NSW DECCW Code of Practice...

[Pythoninfinite]

Some members of the Advisory Group appointed by DECCW to assist in the drafting of the NSW Reptile Keepers Code of Practice met with representatives of DECCW on Friday, Feb 11th, to discuss concerns about the document. We pointed out that the draft of the Code currently displayed on their website is an old one, and that the current Code which varies significantly in content and its impact on keepers (there is a much stronger emphasis on mandated enclosure sizes, and enforcement), should replace it immediately, to enable keepers in NSW to anticipate the impact of the Code.

We believe the Department misrepresents the Code while the old version is displayed on their website, and keepers (who are the major stakeholders, along with their animals) need to be aware of how these changes will affect their lives.

Some members will be aware that the Advisory Group obtained a copy of the current proposal only after lodging an FOI request, despite repeated requests from us to see it without having to go through that process. The Department believes that this constitutes 'release' of the document into the public domain, and seems unwilling to engage in further disclosure.

For the information of members...

 

[buck]

They must be afraid of some pretty severe backlash otherwise I doubt they would be so gaurded.

Was there any talk of when this "draft" is going to officially replace the existing one?

 

[jack]

thankyou to all those dealing with the authorities on our behalf in this advisory group.
i can imagine how frustrating it is at this time with these bureacrats.

They must be afraid of some pretty severe backlash otherwise I doubt they would be so gaurded.

Was there any talk of when this "draft" is going to officially replace the existing one?

the backlash may well be that people just disapear off the system, and then they will have created their own headache in trying to control a huge underground network of keepers off the books - and all the smuggling/poaching that this will also bring.

 

[buck]

the backlash may well be that people just disapear off the system, and then they will have created their own headache in trying to control a huge underground network of keepers off the books - and all the smuggling/poaching that this will also bring.

I suggested the same thing to someone the other day. Many new people getting in to the hobby will not worry about getting a licence etc once they realise how big of an enclosure will be required. There are already plenty of "off licence" reptiles to obtain and I can only see this situation getting worse.

 

[dadaman]

Has the draft been posted anywhere on the net for us to download and read? I build enclosures so I am really interested in what they have to say.

Adam.

 

[sesa-sayin]

lets hope Barry O,Farrel has the guts to downsize the NSW public sector, by about 25% after the election, right accross all depts. that might be the end of some of these , "regulators". the good news amongst beurocrats, is that they fear greatly, that this might happen. the Libs will inherit no money from the present rabble, for the mighty improvements in infrastructure, which NSW requires..one way of getting thi"s ....is to reduce greatly the number of what might be called politely/publicly............".the NSW public sector"..............when the new regs. as to size o0f containers come in..................just where is the Dept. going to put all the thousands of Beardies, that are going to be brought into them......luckily their building at Hurstville has many storeys....they will need it.

 

[buck]

They were posted on the forum previously but I just had a quick look and couldn't find them. Luckily I copied it on my computer before

 

[Laghairt]

the backlash may well be that people just disapear off the system, and then they will have created their own headache in trying to control a huge underground network of keepers off the books - and all the smuggling/poaching that this will also bring.

Agreed, in fact I have spoken to quite a few people who have said they are considering doing just that. The DECCW doesn't have the resources or statutory powers needed to control underground reptile keepers as it is and that is not a situation that is likely to change. People who only want to keep a few herps may not bother with licensing as since there is virtually no capability to investigate this the risks of getting caught are virtually nil.

My biggest problem with the DECCW is the cost of an import/export license. As far as I'm concerned this fee is illegal and if it were ever legally challenged it would fall over. Under the constitution trade between the states must be free and unimpeded by taxes which is exactly what the cost of an export/import permit is.

 

[buck]

Agreed, in fact I have spoken to quite a few people who have said they are considering doing just that. The DECCW doesn't have the resources or statutory powers needed to control underground reptile keepers as it is and that is not a situation that is likely to change. People who only want to keep a few herps may not bother with licensing as since there is virtually no capability to investigate this the risks of getting caught are virtually nil.

My biggest problem with the DECCW is the cost of an import/export license. As far as I'm concerned this fee is illegal and if it were ever legally challenged it would fall over. Under the constitution trade between the states must be free and unimpeded by taxes which is exactly what the cost of an export/import permit is.

I agree the import/export licence fee sucks. Maybe we should all start to contact our local members about this. No time like the present with an election coming.

 

[GeckoJosh]

They were posted on the forum previously but I just had a quick look and couldn't find them. Luckily I copied it on my computer before

Is this the original proposal that was released a while ago?

 

[Pythoninfinite]

I believe the pdfs posted by Buck are the current ones (don't have time to look). They were made available by other members of the Advisory Group after we go the stuff under FOI.

J

 

[sesa-sayin]

Agreed, in fact I have spoken to quite a few people who have said they are considering doing just that. The DECCW doesn't have the resources or statutory powers needed to control underground reptile keepers as it is and that is not a situation that is likely to change. People who only want to keep a few herps may not bother with licensing as since there is virtually no capability to investigate this the risks of getting caught are virtually nil.

