# accidental import of DWA



## stevenrudge (Sep 3, 2009)

Ok l do not go on this section about DWA,but l've got a question for you boys and girls that would know a lot more about this than me.
This question l'm asking is hypothetical of course and in no way am l admitting that l know just an event has happened to somebody l know but l would like your views and opinions as to the likely consequence's of such and event.
A hobbyist of none DWA on one of their regular visits to the European shows to purchase snakes for their 'collection' and may or may not import snakes to resell on the forums and our reptile shows, on one visit on their return unboxing their newly purchased snakes discovers to their shock that one of the snakes that they have just imported is in fact a DWA.
Now this leaves them in quite a big pickle, because their collocation is none DWA.They have no facilities no equipment no paperwork and have just come through two sets of customs.
So my first question would be is this what would happen if HM customs did a random check and discovered this snake?
Would they take a persons word that they new nothing about this snake?if not what would the consequence's be?
Next is what could the person do with the said snake if they got past customs and back home? remember that they have no paperwork for this snake?and what would the consequence be if their local authority did an inspection of their collection and found the said snake ?
Basically what UK legislation would they fail fowl of and what would the likely consequences be.
people can pm me if needed
Your thoughts


----------



## steve7046 (Sep 9, 2009)

I would guess HM Customs could give you informed and definitive answers to your questions.


----------



## roblouth (Nov 15, 2009)

The snake would be seized and you would face a hefty fine from the UK wildlife crimes department. If you had a lot of snakes the penalty is a lot worse.


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

roblouth said:


> The snake would be seized and you would face a hefty fine from the UK wildlife crimes department. If you had a lot of snakes the penalty is a lot worse.


It is not unlawful to transport DWAA without a licence (the DWAA purely relates to keeping) If the individual was driving or being driven the authorities would not be able to seize the animals or fine the individual concerned, they have not committed any offence! What they would be entitled to do is inform the individuals Local Authority he has such animals in his possession when he cleared customs, that is all.


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

roblouth said:


> The snake would be seized and you would face a hefty fine from the UK wildlife crimes department. If you had a lot of snakes the penalty is a lot worse.


I would be interested in why you came to that conclusion?


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

roblouth said:


> The snake would be seized and you would face a hefty fine from the UK wildlife crimes department. If you had a lot of snakes the penalty is a lot worse.


What rubbish. 

First of all there is no such thing as a "UK wildlife crimes department" - police forces deal with wildlife crime in different ways, some have dedicated wildlife crime officers, others don't deal with it at all.
Secondly, the DWAA is not enforcable by the police - although it is a criminal law, it is only enforceable by the Local Authorities ie councils. There is also no option for a warrant to enter and search for DWA species.
Thirdly, there is not a "hefty" fine. As CN has pointed out it is NOT unlawful to bring them into the UK - the offence is purely keeping them without a licence. 

The best thing to do would be honest, contact your local authority, let them know what has happened and see if they do have anyone with a DWAL that could take the snake, or contact a zoo and hand it to them.

What does seem a bit odd, though, from the opening post and the given scenario is how this could happen. My understanding is that at these shows, venomous snakes are kept in a separate room so how on earth could this person have managed inadvertantly to pick up a DWAA species, get it inside a box with others, and not know about it?
Unless it is a rear fanged species such as a keelback or montpellier, but even then if this person does this on a regular basis I would have thought that they would be aware of the DWAA, and the species listed, and what they look like.

Then again, said person, to do what they are doing legally, would need a PSL, and in which case would in fact be exempt from the DWAA so there is no problem at all!


I would also have thought that SR, given his previous revelations of such a long background in reptiles would also know the answers to the questions that he has posed!!


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

ian14 said:


> What rubbish.
> 
> First of all there is no such thing as a "UK wildlife crimes department" - police forces deal with wildlife crime in different ways, some have dedicated wildlife crime officers, others don't deal with it at all.
> Secondly, the DWAA is not enforcable by the police - although it is a criminal law, it is only enforceable by the Local Authorities ie councils. There is also no option for a warrant to enter and search for DWA species.
> ...


