# Keeping DWA species without a DWA



## 118-118 (Dec 16, 2008)

Whats your opinion?

Im really talking about arachnids like black widows, death stalker scorpions etc rather than large mammals.


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

You takes your chances and keeps quiet, maybe you ok. They get to hrear about you and your animals get siezed and you get fined up to £5000 and get a criminal record, possibly a ban on keeping animals


----------



## Fangio (Jun 2, 2007)

Not good. If you're not prepared to do it properly then don't do it at all.


----------



## cervantes (Apr 24, 2008)

I think it's not good for the keepers who want to do it the right way, following the laws, if people keep DWA animals without the licence then it could bring about a total ban.


----------



## 118-118 (Dec 16, 2008)

cervantes said:


> I think it's not good for the keepers who want to do it the right way, following the laws, if people keep DWA animals without the licence then it could bring about a total ban.


Fair point:2thumb: 

Maybe there should be grades of DWA i mean can your class a death stalker in the same catergory as a Tiger?


----------



## cervantes (Apr 24, 2008)

No you can't compare the two. 

But I'm no expert, can a death stalker kill you, or your neighbour if it escapes? 

I think most of the regulations are there to protect the surrounding community.


----------



## 118-118 (Dec 16, 2008)

cervantes said:


> No you can't compare the two.
> 
> But I'm no expert, can a death stalker kill you, or your neighbour if it escapes?
> 
> I think most of the regulations are there to protect the surrounding community.


its unlikely to unless your elderly or ill etc. I mean tho death stalker in a tank, cant get out, safe tiger much more to deal with. If there was a grading system i would say a death stalker requires far less fail safes than a tiger of you understand me.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

anyone that breaks the law is a criminal..
now im not saying its fair or just.. but its a fact

theres a reason for DWA.. do it correctly or dont do it at all and if you break the rules yes you deserve to be punished i think


----------



## 118-118 (Dec 16, 2008)

sparkle said:


> anyone that breaks the law is a criminal..
> ..... yes you deserve to be punished i think


Lets hope you never see my DVD collection all labelled in my handwriting :whistling2:

seriously tho thanks for your opinion


----------



## Genseric (Oct 7, 2007)

It is done.. and being pedantic, the law is the law.. however, i think this is a fickle, weak law that has the potential to be used in a most horrible and draconian way.. and I think, for that reason, there are more 'off' the DWA radar, than on it...


----------



## jj10125 (Aug 24, 2008)

I voted reported ... not to sure about prison but think by not going about it legally, you endanger other people lifes maybe! ? not to pro on the subject but assuming theres a big reason you need a DWA


----------



## 118-118 (Dec 16, 2008)

jj10125 said:


> I voted reported ... not to sure about prison but think by not going about it legally, you endanger other people lifes maybe! ? not to pro on the subject but assuming theres a big reason you need a DWA


Well i dunno about prison was just for effect was gonna put hang them, but thought it might upset someone


----------



## BadBikaDamo (Feb 18, 2008)

If you're keeping the creature correctly and safely, whats the problem with getting the license? What have you got to hide?


----------



## hysteria_uk (Nov 28, 2007)

BadBikaDamo said:


> If you're keeping the creature correctly and safely, whats the problem with getting the license? What have you got to hide?


I dont think its anything to do with hiding things...its more the pathetic costs some local councils impose. Thats a whole nother discussion which comes up too often


----------



## Natonstan (Aug 9, 2008)

I recon its bad, I mean if your not prepared then you shouldnt keep dangerous animals at all, plus its breaking the law so they should get in trouble!


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

I put that they should be reported, but I think prison is a bit extreme. Maybe just have them taken off them and a fine, also maybe a ban on keeping animals.


----------



## angela__k__84 (Oct 4, 2008)

I just don't think it would be worth the risk - would you really wanna lose your animals?
If you are gonna keep an animal like that, for your safety and other peoples, and for the animals, just get a license.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

angela__k__84 said:


> If you are gonna keep an animal like that, for your safety and other peoples, and for the animals, just get a license.


