Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Here is a link to the 300 page study :

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1202/pdf/OF09-1202.pdf

My daughter received her BS in environmental science a year and a half ago. One of the books she had to read was "The Song of the Dodo", subtitled Island Biogeography in an Age of Extinction, by David Quammen. Printed in 1996.

I read the book, and it was quite interesting....especially pages 329-337 that take place on Guam with Gordon Rodda. He was then on the USFWS team with a man named Tom Fritts.

If you can find a copy at your local library, please read it, especially the pages listed above.

Eric,

Thanks...Downloaded my own copy. From page 5 (Chapter 1)

>>The giant constrictors differ in a number of ways important to management or control efforts. For example, the anacondas are found almost exclusively in water, complicating their control in wetlands such as the Everglades, but limiting their spread in dry upland areas. At the other extreme is the Boa Constrictor, a species that may use water but is found primarily in terrestrial environments, including arboreal habitat. The pythons appear to be completely at home in aquatic and terrestrial environments, rendering it problematic to curtail their spread.

>>Another important difference among the giant constrictors is their size and temperament. Although the largest individuals of all of the species covered in this work are probably capable of killing an adult human, most seem disinclined to do so. Unprovoked attacks on humans are largely limited to Reticulated Pythons, and only the larger Burmese/Indian and Northern/Southern African pythons have killed adult humans.

>>One very important difference among the species is the degree to which they naturally inhabit areas that freeze. The Indian or Burmese Python is exceptional in its ability to tolerate cold weather through hibernation; most of the other species are likely limited to areas where below-freezing weather is short-term and can be avoided by submergence in shallow burrows or water.

This is intriguing...Especially the last paragraph as the study that they are doing at the SREL site in South Carolina is NOT yet complete...But it will soon be winter there...

Looks like a set up for their future news stories, "expert" testimony(s) before Congressional committees/subcommittees and "scientific" paper(s) are already in the works...

I guess it will be a "consensus" of science...

Later,
Jim.

PS: Not surprising actually, the science must support the agenda and since the "invasive species" issue is part of the conservation of biodiversity...A giant snake is easy to demonize and scare the parents of the neighborhood children and thus, an excellent propaganda banner...

This USGS "giant snakes" PDF paper is out of their Fort Collins Science Center and recently they've announced a new partner...NASA (along with the USDA, several universities (tax payer grant money funded) and THE NATURE CONSERVANCY! In 2005, they became one of 83 other partners of the "consortium" of the Federation of Earth Science information Partners (ESIP)...

Source (USGS Website): http://invasivespecies.gsfc.nasa.gov/news_nisc.html

NASA Joins the National Invasive Species Council

February 2, 2005 - The National Aeronautics and Space Administration has become the 13th Cabinet agency to join the National Invasive Species Council. NASA’s current work on maintaining the biological integrity of Earth and other solar system bodies along with work with remote sensing of Earth’s biotic and abiotic environment from space will make it an invaluable addition to the council.

“Invasive species are one of the greatest threats to our environment and wildlife,” said Interior Secretary Gale Norton. “NASA brings enormous technical expertise and experience to the partnership of federal agencies combating both the introduction and the spread of invasives. With NASA on board, the council will be able to attack this ecological crisis with new technologies and tools.”

“We at NISC are excited to have NASA join us in our efforts to coordinate federal activities on invasive species,” said Lori Williams, NISC executive director. “They bring a great deal of technological experience and some outstanding tools to help further work on mapping and monitoring invasive species, among other activities.”

Source (USGS Website): http://invasivespecies.gsfc.nasa.gov/news_cluster.html

Apple G5 XServe Clusters Arrive

August 23, 2004 - The ISFS project received its primary, high performance computer systems late June. These two state-of-the-art, Apple G5 XServe clusters will enable high performance parallel processing of statistical models for invasive species forecasting. RIO (formerly referred to as 'FireAnt') is a 10 dual processor cluster and ROCKY a 5 dual processor cluster.

These two systems were installed over the summer, RIO at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) and ROCKY at the USGS Fort Collins Science Center (FORT). These systems will support ongoing research, development and production of the Invasive Species Forecasting System (ISFS). that NASA, USGS and their partners are developing. The Invasive Species Analysis & Modeling Service (ISAMS), a component of the ISFS, has been installed on both ROCKY & RIO and is in-production at both sites. With ROCKY installed at FORT and integrated with ISAMS, the time to process models and produce predictive maps has been vastly reduced, thus improving overall productivity for USGS scientists, engineers & managers.