My understanding of matter is a private keeper here in the UK purchased what he thought were captive bred _Xenochrophis piscator_ from a breeder in Europe at a show, on closer inspection when he got back he thought they might be a _Rhabdphis_ sp. _Xenochrophis _and _Rhabdphis_ are closely related and could easily be confused! Both _Rhabdophis subminiatus_ and _Rhabdophis tigrinus_ are scheduled on the DWAA (all other _Rhabdophis_ are not!) The snakes were donated to a zoological collection.

You are quite right that a European shows venoms snakes would be held in a separate room, but this would not apply to something like _Rhabdophis _as they regard them as harmless. At European shows it’s not uncommon to see many species that are scheduled on the DWAA here openly for sale outside of the ‘hot’ room, scorpions, black widows, beaded lizards etc.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris Newman said:


> My understanding of matter is a private keeper here in the UK purchased what he thought were captive bred _Xenochrophis piscator_ from a breeder in Europe at a show, on closer inspection when he got back he thought they might be a _Rhabdphis_ sp. _Xenochrophis _and _Rhabdphis_ are closely related and could easily be confused! Both _Rhabdophis subminiatus_ and _Rhabdophis tigrinus_ are scheduled on the DWAA (all other _Rhabdophis_ are not!) The snakes were donated to a zoological collection.
> 
> You are quite right that a European shows venoms snakes would be held in a separate room, but this would not apply to something like _Rhabdophis _as they regard them as harmless. At European shows it’s not uncommon to see many species that are scheduled on the DWAA here openly for sale outside of the ‘hot’ room, scorpions, black widows, beaded lizards etc.


That makes sense then. Although in fairness, X. piscator doesnt look like either of teh DWAA Rhabdophis species. At least the person involved did the right thing and handed them to a collection, this being the case that should be the end of teh matter.

I fail to see why SR has decided to raise this into something that it isnt.


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

ian14 said:


> That makes sense then. Although in fairness, X. piscator doesnt look like either of teh DWAA Rhabdophis species. At least the person involved did the right thing and handed them to a collection, this being the case that should be the end of teh matter.
> 
> I fail to see why SR has decided to raise this into something that it isnt.


I haven’t seen juveniles of either _Rhabdophis subminiatus_ or _R. tigrinus_ so I can’t really comment, but I would imagine they are not that dissimilar, but mix-up happen! As to why the individual decided to bring this up now: good question? I have no idea….!! 

The availability of DWAA species in Europe is a matter that Clifford Warwick and Elaine Tolland have highlighting for some time in their campaign to ban shows both here in the UK and Europe.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

X. piscator


















Rhabdophis tigrina


Rhabdophis subminiatus

Photos courtesy of Google.

They do look very different. I can imagine, though, that if they were simply labelled as keelbacks that this could have been how the mix up occurred. 
Given that both Rhabdophis species have caused fatalities this is one of the few DWAA colubrids that should be restricted.


----------



## Moshpitviper (Oct 21, 2005)

You can buy Gilas in the main hall in European shows. Yet Mangroves are sold in the venomous room. These mistakes are easily made.

Although, If you were planning to buy such species... Best you get yourself acquainted with what Herptiles are covered under the DWAL schedule.


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

ian14 said:


> X. piscator
> 
> image
> image
> ...