Sorry Angela I just dont see the link.....safety has little to do with a piece of paper in a pretty mixed up system!!!

and for the record I am licenced!


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

Got to agree there, all that bit of paper means is that you satisfied the requirements of an EHO when he/she visited your house. It doesn't mean you know how to handle them safely, nor does it mean that you can keep them healthy.

As an analogy, every idiot on the road who drinks and drives, uses a mobile when driving, speeds in bad weather etc has got a license (i know that there may well be a few that haven't, but the vast majority have) that piece of paper means bog all.

The DWA act was a knee jerk reaction mainly to address the issue of people keeping big cats in the '70s.


----------



## Lucifus (Aug 30, 2007)

sparkle said:


> anyone that breaks the law is a criminal..
> now im not saying its fair or just.. but its a fact
> 
> theres a reason for DWA.. do it correctly or dont do it at all and if you break the rules yes you deserve to be punished i think


And im sure youve broken laws in the past even if you don't think you have. Its impossible not too in this day and age. Im completely against anyone interfering in the lives of others but i do see the "need" for it. Not every criminal should be punished or we would all go down. 

Personally i despise the DWA system. It has no bearing on people being responsible keepers or not. As it stands its just a bit of paper saying "This person can keep such and such". What it does not do is state that the owner is experienced enough to actually keep the animals they have. The charges are also a post code lottery.

The only thing stopping me going out and getting a fat tail are the repurcusions of being found out. I have the experience and equipment to keep them and would be in the "responsible" keeper group. However the local council would charge me through the sphincter for keeping whats essentially a £20 animal. As soon the system has been made fair for all id be applying for a DWA license. But until then i will have to do without the license and without the animals.


----------



## JuiceeLucy (Dec 21, 2008)

i can see it from both sides. but i think if you're that devoted and committed to get dwa's then you wouldn't mind going through all the hassle and spending all the money to get your licence. if you're not willing to go through it all then you can't be that into it and therefore its probably dangerous for you to have anything dwa as you'l prob just lose interest as it was a 5 minute novelty that wears off and not a life long passion and commitment. thats what i think anywayz x x x :whistling2: 


oh yeah and there are some complete and utter nobs out there that have licences, got to agree with stuart there


----------



## Gaboon (Jun 20, 2005)

I think if your even entertaining the idea then you should not apply. The DWA is a step in the right direction. As far as i can make out its primary function is to protect the public but its benefits are greater. I hope in getting one not only does safety become a heightened priority but also level of care and commitment to your animals. If everyone had to pay a fee up front before getting any animal im sure level of care would increase throughout pet keeping as only those willing to commit and learn would be able to keep animals.


----------



## JuiceeLucy (Dec 21, 2008)

yeah stop hogging the spot light gaboon thats basically what i said lol x x


----------



## Gaboon (Jun 20, 2005)

JuiceeLucy said:


> yeah stop hogging the spot light gaboon thats basically what i said lol x x


Great minds eh! :2thumb:


----------



## 118-118 (Dec 16, 2008)

Thought I would leave this topic for a while to get a few votes

33/13 Im amazed I really expected it been more people leaning towards it been acceptable. Although its not something I would do personally I thought most people wouldnt wanna part with the cash.

Thanx for voting and given me some great feedback was a more interesting topic than I thoght it would be.


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

its not really acceptable, the licensing system is there for a reason.


----------



## LoveForLizards (Apr 20, 2008)

I just want to know why you asked the question :whistling2::Na_Na_Na_Na:


----------



## jonosd (Sep 4, 2007)

the name says it all. Dangerous Wild Animal.
agreed there are some species which need to be put on there which arent as of yet and vice versa.
but if you want to keep an animal which requires a liscense- you get one.
if you had a family and kids etc and your next door neighbour kept lethal arachnids/snakes/whatever im sure you would want to know he was keeping them properly & lawfully


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

I don't keep any animals listed in the DWAA.

The DWAA is not concerned with the welfare of the animals listed in the regulations under the Act. It is implimented to protect the general public.

It is relevant to remember that no other country within the European Union believes it to be necessary to have an equivalent to the DWAA and some Countries, Republic of Ireland being a very good example, have categorically ruled out such legislation.

