# EPS Enforcement: More Trouble Than It's Worth?



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

And a third article written for the PKL about the potential problems of enforcing the new EPS legislations... though it was originally meant to be serious, it has taken a rather humorous tone.

*Enforcing the EPS
More trouble than it’s worth?*​ 
Now that the EPS legislation is in place, there are probably *half a million animals* that are subject to licensing in the UK. But have the legislators thought of all the potential problems of enforcing it – when the law itself may create a much larger group of animals than they originally thought?

Firstly, defining a “*Wild*” animal may pose some problems. Is a Greater Crested Newt that lives in your garden pond “Wild”? The legislation says yes – an animal that grows up in a town, city or even someone’s garden is still a wild animal. *In order for the animal to be considered “not wild”, it must have been born in captivity and never lived in the wild at all.* This has some interesting effects when combined with certain species on the list.

It is explicitly stated that if no subspecies is listed and no exceptions are made on the EPS legislation sheet, then all subspecies of a given species are included. One of these species is _Felis silvestris_.

The subspecies of _Felis silvestris_ present in Europe – all of which would be protected – are:
_Felis silvestris silvestris_ (Wild Cat)
_Felis silvestris lybica_ (Lybian Wild Cat)
_Felis silvestris catus_ (Domestic Cat)

Yes. Wild populations of domesticated cats are by definition included in the species protected by the European Protected Species Act. This could be difficult to enforce, given that:

Animals on the EPS are *presumed to be wild* unless documentary proof otherwise can be provided.
Animals on the EPS cannot be *captured, killed or harmed*.
Animals on the EPS cannot be *owned without a license*.
Animals on the EPS cannot have their *habitats disturbed*.
Animals on the EPS cannot be *sold or transported without a separate license*.
A colony of *feral cats* is “living wild” – they have not been born in captivity and lived their entire lives in captivity. Even if they live in a town or city, they are still wild animals. By the letter of the law, it would be illegal to catch a feral cat – even for the purposes of rehabilitation and rehoming, since you would not only require a license to possess it, but also a separate license to transport or give/sell/adopt it to someone else. It’d be illegal to kill or harm feral cats as well – or to disturb their living areas – without a license to do so.

And are my own moggies – who were presumably born in captivity, but are free to come and go via the wonder of a cat flap – considered captive, since they were born in captivity – or wild, because they go outside and hunt? If I move house and take them with me, am I in violation of the law for disturbing their habitat and transporting them without a license?

Stray and feral dogs are likewise covered, as a subspecies of _Canis lupus_. 

*Have the legislators really thought it all through?*


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

I dont think they have thought it through, in this country things are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty that is part of our fundamental human rights, so how can they justify saying all the animals are presumed WC, it seems to me like the antis have infiltrated the government, because its so ridiculous.

Im sure a top (very expensive) lawyer would be able to pick the whole law apart, and prove how unworkable it is.

And now what if in 10 years time they start saying right any animal purchased in the last 10 years will be put to sleep if you cannot prove they are CB, I think we need to start thinking about the future, this law needs to be fought.


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

The domesic cat (Felis catus) is not a subspecies of the European Wild Cat (Felis sylvestris sspp). It is related to African wild cats domesticated by the Egyptians and distributed throughout the Med. and rest of Europe by the Romans. People have tried to tame European Wild cats by raising them in captivity, but it doesn't work. So don't worry, your moggy is not a EPS, whether feral or not.

_ in this country things are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty that is part of our fundamental human rights, so how can they justify saying all the animals are presumed WC,_ 

As in previous threads, there are exceptions to this, many of which occur with wildlife legislation. The reason that Reverse Burden is used in this case is that it would be much easier for You to prove that your animal was legally obtained than it would be for the CPS to prove that it was not, because you know where you got it from etc.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Matt Harris said:


> The domesic cat (Felis catus) is not a subspecies of the European Wild Cat (Felis sylvestris sspp). It is related to African wild cats domesticated by the Egyptians and distributed throughout the Med. and rest of Europe by the Romans. People have tried to tame European Wild cats by raising them in captivity, but it doesn't work. So don't worry, your moggy is not a EPS, whether feral or not.


