Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I don't think this has been posted yet it was in the Tampa paper a few weeks back.

Wildlife Experts Question Python Numbers In Everglades
By Keith Morelli, The Tampa Tribune 9/5/09

In the dense woods, isolated swamps and steamy hammocks of the Florida
Everglades, the battle for supremacy rages on, at least according to dispatches
from the front by federal and state authorities.

Now those dispatch
es that claim tens of thousands , perhaps even more than
100,000 of the marauding Burmese python horde roam the area, have come into
question by wildlife experts who say there can't possibly be that many out
there.

As the invasion enters its fourth decade (the first python spotted there in
1979), some are beginning to say the strength of the slithering snake infantry
is way overblown.

Wildlife experts and proponents of the exotic pet industry scoff at some
estimates that there are more than 100,000 pythons there, even though that was
the number used by U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson in support of his bill to ban
importation of pythons. Some government biologists have said there could be as
many as 140,000 pythons in the Everglades and surrounding areas.

Whatever the numbers, the gripping photos stick in people's memory; evidence
that there is a primal struggle for survival waged between the invaders and the
natives, most notable of which is the American alligator, whose bloodline has
prowled the 4,300 square miles of the Everglades since prehistoric times. Both
are vying for the top prize: the first link of the food chain; the reptilian
king of the jungle.

Photos of an alligator eating a thick squirming snake and a giant snake eating a
6-foot alligator (both died as a result) are dramatic. So is the photo of the
Okeechobee animal hospital staff hoisting the body of a 17-foot, 200 pound
python they fou
nd and killed next to their clinic in July.

And as the reptiles battle on, the estimates of the invaders' strength vary
widely, depending on who's doing the estimating.

Linda Friar, spokeswoman for the Everglades National Park, admitted there may be
as few as 5,000 pythons loose in the area. Or there may be as many as 140,000.
She said that some of the disparity stems from the area covered by estimates and
who is giving the estimates. The Everglades National Park is 2,400 square miles,
while the entire Everglades ecosystem encompasses 18,000 square miles.

"Most folks tend to go to the high range," she said. "But, it all depends on who
you are talking to. It's just a best guess. There's no empirical data. It's an
elusive species, so we don't really know how many there are. We do know that
they've adapted to the habitat.

"We know they are reproducing," she said. "We found nests and hatchlings."

The first python nest was found in 2006, she said. Python nests have between 40
and 100 hatchlings, she said, and "that makes us extremely concerned. It's
significant. Most exotic species don't tend to survive there. It's a relatively
harsh environment.

"We don't know what the survival rate is," she said. "There are a number of
things that eat hatchlings, like wading birds, alligators and other snakes."

As the fight for survival continues, the high estimates of python numbers vex
some wildlife20experts.

There can't be hundreds,” or even tens of thousands of pythons, they say, or the
snakes would be crawling onto the decks of airboats and across hoods of cars
cruising Alligator Alley.

"I've heard numbers of up to 200,000," said Vernon Yates, founder of Wildlife
Rescue and Rehabilitation in Seminole, "I'd like to know how they come up with
that stupid exaggeration.

"I believe it's probably around 1,000," he said. "That would be more realistic."

But the squeamish public loves to picture the swamp awash in Burmese pythons. He
said a German television station recently came here and interviewed him about
the notion abroad that the Everglades is overrun with giant snapping, hissing
serpents from Southeast Asia.

"Let's assume that there are 150,000 pythons there," he said. "I'd bet there are
not 150,000 alligators in the Everglades; not 150,000 deer in the Everglades; I
know there's not even near that in bears.

"But, you can go to the Everglades, see alligators, see deer, see bear; hell,
you can even find panthers," he said. "I drive over Alligator Alley a lot. Every
time, I see five dead alligators at least."

But, he said, not the first python, dead or alive.

Even a single python loose in Florida is one too many, he said, but trapping
them and then killing them, which is what the trappers are required to do, goes
too far, he said.

"I think it's a
good idea to put a bounty on them, to go out and trap them," he
said. "I have a hard time saying every one collected has to die."

Yates, who himself has trapped pythons in the Tampa Bay region, has doubts about
the snakes' chances of survival in the 'Glades' harsh environment.

"I don't believe they are going to make it in the wild," he said. "They don't
reproduce that fast and young snakes are preyed upon by the myriad of birds and
other animals there that keep other snakes in check."

Joe Fauci, owner of Southeast Reptile Exchange, said he's heard from various
sources that there could be as many 180,000 pythons in the Everglades. He
seriously doubts that.

"There are not 180,000 water snakes in the Everglades," he said. "I don't
believe it."

He has no idea why people would inflate figures, unless there is money or fame
to be made through it somehow.

"I want to know how these guys can even make that estimate," he said. Pythons
could not survive in that environment, he said. His money is on the alligators
and birds of prey.

While ospreys and eagles would munch on smaller pythons, the larger ones aren't
safe either, Fauci said.

"They would get eaten too," he said. "If a 12-foot Burmese swims in front of an
8-foot alligator he's going to get eaten up. Those alligators are going to chew
them up 99 percent of the time. It's a nice little meal."

Na
tional Park Service biologists say that in October 2005, 22 pythons were
killed by tractors tilling up the soil in one section of the preserve.

In 2006, 122 pythons were documented in the Everglades and biologists estimated
then that there were more than 1,000. The increase was up considerably from the
11 pythons documented between 1995 and 2000.

Biologists say that before 1995, they had found only one in the big swamp and
that was in 1979.

In July, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission authorized a
handful of herpetologists to go on hunting sprees. They were given a free hand
to conduct special operations missions into the wilds of the swamp to eliminate
with extreme prejudice the invading hordes.

