# Live Feeding Laws.



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

Firstly, this is not a debate, or discussion into the practices, nor is it for you to say how good, or bad you think it is. 

Myself, and a few others have been making countless posts, telling people of the legalities of live feeding.

This is quoted from British Parlements resources site. 



> Currently under the 1911 Act it is not illegal to feed a live vertebrate to another unless you cause it unnecessary suffering, so that would have to be the result of a court case and the judge would have to make a decision.
> 
> Those of us who have been involved with reptiles will argue that a mouse that is being produced for food really has no cognizance of what is going on and exhibits no fear.
> 
> Whilst we absolutely do not want to encourage live feeding, we think we need some clarity as to whether that is going to be made illegal under this clause of fighting. Our concerns are, because of Clause 3(iv)(c), the need to be able to exhibit normal behavior patterns, that snakes in the wild feed on life prey, there are no carrion feeding snakes, so that would mean we are not going to be able to feed them frozen food; we are going to have to feed them live mice, and equally we would be opposed to having to introduce that.





> this practice is currently legal so long as not practiced in a public place. There has always been confusion over the legality of this practice as no regulation directly relating to this has ever been decreed. Many millions of rodents are destroyed every year by break back traps and poison, compared to these methods the kill by a snake is swift and efficient


Basically, the laws as they are NO NOT ban live feeding, but experts and animal welfare groups DISCOURAGE it. 

The new laws concerning animal welfare may IN THE FUTURE make it illegal, but there is an equal chance that they will make it ILLEGAL TO FEED F/T, or PREKILLED.

Because, under proposed versions, they will make it a legal requirement that natural behavior is exibited, and as said, this would mean live feeding only. 

Another proposal outlaws it completely. This would mean alot of dead reptiles(boiga, and other species that will not take FT/prekilled.)

Basically, i cannot see either of these versions getting through, and i foresee the laws remaining the same. 

The ambiguity probably arose from other laws, banning fighting such as cock fights, and bull fights etc. 



> some people claim that placing a live mouse with a snake for the purposes of a feeding is still deliberate intent to induce them to fight


BUT when it comes down to it, the practice is legal.

I CAN LEGALLY, IF I WANTED TO, PUT A PUPPY WITH A BURMESE PYTHON, THE SAME AS I CAN A MOUSE AND A ROYAL, OR A RABBIT AND A BOA. 
It is my choice as to whether or not i do this, and i personally choose not to. 

All quotations can be found on:
UK Parliament - Publications

(Disclaimer; i do not condone live feeding, under normal circumstance, or where there is a alternative, but in some cases it is necessary, and no matter what our opinions, it is ultimatly LEGAL)

Regards
Dan


----------



## wohic (Jun 19, 2006)

Thank you for a very informitive post Dan, i get tired of the 'its illegal' brigade......... think your link may well be used a fare bit !


----------



## BADGERS MUM (Dec 5, 2006)

very interesting,should solve alot of arguements,i think ppl get confused with whats morally wrong and whats illegal,im not against live feeding if its a means to an end so be it but i think if it came into effect that only live feeding was legal(mad law)there would be a drop in snake owners and most would continue to feed dead so thats just stupid,some ppl have reps as status symbols so no matter what the law says they will feed live and make a show of it too,the law is of no concern to them,we all do things differently i guess....great post anyway


----------



## Sam&Si (Apr 11, 2007)

*hi*

putting a puppy in for a burm........thats upsetting to me.
I know its nature and snakes got to eat, but personally i couldnt feed live, and a puppy would be well out the question. 
A lot of people say to me you got to give them a live mouse/rat. guess its an individual thing, but for me...... i could not do it.

Sam


----------



## HoldenBurn1000 (Apr 2, 2007)

I dont think he was being serious wouth the puppy remark  

And great post. I hope everyone reads it. Well done


----------



## Issa (Oct 13, 2006)

Interesting Post. I may be refering others to this..........


----------



## Kellybee (Oct 13, 2006)

The way I understand it, if you are feeding a vertebrate that isnt suffering as a result of feeding it to something else, then there is no issue present, other than a moral one depending on individual beleif of course, and despite this, only if you are beleived to be causing suffering, could you be brought into a court room and prosecuted for it.

Thankfully most folk see live feeding as unnecessary, and as such animals are, for the most part humanely killed. I think the Youtube live feeding (yes, goats, rabbits, anoles, mice, piglets), and such is primarily outside the UK, certainly I have never seen one of those films that features a british accent.

