I know this is kind of long but it has a lot of really good points to bring up when you are making your phone calls on monday.



The talking points on S. 373 provided below will assist you in discussions with Senators or their

legislative aides responsible for environmental issues. When communicating with these individuals, it is

imperative that you present yourself in a professional manner and make it clear that this Bill would do

nothing to increase the capacities of federal or state officials to address the feral population of Burmese

pythons in south Florida.



Current Status of Python Invasion in the US



• One population of one species. Over the last fifty years, millions of pythons of nearly a dozen

species have been imported into the US. Despite the occasional escape or release of these

animals, only one species of python has established a feral population. And, the circumstances

that contributed to its establishment in the Everglades of south Florida are rather unique and

complex (see below).



Burmese Pythons in the Everglades and Keys



• Agreement on Control in South Florida. There is general agreement that the feral population

of Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) in the Everglades and Keys of south Florida

needs to be controlled, and if feasible, eradicated.

• Unique, Complex Situation. Individual pythons have been documented in the Everglades

region since the 1970s and the establishment of the current population likely resulted from a

relatively unique and complex combination of factors including the mass escape of pythons

when holding facilities were destroyed by Hurricane Andrew (1992); occasional escape of

individual pythons from hobbyists or commercial facilities; occasional release (often wellintended

but misguided) of pythons by their owners; subtropical climate; large area of swampy

habitat with relatively little human activity; and ample prey availability.

• Collaborative Work Underway. A Python Action Working Group, consisting of state and

federal agencies, the Nature Conservancy (TNC), and the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council

(PIJAC), has been working to design and implement an Action Plan to limit the spread and

impact of Burmese pythons in south Florida. The greatest challenges to python management at

this time are lack of proven techniques for python trapping; funding for research on baits/lures

and traps for capturing the animals; and staff for Action Plan coordination and implementation.

• The Pet Industry is Helping. PIJAC and individual python hobbyists are helping to address

these challenges by contributing ideas to lure/trap development, promoting the need for

additional staffing, and volunteering as trainers and participants in python patrols. They are also

promoting the HabitattitudeTM campaign, state permit systems for large constrictors, and

Florida’s Nonnative Pet Amnesty Day in order to help prevent the additional release or escape of

pythons.

• S. 373 Fails to Help the S. Florida Situation. S. 373 does not provide any assistance to state or

federal agencies for controlling/eradicating the population of Burmese pythons in south Florida.

3

It will have limited to no conservation benefits for the Everglades and may, in fact, have

unintended negative consequences (see below).



Unintended Negative Consequences



• Facilitation of Mass Release and Euthanasia. S. 373 could greatly facilitate the very problem

that natural resource agencies and other stakeholders (including PIJAC) are trying to prevent.

The Bill would make it illegal for pet owners, hobbyists, and businesses who currently posses

pythons to rehome them through sale or trade across state lines, or to take them with them if they

decide to move to another state. As a result, hundreds to thousands of the pythons will likely be

released or killed. The animal welfare implications and potential risks for the establishment of

additional python species/populations are significant.

• Unemployment and families at risk. Thousands of businesses - snake breeders, pet stores, and

manufacturers - in the US rely on the sale of pythons and python-related products. S. 373 would

destroy these companies, contributing to greater unemployment and putting families at risk.

[Note: PIJAC is currently conducting a survey in order to determine potential economic damages

to the reptile industry/snake keepers]



Sending the Wrong Message



• S. 373 implies, “Science has little value in policy decision making.” The US Fish and Wildlife

Service (USFWS) is in the process of conducting a science-based assessment of species in the

genus Python, Boa, and Eunectes to determine if action to initiate a rule making process for any

of these species under the Lacey Act is warranted. As mandated by the Lacey Act, this process

has thus far been transparent and open to stakeholder input. The introduction of S. 373 indicates

that Senator Nelson and colleagues do not place value and/or trust on the scientific process being

conducted by the USFWS. Nor do they acknowledge the findings by US Geological Survey

scientist, Bob Reed, who found that there are varying degrees of risk among python species in

terms of their potential to become invasive in the US (J. Risk Analysis, Vol. 25, pp 753-666). S.

