruling is not binding upon any other court, i.e. it does not set a legal precedent.

By 2002 it was very clear that what was required was to seek a Judicial Review (JR) on this matter, although the costs were prohibitive. Knights had quoted 5-8K to seek leave for a JR and should this be challenged by the LA this could easily cost in the order of 20-30K. Costs of this magnitude were beyond the means of the FBH and others.

In early 2003 DEFRA held a meeting at Page Street on the matter of shows in respect of the proposed AWB. This meeting was attended by approximately 26 representatives from the opposing lobby, AA, CAPS etc., with Clifford Warwick, Elaine Toland and Andrew Tyler being the main protagonists for the anti lobby. By contrast, I was the sole representative of the pro lobby. DEFRA officials repeatedly stated to Animal Aid at that meeting that in their view (DEFRA) the law pertaining to shows was ambiguous, and it was not their view that such events held at this time were necessarily unlawful. 

I specifically asked Elaine Toland that if an event was to be held later that year (2003) under a PSL (specifically the National Bird Show held at the NEC) would they (AA) seek a JR against the Council for issuing such a licence. Ms Toland refused to answer the question. My response was to suggest that they would not seek a JR as they were fully aware that such action would be unsuccessful and again Ms Toland refused to respond.

A licence was subsequently sought in respect of the National Bird Show held in December at the NEC. AA ran a protracted and vociferous campaign against the event which culminated in a public hearing by the licensing authority. The outcome of this meeting was that the authority decided that they could issue the license and duly did. AA were challenged to proceed with a JR if they believed their legal argument was correct but they failed to do so.

This failure by AA to move for a JR in view of the Council’s decision to issue a license was seen by many as categorical acceptance by AA that their legal argument was weak, as clearly had they thought the action likely to succeed they would have proceeded. Had AA sought a JR and succeeded at this time then under the AWB it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for DEFRA to have licensed such events under the new Bill, effectively closing all such events permanently.

In 2003 the IHS launched legal action against Bradford City Council for refusal to issue a PSL in respect of there breeders meeting, this was regrettable as in all such previous such actions had had failed. This substantial advantage given to us by AA falling to seek a JR was subsequently lost after the IHS failure. This was further exacerbated by the IHS stated it was considering seeking a JR against Bradford City Council then failed to do so, this was unfortunate in all respects.

DEFRA have given strong indications that under the AWB such events will be specifically licensable and a working party is currently being formed which will be tasked with the duty of setting standards for such events. There are still some difficulties to overcome and AA have not conceded defeat and are still in a position to make mischief, at a DEFRA meeting on the 18th Feb this year the RSPCA have privately conceded that DEFRA will be likely to licensing such events under the AWB.

In light of this the RSPCA asked for a meeting with the FBH, which took place last Friday (March 26th) in order to discuss the issue. Both the RSPCA and FBH have been invited to sit on the working group for shows/fairs and it is important for the best possible chance of successes that both organisations work together on this issue. 

The purpose of setting up this FBH working group is to seek opinion from a variety of experienced keepers and traders to advise on the required Code of Practice for animal welfare at such events. I very much hope that this will pave the way for the re-launch of proper, licensed and well-organised reptile shows which will give the hobby a much-needed boost. 

Chris Newman
_31st March 2004_


----------



## stevenrudge

Khonsu said:


> Mr Rudge, I'd would actually still like an answer to the question below however I also have a further question;
> 
> If, & yes I appreciate this is currently hyperthetical, if Section 2 of the Pet Animals Act is repealed, would this bring to a end any collabaration between yourself & the anti brigade.
> 
> Regards
> 
> Aimo


if what you mean by 'collaboration' l take you mean is as to talk about our differences about live animal reptile shows-YES.
But l would have thought that any ongoing communication 'officially taken' A-link to any animal welfare group might be of use to us.
l personally think that this constant climate of fear this 'siege mentality' that some have been using for over the last 15-20 years is well over done and do's not bare to any scrutiny. Go back and check their posts-see for yourself
if there was any permanent official link, however unpleasant this thought might be for some,there would only be two outcomes,either nothing,so we'l loss nothing, or some good which would mean we gain.
if anybody looks at the way our hobby has been 'run' or guided for want of a better word would see that currently this would not happen,why because in my personal opinion that would be against their interests.
Going back to the point of this post.
it do's not matter what or how many times people from the FBH jump up and down on this thread the facts remain the same.
l pre-warned way before any investigation that could lead to a court case that we are currently vulnerable to this very situation-go back and look.
This has now happened.
They denied that there was any chance of this because they were right and my interpretation of UK legislation was wrong.
The current situation speaks for its self - l was right
As l've made clear l cannot speak about a current case,just look at the posts and replys its all there.
People have to ask themselves that why if l'm so wrong with my views why do these people show such intense intolerance to these views on all reptile forums 
As bill shaky once said you protesth to loudly!
PS anybody asking me to answers anymore public questions will have to show their real names and make their 'bias' publicly known,as l'm tried of people pm'ing me with fake ids and hiding themselves behind silly names just to gain info to pass on,l show my real name so why carnt you?


----------



## Natrix

stevenrudge said:


> PS anybody asking me to answers anymore public questions will have to show their real names and make their 'bias' publicly known,as l'm tried of people pm'ing me with fake ids and hiding themselves behind silly names just to gain info to pass on,l show my real name so why carnt you?


Fair enough,

Which AR group have you been talking with?

Gordon Glasson
Biased towards the FBH 

FBH VC


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> PS anybody asking me to answers anymore public questions will have to show their real names and make their 'bias' publicly known,as l'm tried of people pm'ing me with fake ids and hiding themselves behind silly names just to gain info to pass on,l show my real name so why carnt you?


Which AR Group have a you been speaking to?
Are they speaking for the whole organisation or are they a splinter group?
Do they speak for the whe AR community?

