>>Burmese may be considered introduced, but will not be considerd native. Native species occur in an area historically (prior to European contact) and their migration into an area is not due to human intervention.

>>

>>The intent of a statement may not be deceit, the result may still be misleading when interpreted by people with no scientific or technical background. A number of misleading news articles use information based on scientific and technical information, using the vernacular of science and technology which may be at odds with popular use of terms. These terms may be used with great specificity in a field of study, but more loosely defined in general use.

>>

>>Extrapolating the behavior of captive animals to behavior of the same animals in the wild is fraught with difficulty.





Blaming the media and the "unwashed masses" is getting old. The phrase "no natural enemies/predators" is, at best, (intentionally?) vague and imprecise. And it can be easily argued that it is just plain wrong when used in the context of Florida burms. Just look at the dictionary under the definition of "natural." The animals that feed on burms are part of nature, as are humans. I would think that scientists, above all others, would not use such imprecise language. And even if it means exactly what you are saying it does, then basically what it means is that animals that don't exist in the Everglades don't eat an animal that does exist in the Everglades. Very profound.

[ Show Entire Thread ]