Reptile & Amphibian Forums

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 and his own website 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 probable 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

For the record, BGF has campaigned consistently FOR herpers' rights, including venomous herpers' - nobody is saying that all colubrids should be regulated, quite the contrary. What we are saying is Caution - some may be hotter than you think.

There has been an increasing number of cases of various colubrid snakes causing neurotoxic symptoms - these are nothing to do with allergies. What our paper has shown is that the toxins concerned are everywhere.

Just remember one thing: the most damaging headline of all would be:

"10 YEar Old Killed by 'Harmless' Pet Snake"
with the subtitle
" 'How can these animals be openly available', asks distraught mother"

Forewarned is forearmed.

Cheers,

Wolfgang
-----
WW

WW Home

While I respect and value your right to express your opinion, I think that perhaps it is a bit misguided. Anyone proposing to be a scientist (which Dr. Frye is by virtue of training, credentials, employment, and research publications) has an obligation to pursue "truth" as to the best of scientific ability, and to diseminate research results. While we may not always like what scientists find, we are ultimately better off by building our hobby/livlihoods on facts. The problem you speak of lies not in information as provided by research, but by people who are unable to consider other's views and see all angles and perspectives of whatever topic. These are the people that go to extremes and sometimes do things like...crash planes into buildings.

Dear all
I cut and pasted the following from another list:

Ray,

Having struggled through this report and all the technical information, it seems to me to only really say that people who suffer allergies may be at risk from mildly venomous snakes. As if we didn't already know that was the case!!!! Perhaps beekeepers should have DWAA licences in view of the fact that some people have hugely dangerous allergic reactions to them. All in all, i think this report is an attempt at gaining publicity by exaggerating the risks involved with mildly venomous snakes so as to make it newsworthy. The huge amount of technical information is there just to impress authorities in order to gain funding in my opinion.

-----------------
Eddie Munt
Shop-owner,member of IHS,Pet Care Trust.

Having spoke with Tim Jackson on many occasions throughtout this study and relating my own stories about my rearfangs, I am going to err on the side of caution, I believe this was a well reasearched paper, and who is to say that maybe another colubrid like the heretofore thought harmless boomslang, (refer to Karl Schmidt) will not turn up. I do not believe that this paper is steeped in hyperbole and is not for self-aggrandizment as some of you seem to believe, I have read it and I think it is a valid piece of reasearch. Perhaps it will lead to more regulation, perhaps not but that is up to us in the herp community to be on guard for, to say that this paper, which will most likely not make it past the herp community to begin with will cause an avalanche of laws to befall us is overstating the case. Jusy my humble opinion.