Pythons apparently wiping out Everglades mammals
- Thread starter massaman
- Start date
Help Support Mantidforum:
frogparty
Well-known member
The numbers seem inflated, but pythons are definitely detrimental. This is bound to happen when a new apex predator is introduced into an already delicate ecosystem.
Dj - you need to look at actual scientific data and not jus heresy from uninformed hobbyists who want to keep pythons legal.
Dj - you need to look at actual scientific data and not jus heresy from uninformed hobbyists who want to keep pythons legal.
ShieldMantid1997
Well-known member
Watch Swamp wars Dj, very real! And big!
If you guys watch that show, there are many other venomous snakes such as the green mamba that illegally get released, but those extreme species don't survive to breed (apparently not enough of them).
I saw a story of some man who was bit by a green mamba in his garden (miami).
Scary stuff!
If you guys watch that show, there are many other venomous snakes such as the green mamba that illegally get released, but those extreme species don't survive to breed (apparently not enough of them).
I saw a story of some man who was bit by a green mamba in his garden (miami).
Scary stuff!
frogparty
Well-known member
Florida is the hub for exotic importation, and temps make rearing and breeding cheaper. The big problem isn't released pets... It's facilities damaged by hurricanes causing mass release of animals.
Your animal planet fan boys lol.
Any way large pythons only eat once a month so how much damage is that? 12 meals a year per snake. Plus the baby's are heavily predated by birds and king snakes. And watch python hunters on Natgeo wild because animal planet is very biased. Ask any expert what we should be worried about is hogs and feral cats because they do way more damage
Any way large pythons only eat once a month so how much damage is that? 12 meals a year per snake. Plus the baby's are heavily predated by birds and king snakes. And watch python hunters on Natgeo wild because animal planet is very biased. Ask any expert what we should be worried about is hogs and feral cats because they do way more damage
frogparty
Well-known member
I agree about hogs and feral cats being bigger problems.You forgot rats though. BUUUUUUUUT you still have to account for the fact that that large a number of large predators in ANY SYSTEM will do serious damage. I have worked as a wildlife biologist and can tell you what the affects are like 1st hand. To boldly dismiss claims as "lies as always" implies that you
1. don't really understand the reprocussions of such large predators on an ecosystem. Changing not only the numbers of prey items, but their behavior as well
or
2. blindly believe what your buddies on the reptile forums tell you
or
3. dont care to learn the real facts at all
Large animals eating once a month, I agree. One everglades deer a month.(fairly smalll compared to other deer) Smaller prey items equate to more frequent feedings. Big pythons think BIIIIIIIIIIIIG prey. I also used to volunteer at the woodland park zoo, I know python appetite. Sedate pythons in containers eat far less than active wild animals
Smaller age bracket pythons, of which there are far more than large adults, will all easily eat an adult raccoon or opossum at least once a month, lets say two a month
even smaller than that age bracket are the really really hungry, faster growing animals that would easily eat a whole litter of raccoons or opossums in a month. Since these animals are not constant year round breeders, that puts a huge dent into the population.
There are lots of predators of young pythons, yes. Kingsnakes I doubt play that large a role, as the average size of these pythons quickly grows to be too large for your average kingsnake. (former kingsnake breeder) Alligators and birds and the road likely claim far more individuals.
1. don't really understand the reprocussions of such large predators on an ecosystem. Changing not only the numbers of prey items, but their behavior as well
or
2. blindly believe what your buddies on the reptile forums tell you
or
3. dont care to learn the real facts at all
Large animals eating once a month, I agree. One everglades deer a month.(fairly smalll compared to other deer) Smaller prey items equate to more frequent feedings. Big pythons think BIIIIIIIIIIIIG prey. I also used to volunteer at the woodland park zoo, I know python appetite. Sedate pythons in containers eat far less than active wild animals
Smaller age bracket pythons, of which there are far more than large adults, will all easily eat an adult raccoon or opossum at least once a month, lets say two a month
even smaller than that age bracket are the really really hungry, faster growing animals that would easily eat a whole litter of raccoons or opossums in a month. Since these animals are not constant year round breeders, that puts a huge dent into the population.