Tarron Boon
FBH supporter


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> if what you mean by 'collaboration' l take you mean is as to talk about our differences about live animal reptile shows-YES.
> But l would have thought that any ongoing communication 'officially taken' A-link to any animal welfare group might be of use to us.
> l personally think that this constant climate of fear this 'siege mentality' that some have been using for over the last 15-20 years is well over done and do's not bare to any scrutiny. Go back and check their posts-see for yourself
> if there was any permanent official link, however unpleasant this thought might be for some,there would only be two outcomes,either nothing,so we'l loss nothing, or some good which would mean we gain.
> if anybody looks at the way our hobby has been 'run' or guided for want of a better word would see that currently this would not happen,why because in my personal opinion that would be against their interests.
> Going back to the point of this post.
> it do's not matter what or how many times people from the FBH jump up and down on this thread the facts remain the same.
> l pre-warned way before any investigation that could lead to a court case that we are currently vulnerable to this very situation-go back and look.
> This has now happened.
> They denied that there was any chance of this because they were right and my interpretation of UK legislation was wrong.
> The current situation speaks for its self - l was right
> As l've made clear l cannot speak about a current case,just look at the posts and replys its all there.
> People have to ask themselves that why if l'm so wrong with my views why do these people show such intense intolerance to these views on all reptile forums
> As bill shaky once said you protesth to loudly!
> PS anybody asking me to answers anymore public questions will have to show their real names and make their 'bias' publicly known,as l'm tried of people pm'ing me with fake ids and hiding themselves behind silly names just to gain info to pass on,l show my real name so why carnt you?


So it's not an animal rights group now it's animal welfare ? 

Bill who ? said what ? Pete is my name.


----------



## Purple_D

Natrix said:


> Fair enough,
> 
> Which AR group have you been talking with?
> 
> Gordon Glasson
> Biased towards the FBH
> 
> FBH VC





Tarron said:


> Which AR Group have a you been speaking to?
> Are they speaking for the whole organisation or are they a splinter group?
> Do they speak for the whe AR community?
> 
> Tarron Boon
> FBH supporter[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> 
> Pete Q said:
> 
> 
> 
> So it's not an animal rights group now it's animal welfare ?
> 
> Bill who ? said what ? Pete is my name.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think this numpty is going to answer any questions truthfully.
> Best leaving him/them to their fantasy land:2thumb:
Click to expand...


----------



## Mynki

Purple_D said:


> Do you think this numpty is going to answer any questions truthfully.


No, he's been caught fibbing too much. Combine that with the revelations of his reptile trading and I'm at a loss to think of a forum poster who I view as less honest than Mr Rudge.


----------



## helsbels

Steven, if you refuse to tell us which Anti group(s) you are speaking to, then a lot of people are not going to give their real names because there is a potential that they could be targeted by said organisations and their safety could be compromised. If you refuse to tell us who you are talking to, then no-one in their right mind is ever going to go to such a meeting. It's quite frankly ridiculous.


----------



## stevenrudge

Purple_D said:


> Tarron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which AR Group have a you been speaking to?
> Are they speaking for the whole organisation or are they a splinter group?
> Do they speak for the whe AR community?
> 
> Tarron Boon
> FBH supporter[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Do you think this numpty is going to answer any questions truthfully.
> Best leaving him/them to their fantasy land:2thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> Tarron Boon, you already know the answer to this as l've already made this very clear on C/B,and this forum.
> The organisation
> l do not know if their speaking for the 'whole AR community'??? just as the FBH do not speak for the whole reptile community although this do's not stop them from making this claim.
> Tarron Boon FBH supporter and claims to be instrumental within the IHS for dealing with the June Donny 'crisis'
> Next time reveal your real name and place within the IHS
Click to expand...


----------



## Pete Q

Purple_D said:


> Tarron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which AR Group have a you been speaking to?
> Are they speaking for the whole organisation or are they a splinter group?
> Do they speak for the whe AR community?
> 
> Tarron Boon
> FBH supporter[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Do you think this numpty is going to answer any questions truthfully.
> Best leaving him/them to their fantasy land:2thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> No, but I like point out to him he complains about his questions not being answered in the beginning then doesn't answer his own.
> 
> Also how childish he has been, we have had months of these posts, and why, well he says he didn't get a few questions answered.
Click to expand...


----------



## johnc79

Purple_D said:


> Tarron said:
> 
> 
> 
> Which AR Group have a you been speaking to?
> Are they speaking for the whole organisation or are they a splinter group?
> Do they speak for the whe AR community?
> 
> Tarron Boon
> FBH supporter[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Do you think this numpty is going to answer any questions truthfully.
> Best leaving him/them to their fantasy land:2thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not not be surprised if he has dreamt the whole thing up . Apparently he has a rep for been a fantasist back in the day.
> 
> Sorry Steven I don't enjoy putting you down but you leave your self wide open when you try and cause trouble.
> 
> Your not about "saving the hobbie" is it? You love the attention and drama don't you?
> 
> Look at this random thread on an American forum he started bragging about his battle with a mod on here. http://www.thamnophis.com/forum/garter-snake-lounge/10687-intertesting-week.html
> 
> Is this how a grown man acts ?
> 
> Sorry Steven but time to grow up, get a grip and if needs be get help.
Click to expand...


----------



## stevenrudge

helsbels said:


> Steven, if you refuse to tell us which Anti group(s) you are speaking to, then a lot of people are not going to give their real names because there is a potential that they could be targeted by said organisations and their safety could be compromised. If you refuse to tell us who you are talking to, then no-one in their right mind is ever going to go to such a meeting. It's quite frankly ridiculous.


helsbels l've said this countless times go back and have a look at the relevant replys and posts before posting silly paranoia replys.
Paranoia is used by people to control other people,its also a mental condition that needs treatment.
Please explain how and why some people us their real names to no bad effect,and at the same time others use fake or silly names and then those very same people use underhand tactics to gain information on others.just look at all the agro l've taken from FBH fans and commitee memebers,some use the very underhand tactics that they accuse other of using and then have the check to try and then turn it back to a nondiscloser issue
People get a gip


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Tarron Boon, you already know the answer to this as l've already made this very clear on C/B,and this forum.
> The organisation
> l do not know if their speaking for the 'whole AR community'??? just as the FBH do not speak for the whole reptile community although this do's not stop them from making this claim.
> Tarron Boon FBH supporter and claims to be instrumental within the IHS for dealing with the June Donny 'crisis'
> Next time reveal your real name and place within the IHS


I dont believe you have named the AR Group tbat you have spoken to. If I have missed it, please post a link so that others may see too.
The difference being, Steven, that the FBH aren't known for harrassing individuals. They do not stalk them to their homes. They have never killed animalsnin some wierd logic. AR Groups have! 
If you have spoken to a small, breakaway group of ARs who truly are happy with your ideas, this does not automatically give you protection from other ARs to attack your show. Therefore, anyone involved in your show should be deeply suspicious. You MUST release the name of this group. Each message without it reduces whatever respect is left for you.

