# views on the DWAA



## trw (Mar 2, 2009)

i am doing an alevel project on how effective the dangerous wild animals act is, an am just coming to my conclusion but want some DWA keepers opinions on it.

Do you think it is a good idea?

do you think it works in the way it is currently set up?

Are there any changes you would like see made to it?

if youi have any other thoughts about it then please say. i only want opinions of genuine keepers. if you have any views about, but dont keep any thing covered by the act then feel free to say, but please post that you dont keep any DWA's.
thank you


----------



## leecb0 (Apr 14, 2009)

Firstly i do think the DWAA is a good thing as it stops to a degree any tom dick and viperlover having the ability to get hold of a dangerous/deadly animal. I understand that there are people who are keeping unlawfully but this is mostly due to my next point.

As of this moment the act is not uniformally enforced so to speak.
You have LA's who have reasonable fees and realistic criteria to gain a licence, then you have the other extream where you have very high fees or impossible criteria or even some LA's wont even issue a DWAL whatsoever. Once this has been regulated fairly across the whole country then i think more people will comply and ileagle keeping will be vary rare.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

Whilst its not perfect it does stop some form coming in for the wrong reasons.

Does it prevent people from getting them without the correct paperwork of course it doesnt the same was as those who want a firearm can easily get one despite them being illegal.

Its a fair idea to have the act but does have its flaws.


----------



## leecb0 (Apr 14, 2009)

Like any law or legislation there will always be those who choose to ignore or break it. and the authoritys can only really police those who comply as those who dont tend to stay under the radar


----------



## trw (Mar 2, 2009)

in a review defra did in march they have said that they are going to be extending the licence time from 1 to 2 years, and also trying to make the regulation and prices more constant across the country.

are there any changes that you think would make the act better


----------



## Dougiejohn (Jun 15, 2010)

My understanding and correct me if I'm wrong, is that a reptile shop doesn't actually need to see a DWAL to sell a venomous snake (for example) to somebody. If they're contentious and responsible then they'll request to see one. It's the buyer’s responsibility.

Apparently, someone is allowed to keep a DWA animal for 72 hours without a license, although I'm not sure if this comes with other conditions.

As I say, I’m not 100% sure that this is correct but I was told by both a licensing authority and a v respectable shop. Can't be bothered to look it up however!!

Surprising...


----------



## leecb0 (Apr 14, 2009)

Dougiejohn said:


> My understanding and correct me if I'm wrong, is that a reptile shop doesn't actually need to see a DWAL to sell a venomous snake (for example) to somebody. If they're contentious and responsible then they'll request to see one. It's the buyer’s responsibility.
> 
> Apparently, someone is allowed to keep a DWA animal for 72 hours without a license, although I'm not sure if this comes with other conditions.
> 
> ...


 
You are correct, as far as i am aware the seller of the DWAA animal does not NEED nto see the licence, by law but ethically most will ask to see it if the person purchasing is not known to the vendor. Also you are correct thay you may keep a dwaa animal for upto 72 hours as far as i am aware. but trust me you are not getting a DWAL in that sort of time


----------



## trw (Mar 2, 2009)

im not sure about the sale, but i know petshops dont have to have a seperate licence for DWA as long as the council feels they have taken the correct precautions, then they can keep DWA under the petshop licence.


----------



## markhill (Sep 22, 2006)

leecb0 said:


> Firstly i do think the DWAA is a good thing as it stops to a degree any tom dick and viperlover having the ability to get hold of a dangerous/deadly animal. I understand that there are people who are keeping unlawfully but this is mostly due to my next point.
> 
> As of this moment the act is not uniformally enforced so to speak.
> You have LA's who have reasonable fees and realistic criteria to gain a licence, then you have the other extream where you have very high fees or impossible criteria or *even some LA's wont even issue a DWAL whatsoever*. Once this has been regulated fairly across the whole country then i think more people will comply and ileagle keeping will be vary rare.


I always thought that if you met the required criteria then an LA cannot legally deny you a license?


----------



## leecb0 (Apr 14, 2009)

markhill said:


> I always thought that if you met the required criteria then an LA cannot legally deny you a license?


this is true but i know of a couple of LA's near me that WONT issue DWAL and one of them is a major city. the otherway a council gets around it is by making the criteria almost impossible and expensive as to deter you


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

We need a DWA licensing system, that much is a given. What we also need is a countrywide standard set of criteria and a countrywide standard license fee which are both realistic with regard to the actual costs involved in processing the application and conducting an inspection and realistic with regard to the requirements to achieve an acceptable level of public safety. It makes no sense at all that you can satisfy the requirements of one Local authority, than move house and be denied a license elsewhere, forcing you to either stump up a ridiculous amount of money, get rid of your animals or "go underground"
A realistic, standardised fee and realistic standardised security requirements will mean that there is no longer any excuse to keep illegally other than the keeper just CBA getting a license.
Some people have mooted a "tiered" system of licensing with different bands for different species. For instance a heavy bodied viper such as a Gaboon is not likely to need the same security requirements in terms of window screens, no gaps under/behind vivs as a fast elapid such as a mamba, similarly higher end snakes such as mambas, Taipans etc require a whole different level of handling skills than a Rattler.Btw, I'm not suggesting for one minute that elapid keepers are in any way better than non-elapid keepers.


----------



## leecb0 (Apr 14, 2009)

i totally agree with Stuart not sure about the tiered system mainly due to the fact i have very little interest in keeping mamba or taipan although i do keep elapids but as the DWAA is there to protect the public not the keeper an escape proof room is an escape proof room. And if the DWAA was enforced correctly someone new to venomous snakes shouldnt be getting these snakes


----------



## George_Millett (Feb 26, 2009)

leecb0 said:


> Firstly i do think the DWAA is a good thing as it stops to a degree any tom dick and *viperlover* having the ability to get hold of a dangerous/deadly animal. I understand that there are people who are keeping unlawfully but this is mostly due to my next point.


:lol2: like what you slipped in there Leechbo, young James still casts a big shadow.

Also agree with what you have said in your last post about there being some way of keeping the truely dangerous snakes out the hands of rank amateurs / beginners like myself. 

It would be nice if part of the requierment for new licences was you had the support of a more experienced keeper like yourself and Stuart as a mentor for a couple of years so there was some one we would be able to contact in the case of non bite related emergencies that hopefully don't crop up that ofte. Thinking of bad shedders here and didn't one of you guys have a snake with a retained eyecap recently.

Personally not having kept any snakes not sure how I would deal with it on something as harmless as a corn. But for some one experienced with non venomous I would imagine that even the jump up to a 'relatively harmless' venomous would be a little daunting the first time you had to remove an eyecap,let alone if you had to remove one the bigger elapids you guys keep.


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

Ot I know, but for the second time in as many sheds, I've had to take an eyecap off a Cape Cobra........lots of fun in a walking-across-a-busy-road-with-a-blindfold-on kind of way


----------

