The one and ONLY python BAN thread (HR511) - Page 8

jaleely · 01-17-12, 04:49 PM

Uninformed are always the biggest problem. The uninformed and irrisponsible pet owners are also how we got to this point.

stephenbakir, you advised to sterilize and release them...why on *earth* would you do that? the facts are they *are* a non-native species. That's a terrible plan. Why wouldn't you just ship them back to the amazon or something or adopt them out? I mean, supposedly they are okay enough to own as pets to begin with...even the wild and imported ones. So, are they too used to the wild once in the everglades, to be adopted out? WHy would you catch and release? The whole point is people don't want them there.

stephanbakir · 01-17-12, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaleely

So, let's get back to the animals. I think they should just ban the importing. There is no need at all whatsoever to have any of these animals being taken from the wild when there are so many in the pet trade. They should trap the ones in florida, and adopt them out to all these supposedly responsible snake owners who want them (not the ones who clearly let them escape already) and leave it at that. There shouldn't be any imports at *all*.

Most of the people who even want one right now only want it because it could be banned, and they don't want to not be able to have it.

I hate the government pushing laws and rules, and i hate the minority being able to be louder and push everyone else around, like this. But in this case and others, i think the snakes will be better off NOT being in some dinky petshop to have some inbred hick come over and buy it, starve it, and have it eat their stupid ibred baby and then escape.
Also breeders whine about having new genetics in their lines. If they thought more about the health of the animals, instead of trying to make a name for themseleves, or making money, they wouldn't be breeding mother's to babies, and babies back to siblings, and making a mess of everything anyway.

No imports. And yeah, I think people should have to get a microchip &/or a license for a pet that could be dangerous if not taken care of. *Because* the majority of the people, out of the minority that have snakes....are stupid. Very, very irrisponsible and stupid.

And, when it comes to legsislation picking on something I own, i fight it if i feel like it. I don't need a pep rally. Firstly, if i want to cross a border and move somewhere, I also own guns so they better be prepared to try to take my snake from me. Secondly, i'd be perfectly happy having only the people who currently own large snakes be the only ones. They don't need to keep being imported, since people have already proven they can't take care of their responsibility. Too bad so sad for the rest of us, but it's always the stupid kid who ruins the party for the rest.

Do you really think it's fair to keep selling a snake to just anyone, when it's usually that snake that is mistreated? Just for the right to let anyone have one? Not everyone SHOULD have one. I don't know how else they can protect the snakes from all the morons.

Randyrhodes, you put it better than i did *lol*

Firstly, its impossible to eradicate them from the everglades. They simply don't have enough cause to invest that kind of money into the project, even if they did I still believe it to be impossible.

Regarding imports, it SHOULD be legal, but cracked down on. We NEED new blood, and if we don't right now, we will soon enough. New base mutations are not really needed, we could enjoy them from afar.

Even if you trapped all the burms, there is no way you could adopt out that many... it's just too many snakes.

"they wouldn't be breeding mother's to babies, and babies back to siblings, and making a mess of everything anyway." you really dont know much about it do you? You NEED to inbreed to prove out new recessive mutations, and up until a certain point, it doesn't really hurt. That being said, the GOOD breeders aren't idiots and take that into consideration while breeding. You are also always jumping from project to project (some projects take much longer then others) which mixes up the blood.

" Firstly, if i want to cross a border and move somewhere, I also own guns so they better be prepared to try to take my snake from me." That is the wrong image to portray, they already look at us like an aggressive/defensive minority on a power trip... lets try and change that?

"Not everyone SHOULD have one" I agree, what screening process do you propose? remember it needs to be foolproof.

RandyRhoads · 01-17-12, 04:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaleely

Uninformed are always the biggest problem. The uninformed and irrisponsible pet owners are also how we got to this point.

stephenbakir, you advised to sterilize and release them...why on *earth* would you do that? the facts are they *are* a non-native species. That's a terrible plan. Why wouldn't you just ship them back to the amazon or something or adopt them out? I mean, supposedly they are okay enough to own as pets to begin with...even the wild and imported ones. So, are they too used to the wild once in the everglades, to be adopted out? WHy would you catch and release? The whole point is people don't want them there.

I was trying to refrain, but yeah, what the hell lol......they can still crush the enviornment for the next MANY years of its' life span, even if they can't reproduce.

red ink · 01-17-12, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaleely

Uninformed are always the biggest problem. The uninformed and irrisponsible pet owners are also how we got to this point.

Actually.. I would say it's not the uninformed that has caused the biggest problem but the apathy of the reptile hobby itself. If people cared enough not to sell just to anybody, not to buy from petshops, not to breed just for a quick buck, well then I would'nt think that the govt would have had to step in.

It's a big industry but unfortunately reptile hobbyist are still way way way outnumbered by non-reptile loving people. Given that it's a majority vote in a democracy, maybe the industry should have policed itself from the begining instead of chasing the bucks.