Your final comment about my name and allegiance is ridiculous. I have told you time and time again that my real name (the one on my birth certificate) is Tarron Michael Boon. The fact you choose to ignore this and constantly attempt to attack me on this point shows your level of ignorance!
I have told you to google my name, im the first page of google when you do! Still, here you go;

tarron boon - Google Search

I'm pretty sure my current address is there, come round if you like, I'll show you my birth certificate, driving license, RAF ID, and gas bill if you want.

I never claimed to be instrumental in dealing with the June Donny crisis. You claimed they made it up, so I pointed out that I know they didnt make it up as I was the one that alerted to chris to the claims on the APA website which led to the resultant action.

And I have no position in the IHS, sorry to blow your conspiracies out of the water.

But now please answer the questio that no fewer than 10 individuals have asked,

Which AR group have you been in contact with regarding your show in the west midlands.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> Purple_D said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tarron Boon, you already know the answer to this as l've already made this very clear on C/B,and this forum.
> The organisation
> 
> 
> 
> Well I missed that, as far as I can see you have not told us yet, if you said it already I'm sorry, but I'm sure you havn't.
> 
> Anyway, who is it then ? if they are just animal welfare then thats fine, but animal rights will not listen to us, prove me wrong and tell me who it is.
Click to expand...


----------



## Tarron

johnc79 said:


> Purple_D said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not not be surprised if he has dreamt the whole thing up . Apparently he has a rep for been a fantasist back in the day.
> 
> Sorry Steven I don't enjoy putting you down but you leave your self wide open when you try and cause trouble.
> 
> Your not about "saving the hobbie" is it? You love the attention and drama don't you?
> 
> Look at this random thread on an American forum he started bragging about his battle with a mod on here. an intertesting week
> 
> Is this how a grown man acts ?
> 
> Sorry Steven but time to grow up, get a grip and if needs be get help.
> 
> 
> 
> That thread is just brilliant! Sexual discrimination and sexual harrassment. He then infers he is sexually I terested and tries to arrange a meet, quality! Steven, I Love You Man.
Click to expand...


----------



## Pete Q

johnc79 said:


> Purple_D said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would not not be surprised if he has dreamt the whole thing up . Apparently he has a rep for been a fantasist back in the day.
> 
> Sorry Steven I don't enjoy putting you down but you leave your self wide open when you try and cause trouble.
> 
> Your not about "saving the hobbie" is it? You love the attention and drama don't you?
> 
> Look at this random thread on an American forum he started bragging about his battle with a mod on here. an intertesting week
> 
> Is this how a grown man acts ?
> 
> Sorry Steven but time to grow up, get a grip and if needs be get help.
> 
> 
> 
> That link is pretty sick, :gasp: Steven please get some help, really,I'm not messing about or talking the pee, please go and see someone that can help you, please trust me I'm trying to be helpful.
Click to expand...


----------



## Mynki

I'd genuinely be interested to know what Tesco's would have to say on those kind of comments, particularly as it relates to 'union training'. I know exactly what would happen if my employer found simialar remarks made by an employee of theirs!


----------



## helsbels

stevenrudge said:


> helsbels l've said this countless times go back and have a look at the relevant replys and posts before posting silly paranoia replys.
> Paranoia is used by people to control other people,its also a mental condition that needs treatment.
> Please explain how and why some people us their real names to no bad effect,and at the same time others use fake or silly names and then those very same people use underhand tactics to gain information on others.just look at all the agro l've taken from FBH fans and commitee memebers,some use the very underhand tactics that they accuse other of using and then have the check to try and then turn it back to a nondiscloser issue
> People get a gip


Steven, you have crossed the line. I have been polite with you, but to infer that I have paranoia and it is a 'mental condition that needs treatment' is incredibly offensive. 

If you have already posted which group(s) you have had discussions with, then why can you not just tell us here? 

Sadly, your refusal to answer questions has undermined and destroyed any point you make. On a public forum you have resorted to making deeply offensive comments which are highly inappropriate; this has only served to make you look rude. You have condemned yourself; no one in their right mind is ever going to attend your meetings because you have been incredibly rude and refused to disclose essential information which could potentially have an effect on any attendee's safety. 

I am asking for the mods to ban you now. You cannot make comments such as the above, it is entirely unacceptable.


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> johnc79 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That link is pretty sick, :gasp: Steven please get some help, really,I'm not messing about or talking the pee, please go and see someone that can help you, please trust me I'm trying to be helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if my sense of humor is not to your liking,l was taking the piss out of some one,but this reply do's show have desperate some people are now getting,all diverting as usual.
> Going back to the point about paranoia.
> Has anybody from the forums by placing any adverts on the open forum revealing there own names and address's, inviting strangers in their own homes showing their private collections to people who they have never meet or have any knowledge outside of a open forum advert, had any visits from any AR fanatics?
> Just how dangerous this this!
> These same people now feel that by just being open and honest that by just revealingly their name now puts them in some sort of danger
> Pathetic nonsense
> l'm refusing to pander to others laziness,read the posts all the answers are already there for you.l'm not just going to keep repetting the same answers that most already know
> Or ask tarron
Click to expand...


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> Pete Q said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry if my sense of humor is not to your liking,l was taking the piss out of some one,but this reply do's show have desperate some people are now getting,all diverting as usual.
> Going back to the point about paranoia.
> Has anybody from the forums by placing any adverts on the open forum revealing there own names and address's, inviting strangers in their own homes showing their private collections to people who they have never meet or have any knowledge outside of a open forum advert, had any visits from any AR fanatics?
> Just how dangerous this this!
> These same people now feel that by just being open and honest that by just revealingly their name now puts them in some sort of danger
> Pathetic nonsense
> l'm refusing to pander to others laziness,read the posts all the answers are already there for you.l'm not just going to keep repetting the same answers that most already know
> Or ask tarron
> 
> 
> 
> I just don't get it Steven, you can write all this above, but can't just write APA OR RSPCA or whoever it is.
Click to expand...