The first day, hunters found a 10-foot python and the second weekend, three
python hatchlings. Since then, hunting has been off. Only about a dozen have
been captured altogether, but the hunters say safaris will be more fruitful when
the weather cools and the snakes come out into the open to sun themselves.

Biologists don't hold much hope for eliminating the species from the Everglades
altogether, according to a National Parks Service newsletter published in July.

But, they do want to control the species, to keep the python problem from
worsening. State and federal biologists are trying to cut the python population
of South Florida to the "ecologically extinct level that is, to numbers so low

that the species cannot play a significant role in ecosystem functioning," the
newsletter said.

"We'd then be dealing with nuisance pythons here and there," the publication
said, "not pythons by the hundreds of thousands causing serious problems in
geographically widespread areas."

The damage an invasive species like Burmese pythons can do to the Everglades is
obvious, said Friar of the National Park Service. Although the environment is
harsh, the ecosystem is delicate.

"We have a large predator coming in that can disrupt the natural system of who
eats whom," she said. "There is competition for food sources. The more you add
to the competition, the more you throw out of balance a pretty fragile system."

Looking to the future, biologists are wondering what other exotic animals are
coming into the state as pets that someday may find their way into the wild and
take root.

"Some people just may not understand that it's not good to release these species
into wild," she said. "They think they're sending them home.

"But, they don't' belong there."

Biologists with the National Park Service have these suggestions on how to curb
the growing population of the invasive Burmese pythons in the Everglades:

•Establish partnerships to carry out control efforts. Currently agencies
involved in the effort include the National Park Service, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, the U.S. Geological Survey,20the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission, the South Florida Water Management District, the
University of Florida and the Savannah River Ecology Lab.

•Concentrate on research that can predict where pythons congregate, making
capture more efficient. Biologists are conducting necropsies on pythons found in
the Everglades to learn what the snakes are eating. Some pythons released a few
years ago, have implanted radio transmitters to signal where they roam.

•Make it easy for people to report the location of any pythons they encounter in
the wild. The park service already has a python hotline that the public can use
to report python sightings in parks. The number is (305) 242-7827 or (305)
815-2080.

•Establish rapid response teams to deal with python problems. Such action can
eliminate new infestations before they can grow out of control.

•Develop reliable ways to locate pythons, which move in densely vegetated or
remote areas and are well camouflaged. Some scientists suggest using dogs
specially trained to pick up trails of pythons from along roads or canal banks.

•Use traps baited with attractants such as pheromones.

•Encourage licensed hunters to shoot pythons on sight.

•Pay bounties to people who capture or kill free-roaming pythons.

•Promote responsible exotic pet ownership.
________________________________________________________________________
-----
"We don't inherate the earth from our parents, we borrow it from our children"

glad to see that serious questions about those numbers are arising. Even including the whole 'glades ecosystem, 100,000 pythons is a laughable estimate. I think it's telling that they've found fewer than 2 dozen during the hunting.

Below is a direct quote from one of the biologist working in the glades. This response was to my mentioning that a published article said that there was an estimated 10,000 to 150,000 pythons in the glades.

I thought a better answer would have been to simply say......"We're guessing."

" The population estimates are broad because they can't be done the way people do them most of the time using mark/recapture techniques since we obviously don't want to release pythons back into the glades after we catch them. The numbers being thrown around use known densities from a few areas and then project them over the acreage of the glades. I'm not directly associated with those population estimates so I'm not sure of the details beyond that but I do know that nobody is claiming to have an exact number because the confidence in that method can't be as high as one would like... hence the range of values rather than the exact number."

Ernie Eison
WESTWOOD ACRES REPTILE FARM INC.

What's being reported to the media isn't "a range". It's a concrete number, which is unrealistic.

That's because the media can choose to report the more interesting number. It's really not fair to hold that against the scientists who give them the information.

Mike

Its VERY clear some scientists intentionally throw out and push various number's knowing the media will choose to report the more "interesting number."

Its not only about whats said, its about how its said and about how its presented....also just as important what ISN'T said.

When a witness is put on the stand during a trial...... their told to swear to.....tell the WHOLE truth. By withholding things and only telling selected parts of the truth a witness can without lying skew the evidence and cloud the facts. Bias the story. Thats exactly what some scientists are hoping to do.

In a court of law if they catch you doing this there's a price to be paid..............but this isn't a court of law and there's no punishments for this type of dirty pool as matter a fact its an accepted practice................ all part of the game.

There's nothing unfair about calling someone on their sneaky BS. Trying to put it all on the media is a lame defense and just as unfair.

Ernie Eison
WESTWOOD ACRES REPTILE FARM INC.

I agree. The problem is that none of us (including me) can tell when the scientist reports the whole range and when the scientist only reports the upper number unless we are there during the interview or they show the entire interview, uncut. And I would say that the politicians are just as bad as the media. Anyone who has seen "Religulous" may be familiar with the quote from the Arkansas senator who said "you don't have to take an IQ test to be in the senate." Scary. These people toss around facts that they've heard maybe one time as if they're some kind of expert and they often tell the wrong story.

There is nothing wrong with calling BS when it is appropriate. We just need to be careful that we're accusing the right people at the right times and it's hard to say who/when that is in some of these scenarios. And, just as it is ok to call BS on scientists/reporters/politicians when they mess up, it is also ok to call BS on the Barkers when they say something wrong. Anyone who reads that paper and takes every word of it as fact needs a reality check. I just want to make sure people have the correct information available to them (the Barkers included).

Mike

Well, I'd be curious if any of the "scientists" who seem to be misquoted all the time have written the offending media demanding a correction/retraction...

