# help please



## phily p (Mar 29, 2010)

was looking at some rear fanged snakes the other day Rhagheris moilensis but cant find much out about them are they dwa ? any info would be good please .


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

They are a former DWAA species. They used to be in the genus _Malpolon_ but a nomenclature change now means they're off Schedule 1.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

ViperLover said:


> They are a former DWAA species. They used to be in the genus _Malpolon_ but a nomenclature change now means they're off Schedule 1.


No, James, they are not. They are still DWAL. I could come along and rename _Naja_ as _Sainsburyi_, they would be the same animal, and remain restricted.
Changing names does not mean that the animal itself becomes legal to keep.
How about if rattlesnakes become Mickey Mouse snakes, genus _Mickeymousus_, and cobras get renamed _Basilfawltyius_?
The animals are the same.
The only species released from Schedule 1 were those in the October 2007 review, basically mangroves, and not much else.


----------



## ViperLover (Jun 7, 2009)

ian14 said:


> No, James, they are not. They are still DWAL. I could come along and rename _Naja_ as _Sainsburyi_, they would be the same animal, and remain restricted.
> Changing names does not mean that the animal itself becomes legal to keep.
> How about if rattlesnakes become Mickey Mouse snakes, genus _Mickeymousus_, and cobras get renamed _Basilfawltyius_?
> The animals are the same.
> The only species released from Schedule 1 were those in the October 2007 review, basically mangroves, and not much else.


I stand corrected. Although which section deals with nomenclature changes?


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

ViperLover said:


> I stand corrected. Although which section deals with nomenclature changes?


Section 0
The animal remains the same. Can it cause serious harm/death to a member of the public? If yes, it's a DWAA schedule 1 animal. Armchair "scientists" can change names as much as their ego bag requires. It doesn't stop the animal being dangerous.


----------



## GT2540 (Jan 31, 2012)

ian14 said:


> Section 0
> The animal remains the same. Can it cause serious harm/death to a member of the public? If yes, it's a DWAA schedule 1 animal. Armchair "scientists" can change names as much as their ego bag requires. It doesn't stop the animal being dangerous.


I.m going to have to add the wife to my license


----------



## LeeF (Jul 15, 2012)

ViperLover said:


> They are a former DWAA species. They used to be in the genus _Malpolon_ but a nomenclature change now means they're off Schedule 1.


As already mentioned, but with a bit more explanation.


The DWA is set out more robustly than would be thwarted by simple changes in nomenclature. You could change a cobra genus name all you wanted to, but unless that genus is removed from the _Elapidae_ the act would still apply. 

If a genus was removed from the _Elapidae_, then ipso facto it never belonged there in the first place. Where it's moved to would, of course, come into play.

Let's take a real life example of this, _Homoroselaps _(Harlequin Snakes). Previously they were classed as Elapids. 

But they're not. They're firmly part of the _Atractaspididae_. The _Atractaspidae_ are covered under the DWA, BUT only, members of the family _Attractaspis_. 

_Attractaspidae_ are not blanket covered like the _Elapidae_ or _Viperidae_. Ergo the DWA does not cover _Homoroselaps_. It used to, but only due to a mistake in taxonomy. There is no rational argument that _Homoroselaps _was an active consideration of the original DWA _Elapidae_ ban. It's small, innocuous, rarely kept outside of its native range and has never resulted in a bite remotely approaching life threatening.

That's not the be all and end all, tho. If the CPS decided to prosecute you under breach of the DWA for keeping Homoroselaps, it would still be left to the discretion of a judge as to whether Homoroselaps was ever an intended DWA species. Common sense and science would be on your side, but there's no guarantee it would go your way.


Now, some DWA snake are listed by species. Name changes would not affect those as they are still the same animal. Ditto species splits: if, for example, _Dispholidus typus_ was split into two species, then both would be remain DWA. Future act revisions would cover this specifically, but the point would be that at the time of writing _Dispholidus typus_ was effectively a name covering both species. There's no way a judge wouldn't view _Dispholidus madeupii_ as being an animal expressly covered by the act. 

However, if an entirely new, unsubscribed species of _Dispholydus_ was discovered you be golden to keep it until the law was updated.

The moila is a slightly greyer area. But I suspect that a judge would rule it was an intended DWA animal. Reason is as follows... 

When the first act was written (1976) there were two known _Malpolon _species, the Montpellier snake and the moila. The original act included both by common name and _Malpolon_ in general by genus.

The 2007 revision of the act did not mention the Moila by name. It did still blanket cover the genus _Malpolon_. This time it refers to them as "The Montpellier snakes". Now, In 2007 there were 3 _Malpolon_ genus members: _Malpolon monspessulanus_; _Malpolon insignitus_; and _Malpolon moilensis_. Logically the act now included all three species. Although the English use of "Montepellier snakes" could be deemed to apply only to _M. monspessulanus_ and _M.insignitus_, the blanket ban of _Malpolon_ would suggest the name was being used globally Technically, _M. moilensis _is no longer directly listed as it was transferred to it's own monophyletic genus. However, given it's prior and explicit inclusion by common name, and its taxanomic status at the time of the 2007 revision, there is no reason to suspect that the Moila was ever intended to be removed from the schedule or that it was on the schedule by accident like _Homoroselaps_.

On a slight side-note, there was more than just _Boiga dendrophilia_ removed from the act in 2007. 30 or so species of_ Psammophis_ were also removed. These include some quite big, pissy snakes that should be dealt with as carefully as you would _Malpolon_ :diablo:


----------