----------



## Tarron

stevenrudge said:


> Sorry if my sense of humor is not to your liking,l was taking the piss out of some one,but this reply do's show have desperate some people are now getting,all diverting as usual.
> Going back to the point about paranoia.
> Has anybody from the forums by placing any adverts on the open forum revealing there own names and address's, inviting strangers in their own homes showing their private collections to people who they have never meet or have any knowledge outside of a open forum advert, had any visits from any AR fanatics?
> Just how dangerous this this!
> These same people now feel that by just being open and honest that by just revealingly their name now puts them in some sort of danger
> Pathetic nonsense
> l'm refusing to pander to others laziness,read the posts all the answers are already there for you.l'm not just going to keep repetting the same answers that most already know
> Or ask tarron


Ask me what steven, I have never seen you post any information about who you have spoken to. A simple name will suffice, arter all, thats what you demand from others.

I assume one is now content that I am using my real name? An apology would be nice, but I doubt it is forthcoming. 

You seem very content with skipping over valid points, only addressing what you feel to be insulting, despite the virtriolic insults yiu spout yourself.

Which AR Group have you been I talks with regarding the show you are planning I the west midlands? Please answer.


----------



## Donnie76

stevenrudge said:


> l pre-warned way before any investigation that could lead to a court case that we are currently vulnerable to this very situation-go back and look.
> This has now happened.
> They denied that there was any chance of this because they were right and my interpretation of UK legislation was wrong.
> The current situation speaks for its self - l was right


Steven please correct me if i am wrong but you "pre-warned" that the shows themselves were illegal and as far as I am aware the IHS/organisers of the shows are not the ones due in court. How does this make you right? Also I may have missed the answer to this question that was asked of you many time so apologies if I did but how did you know about this court case prior to anybody else knowing about it? Were you the one who blew the whistle?


----------



## Tarron

Donnie76 said:


> Steven please correct me if i am wrong but you "pre-warned" that the shows themselves were illegal and as far as I am aware the IHS/organisers of the shows are not the ones due in court. How does this make you right? Also I may have missed the answer to this question that was asked of you many time so apologies if I did but how did you know about this court case prior to anybody else knowing about it? Were you the one who blew the whistle?


The question has been posed many a time. No official answer so we are all left to guess!


----------



## Donnie76

Tarron said:


> The question has been posed many a time. No official answer so we are all left to guess!


As is the case with 99.999999999% of the other questions directed to him. Who would of thought he would be a hypocrite as well.........


----------



## Pete Q

Tarron said:


> The question has been posed many a time. No official answer so we are all left to guess!


Yes, I would guess that no AR would be fine about a show, so I'd go for RSPCA.

If that is the case I don't understand why he would hide that, many people would welome their support, some wouldn't and still won't trust them but I think a lot of people would feel okay about it.


----------



## Tarron

Pete Q said:


> Yes, I would guess that no AR would be fine about a show, so I'd go for RSPCA.
> 
> If that is the case I don't understand why he would hide that, many people would welome their support, some wouldn't and still won't trust them but I think a lot of people would feel okay about it.


Im starting to doubt whether any of it is true at all. I wouldnt put him past saying all this in the hopes the community would say "look FBH, thats all you needed to do" then the support would stop and he'd be happy.

If im right, its clearly backfired. He has been put in a corner and rather than hold his hands up, hes trying to fight his way out of it.


----------



## Mynki

Tarron said:


> Im starting to doubt whether any of it is true at all. I wouldnt put him past saying all this in the hopes the community would say "look FBH, thats all you needed to do" then the support would stop and he'd be happy.
> 
> If im right, its clearly backfired. He has been put in a corner and rather than hold his hands up, hes trying to fight his way out of it.


I'm still betting his invloement with AR groups (Assuming he's not telling stories) is limited to the odd PM to Gemma from the RSPCA on the CB forum.


----------



## Tarron

Mynki said:


> I'm still betting his invloement with AR groups (Assuming he's not telling stories) is militeed to the odd PM to Gemma from the RSPCA on the CB forum.


I dont think I've met her on there. But only been on CB a month. Wouldn't surprise me though.

Its like a forum version of tedious link.


----------



## Purple_D

Mynki said:


> I'm still betting his invloement with AR groups (Assuming he's not telling stories) is militeed to the odd PM to Gemma from the RSPCA on the CB forum.


I believe he's living in cloud cuckoo land,he's missled ,lied and been devious.
He a pain in the rear.I doubt he 's done anything he claims.
Though i do think he was the guy that set up the table holder at donny.His name 's been forwarded to the person concerned:2thumb:


----------



## Chris Newman

It would appear a few of us are thinking along the same lines, so perhaps we should not be so reticence and simply ask Mr Rudge the question directly! So, Mr Rudge have you had any dialogue, written or electronic, with any members of the Animal Protection Agency or their associates in the passed twelve months... A simple yes or no answer will suffice?


----------



## Chris Newman

stevenrudge said:


> if what you mean by 'collaboration' l take you mean is as to talk about our differences about live animal reptile shows-YES.
> But l would have thought that any ongoing communication 'officially taken' A-link to any animal welfare group might be of use to us.
> l personally think that this constant climate of fear this 'siege mentality' that some have been using for over the last 15-20 years is well over done and do's not bare to any scrutiny. Go back and check their posts-see for yourself
> if there was any permanent official link, however unpleasant this thought might be for some,there would only be two outcomes,either nothing,so we'l loss nothing, or some good which would mean we gain.


_Are you referring to communication such as this [see below]. Regrettably Elaine did not have the courtesy to respond to this or any of my other open invitations for dialogue. _

*OPEN LETTER TO ELAINE TOLAND, SPOKESPERSON FOR ANIMAL AID.*

Without prejudice

23/08/01

Dear Ms Toland,

Further to my fax dated 21/01/01, regarding your press release of 17/08/01, I am disappointed, although not altogether surprised that you have, once again, failed to respond. Perhaps you will have the courtesy to do so on this occasion. I also note, for the record, that you also failed to respond to my previous letter (dated 22/06/01). I have attached a copy of this, just in case you have forgotten about it.