The ICZN states that domestic cats are _Felis silvestris catus_ - a subspecies of the Eurasian Wild Cat.

The name _Felis catus_ is to my knowledge a depreciated name, based on a 2003 ruling that where domesticated species live alongside their wild originating population, they are to be named as a subspecies of the original population.


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

Opinion 2027 doesn’t alter the names of domesticated species, it only serves to conserve the name of wild species i.e, renders them valid despite the fact that the wild species were named (differently) AFTER the domesticated species were named. The confusion has arisen where the domestic name has been subsequently applied to the wild species.

I would argue that domestic cats, Felis catus do not ‘suddenly’ become Felis sylvestris just because they choose to live in the wild. They arise from domesticated stock, which itself is derived from North Africa wild cats, not from native wild cats.

Common sense can therefore prevail and the domestic cat not treated as an EPS.


----------



## purejurrasic (Mar 18, 2006)

Ask the estimated 500,000 EPS affected reptiles if theres any common sense in the way the EPS has been implemented


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

purejurrasic said:


> Ask the estimated 500,000 EPS affected reptiles if theres any common sense in the way the EPS has been implemented


not to mention animals endemic to japan, like the japanese dormouse.. why on earth is THAT included ??? and we won't get onto extinct animals included... extinct for 5000 or so years and known from the fossil record... 

N


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

2 questions. Where did you get the idea that the Japanese Dormouse is a EPS?

and

What does this mean:-

_Ask the estimated 500,000 EPS affected reptiles if theres any common sense in the way the EPS has been implemented_


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Matt Harris said:


> 2 questions. Where did you get the idea that the Japanese Dormouse is a EPS?
> 
> and
> 
> ...


Matt, the EU Habitats Directive listing of EPS species lists:

"_Gliridae_ EXCEPT _Glis glis_ and _Eliomys quercinus_" ... there is no mention of any other exempted Dormouse species.

As for the 500,000 EPS affected reptiles... that's a conservative estimate of how many captive EPS reptiles there are in Britain, many if not all of which will have NO proof of origin.


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

Matt Harris said:


> 2 questions. Where did you get the idea that the Japanese Dormouse is a EPS?


Mmm lets see...

i think.. i just _think _that i might have got it directly from natural england/defra's website..

you know, that place where the list of animals on the eps is???

just a brief guess.. *rolls eyes*

as i said in this post on Livefoods forums..
Cirtificates! - Livefood UK Forum



> regretably, defra in their oh so infinite wisdom, have included all of the Gliridae family, this cover 34 genus, and includes the African Pygmy Dormous.
> 
> it just goes to show how pants Defra's "zoology" department is, as although they have managed to exlude Glis Glis, the edible dormouse, at sub species level, they have neglected to take into account that of the other 33 sub species included within this family, there is one Genus, with two sub species.. who are EXTINCT, and have been so for the last 5000 or so years.. there is another, at species level, the japanese dormouse, which is endemic to Japan
> 
> ...


they name two sub species BY NAME as being exempt.. if other sub species were also exempt surely they would also have listed them?

as they have not listed them as exampt, they must be included

but yes, in answer to your question, 

"who says the japanese dormouse is on the EPS"

the answer is, the muppets who wrote the legislation say it is.

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nat...n/eu_enlargement/2004/habitats/annexiv_en.pdf

look on that, page 2, first family mentioned in rodentia, under Mammals.










N


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

Nerys,

I try not to rise to the bait on these forums, but your sarcasm is noted, and not appreciated. 

I just asked a straightforward question.

I can see that people are worried by this legislation, and I'm just trying to add my contribution on its interpretation because I know a bit about it.

Although most people seem to grasp the new laws, there are a few misinterpretations which I thought I would point out.

If this isn't welcome, I prefer you to use the direct approach and tell me to p*** off, rather that being sarcastic.


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

*Matt*

That is right, you seem to know it, and you are most assuredly right most normal keepers are finding it difficult to grasp - so l ask you again, are you able to highlight it in an article so that it is easier to understand?

