# are dart frogs on DWA?



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

as above cheers


----------



## Lew (May 31, 2009)

no theyre not poisonous


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

always thought they were! they got to be the prettiest creature on the planet


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

surely the golden frog is poisionous


----------



## Lew (May 31, 2009)

they are beautiful ! they are poisonous, just not in captivity, wc specimens may still be poisonous but will lose it after a while , in the wild theyre poisonous from certain things they eat i think


----------



## kelboy (Feb 10, 2009)

Lew said:


> they are beautiful ! they are poisonous, just not in captivity, wc specimens may still be poisonous but will lose it after a while , in the wild theyre poisonous from certain things they eat i think


That's what I was told by a zoo keeper in Chicago.


----------



## Mark O'Shea (Nov 5, 2009)

*poisonous frogs*

On the contrary dart-poison frogs ARE poisonous, but they are not venomous.

Poison is ingested via the mouth or absorbed via the skin, venom is actively injected via a bite or sting.

Therefore there are no venomous amphibians and no poisonous reptiles, but there are both poisonous and venomous fish and inverts, a few venomous mammals (white-toothed shrew, male duckbilled platypus) and poisonous birds (pitahui birds from PNG). None of the mammals or birds on the Act are there because of toxins, they are there because they can do you in, in other ways.

Therefore, whether something is poisonous or venomous does not determine whether it is on the DWA, it is more whether they pose a threat to human life, therefore a tiger, which is neither poisonous or venomous is definately DWA, but a mangrove snake, which is mildly venomous, is no longer DWA, and most of the small rear-fanged snakes, which are venomous to their prey but largely considered inconsequential to man, have never been DWA.

There are no DWA amphibians.

For a list of species on the DAW check out this link:
Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 (c. 38) - Statute Law Database

Hope this helps, this seems to be a recurring theme, is A or B on the DWA.
It really is easy to find out.

Mark


----------



## Mark O'Shea (Nov 5, 2009)

*dart-poison frogs*

Lew is quite correct, dart-poison frogs obtain their toxins from the microfauna they feed on, ants and other tiny invertebrates, and they seem to relocate them to their skin, advertising their toxic nature with their bright colours. In captivity, without this specific diet and on a diet of micro-crickets, they become nontoxic quickly.
This is the reason why it is difficult for biochemists to study their skin toxins if they do not live and work in the country of origin, and why they work instead on the skin toxins of treefrogs, less toxic than the dart-poison frog toxins, but hereditary, permanent and unaffected by diet.

Mark


----------



## kelboy (Feb 10, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> On the contrary dart-poison frogs ARE poisonous, but they are not venomous.
> 
> Poison is ingested via the mouth or absorbed via the skin, venom is actively injected via a bite or sting.
> 
> ...



Hi Mark, as said above, I was led to believe that poison dart frogs actually cease to secrete poison on a captive diet. Is this not true? 
Also, is it not true that some species of snake are in fact poisonous? Such as certain _Thamnophis_ subspecies?


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> On the contrary dart-poison frogs ARE poisonous, but they are not venomous.
> 
> Poison is ingested via the mouth or absorbed via the skin, venom is actively injected via a bite or sting.
> 
> ...


 
Seeing Sloths on that list made me smile.

Some of the mammals on there I think is rediculous!


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> On the contrary dart-poison frogs ARE poisonous, but they are not venomous.
> 
> Poison is ingested via the mouth or absorbed via the skin, venom is actively injected via a bite or sting.
> 
> ...



ok fair enough, i respect that, whats the sketch with komodo dragons


----------



## salvatoruk (Apr 28, 2009)

ViperLover said:


> Seeing Sloths on that list made me smile.
> 
> Some of the mammals on there I think is rediculous!


Please James, do elaborate. I was unaware you had kept all the animals on the DWA schedule and had done risk assessments on them all. 
I only keep DWA Snakes but have a big interest in Mammals so I look forward to hearing from you.

Looks like all these other guys have underestimated you...


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

salvatoruk said:


> Please James, do elaborate. I was unaware you had kept all the animals on the DWA schedule and had done risk assessments on them all.
> I only keep DWA Snakes but have a big interest in Mammals so I look forward to hearing from you.
> 
> Looks like all these other guys have underestimated you...


 
Sloths for example...how could they possibly be a "Dangerous Wild Animal"?


----------



## SWMorelia (May 15, 2007)

Mark O'Shea said:


> On the contrary dart-poison frogs ARE poisonous, but they are not venomous.
> 
> Poison is ingested via the mouth or absorbed via the skin, venom is actively injected via a bite or sting.
> 
> ...