What do you (and your organisation) have to hide and why do you refuse to communicate? Even opposing political parties have dialogue; are Animal Aid above the principles of democracy? If you and your fellows are so concerned for public welfare, why not attend the Exotica show at the weekend and let everyone know your views. You have been offered a stand free of charge, so why not take advantage of the opportunity? You could even bring along your self-styled scientific expert, Clifford Warwick, as does not live too far away. I am sure he would be pleased to know that the tortoises I brought from him years ago are still thriving in captivity, despite your claims that reptiles seldom live more than a year. It would be most pleasant to meet up with him again and reminisce about the good old days and how things have changed in the reptile trade. I am sure many other old acquaintances would be only too pleased to meet up with him. 

You call yourselves Animal Aid and describe your organisation as an animal rights group, but on what basis. Many of your actions are clearly detrimental to animals, for example:
Creating and/or exploiting public fear and hatred of certain groups of animals (reptiles) in order to generate publicity for your group.
Intimidating those working in the fields of reptile conservation and captive breeding.
Using intimidation and threat in order to stop events which promote education about the natural world. 
Attempting to prevent people having contact with animals which are not on your approved list.

Incidentally, just how does an animal get onto your approved list. Do people who like pigeons, for example, make a donation to your cause?

The facts about salmonella and reptiles are quite clear and the figures show that the threat to human health is infinitesimal, so why you continue to use this argument is unclear. Why is it okay to have contact with pigeons, which are a known threat to public health, but not reptiles, which pose little or no threat. Can it be that reptiles make good press and scare-mongering stories make very good publicity, which any group inviting public donation would be keen to exploit? A cynical view would, therefore, be that Animal Aid are exploiting animals, not protecting their rights. 

Your press releases show a blatant disregard for the truth but, when challenged, you refuse to communicate with anyone whose views are in opposition. Even when provided with facts you still continue to broadcast material which is wildly inaccurate. The fact that you are so violently opposed to any contact (even second-hand contact) with reptiles poses the question what should people do if they chance to encounter a wild reptile or amphibian? Consider it a risk to public health and kill it, then bury the body in a lime pit to prevent contamination? What do you do if you see a newt in your garden pond? Cordon off your garden and make it a no-go zone then post boards up and down the road warning of the peril. What happens when the family cat picks up a slow-worm? Slaughter it… there could be a risk of secondary infection. Sounds stupid, but this could be the effect of you inciting public panic. It is certainly no less stupid than your press release suggesting that people attending a reptile show will go home and infect all their family and friends with diseases picked up from reptiles. You must know yourselves that this is rubbish and yet you continue to go to press with it. Does your group ever consider the consequence of your actions, or do you consider yourselves unaccountable?

If people, particularly children, are denied contact with animals and are prevented from learning about the natural world we will see a generation that simply does not care. Habitat destruction could lead to a mass extinction such as has never before been seen and it is only by fostering respect for the natural world that this trend can be reversed. The more we learn about animals, the more we can do to help their long-term future on the planet and we can certainly learn much by keeping certain species in captivity. Your group opposes contact with animals (except those on your approved list) and the learning process which goes with keeping animals. This attitude will surely make the world a poorer place.

Deep down could it be that you do not actually believe in the nonsense you publish and is that why you refuse to enter debate on the issues? It has been widely perceived that you simply do not have the courage to support your convictions, but perhaps you are convinced by your own arguments. Which ever way, please feel free to come along at the weekend – perhaps you will learn something. 

Yours sincerely,

*Chris Newman*

Editor Reptilian magazine & lifelong herpetologist


*LETTER DATED 22/06/01, FAXED AND E-MAILED TO ELAINE TOLAND REGERDING THE I.H.S. BREEDERS MEETING*

No reply received as off 23/08/01


Dear Ms. Toland,

I am writing with regard to the letter sent by you to St Edmunds Road Catholic School. Not only was this letter very threatening, it was also highly inaccurate and emotive. It is a great pity that you feel the need to use terrorist tactics to get your own (minority) point of view accepted by the public and that you resort to lies and propaganda to foist your own misguided beliefs upon others. I accept that we are all entitled to a viewpoint, but trying to get your own way should not blind you to moral issues and the rights of others to pursue their chosen way of life. I realise that you, and the rest of your sorry organization, are not interested in the truth but the facts are as follows.

What you describe as a show/market is, in fact, a meeting of a long established society which promotes the conservation, captive-breeding and furtherance of knowledge of reptiles and amphibians. As your organization is called Animal Aid, surely your sympathies would lie with such an organisation. What benefit is there to animals to stop breeders meeting and/or exchanging knowledge, information and, indeed, breeding stock? As you well know, there has been no attempt to use devices of membership – you just made that bit up for effect. If you can’t get your own way by truthful means, you invent something. Very ethical. Of course the organisers attempted to conceal the venue, with the threat of terrorism held over them this was the only sensible course of action.

There was never any chance of the health and safety of the school, pupils, their families and staff being at risk from the meeting; the only risk was posed by yourselves. The risk of reptile-related salmonellosis is so small that it can be discounted. With even the most basic hygiene practices, the chance of contracting disease from a reptile is infinitesimal, unlike the real risk posed by domestic pets (principally dogs) and contaminated food. Should your group, therefore, not campaign against dogs, cats, chickens and all those other animals out here posing a real threat to public health? If you want to run campaigns at least run them on a real issue – inventing a non-existent threat to human health just furthers the public dislike of a group of animals that are already much maligned. 

Throughout the world reptiles and amphibians receive a hard time at human hands. In many countries reptiles are killed on sight. Educating the public as to the value of reptiles and amphibians has been an important part of the herpetological scene in the UK but this valuable conservation work is now being seriously affected by your activities. Exploiting the public fear of reptiles generates publicity and you milk it for all it’s worth. You don’t care about the harm you do in the process. You are not aiding animals – you are harming them. You are also harming their long-term future on the planet.

How will the next generation learn to respect and care for the natural world when denied access the living things which enrich it? Presumably your organisation does not look this far ahead. Captive breeding can offer hope to species which face the real threat of habitat destruction but your organisation does not want breeders to meet , thus denying them the chance to increase their knowledge and perfect their husbandry techniques. Most people who keep reptiles and amphibians do so from a deep love and respect for the natural world and a desire to further the knowledge of a group a animals which are in need of support. 