R


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

tbh matt, i thought it was you being sarcastic!

i have, in the dormouse posts i have made, clearly stated where i found the inclusion of the Japanese Dormouse..

and tbh, where else would i have found it? if not on the full list from natural england? there is no-where else it would be really is there???

it just seemed, to me, a pretty obvious question.. and tbh i kinda wondered if you were taking the pee asking it!

you asked: Where did you get the idea that the Japanese Dormouse is a EPS?

my answer: i got it from the EPS list.. where else could i have got it from?

they wrote the list, not me, i would not add to it, i have no need.. it makes its own cock ups itself!

N

actually, seeing as you prefer direct... what i actually thought, when i read your question.. was

"well where the F**K does he think i got the idea from.. the Sun Newspaper??? *DOH* "

but i phrased it differently in my first post!




Matt Harris said:


> Nerys,
> 
> I try not to rise to the bait on these forums, but your sarcasm is noted, and not appreciated.
> 
> ...


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

Anyhoo, back to the Japanese Dormice!

This is a European directive relating to EU member states.

Annex IV refers to, for example Microchiroptera (all species) and Gliridae (all spp except Glis glis and E quercinus)

However, this doesn't mean that all of the (non fruit-) bats throughout the world or all Glirids throughout the world are on the European list of species of Community interest in need of strict protection. Only those whose natural range includes the European territory of the member states.

Regulation 13 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) (Amendment) Regulations 2007 reads:-

 _(13) For regulation 39 (protection of wild animals of European protected species) substitute the following regulation_—

Part* 2* of this substitution reads

(*2*) It is an offence for any person—
(a) to have in his possession or control;
(b) to transport;
(c) to sell or exchange; or
(d) to offer for sale or exchange,
anything to which this paragraph applies

 (3) Paragraph (*2*) applies to—

(a) any live or dead animal or part of an animal—
(i) which has been taken from the wild; and
(ii) which is of a species or subspecies listed in *Annex IV(a)* to the Habitats Directive; and
(b) any part of, or anything derived from, such an animal or any such part of an animal.

*Annex IV* is entitled:-

_Animal and plant *species of community interest* in need of strict protection_

*Species of Community Interest* are defined in the Habitats Directive thus:-

(g) *species of Community interest* means species which, *within the territory referred to in* *Article 2,* are:
(i) endangered, 
(ii) vulnerable
(iii) rare, 
(iv) endemic 
Such species are listed or may be listed in Annex II and/or *Annex IV* or V;

Article 2 starts off with
1. The aim of this Directive shall be to contribute towards ensuring bio-diversity through the conservation of natural habitats and of *wild fauna* and flora *in the European territory of the Member States to which the Treaty applies.*

I think it's pretty clear that this means that the directive only applies to the European territory of Eu member states, and not Japan, Canada or any other countries in which Bats or Dormice may occur.


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

> I think it's pretty clear


!!! i'm good with data and figures, i have a high IQ, a large amount of logical capability and a good overall understanding of english language and sentance construction.. did i find it clear? no!

and in that case, if you do, rory is right, you need to write for us, a laymans guide to the ins and outs of it all lol..

because no, tbh, no-one i have shown it too either, thinks it any clearer than the proverbial mud !!!

first off they have the advisory list, then they have the full list, then they have exceptions that you have to know defra regulations and sub sections inside out to know about.

mat.. if they could list two sub species as exempt, glis glis and quercinus, then why not list japanese exempt also, rather than trying to baffle people with exemptions under regulations that most people do not know about, and no-one will look up?

N


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

*Are you deliberately ....*

............. avoiding a simple request Matt?

I have not been sarcastic to you and still you reel off the eps like it was your own written work.

Can you break it down in simple plain English?

Normal Joe will not read past the initial phasing of this legislation Matt, you and l both know this. DEFRA and other regulative bodies employ powerful 'gobblygook' writers to specifically write up easy jargon and place it into the most dumbfoundedly difficult lingo.

Joe will go to the easiest part and read what is there..........simple. Sad but true, we are displaying that there are flaws to this legislation - not just in the actual deliverance of it nor the operation of its enforcement or lack of, but in its simple presentation.

Read into Gliridae species and the first thing all of us read is only two species of this genera are not on the list which would mean all the others are.