There are lots of predators of young pythons, yes. Kingsnakes I doubt play that large a role, as the average size of these pythons quickly grows to be too large for your average kingsnake. (former kingsnake breeder) Alligators and birds and the road likely claim far more individuals.
ok so what i said was to blosh. What i meant was that the mediaas usial is just over shooting things. 1) I agree that they need to be removed 2) I know that they are bad im just saying that that is just the media trying to scare the publice because they are sankes. what we need is another big freeze like last year as you should know the burms pick up upper respitory infections real easy. Another two years with that and mabe we could erraticate them. and what is prbaly killing the large amounts of babys are herrings and storks. It would be nice if we could cancle out two invasevs with eachother out like burms vs nutera or burms vs the nile monitors. that be nice :gunsmilie: :shifty:
Last edited by a moderator:
lunarstorm
Well-known member
Is the media often sensationalist? You betcha, and good on those who know it when they see it. But when refuting a point, you need to point out the inconsistencies, ideally with proof.
Though the issue might be presented by the "sensationalist media", the thought of increased awareness leading to research and solutions is always a good thing. And in this case, I think the truth lies somewhere in-between. Is the snake situation in Floria a real problem? Yes. But only time will tell to what extent.
Though the issue might be presented by the "sensationalist media", the thought of increased awareness leading to research and solutions is always a good thing. And in this case, I think the truth lies somewhere in-between. Is the snake situation in Floria a real problem? Yes. But only time will tell to what extent.
frogparty
Well-known member
yeah, most likely a large chunk...but then you create selective pressure for the ones that live and reproduce. most likely theyre here to stay now. Time to create an industry of harvesting them for their skins. new boots here we come
PhilinYuma
Well-known member
"Lies as usual" "The numbers seem inflated>" So the named authors of a scientific study, open to scientific scrutiny and refutation if inaccurate, are nonsense, and you know this, how? And most python escapes are from damaged facilities rather than pet owner? You have evidence of this? Is it possible that you, not the University scientists who made the report have an ax to grind? :devil:
frogparty
Well-known member
nope I actually have several articles on my home computer I can link to you, in additiopn to one of the national geographic specials thats been aired recently that points to hurricane damage to large wholesale/holding facilites as the primary vector for mass distribution of these animals
anytime I see over 99% reduction population counts specifically from visual confirmation, I know the error bar on that data is higher than 10% so claiming over 99% is pretty much impossible.ALSO changes in behavior due to increased predation by a new predator, IN ADDITION TO increased human presence due to increased sampling will decrease overall percieved values while not truly representing REAL population values
anytime I see over 99% reduction population counts specifically from visual confirmation, I know the error bar on that data is higher than 10% so claiming over 99% is pretty much impossible.ALSO changes in behavior due to increased predation by a new predator, IN ADDITION TO increased human presence due to increased sampling will decrease overall percieved values while not truly representing REAL population values
Last edited by a moderator:
frogparty
Well-known member
additional info on population sampling, statistical analysis etc is easy to find for free online.
for the record Im all for the exotic pet trade, and used to work as a wildlife biologist before I went into the biotech field. Im not just talking out of my ######
for the record Im all for the exotic pet trade, and used to work as a wildlife biologist before I went into the biotech field. Im not just talking out of my ######
Last edited by a moderator:
PhilinYuma
Well-known member
I didn't think that you were talking out of anything but your keyboard, Frogparty! However, here is the news item reported by the BBc and available on their site if you search "python Florida"
Prof Dorcas and his colleagues looked at data on mammals found during roadkill surveys from 1993-1999, and on live and dead mammals encountered during nighttime road surveys from 1996-1997.
They then compared these results with similar data collected between 2003 and 2011, after the pythons were recognised as being established.
They found that observations of raccoons and opossums had dropped by about 99%. There had been a 94.1% fall in observations of white-tailed deer and an 87.5% decrease in sightings of bobcats.
No rabbits or foxes were seen during the more recent survey; rabbits were among the most common mammals in the roadkill survey between 1993 and 1999."
Now what is your expert estimation of the statistical error in such a survey. 10%+/-? Much higher and the data wont stand. The population of road kills obviously has a high n, but even though the ratio of road kills to the overall population is not known, it is a useful tool for wildlife biologists like yourself from Florida to Death Valley in estimating total (unseen) population change. I don't think that we need to mess with confidence levels here, but even if we postulate a 10 %+/- error and assume, for the sake of argument that it is 10%-, that would still mean a a 74% drop in bobcats and an 84% drop in white tailed deer. Would you not call this catastrophic? The only way to dispute this finding, made by scientists on the spot, would be to find an alternative solution. Do you have one?
