NSW code of practice about to be released
- Thread starter girdheinz
- Start date
Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:
- Status
S
Snowman
Guest
Sorry I'm part of that. Delete my posts...
I feel that everyone should let people do what they like. Casting comments that APS users are buying racks and cant wait to fill them is no ones business but the owner of the rack. Stick to the facts at hand and leave personal opinions of what others do off the screen I say.....
Ramsayi
Very Well-Known Member
Some breeders do just that,me included.I just don't like the interference from the department and having them tell me what's best.Seems all they are interested in is changing the goal posts for everyone that does the right thing while seemingly ignoring the things that really matter like poaching,exotics and smuggling etc.
Umbral
Very Well-Known Member
Does anyone know who to email if we would like to say something about this? Instead of sitting her complaining I want to write a polite email. While I thing minimum enclosure sizes are a good idea I think it should be based on the size of the reptile. I think their 20% x 50% would be a much better idea.
Dont get me wrong I doubt the email will be read let alone acted on but I want to try and do something.
Dont get me wrong I doubt the email will be read let alone acted on but I want to try and do something.
Ramsayi
Very Well-Known Member
It's done and dusted and was always going to be the case when petshops came into the picture.
Umbral
Very Well-Known Member
Just measured my enclosures, most have a lot bigger than required but my womas are in a .38m2 enclosure, even though they are Tanami womas this doesn't meet regulations even though it's not much smaller than required for the larger localities 
Try [email protected]. Or, if you want to get political, contact your local member for NSW (not Federal).
Umbral
Very Well-Known Member
Thanks Zip I'll try shooting them an email when I have a little more time.
Umbral
Very Well-Known Member
Heres what I sent:
To whom it may concern,
After reading the new codes of practice I would like to make some points for your consideration.
Firstly I think the codes of practice in general are a good idea but some points make little to no sense.
Regarding enclosure sizes, a Antarisia stimsoni and an Antaresia perthensis are both listed as a catagory A python and as such require a floor are of .15m2 however a perthensis only grows to half the size of a stimsoni. I can understand why a stimsoni would require that amount of space but not the perthensis.
That is only the start, from there Aspidites ramsayi are a category C and require .4m2, that is fine for the larger localities but what about the Tanami womas that grow to a much smaller size than womas from other localities and yet require the same floor area. On the locality issue many examples could be given on the varying sizes between localities.
Another point is that an adult coastal carpet may well exceed the size of a two year old olive python but they require a smaller enclosure, add fussy feeders into the equation and this difference becomes ever greater.
I could give many more examples of why the current enclosure size system is faulty but I think I have made my point. Would it not be more practical to make the minimum enclosure size based on the size of the snake or lizard in question? For example if you have a minimum enclosure size of 20% x 50% of the length of the snake, by this we would have an enclosure size that fits all snakes regardless of its locality and growth rate.
Just thought I would send this to you for your thoughts.
Kind regards,
Timm
Pretty sure it will do no good but atleast I have tried to have my say.
To whom it may concern,
After reading the new codes of practice I would like to make some points for your consideration.
Firstly I think the codes of practice in general are a good idea but some points make little to no sense.
Regarding enclosure sizes, a Antarisia stimsoni and an Antaresia perthensis are both listed as a catagory A python and as such require a floor are of .15m2 however a perthensis only grows to half the size of a stimsoni. I can understand why a stimsoni would require that amount of space but not the perthensis.
That is only the start, from there Aspidites ramsayi are a category C and require .4m2, that is fine for the larger localities but what about the Tanami womas that grow to a much smaller size than womas from other localities and yet require the same floor area. On the locality issue many examples could be given on the varying sizes between localities.
Another point is that an adult coastal carpet may well exceed the size of a two year old olive python but they require a smaller enclosure, add fussy feeders into the equation and this difference becomes ever greater.
