# Monster Burmese Python found in the Everglades



## LV-426 (Aug 13, 2012)

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/13/2950397/monster-python-caught-in-the-florida.html

17ft 7in with 87 eggs inside, 164lbs sets a record in Fl. Looks like the python problem in Fl is still lurking around.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## SamuraiSid (Aug 13, 2012)

Wow thats a big snake.

So.... whats the problem? Honestly I dont fully understand, and Im pretty ignorant when it comes to ecosystems, but wont the environment eventually right itself and find a new equilibrium with room the these magnificient beasts? Or will these pythons eventually just decimate everything?


----------



## The Snark (Aug 14, 2012)

SamuraiSid said:


> Wow thats a big snake.
> 
> So.... whats the problem? Honestly I dont fully understand, and Im pretty ignorant when it comes to ecosystems, but wont the environment eventually right itself and find a new equilibrium with room the these magnificient beasts? Or will these pythons eventually just decimate everything?


The environment will always find equilibrium eventually. There are two problematic factors to that though. First, the obsession the average moron... excuse, American couch potato has with big bad monster beasties of any make and model as exemplified in that newspaper article, and then the depredation of native animals as things adjust.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Louise E. Rothstein (Aug 14, 2012)

There were snakes that size before the Ice Age.
Things had already adjusted before the Ice Age threw things off.
However,there was some serious time to get adjusted in those days...humans didn't speed the onset of earlier episodes of global warming and no human vehicles were speeding unfamiliar species to the state of Florida or to anywhere else.

Since humans are engaged in both of those problematic activities now we may expect to encounter some problems before anything can adjust because the speed of change has been speeded up much too much.

However,snakes that size have been there before.

And they did not destroy the Everglades.

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## pitbulllady (Aug 14, 2012)

Louise E. Rothstein said:


> There were snakes that size before the Ice Age.
> Things had already adjusted before the Ice Age threw things off.
> However,there was some serious time to get adjusted in those days...humans didn't speed the onset of earlier episodes of global warming and no human vehicles were speeding unfamiliar species to the state of Florida or to anywhere else.
> 
> ...


Beat me to it, Louise!  Yes, indeed, there were some very large Boids in Florida prior to the Ice Age, as fossils suggest.  Now, while these were not PYTHONS, per se, but related to the modern Boa Constrictors and more likely, Anacondas, they were still very impressive big honkin' constrictor snakes.  AND, I find it utterly ridiculous that people still insist that nothing will eat a Burmese Python.  Those things don't hatch out as 17-footers.  Anything that will eat a native snake will eat a young Burm, and that's a lot of animals in south FL!  Gators eat them, and another even more dangerous and persistent invasive species, the feral hog, will certainly eat them.  Hogs are especially fond of snake meat, and unlike solitary species that the Burm will prey on, those babies run in gangs, and stick up for one another.  Tangling with a herd of wild hogs is like running into a wall of chain saws, and the Everglades is overrun with those critters and not ONE thing is being done about it, either.  Unlike snakes, hogs actually DO alter the land itself through their incessant rooting, and again, unlike snakes, they also destroy native plants as well as preying on animals.  No one mentions the hogs, though, because when you mention "hogs and pigs" people think of "Babe" and "Wilbur" from "Charlotte's Web", not bad-tempered, 300-lb. beasts with six-inch tusks for slicing and dicing, so people tend to get all upset about the notion of killing them.  Mention snakes, though, and most people get a bad case of the "KILL-IT-WITH-FIRE" heebie-jeebies.  Also conveniently left out of the picture is the fact that HUMANS have already irreparably damaged the Everglades, by diverting water from it to the sugar cane fields and housing developments and golf courses and resorts, and by building major highways through it, and this happened long before anyone in the US thought of keeping a Python as a pet.  Another conveniently left-out fact is that there are a lot of much more insidious invasives in the Everglades that aren't even animals, but PLANTS, like Kudzu and Hydrilla, which do more damage than the animals, but they aren't exciting enough to warrant a fear-mongering news headline.

pitbulllady

Reactions: Like 3


----------



## Shrike (Aug 15, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> but PLANTS, like Kudzu and Hydrilla, which do more damage than the animals, but they aren't exciting enough to warrant a fear-mongering news headline.


The plant that ate the South?  Sounds pretty scary if you ask me 

I agree though.  Big snakes make for big headlines.  Burms don't reach impressive, alligator swallowing proportions over night.  They start out small and are on the menu for countless other species.  I'm not so much worried about Burms consumption of larger animals such as alligators or deer; I think it's the predation on small to mid-sized species (birds, rabbits, opossums, etc) that may shake things up.  We're not going to see anything on the scale of Guam with the introduction of the brown tree snake.   I doubt that Burms will extirpate any native species (the Key Largo wood rat might be an exception).  As you and others pointed out, snakes have always played a large role in the ecology of the Everglades.  

I worry more about nutrient pollution in the Everglades than giant pythons.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tarac (Aug 15, 2012)

There is the Key Deer as well- and a number of other rare, smaller animals.  Mainly an issue because they are not native and no other comparable predator exists there so there is a possible vulnerability of some of our native species.  Documented decline in small mammal populations already which means less food for other predators aside from the direct injury to the prey species.  It's hard to know exactly what ramifications the introduction of a new species can have.  Some are harmless over time, some are terrible.  