I do hope some of you will attend the meeting on Sunday so that we can discuss the issues at greater length. My children would, I am sure, also be interested to see the sort of people who are attempting to criminalize their interests and make the world they will inherit a poorer place, where the freedom of the individual can be quashed by a minority group who wish to inflict their views upon the majority and will stop at nothing to win. 

It is interesting to note that your consultant, Mr Clifford Warwick, has become involved in an organisation which is so against the reptile trade as I, like many others who will be at the meeting, remember well his reptile-dealing days. Perhaps he would like to come along and reminisce about the good old days. 

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Chris Newman
Lifelong herpetologist & father to four animal loving children.


----------



## Pete Q

Mynki said:


> I'm still betting his invloement with AR groups (Assuming he's not telling stories) is limited to the odd PM to Gemma from the RSPCA on the CB forum.


The crazy thing about this whole story is nothing would be a shock anymore.

Next thing we're hear is that they all have an orgy once a week, ET, CW, and SR.


----------



## Chris Newman

_Or this....._


*Chris Newman personal invitation to Elaine Toland *

Open letter, dated 24th September, 2009

Dear Elaine,

For the nearly ten years you have been making inaccurate and defamatory statements that ‘Breeders Meetings’ are illegal and a threat to public health and animal welfare, so I would like to extend an invitation for you to attend this weekend’s event so that you can make slightly more informed decisions in the future. You are perfectly entitled to you views and opinions, as are we all, but it would not be entirely reasonable for you to perpetually attempt to force your minority and extremist views upon the rest of society, indeed this would seem to be bullying of the worst possible kind.

Your organisation is called the Animal Protection Agency and I fail to see how hassling pet keepers protects animals, quite the contrary I would have thought. I would also have thought that breeding reptiles (many of which face a hard time in the wild) in captivity could only be construed as a positive activity from an animal welfare viewpoint.

The group you are currently bullying and attempting to intimidate are the Essex Reptile and Amphibian Club, a group of reptile and amphibian enthusiasts actively engaged in reptile and amphibian conservation, public education (much needed in a field where the animals are still persecuted due to ignorance) and captive breeding. How your persecution of such a group fits in with your agenda of ‘animal protection’ I fail to see.

I have personally invited you to many previous events and you have always failed to acknowledge or respond, and I assume this is connected to your obvious aversion for animals but I would urge you to bury your distaste in the interests of animal protection, a field in which we all (supposedly) work.

As it appears that you have personal issues with people having contact with animals and we would respect your views and keep all livestock sufficiently removed from you in order that your comfort zone was not in any way violated.

On a closing note, I realise that the mere mention of the t*rr*r*sm word strikes fear in the heart of the animal rights activist but actually using scare tactics in order to foist your views upon the silent (and suffering) majority does fall within the wider definition of the term, I would suggest.

I had the decency to attend the Animal Rights conference you sponsored earlier this year and listen to the arguments put forward and I believe you should reciprocate.

I hope to see you on the day. 

Yours faithfully,

Chris Newman


----------



## Tarron

Im pretty sure, Chris, that you just 'pwned' steven, as the young ones would say.



Pete Q said:


> The crazy thing about this whole story is nothing would be a shock anymore.
> 
> Next thing we're hear is that they all have an orgy once a week, ET, CW, and SR.


You are o e sick puppy Pete! Take it back, I dont wanna see them visions no more!


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

I noticed a change from 'yours sincerely' in the first letters to 'yours faithfully' in the last (I know, I'm sad and notice anal detail as such) - am I right in reading into this that she is yet to reply to ANY letters or open communication at all?


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> The crazy thing about this whole story is nothing would be a shock anymore.
> 
> Next thing we're hear is that they all have an orgy once a week, ET, CW, and SR.


Seeing that l've already said that l cannot say anymore about Newman's very public lie,and deformation on his C/B post (commercialism your views)Due to my Lawyers currently taking action against him,l've been advised not to say anymore about this issue,So Newman unblock me from your post and l'll copy and paste what you said and what my reply was,or better still you do it,as you already seem to have forgotten what my public answer was,
Again Newman and Co are just trying to divert away from a question and answer that they already know.
Newman you have already been told not to try and communicate with me on the forums,speak to my Lawyers their waiting for you,you should have the second letter by now.


----------



## Blake1990

stevenrudge said:


> Seeing that l've already said that l cannot say anymore about Newman's very public lie,and deformation on his C/B post (commercialism your views)Due to my Lawyers currently taking action against him,l've been advised not to say anymore about this issue,So Newman unblock me from your post and l'll copy and paste what you said and what my reply was,or better still you do it,as you already seem to have forgotten what my public answer was,
> Again Newman and Co are just trying to divert away from a question and answer that they already know.
> Newman you have already been told not to try and communicate with me on the forums,speak to my Lawyers their waiting for you,you should have the second letter by now.


Steven. 

Did you get bullied at school?

Kind regards,

Ross Blake


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

stevenrudge said:


> Seeing that l've already said that l cannot say anymore about Newman's very public lie,and deformation on his C/B post (commercialism your views)Due to my Lawyers currently taking action against him,l've been advised not to say anymore about this issue,
> 
> Exhibit A: *So Newman unblock me from your post and l'll copy and paste what you said and what my reply was*
> 
> ,or better still you do it,as you already seem to have forgotten what my public answer was,
> 
> Exhibit B: *Again Newman and Co are just trying to divert away from a question and answer that they already know.*
> 
> Exhibit C: *Newman you have already been told not to try and communicate with me on the forums*
> 
> ,speak to my Lawyers their waiting for you,you should have the second letter by now.


They might but we don't. So spit it out.
Would it not be easier to tell us than to repeat that cryptic rubbish 500 more times?
And communication takes two, funnily enough.


----------



## stevenrudge

Pete Q said:


> The crazy thing about this whole story is nothing would be a shock anymore.
> 
> Next thing we're hear is that they all have an orgy once a week, ET, CW, and SR.