Population percentage wise there are no greater number of injuries caused by DWAA species in non UK (non DWAA) European Countries.

It should also be remembered that IF legally challenged in the European Court (if someone has that sort of £££££) the DWAA would most likely be quashed.


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

Caz said:


> It should also be remembered that IF legally challenged in the European Court (if someone has that sort of £££££) the DWAA would most likely be quashed.


I highly doubt that would happen


----------



## Sprocket (Apr 21, 2008)

sparkle said:


> anyone that breaks the law is a criminal..
> now im not saying its fair or just.. but its a fact
> 
> theres a reason for DWA.. do it correctly or dont do it at all and if you break the rules yes you deserve to be punished i think


Everyone breaks the law, have you ever downloaded anything off the internet?, sold a cd to your mate ?

I dont agree with breaking the law in regards to DWA, but no-one is squeaky clean.


----------



## VoodooWitchDoctor (Sep 3, 2008)

These laws are there for a reason.

If you want to keep DWA species, you should do so legally.

If you do it illegally, (dance with the devil, you pay the price) you risk alot for nothing.

DWA is there for a reason. DANGEROUS WILD ANIMALS

This means you must be a very responsible person, to own such pets.

It would be very irresponsible for an owner, to do so without a DWA license, as what I gather, when you apply to one of these license, they pay you a visit at home, to check you have everything in order, just as they do if you own or are applying for a shotgun or firearms licence.


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

Caz said:


> I don't keep any animals listed in the DWAA.
> 
> The DWAA is not concerned with the welfare of the animals listed in the regulations under the Act. It is implimented to protect the general public.
> 
> ...





SiUK said:


> I highly doubt that would happen


Which part? The challenge or the quashing?
As said the challenger would have to be truly wealthy BUT the quashing is very likely, hence the tip toe DEFRA consultation during the revision of the Act.


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

the quashing, its UK law so they cant just overturn it.


----------



## Akro (Aug 16, 2008)

personally id go the legal route and get a licence.


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

SiUK said:


> the quashing, its UK law so they cant just overturn it.


Without getting into a courtroom style argument, theCourt of Justice can over rule national law when EU law is relevant or deemed unfair on the persons (who in this case form a minority) in a member state.

Living in the UK (arguably given the numptys born here..) doesn't make us any more likely to require this law to protect our citizens than any other member state. Therefore the law is discriminatory towards a minority group of one member state.

Not saying I'd agree with quashing the DWAA however.


----------



## Myo (Feb 14, 2008)

I think it's a little bit silly but if you know what your doing I think it's someting that's doable with arachnids. I mean, some dorky RSPCA guy comes to your house and asks if you have a death stalker scorpian, you just say "no this is a death _walker_, they're legal" he's not gonna know!


----------



## scotshop (Apr 20, 2007)

118-118 said:


> Whats your opinion?
> 
> Im really talking about arachnids like black widows, death stalker scorpions etc rather than large mammals.


and what happens if one escapes? do you alert neighbours etc and land yourself in it or do you keep quiet and hope no-one gets killed?

i'd rather my neighbours lost a dwa mammal, much easier to find and capture than a spider that could hide anywhere!


----------



## scotshop (Apr 20, 2007)

slippery42 said:


> Sorry Angela I just dont see the link.....safety has little to do with a piece of paper in a pretty mixed up system!!!
> 
> and for the record I am licenced!


 
that bit of paper is supposed to be so they can trace who has what and where, for safety reasons. you might be fine but whats to stop any halfwits from doing the same?


----------



## Melonhelmet (Nov 11, 2008)

I think the scale should be:

Class A: Scorpians & Spiders
Class B: Rear Fanged Snakes & Venomouse Reptile (Ie Gilamonster)
Class C: Mammals And Venamous Snakes


----------



## pedro (Nov 3, 2008)

Do you not have to have some kind of public liability insurance before you get granted one of these licences? just in case it does escape and bites someone living close by.:whistling2:


----------



## The_Real_Moreliaman (Jan 24, 2009)

Not sure if this is 100% accurate, but i was told by an inspector that if your keeping something on the DWA like a venomous snake then the local hospital needs to have the anti venoum in stock incase someone gets bitten, some of them only last for 1 month & can cost £80 or more per vial, this cost is met by the local health authority.
Dont take that as gospel as i know council officers are quite adapt at telling little white lies!
Also bearing in mind i was told by an animal licence officer in swindon borough council that they would throw everything in the way possible to try and stop a DWA application going through, as they didnt want any issued, mainly because they didnt have a clue what they were dealing with !!!