Background

February 23, 2004 - The ISFS project purchased these systems to enable high performance parallel processing of statistical models for invasive species forecasting.

Each cluster will be made up of a server node and cluster nodes. Each individual computer has a processing speed of 2 Giga-Hertz (GHz), with 2 Giga-bytes of memory for the server nodes (1 GB for the cluster nodes), and 80 Giga-bytes of internal disk storage. The server node will be equipped with an additional 500 Gigabytes of disk storage, and the cluster is connected to a 3.0 Terrabyte Xserve Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks (RAID) system via high-speed fibre-channel cable, bringing the total disk capacity of the 10-node cluster at Goddard to 4.3 Terra-bytes! The entire cluster is connected together via high-speed gigabit Ethernet. The computer system at Ft. Collins is nearly identical, and consists of five dual processor Apple G5s and a 1.5 Terra-byte RAID. The systems are expected to go online in time for the May Science Team Meeting.

United States Geological Survey (USGS)

In this project, NASA is working directly with the National Institute of Invasive Species Science in Fort Collins, Colorado. The Institute is administratively housed in the Invasive Species Science Program of the USGS Fort Collins Science Center, one of 17 science centers within the USGS Biological Resources Discipline (BRD). The major public interface to the data and capabilities of the Invasive Species Forecasting System will be through the National Biological Information Infrastructure (NBII), developed and maintained by the USGS Center for Biological Informatics.

United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)

NASA and USDA recently signed a MOU identifying invasive species as one of five critical areas for interagency collaboration. This new partnership will ultimately broaden the reach of invasive species predictive capabilities to agricultural applications. USDA's Agricultural Research Service is taking the lead in these activities.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

NASA's Office of Earth Science is participating in these joint efforts through both the Research Division and the Applications Division. NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is the home institution for many people working directly on the project. NASA team members have a diverse, interdisciplinary background and come from Goddard's Earth and Space Data Computing Division and the Laboratory for Terrestrial Physics.

The Growing Extended Family of Invasive Species Partners

University of Alabama at Huntsville, Mississippi State University, Patuxent Wildlife Research Center, Florida Caribbean Science Center, National Wildlife Health Center, Columbia Environmental Research Center, Upper Midwest Environmental Science Center, Integrated Taxonomic Information System, US Fish and Wildlife Service Wildlife Refuges, Biota of North America Program, National Park Service, US Forest Service Forest Health Monitoring Program, Colorado State University, Natural Resources Ecology Laboratory, University of California at Davis, Long Term Ecological Research, Colorado Natural Heritage Program, Center for Environmental Management of Military Lands, The Nature Conservancy, State of Colorado.

Source (USGS Website): http://invasivespecies.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/2005_09_01_News_Release_New_Members_final.pdf
ESIP Federation Elects 6 New Partners

September 1, 2005—The Federation of Earth Science Information Partners (“Federation”) has elected six new partners for full membership. The following projects and company represent the latest class of Federation members:

The Invasive Species Data Service: Towards Operational Use of Earth Science Data in
the USGS Invasive Species Decision Support System, John Schnase, NASA Goddard
Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

“The Federation’s growth during the past few years has been phenomenal,” says Dr. Thomas Yunck, Federation President. “Together, Federation partners leverage expertise across science, technology and education to create new products and services for people who care about exploring and protecting Earth. Broadly speaking, the Federation seeks to promote a deeper understanding of Earth’s behavior which will result in informed decisions about our planet.” The Federation now numbers 83 partners representing a wide range of Earth science data interests. Federation partners include science data centers, environmental research groups, innovators in the application of environmental data, educators and technologists. Across these diverse interests, public, private and non-profit organizations are represented.

The Federation is a consortium of Earth science data centers, researchers, scientists, technologists, educators, and applications developers. The Federation promotes increased accessibility, interoperability and usability for Earth science data and derivative products. Initiated by NASA in 1997, the Federation provides data, products and services to decision makers and researchers in public and private settings. The Foundation for Earth Science provides administrative and staff support to the Federation of Earth Science Information Partners.

-----
CSRAJim

Eric,

So how much does all of that mapping cost us (just from the USGS – not including other agencies)????