Anyway, we can't speak for the rest of the world, and there is always a minority that is the exception to the rule, but I beleive that whether this law is displayed to all (like Dan has rightly posted here for example), people here are likely to leave their egos in their pants and continue to feed defrosts rather than live, based on the morals that are set by British heritage. Something to be proud of, and a really interesting subject, thanks Dan.

EDIT: PS I was always under the impression it was not legal to live feed vertebrates, so this has been really enlightening for me, I cringe at the thought of live feeding, but at least someone has the brains to enlighten me as to how or why it might be considered right or wrong. Funny though, how the RSPCA condone reptile keeping, yet havent (from what I can find on the net), taken any action to overturn this law and have vertebrate feeding banned. Interesting.


----------



## captaincaveman (Nov 6, 2006)

yeah thats what i'd read to, im along the same lines as you, i know its legal to do but choose not to


----------



## King Of Dreams (Aug 4, 2006)

interesting stuff.


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

I only wish that the section of this law which states not in a public place would apply worldwide, and would apply to the uploading of videos on the internet, which as most of us know has recently hugely increased due to yootube and other similar sites not taking action against videos of live feeding - which are in some cases clearly not functional feeding episodes but videod purely for pleasure & entertainment purposes and to be distributed.

I would think that even in the USA where cock fighting, dog fighting etc. is illegal in most states, that they would crack down on live feeding for general public entertainment purposes... I can only hope for the future, if the governments crack down on it then yootube would crack down on it. If you're feeding your snake fine, if you're making a sport of it - it shouldn't be legal.


----------



## captaincaveman (Nov 6, 2006)

Athravan said:


> I only wish that the section of this law which states not in a public place would apply worldwide, and would apply to the uploading of videos on the internet, which as most of us know has recently hugely increased due to yootube and other similar sites not taking action against videos of live feeding - which are in some cases clearly not functional feeding episodes but videod purely for pleasure & entertainment purposes and to be distributed.
> 
> I would think that even in the USA where cock fighting, dog fighting etc. is illegal in most states, that they would crack down on live feeding for general public entertainment purposes... I can only hope for the future, if the governments crack down on it then yootube would crack down on it. If you're feeding your snake fine, if you're making a sport of it - it shouldn't be legal.


 
yeah, i agree, the amount of people i know who know i keep snakes but dont themselves assume i feed live cause of these kinda videos along with films like road trip which show it happening

gives a bad impression and i wonder how many people would love to keep snakes but choose not to because they assume that you have to feed live


----------



## King Of Dreams (Aug 4, 2006)

but (im not starting an argument just posing a point) surely as long as the snake gets fed, the animal isn't stressed, the prey isnt put through unecessary pain or fear, then surely what the harm in a few peole gathering round and enjoying the (rather morbid IMO) spectacle of a snake eating. me and my buddies enjoy watching my snake eat the thawed mice, what's the difference (apart from the fact that one is alive and the other dead)?

and from that point what's the harm in showing it on youtube?


and now to cover my ass so i dont get flamed: 

like others here i dont agree with live feeding purely because it causes pain to the prey animal which, when there are much better methods around is unecessary.


----------



## Aquilus (Feb 22, 2007)

The key word is all of this is 'unnecessary'. Feed a puppy to a snake, and you can be sure you would be prosecuted for causing unnecessary suffering, unless you could prove that the snake only ate live puppies, and its suffering was therefore necessary.


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

King Of Dreams said:


> but (im not starting an argument just posing a point) surely as long as the snake gets fed, the animal isn't stressed, the prey isnt put through unecessary pain or fear, then surely what the harm in a few peole gathering round and enjoying the (rather morbid IMO) spectacle of a snake eating. me and my buddies enjoy watching my snake eat the thawed mice, what's the difference (apart from the fact that one is alive and the other dead)?
> 
> and from that point what's the harm in showing it on youtube?
> 
> ...


Well, firstly - when you live feed there IS a chance of the snake getting hurt. There IS also a chance of unnecessary pain / suffering and fear being shown from the mouse. 

To risk a snake being injured for natural feeding response is one thing. To watch the mouse being in pain / fear / suffering because it is the feeding option and necessary, that's also one thing.

To risk the life and health of snake, and to advertise pleasure and entertainment from pain / suffering of a mouse, seems extremely perverse to me and un-necessary.