I would certainly not argue with your claim that reptiles have been released from facilities; invasive species of fish have been released in the same way. But that is not what you said. You calim that more reptiles are released by holding facilities than by pet owners, and again, I ask you what evidence to support that claim. Obviously, though, if Pythons are banned, there will no longer be a problem with inadequately built holding facilities.
I am not very excited about this issue, but the arguments are interesting!
.
Prof Dorcas and his colleagues looked at data on mammals found during roadkill surveys from 1993-1999, and on live and dead mammals encountered during nighttime road surveys from 1996-1997.
They then compared these results with similar data collected between 2003 and 2011, after the pythons were recognised as being established.
They found that observations of raccoons and opossums had dropped by about 99%. There had been a 94.1% fall in observations of white-tailed deer and an 87.5% decrease in sightings of bobcats.
No rabbits or foxes were seen during the more recent survey; rabbits were among the most common mammals in the roadkill survey between 1993 and 1999."
Now what is your expert estimation of the statistical error in such a survey. 10%+/-? Much higher and the data wont stand. The population of road kills obviously has a high n, but even though the ratio of road kills to the overall population is not known, it is a useful tool for wildlife biologists like yourself from Florida to Death Valley in estimating total (unseen) population change. I don't think that we need to mess with confidence levels here, but even if we postulate a 10 %+/- error and assume, for the sake of argument that it is 10%-, that would still mean a a 74% drop in bobcats and an 84% drop in white tailed deer. Would you not call this catastrophic? The only way to dispute this finding, made by scientists on the spot, would be to find an alternative solution. Do you have one?
I would certainly not argue with your claim that reptiles have been released from facilities; invasive species of fish have been released in the same way. But that is not what you said. You calim that more reptiles are released by holding facilities than by pet owners, and again, I ask you what evidence to support that claim. Obviously, though, if Pythons are banned, there will no longer be a problem with inadequately built holding facilities.
I am not very excited about this issue, but the arguments are interesting!
.
frogparty
Well-known member
I never disagreed it wasnt catastrophic. 99% is just an insanely high number to be reporting. We also, of course cant be blaming the entire animal population decrease on the burmese python. Quality of everglades habitat has been on a steady decrease for many years, and that also has to be taken into effect. Since we are comparingf data from as far back as 1993, this fact HAS TO BE CONSIDERED in the overall scale of these findings.
Reptiles are not INTENTIONALLY relesed by wholesale facilities, but it is believed that massive damage sustained to multiple such facilities during the last several years devastating hurricanes has caused a MASS RELEASE of thousands of individuals into the surrounding area. Not just burmese pythons, but many exotics including the green mambas andother exotic venemous animals previously mentioned in tis thread. The burms, however, can overwinter and breed, while many others cannot.
Im all for pointing out how devastating these pythons are to the ecosystem. And people who say the danger isnt real are fooling themselves.
Reptiles are not INTENTIONALLY relesed by wholesale facilities, but it is believed that massive damage sustained to multiple such facilities during the last several years devastating hurricanes has caused a MASS RELEASE of thousands of individuals into the surrounding area. Not just burmese pythons, but many exotics including the green mambas andother exotic venemous animals previously mentioned in tis thread. The burms, however, can overwinter and breed, while many others cannot.
Im all for pointing out how devastating these pythons are to the ecosystem. And people who say the danger isnt real are fooling themselves.
dragon
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2011
- Messages
- 93
- Reaction score
- 2
The presence of Burmese is a problem but, genereally speaking, so is the release of any invasive -- and this holds true for any ecosystem. I do not support a ban on python ownership or importation. Banning of one species, I believe, will set a presidence for future bans of other exotis. The Everglades, in particular is a sad situation. The most grevious damage to the Glades isn't even the exotics but rather the massive draining of the watersupply for human consumption.
This means less pressure on the authorities to control us human beings. With more articles like this, i suspect the public will go howling for python skins... and more or less forget the human contribution to ecosystem damage. Which - snakes or no snakes - only increases with time as well.