Im sure someone on here with a DWA could answer pedros question, but i dont think you do, i had to have public liability insurance for the shop (which included a DWA licence) but that wasnt because of the DWA


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

The_Real_Moreliaman said:


> Not sure if this is 100% accurate, but i was told by an inspector that if your keeping something on the DWA like a venomous snake then the local hospital needs to have the anti venoum in stock incase someone gets bitten, some of them only last for 1 month & can cost £80 or more per vial, this cost is met by the local health authority.
> Dont take that as gospel as i know council officers are quite adapt at telling little white lies!
> Also bearing in mind i was told by an animal licence officer in swindon borough council that they would throw everything in the way possible to try and stop a DWA application going through, as they didnt want any issued, mainly because they didnt have a clue what they were dealing with !!!
> 
> Im sure someone on here with a DWA could answer pedros question, but i dont think you do, i had to have public liability insurance for the shop (which included a DWA licence) but that wasnt because of the DWA


The local Hospital doesn't have to keep antivenin.

Antivenin costs different amounts dependant on species. It can cost thousands to treat one snake bite.

It is unlawful for them to try and stop a DWAA license. They are a licensing body and as such have a duty to the proposer. I believe the FBJ have successfully challenged Councils re this issue.

One of the requirements of DWAA is that you hold adequate public liability insurance.

HTH.


----------



## The_Real_Moreliaman (Jan 24, 2009)

cheers caz....i thought they were being economical with the truth !
As they usually do!


----------



## pedro (Nov 3, 2008)

Caz said:


> The local Hospital doesn't have to keep antivenin.
> 
> Antivenin costs different amounts dependant on species. It can cost thousands to treat one snake bite.
> 
> ...


Hi thanks for the answer i would have been very suprised if you didn't have to have some form of insurance if you kept a snake that could kill someone if it got out by accident.


----------



## The_Real_Moreliaman (Jan 24, 2009)

Caz said:


> It is unlawful for them to try and stop a DWAA license. They are a licensing body and as such have a duty to the proposer. I believe the FBJ have successfully challenged Councils re this issue.
> 
> HTH.


Challenged them yes, but has it ever got anywhere, the DWA licence requirments & prices are spused to be exaclty the same no matter what county you live in, some councils charge the standard fee & some charge double or more, some councils even add their own rules, making application requirments very expensive, i can tell you now from experince, its much easier to get a DWA in cheltenham than it is swindon


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

The_Real_Moreliaman said:


> Not sure if this is 100% accurate, but i was told by an inspector that if your keeping something on the DWA like a venomous snake then the local hospital needs to have the anti venoum in stock incase someone gets bitten, some of them only last for 1 month & can cost £80 or more per vial, this cost is met by the local health authority.
> Dont take that as gospel as i know council officers are quite adapt at telling little white lies!
> Also bearing in mind i was told by an animal licence officer in swindon borough council that they would throw everything in the way possible to try and stop a DWA application going through, as they didnt want any issued, mainly because they didnt have a clue what they were dealing with !!!
> 
> Im sure someone on here with a DWA could answer pedros question, but i dont think you do, i had to have public liability insurance for the shop (which included a DWA licence) but that wasnt because of the DWA


AV does have a very short shelf life although not as short as a month, its still works the older it gets but its not as effective, crofab for example which is used to treat north american crotalids can cost anything from about $800-1500 per vial, remembering some envenomations up to 50 vials have been used, but the average is about six I believe, so even average is very expensive, plus the other drugs that are needed and equipment used the cost on the health service soon adds up.