It is one thing if for education purposes people watch a snake eat live - but many of the videos published are feeding live PURELY for entertainment and amusement so they can video it and publish it.

Ignoring the health of the snakes, and the pain/suffering of the rodent, also consider the reputation of reptile keeping.

Many new keepers may be put off the trade if they believe that live feeding is necessary. They may see it as cruel, which many of us also do.

Many organisations that previously may have left reptile groups alone may see live feeding as a place to target us for animal cruelty, thus endangering reptile keeping as a hobby as well as putting new people off joining us.

It may also give each and every one of us personally a bad reputation. If you tell someone at work or a friend that you keep snakes and they have seen what they consider disgusting/unnecessary/cruel videos posted all online with their favourite animals (mice, birds, others, etc) being eaten alive for pleasure, they may just judge you based on the acts of others. The general public have no education about the fact that the majority of us feed frozen, yet there is now a wealth of evidence about the reptile community feeding live on popular video sites.

I don't want to be judged by the images that others produce, yet it will happen.


----------



## Kellybee (Oct 13, 2006)

King Of Dreams said:


> because it causes pain to the prey animal which, *when there are much better methods around is* *unecessary*.


 
I think you answered your own question......

Kids know beef comes from a cow, pork from a pig, but would you want your kid to spend time in an abbatoir watching the animals being slaughtered?

There is so much more than just the reputation of reptile keeping, and us being tarred with the same brush as these incensed, idiotic and irresponsible thrill seekers uploading their escapades onto Youtube.

Do your firewall setting prevent your children from accessing youtube? Would you allow your kids to use websites like rotten.com? 

Did the jamie bulger killers get the inspiration for their actions from horror movies? 

Will other people, both adults and children consider the killing of animals acceptable when they regularly see other people are doing it legally, and gaining enjoyment from it? 

People grow to accept the common occurrences around them in life as normal and acceptable. The Chinese eat dogs and cats, and live octopus, we dont consider that a moral action. The French eat horses, in South America they eat bugs. We might not be at the stage where we consider a poodle to be something you order with chips in the pub, but cultural differences, and changes in modern lifestyle are being accepted more and more. You can now order mealworms in british pubs, and I saw my brother eat a lollipop with grubs in it recently 

Youtube is an international phenomena, it is becoming more and more popular, not only adults but kids all over the world use it every day. I wouldnt want my kids growing up watching live feeding, aided suicide, torture or anything else I consider inappropriate online, and I would hate to be the one that encouraged them to participate in feeding goats to constrictors etc by teaching them that live feeding is acceptable, *when there are much better methods around it is* *unecessary*


----------



## King Of Dreams (Aug 4, 2006)

agreed to all of the above.


----------



## Stoke Lad (Jan 26, 2007)

you learn somthing new evryday, i can see alot of people quoting back to this thread when a live feeding argument starts. 

i think this should be made a sticky :smile:


----------



## Nerys (Apr 18, 2005)

good post dan.

also serves to highlight the hypocripsy of the animal welfare bill.. 

Nerys


----------



## ratboy (Jan 10, 2007)

I think we actually lose a lot of behavioural information about our pets by not feeding live. I'm not suggesting for one minute that we should do it, but if you consider the different reactions you get with dead food when you move it about and warm it up the differences are obvious.

Another forum I belong to has rat snake keepers from other countries where feeding live is normal, and it is only by speaking to these people that I have learned that Russian rat snakes for example, attack their prey from off the ground. They will actually stalk it from a branch and basically swoop their head down to catch it. This explains a LOT of behaviour that I have seen with these snakes but it never occured to me that it was anything to do with hunting, since with dead food they do not do it.

You live and learn.


----------



## Guest (Apr 12, 2007)

Dan that a very good post mate.

The thing that has always got me on this so called law is you can not cause a feed item any stress during the live feeding of mice or rats to snakes etc.Who is to say wether or not the animal is stressed whilst this is happening.In all honesty if a snake struck at me and then started to constict me i think it would cause me to be slightly stressful during the attack lol.

I cant personally see this law being changed as it would cause a lot of problems etc for all the people involved.