Well, it's not necessarily the media giving incorrect information so much as "not telling the whole truth" as Ernie was talking about. But, to answer your question directly, I don't know of anyone who has ever asked for a retraction. I'm guessing it's a lost cause after the initial report, unfortunately. And I'm not saying that scientists have always been perfect but I haven't seen anyone produce any direct examples of scientists providing bad information yet so I can't address it without speaking in generalities.

Mike

The bigger number is the one that will be used because it fits the narrative that has been created by the media. A smaller number would undermine that news story - pythons taking over the planet. Anyone who has had any interaction with the news media will know that a retraction is printed when there is a substantive discrepancy between the facts and what was written. It will also be buried somewhere inside the paper. In this case, I would doubt a retraction will see the light of day even if requested, because the bigger number has been used by someone to delineate the possible range of the population of Burmese pythons and has become a meme, to be repeated when needed. It has taken on a life of its own and probably does not even need direct attribution any longer - "Everyone knows there are 180,000 Burmese pythons in the Everglades." Nuance does not matter - clear narrative does. The news is a spectacle to sell advertising; it is business that has less to do with good reporting than good story-telling.

While I agree with your premise.........In theory it sounds great and all........ but........Your being presumptuous in what can or can't be ascertained. Its not only what's seen in the media its also what's documented in peer reviewed papers and what has been heard directly from the persons mouth. The skewing of data via withholding certain truths and excentuating others. The body of evidence is there.

Recent Example...........

Ken Krysko along with Robert Reed made some very calculated alarmist statements to National geographic. No lies, but lets be serious.....Krysko was pushing his agenda. As you probably know some people tried to defend Krysko by saying the magazine took his comments and ran with them. Also as you probably know Krysko admitted (likely not thinking it would get out) ... that those comments were EXACTLY what he said. He along with some others wanted to escalate the situation to aid their own self anointed righteous views. I called it before Ken outed himself , I was right about him and Ive been right all along. Unlike the population estimates.. Im not just guessing . When it comes to seperating the wheat from the shaft.....Im good and I know the people Im pointing the finger at are guilty. Another example, you know this one but for those who don`t................

Many people heard via a Government radio interview that I linked to this site, Gordon Rodda going on a full all out scare attack following his extreme maps appearing on the front page of USA Today. This was a one two media blitz not based on any real science to hype, scare and envoke knee jerk reactions from politicians and the public alike......interestingly enough ...............

A few days before via email he said that he didn't know how the paper got those maps and that the media blew everything out of proportion. Rodda LIED to cover his intent and deflect some of the heat he was getting about his preposterous range maps. He did it for his own purposes and it was very sneaky/Dishonest. The game is transparent if you've been around the block a few times.

Don't you find it curious that only the "scientist" are getting repeatedly misquoted and abused by the media?

Has anyone else told a snake story to the media and have had it get blown out of proportion full of misquotes etc ? I haven`t . Almost all the over the top new stories involve some "expert" jumping in with their two cents and making all kinds of wild statements or a complete novice telling their version of the tale and the media reporting it.

Ernie Eison
WESTWOOD ACRES REPTILE FARM INC.

I know Kenney pretty well. I wouldn't have said what he did and I think he should have been a little more careful with his words given the backlash from the Rodda et al. media circus. However, Kenney is a pretty light-hearted guy and I can picture him saying that to anyone whether he has an agenda or not. He has a very animated personality. Like you said, it wasn't a lie, even if it was over-the-top. No reason for him to backpedal about the statement. I didn't say everyone is sympathetic in regard to the pet trade. My point is that SOME of us are and that we need to start agreeing on some simple facts about pythons. There has to be a middle ground if we're ever going to make progress in this debate. Otherwise, neither side will ever take the other seriously and we're going to be looking at eternal warfare. I don't think anybody here wants that.

I honestly don't know much about the situation with Gordon and the media. I know that the USGS has "media people" (for lack of a better term) that made the press release. I think Gordon still stands behind those maps (although Bob has told me that there are some points he would like to revisit (in light of new evidence)). Part of the problem is that a lot of people took them to mean that pythons WILL colonize the entire area shown in the map when the real purpose of the map was to show where pythons MIGHT establish themselves because the climate is similar. This doesn't mean they WILL colonize all of those areas. It ONLY means that the climate matches. I realize there were some issues with using P. m. molurus and some northern records that may not have been substantiated. But, I still don't think most people realize what the map was trying to say and I think that is where the media made the problem worse. I'd have to go back and look at Gordon's statements to form an opinion on how much he was pushing an agenda. From the conversations I've had with him he was all about the science. Again, this isn't really my department.

I think the difference in who is being misquoted or "abused" by the media has to do with the fact that the scientists are the first people they go to when they report the story. This is the stage when the reporters want to make the problem sound as threatening as possible. They do the same thing with hurricanes, shark attacks, etc. Then, they hear the other side of the story so they want to cover that. In the case of the population estimates they used some ridiculously low numbers (1,000 pythons). That number is clearly wrong. The number of 140,000 or 180,000 is probably wrong too. It's probably somewhere in the middle. But I guarantee it is more than 10,000 and it falls somewhere in the range given by scientists in the first place. I think we need to settle on the middle-of-the-road number but we're never going to get an exact figure so we could argue about this forever. The point is that there are thousands of pythons out there and it is a problem. We should be able to agree on that. Right?

