25 January 2015
To Whom it may Concern
I am writing this letter as a concerned hobbyist in response to the latest legislation that is currently
being proposed to govern the pet industry.
As far as I understand, the draft legislation in its current form seeks to fundamentally destroy the pet
trade in KZN (and by inference the rest of the country in due course) by making the breeding, sale, or
even ownership of any exotic species of animal illegal. By exotic it is meant any species of animal
that is not indigenous to SA, with the exception of domesticated dogs and cats.
I realise that the draft legislation is designed to prevent invasive species of exotic animals from
entering the natural habitat, but the current method of implementation is flawed in the most
fundamental way.
The following are reasons I disagree with the draft legislation.








This document will destroy the pet trade in KZN
Thousands of South African rely on the pet trade for their livelihoods, directly and indirectly.
Not only pet shops and breeders, but suppliers of pet products, food, housing, bedding, etc.
The threat of the “invasiveness” of various exotic species has been grossly over-exaggerated.
For example the common corn snake has been in the country for 40 years without any
environmental impact. The perceived invasion of the Burmese python in the Florida
everglades, also has proved out to be a myth, and environmental balance is being naturally
restored all on its own.
The definition of exotic is flawed. Dogs and cats are not considered part of the legislation as
they are “domestic” however feral cats are a huge invasive environmental problem,
responsible for the destruction of indigenous wildlife for years. Neither dogs nor cats are
indigenous.
Horses are also not an indigenous animal however no provision is made for them in the
document. The horse trade is a million Rand business, from stud, to professional racing,
dressage and other sporting codes, to work horses. Impact to the economy would be
devastating.
Common children’s pets are now illegal according to the document, there shall be no more
pet hamsters, Guiney pigs, rabbits, gerbils, budgies, goldfish, and many others. Essentially, if
it is not a dog or a cat it can’t be kept as a pet.
No provision for “hobbyists” in the document, i.e. breeding not on a commercial level as a
pure livelihood.
Even in species that may be kept, breeding to enhance naturally occurring genetic traits
(such as albino) would be illegal. By this argument then breeding “pure bred” dogs or cats
would also be illegal as the breeder would be enhancing naturally occurring traits. There is
way more genetic manipulation and engineering in farm animals than the pet trade will ever
have.
The following are suggestions, alternative ideas, and personal recommendations.




General common pets should not be illegal to keep and/or breed, including reptiles, fish,
birds and mammals.
Permits should not be needed to own an exotic pet that presents no risk of harm to the
keeper or anyone else.
I am however not opposed to needing a permit to keep and/or breed venomous animals
that may present a danger to inexperienced keepers or to the public. However it should not
be illegal to do so.
In order to keep a track on indiscriminate breeding, I am not opposed to a
permit/registration to be needed to become a breeder with an intent to sell the offspring.
This however should only be a once-off requirement, covering all animals in the collection.
The title of “Registered Breeder” can be conferred to such permit holders which would also
lend credibility to the industry.
I write this letter to the Animal Interest Alliance (AIA) as well as Association of Reptile Keepers
(ARK) with the intension that they represent my interests as a reptile keeper in this matter.
Regards
Graeme Harpham
Concerned reptile hobbyist.