I have seen cases where a vet has told people to feed live mice as the snake was sure to die if they didnt.The vets always push for the snake to be fed the minimum amount of live feeds you can get away with to get them going again and back onto defrost as soon as possible.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

whew! being on the forum i got the distinct impression that live feeding was illegal there and that live and freshly killed feeding was a felonious, barbaric practice. i know that it's far more common here than there but people who do it were made to look like crimminals a bit. personally to me live feeding should be a last resort, not for concern over the mouse but for fear of harming the snake. a live rodent, in a confined space, even while supervised, is inherently dangerous. but if you have a snake that will only eat live then what else can you do? it doesn't make you somekind of barbarian. anyone who feeds live rodents as a preference is setting themselves up for an accident. i adopted a boa without an eye and a yellow anaconda with it's jaw torn out. it will happen one day to those that purposly feed live. but if you have to feed live at least it's not a crime against nature.


----------



## BADGERS MUM (Dec 5, 2006)

two stories....... a friend rescued a snake from a petting zoo that was kept in a tank surrounded by rodents,when he took him to the vet he has damaged himself badly by striking constantly at the glass,he would not eat dead food ever so he has always been fed live of whatever he can breed,rats baby rabbits guinea pigs and he has a happy healthy snake,im proud he kept it as i would not of coped,i dont condemn him,hes looking after his snake fantastically i personally couldnt,i bought a frozen pinkie for my leo and ended up burying it in my garden:roll: sad but true,sometimes these things have to be done,like it or not and anyone passionate about their rep would feed live if need be,actually i like feeding eddie live crix cos i hate them


----------



## Pro Mantis (Apr 7, 2007)

BADGERS MUM said:


> actually i like feeding eddie live crix cos i hate them


Thats why I am getting a lizard (in 14 hours- can't wait!), they eat MORE than a mantis, and i'm getting another mantis enclosure!:lol2: :mf_dribble:


----------



## Blazey (Apr 30, 2006)

gan1 said:


> The way I understand it, if you are feeding a vertebrate that isnt suffering as a result of feeding it to something else, then there is no issue present, other than a moral one depending on individual beleif of course, and despite this, only if you are beleived to be causing suffering, could you be brought into a court room and prosecuted for it.
> 
> Thankfully most folk see live feeding as unnecessary, and as such animals are, for the most part humanely killed. I think the Youtube live feeding (yes, goats, rabbits, anoles, mice, piglets), and such is primarily outside the UK, certainly I have never seen one of those films that features a british accent.
> 
> ...


 
this is possibly due to the fact that many pet shops wont sell u a live mouse if they know ur going to use it as live food. My shop wont sell me a breeding pair of mice which annoys me greatly but obviously this is so i just buy their food instead of breeding my own and i could breed my rats but baby rats look too cute.


----------



## PendleHog (Dec 21, 2005)

gan1 said:


> Funny though, how the RSPCA condone reptile keeping, yet havent (from what I can find on the net), taken any action to overturn this law and have vertebrate feeding banned. Interesting.


*Chokes*

The RSPCA most certainly do NOT condone reptile keeping and would be more than happy to see it banned altogether!

Has anyone looked into the implications of the new welfare bill (now up and running!) as the original post only really covers the older, established law.


----------



## Blazey (Apr 30, 2006)

PendleHog said:


> *Chokes*
> 
> The RSPCA most certainly do NOT condone reptile keeping and would be more than happy to see it banned altogether!
> 
> Has anyone looked into the implications of the new welfare bill (now up and running!) as the original post only really covers the older, established law.


think i looked at the bill a few months back but didnt know it was implemented yet, thought it wasnt due til june time.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i know how you feel, mice and things are not a problem, they give me the runaround when it comes to rabbits. i have to trick the folks at the shops. i have to ask all the usual questions you ask when buying a rabbit and say "aw that's so cute!" and buy a salt lick or something. they never catch on and are glad to have sold their largest rabbit to a loving home ( he says with a ghoolish cackle) i just have to not go to the same shop twice.:lol2:


----------



## Blazey (Apr 30, 2006)

HABU said:


> i know how you feel, mice and things are not a problem, they give me the runaround when it comes to rabbits. i have to trick the folks at the shops. i have to ask all the usual questions you ask when buying a rabbit and say "aw that's so cute!" and buy a salt lick or something. they never catch on and are glad to have sold their largest rabbit to a loving home ( he says with a ghoolish cackle) i just have to not go to the same shop twice.:lol2:


lol i quite like that, do u keep them alive or do you kill them yourself? I'd say breed them but it would be costly to feed them up to the size you would probably want!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i put them down before i feed. they sometimes scream and a bigg rabbit can really do a number on my retic if given the chance. i'm talking big ole rabbits.