Mark O'Shea said:


> Lew is quite correct, *dart-poison frogs obtain their toxins from the microfauna they feed on*, ants and other tiny invertebrates, and they seem to relocate them to their skin, advertising their toxic nature with their bright colours. In captivity, without this specific diet and on a diet of micro-crickets, they become nontoxic quickly.
> This is the reason why it is difficult for biochemists to study their skin toxins if they do not live and work in the country of origin, and why they work instead on the skin toxins of treefrogs, less toxic than the dart-poison frog toxins, but hereditary, permanent and unaffected by diet.
> 
> Mark


This is a wierd moment and I never thought I would say this...... But....
I think you're wrong there......
Isn't the common Garter snake poisonous for the same reason as the Dart frog?.... 
Due to some newt it eats.....


----------



## salvatoruk (Apr 28, 2009)

ViperLover said:


> Sloths for example...how could they possibly be a "Dangerous Wild Animal"?


Shall I start with the sheer size of them, their claws or their bite? Or the tropical disease many of them carry?

While I have you engaged though perhaps you can help me. If I am completely honest I can not remember for the love of me when I last fed my Male Popeia nebularis. What day was it again? Also was it a fuzzie or 2 pinkies?

Thanks in advance


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

salvatoruk said:


> Shall I start with the sheer size of them, their claws or their bite? Or the tropical disease many of them carry?
> 
> While I have you engaged though perhaps you can help me. If I am completely honest I can not remember for the love of me when I last fed my Male Popeia nebularis. What day was it again? Also was it a fuzzie or 2 pinkies?
> 
> Thanks in advance


 
LOL. Your the DWA specialist, I'm just a novice...


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

sloths are no longer on the list along with squirrel monkey, racoon and a few others


----------



## MattsBeard (Nov 29, 2009)

ViperLover said:


> LOL. Your the DWA specialist, I'm just a novice...



I'm new here and inexperienced. I wont pretend DWA doesn't fascinate me but you just seem to like it for the sake of them being dangerous. 

For the same thrill, why not just wire a plug up badly and play with it? probably as safe for you. Im not trying to start an argument, just an observational suggestion.


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

MattsBeard said:


> you just seem to like it for the sake of them being dangerous.


 
Wrong on every single level.


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

:iamwithstupid:


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

viperlover, i think ya class, you crack me up man


----------



## MattsBeard (Nov 29, 2009)

ViperLover said:


> Wrong on every single level.



There was only one level there. I just enjoy the reading here. Good luck with your desired career.


----------



## kain (Mar 23, 2009)

Oh for the love of god viperlover just stop, do what I do and browse, just because the reply button is there dosn't mean you have to press it.


----------



## Tehanu (Nov 12, 2006)

A couple of days ago on another topic Paul said this;



PDR said:


> I see they have taken Sloths off the list..... that always made me smile.


When he said it, he had a reason for why he thought sloths being taken off DWA made him "smile"...





ViperLover said:


> Seeing Sloths on that list made me smile.
> 
> Some of the mammals on there I think is rediculous!


This is what we're dealing with.
So go on James, take a wild guess at why it might make you copy someone's opinions word for word when you have no idea what it might mean.


----------



## carpy (Nov 13, 2007)

Mark O'Shea said:


> On the contrary dart-poison frogs ARE poisonous, but they are not venomous.
> 
> Poison is ingested via the mouth or absorbed via the skin, venom is actively injected via a bite or sting.
> 
> ...


Actually, has anyone tried ingesting all known reptiles, there may well be a poisonous one in there somewhere:gasp::whistling2:


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

Saedcantas said:


> A couple of days ago on another topic Paul said this;
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I was actually laughing aloud when I saw Sloths on that chart. If they have been taken off, they may need to update that list.

I need a DWA to keep Sid from Ice Age.  :lol2Joke)


----------



## Rain (Oct 9, 2007)

carpy said:


> Actually, has anyone tried ingesting all known reptiles, there may well be a poisonous one in there somewhere:gasp::whistling2:


 I was under the impression that the japanese rat snake was pretty poisonous..... Anyone care to confirm either way?


----------



## Mememe (Feb 15, 2009)

Rain said:


> I was under the impression that the japanese rat snake was pretty poisonous..... Anyone care to confirm either way?