Cripes, this forum is the perfect example of this, half the written word is not referred to, skimming and scanning or just plain ignorance and leave it be. So - bearing that in mind, do you see where we are going with this?

Rory

PKL


----------



## Ally (Mar 8, 2006)

Matt - I would never even dream os assuming anthing to do with a written law.

Therefore I refuse to assume that they don't actually mean all the dormose species. To guarantee that I remain within the law, I will take it as it is written, and that is that all species are included on the list except the written exemptions.

They employ people specifically to write these laws - if it is written in the legally accepted wording of the law in question, then it is law as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

Nerys said:


> !!! i'm good with data and figures, i have a high IQ, a large amount of logical capability and a good overall understanding of english language and sentance construction.. did i find it clear? no!


A cruel person would say, "Yes but, no good at spelling or punctuation!"

Only teasing.:Na_Na_Na_Na:

Perhaps 'clear' was not the best description!

If you follow it through, it means that the Directive, with it's annexes, only refers to Countries in the EU.

I can't help it if it's written in a legalistic language - I find it as difficult to understand as anyone.


To condense it a bit

§ The species you are worried about are listed on Annex IV

§ Annex IV is entitled: *Animal and plant species of community interest in need of strict protection.*

§ Species of community interest defined as species which, *within the territory *referred to in Article 2, are endangered, vulnerable, rare, endemic 

§ The *territory* referred to in Annex 2 is the *European territory of the Member States to which the Treaty applies.*

They have written ‘all microchiroptera’ and ‘all Gliridae’ simply so that they don’t have to list all the species of these taxa that occur in the EU.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

sounds like everything is a convoluted mess over there. do the authorities even know the laws? all this stuff is mushy logically. in combat you first need an objective. accomplishing anything takes a linear mindset. all this confusion and disagreement shouldn't be happening. everything is in black and white on the books isn't it? i know that legalese is hard to understand but all anyone needs is a lawyer to put it into basic language. seems like some can't see the forest for the trees.


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

*Just a quickie*

Whilst only a teasing comment, but...

I read through an awful amount of text and see err on many pages but am able to bypass it... without comment.

Just teasing of course here, but per chance - like to write an article - with or without err - we can edit.

R


----------



## Matt Harris (Aug 21, 2007)

TSKA Rory Matier said:


> Whilst only a teasing comment, but...
> 
> I read through an awful amount of text and see err on many pages but am able to bypass it... without comment.
> 
> ...


I think what you have written so far, the different articles, posters etc are fine. I couldn't do any better, I've just tried to point out a few instances where I think that you've not interpreted things correctly.


----------



## Ssthisto (Aug 31, 2006)

Thank you, Matt. I've written the majority of the articles based on my understanding of the legislation.

That said... I still want a straight answer about what they'll do with Chumley and Tananda if they take them away from me.


----------



## TSKA Rory Matier (May 27, 2007)

*we need*

to stop this thread and the others, for a while, for they are now just as confusing as DEFRA. 

And try and build it into one, l have just requested this of the forum, so l am not sure if we can achieve that, and if not, then just ignore this post and l will go and water the paperclips!

R


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

lol, yeah i know, my spelling and punctuation is not always the best. my mind thinks too fast for my fingers to keep up with... sometimes it goes too fast for my mouth to keep up with also lol..

notice you still have not told us matt.. how it is you come to know all this as well as you do. i know you have been asked a few times now, and not come back on it.. 

back to dormice.. tbh to assume makes a ASS out of U and Me.. 

in response to this comment

They have written ‘all microchiroptera’ and ‘all Gliridae’ simply so that they don’t have to list all the species of these taxa that occur in the EU.

i personally think, when it comes to the law, that they need to have it exact, and not assume that people will read it and follow it.. as most of them will not..

surely - "so they don't have to" is being kinda lazy and inadequate in terms of giving us, the people who keep them, the right info?

it sort of reads like.. "they wrote *all gliridae* as they could not be bothered to find out which it would not cover"

and i still think you need to write something explaining regulation 7billion.2, sub section 49thousand, paragraphs 28-698, word 7. or how ever it goes! :lol2:

N


----------

