Burm hunt video

[redpython]

well i got an infraction, does this mean i am going to be banned? gee i hope not.

but let me clarify: i didn't reply to envy_ld50, i was replying to lucas and what was so rude or hostile about it?

i was making a point. people saying get rid of invasive species, well humans are the most invasive...so if a person truly believes this philosophy of eliminating invasive species, then they will not reproduce and/or they may terminate their life.

it's not what i preach or believe, but some do.

the supposed snake people have a hug war ahead of them, and yet you are wanting to see snakes terminated. you are doing all of the work for the people that do not want to see snakes in captivity!

they also better get some thicker skin as well.

[Lucas339]

If you truly believe what you preach, then you'll never reproduce and go jump off a cliff right now
these habitats are controlled by fish and wildlife game as they see fit, introducing and reintroducing species of animals and plants as they see fit.

lol

[wolfy-hound]

So let's see... if you break your arm, you won't treat the infected cut on your leg.. even if it's getting worse without treatment.. because your arm is broke? Do I have your logic down pat? Just because humans cause a lot of issues, and disturb the environment doesn't mean you shouldn't fix other issues like introduced species.

When you figure out how to stop humans from having any affect on any environment, while feeding and housing all of US, you let me know.

Get off your duff and try to fix the issues. Whining that people made it happen doesn't fix a darned thing. Humans aren't invasive, we're pervasive. We're everywhere, and there's no way to eliminate all humans.

Burms don't belong in the everglades. Removing them is the right thing to do for the ecology of the swamp. Removing them is also the right thing to do for the PR of herp hobbiests. Just because I love dogs doesn't mean I won't tell someone to put down a vicious one. Just because I love snakes doesn't mean I'll sacrifice the entire everglades and any native species to prevent feral burmese from being euthanized.

If burmese reach the keys, we could lose the Key deer population. I'd like to keep the Key deer. I like the useless little buggers.

[Mendel's Balls]

thats the most ignorant thing i have herd about invasives!!

nearly all invasives have been human introduced and many are causing shifts in the ecosystems that will cause native animal populations to crash meaning no more native animals. with a large preadator like burms, who knows what the extent of the damage will be. weither killed or kept it is a postive step and i wish there would be more programs like this for other invasives.

Most exotic or non-indigenous species (NIS) pose no threat at all (see http://www.invasive.org/101/moreinfo.cfm) and some species typically labeled " invasive" actually do provide benefits. An example of a ecological benefit would be a non-native plant attracting more pollinators for the overall plant community (see http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0516125934.htm). Most of our food chain is dependent on crops that were not native at some point. And many invasive plants are being considered as biofuel sources. So there are often overlooked economic benefits to NIS as well.

See the link below for more info on some of the economic benefits

http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA544...veSpecies.html

I'm also seeing a lot of confusion in this thread and the other thread about invasives. The problem is with the term "invasive" The term "Invasive species", historically, was a value-ridden scientific term/category. Scientific terms in which values are connected are not operationally very good scientific terms! Scientific terms should be neutral; they should be objective and judgment-free. Traditionally, invasive meant a species non-native species "bad for the environment" that had the capability to propagating tremendously in its new surroundings, often rapidly, and displacing native species by predation, competition, or some other means.

The problem is that "bad for the environment"- This cannot be measured objectively without the injection of some values. After all, nature has winners and loser in it.......see this paper for more information.

http://planet.botany.uwc.ac.za/nisl/...ndMacIsaac.pdf

The above paper gives the example of the mosquito fish which was introduced to decrease larval mosquitoes, but also harmed native species of fish and amphibians as well as some non-target insect species. Mosquitoes went down that's good for the human environment, but is it good ecologically? There are often positive and negative effects of introduced species.

[jglass38]

1. Good job I think? Not sure how I feel about all this yet.
2. When did Greg Graziani become a scientist? If he can be a scientist, then I am knighting myself and putting sir before my name. You will all address me as such!
3. That is the best mustache I have seen since:

[Mendel's Balls]

Not to mention that exotic species are an important part of the pet industry. This site does a good job in pointing this out often and members of the herpetological hobby seem to organize to prevent the hysteria often associated with the invasive classification. This proactive approach to Burmese problem by big names in the herp industry will help quell fears of a massive Python invasion out of the Everglades and into more Northern states, even if those fears rest on some very shaky science (the orginal USGS report)

