>>I don't think any endangered species have been found in the gut contents of any of the other 8 out of the big 9. And only a very small number of actual specimens of endangered species have been actually been found in Burmese. I think it's actually less than 5 individuals of 2 endangered species. From this they have extrapolated the dangers. Certainly no endangered species have been found in the gut contents of the Burmese pythons established in Minnesota because there are no Burmese established there. Yet the law seeks to 'protect' the endangered species in Minnesota from a Burmese problem that in all likelihood will never occur.

I am perfectly willing to entertain the idea that a total ban may be an overreaction to the possible problems with the "big 9". But, given that NO ruthvenis or thayeris have been found either established or escaped in the wild (that we know of), can we first agree that there is currently NO justification for positing a ban on them?
-----
----

0.1 Peruvian rainbow boa (Amaru)
0.3 Honduran milksnakes (Chicchan, Chanir, Hari)
2.6 corns (Cetto, Tolosa, TBA)
1,000,000.1,000,000 other critters

[ Show Entire Thread ]