I could give many more examples of why the current enclosure size system is faulty but I think I have made my point. Would it not be more practical to make the minimum enclosure size based on the size of the snake or lizard in question? For example if you have a minimum enclosure size of 20% x 50% of the length of the snake, by this we would have an enclosure size that fits all snakes regardless of its locality and growth rate.
Just thought I would send this to you for your thoughts.
Kind regards,
Timm
Pretty sure it will do no good but atleast I have tried to have my say.
Last edited:
S
solar 17
Guest
l am in QLD but my Bredli are in enclosures 75 cm square by 200cm tall, would they pass ??? solar 17
jacorin
Well-Known Member
no idea baden....... its giving me a headache trying to understand.......... for me i need to "see" what they want,not just read it and hope for the best
treeofgreen
Well-Known Member
Feel sorry for you guys down in NSW...
More gov control is only ever a good thing right????
More gov control is only ever a good thing right????
jacorin
Well-Known Member
what about the Mt Isa carpets that worley is selling??? they grow just over a metre,do they need(because they are carpets) a space of a coastal???
Umbral
Very Well-Known Member
It would well and truly pass on my Maths.
P
Pythoninfinite
Guest
Just to be clear about this, the committee made up of representatives to support KEEPERS in NSW and negotiate on their behalf had NO PROBLEM with RECOMMENDED minimum sizes. We were unanimously of the belief that the Department should deliver more in the way of education and advice, rather than hammer the issue with a big legal stick, i.e., make it punishable by law if you choose (often because you know more about the circumstances of your animals) to do something other than what the bureaucrats recommend.
And Chris1, I hope to hell your muffins are mouldy and toxic by the time they get around to seeing you. You really can be a lightweight sometimes, you have no idea the amount of time and discussion these people (far more knowledgeable than you will ever be) put into pushing the case for keepers in NSW. For me, it also involved the expenditure of 10 hours travel and related fuel and vehicle costs every time we met, both with the department and between ourselves. You are doing what you do here simply to aggravate other members. Very much a case of "I'm all right Jack, bugger the rest of you" I think. You present a very good reason why the development of a national body to represent the interests of keepers will never work - there are always heaps of self-interested people like yourself who can't ever see another point of view.
Jamie
And Chris1, I hope to hell your muffins are mouldy and toxic by the time they get around to seeing you. You really can be a lightweight sometimes, you have no idea the amount of time and discussion these people (far more knowledgeable than you will ever be) put into pushing the case for keepers in NSW. For me, it also involved the expenditure of 10 hours travel and related fuel and vehicle costs every time we met, both with the department and between ourselves. You are doing what you do here simply to aggravate other members. Very much a case of "I'm all right Jack, bugger the rest of you" I think. You present a very good reason why the development of a national body to represent the interests of keepers will never work - there are always heaps of self-interested people like yourself who can't ever see another point of view.
Jamie
Umbral
Very Well-Known Member
I don't mind them for the most part but enclosure size should be based on THE SIZE OF THE REPTILE not just a generic value.
It's so frustrating. But we should calm down. I have had similar problems working with government departments (not herp related I should stress), mounting a case, spending hours doing research and playing the bureaucratic games, only to have the suit-wearers ignore the recommendations and do their own thing. But you know what... the suit-wearers get nervous when people play the game by THEIR rules. I'll say it again - to the fans and the critics of these guidelines: the best way to go is print out the docs, read them and understand your rights. Do your homework. The best people to tackle the nonsense in these guidelines are responsible herp keepers. If they find no major compliance issues, this thing will go away. There will be no budget and no auditing. If they find terrible keepers (and they should be out of the business anyway) then we can expect more attention. If we stick together, do the right thing, I reckon it'll all go away like it has elsewhere. And Pythoninfinite, as a keeper, I'd like to say thanks for the work you did in putting the case forward for a cooperative approach. Really appreciate your efforts.
even the generic values aren't that far off what most people keep and recommend... I cant see the problem
- Status