373 treats all Python species as if they are highly likely to become invasive, but peer-reviewed

scientific findings do not support this conclusion.

• S. 373 implies, “If you are going to use science, use controversial science.” Senator Nelson

largely justifies his actions by referencing a climate matching study by Gordon Rodda and

colleagues (2008) which projected that Burmese pythons could inhabit nearly three-quarters of

the US. Not only have other scientists questioned the data and methodologies used in the climate

matching analysis, but this and all subsequent studies by other scientists have included the range

of both P. m. molurus (the Indian python) and P. m. bivittatus. The Indian python occupies a

much broader and more temperate climatic range than the Burmese python and there are

biological and behavior distinctions where the two species overlap in Asia. Furthermore, these

snakes were originally considered separate species and some pythons experts believe they are

distinct enough to be considered separate species at this time. There is no evidence that climate

matching or ecological niche modeling of the Indian python would accurately project the

distribution potential of the Burmese python.

4

• S. 373 implies, “The State of Florida doesn’t have the competency to manage its natural

resources.” After careful evaluation, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

(FWCC) concluded that responsible pet ownership and facilities management are key to

preventing the further establishment of pythons in Florida. They regulate large-breed pythons as

Species of Special Concern which require permits and microchipping. They have also been

sponsoring: a) “Do not Release” campaigns (including HabitattitudeTM) to educate pet owners on

the negative consequences of pet release, as well as alternatives to release, and b) Nonnative

Species Amnesty Days to provide people with the opportunity to surrender large constrictors if

they can no longer keep them. The FWCC has also been collaborating with other state agencies,

federal agencies, and stakeholders through the Python Action Working Group. The FWCC’s

management challenges are likely to be made worse by S. 373 as they will have to contend with

the potential release of hundreds to thousands of pythons that can no longer be rehomed across

state lines.



Setting a Dangerous Precedent



• Lacey Act listing on a whim. Previous Congressional action has resulted in additions to the

Lacey Act, including brown tree snakes (Boiga irregularis) and zebra mussels (Dreissena

polymorpha). In each of these cases, there was: a) clear scientific evidence that the species

were causing significant biological and/or economic damages, b) no constituency that was

socio-economically dependent on the species, and c) consensus that the species were highly

likely to be able to establish and cause significant harm in other parts of the US if

translocated and released into the natural environment (e.g., Hawaii in the case of brown tree

snakes). Congressional action was chosen because it provided a means to respond in the most

timely manner feasible under circumstances clearly consistent with the intent of the Lacey

Act. In the case of S. 373, Senator Nelson and colleagues have chosen to take action counter

to scientific evidence, state and federal agency program initiatives, and a constituency that is

socio-economically dependent on the species. If it passes, S. 373 could set a precedent for the

listing of any species by virtue of an elected official’s circumventing the established statutory

process.



HOW YOU CAN HELP –



♦ Remain calm throughout the process and recognize that this is only the beginning of a long

process.

Be professional! It is paramount that all segments of the pet industry are perceived as highly

professional throughout the course of this process. If perceived otherwise, we loose our

credibility and without our credibility our collective voice as well as individual voices will have

little to no effect.

♦ Alert your friends/colleagues in the reptile community to the potential implications of S. 373.

♦ Contact members of the Senate (Please use the talking points provided above and explain how S.

373 affects you).

♦ Encourage your friends, employees, customers, suppliers to contact their Senators.

♦ Promote HabitattitudeTM – a PIJAC initiative that promotes thoughtful pet choice (Habits),

responsible pet care (Attitudes), and alternatives to the release of unwanted pets so that they do

not become invasive species (protecting Habitats). See www.pijac.org for more information.
-----
Brian Grosart

foreverconstrictors@hotmail.com

[ Hide Replies ]

• TALKING POINTS ON S373 USE WHEN CALLING! - ArizonaB, Sun Jul 26 18:46:42 2009