I doubt the Japanese rat snake is poisonous very much, but at least one Asian Keelback: _Rhabdophis tigrinus_ isboth poisonous and venomous:

http://frogchemistry.com/PDFs/snakeTOAD_PNAS2007.pdf


----------



## SNAKEWISPERA (Aug 27, 2007)

Rain said:


> I was under the impression that the japanese rat snake was pretty poisonous..... Anyone care to confirm either way?


Thats why my dad passed out on the M4....:gasp:


----------



## George_Millett (Feb 26, 2009)

SNAKEWISPERA said:


> Thats why my dad passed out on the M4....:gasp:


SnakeWispera

You can't leave a comment like that on its own. Could you please provide a few more details?


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

SNAKEWISPERA said:


> Thats why my dad passed out on the M4....:gasp:


Explain? What happened?


----------



## PDR (Nov 27, 2008)

ViperLover said:


> Seeing Sloths on that list made me smile.
> 
> *Some of the mammals on there I think is rediculous*!


Which version of the Act are you referring to when you say “*Some of the mammals on there I think is ridiculous!*” 
The Act has recently been revised following a consultation period and a panel of experts was set up (including some of my colleagues) to advise on the animals that should be subject to control. Their advice, on which species should be removed or added to the Schedule, was taken into account and in June 2004 the Government published a consultation paper on proposals for revisions to the Act. Some of the public consultation responses recommended amendments (both additions and deletions) to the Schedule, but few suggestions were backed up with new evidence in support of them. 

Following the introduction of the Animal Welfare Act, Ministers agreed to the revision of the Schedule by secondary legislation, to limit it to those species which the expert panel thought presented a genuine threat to the public. 

Here is the revised list of species which are now controlled by the Act.
http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-pets/wildlife/protect/documents/dwa-animallist.pdf
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2007/pdf/uksi_20072465_en.pdf

I’ve kept, worked with and interacted with a very wide range of exotic and dangerous animals over the years way beyond my core interest in venomous species, (for example, primates including orangutans, gorillas & chimpanzees) yet I’d never question the expertise of people who specialize in the various types of mammals or their reasons for adding or removing a species from the Act.

Maybe you should set yourself a little project to work your way through the act and try and establish why the less obvious animals may be dangerous to man... or why species such as the Blue-Ringed Octopus are omitted.


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

PDR said:


> Maybe you should set yourself a little project to work your way through the act and try and establish why the less obvious animals may be dangerous to man... or why species such as the Blue-Ringed Octopus are omitted.


 
I was reffering to the version Mark posted.

Sounds like a good idea, will keep me busy. - Blue-Ringed Octapuss...Is it true that species is far more toxic then any snake? (I think it was an episode on the Discovery Channel where it was meantioned)


----------



## salvatoruk (Apr 28, 2009)

ViperLover said:


> Sounds like a good idea, will keep* me* busy. - Blue-Ringed Octapuss...Is it true that species is far more toxic then any snake?


Asking Paul to answer your question does not count as keeping you busy. His point was do the research yourself. You are sitting infront of the internet right now so put some of your own bloody effort in and do something for yourself for once!


----------



## SWMorelia (May 15, 2007)

Rain said:


> I was under the impression that the japanese rat snake was pretty poisonous..... Anyone care to confirm either way?


I mentioned the common Garter snake earlier, but there are two known poisonous snakes and the other is a Japanese something.... Something I can't quite remember ATM but it's a good chance that it's the ratsnake or was it grass snake..... Either way it's Japanese.....


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

SW-morelia said:


> I mentioned the common Garter snake earlier, but there are two known poisonous snakes and the other is a Japanese something.... Something I can't quite remember ATM but it's a good chance that it's the ratsnake or was it grass snake..... Either way it's Japanese.....


 
I have no clue...what food sources do they prey on?


----------



## kelboy (Feb 10, 2009)

ViperLover said:


> *I have no clue...*


I don't think you were expected to.


----------



## Mark O'Shea (Nov 5, 2009)

*poisonous v. venomous*

Guys

Please read what I wrote at the start of this thread.
If you eat a gartersnake or any other kind of snake, will you be poisoned?
No, because snakes are not POISONOUS, although some of them are VENOMOUS.
What I wrote is the definition accepted by toxinologists, the people who work on animal, plant and microbial poisons and venoms.