This is a wake up call to the hobby itself... be responsible or "they" step in.

stephanbakir · 01-17-12, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaleely

Uninformed are always the biggest problem. The uninformed and irrisponsible pet owners are also how we got to this point.

stephenbakir, you advised to sterilize and release them...why on *earth* would you do that? the facts are they *are* a non-native species. That's a terrible plan. Why wouldn't you just ship them back to the amazon or something or adopt them out? I mean, supposedly they are okay enough to own as pets to begin with...even the wild and imported ones. So, are they too used to the wild once in the everglades, to be adopted out? WHy would you catch and release? The whole point is people don't want them there.

I understand that, and I specifically stated to sterilize MALES and release them back into the wild. The project has worked with dozens of species, the main ones being sea lamprey and various other fish species.

The way it works is, those males go back into the wild, and yeah they kill the stuff they eat, but they compete with other males for breeding rights with females, and they may lose some battles, but the battles they win mean they there will be 20-45 less pythons in the wild, it sounds crazy but it works, and it works WELL.
As those burms get older, they overpower more and more non sterile males and every female they breed slugs out, meaning there are so many less babies popping up in the wild.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyRhoads

I was trying to refrain, but yeah, what the hell lol......they can still crush the enviornment for the next MANY years of its' life span, even if they can't reproduce.

The damage they do is nothing compared to the damage ALL of the offspring they stop from popping up will do. 1 healthy male can breed 3-8 females in a season, more since mature male retics and burms are rapists... that male in the wild does their population more damage then simply removing him.

RandyRhoads · 01-17-12, 05:15 PM

I wont argue with you there but why would you want ANY more damage done by releasing them back? OF course 1,000,000 of them will do more harm than 1,000. But why put that 1,000 back at all?

stephanbakir · 01-17-12, 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyRhoads

I wont argue with you there but why would you want ANY more damage done by releasing them back? OF course 1,000,000 of them will do more harm than 1,000. But why put that 1,000 back at all?

Lets say half those 1000 males are healthy, and they each win 4 battles with other males for the females attention, they will then each breed their 4 females and those females will slug out.

Now, 500X4=2000 So 2000 females will be bred by the 1000 males you sterilized and released into the wild. Those 2000 females will lay between 20 and 45 slugs (infertile eggs) for the sake of argument I'm going to lowball it and say all 2000 females lay only 20 eggs. By releasing 1000 sterile females into the wild you just stopped 40,000 fertile eggs from being layed, not to mention all of the females the males found and didn't have to fight for.

Its a simple math problem.

RandyRhoads · 01-17-12, 05:38 PM

Either you're missing what i'm saying or there is something that releasing them does i'm not understanding. I know what you're saying about them multiplying, I get your math problem. But why would you want to release them to "slug out" what exactly greater accomplishment does that achieve than just killing them so they don't go and mate in the first place. Just kill all the males and females.

If i'm not getting it explain in more detail please, i'd like to know.

stephanbakir · 01-17-12, 05:45 PM

Lets say the average person you send out into the glades gets 10 burms a week, 1.1 ratio, by releasing that 1 male every time you stop multiple clutches of 20-45 from being layed. This multiplies year by year because that male not only breeds every year hes alive in the wild, but he fights other males for females, and finds females for himself and breeds them. For the same manpower and just about the same investment you do WAY more damage the population then you otherwise would.
Yeh 1 burm will do damage, but is it better to accept that he will do damage if it means that he will stop the population explosion in some small way? even if he only breeds for 1 year and then dies in the winter, he just stopped 20-180 babies from ever being born.

Necrias · 01-17-12, 05:48 PM

I think the point that Stephan was trying to make is that for each female these infertile males mate with, that is one less female giving birth. So you are "blocking" those fertile female from reproducing.

stephanbakir · 01-17-12, 05:49 PM

Exactly! it works better then you think.

RandyRhoads · 01-17-12, 05:52 PM

So you are going off the assumption that the female will breed with a male regardless, and it would be better to be a sterile male,taking up her breeding season. At least I understand what you are saying now thanks for explaining it. I see what you're saying but that involves live catching/sexing. I still think it would be better to just slaughter every one. We've hunted other species to extinction/ near extinction, what's different about this? There would actually be a high market for burm leather products I would assume..

RandyRhoads · 01-17-12, 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Necrias

I think the point that Stephan was trying to make is that for each female these infertile males mate with, that is one less female giving birth. So you are "blocking" those fertile female from reproducing.

You know what else stops a female from breeding? A slug to the head. Just my opinion I haven't been to the everglades so I don't know what it's like but given the opportunity i'd think they could have enough people hunting them out for their skins, like elephants and ivory. I know i'd be out as much as possible if I was there and it was open season no bag limit..

red ink · 01-17-12, 05:59 PM

You've caught it... and you would go to the trouble of performing an operation to sterilise it then release it?

A quick destruction of the medulla oblangata would be more efficient and cost effective... why release it again as while it is out there firing blanks it's still causing damage to the eco system. A more effective way in saving the ecosystem is not by having sterile males out there, it would be by not having any males (or females) at all.

stephanbakir · 01-17-12, 06:04 PM

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?