I've just copied this from the other thread re: the need for a name. A name is needed early on for very fundamental reasons...
Although it does seem to be putting the cart before the horse a bit, the organisation really does need to have a name very early on, so it can be built as a proper legal entity from day one, particularly because it will be taking members money, probably from day one. I'm assuming it will need to be an incorporated body, this facilitates the setting up of bank accounts and all those structural things, and means that the body must be accountable for every cent whenever audited.
If I recall, to have a body like this incorporated, you need to have all the office-bearers named and in place, similarly to establish bank accounts for an incorporated body. So there's a bit of work to do to get the show up and running.
The names I'd find easy are ARKA - Australian Reptile Keepers Association, or one I find even more appealing - OzARK - Oz Association of Reptile Keepers. This dovetails nicely with USARK, and although I haven't followed their developing philosophy, if it was agreeable perhaps the Australian body could seek some sort of affiliation with our US counterparts. Just a thought bubble really. I've had a couple of quite long yarns with Brian Barczyk about our plight and the parallels with what the Yanks are dealing with now. It won't be too long before the influences that have successfully infected herp politics in the US will cast their eyes in our direction - the world is shrinking every day, and animal RIGHTS lobbyists can very easily dress up their debates as animal WELFARE to make them palatable even to reptile keepers. They are patient, skilled at politics and they are extremely well funded.
Jamie