Easy to scold the papers and news for making a fuss about it because so many of us are sympathetic to these kinds of creatures (burms, etc.) and they do tend to be quite dramatic.  But think of it this way- imagine that some other animal we feel sympathy for is introduced into Chile and it happens to like tarantulas.  Sure, nature will balance out as it always has.  But is it worth allowing this new, non-native predator to run wild, eating all the Chilean tarantulas and possibly more just because we know that nature will re-balance?  At some point you are choosing a side and for me it is more important to preserve the ecosystem and it's native inhabitants because it's much harder to predict what might happen and how many species could be potentially be affected than it is to predict what will happen to the burmese python populations of the world if we eradicate them from Florida.  It is sad to kill any animal in these circumstances no question, of course it is not their fault they are here.  But it's also very sad to watch an ecosystem collapse because people cannot be responsible for the animals they bring into this country and their homes.  Yes, the Everglades face lots of threats from agriculture and development.  Why add insult to injury?   And at this stage we cannot say whether or not the burm, or any of the other introduced pet trade animals, will have a major effect on it or not.  Usually you do not know these things until it is beyond the point of no return.  Best to err on the side of caution I think.  I would rather not find out how bad the problem can be just because I like burms.  I like the Everglades too.  

That reasoning- nature will re-balance itself- is precisely how we justify people destroying everything.  Nature will rebalance, go ahead and chop down every last drop of virgin forest.  May as well kill everything but soy and wheat and corn and domesticated cattle and chickens and just be done with it, right?  Nature will re-balance.  Or is there some virtue in trying to preserve diversity after all?

Please review this:

https://public.myfwc.com/crossdoi/fundedprojects/GrantDetails.aspx?ID=164

Look how much crap the pet trade and irresponsible idiots (hobbyists, importers of animals and products alike, etc.) have brought in.  I am all about private patronage of exotic species but at a certain point it becomes unreasonable to think that one of these many many things won't have a deleterious effect on the native ecology here.  The vast majority of these animals have one thing in common- they are almost all animals that any average idiot can buy in a pet store.  It's not right, for the exotic animal or for the native.  I don't have any clue how it should be handled because there are many virtues to keeping exotics _responsibly_ but it is a problem, no question about it.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Deftones90 (Aug 15, 2012)

They really do act like it's this devastating problem and it's really not. Their numbers are seriously exagerrated. There's plenty of things to keep them in check as other posts have stated. Florida has MUCH bigger problems on their hands than the damn burms.


----------



## Shrike (Aug 15, 2012)

Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of Burms in the Everglades.  You're right, it's appropriate to err on the side of caution since we don't know what the pythons' ultimate impact will be.  I just don't think their effect on the ecosystem will be as catastrophic as what occurred in places such as Guam.  And I do get tired of pop media coverage of this issue.  CNN and Yahoo get their hooks in to the story and all of a sudden we've got Snakes on a Plane-like hysteria.  I'm sick of these mother <edit> pythons in this mother <edit>  swamp!         

I don't want pythons in the Everglades.  It wouldn't bother me a bit if they were eradicated (even if that isn't likely).



Tarac said:


> Or is there some virtue in trying to preserve diversity after all?


Absolutely.  Unfortunately, exotic invasions under the right conditions are almost impossible to control or reverse.  The question is how far are we willing to go in ensuring they don't occur in the first place.


----------



## Tarac (Aug 15, 2012)

Shrike said:


> Don't get me wrong, I'm not in favor of Burms in the Everglades.  You're right, it's appropriate to err on the side of caution since we don't know what the pythons' ultimate impact will be.  I just don't think their effect on the ecosystem will be as catastrophic as what occurred in places such as Guam.  And I do get tired of pop media coverage of this issue.  CNN and Yahoo get their hooks in to the story and all of a sudden we've got Snakes on a Plane-like hysteria.  I'm sick of these mother****** pythons in this mother****** swamp!
> 
> I don't want pythons in the Everglades.  It wouldn't bother me a bit if they were eradicated (even if that isn't likely).
> 
> ...


It is really hard to qualify whether or not the burms will be as catastrophic as the house snake in Guam.  Like Guam, we don't have this kind or scale of predator naturally, not even gators.  I will reserve judgment for now on that front, it's impossible to predict one way or the other beyond saying that we don't know because we don't have anything similar.

I completely agree with you on the news front- why we are so hysterical over a few pythons and not kittens is beyond me.  Actually, it's not- people just don't find snakes agreeable in general.  And kittens don't generally grow up to eat people where the rare burm or other large serpent has ocassionally made a meal out of a small person which of course gets attention immediately, the same way shark and alligator attacks do.  Heck, even Sigfried and Roy's captive bred and raised Tiger was national news when it attacked one of them as are most other incidents of this nature.  Understandably we are more fascinated and afraid of animals that can potentially consume us, however unlikely it might be.  But as far as focusing on it as an "invasive" or even a remote chance of attack- let's get real and start looking at cats and dogs and feral hogs.

