The one and ONLY python BAN thread (HR511)

[stephanbakir]

Those males you release will do more damage then you ever could hope to, to the population. and thus saving the environment, the damage they do is minor compared to the damage the offspring they will never give a chance to be, will ever do.

The everglades is MASSIVE, do you really think anyone has the manpower to eradicate burms from it? If it was even 20% the size it is now, do you really think that even then we have the power to kill every single one? without changing our mindset and being smarter about it?

[RandyRhoads]

Originally Posted by stephanbakir

Those males you release will do more damage then you ever could hope to, to the population. and thus saving the environment, the damage they do is minor compared to the damage the offspring they will never give a chance to be, will ever do.

The everglades is MASSIVE, do you really think anyone has the manpower to eradicate burms from it? If it was even 20% the size it is now, do you really think that even then we have the power to kill every single one? without changing our mindset and being smarter about it?

How big was Africa and other places animals were hunted out? Pretty big i'm guessing. I'm not saying overnight, and yes devise a plan. I just think it would at least get a good handle on them. Allow native burm leather to be sold, with high prices like ivory,mink, and such, and see how quick people are to harvest it.

[red ink]

Originally Posted by RandyRhoads

How big was Africa and other places animals were hunted out? Pretty big i'm guessing. I'm not saying overnight, and yes devise a plan. I just think it would at least get a good handle on them. Allow native burm leather to be sold, with high prices like ivory,mink, and such, and see how quick people are to harvest it.

Yep... nearly wipe out the buffalos from the plains in a few decades.

[red ink]

Originally Posted by stephanbakir

Those males you release will do more damage then you ever could hope to, to the population. and thus saving the environment, the damage they do is minor compared to the damage the offspring they will never give a chance to be, will ever do.

The everglades is MASSIVE, do you really think anyone has the manpower to eradicate burms from it? If it was even 20% the size it is now, do you really think that even then we have the power to kill every single one? without changing our mindset and being smarter about it?

Yeah I get what your saying... I'm still just having trouble with the reasoning.

Your saying that the damage they do is minor compared to the offsprings they will never have.

What I'm getting at is... It's already in your hands and dead snakes don't eat, dead snakes don't mate is saying.

The money saved from euthanising instead of catching, sterilising then releasing can be put to better use i.e more traps, more hunters.

Think of this as a scenario... your sterilised specimen gets released back into the glades, continues to grow then somehow manages to get back into someones backyard, media gets a hold of the story... what do you think happen then?

Joe public don't care bout no science mumbo jumbo, joe public only cares bout kickin arse and takin names yeeehahhh.

You gotta fight fire with fire on this one as that's the mentality of your enemy.

[stephanbakir]

Originally Posted by RandyRhoads

How big was Africa and other places animals were hunted out? Pretty big i'm guessing. I'm not saying overnight, and yes devise a plan. I just think it would at least get a good handle on them. Allow native burm leather to be sold, with high prices like ivory,mink, and such, and see how quick people are to harvest it.

Suply and demand, if you flood the market the prices wont be so high. When the supply goes down because the population goes down the number of people hunting them will skyrocket, helping your battle. That being said, what happens when the population drops to the point where it stops being financially reasonable to hunt them? People will stop, and do you really think everyone out there hunting them cares more about the glades then their financial situation? I'd be surprised if half the hunters didn't let babies go free instead of killing them on sight, so the hunt can go on.

I don't think there has been a documented case of parthenogenisis in burmese pythons, so lets pretend its impossible. Do you honestly think that you can kill ALL of the males, and or females in the wild population? I doubt you can even find them all, hollow standing trees, tunnels, dense vegetation, its not feasible to eradicate them, but your best bet when it comes to decimating the numbers as fast as possible to is to reintroduce infertile males.

Originally Posted by red ink

Your saying that the damage they do is minor compared to the offsprings they will never have.

What I'm getting at is... It's already in your hands and dead snakes don't eat, dead snakes don't mate is saying.

The offsping the MALES will never have, you are killing the females. Be not releasing infertile males the females are forced to breed with males who are almost 100% likely to be fertile... its a losing battle.

[red ink]

Originally Posted by stephanbakir

The offsping the MALES will never have, you are killing the females. Be not releasing infertile males the females are forced to breed with males who are almost 100% likely to be fertile... its a losing battle.

How about we don't release any back at all (male or female) is what I'm getting at. I understand what you are saying the infertile male will compete with the fertile males for females... in the meantime the infertile male is still having an impact on the local ecology.

There's no guanrantee the infertile male will win courtship rights with the female... Females can mate with multiple males during the breeding season, one infertile the other fertile.. results still more snakes.

Easiest way let the public have their way and let them go on a invasive species killing spree... win win. They feel like they're doin something and there's a dent in the population. If we were going to spend money on the operation for sterilisation, half that and use it as a bounty for the snake. Quickest way to make a natural resource scarce.. put a value on it and don't restrict the take. Even at 10 bux a pop, there will be hunters out there who will take 10-20 a weekend to make that kind of cash.

It's the same tactics we are trying to use here... "shoot all ferals". Hunters wil hunt and rednecks will kill for kicks. Why not use their idiocy to your advantage, shift their mentality to go hunting and killing invasives.

[jaleely]

Originally Posted by red ink

How about we don't release any back at all (male or female) is what I'm getting at. I understand what you are saying the infertile male will compete with the fertile males for females... in the meantime the infertile male is still having an impact on the local ecology.

There's no guanrantee the infertile male will win courtship rights with the female... Females can mate with multiple males during the breeding season, one infertile the other fertile.. results still more snakes.

Easiest way let the public have their way and let them go on a invasive species killing spree... win win. They feel like they're doin something and there's a dent in the population. If we were going to spend money on the operation for sterilisation, half that and use it as a bounty for the snake. Quickest way to make a natural resource scarce.. put a value on it and don't restrict the take. Even at 10 bux a pop, there will be hunters out there who will take 10-20 a weekend to make that kind of cash.

It's the same tactics we are trying to use here... "shoot all ferals". Hunters wil hunt and rednecks will kill for kicks. Why not use their idiocy to your advantage, shift their mentality to go hunting and killing invasives.

Thank you. Couldn't have said any of that better. I really couldn't, i'm terrible at this lol
I just keep getting frustrated and resorting to calling everything stupid *lol*