An idea of how much this costs us is found in the June 2000 report to accompany the appropriations bills, this information is found in the:

“Report [To accompany H.R. 4578], Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, 2001, Senate, Report 106-312, 106th Congress, 2nd Session, June 22, 2000”
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=106_cong_reports&docid=f:sr312.106.pdf

The Committee on Appropriations to which was referred the bill (H.R. 4578) making appropriations for the Department of the Interior and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2001, and for other purposes…(Figures for the USGS below from p.40):

Note: The appropriated amount is listed first, followed by the requested amount-budget estimate in [brackets].

NATIONAL MAPPING PROGRAM

National Data Collection and Integration = $54,558,000 [$67,327,000].

Earth Science Information and Delivery = $35,411,000 [36,911,000]

Geographic Research and Applications = $36,744,000 [$51,044,000]

BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Biological Research and Monitoring = $122,922,000 [$123,430,000]

Biological Information Management and Delivery = $10,743,000 [$21,243,000]

Cooperative Research Units Applications = $14,108,000 [$14,108,000]

SCIENCE SUPPORT = $69,895,000 [$70,895,000]

FACILITIES = $88,036,000 [$88,036,000]

Overall, the committee recommended the appropriation of $847,596,000 for the USGS (agency budget) for FY-2001.

Of note is that the committee added this paragraph into the report (below)…What did the USGS mapping program spend the money on? And no accounting…I wonder how the IRS would treat the American citizen if we were to do this? The USGS still received $848 million in the end…

“The Committee is deeply disturbed by events that have transpired over the past year within the Mapping Program. Mapping Program staff redirected substantial sums of money to activities, which were unauthorized and for which dollars were not appropriated, without the Committee’s knowledge or consent. The apparent lack of recognition by the Mapping Program staff that these actions were, at a minimum, contrary to accepted procedure, as well as their lack of cooperation as the Committee attempted to obtain complete information, has proven as disturbing as the initial events themselves. The Committee will not tolerate the continued failure of the Mapping Program to operate in a responsible and accountable manner. The Committee expects the Director of USGS to act immediately to ensure that systems are put in place whereby the Mapping Program’s budgetary operations are coordinated with the larger USGS budget office and appropriate oversight is provided at a sufficiently detailed level to avoid further incidents of this magnitude.” (p.41)

What did the USGS mapping program spend the money on? And no accounting…I wonder how the IRS would treat the American citizen if we were to do this? The USGS still received $848 million in the end…

Later,
Jim.

-----
CSRAJim

Eric,

Once again we see the Brown Tree Snake (Guam) included within the contents of a US governmental agency report. In this case, the USGS, in their "Giant Constrictors: Biological and Management Profiles and an Establishment Risk Assessment for Nine Large Species of Pythons, Anacondas, and Boa Constrictor" by Robert Reed and Gordon Rodda…

From page 2 there is this, "Novelty is less readily quantified, but most ecologists are convinced introduced predators do significantly more damage if their predatory method includes a novel tactic for which the prey species has not evolved a defense (Rodda and others, 1997). A classic example is the doomed birds of Guam, which were unfamiliar with snakes and had not evolved any defense against a nocturnal arboreal snake predator such as the Brown Treesnake (Boiga irregularis, Savidge, 1987)."

Wow, Rodda (and others) worked on the Brown Tree Snake problem back in 1997 as well...Imagine that!

Well approximately seven years later (October 30, 2004), Congress (108th) passed Public Law 108-384 which states, “An Act to provide for the control and eradication of the brown tree snake on the island of Guam and the prevention of the introduction of the brown tree snake to other areas of the united States, and for other purposes.”
Source: http://www.fort.usgs.gov/resources/education/bts/resources/pdf/PublicLaw_108-384.pdf

PL 108-384 includes the following information…

SEC. 3. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING NEED FOR IMPROVED AND BETTER COORDINATED FEDERAL POLICY FOR BROWN TREE SNAKE INTRODUCTION, CONTROL, AND ERADICATION.

“It is the sense of Congress that there exists a need for improved and better coordinated control, interdiction, research, and eradication of the brown tree snake on the part of the United States and other interested parties.”

SEC. 4. BROWN TREE SNAKE CONTROL, INTERDICTION, RESEARCH AND ERADICATION.

1. The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Wildlife Services (Operations), received “not more than $2,600,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $13,000,000 over five years).

2. The APHIS, Wildlife Services (Operations), National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC), Methods Development, received “not more than $1,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $7,500,000 over five years).

3. The Office of Insular Affairs (OIA) received “not more than $3,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $15,000,000 over five years).

4. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) received “not more than $2,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $10,000,000 over five years).

5. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Biological Resources received “not more than $1,500,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $7,500,000 over five years).