On the other hand, if we don't have some coverage then the problem will just continue, with more and more large snakes, crocodilians, monitors, monkeys, etc. being introduced and establishing every year.  At least if there is a witch hunt it will slow the process a bit.  It's sad it has to happen this way with so many gorgeous and innocent animals being killed because a person (the most noxious and invasive species ever to roam the earth) can't be responsible, but it is better than turning a blind eye like we do for the aforementioned "domesticated" animals.  We just accept there presence and do very very little to control them.  

The list in the link has the native and non-native species that are already shown to be established.  There are innumerable more species that have been collected (it covers a mere 4% of the total specimens, grant funding ran out before the other 53K or so could be processed) and just not shown to be established yet.

This is a list of species that are found in the Everglades alone, not necessarily known to be breeding but not excluded yet either:

http://www.evergladescisma.org/species/

Freaking insane, really.  There is no way that at least a few of these vast numbers of exotics will prove to be very harmful to our native ecology over time.  Some of them already are in fact.

---------- Post added 08-15-2012 at 12:12 PM ----------




Deftones90 said:


> They really do act like it's this devastating problem and it's really not. Their numbers are seriously exagerrated. There's plenty of things to keep them in check as other posts have stated. Florida has MUCH bigger problems on their hands than the damn burms.


The presence of numerous, very large (e.g. larger than any other native predator by a long shot) breeding adults contradicts that.

Yes there are a lot of other issues here and everywhere else on earth.  But dismissing the problem as small in the grand scheme is not unlike telling someone on Chemo not to worry about the common cold they just contracted because they have bigger problems to worry about.  It could be the insult that topples the house of cards completely.  You cannot say otherwise at this point, all we know is that it is affecting the native populations we have monitored.  And of course so little financing available to watch these things go on, we have very little of the picture exposed so far.  Always better to be cautious with these kinds of things.  

I think of the recent establishment of the red bay ambrosia beetle which carries a pathogen that is fatal to members of Lauraceae in the NW.  It came from China and was ignored because it was only affecting "unimportant" trees- too bad that family makes up a huge percentage of tropical flora over most of the NW, it's the biggest family in Florida tropical hammocks and top 10 in the world.  One major affect, which will impact people all over Latin America, is that the officials who designated this as affecting only "unimportant" trees somehow overlooked the Avocado which shows little to no resistance at all.  Trees are dying everywhere now and the invasion has become unstoppable because it got so little funding and so little attention that it was allowed to persist beyond manageability.  Not only will we likely lose many many ecosystems but we will also see the livelihoods of many people destroyed.  

Best to be cautious and treat everything as a potential disaster on this front because you really never know.  Invasives are not something to dismiss even if they are being demonized because they happen to be a giant snake and not a small, unnoticeable beetle with an even less noticeable fungus on board.  It's very short sighted to treat them as "not that bad" since there is no way to ensure they are not a major threat except to control them.  One of those hindsight issues.  Best to be overly dramatic than overly nonchalant IMO.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## LV-426 (Aug 15, 2012)

The point of me posting this article was to inform people that these things are still out there. PitBullLady, I am also happy to announce that in Miami-Dade county they upheld the 23 year old pit bill ban. Glad to see some humans have common sense.


----------



## Aviara (Aug 15, 2012)

Perhaps instead of emphasizing cleanup, more attention should instead be turned to making sure these situations stop happening. Too many invasive species have been carelessly deposited around the globe in places they don't belong. To the general public the burmese pythons are frightening, but the truly terrifying issue at hand is not giant constrictors roaming the everglades and swallowing our children. It's the fact that we have witnessed the damage that invasive species continue to cause, and yet we continue to deposit animal and plant life where it does not belong. Invasive plants and insects have done untold damage far more extensive than any invasive vertebrate can cause. They've been permitted, even encouraged, to spread because of human doings, human mistakes and human ignorance. 

The burmese pythons have spawned a partially-passed "python ban". Now it is illegal to cross U.S. state lines with many of the large constrictor species. How is this progress? People will still continue to irresponsibly breed and carry these species. They will still continue to release these species and others when they grow "too large", "too expensive", or just become "boring". The real attention should be paid to the vendors and careless breeders who sell these animals to unprepared homes and ignorant buyers. The phenomenon happens with large constrictors, venomous snakes, juvenile monitors, hatchling iguanas, etc. far too frequently. Perhaps a license for ownership should be required, including an examination of the facility and of proper caging and husbandry practices. Perhaps there should be a penalty for producing these animals in excess, or a license for breeding. I firmly believe that these species should be legal to own, BUT only once responsible ownership, proper finances, and the ability to commit long-term is proven. All invasive species are a product of human irresponsibility, and it's time to start educating ourselves and being aware of the consequences of our actions.

Reactions: Like 2


----------



## LV-426 (Aug 15, 2012)

The problem is people buy these animals as babies (pythons and monitors), then as they grow they find out they cant control them, either they dump them in the glades or gives it to someone else (who then eventually doesn't want it and dumps it). It's a vicious cycle. I understand that people have the right to own these animals but some people aren't just up to the task, it requires a lot of dedication to properly keep these animals. Unfortunately with today's demands most people don't have the time to put into them.