The Japanese ratsnake some are referring to is the Japanese or tiger keelback, a watersnake related to our own grass snake, known in Japan as the Yamakagaski but scientifically called Rhabdophis tigrinus, and serious bites have also been administered by the related red-necked keelback from Vietnam, R.subminiatus. I said bites, the snake bit the person, the person did not eat the snake so was not poisoned. Grass snakes, keelbacks and gartersnakes belong to a former subfamily of the Colubridae called the Natricinae, now often called Natricidae as it is elevated to family status. All these snakes possess toxins in the mouths, in specialised glands, but whether they warrant being called 'venoms' is debatable. Some colubrid snakes possess Duvernoy's glands which release toxic compounds when they bite. Recent research, but Bryan Fry and others, suggests that 'venoms' in the broadest sense of the word as toxins released into prey or victim as a result of a bite, are more widely distributed in snakes than previously thought. They are absent from boas, pythons and all primitive snakes, and they may have been secondarily lost from ratsnakes, kingsnakes, milksnakes and indigo snakes, but they are present in most other snakes and especially prevalent in xenodontines such as the American hognoses and false water cobras etc., and some Malagasy species, again hognoses but unrelated to the American hogs. Technically, therefore all three British snakes (grass snake, smooth snake and adder) could be considered 'venomous' but to do so rather diminishes the definition of a 'venomous snake' by including a raft of species that could do us no harm. Also from recent work it has been determined that many lizards, ie. monitors, agamas, iguanas, probably chameleons, are technically 'venomous' since they possess oral glands that secrete toxins of some form or another, some called 3-finger toxins. Whether these toxins are dangerous to us, and whether the snake or lizard concerned also has a delivery mechanism, are important factors to consider, certainly Komodo dragon bites are serious, but whether it is the bacterial broth in the mouths of 'venom' that does the damage has not been determined with certainty. 

Consider, I have a handful of 9mm bullets, very dangerous ammo, but I don't have a gun, the delivery mechanism, so in reality they pose no danger.

I hope this helps and give food for thoughts, but please differentiate between venom and poison. The Destroying Angel or Death Cap toadstools are very poisonous because you die if you eat them, but neither has yet been credited with jumping up and biting anyone, so they are not venomous.

To quote a popular TV celebrity (non-DWA) meerkat "Simples-ck"

Mark


----------



## kelboy (Feb 10, 2009)

Hi Mark, I don't think those of us that were asking were actually confusing venom with poison, but in fact had heard or read that certain species of snake were poisonous if ingested. Sorry if there was any confusion.


----------



## Mememe (Feb 15, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> Guys
> 
> If you eat a gartersnake or any other kind of snake, will you be poisoned?
> No, because snakes are not POISONOUS, although some of them are VENOMOUS.




Granted they do not produce their own toxins, however...

From the Journal of chemical ecology, "A resistant predator and its toxic prey: Persistence of newt toxin leads to poisonous (not venomous) snakes":
_
"The Common Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis) preys upon the Rough-skinned Newt (Taricha granulosa), which contains the neurotoxin tetrodotoxin (TTX) in the skin. TTX is toxic, large quantities are present in a newt, and highly resistant snakes have the ability to ingest multiple newts subsequently snakes harbor significant amounts of active toxin in their own tissues after consuming a newt. Snakes harbor TTX in the liver for I mo or more after consuming just one newt, and at least 7 wk after consuming a diet of newts. Three weeks after eating one newt, snakes contained an average of 42 μg of TTX in the liver. This amount could severely incapacitate or kill avian predators, and mammalian predators may be negatively affected as well."_

and from another Journal:

"Dietary sequestration of defensive steroids in nuchal
glands of the Asian snake Rhabdophis tigrinus":

"_The Asian snake Rhabdophis tigrinus possesses specialized defensive
glands on its neck that contain steroidal toxins known as
bufadienolides. We hypothesized that R. tigrinus does not synthesize
these defensive steroids but instead sequesters the toxins
from toads it consumes as prey. To test this hypothesis, we
conducted chemical analyses on the glandular fluid from snakes
collected in toad-free and toad-present localities. We also performed
feeding experiments in which hatchling R. tigrinus were
reared on controlled diets that either included or lacked toads. We
demonstrate that the cardiotonic steroids in the nuchal glands of
R. tigrinus are obtained from dietary toads. We further show that
mothers containing high levels of bufadienolides can provision
their offspring with toxins. Hatchlings had bufadienolides in their
nuchal glands only if they were fed toads or were born to a dam
with high concentrations of these compounds. Because geographic
patterns in the availability of toxic prey are reflected in the
chemical composition of the glandular fluid, snakes in toad-free
regions are left undefended by steroidal toxins. Our findings
confirm that the sequestration of dietary toxins underlies geographic
variation in antipredatory behavior in this species and
provide a unique example of sequestered defensive compounds in
a specialized vertebrate structure._"

I can't, of course, vouch personally for the accuracy, validity or reliability of the authors or journal.