I think its important to bear in mind the DWAA is there to protect the public, not the keeper or immediate family. Back in the 1970’s and 80’s large numbers of _Rhabdophis subminiatus_ were imported for the pet trade, thankfully mass trade in such species stopped a long time ago. However, I am circumspect that _Rhabdophis_ warrants being on the schedule? I got bitten by them many times as did many others, I don’t recall anyone having an issues! There have been deaths attributed to _Rhabdophis_ in the Far East (not sure about Europe?) and I have know doubt some people will be sensitive to the venom, as some people are to bee and wasps venom! On balance I am not convinced they should be on the DWAA. Notwithstanding it’s not something that is a high priority to challenge, other priorities to get removed from the schedule such as _Malplon_.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris Newman said:


> I think its important to bear in mind the DWAA is there to protect the public, not the keeper or immediate family. Back in the 1970’s and 80’s large numbers of _Rhabdophis subminiatus_ were imported for the pet trade, thankfully mass trade in such species stopped a long time ago. However, I am circumspect that _Rhabdophis_ warrants being on the schedule? I got bitten by them many times as did many others, I don’t recall anyone having an issues! There have been deaths attributed to _Rhabdophis_ in the Far East (not sure about Europe?) and I have know doubt some people will be sensitive to the venom, as some people are to bee and wasps venom! *On balance I am not convinced they should be on the DWAA. *Notwithstanding it’s not something that is a high priority to challenge, other priorities to get removed from the schedule such as _Malplon_.


I am not so sure that they should be removed, the following are a number of links showing the toxicity of these species. As you say, the DWAA was brought in to protect the public, not the keeper, but I fail to see how that argument can be used to suggest that they do not belong on the DWAA, as this could then be argued for any species of dangerously venomous snake!

http://www.thailandsnakes.com/tag/rhabdophis-subminiatus/
http://www.venomdoc.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=4572&sid=1f9856fbb1fc5e4f852c95baf2d63b7d
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhabdophis_subminiatus
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3800472
Tigrinus:
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/3892025?uid=3738032&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21101922827881
And from in that report specifically:
The yamakagashi, Rhabdophis tigrinus, a common natricine snake of Japan and adjacent East Asia, is generally considered inocuous to man despite its enlarged posterior maxillary teeth and well developed Duvernoy's glands. Three cases of serious envenomation by this species are reported, all marked by delayed, spontaneous, superficial hemorrhaging and profound impairment of normal blood coagulation. In two cases these phenomena were accompanied by signs of severe internal hemorrhaging and hemolysis. Other symptoms may have resulted from transitory involvement of the central and autonomic nervous systems. Therapeutic measures applied in these cases are described, including the apparently effective use of a systemic antihemorrhagic drug.* It is concluded that R. tigrinus is a dangerously venomous snake and potentially lethal to man. *
http://www.toxinology.com/fusebox.cfm?fuseaction=main.snakes.display&id=SN0002
Within this is the following:
*Clinical Effects *
*General: Dangerousness*
*Severe envenoming possible, potentially lethal *


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

The operative word is “potential” - a tortoise has the “potential” to be dangerous? If you keep it on the balcony of a tower block and it wanders off the end and falls on someone’s head! A little obsequious argument I know, but the DWAA requires the animal to be overtly dangerous! I would suggest this would preclude the inclusion of _Rhabdophis_ from the schedule if looked at objectively, they do not have the armament to be overtly dangerous (life threatening) to a member of the public. That said I do believe that _Thelotornis_ and _Dispholidus_ are justified, on the grounds of dentition and toxicity, _Rhabdophis_ fail on both counts, in my view. It is a pity for those who have a genuine interest in them that they cannot easily keep them in the UK today (whereas they can across the rest of Europe). They have not been imported on mass and sold as pets for more than thirty years, the potential threat they could posse to the public is negligible, should they really be on the DWAA today?


----------



## PDR (Nov 27, 2008)

Chris Newman;
You are quite right that a European shows venoms snakes would be held in a separate room said:


> Rhabdophis [/I]as they regard them as harmless. At European shows it’s not uncommon to see many species that are scheduled on the DWAA here openly for sale outside of the ‘hot’ room, scorpions, black widows, beaded lizards etc.


This is true, while the Gila Monsters I pre-ordered from the Hamm show where being held in the Venom Room (due to the fact that the dealer was mainly selling venomous snakes), I did see a nice display of Beaded Lizards for sale in the main hall. Apparently there where some Gilas too but I didn't see them. I also picked up a few species of Widow spiders within the main hall (for someone in the UK who has a DWAL to hold them).