----------



## The Snark (Aug 15, 2012)

Some nesting birds will be threatened by the pythons. They are eating machines when it comes to raiding nests, damaging the nest, eating the young then coiling in the location and waiting for the adults. But then there is another equally serious threat to many species in the Everglades. Idiots stomping and tramping the environs, often armed with guns, out hunting for the pythons and taking shots at anything that moves in the process.


----------



## Deftones90 (Aug 15, 2012)

Tarac said:


> It is really hard to qualify whether or not the burms will be as catastrophic as the house snake in Guam.  Like Guam, we don't have this kind or scale of predator naturally, not even gators.  I will reserve judgment for now on that front, it's impossible to predict one way or the other beyond saying that we don't know because we don't have anything similar.
> 
> I completely agree with you on the news front- why we are so hysterical over a few pythons and not kittens is beyond me.  Actually, it's not- people just don't find snakes agreeable in general.  And kittens don't generally grow up to eat people where the rare burm or other large serpent has ocassionally made a meal out of a small person which of course gets attention immediately, the same way shark and alligator attacks do.  Heck, even Sigfried and Roy's captive bred and raised Tiger was national news when it attacked one of them as are most other incidents of this nature.  Understandably we are more fascinated and afraid of animals that can potentially consume us, however unlikely it might be.  But as far as focusing on it as an "invasive" or even a remote chance of attack- let's get real and start looking at cats and dogs and feral hogs.
> 
> ...


I'm not saying they need to dismiss the problem. The news is making things seem like if you live in FL that your backyard is teaming with giant snakes that are spreading like the the zombie virus in 28 Days Later. Of course these will have some sort of impact on the ecology in the glades. What my first post was getting at was that the python issue in the media's view is unrealistic. The burms and other exotics have been in the glades something like 3 decades. My only question is why NOW is it becoming a "problem" if they've been around so long? They can't possibly be taking over as fast as these news writers insist if they've been around that long.....just my .02 on it all. Regardless the news should be taken with a HUGE grain of salt.

Sent from my HTC Glacier using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ZergFront (Aug 15, 2012)

The Snark said:


> The environment will always find equilibrium eventually. There are two problematic factors to that though. First, the obsession the average moron... excuse, American couch potato has with big bad monster beasties of any make and model as exemplified in that newspaper article, and then the depredation of native animals as things adjust.


 Yeah, no kidding. Big, "bad" snakes terrorize the Everglades and gobble up the native animals of FL and it gets to the press. Meanwhile, the many, MANY adorable pet kitties people allow to roam freely to "explore their territory" kill without needing to eat don't even get a little press. Guess it's okay as long as the critter is fluffy.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## pitbulllady (Aug 15, 2012)

Aviara said:


> Perhaps instead of emphasizing cleanup, more attention should instead be turned to making sure these situations stop happening. Too many invasive species have been carelessly deposited around the globe in places they don't belong. To the general public the burmese pythons are frightening, but the truly terrifying issue at hand is not giant constrictors roaming the everglades and swallowing our children. It's the fact that we have witnessed the damage that invasive species continue to cause, and yet we continue to deposit animal and plant life where it does not belong. Invasive plants and insects have done untold damage far more extensive than any invasive vertebrate can cause. They've been permitted, even encouraged, to spread because of human doings, human mistakes and human ignorance.
> 
> The burmese pythons have spawned a partially-passed "python ban". Now it is illegal to cross U.S. state lines with many of the large constrictor species. How is this progress? People will still continue to irresponsibly breed and carry these species. They will still continue to release these species and others when they grow "too large", "too expensive", or just become "boring". The real attention should be paid to the vendors and careless breeders who sell these animals to unprepared homes and ignorant buyers. The phenomenon happens with large constrictors, venomous snakes, juvenile monitors, hatchling iguanas, etc. far too frequently. Perhaps a license for ownership should be required, including an examination of the facility and of proper caging and husbandry practices. Perhaps there should be a penalty for producing these animals in excess, or a license for breeding. I firmly believe that these species should be legal to own, BUT only once responsible ownership, proper finances, and the ability to commit long-term is proven. All invasive species are a product of human irresponsibility, and it's time to start educating ourselves and being aware of the consequences of our actions.


You ARE aware that DNA testing has ruled out the "released pets" scenario as the reason that the Burms are in the Everglades...RIGHT???  THAT is something cooked up by the AR's, along with the entire mythos surrounding a non-existent breed of dog that the AR supporters still insist is something out of the ordinary.  Kook-Aid drinker, or Kool-Aid mixer...which are you going to be?  

pitbulllady


----------



## LV-426 (Aug 15, 2012)

ZergFront said:


> Yeah, no kidding. Big, "bad" snakes terrorize the Everglades and gobble up the native animals of FL and it gets to the press. Meanwhile, the many, MANY adorable pet kitties people allow to roam freely to "explore their territory" kill without needing to eat don't even get a little press. Guess it's okay as long as the critter is fluffy.