----------



## Blazey (Apr 30, 2006)

pet shop i worked at used to save rabbits that had died to sell to snake owners but why would u buy a rabbit that could have died of a disease.

I understand why they got rid of me, i hated the shop and its ruthless ways so much that i used to whipser to people where to get better prices and value. I'm not bothered though, i'd rather see people happy than come back and feel angry with me for something i was forced to say, would rather be honest!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

it's all about the bottom line... the sad fact


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

thats very interesting I thought that it was illegal, how about live feeding to a tarantula or of invert??


----------



## Blazey (Apr 30, 2006)

i imagine the law covers them all.


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

Blazey said:


> i imagine the law covers them all.


correct!

the law concerns using a vertabrate as a prey item, and it doesn't matter too much which vert, or what will eat it.

thanks for all the replies, i just read all four pages! 

and sorry for the puppy joke, in bad taste, but used to make a point! one of the reptile shops near me sells live mice for food, but they only sell the males as food, and females as pets. they wont sell me any females becausee they know that i buy frozen, and reptile equeptment!
silly beggers!


----------



## Pro Mantis (Apr 7, 2007)

so let me settle my mind.

It IS legal to live feed, but not worth the risk of your reptile?


----------



## lesvegas (Jan 6, 2007)

Interesting but why mention the puppy?

Surely that is classed as cruelty to animals as its not a natural diet?

If anyone did it, id gladly eat them


----------



## lesvegas (Jan 6, 2007)

darkdan99 said:


> correct!
> 
> the law concerns using a vertabrate as a prey item, and it doesn't matter too much which vert, or what will eat it.
> 
> ...


Sorry didnt read this post before i posted

thank god it was a joke:lol2:


----------



## King Of Dreams (Aug 4, 2006)

_*BUMP This should be made sticky.*_


----------



## Pro Mantis (Apr 7, 2007)

Yeah, stickify it please teebs!


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

Currently under the 1911 Act it is not illegal to feed a live vertebrate to another unless you cause it unnecessary suffering, so that would have to be the result of a court case and the judge would have to make a decision. 

Those of us who have been involved with reptiles will argue that a mouse that is being produced for food really has no cognizance of what is going on and exhibits no fear.

Whilst we absolutely do not want to encourage live feeding, we think we need some clarity as to whether that is going to be made illegal under this clause of fighting. Our concerns are, because of Clause 3(iv)(c), the need to be able to exhibit normal behavior patterns, that snakes in the wild feed on life prey, there are no carrion feeding snakes, so that would mean we are not going to be able to feed them frozen food; we are going to have to feed them live mice, and equally we would be opposed to having to introduce that.

^^^^

that piece is from before the new animal welfare act came in, sorry if its already been said I havnt read the whole thread through.

Under the new animal welfare act there is pieces that you could very easily be prosecuted under.


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

Gonna bump this up because a month on and everyone has forgotten, and thinks its illegal again. 

Dan


----------



## King Of Dreams (Aug 4, 2006)

_*Should be stickied really, people are pretty dumb...*_


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

it should be stressed though that you can still be prosecuted


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

You can be prosecuted for creulty to animals, if you are showing the event publically(even electronically), charging an entry fee, placing bets on the outcome, or neglecting the prey item (without necessities for a prolonged duration). 

If you are simply placing it in an tank, in a private area to be eaten then this is legal. If it doesnt get eaten within an hour, and enviromental health official was quoted as saying "put some food and water in for it" (credit o reticulatus dan for that quote) 

Also i think stickying this is a good idea


----------



## ratboy (Jan 10, 2007)

The official Defra Line is :

Although the Protection of Animals Acts 1911 to 1964 do not prohibit the
feeding of animals with live prey, the live feeding of vertebrate prey should be
avoided save in exceptional circumstances, and then only under veterinary
advice. Where any live prey must be used, its welfare must be considered as well
as any potential injury which might be caused to the predator.

So if you are going to do it, you had better be able to prove that a vet told you to.


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

I argued the bit with another forum member months ago when he said it was totally 100% illegal... I said not in all circumstances. He was so insistant he was right I gave up. The defra quote above is exactly correct. I got sick of the last arguement. Its not about whether we THINK its ok.. its about legality. What you feel is another thread entirely.