----------



## Mark O'Shea (Nov 5, 2009)

*interesting*

That is very interesting Mememe, and worthy of further investigation.
Anti-predator tactics using relocated toxins from prey, something only possible in a predator that is itself immune to the prey's defences, such as a natricine that can eat toads with impunity. Do you happen to have the citations for these papers as I would like to read them.

I am very grateful for the heads-up and will not dine on keelbacks or gartersnakes until I have determined the risk of poisoning.

Thanks for that.

Mark


----------



## Mememe (Feb 15, 2009)

Unfortunately I don't have any citations on me at the moment. As you point out though I think it is clear why the two currently known (to me anyway) poisonous species spend a lot of their time in or around water. Shame as I always wanted to know what yamakagashi tasted like!


----------



## Mark O'Shea (Nov 5, 2009)

*yamakagashi*

The point is though, Mememe, that yamakagashi and maybe a gartersnake, may become toxic through feeding on particular prey, a toad, a newt, but they are not in themselves toxic species. I suppose you could say the same for dendrobatids which are toxic due to their prey, but in the wild the entire species is toxic, whereas I would imagine it would be individual or small populations of the snakes that became toxic. TTX (tetrodotoxin, fast-acting neurotoxin) are found in a wide variety of organisms, especially marine organisms such as cone shells or blue-ringed octopus. These toxin are far more deadly than even the venom of the inland taipan.

And many normally edible fish species can become lethally toxic due to a build up of a unicellular organism called Gambierdiscus which finds its way into the fishes tissue, presumably by being eaten, the result being that the fish are deadly to eat. Largely predatory fish feeding on smaller fish that fed on smaller fish that fed on..., you get the picture, a build up of toxins, so mackeral, barracuda or tuna may become deadly to eat, the victim dying of ciguatera poisoning which gradually paralyses them. 

Not everything is clear cut or even known in the toxin world.

Mark


----------



## nitro (Dec 8, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> The point is though, Mememe, that yamakagashi and maybe a gartersnake, may become toxic through feeding on particular prey, a toad, a newt, but they are not in themselves toxic species. I suppose you could say the same for dendrobatids which are toxic due to their prey, but in the wild the entire species is toxic, whereas I would imagine it would be individual or small populations of the snakes that became toxic. TTX (tetrodotoxin, fast-acting neurotoxin) are found in a wide variety of organisms, especially marine organisms such as cone shells or blue-ringed octopus. These toxin are far more deadly than even the venom of the inland taipan.
> 
> And many normally edible fish species can become lethally toxic due to a build up of a unicellular organism called Gambierdiscus which finds its way into the fishes tissue, presumably by being eaten, the result being that the fish are deadly to eat. Largely predatory fish feeding on smaller fish that fed on smaller fish that fed on..., you get the picture, a build up of toxins, so mackeral, barracuda or tuna may become deadly to eat, the victim dying of ciguatera poisoning which gradually paralyses them.
> 
> ...


sorry to but in, I also here concerning marine life, that, cant remember the name of the fish think its a puffer fish (japenese fugu i think) is also very toxic


----------



## Jczreptiles (Sep 1, 2009)

nitro said:


> sorry to but in, I also here concerning marine life, that, cant remember the name of the fish think its a puffer fish (japenese fugu i think) is also very toxic


 Yes but only a section of the fish is actualy poisonous.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

My understanding is that the yamakagashi has caused human fatalities through its bite, not due to being eaten, hence being a DWA species, also that the reference to venom being isolated from the Japanese Rat snake does indeed refer to E. climacophora, not the Asian keelbacks, and unrelated to the Asian keelbacks, Rhabdophis, Amphiesma, and Xenocrophis, this having been documeted by Dr Fry.


----------



## Mememe (Feb 15, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> The point is though, Mememe, that yamakagashi and maybe a gartersnake, may become toxic through feeding on particular prey, a toad, a newt, but they are not in themselves toxic species. I suppose you could say the same for dendrobatids which are toxic due to their prey, but in the wild the entire species is toxic, whereas I would imagine it would be individual or small populations of the snakes that became toxic. TTX (tetrodotoxin, fast-acting neurotoxin) are found in a wide variety of organisms, especially marine organisms such as cone shells or blue-ringed octopus.