Before any of this was leaked by Tarron on his post (stevens dirty secret) because l'd told him in confidence,as well as others who for some strange reason seem to have forgotten what l'd told them, if any of this were to prove to be successful,l was planning releasing everything in full,l still will at some stage,but l cannot now that lawyers are involved,when this is settled l will release everything l have.
The only craziness around this post are peoples paranoia.l really do not mind the public diverting by Newman and his fans away from the facts of his very public lies,l'll leave this to the Lawyers to put this right. WTF is all this sick stuff about?says more about the people posting this garbage than me


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

stevenrudge said:


> Before any of this was leaked by Tarron on his post (stevens dirty secret) because l'd told him in confidence,as well as others who for some strange reason seem to have forgotten what l'd told them, if any of this were to prove to be successful,l was planning releasing everything in full,l still will at some stage,but l cannot now that lawyers are involved,when this is settled l will release everything l have.
> The only craziness around this post are peoples paranoia.l really do not mind the public diverting by Newman and his fans away from the facts of his very public lies,l'll leave this to the Lawyers to put this right. WTF is all this sick stuff about?says more about the people posting this garbage than me


OK, so seeing as you are unable to say anymore than you've said, I presume you won't be posting again anytime soon?

Bye bye Mr Rudge


----------



## stevenrudge

Cleopatra the Royal said:


> OK, so seeing as you are unable to say anymore than you've said, I presume you won't be posting again anytime soon?
> 
> Bye bye Mr Rudge


this reply is really stupid,l'm going nowhere,go to his post,about page 13',my lawyers already have the page prints,and l'm now locked out,So go look and then come back and ask why do's he and his mates need to ask a question when the answer is there for everybody to see.
Then you will need to ask just what is their game ?, look then comeback with an apology


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

stevenrudge said:


> this reply is really stupid,l'm going nowhere,go to his post,about page 13',my lawyers already have the page prints,and l'm now locked out,So go look and then come back and ask why do's he and his mates need to ask a question when the answer is there for everybody to see.
> Then you will need to ask just what is their game ?, look then comeback with an apology


I know your reply will be really stupid, and we know you're getting nowhere. I get the hint of that from seeing 'stevenrudge' as the user that posted it, but thanks for the pre-warning anyway


----------



## Cleopatra the Royal

stevenrudge said:


> this reply is really stupid,l'm going nowhere,go to his post,about page 13',my lawyers already have the page prints,and l'm now locked out,So go look and then come back and ask why do's he and his mates need to ask a question when the answer is there for everybody to see.
> Then you will need to ask just what is their game ?, look then comeback with an apology


And besides, you shouldn't be the person saying other's replies are stupid. That's not the pot calling the kettle black, that's the pot calling the kettle a potting pot used for being a pot.


----------



## stevenrudge

Cleopatra the Royal said:


> And besides, you shouldn't be the person saying other's replies are stupid. That's not the pot calling the kettle black, that's the pot calling the kettle a potting pot used for being a pot.


Look some of you have been very insulting personally to me,that ok because l'm big enough and ugly enough to take it,but its really not nice to see ok?
Now they ask a question that they already now the answer to,and l've made it clear that l cannot say anymore about that issue,they in there tiny minds think that l've been court out not being able to say yes or no-wrong please just have a look and its there for all to see,l do not have to say anything-its there,when you come back surly you must then be asking yourself that SR was very clear and give a straight answer so why do they feel the need to ask again?
l do not know you or do l make any judgment of you,some seem to think that l've been court out doing something underhand,not so all l've tried to do is some clear blue sky thinking and attempted to try something different,look at work we have this training its called (risk analyses review)l looked at or hobby and did this review,it pinpointed were are problems were,theres no emotion-thats the key-just the problem and what the answer might be,so with this l took it upon myself to try and talk to people who would be against a planed new show,and asked what the problems might be and what 'if any' accommodation or agreement we could come to for them to leave us alone.
Early days but l'll be honest and say l was surprised at what come back and this give me hope that we could pull something off.
Yes l know that theres the chance that l might be taken in-agreed-but its my call,it my risk nobody elses.if it came to nothing,then from where l started we have lost nothing,but if anything came of it would that not be worth my risk?
So lets start again and stop this name calling nonsense,l do not judge you so why do you think that you can judge me


----------



## kato

I may sound out of order here, but I apologise in advance, but Mr Rudge, do you seriously think that you are going about things in the best manner with the Reptile Hobby at heart? I seriously have my doubt's about the way you are going about things and would love to see you act in a mature way with the hobby at heart and not your own agenda.


We all have to stick together and try to work alongside one another for the sake of our Hobby in the future and by sticking an oar in in an unprofessional manner just seems detrimental to me. Our future Show's in the United Kingdom are in my opinion on a tight rope and just one nudge in either direction can cause a show to go ahead or falter. If you tried to work alongside those you appear to be against or even come up with a half decent argument it would be better than negative comment after negative comment.

Luckily for me as a non reptile professional or private breeder other than attending shows the outcome will have little direct effect on me. But I cannot help but think that if you do not act more professionally then a lot of folks, many of my friends included will be effected greatly and this I feel is not fair. It would be far far greater for all those involved if any plans you did have were kept quiet so not to bring any negativity or give any anti the chance to build a case or prepare themselves about what you plan. Your "Lawyer's" if any good would already have advised you of this if they were any good.


----------



## Chris Newman

stevenrudge said:


> Seeing that l've already said that l cannot say anymore about Newman's very public lie,and deformation on his C/B post (commercialism your views)Due to my Lawyers currently taking action against him,l've been advised not to say anymore about this issue,So Newman unblock me from your post and l'll copy and paste what you said and what my reply was,or better still you do it,as you already seem to have forgotten what my public answer was,
> Again Newman and Co are just trying to divert away from a question and answer that they already know.
> Newman you have already been told not to try and communicate with me on the forums,speak to my Lawyers their waiting for you,you should have the second letter by now.


Mr Rudge as you are well aware Gordon Glassson [Natrix] is vice-chairman of the Federation of British Herpetologists, therefore he would be duty bound to inform my committee, and myself, of any issues that could potentially affect organisation, such as a law suite. 

The PMs that you have been sending him stating that I have received a letter from your solicitor is pure fantasy on your part. Further the suggestion that I have phoned your solicitor is even more disturbing, what possesses your to make such palpably dishonest statements is quite simply beyond my comprehension!


