Dozens of exotic animals – including parrots, pelicans, porcupines, iguanas, mara and agouti – have been rescued by the RSPCA after being neglected by their Preston owner. 

 

The animals were living in filthy conditions, most in unsuitable housing and some of them were suffering from untreated injuries.Pelican

 

Their owner Bradley Michael Tomes (D.O.B 27.04.95) of Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston appeared in court for sentencing yesterday (Thursday 11 July) after pleading guilty to 15 offences* under the Animal Welfare Act at a hearing last month.

 

The offences relate to six iguanas; two mara (large rodents from South America); 16 peafowl; two pelicans; three agouti (a rodent native to America and South America); five porcupines; one green parakeet; two jardine parrots; one golden pheasant; one green winged macaw; one white necked raven and one cape parrot.

 

AgoutiThe RSPCA attended a farm on Taylors Meanygate in Tarleton on Thursday 17 January after a call from police where a number of exotic animals were being kept in squalid and unsuitable conditions and a second address on Moss Lane, Tarleton where a shed-type building at the back of the premises contained a number of animals.

 

RSPCA Deputy Chief Inspector Alison Fletcher said: “Some of these animals were species we as RSPCA inspectors of many years experience had never dealt with before, and it was a shock to see them kept in such conditions.

 

“Both locations were filthy, many of the animals were in accommodation that was obviously completely unsuitable, did not have access to food or water, or were suffering.

 

“At the farm, we found two mara inside a small plastic transportation crate on the floor of one of the make-shift buildings. Mara are a large rodent who stand up on their hind legs. The height of the crate was 300mm, or just 12 inches. The depth of the crate was 560mm, and the length was 870mm giving no real room for them to move around.

 

“A squalid enclosure at the same location housed three agoutis, two pelican and 13 peafowl (pictured above).

 

Porcupine“Four porcupines (pictured right) were in a pen which was wet and muddy with just a small structure for shelter – temperatures on site were close to freezing with snow and driving rain.

 

“At the second address a macaw was found in a black crate, similar to a dog crate. The bird’s tail feathers were touching the sides of the crate.

 

“The iguanas were at this location too – all six of which were in poor body condition and four had injuries to their tails.”

 

In mitigation the court heard that Tomes had an interest in animals all of his life and had been employed as a zoo keeper.  He had signed all of the animals over in February – which have been rehomed to specialist keepers – and pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. He had gone through a difficult break up but had now turned his life around and had a new job and new relationship.

 

He was sentenced to 20 weeks in prison suspended for 12 months, ordered to undertake 25 rehabilitation days, 120 hours community service and pay £500 costs and a £115 victim surcharge. He was disqualified from keeping all animals for five years with no appeal for two years.

 

DCI Fletcher said: “This was very much a joint effort between the RSPCA and Lancashire Police and I’d like to thank them for their part in this investigation.”

 

*The full offences are:

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did cause unnecessary suffering to certain protected animals, namely six Iguanas (SM/27, SM/28, SM/29, SM/30, SM/31 & SM/32), by failing to explore and address their poor bodily condition, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did cause unnecessary suffering to certain protected animals, namely four  Iguanas (SM/27, SM/28, SM/30 & SM/31), by failing to seek appropriate professional veterinary care to address injuries to their tails, which you knew or ought reasonably to have known would have such an effect or be likely to do so, contrary to Section 4(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Taylors Meanygate, Tarleton, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely two adult Mara (AF/1 & AF/2), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Taylors Meanygate, Tarleton, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely sixteen Peafowl (SM/1, SM/2, SM/3, SM/4, SM/5, SM/8, SM/9. SM/10, SM/11, SM/12, SM/13, SM/14, SM/15, SM/19, SM/20 & SM/21), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Taylors Meanygate, Tarleton, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely two Pelicans (SM/6 & SM/7), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Taylors Meanygate, Tarleton, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely three Agouti (SM/16, SM/17 & SM/18), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Taylors Meanygate, Tarleton, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely five Porcupines (SM/22, SM/23, SM/24, SM/25 & SM/26), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you did not ensure their need for a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of a certain protected animal, namely a green Parakeet (JB/1), for which are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, as you did not ensure its need for a suitable environment in which to live, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of a certain protected animal, namely a green Parakeet (JB/1), for which are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide it with a nutritionally balanced diet, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely six Iguanas (SM/27, SM/28, SM/29, SM/30, SM/31 & SM/32), for which are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide them with a suitable environment,, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of certain protected animals, namely two Jardine Parrots (SM/33 & SM/34), for which are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide them with a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of a certain protected animal, namely a white necked Raven (SM/36), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide it with a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of a certain protected animal, namely a Cape Parrot (SM/37), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide it with a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of a certain protected animal, namely a Golden Pheasant (SM/38), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide it with a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.

 

  1. That on and before the 17th January 2019 at an address on Moss Lane, Hesketh Bank, Preston he/you did not take such steps as were reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure the needs of a certain protected animal, namely a Green winged Macaw (SM/39), for which you are responsible, were met to the extent required by good practice, in that you failed to provide it with a suitable environment, contrary to Section 9(1) of the Animal Welfare Act 2006.