NSW DECCW Code of Practice...

[-Peter]

and in five years we in NSW will all have to comply with exhibitors requirements.

 

[Braidotti]

What would the requirements be for a BHP under the new proposed code of practice, since they get to 3m and our ground dwellers ?

 

[ShaunMorelia]

How can it be pointless crap if these regulations will improve things for the snakes????

Any regulations that will improve housing conditions for reptiles should be welcomed???

I just finished reading all the proposed changes
Nothing in there will be detrimental FOR THE SNAKES
Yes
Some people will complain that they cannot house all their reptiles any more
In that case sell them off and limit their collections to what they can handle
..


..

Did you not read my posts?

What would the requirements be for a BHP under the new proposed code of practice, since they get to 3m and our ground dwellers ?

According to the code they come under the same class as morelia.
1.52sqm floor area.

 

[hugsta]

How can it be pointless crap if these regulations will improve things for the snakes????

Any regulations that will improve housing conditions for reptiles should be welcomed???

I just finished reading all the proposed changes
Nothing in there will be detrimental FOR THE SNAKES
Yes
Some people will complain that they cannot house all their reptiles any more
In that case sell them off and limit their collections to what they can handle
..


..

I agree, if it is for the benefits of our animals, then fair enough. But there is a minimum to what our animals need and these cage are certainly rediculously large and not needed. In fact, it would cause more problems for most people as most underfeed their snakes and would have an animal no where near adult size in 12 months and putting that small animal into a rediculously large enclosure is most likely going to cause it to stress, stop feeding, hide in the coldest part etc etc and be more detrimental to that animal than it being in an appropriately sized enclosure. Nothing wrong with tubs, they give the animal a great sense of security and wellbeing IMO.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

This thread is not a debate about the welfare of reptiles, it is about the Code of Practice proposed for introduction in NSW. Your opinions on animal welfare probably don't differ much from those of most other members on this site longqi. If you are unable to distinguish between these two very separate concepts, please butt out.

This is a matter that is extremely important to keepers in NSW, and it will have very wide ranging effects, not just for pet keepers and exhibitors, but those who hold large collections for venom production etc.

Jamie

 

[Kurto]

I can agree about the interstate fees and the time it takes to get a permit

But what exactly is the problem with enclosure sizes????
The sizes seem reasonable to me
People who use tubs etc might want to complain but most PET owners would not
Maybe this will slow down the people who just want lots of slitherers but have neither the time or inclination to treat them as pets??
.
.
Uh Oh
{I better hide for a while after that statement I suppose}
..

I treat all my snakes as pets, because thats exactly what they are - CAPTIVE PETS! The sooner the DECC realise this the better.. How many generations does it take to deem as such - 10, 20, 30, 40?

And last time I checked 4 x 2 x 2 was overly adequate for most carpet species..

Another thing of worry is that they will class any reptile that is 12mths or over as an adult and will have to be housed like an adult. (keeping in mind the above measurements)
I have a couple of yearlings that are lucky to push 60-70cm, so housing them in adult sized enclosres wouldn't be beneficial for their future IMO.

I know mate, who wrote this crap? I've got an 11yr old nephew with a better understanding of cage requirements.


Having said all that... Is this building towards something? Other than a remodel of my herp room? Is the DECC going to bring in the retail sale of herps in NSW??

 

[hugsta]

I think they will Kurto, as to how long it will take is another matter.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

I'd like to thank the mods for managing this thread and keeping it on-topic.

The thread was started to throw some light on the conduct of DECCW in the development of the Code of Practice for reptile keepers in NSW. DECCW appointed an 'expert advisory group' drawn from herp clubs around NSW, and including academics and some of the most experienced and well-known keepers in the state. This group was comprised of individuals who collectively have in excess of 250 years keeping experience.

We were unanimous in our rejection of MANDATORY standards (enforceable by law), but fully supportive of RECOMMENDED guidelines for those who keep reptiles in NSW. Documents gained following our FOI search indicate very clearly that the Department of Industry and Investment is placing big pressure on DECCW to make the Code enforceable in law.

We have two government departments working in concert to bring about change which is not based on need, but on the ideologies of a few government officials who don't even keep reptiles. We are all interested in the welfare of our animals (those that aren't won't be caught up in this of course, it'll only be licensed keepers who are open to scrutiny), but where is the evidence that cruelty to reptiles exists on a scale that needs an approach that will affect every one of the 17,000-odd keepers in NSW? A document built by non reptile keepers who simply have a personal viewpoint, and the power to inflict change even where there is no demonstrated need for it.

We sought to meet with DECCW several times last year to discuss these concerns, but it is evident they are avoiding scrutiny of both the document itself, and the means by which they intend implementing it.

We were told, at the meeting on Friday Feb 11, that DECCW had given no undertaking to meet with us to discuss the Code once it was 'finalised'. This is untrue - we were insistent throughout the process that our group remain involved thoroughout development of the document. Even as late as last Friday, we were told that DECCW has to discuss with 'other stakeholders' (read DII), our request to meet and consider glaring problems with the current Code. We anticipate no change - DII wants to go in hard on reptile keepers, and DECCW will comply.

 

[saximus]

I've finally taken the time to start reading the PDFs on an earlier page. Even for someone relatively inexperienced like me it's obvious this was written by someone with no clue about keeping and caring for reptiles.
Jamie thank you for posting this thread, for keeping it on track when individuals with no stake try to interfere and thank you and the rest of the advisory group for fighting for the rest of us.

