UPDATE: HR2811 Amendment

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wolfy-hound

They don't need a event to get them headed to ban things. The legislationw as in the works long long before the child was killed.

Remember that HR669 was against ALL exotics, and I dont' remember any canary related deaths, or feral populations of hamsters destroying wildlife.

The politicians and animal rights groups do NOT need legitimate events to try to ban our pets. All they need is the ability.

---

Again you have to understand how this works. Things get shot down daily in these commitees, and they know it. I will almost gauranty you that they only wanted big snakes banned. To make it look like they are comprimising on the subject, they add all other species also and amend the proposal to work in thier favor. It's just like someone who gets busted in a criminal case....They get charged with all kinds of extra charges in order to get the person to take a plea bargain on what charge they origianlly wanted him to have.

It's not true that Burmese do not have any natural predators in the Everglades. They have MANY predators, from raccoons and opossums to herons and raptors when they are small, all the way up to adult alligators once they are fully grown. No doubt a black bear would figure out a way to take advantage of this new prey source as well.

Yes, Burms eat a lot of animals--rodents and baby alligators, young birds, etc--but they're also eaten by a lot of animals, particularly when small. This isn't a case where a species is introduced to a place where it has no natural predators. MANY animals in the Everglades eat snakes, and the burm is not so significantly different that it's not on the menu. We KNOW alligators are eating them. It's much too early to declare that Burmese are going to cause harm to the everglades ecosystem.

Back in 2007 I wrote on a thread on here......

"There's a pretty extensive ban on the importation of three species of African tortoises. These species were found to carry ticks that harbor Heartwater disease after their importation. Heartwater disease effects ruminants, anything from livestock cattle to white-tail deer.

It has been recommended that both captive-hatched and wild-caught specimens be certified free of external parasites such as ticks. Some go as far as suggesting that the US spray all exotics with a safe pesticide. They argue that's it better to be proactive rather than reactive as in the case of Heartwater disease."

Then there's this paper from 2000......http://www.jstor.org/pss/3284951

"Exotic ticks were identified on 29 (91%) of 32 reptile premises in 18 counties of Florida. The ticks, found on a variety of imported tortoises, snakes, and monitor lizards, belonged to 4 Amblyomma species (A. marmoreum, Amblyomma nuttalli, Amblyomma sabanerae,and Amblyomma sparsum) and 4 Aponomma species (Aponomma exornatum, Aponomma flavomaculatum, Aponomma latum, and Aponomma varanensis). The most commonly encountered ticks were A. latum and A. marmoreum. The identifications of A.marmoreum on 8 premises in 7 counties, and of A. sparsum on 1 premises, are of great concern because both species are vectors of heartwater, a lethal disease of cattle, sheep, goats, and deer."

Some of the snakes they found these ticks on were ball pythons, African Rock pythons, and reticulated pythons.

My question to anyone who knows better than me:

Have the importers changed their practices since this time to decrease the chances that exotic, disease carrying ticks could be on imported snakes?

A would think a legislator or two could ask this at some point.

some ppl fail to see that just because the wording is changed now that it will not be added or actually removed from the bill. even then this bill does bypass due process and surely every year they will attempt to go back and amend this piece of rubbish to include more animals just like they have tried in the past or to outright ban them.

my arguement is it took FL how many years to open a hunt while all these years they claimed burms were protected. last time i checked how can a protected species be also an invasive species.
oh yes and the introduced bills to ban these animals before they even had a permit system or even looked into state regulation.

Just read on ecrb's tweet page that the amendment passed with no discussion

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by divine_reptiles

Just read on ecrb's tweet page that the amendment passed with no discussion

---

Confirmation from Adam W's tweets as well.....http://twitter.com/NOHR669/

However, What does this mean exactly? What form of the amendment passed?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mendel's Balls

Confirmation from Adam W's tweets as well.....http://twitter.com/NOHR669/

However, What does this mean exactly? What form of the amendment passed?

---

I am trying to get some more info from Adam but so far the word is a ban on Burms and Afrocks. I asked if that meant importation and interstate/breeding and he said yes, depending on how you interpret the law. Don't know exactly what that means.

i am going to take wild guess and say that the burmese pythons taking over the everglades and the populations there are overflated.

Even if burmese pythons are reproducing, laying eggs, and eggs are hatching, there are still major adversities of surviving life for them.

They just don't hatch out of the egg and eat all of the native wildlife...they also provide a food source to many predators that live there.

maybe it's there, but are they just going to ban the importation of burms and af. rocks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redpython

i am going to take wild guess and say that the burmese pythons taking over the everglades and the populations there are overflated.

Even if burmese pythons are reproducing, laying eggs, and eggs are hatching, there are still major adversities of surviving life for them.

They just don't hatch out of the egg and eat all of the native wildlife...they also provide a food source to many predators that live there.

maybe it's there, but are they just going to ban the importation of burms and af. rocks?

---

You probably right about the Burmese Problem being over-hyped.....

Here's a interesting quote form the Barkers on a review they had of a Letter published in the journal Science:

"The paper (letter) ends with the dire warning that the cost of invasive species to the United States is $120 billion annually. Smith et al. are surely quite aware that it is plant species and accidental pest imports that account for all but a tiny fraction of that figure. Terrestrial vertebrate animals legally identified, declared and imported are not the real problem, but they are the primary concern of animal-rights activists."


I will point out something the quote doesn't bring up--the fact that terrestrial vertebrates often do act as vectors for the spread of pests such as ticks.....that's why I asked about the importation practices earlier and if they have changed at all.

REPTILESmag on twitter posted this link!

http://www.reptilechannel.com/reptil...mendments.aspx

-Jeremy