Mike

It is not just range distribution lies. My favorite lie is the, Burmese pythons have no natural predators" lie. If you were to track down the source of this lie I'm sure it would lead back to some scientist. They probably ASSUMED everyone would realize they were talking about ADULT Burmese pythons but the media took it literally. And to get right down to as long as there are alligators adult Burms STILL have a natural predator.
How about clutch size? They throw out 100 egg clutches like this is the norm. The RECORD use to be 106 and that was a Retic.
I don't know if a Burm has ever laid a hundred egg clutch and if she did what is the likelihood they all hatched out. And on top of it all there are inferences of double even triple clutching.
When the truth is MAYBE every other year she drops between 20-40 eggs. 25 hatch out. Most are killed and eaten before there first birthday. Studies have shown that about 1% of crocodilians ever reach adulthood. And a lot of crocs protect their babies. I can't imagine snakes to have a higher survival rate than this.
The public hears 140,000 snakes. They assume adults. they assume 1/2 are female. They lay 100 eggs twice a year. All hatch, all survive, because they have no natural predators.
If my math is right 14,000,000 baby burms a year. Heck that scares me too. D.C.

I have been looking for the origin of the "no natural predators" quote and have yet to find it, it has been used as far back as 2004 if not prior to that time. No attribution yet. I suppose that it might be argued that it cannot have a natural predator in that it does not naturally occur in the area in question. That appears disingenuous at best, as there are obviously animals that prey on snakes in the Everglades. It is also probably true that large numbers of these animals are preyed upon by native species, but those are numbers that we will likely never know. The mortality of Burmese hatchlings is likely to remain an unknown quantity.

The lack of science knowledge of the general public is appalling and that ignorance is reinforced by the media in many ways. It is also easy to take advantage of that knowledge gap if you are so inclined or to misspeak and have that information repeated without critical analysis.

I can think of a few sensational outlets that have completely misrepresented things that have been said and may even have completely fabricated some quotes.

I think what you said about clutch sizes is probably pretty accurate. Ernie and I hashed-out the clutch size record on another forum. One source states that 107 is the record for burms. However, the source is a bit sketchy and this would obviously be a rare event. And you're right about the frequency of clutches... burms in FL seem to be incapable of breeding every year (and obviously incapable of double- or triple-clutches). There may be some exceptions but I've certainly never heard of any.

As flherp said, I'm not sure who that quote can be attributed to. It's obviously flawed for many of the reasons you mentioned but I can see it being a somewhat valid point if you consider that none of the animals here are native to SE Asia where Burms are from. I wouldn't want to be associated with that quote though.

Hatchling burms certainly have a good number of predators in FL. Survival rates will be tough to get but it wouldn't surprise me if they are relatively low. They do start off larger than most snakes though so they have a slight advantage (and they grow so quickly).

Like I've said elsewhere, there are almost certainly several thousand pythons out there. The exact number could be debated forever but 1,000 is way too low for a guess. Ask anyone that herps out here regularly and they will tell you that pythons are a relatively common find.

Mike

I DID get FWC to change their webpage from no known predators to gators and crocs as adults. The guy admitted it was wrong.

Good. I think it is better now that they've changed it.

Mike

data agree with your assessment. They are totally guessing. We conducted population studies on several snakes species when I was in college many years ago. Nothing has been done to date even remotely resembling a population study on these pythons in southern Florida. That said, from all of the thin data I have seen to date, I would be very surprised if there were over one thousand burmese currently in that entire area. The one person interviewed in the previous article was absolutely correct. If the numbers were anywhere close to the ridiculous estimates that have been thrown out, many more of them would be turning up than currently reported and many, many more would be seen DOR. The current data available is not supporting anywhere near the numbers being estimated.

Kelly

But real statistics don't sell newspapers.

1,000? Are you serious? Everglades National Park consists of 1.5 million acres of land. Are you saying there is only one python for every 1,500 acres? Anyone who has herped on the ONE road going through the park knows that pythons are pretty easy to find. The guy who says he's never seen one on the Tamiami Trail (the park's northern boundary) must be driving with his eyes closed if he drives it regularly and has never seen a python. Pythons make most of their large movements in the warmer months when they are primarily nocturnal. That's why people don't see many of them. They're easy to find in the colder months but they don't make as many large moves during that time. You have to know where to find them. I don't even drive Tamiami very often and I've seen several on that road. Joe Wasilewski even took a film crew out there recently and caught one while they were with him. Pythons are extremely cryptic when they're out in the glades. I've been standing on them before without being able to see them.

Mike

...to estimate the size of the python population?

Mike

Considering the area involved is not traversed by roads with the exception of a few areas, road mortality is not likely to be high. Those who study amphibians, turtles and lizards have an easier time establishing populations as the majority are far easier to locate. These are ambush predators with cryptic coloration that avoid predation by remaining still - this really complicates locating them in natural areas. There are some areas where they are found fairly often in numbers that I find kind of amazing for a predator of this size - an 80+ acre field yielded 44 after discing (average length 6' or so). That is a pretty high density, but not likely to be representative of what you would find in a natural or undisturbed area.

There are probably considerably more than 1000 (honestly).

I have heard others talk about this mysterious 80 acre field.
Even though I'm a native Texan I have a lot of Missouri in me.
SHOW ME. 44 snakes of any species in an 80 acre area seems a little hard to believe.
It is kind of like if you went to TN in the winter and dug up a den of Timbers and then claimed the whole state was infested with rattlesnakes because you found 50 of them in an area less than 1,000 sq. feet. Let's be realistic that is some magical piece of property to support all those predators.
I have a friend who collects gator eggs for the state of FL.
He does the south and his buddy does the north. They disperse the eggs to licensed FL alligator farms. I ask how many caiman did you see this year. Now I've known this guy for 10 years and this has always been his job. I always assumed he saw tons of caimans. He said," I didn't see any. I've never seen any. I once mistakedly collected a clutch of caiman eggs, but I've never seen a live caiman."
I'm shocked to say the least. I think he doesn't understand.
I say," I mean on the airboat, collecting eggs you didn't see any caimans?"
He said," Danny, I have 5 airboats and 1 helicopter and I have never seen 1 caiman."
We know there are caiman.He found eggs. Airboats and helicopters are REALLY loud. But to not see one. I just don't believe people are tripping over caimans OR Burmese pythons.
I just don't. D.C.