 

[Waterrat]

The elections are looming and now is the time to write / email / fax / phone your local MP and the Minister. Tell them there is 17000 (or whatever the figure is) people who will swing their votes (which will happen anyway) unless the proposed Code of Practice is scraped and the proponents sacked. If this minister doesn't do it, the next one will hear the message loud and clear.
No mercy!

 

[AUSHERP]

ATTAAAACK!!!!
I like your work Water.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

ATTAAAACK!!!!
I like your work Water.

Ha! Just remember it's my head in clear focus on the chopping block lol!

 

[Laghairt]

Michael is right, to make things happen you have to get political.

Does anyone have a draft letter they can upload to this thread? Then APS users could add to it, print it off and send it top their local member. I know not all members of APS would be confident in doing this but if they have a draft letter then it would make it that much easier.

The elections are looming and now is the time to write / email / fax / phone your local MP and the Minister. Tell them there is 17000 (or whatever the figure is) people who will swing their votes (which will happen anyway) unless the proposed Code of Practice is scraped and the proponents sacked. If this minister doesn't do it, the next one will hear the message loud and clear.
No mercy!

 

[ShaunMorelia]

Does anyone have a draft letter they can upload to this thread? Then APS users could add to it, print it off and send it top their local member. I know not all members of APS would be confident in doing this but if they have a draft letter then it would make it that much easier.

I agree with you. I would write something up, but I am told often enough that most of my letters don't make any sense...
But it is a great idea.

If someone has the time and grammar skills.....

 

[hornet]

Great idea anouc, lets hope someone can come up with something. This change in the code may not affect us interstate keepers straight away but there is a huge chance it will, we need to all get together and do something about it before its too late

 

[Pythoninfinite]

Here you go - part of an email from a Government official to someone with a vested interest in the Code of Practice, being told...

As for a copy of the DECCW Reptile Code the version of which was spoken
of at the meeting, I cannot provide you with a copy at this time. The
copies that are in the public domain at this time were made available
through FOI application. Those people or groups that obtained these
copies are free to distribute them however they wish so perhaps Glen can
provide you with one.

This is what we have been trying to deal with. DECCW has basically told us that their 'releasing' the Code to us under FOI constitutes 'release' in the broadly accepted sense. It does not. Thery have told us that we can distribute it however we wish - but it's not our job to do that.

At the very least they are misleading the keeping community by leaving an outdated and very different Code on their website.

 

[martinjones]

we must keep our species safe and free, and suppor many organizations that provide ethical care to each individual. that's my opinion [ NO LINKS THANKS ]

 

[Waterrat]

At the very least they are misleading the keeping community by leaving an outdated and very different Code on their website.

This should also be communicated to the Minister and copied to the DECCW Director. His Department is engaging in unethical if not fraudulent practices. Intentional deception is fraud.

 

[Octane]

I understand that the Department of Industry and Investment does have juristiction over housing of reptiles that are used for commercial purpose and thus there is an overlap with DECCW.

However it is a condition of the NSW reptile keepers licence that reptiles are not the be publicly exhibited (other than at organised events, functions or meetings) and the animals are not able to be commercially sold. This would mean private keepers do not and will not fall under the juristiction of the Department of Industry and Investment.

Why is it that this department would be condsidered as such an important stakeholder in private keeping.

It could be the whole advisory commitee thing was a fishing expedition and when the recommendations didn't fall in line with the agenda of these departments the recommendations were disregarded.

It would be interesting to see all reptile related correspondence between DECCW and DII in the last couple of years.

What is next minimum backyard sizes for dogs or minimum tank sizes for aquariums this stinks of government beaurocrats creating projects to justify their existance.

How about implementing online record keeping instead of the antiquated record book we are forced to return for manual processing every year. The online systems could also include licence renewals changes of particulars and import/export permit applications.

I know DECCW staff read these threads so be the public servants for which are paid and concentrate on providing better services before legislating.

Thank you for reading.
Octane

PS There are already multiple Acts of Parliament and regulations in place for the prevention of cruelty/mistreatment of animals. If DECCW staff are aware of animals living in conditions deemed to be cruel or constituting mistreatment why don't they use legislation already in place.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

It could be the whole advisory commitee thing was a fishing expedition and when the recommendations didn't fall in line with the agenda of these departments the recommendations were disregarded.

There are already multiple Acts of Parliament and regulations in place for the prevention of cruelty/mistreatment of animals. If DECCW staff are aware of animals living in conditions deemed to be cruel or constituting mistreatment why don't they use legislation already in place.

Spot on with both of these comments Octane. It has become very evident that individuals in both departments had an outcome in mind when they set out to build the Code, and that any recommendations made, that didn't fit with that outcome, would be discarded in the smoke of all the other submissions. We were described as 'stakeholders' at the meeting on Friday 11th. In fact we were 'consultants', with no vested interest other than good outcomes for the major 'stakeholders' - the animals and their keepers.

In the matter of DII involvement, it has been very much 'behind the scenes' - but our FOI application to DII indicates that they did not think DECCW was going hard enough on the enforcement thing, and DII was very clear that one of the most important outcomes for them MUST be enforceability. I'm not very computer savvy, but some of us who are better equipped to do these things have hard copies of the submission from DII to DECCW. I'll see if I can arrange to get it published online. One of the reasons DECCW won't release the current Code electronically is that it makes distribution much easier, and they want to keep it pretty much under wraps until it's signed, sealed and delivered.

Of course there are already avenues to address issues of animal cruelty, but why use a tackhammer when you've got a sledgehammer at your disposal?