I've already started drafting my letter too, but I like yours SO much more



Two things, in the following paragraph, a word is missing:



I am writing to express my opposition against S373. Recently several outstanding doctorates, professionals and organizations (such as National Geographic) have commented that the current “data” that supports the ban of importation, exportation and interstate movement of nine major species of constrictor snakes is not scientifically valid. Although I recognize that some species, such as the Burmese Python, have become an issue in Florida, there is: 1) no reasonable evidence to support that all of the species pertaining to the genera implicated in the bill pose ANY __________ native wildlife or the environment; 2) no reasonable evidence to support that the species pertaining to the genera implicated in the bill pose a threat to persons of this country.



I assume the missing word is "threat" or "danger".



Also, it wouldn't be illegal to own these animals, or even to sell them. It would just be illegal to move them across state lines (either by transporting them or shipping them) which means no out of state sales.



Hope those suggestions help I REALLY love your letter and will definitely be stealing rather shamelessly from it!



Here's a VERY rough version of mine so far. I have a LOT of work to do on it...



Dear Senator,

I watched the Environment and Public Works committee meeting on December 10th, 2009 to see what happened with S373.



Although I’ve voiced my opinion before on this piece of legislation, I feel I must do it again. The intention of S373 is noble and good, but the methodology is fatally flawed.



The intention of the bill is to protect native US habitat from the non-native Burmese python, and now it has been amended to include nine species of constrictor snakes.



There is no doubt that Burmese pythons have a self sustaining population in the Everglades, however, the science behind the USGS report that asserts the pythons could spread across the nation is disturbingly simplistic and grossly inaccurate. As a community, we are not questioning the claims of potential global warming, but we are questioning the parameters to determine suitable habitat for these snakes.



Because of this completely false report of potential expansion on the Burmese pythons, this issue looks like a national issue when in fact; it is truly a state issue only for the state of Florida.



For an accurate portrayal of the risk of expansion of the Burmese python, please see this rebuttal report by Pyron, et al from The City University of New York:



http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002931



The report linked above is thorough in its science, and completely discredits the findings of the initial report published by the USGS. Keep in mind, the report does not question the climate mapping performed by the researchers, but instead it questions the assertion that the average daily temperature is the best method to determine if a snake can survive in an environment. This report plainly states that Burmese pythons will NEVER leave the Everglades, regardless of how warm the rest of the nation becomes.



If you ask any person with any experience keeping snakes, they’ll tell you that the single most important factor in determining how well a snake will survive – with regards to temperature – is “temperature extremes”, or, highs and lows. That is important because low temperatures kill snakes. In the case of Burmese pythons, temperatures below 60 degrees can be fatal.



The second and final point I’d like to share with you is this. If this bill is passed, either as written or with the recent amendment to include the nine large constricting snakes, the market for these animals will fall to a total value of $0 before the bill is even enacted. In fact, just mentioning that these animals may be banned has dramatically affected the market value of these animals.



You may ask why? The reason is; the vast majority of the value of these animals is in their reproductive capabilities in the future. Therefore, a non-breeding animals market value is: worthless. If a bill makes it illegal to sell these animals across state lines any time in the future, no person will want to invest in the animal now.



There will be no opportunity to “wind down” and liquidate stock because buyers will not want to buy the animals because they can’t breed them and sell their offspring. Basically, any animals a person owns before the bill, will be the animals the person owns after the bill. Also I heard in the committee meeting a Senator mentioning selling the skins of snakes. Let me assure you that no pet owner will consider for a second, the idea of skinning their pet so please do not consider that as an option.



To give you an example of what can happen, I’ll use my scenario. I am a “hobbyist” and with a rather small collection compared to most “hobbyists”. I have a collection that I’ve been building for a decade that consists of 10 boa constrictors valued at about $25,000. This breeding season, I could produce as many as three litters of baby boas with a market value as high as $40,000. If this bill is passed, my 10 boa constrictors will be economically valueless and any offspring produced will not be purchased because people will not buy them if they don’t have the option to breed them. So, I could potentially have a collection with as many as 60 or more boas, with no additional income to pay for their food (about $100/year each), escape proof housing ($750 over their lifetime of 20 years) and electricity to heat their enclosures ($120/year per animal) and supplies ($50/year each). I do not have the room in my house to accommodate this many boas as they can get up to about 6 feet in length and will need a 4’x2’x1’ cage to live in as adults.



What are my options? Kill these animals? Couldn’t do it. Release them into the wild because I don’t have the heart to kill them? That would counteract what this bill seeks to accomplish. Please tell me, what do I do if this bill is passed?



Senator, please see that this bill is scientifically unjustified, and economically crippling to many US citizens. Please vote no on S373.



Kindest regards,

Jonathan Brady



PS, I’ve yet to figure out how this bill addresses the removal of pythons from the Everglades.
-----
What's written above is purely my opinion. In fact, MOST of what you read on the internet is someone's opinion. Don't take it too seriously



Jonathan Brady

DeviantConstrictors.com

Deviant Constrictors picturetrail

[ Show Entire Thread ]