Caiman are relatively uncommon. I've seen a few here and there but now many. One night I saw two in the canal on the north side of US-41 while spotlighting for alligators in an airboat. One was about 5 feet long and the other was only a couple feet long. I wasn't able to catch either one and have been back there several times since then but haven't seen any more caiman. I caught one at Holiday Park out in the marsh and I know a spot off of US-41 where a few have been removed. A friend of mine found a large one off of loop road in Big Cypress. But, I don't think caiman are nearly as successful as pythons. MOST of them seem to be found in canals. I'm not sure if they do too well in the interior marshes, even though they are occasionally found in them.

Some friends of mine also found a Paleosuchus in ENP but I'm guessing it was an isolated individual.

Pythons, on the other hand, live in every kind of habitat the Everglades has to offer. Mangroves, marshes, pine flatwoods, agricultural fields, etc. "THE" field being referred to is immediately adjacent to ENP and is used for agriculture. I'm sure that attracts unusually high numbers of rodents which in turn attracts unusually high numbers of pythons. I don't think anyone would tell you that the densities in that field are the same as the densities you would find in a marsh. Interestingly, this year more farmers to the north of this field (closer to US-41) have started reporting large numbers of pythons in their fields (and a lack of rabbits compared to years past).

Mike

Also, for most species of snake, I think 44 in an 80 acre area is quite reasonable. I grabbed a book off my desk for a random reference and here is a direct quote "Estimates indicate a population density as high as 3 or 4 copperheads per acre in northeastern Kansas." That is from "Amphibians and Reptiles in Kansas" by Joseph T. Collins. I know this isn't Kansas, but I wouldn't be surprised at all to find out that Nerodia and Thamnophis have similar densities in the Everglades. Frogs and cover are abundant. I'm not saying pythons have similar densities throughout the glades... just opening your eyes to the fact that most snakes are more common than people realize but are observed somewhat infrequently.

Mike

National Geo did a special recently (in HiDef..it was beautiful) on the Glades. They caught 4 Burms and put transmitters in all 4 and released them back at their research site, not where they were caught. A month later they had signals from 2 of them so they went up in a copter to find the other two...which they did. 40 miles away, back where they were caught. Evidently they were traveling mostly by water, and WERE homing in on their previous territory.

Yep, I was one of the people in that special. I wondered if anyone saw it! Haha.

Mike

Mike,

The field I am speaking of is North of the agricultural area usually considered a hotspot. I will try and photograph the area after it is plowed next (probably won't happen for six months or so). As I said in my previous post, this is not a normal number of animals to find - this is an agricultural area with many human commensals ( = high prey densities). Finding densities this high could be alarming, but I think it is primarily due to the ready availability of prey in these fields and adjacent areas (homes, groves, packing houses, stables, etc.). Much easier than mucking about in the glades waiting for food.

First let me say if FWS changed their website over an inaccuracy,my hats off to them. I admire when people can admit when they're wrong.
Second the whole natural predator thing, I can't believe a biologist would purposely be that deceptive. That kind of language bastardization usually comes from politicians. However, how many generations have to be born before a species is considered indigenous?
And comparing watersnakes to the third largest snake in the world is a little of a stretch.
But I have appreciated your arguments and the thought with which you write.
Having said that, I thought the Nat. Geo. piece was the biggest load of crap I had seen in a while. For a Burmese python to travel 40 miles in 30 days is absurd. Even with a FWS officer walking behind it poking it with a cattle prod I STILL don't believe it could happen. For a second forget could how about would. Like a Hollywood D.A., what's their motivation. We're discussing one of the most lethargic species of animals in the world crawling over a mile a day for 30 days. It didn't happen.
The only way they traveled that distance is they hitched a ride on the airboat when noone was looking.
This reminds me of the old Naval study on Dolphin speed.
I don't remember the exact numbers so don't hold me to them. Let's say the ship is going 35 mph and the dolphin is swimming ahead of the ship. This causes the Navy's biologist to assume dolphins can swim at least 35 mph. Years later in another study marine biologist prove unequivicably, dolphins cannot swim 35 mph. In the navy's study the dolphins were simply riding the wake. Body surfing in front of the ship.
I am not a biologist but I have been keeping giant snakes for over 35 years. I have done a lot of observing. Remember in the New York zoo they had a big python go 3 years and 9 months without eating. This is a species that is not necessarily motivated by food. These are not cats and dogs this is a very primitive species. As long as their needs are met I can't imagine them moving much.
Needs 80% safety/shelter 15% food and water 5% other D.C.

I pointed out in my own post that water snakes and pythons are not the same thing. I wasn't trying to deceive anyone. I posted that because someone said they couldn't believe any species of snake would be found in that density.

I'm not sure what the Nat Geo special said about the time frame involved. I'd have to watch it again and I'm about to head out the door. One month does sound a bit brief. I've got the telemetry database so I can look up the dates late tonight or tomorrow. The snake did make that move though. It might have been over the course of an entire summer or something but it did make the move. It was clearly motivated by a desire to return to the area it came from. I don't know why it would do that but several snakes did the same thing. This has also been cited as a reason that relocating rattlesnakes is not a good idea. Apparently, they roam for miles trying to find the area they came from and often die. So this is not a phenomenon limited to pythons. Anyway, this was the python that traveled the greatest distance and it should be pointed out that most pythons probably don't travel this far. In fact, I would say that most cover an area of only 5-10 miles in a year (or less). Keep in mind, these snakes are excellent swimmers and it's a lot easier for them to swim that distance than to crawl it. Their movements usually coincide with rising water levels/the rainy season. I'll address the details soon but I do need to get on the road right now.