To echo what you say, when I was a kid I used to find ring necked snakes, see cardinals and orioles, numerous black racers around my old mans house. Nowadays I barely see any of those animals. Maybe cats are to blame, who knows but something is happening to which I never see these animals anymore.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tarac (Aug 16, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> You ARE aware that DNA testing has ruled out the "released pets" scenario as the reason that the Burms are in the Everglades...RIGHT???  THAT is something cooked up by the AR's, along with the entire mythos surrounding a non-existent breed of dog that the AR supporters still insist is something out of the ordinary.  Kook-Aid drinker, or Kool-Aid mixer...which are you going to be?
> 
> pitbulllady


Really?  Can you please provide a link to that study?  I didn't realize anyone had genotyped all the assorted python lineages found in the pet trade and eliminated them as possible sources of the populations found in the Everglades.  

Intentional release or not, if you had seen Miami after Andrew in person, i.e. the pet stores completely exploded all over US1 not to mention private residence, zoos, everything else, you would be very suspicious of the origins of many of Florida's exotics too.  I did, I was there for clean up on Douglas Road just south of US1 in the heart of downtown Miami.  It's a simple path of least resistance kind of thing.  A lot of new invasive species appeared after that with the expected lag in sightings as the populations were establishing and growing.  One detail that makes it difficult to refute the pet trade connection is the relative lack of invasive herps that are NOT sold in pet stores.  Seems odd that only herps we like to keep as pets would decide to stow away in shipping pallets or what have you in their country of origin and escape here.  

All genetic data that I am aware of to date only suggests a few blood lines of closely related animals which has no bearing on whether or not they were released, and there are more than one distinct line so there is evidence of at least several independent introductions.  

I'm sorry but I won't buy that claim until I see the data myself- since you put it out there you must have this report yourself, RIGHT?... wouldn't want to spread unwarranted rumors like the AR now would we?

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/01/23/1115226109.full.pdf+html


----------



## LV-426 (Aug 16, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> You ARE aware that DNA testing has ruled out the "released pets" scenario as the reason that the Burms are in the Everglades...RIGHT???  THAT is something cooked up by the AR's, along with the entire mythos surrounding a non-existent breed of dog that the AR supporters still insist is something out of the ordinary.  Kook-Aid drinker, or Kool-Aid mixer...which are you going to be?
> 
> pitbulllady


Conspriracy theory?


----------



## Tarac (Aug 16, 2012)

LV-426 said:


> Conspriracy theory?


Nah, this is a rumor that is circulating, she did not invent the false inference herself but rather likely picked it up in a blog somewhere or something along those lines.  Most likely people who want to believe that there isn't an underbelly to their hobby have read the paper that says genetic diversity is limited and then drawn there own conclusions which are not supported by the published data or the scientific group responsible for executing the study.  It's a problem with science in general- trained professionals do the work and then untrained people make the public aware by trying to "summarize" what they think it means without having a good understanding of the content.  Conclusions are drawn because they sound like reasonable arguments but they are in fact not supported by the data in the study being quoted, usually because the people reporting the results do not have a grasp on the nature of the study or the scope of the potential variables involved.  Ultimately it's a bunch of flawed logic being passed around like the truth with a link to the paper that was misinterpreted in the first place.  The next guy reads the title, skims to the end (skipping over the models, math, figures and data, the real "content" of the literature, because he/she is not trained to interpret it and finds it too challenging to be worth tackling as a hobbyist) or maybe just reads the abstract and draws the same flawed conclusion that other unqualified people have told them is really there.  Surprise!  It is not.  

No kind of DNA work will ever be able to tell us how those first few pythons got here, period, so that is a clear cut way to show that this is not a conspiracy but an all too common misunderstanding of valid scientific data.  We know that there are several introductions through DNA, we know that one line is dominant and variability outside of that line is quite limited to date.  

BUT that does not say anything about the origin of the line, those are the flawed arguments that are being used to excuse the pet trade from being a contributer to this mess.  All this tells us is that the pythons are closely related to one another- could be from a single breeding facility, could be low diversity in captive bred pythons in the area or in general, could be that this line predates all others by decades and so is found at a higher frequency in the wild or could be one big fat 20 foot 250 lb preggo female somehow eluded all notice and escaped from a shipping port and crawled all the way to the Everglades where she promptly had 100 babies that have formed the bulk of the population we see today.  DNA will never be able to clarify that.  All it can do is tell us about the relationship of the animals to one another.  It does tell us that several distinct pythons were reproducing there and it also suggests that hobbyists are not all buying every python they can so they can dump it in the glades.  Most of these are probably from whatever original pairs were introduced, not a ton of separate introductions.  But still no way knowing how they got there, certainly not using DNA.  

So funny- people used to be so skeptical of DNA back in the day, now it is the answer to things it can't really even answer!