In scotland we are only allowed a 5 minute viewed feed. This means that if the live prey item is not consumed within 5 minutes whilst being observed we must remove it. that was the last info I had on it.

I think making this a sticky is agreat idea.


----------



## matty (Feb 17, 2007)

thanks for an interesting and informative thread 

i also think this should be made a sticky, theres too many people saying live feeding's illegal :|


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

Look at the wording, and it says "should", not must.

It is NOT prohibited, and thus legal, but we reccomened would be closer to the truth.


----------



## CBR1100XX (Feb 19, 2006)

has been made a sticky for now.


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

Thanks Fazer


----------



## Incubuss (Dec 19, 2006)

Great post.


----------



## ratboy (Jan 10, 2007)

Dan... the wording is "the live feeding of vertebrate prey should be avoided save in exceptional circumstances, and then only under veterinary advice."

This is basically saying that unless you have been to a vet and the vet has advised you to feed the animal live prey in order to save its life... you are on your own.

I am not daft enough to think it does not happen but feeding live prey to starving snakes is not condoned by the government unless a vet has told you to do so and you can prove that. 

Look at the threads recently where the RSPCA are visiting people because they have been told they are feeding live food to their reptiles... Nerys included. If anyone is doing it and cannot prove that a vet has advised them to do so to save the snakes life, the RSPCA *WILL* prosecute.


----------



## punky_jen (Feb 22, 2007)

What i dont get is, how can they prove you have live fed? Does it mean if you breed mice and rats and have snakes, then your up the creek without a paddle? because that isnt right.


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

Firstly, this is not a debate, or discussion into the practices, nor is it for you to say how good, or bad you think it is. 

Myself, and a few others have been making countless posts, telling people of the legalities of live feeding.

This is quoted from British Parlements resources site. 


Quote:
Currently under the 1911 Act it is not illegal to feed a live vertebrate to another unless you cause it unnecessary suffering, so that would have to be the result of a court case and the judge would have to make a decision. 

Those of us who have been involved with reptiles will argue that a mouse that is being produced for food really has no cognizance of what is going on and exhibits no fear.

Whilst we absolutely do not want to encourage live feeding, we think we need some clarity as to whether that is going to be made illegal under this clause of fighting. Our concerns are, because of Clause 3(iv)(c), the need to be able to exhibit normal behavior patterns, that snakes in the wild feed on life prey, there are no carrion feeding snakes, so that would mean we are not going to be able to feed them frozen food; we are going to have to feed them live mice, and equally we would be opposed to having to introduce that. 
Quote:
this practice is currently legal so long as not practiced in a public place. There has always been confusion over the legality of this practice as no regulation directly relating to this has ever been decreed. Many millions of rodents are destroyed every year by break back traps and poison, compared to these methods the kill by a snake is swift and efficient Taken from the british parlement site, from the legislation. Wouldnt be the first time the RSPCA felt the need to "bend" the laws in their favour. . . 

And while we are hear, this is what DEFRA have to say 


ratboy ;) said:


> The official Defra Line is :
> 
> *Although the Protection of Animals Acts 1911 to 1964 do not prohibit the
> feeding of animals with live prey*, the live feeding of vertebrate prey should be
> ...


The fact is, that the law says catagorically that you can, HOWEVER they discourage it. the wording is "should be" not "needs" or "legally" etc. 
even the RSPCA admit that it is legal, but they are "against" the practise. 


RSPCA said:


> The RSPCA is opposed to the feeding of live vertebrate prey to captive animals.


The truth is that no-one likes it, but its still legal.


----------



## ratboy (Jan 10, 2007)

Dan what you have to remember is that it does not actually matter whether it is technically illegal or not. If you are caught doing it by the RSPCA they will prosecute you for it. The RSPCA take out private prosecutions not criminal ones. One of your own quotes said that it would require a court case and a judge to make a decision. Once that judge has decided it's illegal... then it's illegal.

I have never said it is currently illegal to do ... all I am saying is that if anyone does it, they need to make bloody sure they don't get caught !


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

ahh, now i see your point. 

as you know my point is its not illegal, and as such the RSPCA should not be able to prosecute for it... But whats the law asn what happens are 2 differnt things. 

This thread is LF law, so thats why i have repeated my points


----------



## Natrix (Dec 9, 2006)

I have a copy of a letter from DEFRA that was sent to a member of this forum answering a number of questions they had raised. I think the following may be of interest to some of you.


