Been reading Fry et. al's paper on venoms (the recent one) and his many media releases and articles that he's foisted on us, including in the daily papers on his own website and as posted on this forum below, and I cannot help but be alarmed at the tack he's taken.

It strikes me as a cynical grab for funds AND as a bid to give ammo to those regulation obsessed bureaucrats another excuse to ban or restrict the keeping of reptiles - this time the mildly venomous forms.

Claims of near death experiences as a result of allergic reactions to venom or saliva componants does nothing to further rational debate on these snakes or their relevant risks.

It's akin to trying to ban all dogs and cats on the basis that some may carry fleas, have mange, or salmonella.

Had Fry et. al. merely provided data without hyperbole then their paper may eventually have gained due respect and perhaps even made a useful contribution to our general knowlegde of these snakes.

However now it will go down in history (along with the his hype) as yet another nail in the coffin of private people being allowed the right to keep venomous and even very mildly venomous snakes.

I delayed posting on this so as to save anothe barrage of attacks on myself, but on Fri night at a local herp meeting several people there expressed outrage at Fry's comments as reported in the Melbourne media and hence I can say that the views above are not just my own.

ALL THE BEST IN HERP

[ Show Entire Thread ]