Ernie: if you're reading this, I'll address your post later or tomorrow.

Mike

I thought I saw somewhere that the radio data on a few pythons had them moving in a spyro-graph type flower pattern? Basically covering the area within a circular area. Maybe that was just the area around the tree island or something. I also think a python could move over an exceptional distance quite easily swimming down a canal. I also would think the really big ones would tend to be far more sedentary and command a tree island habitat more than a juvenile or young python that would probably have an easier time hauling their considerably less bulky selves through the wet lands. I would also love to compare the densities of the Indigo snakes, which are federally protected as being rare, I guess, with something like a yellow rat snake in the agricultural areas along with the pythons to get some sort of comparative to the density of the invader. Is there a link to that somewhere?

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.

>>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.

"no natural predators" is a claim fraught with deceit. Pure and simple. Predator/ prey conversations are actually pretty simple and something the general public can understand. This statement was made intentionally to deceive.
Comparing captive burms to wild caught burms I don't believe is such a stretch. Unless you're implying captive burms are domesticated animals. Inferences have been made that a lot of these snakes have been released by previous owners(as opposed to hatching out in ENP) so are these Burms wild? Domestic? Feral?
In my show I always say, never forget they are wild animals.
Having said that I believe the Burm. is docile by nature.
I don't believe it necessary to grab the animal by the head. A little patience, and most would repond "peacefully".
My point is I believe all Burms are wild some are just held in captivity. So I believe it is totally logical/reasonable to apply behavioral similarities. Cont. under Mike's post. D.C.

I can see either way. An American alligator would not naturally prey upon a Burmese python because they do not exist together under natural circumstances. However, they are all natural creatures. So it is natural and it isn't. It's hard to say that it was intentional deceit. It sounds like we still don't even know who said it except that it was posted on an FWC website or something. I could see it going either way.

My opinion is that most burms hatched in ENP and that a small number of escapes and/or releases started the large population that exists today.

I agree that burms tame down very easily but I have to say after catching 100 burms in FL that almost none of them are calm upon capture. I know how to handle snakes in a calm way that won't get me bit. When I was younger I free-handled rattlesnakes, copperheads, and coral snakes without ever getting bit. I can pick up almost any Nerodia without having it bite me. That said, almost all wild burms try to bite me no matter how calm I am in handling them. I have been able to pick up hatchlings without getting bit. The larger ones immediately respond when you touch them, no matter how careful you are. Personally, I don't care if I get bit. I've been getting bit by snakes since I was 10 (including burms) and I've never even had one get infected (though I did get a nasty bite from a garter snake this year that swelled considerably). However, since I do this for a job, my boss is responsible for anything that happens to me and if for some reason the bite should get infected or if it somehow is so bad that I need stitches then he probably has to explain that to the worker's comp people and I'm sure there is some kind of consequence for him. My boss is a pretty cool guy and I learned early on that he doesn't make rules just for the sake of making rules. So, when I'm told not to get bit, I listen. Although, in the early days I didn't realize it was such a big deal so I did get bit a few times when I first got here. Once I had one with me when I went to the airport to track the snakes and the pilot wanted to show his brother. It was just a little six or seven foot burm and I took it out of the box it was in without restraining it and hoped to avoid a bite just by handling it gently. It worked for about 10 seconds but then it gave me a brief stare and then struck and started biting me on the shoulder and arm a few times in rapid succession. I can't attempt that kind of thing anymore but I think the result would often be the same unless they had been handled a couple of times already.

I'm sure they calm down after only a little bit of handling but I usually only have to handle them once and it is just long enough to get them into a bag. I know people who have used wild-caught FL burms for snake shows and they want them to be aggressive for the show but they say they're not good snakes to use because they tame down too quickly. So I do not doubt that they are docile snakes after only a short introduction to handling. I was almost never bit by captive burms I worked with. The only times were a couple of stupid feeding errors and it was really my mistake.

Mike

The DNA work has been done by a grad student at FIU, and they most of them are related, probably from the hundreds (900 at one dealer) when Andrew came through.

Clearly you have much more experience with wild Burms than me. If you say most of them bite while being captured I believe you.
I appreciate your willingness to take a bite and not just immediately resort to manhandling. I certainly don't think all Burms are tame even some in captivity are pretty nasty. Equally true they are more docile by nature. If all it took was sticking them in a cage then Rocks, Retics and Greens would be just as gentle. And they're not.
One last thought on the whole natural predator statement. The reason this bothers me so much is because I believe it was totally deceitful. Purposely deceitful.
Of course it's true that they have no NATURAL predators.
The same sophmorish statement applies to sparrows, starlings,nutria, fireants etc.
Can you imagine a biologist on Fox news saying, "America brace yourself, the European Starling has invaded the U.S. where it has no natural predators."
I really don't want to get in a invasive species argument and how Starlings really are a problem.I just want everyone to open their minds enough to appreciate the absurdity of this comment. D.C.

"One last thought on the whole natural predator statement. The reason this bothers me so much is because I believe it was totally deceitful. Purposely deceitful.
Of course it's true that they have no NATURAL predators"

I agree. Natural is supposed to indicate predators from their own country, not the country they are transplanted to. And as far as Burms go, Indians are much more docile than bivittatis, and I probably spelled THAT wrong, lol.

I've looked at the data and the snake made the move from mid-May to the end of September.

