A few months back I banged on about how unfair it was that the Czechoslovakian Wolfdog and Saarloos Wolfhound should still remain banned in this country due to the ancestory with a wolf (even though it was bred out of the breeds nearly 70 years ago). However, that is not the reason for this post.

A couple of weeks ago I was speaking to a lecturer specialising in exotics and she was saying that they're considering changing the DWA (Dangerous Wild Animals) Act as it's so outdated. Bearing in mind the last amendment was when it was legalised back in 1976.

This should, technically, allow us with more choice in the animals we buy. The two major dog breeds, Czechoslovakian Wolfdog and Saarloos Wolfhound will become legally available within the UK and so will many other animals, such as certain lizards.

The main reason for this post is to see if anybody else has heard of this happening and whether people agree or disagree with the changes being made. By the way, please bear in mind that this is not only about the two breeds of dogs mentioned, it also includes many other animals aswell.

I have alot more information if anyone is interested.

I've not read anything about this, but God forbid they loosen it to allow people to own lions and other big cats freely, as was the case before the Act.

OMG  perish the thought.  Was it in New York that they had to rescue a lion from a high rise flat a year or two ago?

No it's not going that far. It may legalise animals which did have wild animal blood in them such as the "wolfdogs" mentioned earlier. It's also legalising snakes which were orginally bred with venom and lizards originally bred to have a taste for blood. Obviously, the "nastyness" is bred out of them now!

No animals still considered to be the same as they were the first day they walked on the earth such as lions/big cats/wolves etc will be legalized.

I would imagine in the present climate of media fear regarding zoonotic deseases etc it would be extremely unlikely that any law changes would be welcomed that could be perceived as increasing ownership or, more significantly, importation of exotic species. 
Even disregarding the media hype, personally I feel no need for a change in the law.  There are plenty of possibilities of different breeds to own as it is, in fact to the detriment of the ancient British breeds in several cases.

please read the post I made carefully...ONLY THE ANIMALS WHO ARE CONSIDERED SAFE...

exporting animals is not the case, as these would still be considered as wild.

Please read my post carefully :)  I have not said anything to suggest I do not think you are talking about safe animals, read it again and you may see what I am saying.

Sorry, I apologise, you said "media" climate, not climate in general. Zoonotic diseases however, would not be the case as safe animals would be accepted free of disease...otherwise they're dangerous :D

Personally, I hope changes do take place, we're suppose to be part of the EU but their laws don't apply here and half of our laws don't apply there. Let's not get into politics!

>safe animals would be accepted free of disease...otherwise they're dangerous

Indeed, but the media are not content that the quarantine system worked as regards the parrot imported with bird flu they just report it as a terrible disaster that it was imported in the first place.  While all this stuff goes on I think it very unlikely that the public would be persuaded that now is the time to loosen laws regarding animals.  I would imagine very few of the general public will feel we need to go beyond the ownership of all the animals we already have available to us so I could never see any great support for such a change.

I see what you mean and agree entirely that the public would not agree with the law changing because of our media blowing things out of proportion. But, we can't complain, that is what the media is for and that's how it will always be whether we like it or not.

But, amendments in such acts do not always have to regard the public. If countries are having trouble finding certain species homes then they can expand to other countries. The countries which they expand to may have a law saying that the species is not accepted (such as our DWA Act) but the restrictions can be lifted, such as the animals being kept privately. Eventually people will start to buy the animals and not realise that they were on the Dangerous Wild Animals Act.

Such as llamas and alpacas that are now excepted under "livestock".

>that is what the media is for

Beg to differ on that one! :)  Reporting the facts or even impartially reporting the pervailing opinions of those involved in a matter, but hyping up to sell copy, definately not.
I realise you have an interest in these animals but I do feel it is wishfull thinking that Governments will see a need to expand their home posibilities we are not talking about a rare, ancient breed after all just an animal of very small niche interest.
Personally I think it would be great if it could be somehow devised that all foreign breeds could be banned :p to facilitate a greater interest in our native breeds, some of which are in drastic decline, but I accept that that is my minority interest and the vast majority will not agree with me :)

Lol, I wasn't disagreeing with you on the media. I think if anything, before any animals become legalized, or any bans take place, or any parrot coming into our country with flu the media should have all the reporters shot who deal with the animal side of things!

How many people disagree with me on that? :D

>But, amendments in such acts do not always have to regard the public.

Public opinion is hugely important in enacting new laws or amending existing ones. The DDA was amended due to pressure, the Hunting Bill was passed due to public pressure ... with the supposed threat of bird flu I can't imagine anyone will risk relaxing any restrictions on animals for the foreseeable future. Too many votes to lose!