----------



## pitbulllady (Aug 16, 2012)

Tarac said:


> Really?  Can you please provide a link to that study?  I didn't realize anyone had genotyped all the assorted python lineages found in the pet trade and eliminated them as possible sources of the populations found in the Everglades.
> 
> Intentional release or not, if you had seen Miami after Andrew in person, i.e. the pet stores completely exploded all over US1 not to mention private residence, zoos, everything else, you would be very suspicious of the origins of many of Florida's exotics too.  I did, I was there for clean up on Douglas Road just south of US1 in the heart of downtown Miami.  It's a simple path of least resistance kind of thing.  A lot of new invasive species appeared after that with the expected lag in sightings as the populations were establishing and growing.  One detail that makes it difficult to refute the pet trade connection is the relative lack of invasive herps that are NOT sold in pet stores.  Seems odd that only herps we like to keep as pets would decide to stow away in shipping pallets or what have you in their country of origin and escape here.
> 
> ...


Here is an interview with the FL biologist, Dr. Sean Heflick, who was one of the biologists who actually conducted the genetic testing, in which he answers that question not once, but twice: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/epis...st-shawn-heflick-answers-your-questions/5564/ .  He is quite adamant that the snakes all derived from a small genetic base and that it would actually have been impossible for sporadic releases of random animals over an extended period of time to have produced the resulting population that we now have in the Everglades.  He is quite clear that a natural disaster, Hurricane Andrew, is responsible for the present situation, NOT "irresponsible pet owners".  He and Dr. Frank Mazzoti have been to the two biologists who have conducted the greatest volume of research on these snakes from the start and have worked hands-on, in the field and in the lab, with them, so they would have the most answers and the most well-researched answers at that.

pitbulllady

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## Tarac (Aug 17, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> Here is an interview with the FL biologist, Dr. Sean Heflick, who was one of the biologists who actually conducted the genetic testing, in which he answers that question not once, but twice: http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/epis...st-shawn-heflick-answers-your-questions/5564/ .  He is quite adamant that the snakes all derived from a small genetic base and that it would actually have been impossible for sporadic releases of random animals over an extended period of time to have produced the resulting population that we now have in the Everglades.  He is quite clear that a natural disaster, Hurricane Andrew, is responsible for the present situation, NOT "irresponsible pet owners".  He and Dr. Frank Mazzoti have been to the two biologists who have conducted the greatest volume of research on these snakes from the start and have worked hands-on, in the field and in the lab, with them, so they would have the most answers and the most well-researched answers at that.
> 
> pitbulllady


Hahaha, you point us to a TV personality... it's worse than I thought.  Impugn the TV for dramatizing the pythons and then turn around and refer us to it for "reliable" information about it.  Contrary to what you may think (or what he make think of himself) he is not the leading expert on this front nor did he conduct most of the said research he is discussing.  This work is primarily being done at FIU.  Here is the _real_ study from which he has drawn those same perverted conclusions:

reptile-nation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/FloridaBurmGenetics.pdf 

(copy paste into browser the above, it will open)

If you don't want to parse through all of the details of how the study was structured and which molecular techniques were used to determine the relationships for this, you can do as most do and skim to the end.  Check page 8, the discussion, where it says in no uncertain terms, and I quote:

"Our results indicate that the Python molurus bivittatus populations in Everglades National
Park are not genetically structured. However, there are competing hypotheses for this lack of
structure. It is possible that the python population in the Park is freely interbreeding or
panmictic. There are no significant geographical barriers in ENP to this species as the Burmese
pythons are adept swimmers and climbers, and radio tracking of individual snakes has revealed
movement across large distances in the park (Mazotti et al., 2007). Alternatively, lack of genetic
differentiation may indicate a population originating from a genetically depauperate source
population in the *pet trade*."

This is real literature, not some crack pot getting his jollies chasing big scary snakes on TV... "On next, after HillBilly Handfishing..."  Once again, the main conclusion from this study is that DNA cannot tell you anything about the origins of these animals.  All it can tell you is how they relate to one another and what wild populations they may have originally been derived from.  Hmmm... you cannot say for sure they are pet trade (and note this is not saying from pet owners, it is from the trade- the sequestering of high numbers of the animals in the US with the intent to distribute) but you can absolutely say that there have been several introductions over a period of decades not corresponding only with the Andrew disaster.  The authors- PhDs, not masters in ecology that got a tv show- will never say "we are certain these did or did not come from XXX" because, being _actual experts_ they know you cannot support a claim like that using this data.  But they do very clearly suggest that these are the possible answers:

"This lack of genetic differentiation could be the
result of a freely interbreeding panmictic population, or alternatively, isolated populations
separately introduced from a genetically uniform *captive-bred* source population"

You have to use a discerning eye when you are picking your sources.  TV is not a good one.  You should look up that guy's credentials before you start telling us he's the expert that did most of the work himself.  He's barely qualified to talk about it on TV.  Lol

Here's this guy's website... you tell me if he looks like anything more than a TV personality...

http://shawnheflick.com/


----------



## lizardminion (Aug 18, 2012)

Tarac said:


> Hahaha, you point us to a TV personality... it's worse than I thought.  Impugn the TV for dramatizing the pythons and then turn around and refer us to it for "reliable" information about it.  Contrary to what you may think (or what he make think of himself) he is not the leading expert on this front nor did he conduct most of the said research he is discussing.  This work is primarily being done at FIU.  Here is the _real_ study from which he has drawn those same perverted conclusions:
> 
> reptile-nation.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/FloridaBurmGenetics.pdf
> 
> ...