----------



## johnc79

Lol Steven , I don't know what has happened to you since I first met you but this is comedy gold! Think David Brent from the office with more fanaticism.

Seriously Steven something is very wrong with you . Seek help please.


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> Seeing that l've already said that l cannot say anymore about Newman's very public lie,and deformation on his C/B post (commercialism your views)Due to my Lawyers currently taking action against him,l've been advised not to say anymore about this issue,So Newman unblock me from your post and l'll copy and paste what you said and what my reply was,or better still you do it,as you already seem to have forgotten what my public answer was,
> Again Newman and Co are just trying to divert away from a question and answer that they already know.
> Newman you have already been told not to try and communicate with me on the forums,speak to my Lawyers their waiting for you,you should have the second letter by now.


Wow :crazy::crazy::crazy:


----------



## penfold

stevenrudge said:


> Look some of you have been very insulting personally to me,that ok because l'm big enough and ugly enough to take it,but its really not nice to see ok?
> Now they ask a question that they already now the answer to,and l've made it clear that l cannot say anymore about that issue,they in there tiny minds think that l've been court out not being able to say yes or no-wrong please just have a look and its there for all to see,l do not have to say anything-its there,when you come back surly you must then be asking yourself that SR was very clear and give a straight answer so why do they feel the need to ask again?
> l do not know you or do l make any judgment of you,some seem to think that l've been court out doing something underhand,not so all l've tried to do is some clear blue sky thinking and attempted to try something different,look at work we have this training its called (risk analyses review)l looked at or hobby and did this review,it pinpointed were are problems were,theres no emotion-thats the key-just the problem and what the answer might be,so with this l took it upon myself to try and talk to people who would be against a planed new show,and asked what the problems might be and what 'if any' accommodation or agreement we could come to for them to leave us alone.
> Early days but l'll be honest and say l was surprised at what come back and this give me hope that we could pull something off.
> Yes l know that theres the chance that l might be taken in-agreed-but its my call,it my risk nobody elses.if it came to nothing,then from where l started we have lost nothing,but if anything came of it would that not be worth my risk?
> So lets start again and stop this name calling nonsense,l do not judge you so why do you think that you can judge me


 the ramblings of a nut job


----------



## Pete Q

stevenrudge said:


> So lets start again and stop this name calling nonsense,l do not judge you so why do you think that you can judge me


I think this is nonsense, starting again to you seems to be just picking up from where you left off.

I also think most reptile keepers are a forgiving lot, if you stopped all this "nonsense" yourself it might help. 

When is the light bulb going to come on ?


----------



## Blake1990

penfold said:


> the ramblings of a nut job


I think he may actually be crying out for attention, I'm not sure if he cares if its positive or negative.

If i look at it from my most optimistic point of view, Steven is a hobbyist who just wants to make a positive difference, unfortunately has a very deranged idea of HOW to make a positive difference.

SOME of what he says, does have a little substance to it, and if put across the right way, to the right people, might even be implemented.

Steven, you are asking for a clean slate. Perhaps if you look at the arguments against your ideas i'm sure you will realize how flawed they are.

IF a public apology was made to Chris Newman, the FBH, and all others that you have crusaded against my opinion of you would be neutral, i can't speak for everybody else but i imagine it would go a little way into repairing the damage to your credibility : victory:


----------



## Chris Newman

I am loathed to see people being banned from having there say, everyone is entitled to their opinion. However, this has well and truly overstepped the mark. I simply cannot comprehend how any sane rational person could make such defamatory and untrue statements as Mr Rudge has in the passed months, perhaps it is time for him/them to be banned! I am also taking the unprecedented step of reporting this to the police; I contemplated doing so before but now I see that I have no choose. Safety of my family is paramount. I am away for a couple of days but on my return I will be making a formal complaint to the police regard Mr Steven Rudge and provide copies of all threads etc. I have already been sent a number of PM’s that Mr Rudge has sent to other people, if anyone has anything thing they think is relevant and are will to let me have a copy so that it can be forward to the authorities I would be very grateful.


----------



## helsbels

I have sent a request to have Steven banned to 3 mods over the weekend and I am waiting for a reply.

MODS- please can you look into a ban? The comments he posted relating to my post earlier are unacceptable. Many thanks.


----------



## Poxicator

helsbels said:


> I have sent a request to have Steven banned to 3 mods over the weekend and I am waiting for a reply.
> 
> MODS- please can you look into a ban? The comments he posted relating to my post earlier are unacceptable. Many thanks.


*Where reports are made on particular posts of any member (in any thread) we will deal with any issues that are not within the rules of the forum. However, it has been made clear (via pm) to certain people within this thread that their opportunity to discuss the issue will only continue if they stay within the rules. We don't want to be accused of censoring or favouring opinion. But rule breaking is likely to get the thread closed.
We will not ban people simply because it is requested, there has to be a justified history of issues, not a difference of opinion.

helsbels, I can confirm you have not made any reports concerning issues raised here. I suggest that is the best way to get opinions from all the mods on issues raised, free of any bias, and open for the whole team to discuss a response. pm's are great for direct contact but the best way forward is to report the instances that break the rules of RFUK.*


----------



## helsbels

Hello Poxicator, on the weekend I sent a PM to Athravan, to SexyBear77 and also to Ssthisto, but I have not had a reply. I object to Steven's comments, which I listed in my PMs. The request for the ban was a direct result of these comments, which had no justification and I found offensive. Please can you contact the Mods who I sent PMs to so they can confirm receipt of the messages. Thank you.


----------



## Poxicator

Ssthisto hasnt visited the forum since November.
And so far neither Athraven or SexyBear have made any comment. That's why I suggest a report rather than a pm.


----------



## helsbels

That would explain a lot then!! :blush:

I'll have a look into how to do a report when I get home from work. Thanks for your help.


----------



## Poxicator

you merely hit the red triangle on the post you wish to report.
That brings up a window for you to provide information on why you have reported it.
Very simple, seen by the whole mod team and provides them with an opportunity to add comments and form a response within the mod board.


----------



## kato

*Admin Say:*

:closed: This one has run its course, so is now closed.

Simon

ps if anyone has a good recipe for a Victoria Sponge Cake, please let me know.:whistling2:


----------

