(2)For the purposes of this Act, an animal's needs shall be taken to include—
(a)its need for a suitable environment,
(b)its need for a suitable diet,
(c)its need to be able to exhibit normal behaviour patterns,
(d)any need it has to be housed with, or apart from, other animals, and
(e)its need to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/45/contents
I think all of this is very well-intended but completely subject to interpretation: wouldn't "(c)...to exhibit normal behaviour patterns" include feeding as it would
in nature? ie. live? And the "(e) need to be protected from...suffering...& disease" would surely preclude starving your snake that won't eat f/t?
As I've said many times, I'm ALL FOR feeding pre-killed (fresh or f/t) for safety & humane considerations, but another difference is that here in the U.S. we have
many more species of native snakes. For someone like me, who used to be involved with rescue/relocation of native snakes (most often rattlesnakes), well you just
can't feed them dead food like "room service" and then send them back outside. A meal (or several) at my house meant they had the strength (energy) to have a
better chance of survival when relocated; snakes in the desert are typically struggling with survival to begin with, so food & hydration goes a long way to help
them stay alive. You'd better believe I fed them live, with no regrets. But any that weren't healthy enough to go outside, or that had to stay captive for other reasons
(too long in captivity-exposure to exotics) all got switched to dead prey, & pretty easily.
I know there are differences of perspective in this area of keeping snakes...I think this is actually a good area for discussion. You can find cruel people everywhere,
those who take a perverse pleasure in watching a snake kill a rodent, but happily that's not most of us. I think most of us just want the best for our animals.
Reply With Quote