I agree, they could get "extra marks" for showing their working out!!

__________________
My pets Royal Python - Monty 0.1.0Albino Burmese Python - Snowy 0.1.0Boxer - Molly 0.1.0

Yeah, I'm sure we'd all like to see how they "arrived at the answer"!

Here is the letter in its entirity:

Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

28 January 2005



Dear Mr Newman,

The RSPCA Council met on 25th January and decided that the RSPCA
Should not enter into the Memorandum of Understanding with the Federation of British Herpetologists, International Herpetological Society, British Herpetological Society and the UK Reptile Trade Association.

However, we still believe that there could be practical animal welfare benefits if we continue to meet and discuss the various relevant issues identified and hope the meeting on Friday can go ahead.

Yours sincerely



John Rolls
Director of Animal Welfare Promotion

This bunch of animal rights plonkers should be forced to explain why they do not want to improve the welfare of captive reptiles.A disgraceful decision most likely due to political reasoning which is in conflict with their charitable status.Harry

Did they ever state an "unofficial" reason why not? And did the groups attempt to contact the RSPCA individually? Only reason I ask is that if they are as beuracratic as most corporations 1 problem with 1 group would have probably been enough to reject the lot.

__________________
My Scaley Little Clan2.3.0 Royal Pythons1.0.0 Bearded Dragon1.2.0 BCI0.1.0 BCC x BCI0.0.1 Ackie1.0.0 Hoggie

Chris, could you remind us again what proportion of the Ruling Council have also signed up for membership of Animal Aid?

Id like to know this also.
Further more Chris could you or Rory clarify what the ban is likely to involve as ive been told by my local councilor its a total ban.
I.e no keeping at all.
Then was told by an rspca animal collector at an rspca rescue centre that were going to be allowed to keep the reptiles we have but not buy anymore.
Also there is a petition on the pro keeper lobby about the ban which I've signed & in hindsight now come to realise that everyone who's signed that petition has given the ''powers that be'' our addresses.
So they now have a list of reptile/exotic keepers.

__________________

1.0.0 albino burmese python.
1.0.0 bci.
0.1.0 choc banded cali king.
1.0.0 cali king.
0.2.0 dumbo rats
0.0.2 butterfly agama

Taken from the Minutes of a meeting held on the 4th January 2005.

Mr Newman asked for confirmation, if at all possible, that 18 members of Council were members of Animal Aid. There was, he said, much circumstantial evidence that the RSPCA was following their direction.

John Rolls pointed out that the trustees are there to represent the Society alone; that they had made a strategic decision. Whether trustees were also members of Animal Aid did not affect their membership of the RSPCA.

Hi Storm,

Your post is the most intriguing one here.

First off , to the signing of petitions.

All informations processed to this government site are covered by the data protection act, and as such are not to be passed onto other bodies. When you sign these petitions you are showing your support to that particular petition - and to them [eyes that view] you are a legal signature. They do not know if you keep animals or if you are just supporting the argument.

Looking at the talk of a ban:

If we look at petition one:

Captive care keepers in the United Kingdom believe that they have the right to maintain exotic animal species within their collections. Many oppose the keeping of animals, many more oppose the keeping of exotic species, be these, mammal, primate, avian, reptile, aquatic or invertebrate.

With increased legislation under the new animal welfare act such as codes of practice, enforcement, education, regulation, communication and awareness there should be no genuine reasons for the government to encourage the opposition to continue their campaigns to cease this.
Responsible ownership and husbandry, promotion of both keepers and animals rights also feature very heavily upon the minds of those that do keep animals privately. All keepers therefore call for support from the government rather than condemnation.

This is asking for the government to support all keepers of animals, with the predominance on exotic keepers. We are basically saying that under the new legislation with improved husbandry and supportive legislation, there is no need to prevent keepers from maintaining exotics by supporting the calls for a ban from the opposition.

Whilst the second petition is in fact for primates specifically:

Responsible private keepers are calling for the introduction of the code of practice for primates.

Genuine primate keepers in the United Kingdom believe that they have the right to maintain this beautiful species within exotic collections.

Private keepers believe that if a code of practice is introduced for primate keeping, then there should be no reason why responsible keepers of this species can not maintain them. For far too long, primate keepers have been under the scrutiny of those that oppose the keeping of exotics. If there is a strict code of practice in place under the new animal welfare act, then this will – we believe bode well for private keepers and show to those whom do oppose, and are calling for a ban on the keeping of primates in private hands, that exotics keepers can keep and maintain this species not only well, but extremely well.

This petition focuses on the fact that this is a group of animals -primates- that is under fire from the opposition, this group is a group that they do want to see prohibited from keeping by private keepers. So an outright ban on private ownership is something they seek, and yes there are raised petitions by the opposition currently running which end in 2009 to see this happen.

What l do find interesting is that your local councillor pays heed to a total ban, yet the RSPCA make reference to a ban on future buying?

These two statements alone l find more than slightly disturbing, for there is nothing specifically definitive and set in foundation as of yet, but we have two views of difference. This shows how some councillors are thinking and also to boot how the RSPCA are thinking in certain ways. I can answer no more differently than l have done at present.

Bans are something they are looking at, but nothing is set in concrete as of yet.

R

__________________