You do realize no one will ever want to listen to you if you are going to sound like some arrogant @$$, right? Someone may or may not agree with the statements you are posing, but in a debate, you want to leave out some of that tone and sound more formal. By the way you worded your post, you sounded quite immature, which in turn makes you look unintelligent and nobody someone would want to agree with, nor except any proposed facts from.

That said, Shawn Heflick has a graduate degree in biology, as well as helped form USARK, and along with USARK, they have preformed the most studies in regards to the Burmese python issue in the Everglades compared to other agencies who have been involved. They have also worked along side the USFWS with this. Along with research, they also are contributing to eradicating the invasive reptile.
The only morph showing up in the Everglades is the normal/wildtype and this only contributes to evidence of the escaped pythons after hurricane Andrew. 
Even then, as it has always been regurgitated over and over, this is still Florida's problem, not the entire nation's.


----------



## Louise E. Rothstein (Oct 10, 2012)

People forget that the Everglades hosted "wild boars" before the Ice Age.
Although these ancient PECCARIES were technically "not truly pigs" modern peccaries do not know that-and their ancient relatives would not have either.

---------- Post added 10-10-2012 at 08:26 PM ----------

There were also ancient wildcats,wild dogs,and such an awful lot else that many of those thriving "invaders" are more like "replacements."


----------



## lizardminion (Oct 13, 2012)

Edit: Oops, I've posted here before. Disregard my silly pointless post.


----------



## pitbulllady (Oct 13, 2012)

Louise E. Rothstein said:


> People forget that the Everglades hosted "wild boars" before the Ice Age.
> Although these ancient PECCARIES were technically "not truly pigs" modern peccaries do not know that-and their ancient relatives would not have either.
> 
> ---------- Post added 10-10-2012 at 08:26 PM ----------
> ...


That's basically how I see it, too.  When a species disappears from an ecosystem, for whatever reasons, SOMETHING will eventually come in to fill that niche.  That's why we have coyotes here in the east; we eliminated the wolves, so the 'yotes moved in and were far more successful than the wolves ever were.  Southern FL had large constrictor snakes, jaguars, ocelots, peccaries and a lot of other animals that we generally associate with the Amazon rainforest.  The Ice Age, especially the last one known as the "Younger Dryas Period"(which might have been initiated by a comet impacting the Laurentide Ice Sheet in the Great Lakes region), wiped out a lot of those tropical animals, but now the climate is warming back up, a phenomena which a growing number of climatologists are considering a "correction" from those glaciation periods, and one way or the other, many of the animals which once populated the south FL area, or at least something similar, are going to repopulate.

pitbulllady


----------



## SamuraiSid (Oct 13, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> That's basically how I see it, too.  When a species disappears from an ecosystem, for whatever reasons, SOMETHING will eventually come in to fill that niche.  That's why we have coyotes here in the east; we eliminated the wolves, so the 'yotes moved in and were far more successful than the wolves ever were.


If the coyotes are more succesful, havnt they overstepped their niche? If Im understanding everything correctly, I think the introduction of coyote holding top spot as apex predator (they are, right?) will force the entire system to reengineer itself, meaning new niches for everybody and new population figures. Although I think Im being overly dramatic considering we're talking wolves and coyotes, instead of introducing a new species altogether. I just want to understand

If Im understanding Tarac correctly, the issue isnt "the environment will take care of itself", but the fact that it will take its sweet time and us short lived humans will notice a negative impact to the economy because of it.


----------



## pitbulllady (Oct 14, 2012)

SamuraiSid said:


> If the coyotes are more succesful, havnt they overstepped their niche? If Im understanding everything correctly, I think the introduction of coyote holding top spot as apex predator (they are, right?) will force the entire system to reengineer itself, meaning new niches for everybody and new population figures. Although I think Im being overly dramatic considering we're talking wolves and coyotes, instead of introducing a new species altogether. I just want to understand
> 
> If Im understanding Tarac correctly, the issue isnt "the environment will take care of itself", but the fact that it will take its sweet time and us short lived humans will notice a negative impact to the economy because of it.


It's difficult to say how much more of an environmental impact the coyotes in the east have had than their wolf predecessors, because no one ever took the time to study the impact of the wolf on the environment. No one was even concerned about the environment at that time, only expanding our own boundaries and our own financial interests.  Predators in general were seen as bad, things to be eliminated by any means necessary.  Coyotes ARE more adaptable than wolves, that much we do know; they can take advantage of habitats that would not support a wolf population for various reasons.