It is up to the show organisers as to what they allow in the main hall as opposed to the venom room. The bottom line... it is up to the buyer to ensure that they adhere to UK law.


----------



## SWMorelia (May 15, 2007)

Before this thread gets too bogged down by it's topic, remember that the DWAL is a UK thing and not a European thing.. The end...

The important issue is, why has Steven raised this?
And why is he so concerned with data protection?


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

SW-morelia said:


> The important issue is, why has Steven raised this?
> And why is he so concerned with data protection?


Because he has his own agenda?


----------



## Donnie76 (Aug 24, 2012)

stevenrudge said:


> Ok l do not go on this section about DWA,but l've got a question for you boys and girls that would know a lot more about this than me.
> This question l'm asking is hypothetical of course and in no way am l admitting that l know just an event has happened to somebody l know but l would like your views and opinions as to the likely consequence's of such and event.
> A hobbyist of none DWA on one of their regular visits to the European shows to purchase snakes for their 'collection' and may or may not import snakes to resell on the forums and our reptile shows, on one visit on their return unboxing their newly purchased snakes discovers to their shock that one of the snakes that they have just imported is in fact a DWA.
> Now this leaves them in quite a big pickle, because their collocation is none DWA.They have no facilities no equipment no paperwork and have just come through two sets of customs.
> ...


In other words what exact crime can I report this "hypothetical" person for and how much damage would I do to their life?


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Chris Newman said:


> The operative word is “potential” - a tortoise has the “potential” to be dangerous? If you keep it on the balcony of a tower block and it wanders off the end and falls on someone’s head! A little obsequious argument I know, but the DWAA requires the animal to be overtly dangerous! I would suggest this would preclude the inclusion of _Rhabdophis_ from the schedule if looked at objectively, they do not have the armament to be overtly dangerous (life threatening) to a member of the public. That said I do believe that _Thelotornis_ and _Dispholidus_ are justified, on the grounds of dentition and toxicity, _Rhabdophis_ fail on both counts, in my view. It is a pity for those who have a genuine interest in them that they cannot easily keep them in the UK today (whereas they can across the rest of Europe). They have not been imported on mass and sold as pets for more than thirty years, the potential threat they could posse to the public is negligible, should they really be on the DWAA today?


So you advocate a species proven to be so toxic in its venom that it can cause human fatalities should be freely available with no controls in place? How would you feel if this species was removed (and i would suggest this will never happen) and a keen young child died after a bite?
I remember a remark made by someone about red necks after seeing one die within minutes of being bitten by another. It is generally held that snakes are immune to venom from their own species, this death tended to show just how potent their venom is.


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

Donnie76 said:


> In other words what exact crime can I report this "hypothetical" person for and how much damage would I do to their life?


If you read the thread you would see this was not a hypothetical person. Appears they somehow confused a highly venomous colubrid which has previously kilied with a harmless species that looks very different but shares a common name.


----------



## Donnie76 (Aug 24, 2012)

ian14 said:


> If you read the thread you would see this was not a hypothetical person. Appears they somehow confused a highly venomous colubrid which has previously kilied with a harmless species that looks very different but shares a common name.


I did see that, my response was using the word hypothetical in a sarcastic way (tried to use "" to emphasize this ) as Stephen knew all about this and his question was loaded as they always are


----------



## ian14 (Jan 2, 2008)

As an aside it appears this happened in 2012 not a recent import.


----------



## Tarron (May 30, 2010)

There are 2 possible reasons for Steven to have started this thread,

1. He is genuinely concerned for the safety of the person involved or the public in general, and wishes to advise this individual of how to proceed from here.
This would require him believing the keeper still has the snakes.

2. He is attempting to be very sneaky and was hoping to drive the DWA section in to an uproar at an 'irresponsible keeper' who would do such a thing. He knows full well the keeper no longer has the snake, but as he has an ulterior agenda, and an axe to grind, he is ignoring the truth.