All keepers need public liability insurance although since the act was brought in, in the 70s then no member of the public has ever been injured by any animal kept under a dwa license.


----------



## Danhalen (Jun 6, 2008)

While I do think a licensing system is appropriate, I do feel that it is heavily flawed in regards to inverts that are on the list. 

There are spiders and scorpions listed, which have either never actually proven fatal, or not seriously hurt someone in many years. Conversely, there are several species that most certainly should be on the list, but aren't. These unlisted specimens can be purchased with relative ease, and can indeed prove more dangerous than their listed counterparts.

If you ask me, the licensing system needs to be run by people who actually know what they are doing.


----------



## Caz (May 24, 2007)

Danhalen said:


> While I do think a licensing system is appropriate, I do feel that it is heavily flawed in regards to inverts that are on the list.
> 
> There are spiders and scorpions listed, which have either never actually proven fatal, or not seriously hurt someone in many years. Conversely, there are several species that most certainly should be on the list, but aren't. These unlisted specimens can be purchased with relative ease, and can indeed prove more dangerous than their listed counterparts.
> 
> *If you ask me, the licensing system needs to be run by people who actually know what they are doing.*


The problem with that is we'll all have to pay more tax to pay for the updated DWAAL system and inspectors; that no other European Country deems nessersary..
It wont happen.


----------



## Demonique (May 5, 2007)

cervantes said:


> I think it's not good for the keepers who want to do it the right way, following the laws, if people keep DWA animals without the licence then it could bring about a total ban.


I agree


----------



## The_Real_Moreliaman (Jan 24, 2009)

Isnt that the same with everything you try to do in this country legally though, dometimes you feel like banging your head against the wall !


----------



## rick1980 (Mar 3, 2008)

I don’t agree with charging the prices they do for DWA but think you still need somebody with 'experience/knowledge' to make sure your experienced/able to care safely for DWA species. (But that would create cost that would need to be funded / why not by the person who wants to keep it)

Otherwise there would be lots of idiots keeping vipers ect to impress. You can imagine the kind of rubbish you'd see on youtube, Pished up Burberry grand dad 26 introducing granddaughter aged 1 to...god only knows what.

I mean how many morons are there miss treating dogs because they think they're ten men:whip:

But that’s just my opinion

No chaves were harmed in this reply…like I care if they were anyway:bash:


----------



## stuartdouglas (Mar 5, 2008)

Current suitability to own DWA animals is most likely determined by the local EHO, who is more experienced in unsafe trees and smelly restaurants than venomous snakes. So the likelihood of unsuitable folks slipping through is quite high. Plus there is a vast disparity in the "selection" process across the country, some pay only a cursory glance at the owners setups, some want CRB checks GP's reports and written references. The trouble is, the more difficult that Local Authorities make the licensing process, the more likely it is that the keeping of these animals will go "underground" I'm not suggesting that it should be free and easy to obtain a license, just reasonable and equitable


----------



## rick1980 (Mar 3, 2008)

Agreed Stu

i don't think it's fair being checked out by people with no experience – what’s the point? and the cost should be fair and standard (and implemented that way)

All that should happen is a person applying should have an assessment of competence provided by someone that is capable/suitably experienced to deliver the assessment.

The local authority need to provide adequate training to the people who's job it is to provide this, and if the person carrying out the assessment prove during it they know sod then this should be reported back to the L/A.

Sounds like a lot needs to change nationally and locally before anyone’s really satisfied though...Good Luck


----------



## antmac (Jan 28, 2009)

my view is that even pepl who have a dwa may still not keep the animal proply and also not keep two health and safety side. .e.g. take the animal out the cages its in with out safety procegers 

cus in my eyes an escaped scorp is much easyer 2 catch than a croc or big cat

not that im sayin it is right 2 keep a dwa animal with out a dwal


----------



## georgieabc123 (Jul 17, 2008)

it would be stupid what if a really unexperienced person got hold of something got bit went to hospital it would make are hobby look bad :


----------



## giantdaygecko (Feb 1, 2009)

*I have a DWA licence for mine,*


*It is called a marriage certificate!!!! :whistling2:*


----------