The thing with the Everglades is that this ecosystem was severely damaged before the pythons ever entered the scene.  Development and agricultural interests, especially the sugar cane industry, had already seriously altered the entire system, diverting water flow, draining the water, destroying entire habitats, and now FL politicians are lining up to be the hero who rides in to save the day by restoring the Everglades to what it was before the FL land boom, before the sugar cane plantations, before the tourists and "snow birds", and they want that recognition NOW, while they are still in office.  It's true that often it takes longer than a couple of human generations for an environment to "take care of itself", and people are impatient.  The politicians need a scapegoat, something tangible they can go after, a real-life dragon to slay, so that they can reap the benefits of being seen as a hero now.  You can overlook truth and facts when you are in politics, and this is very much a political issue.

pitbulllady

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ZergFront (Oct 14, 2012)

LV-426 said:


> To echo what you say, when I was a kid I used to find ring necked snakes, see cardinals and orioles, numerous black racers around my old mans house. Nowadays I barely see any of those animals. Maybe cats are to blame, who knows but something is happening to which I never see these animals anymore.


 Yeah. You know where I live, we have so many aggressive species of birds; ravens, mockingbirds, bluejays, etc. I rarely ever see any type of little colorful birds or songbirds. Very sad. I got to say it was cool seeing a falcon with fresh kill on my lawn, though, especially since it didn't seem too bothered we watched it.

 The ravens and crows are getting annoying, however... just everywhere!


----------



## lizardminion (Oct 14, 2012)

ZergFront said:


> Yeah. You know where I live, we have so many aggressive species of birds; ravens, mockingbirds, bluejays, etc. I rarely ever see any type of little colorful birds or songbirds. Very sad. I got to say it was cool seeing a falcon with fresh kill on my lawn, though, especially since it didn't seem too bothered we watched it.
> 
> The ravens and crows are getting annoying, however... just everywhere!


Good thing we have guns, right?


----------



## SamuraiSid (Oct 14, 2012)

pitbulllady said:


> because no one ever took the time to study the impact of the wolf on the environment.


This is epic, and in a round-about way answers my question in full. 



pitbulllady said:


> The thing with the Everglades is that this ecosystem was severely damaged before the pythons ever entered the scene.


This seems obvious, but something I never thought of before... Thanks


----------



## Aarantula (Oct 23, 2012)

"Because of its size, the record-breaking female snake also was briefly employed in the project, fitted with a radio transmitter, GPS and accelerometers that measured its precise body movements every four seconds. Before it could lay any eggs, it was recaptured on April 19, after 38 days in the wild, and euthanized, Hart said.

After scientists are done with the record-setting reptile, it will be mounted for display at the museum on the University of Florida campus for about five years then returned for display at the park."

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/08/...thon-caught-in-the-florida.html#storylink=cpy

This is suuuuuch bull!!! Way to go scientists, capture and kill anything that THEY feel the Earth can't handle!!!! This article is a joke! First they praise the incredible size etc. about this magnificant creature then finish it off by explaining that they killed a pregnant mother. Nice job... 
Humans discust me...


----------



## LV-426 (Oct 28, 2012)

Aarantula said:


> "Because of its size, the record-breaking female snake also was briefly employed in the project, fitted with a radio transmitter, GPS and accelerometers that measured its precise body movements every four seconds. Before it could lay any eggs, it was recaptured on April 19, after 38 days in the wild, and euthanized, Hart said.
> 
> After scientists are done with the record-setting reptile, it will be mounted for display at the museum on the University of Florida campus for about five years then returned for display at the park."
> 
> ...


It's an invasive species and should be killed on site.


----------



## lizardminion (Oct 29, 2012)

LV-426 said:


> It's an invasive species and should be killed on site.


As are humans. Come at me bro!

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## LV-426 (Nov 1, 2012)

lizardminion said:


> As are humans. Come at me bro!


Are you serious kid....whatever


----------



## Aarantula (Nov 2, 2012)

LV-426 said:


> It's an invasive species and should be killed on site.


Humans are INDEED the most invasive and destructive species on this planet so I don't buy your response as well thought out. WE are a virus... this snake was just trying to survive. 


*By the way, AWESOME screen name and quote. I'm the BIGGEST Aliens fan you will EVER meet!


----------



## LV-426 (Nov 2, 2012)

Aarantula said:


> Humans are INDEED the most invasive and destructive species on this planet so I don't buy your response as well thought out. WE are a virus... this snake was just trying to survive.
> 
> 
> *By the way, AWESOME screen name and quote. I'm the BIGGEST Aliens fan you will EVER meet!


Thanks, trust me I know humans are the scourge of the planet. I wouldn't mind 1/2 the worlds population wiped out.


----------



## lizardminion (Nov 2, 2012)

LV-426 said:


> Thanks, trust me I know humans are the scourge of the planet. I wouldn't mind 1/2 the worlds population wiped out.


 But who wants to sign up for that? You wanna be the first?


----------



## VictorHernandez (Nov 3, 2012)

I've heard that Florida is infested with thousands of invasive species or something.

Reactions: Like 1


----------



## ShredderEmp (Nov 3, 2012)

VictorHernandez said:


> I've heard that Florida is infested with thousands of invasive species or something.


Wouldn't surprise me.


----------



## LV-426 (Nov 4, 2012)

lizardminion said:


> But who wants to sign up for that? You wanna be the first?


Shoot I ain't going out like that, survival of the fittest. If I don't make it oh well.

---------- Post added 11-04-2012 at 05:24 PM ----------




VictorHernandez said:


> I've heard that Florida is infested with thousands of invasive species or something.


I see them everyday


----------