Mike

I'm aware of huge numbers of Timbers wintering in the same "ancestrial" den generation after generation. But these animals are born there. An interesting study would be take 2 adults from the same den breed them in captivity and then release their offspring 20 miles from the den. Hopefully there are plenty of capable den sites between the release point and the den of their parents.
In my mind if these are "released" Burms why are they traveling back to the ENP. Their "ancestrial" den is an aquarium in little Johnny's room in Orlando.
It took my cat 2 months to travel 8 miles back to my old house.
Obviously 4 1/2 months is longer than 3 but still 30 miles.
Snakes typically take the path of least resistance which swimming would be but I still can't see it. With everything that has happened and been said in FL over the last year I can't be blamed for my skepticism.
Here's a scenario. Two days after the release a biologist returns to the site. Within moments he comes across this snake.
Frustrated he grabs in by the head and wrestles it into a dog kennel. Drives to the original place of capture and releases it.
In mind more plausible than an adult python in a suitable habitat that "chooses" to travel 30 miles back to another place.

It is difficult to prove deceit when there is no person that the statement can be attributed to and the statement has no context. The semantic argument that there are no natural predators is, however, true, as Burmese do not naturally occur in the Everglades. They may be an introduced species with a reproducing population, but they are not natural or native.

While it may be true that captive Burmese pythons are generally docile;a wild Burmese is not a captive Burmese python, and many will defend themselves vigorously (striking, defecating, fleeing, etc,)if molested. I think it appropriate to gain control of the head rather than being bitten; although I will usually test their temperament prior to attempting to capture them. As I said before, extrapolating the behavior of captive animals to wild populations is difficult. You are operating from an a priori assumption that all Burmese pythons are docile, which is demonstrably untrue.

As to their ability and desire to move, I would not offer an explanation as to why they moved the distance (over a four-month period) Mike says they did. However, I have little reason to doubt that it did occur. If the animal was transported to the area of capture - the first question I would have to ask is why? It is much easier to release the animal on the edge of undisturbed habitat and much easier to follow it afterward. I would think someone would realize that the animal was returned to the capture site by study personnel and it would not have taken four months. You are basing your opinion on what the animals will or will not do from the limited perspective of keeping the animals in captivity. It is quite possible that their behavior in the wild is substantially different from what you expect based on your experience,perhaps you should entertain the notion that you might be incorrect. It is important to not allow innate biases to determine what you find when you examine information. There is a fairly broad area between being skeptical to the point of nonsense and having such an open mind your brain falls out.

My memory failed me on the time frame, or it was stated incorrectly (yeah, that's it, lol) But the distance is correct, and they mentioned they were not released at the point of capture, but at their base of operations. They DID indicate that suspected travel was by water. All snakes swim well and I have no doubt that an average to large Burm could do that.

The other fascinating story was about American crocs laying their eggs at the southern end of the Glades, in the salty water of the bay, and that the young couldn't survive in salt water, and had to find fresh. And when there's a drought in the glades, less fresh water trickles down and affects their mortality.

Yeah, the croc stuff is pretty cool. This year wasn't a good year for nesting success but last year was excellent. We were treated to this sight a couple times last year:

Mike

Why? That's the easy part. They have an agenda. Job security. Prove a premise. etc.
I've said captive Burms are not domestic they are just captive.
I'm pretty sure if you were to ask a rabbit if it hurt less being bit and constricted by a captive Burm as opposed to a wild one...
I think they can be more docile in nature I think they probably are but being such a primitive animal I think most of their behavior is remarkably similar.
Crocodilians, another reptile I have no experience with in the wild but 20 years of observation in captive situations, are the Einsteins of the reptile world. Consequently I think they may display a few more subtle behaviors in captivity compared to their wild counterparts. Still in all I believe that basically their behaviors alter little from wild to captive.
And more importantly in a controlled environment you can create
artificial situations that you could waste years waiting in the wild to observe.So as important as wild observation is don't discount the knowledge that can be obtained through observing captive animals. I guess I think the nature of the animal is the primary motivator in it's behavior. I don't believe that changes just because the animal is captive. An anthropology class I took at school discussed an experiment with a remote tribe of Eskimos.
They gave them a hallucinogenic drug and then told them to draw pictures of what they saw. The people in the study were kept apart. They had no written language and had never seen a book, much less t.v. All the people dreamed/hallucinated the same thing. They drew pictures of big cats and snakes. Giant snakes.
They didn't have a word in their vocabulary for snake.
Humans are much more complex organisms than reptiles but something in the most primitive parts of their brain where fight or flee impulses reside lived memories they had never had.
From this primitive part of the brain behaviors are established and something as inconsequential as captivity isn't going to change that. And the more primitive the animal the less likely it is to change.
Finally my distrust of scientist I actually think comes from an open mind. Revisit the dolphin and the navy. The ship is traveling at x mph the dolphin is in front of the ship. Conclusion dolphins can swim at least x mph.
If the dolphin couldn't swim that fast the ship would run over him. This is simple you can't argue this experiment. Except the dolphin was surfing the wake and could never generate that speed on his own. Maybe that Burm traveled that distance. If so that proves 1 Burm can do it. I DON'T believe now, that it was some elaborate conspiracy. But my open mind demands me to allow the possibility of the greatest escape artist in the natural world to have hitched a ride UNKNOWINGLY back to his home ground. Afterall isn't that how most of the invasive species arrived here unwanted, unknown hitchhikers? D.C.

I don't discount captive observation as being valuable. In fact, I've lost respect for people in the past for saying things that they would have never said had they ever kept the animal we were studying in captivity (this was years ago.... not anyone I work with currently). Crocodilians are a good example. I had a dwarf caiman for years and that thing was unbelievably smart (for a herp). I know a lot of people who work with captive crocodilians and they say they can pretty much train them to do a lot of things they need them to do. Awesome animals.