Just a personal opinion. Dogs have been domesticated and although most are kept as pets, if they are kept properly they have a good quality of life.  What sort of quality of life does a lizard or snake get in a tank. I know this is just me, but I really don't understand this at all.  By allowing more exotic animals into the country for people to own just encourages large numbers to be bred for this purpose alone.  It doesn't help the animal and it doesn't help the species.  The same goes for dangerous dogs, that were.  Why encourage indiscriminate breeding of a breed that we don't need in this country just to satisfy the 'I've got something dangerous' brigade.  As Isobel said there are plenty of endangered British breeds that people should be encouraged to breed and own to keep the lines going.

The lizards and snakes as mentioned who may become legalized are being kept in a glass tank elsewhere anyway as a safety precaution.

The red leg turantula was being imported illegally into this country and now they are distinct. So, I see what you're saying but wouldn't it be better if certain species were to be accepted and at least being given a chance of a better quality of life, even if it is within a glass tank?

The only way captive exotics are going to have a better quality of life is if you replicate their natural habitat.  By introducing an animal, whatever it is to people who have not had access to it before is going to encourage breeding more of the same or catching more of the same.  It's supply and demand.  The more people who want them the more will be supplied, the more that are supplied, the cheaper they will become and more people will be able to access them.  As far as dogs are concerned if there is a quick buck to be made from an unusual breed there will be puppy farmers all too willing to breed from them.

>Zoonotic diseases however, would not be the case as safe animals would be accepted free of disease...otherwise they're dangerous

They can still catch them, though, and pass them back!

And so can dogs, so can cats, so can horses, so can sheep, it's a never ending cycle!

Exactly - so they're unlikely to be adding to the list in the current climate of supposed pandemics.

But why do we have random animal species suddenly becoming available to us so often? If animals are so dangerous, then surely the authorities would stop any animal selling full stop. Although, this does not seem to be happening - so, surely, the act could still have an amendment and it would not make any difference.

Say, within the next ten years, two mammal breeds and two reptile species are accepted. This would not drastically change the world we live in but zoonotic diseases talk suddenly crops up everywhere because of these "alien" species.

For example, the two reptile species may cause salmonella. But, within the past two years, 13 people caught salmonella from their pet reptiles! (Which is shocking to say the least).

So, if the laws were changed, the zoonoses perspective would not differ much. Why would there be such a problem with accepting "alien" species?

By the way, I'm not arguing, I'm just posing questions out of interest to see the feedback :)

I have not done links before so I hope it works.

One reason that exotic animals can be dangerous is when their owners grow bored/tired/frightened of their pets.  Rather than be responsible they might release them into the open countryside.  Bullfrogs are now putting our own native frog in serious danger of eventual extinction and this upsets the balance of nature for other creatures.  On a less dangerous but sad point, unusual breeds of dogs that are accepted and become popular means that other breeds will not be taken up. This is actually happening, I read something about it on the Kennel Club site.  Going to the other extreme you have have imported species of animals that literally take over as in the link.

[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4313978.stm]imported animals[/link]

ok obviously did that wrong, sorry

Also, the importation of the American grey squirrel in Victorian times has led to the near-extinction of our own native red squirrel. The importation of 'safe' bunny-rabbits into Australia was an unmitigated disaster.

imported animals

hurrah :D

Can't remember what hunts the Kiwi but whatever it isn't native to NZ.

OK i agree with that and I also understand that we also have many myths of big cats now roaming our native countryside because this ban came in.

The reason they were "set free" is because the government were eager enough to bring in the Act but not eager enough to clear up the mess (as with many topics). What's the views on this?

The government often acts like an ass. You only have to follow the smoking ban/not ban/nearly ban this week to realise that!

lol. Do they ever know what they're on about or doing?

I think that's the conclusion to all this then (I feel like Jeremy Paxman saying that!)

>It's also legalising snakes which were orginally bred with venom<

When did they make them illegal? you could legaly buy any snake, venoumous or
otherwise, here unless it was endangered at least untill around 1992

No, what I meant is snakes that are naturally unsafe and did have venom. The snakes that are legal to buy and do have venom are not naturally nasty and will only use it when they find something is a threat. As some people would say, a dog will bite using his teeth when under threat. Same with a snake.

Neither the Czechoslovakian Wolfdog and Saarloos Wolfhound are illegal to own in this country, you just have to have a licence and keep them under the same restrictions as any other animal covered by the DWA.  There are some here already under these restraints.
Have heard that DEFRA hace approached the KC to get a breed standard so things may well be changing

Snakes and dogs are incomparitive,in every way, one is a very new modern mammal,of a synthetic species,the other is a post Dinnasor prehistoric reptile and a supreme,predator. It has a very,very small cortex and very smal cpabilty for learning.
Venomous snakes bred and bought here will strike at most things which moves at the point their sensory detectors something live,they are usually fed live food and many of them can kill from birth, they would be unlikely to react to anything with any effectivness for many days or weeks after feeding and would show greatly reduced respiratory activity.
Most of the pythons do tame to man except the Yellow Anaconda,apart from the odd exception, they are very aggressive and I have personaly seen one eat another.