Finally, the protection of Animals Acts 1911 to 1964 do not prohibit the feeding of animals with live prey, although the live feeding of vertebrate prey should be discouraged and avoided apart from in exceptional circumstances and then only under veterinary advise. 
Where live prey must be used, feeding must be observed and its welfare must be considered as well as any potential injury which might be caused to the predator. 

The letter was signed by Ben Bradshaw.


----------



## snickers (Aug 15, 2007)

<...it is not illegal to feed a live vertebrate to another...>

Since the reference is to vertebrates will this cover the use of 'feeder' fish, which are sometimes offered to garter snakes and predatory fish.

I'm fairly sure I've seen 'feeder' fish on sale in petshops


----------



## darkdan99 (Dec 28, 2006)

fish are a grey area, but the feeding of verts, or inverts is LEGAL anyway 

Note the wordings are "discouraged" and "reccomend" and alike. 

In the same way i would discourage LF, the government do also, but LAW states it is legal


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

what you have to remember though is the RSPCA have a sh*t load of money to throw at these court cases, they can afford the best solicitors to prosecute you, so basically you will have to fund your own defence as legal aid doesnt cover cases like this, and soliciters are not cheap, your best option would be to plead guilty and get it over with, minimising the damage to your wallet.

I think that if you got prosecuted and you didnt have a vets letter you would be screwed.


----------



## miffikins (Feb 25, 2007)

Nice thread. I always thought it was illegal, 100%. In fact when I was on a field trip the other week, my professor stated it was illegal. I may show him this post! 

Very informative, cheers


----------



## sparkle (Mar 21, 2007)

wohic said:


> Thank you for a very informitive post Dan, i get tired of the 'its illegal' brigade......... think your link may well be used a fare bit !


 
hear hear


i got into a debate months back on here with a police man who told me it was 100% illegal and he could arrest me for it....:crazy:


quite frankly i sent him proof he was talking pants... and he shut up


----------



## davenoble (Aug 25, 2007)

sparkle said:


> hear hear
> 
> 
> i got into a debate months back on here with a police man who told me it was 100% illegal and he could arrest me for it....:crazy:
> ...





i like pants


----------



## SiUK (Feb 15, 2007)

the fact of the matter is its a grey area, they will attempt to prosecute you for it, and without a vets backing I can see people losing the case.


----------



## Schip (Mar 31, 2007)

Can members of an offical body send this sort of clarification out to the Colleges and Universities who are as we speak TEACHING their students that under the new AWA it is 100% illegal to live feed?

My godson rang me last night asking this very question as he knew I'm on the committee of ADA (Anti Docking Alliance for dogs) and would know the facts. I told him to send his professor here or to the IHS for clarification as there had been no test case to show it was indeed illegal. 

If our up and coming Vets, zoo keepers, pet shop workers etc etc are undertaking their education with the belief that they would be breaking the law by live feeding what sort of problems is that going to cause us as keepers at a later stage? Imagine if they clarify the law based on the 'exhibiting natural behaviours' side of the Act how would that work with these new folk having been taught something completley incorrect?

Just thought I wouldn't want to be trying to answer that question in an exam situation as you're taught one thing but reality is another, who's right and which answer would be the correct one yes/no? Is the answer set in stone ie by the examination board or do the markers have some discresion and their own understandings of the law could apply?

I'll shut up now I'm rambling with my lateral thinking lol


----------



## zukomonitor (Nov 11, 2007)

this is a great thread, at the minute my rep excepts FT so i dont need to worry about suffering - neccessary or unnecessary and anybody tryng to quote legality on the subject

its always good to know the law though, and youtube should ban those 'live feeding' videos as ive seen some stupid things on there. 

thanks for the info


----------



## King Of Dreams (Aug 4, 2006)

zukomonitor said:


> youtube should ban those 'live feeding' videos as ive seen some stupid things on there.
> 
> thanks for the info


_**Facepalm**_


----------



## PendleHog (Dec 21, 2005)

I have taken this off sticky and placed just Dan's first post in a locked sticky for reference, so its less daunting to read! This can stay open for discussion.

Dan if you're really mad at me for doing this let me know!


----------



## snickers (Aug 15, 2007)

It's interesting that this covers vertebrates. The fish industry doesn't seem too bothered at all. I've even seen fish being sold cheap and marked as 'feeder fish'!


----------