In regard to your last statement about the long burm movement, I suppose it is a possibility and it is good to keep an open mind. It just seems unlikely. The snake was tracked about once per week and each week it made a small move (more like 4 miles/week). If it hitched a ride on an airboat then somebody must have been on an epic camping trip! Also, not many airboats are allowed through that area. Only park rangers/researchers can airboat in the national park and they must remain on designated trails. The snake's path does not follow the airboat trails. But, who knows. I suppose it's possible. Just unlikely.

Mike

If my memory is correct, they didn't mention weekly tracking, just the tracking at the end of the time period. They also said that the 2 animals were out of range of the transmitter at the end of that time period.

Hmm....wonder if the show is on NG's website. I'll look.

I'm sure they don't mention that it was tracked weekly. I only know that because I do most of the tracking now. And I did some of it back then but not the majority of it. And I have the database showing exactly where the snake was at exactly what time. I can't post the exact data right now because it's currently unpublished (although a paper has been submitted and will probably be out very soon).

The snakes are never really "out of range of the transmitter." The transmitters are always sending a signal until the batteries die. You just have to fly around searching for it until you hear the beeps. However, in the beginning, we were tracking snakes on foot because we didn't know they would move so far. But at one point some of the snakes did move too far from any roads for us to track from the ground and so that's probably what they meant when they said they were out of range. I have a copy of the DVD that they gave us after we made the show. I'll watch it in the near future to see what they said.

Mike

Thanks for the info, Mike. I just tried to find it on their webpage and couldn't. Do you know the exact title? And it WAS in HD, I remember that. The Burm part was only one part of it.

I didn't know they had rescue people in the mangrove area byt the bay area to find lost people.

I believe it was called "America's Wild Spaces: Everglades."

I think we're talking about the same show. The one I'm thinking of talks about pythons, crocs, manatees, small fish (I think), hydrology, and shows the fish guys airboating and shows the hydro guys in the helicopter. And it follows some people who kayak through the Everglades.

Mike

Yep, that's it. One of the people in the kayak was a photographer.

I'll echo some of what flherp said.

I'm pretty confident that most burms out there now were born out there and have probably never been in a cage.

I can understand your skepticism. You don't have to believe me but I can assure you I have no reason to lie about this. There were several biologists involved in tracking this animal and a couple of pilots that fly the plane so it would have to be a very organized lie if it weren't true. The pilots don't care about any of these issues... they're just pilots. And if you were to ask them they would tell you that it's true. Then there are the Miccosukee Indians who knew the snake was there and said they wanted it removed. I guess they could be lying too... but why would they care? Here's a picture of the day we captured and removed the snake:

I'll address the issue of restraining the snakes in the other thread where it was initially mentioned. In short, it's necessary to hold them like that.

Mike

I'm aware of huge numbers of Timbers wintering in the same "ancestrial" den generation after generation. But these animals are born there. An interesting study would be take 2 adults from the same den breed them in captivity and then release their offspring 20 miles from the den. Hopefully there are plenty of capable den sites between the release point and the den of their parents.
In my mind if these are "released" Burms why are they traveling back to the ENP. Their "ancestrial" den is an aquarium in little Johnny's room in Orlando.
It took my cat 2 months to travel 8 miles back to my old house.
Obviously 4 1/2 months is longer than 3 but still 30 miles.
Snakes typically take the path of least resistance which swimming would be but I still can't see it. With everything that has happened and been said in FL over the last year I can't be blamed for my skepticism.
Here's a scenario. Two days after the release a biologist returns to the site. Within moments he comes across this snake.
Frustrated he grabs in by the head and wrestles it into a dog kennel. Drives to the original place of capture and releases it.
In mind more plausible than an adult python in a suitable habitat that "chooses" to travel 30 miles back to another place.

You mean they are not all gentle giants, Mike?

I'd wager that wild Burms in India are NOT tame little critters and will bite quickly. Not as bad as afrocks, but I've seen some Burms that would try to take your hand/head off. For some reason, the darker the animal, the nastier. IMO.

>>I've looked at the data and the snake made the move from mid-May to the end of September.

Not the 30 days someone claimed on here. Are we to assume he was mistaken? Or--as someone on here feels so strongly about the "natural predators" statement--that it was an intentional misrepresentation to support his point of view?

I get uneasy when we're arguing about science and someone (not you) simply declares without support that a position they disagree with is not only wrong, but intentional deceit. My purpose with this post is to point out how we can all be mistaken--maybe the nat geo show said 30 days in error, despite what your data shows; maybe the poster heard the show wrong; only a cynic would say it was an intentional misrepresentation. If we're gonna argue facts (and i like the effort you've put into presenting exactly that) we've gotta reject "as a matter of fact" declarations that are really statements of opinion (natural predators, again). Whoever it is that's said that several times, imho it weakens the rest of your arguments.

I believe this “problem” really took off when Broward County became built out and real estate investors began eyeing the protected land even further west and to the south. This is part of a deliberate publicity scheme to promote the notion that the Everglades are already ruined and not worth preserving. “Follow the money”. Just watch who gets involved in this. It is a scam.

Wouldn't the king snakes help control the population by eating the babies?
-----
3.2 Normal ball-Alex,Jake,Monty,Siv,Nanna
1.0 Pastel-Tony
0.3 Green Anoles-Penelope,Lacy,Glen
1.0 CA Red-tail Boa-Bulwai
1.0 Colombian RT-Adam
0.2 Burmese-Chelsae3.5',Sheba7'
1.0 Red Eye Tree Frog-Tony

Probably, to some degree. It's hard to say how much. I think they are one of many species in the glades that will eat hatchling Burms. That said, it's not hard to find a python in the Everglades if you know how. Even thought the hunt just started, some of us (with permits) have been out there removing every one we find for years now and every year there are more to be found.

Mike