My biggest problem with the DECCW is the cost of an import/export license. As far as I'm concerned this fee is illegal and if it were ever legally challenged it would fall over. Under the constitution trade between the states must be free and unimpeded by taxes which is exactly what the cost of an export/import permit is.

good point about illegality about the import/export licence...the rel. section of the Constitution is sec. 92, which says that "trade and commerce amongst the States will be absolutely free " this sec. was fought over and over again in the High Courtin the 40,s and 50,s often by KC Evatt on one side, KC Menzies on the otherside....Evatt was always the superior lawyer.

 

[-Peter]

Thanks for the update Jamie and thanks for putting the PDFs up again Buck.

 

[Sock Puppet]

The DECCW actually met with the advisory group again? Must have caught them in a good mood
I assume it's still too much to hope that negotiations could reopen & DECCW listening to some common sense?

 

[hugsta]

There will be many keepers that will wipe their collection off the books and go underground. I mean you pay a fee for what...?? I have no problem paying for a licence if you can see the funds are going into something of use, like conservation or research into a species that is going extinct, but it seems it is being used to make reptile keepers lives rediculously hard. You then have to pay a fee to send your animals interstate. Once the DPI standards come into play in 5 years the size of the enclosures you need will so be so rediculous that ppl won't bother with a licence so they don't fall into the rediculous legislation they will have. So now reptile keepers who look after their animals may as well be drug dealers as we will all be criminals. So now would be the time to sell off your collection, get rid of your licence, get your hands on some nice corns, milks, boas and ball pythons as the supply and demand for these will go through the roof as people without a licence won't care what animals that have. So, a big grats to DECC for screwing up an already poor system.

 

[TWENTY B]

This is obsurd, the nsw deccw has gone to far and must me stopped.

 

[Pythoninfinite]

The DECCW actually met with the advisory group again? Must have caught them in a good mood
I assume it's still too much to hope that negotiations could reopen & DECCW listening to some common sense?

No... they have so far refused to meet with us as a group to discuss the Code. We arranged for a small group to attend a probity meeting at DECCW in Hurstville, with the Acting Director and two staff members. This meeting was to discuss the process, and to try to find out why we have been blocked from futher discussion about the Code itself.

My point in posting this thread is to alert members, who may see it on the DECCW website, to the fact that the version on that website is very much out of date. It reflects the advice we gave them re: recommendations vs enforceable standards. Subsequently, there have been major changes which lean much more towards enforcement in law. The enclosure size thing is interesting because there is the statement that standards will change again, within 5 years, to larger (but yet unknown) sizes yet again, to comply with those required by another Government Department - Industry and Investment. The future is vague indeed... but could be very expensive if you're a dedicated herp keeper.

I have also advised them that publishing an out-of-date or superseded document is misleading, especially when there are significant implications for keepers in the new one, which they have been very unwilling to publicise. They should either replace it with the new document, or, if they don't want keepers to see the new one, remove it altogether. It's up them to explain which way they want to go.

J

 

[Hetty]

They're allowed to charge for import/export permits to regulate, but not to raise money. I think $30 for a piece of paper is raising money, it would be interesting to see how they would justify it.

 

[Laghairt]

IMO, the DECCW have lost their way when it comes to licensing for herps. I think that reptile licensing and other related fees has become a profitable part of their operations. Each year we cough up our fees and although they have increased and the hobby is growing, the "customer" service is appalling. It recently took 6 weeks for a mate of mine to get his license approved and I think we have all been on the receiving end of poor service at some point.

I suspect that these latest "reforms" have little to do with animal welfare and are an attempt for them to justify their existence and their "right" to continue to increase licensing & import / export fees etc.

I mean in all seriousness, there is no way the minimum enclosure sizes will be enforced. The DECCW's powers when it comes to forcing entry to premises and investigating breaches are almost non existent. Additionally they don't have enough staff to visit all keepers premises anyway. It's just another political stunt that achieves nothing and makes life harder for keepers.

 

[aussie.snakes]

IMO, the DECCW have lost their way when it comes to licensing for herps. I think that reptile licensing and other related fees has become a profitable part of their operations. Each year we cough up our fees and although they have increased and the hobby is growing, the "customer" service is appalling. It recently took 6 weeks for a mate of mine to get his license approved and I think we have all been on the receiving end of poor service at some point.

I suspect that these latest "reforms" have little to do with animal welfare and are an attempt for them to justify their existence and their "right" to continue to increase licensing & import / export fees etc.

I mean in all seriousness, there is no way the minimum enclosure sizes will be enforced. The DECCW's powers when it comes to forcing entry to premises and investigating breaches are almost non existent. Additionally they don't have enough staff to visit all keepers premises anyway. It's just another political stunt that achieves nothing and makes life harder for keepers.

It does achieve something - I see this as no more than a tool the DECC want to use to negate the criticism and disapproval from welfare groups regarding the possibility of reptiles being sold in NSW pet stores.