Now I'm no cynic, however,

The incident occured in 2012
The keeper concerned made an honest mistake
The snake was handed over to a suitable establishment as soon as possible
The most Steven knows about this is because he happened to be collecting another set of snakes off the keeper, snakes which soon went up for sale on here, and snakes which have been a thorn in his 'high and mighty' side for a while now.

I don't think it would take a genius to work out who this 'hypothetical' person is, however the keeper has chosen to keep out of the 'conversation' for now.

Steven is merely trying to retaliate to a claim that he does not practice what he preaches, and could possibly come in to contravention of a few laws himself.

However, Steven will most likely not read this. Not just because he has me on ignore, but also because he seems to posting up threads with wild allegations that he can not prove, and seems to be leaving it at that, ignoring it from thereon in.
Possibly because there is no uproar from the community, as nobody really cares what he says anymore?


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

ian14 said:


> So you advocate a species proven to be so toxic in its venom that it can cause human fatalities should be freely available with no controls in place? How would you feel if this species was removed (and i would suggest this will never happen) and a keen young child died after a bite?
> I remember a remark made by someone about red necks after seeing one die within minutes of being bitten by another. It is generally held that snakes are immune to venom from their own species, this death tended to show just how potent their venom is.


You could apply the same logic to bee keeping? It is legal to keep bees in your back garden or even a public place without any controls……!! Such emotive arguments are unhelpful!

Thirty years ago _Rhabdophis_ were very common in trade and sold as pets, thankfully today that trade no longer exists! Today it is only serious hobbyist that would wish to keep them. Do they warrant remaining on the DWAA my view is no, you disagree which is perfectly fine. The reality is I don’t see them coming of the schedule any time soon!


----------



## stevenrudge (Sep 3, 2009)

*reply*

Thanks for all the pm's,So now understand this its only the UK that the DWA covers and its the place the animals are kept that needs the license,ok so is it like other local authority granted licenses that have a time limits and yearly inspections?
If so who would the council send in to inspect?l have thought that their usual people that do their inspections for things like the PSL would not have the knowledge or the experience to check the paper work?
I now understand that if anybody importing animals on a regular bases was checked at border control on their re entry into the UK was found to be carrying DWA without the appropriate paperwork would be likely to expect a visit from their local authority to inspect their collection.
What would the likely outcome be if
A.the authority's found DWA in a non licensed premise's
B.Found DWA at a licensed premises but did not have the paperwork.
l say this because l know for a fact that hobbyists that specialize in DWA have the knowledge and integrity to say within the Law so just such a event would not happen to them,but just such an event might happen to people that import casually without due care and attention to what their buying and from who,seeing that what could be purchased at European shows legally only to return to the UK to find that they have now fallen fowl of the UK DWA legislation.


----------



## Berber King (Dec 29, 2007)

Steven,any chance you could "accidentally" buy a taipan or mamba,and free-handle it.......


----------



## slippery42 (Mar 23, 2008)

Berber King said:


> Steven,any chance you could "accidentally" buy a taipan or mamba,and free-handle it.......


I wish he would!

Round and round we go! 

What is the point in your post Mr Rudge?


----------



## Tarron (May 30, 2010)

stevenrudge said:


> Thanks for all the pm's,So now understand this its only the UK that the DWA covers and its the place the animals are kept that needs the license,ok so is it like other local authority granted licenses that have a time limits and yearly inspections?
> If so who would the council send in to inspect?l have thought that their usual people that do their inspections for things like the PSL would not have the knowledge or the experience to check the paper work?
> I now understand that if anybody importing animals on a regular bases was checked at border control on their re entry into the UK was found to be carrying DWA without the appropriate paperwork would be likely to expect a visit from their local authority to inspect their collection.
> What would the likely outcome be if
> ...


Steven, he doesn't have the snake anymore, if you send the inspectors round, they will say he has a nice collection of legally held reptiles. THAT IS ALL!

All this because he exposed your hypocrisy.


----------