Many in the political environmental movement want laws to ban all exotic species or apply what is called the "precautionary principle" to exotic species. The precautionary principle sounds good at first glance. It sounds like look before you leap. However, in many of these proposed invasive species laws, the US Fish and Wildlife Service would have to "prove" that the exotic species to be imported is not harmful if it determines to take no action. "Proving a negative" in science is impossible. It's like assuming guilt before innocence and it would hamper the economic incentives to do business and innovate in many fields-for example, the chemical industry, electronics industry, agriculture, aquaculture, as well as the pet industry. I'm not for no risk assessment but the precautionary principle puts all the burden of proof on people who want to try new things. The first people to import and sell Ball pythons may have never got the chance if a strong environmental precautionary principle based law was around at the time they were first imported.
You can read more about precautionary principle here...... http://www.reason.com/news/show/30977.html

[Lucas339]

sure some non-native species pose no real threat....elsewhere! here in florida we are plagued with some of the worst species around...both plant and animal. plants that cause harm to water ways and choke out native speices: Brazilian Pepper, Austrialian Pine, Water Hydrilla, water hyacinth, animals causing declines in local animal populations Cuban tree frog, Cane toad, green mussel, Titan acorn barnacle, lion fish (not yet shown to be negative but just wait). here is a list from USDA of all of the florida non-native speices minus the insects two of which are causing harm are the african honey bee and the fire ant (http://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/Speci...thway=&Sortby=[Group],Genus,Species,SubSpecies&Size=50&nativeexotic=&HUCNumber=&Page=1)

some introduced species can be benifical, however, in FL these animals get out of control and begin taking over are replacing native animals. this is never good...no way, no how. it is not beneficial...ever. florida's unique ecosystem offers a good enviorment for exotics to gain a foot hold. you cannot compare this state to anyother. we do not need any more insvasive and those that are here need to be irracated.

my comments were directed at the person who suggested that true invasive species should not be killed, even when negative impacts are determined and they should be allowed to creat a niche for themselves.

[Mendel's Balls]

s

some introduced species can be benifical, however, in FL these animals get out of control and begin taking over are replacing native animals. this is never good...no way, no how. it is not beneficial...ever. florida's unique ecosystem offers a good enviorment for exotics to gain a foot hold. you cannot compare this state to anyother. we do not need any more insvasive and those that are here need to be irracated.

Just as you can't compare the biogeography of Florida to other states, you can't make lofty generalizations about all non-ingenious species and/or invasives. Each species and population is unique in terms of it establishment and dispersal, physio-chemical tolerances, and community interactions. Each population has its own overall cost-benefit ratio associated with it as well as individual cost-benefit ratios for industries such as tourism, timber, agriculture, etc. So I don't see how you can see they are never beneficial ever.

The size of the "invasive" population helps determine the cost-benefit ratio. This is true about natives species as well. Here in PA and many other northeastern states we have an overabundance of the native white-tailed deer. The overpopulation increases the frequency of deer-vehicle collisions and impacts forest ecology heavily. Certain types of trees (oaks and sugar maples) in eastern deciduous forests fail to regenerate with heavy foraging on the saplings by large populations of the white-tailed deer. Wild-flowers disappear from the forest understory.

Here's an interesting part to the story ...then often the garlic mustard (an invasive) that deer do not eat takes hold. So is it all the "invasives" doing (garlic mustard does produce poisons that hurt native's plant roots) or are large scale patterns of ecological disturbance at work here as well? My point is forestry and wildlife management is not as simple as let's get rid of those evil invasives. Vilifying invasive and/or exotic species is emotionally based approach that will lead to nowhere in my opinion.

More on the White Tail Deer Story can be found in this link..... http://www.na.fs.fed.us/fhp/special_...ailed_deer.pdf ( a pretty short paper that provides a good overview of the scope of the issue)

Nor are invasive plants and their spread a modern industrial problem. The American Lotus was spread northward by Native Americans. We have and will always be a vector for the spread of other living things. However, I think we can take steps to manage this intelligently and economically.

[Mendel's Balls]

Next time people vilifying invasive or exotic snakes and attempt to justify an outright ban on them because of the Burmese-Florida problem point them to this link which lists North American mammal species...http://www.invasive.org/species/mammals.cfm

Notice the domestic dog is the first one on the list.

[wolfy-hound]

Why would they list native species on there as exotic, invasive? Coyotes and prairie dogs are both native.