It all comes down to what you call 'poisonous'. 
With regards to _Rhabdophis, _in my opinion and definition, they are pretty clear cut as being poisonous;they have specialised structures on their necks to store toxins (though I wonder if all/most/few populations have these glands?). Mothers even even pass their toxins to their embryos and these toxins then persist in the young for months. Whether the animal makes its own toxins is trivial to me in this case; as in the case of dendrobatids.

Deborah A. Hutchinson, Alan H. Savitzky, Chemoecology 18: 181 – 190 (2008) 

For the garter snake I find it a little less convincing.


----------



## chondro13 (Aug 18, 2008)

SW-morelia said:


> I mentioned the common Garter snake earlier, but there are two known poisonous snakes and the other is a Japanese something.... Something I can't quite remember ATM but it's a good chance that it's the ratsnake or was it grass snake..... Either way it's Japanese.....



Hehe... you watch QI.... god i need to get out more....


----------



## carpy (Nov 13, 2007)

Firstly, Viperlover, your signature made me laugh a great deal. 

Mark, just to clarify i was not confusing venomous with poisonous, merely questioning whether all snakes have been researched with regards to being "poisonous" in the true sense of the term


----------



## Dragon84 (Sep 20, 2009)

Mark O'Shea said:


> ...from recent work it has been determined that many lizards, ie. monitors, agamas, iguanas, probably chameleons, are technically 'venomous' since they possess oral glands that secrete toxins of some form or another...


:lol2: Does this make me a fully fledged member of the DWA club with my "hot" beardie:whistling2:


----------



## stubeanz (Mar 28, 2007)

just thought id answer why sloth were on DWA ... apart from the power behind their large claws (anyone whos worked with sloths will tell you they can move fast when they want to), it was probably due to some people having reactions to their bites which are similar to having a cold or flu for around a year:gasp: i know of a few storys of keepers around the world being bitten by sloths and having this "cold" for over a year. im sure it must be a type of bacteria they have in their mouths and have heard that a few years ago a keeper from london zoo was bitten by a sloth and had similar effects.
stu


----------



## salvatoruk (Apr 28, 2009)

stubeanz said:


> just thought id answer why sloth were on DWA ... apart from the power behind their large claws (anyone whos worked with sloths will tell you they can move fast when they want to), it was probably due to some people having reactions to their bites which are similar to having a cold or flu for around a year:gasp: i know of a few storys of keepers around the world being bitten by sloths and having this "cold" for over a year. im sure it must be a type of bacteria they have in their mouths and have heard that a few years ago a keeper from london zoo was bitten by a sloth and had similar effects.
> stu


From keepers I've spoken to I was under the impression once bitten you never loose the illness. It may lie dormant in you for years then come to the surface and this continues for the remainder of your life with no known cure.


----------



## The T Lord (Mar 28, 2009)

Rain said:


> I was under the impression that the japanese rat snake was pretty poisonous..... Anyone care to confirm either way?


I had a female earlier on this year, and i can confirm one thing, there bites cause your hands to swell up a little more then any other snake there size, so its possible, but it may just be me, there were no other side effects


----------



## Snakes Incorporated (Jun 27, 2006)

Central American poison Dart frogs produce toxic compounds acquired from their diet of tiny arthropods known oribatid mites. These compounds known as alkaloids protects these critters from predators. 
It is surprising that mites—rather than ants—were found to be the major source of alkaloids. 
Alkaloids, which include caffeine and nicotine, are a highly diverse group of chemicals with many unusual properties. 
Virtually nothing is known about how the frogs actually take the alkaloids from a dietary source and store them in their glands.


----------



## leeh1985 (Dec 6, 2006)

PDR said:


> Which version of the Act are you referring to when you say “*Some of the mammals on there I think is ridiculous!*”
> The Act has recently been revised following a consultation period and a panel of experts was set up (including some of my colleagues) to advise on the animals that should be subject to control. Their advice, on which species should be removed or added to the Schedule, was taken into account and in June 2004 the Government published a consultation paper on proposals for revisions to the Act. Some of the public consultation responses recommended amendments (both additions and deletions) to the Schedule, but few suggestions were backed up with new evidence in support of them.
> 
> Following the introduction of the Animal Welfare Act, Ministers agreed to the revision of the Schedule by secondary legislation, to limit it to those species which the expert panel thought presented a genuine threat to the public.
> ...


 
Do you know if they will revise the dwa act again anytime soon or was the 2007 review a one off?


----------