The subtotal of tax payer dollars for the “control, interdiction, research and eradication” of the Brown Tree Snake on the Island of Guam (FY2006-2010) is $53,000,000!

But that’s not the end of it…

SEC. 5. ESTABLISHMENT OF QUARANTINE PROTOCOLS TO CONTROL THE INTRODUCTION AND SPREAD OF THE BROWN TREE SNAKE, Congress authorized these additional amounts directly to the Secretaries…

1. To the Secretary of Agriculture “not more than $3,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $15,000,000 over five years).

2. To the Secretary of the Interior “not more than $1,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2006 through 2010” (Total of $5,000,000 over five years).

For the grand total of not more than $73,000,000 tax payer dollars over a five year time period, four U.S. governmental agencies, two U.S. governmental secretaries and one governmental research center will attempt to “solve” the Brown Tree Snake on the island of Guam. Surely, the dreaded Brown Tree Snake will meet its demise from all of these “king’s horsemen”…

I’ll bet that we will continue to see the dreaded Brown Tree Snake as a problem for the “doomed birds of Guam”…I wonder how much the “control, interdiction, research and eradication” of the pythons, anacondas and boas will eventually cost all of us? I can not wait to hear about their “success” stories during their testimonies before Congress…

Later,
Jim.

PS: Did I say Guam is an island? And these "experts" are in charge of the python problem in the Florida Everglades? OMG!!!!

-----
CSRAJim

There were very few, if any, predators on Guam for the Brown tree snakes, and, as you mentioned, an island is far different than Florida. That was the whole premise of the book I mentioned.

I noticed Rodda's report keeps grouping both subs of Burmese as having the same range, when the ability of Indians to live in cooler climes is well know, versus the normal Burms. Anyone want to wager on the outcome of the test in the cold weather?

Jaykis,

My sentiments exactly...The fix appears to be in the works from the foundation they appear to be establishing ahead of the results of the "experiment" at SREL...Once the "results" are in, it will simply be a matter of touting the "consesus of science" to the DOT-ORGS and the selected media outlets (press releases) and The Orlando Slantinel, NY Times, Huffington Post, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, etc, and it will be of to the races to be the first to report the "news"...Followed by the inevitable "polls" after the deluge of "fear mongered propaganda" to scare parents (for the children)...Then there will be the tax-payer funded "experts" before Congress and we'll have a tailor made "agenda" shoved down our collective throats...

In the end, we will loose another one of our freedoms (commerce clause via interstate trade) and they'll use this legislation to go after the next target industry using this "victory" as the template for the assault...Just as they did with the ESA, NEPA, Clear Air Act, Clean Water Act, Lacey Act, etc...

As with the Brown Tree Snake on Guam, they NEVER SOLVE THE PROBLEM, rather they ID a problem for a government solution, which means a program (and everything associated with it) that never ends because this is about the public (government) control of the means of production, distribution and exchange of goods, services and commodities for the equitable "share" for all...

In this case, this is a low fruit example (easy to scare people about giant snakes) for only a small segment of our commercial society (animal/plant industry) but the lesson of history regarding ALL socialist governments is that they start small...Gradually over time, they'll get around to the rest of society under the guise of some form industry "nationalization" to "protect" it...In other words the exchange of freedom for government security

The day is never done for a socialist...LOL!

Later,
Jim.
-----
CSRAJim

"...Gradually over time, they'll get around to the rest of society under the guise of some form industry "nationalization" to "protect" it...In other words the exchange of freedom for government security
>>
>>The day is never done for a socialist...LOL!
>>

Jim,

You are absolutely correct, except that we (the United States) are already very socialist (ie, Social Security ponzi scheme, Dept. of Education, welfare, etc., etc.) Progressives/liberals "started small" a hundred years ago. What I find really sad is that many people do seem to believe the false premise that if something is run by "the government" it is somehow more secure or immune to corruption (ie health care), which history has shown us not to be true. The sad reality, imo, is that "we the people" have let our system of government become exactly what the founding fathers fought so hard to avoid - a huge, centralized, federal power that strives to control every aspect of people lives and make laws to "protect" the "unwashed masses" from every possible bad event (real or imagined) that might ever occur. IMO, all the stuff you've cited is dead accurate, but it's not the beginning of socialism. It's just yet another manifestation of it, one among many.

Thanks,
Ed

WELL SAID, ED....
-----
Tom Crutchfield
www.tomcrutchfield.com

Ed & Tom,

>>You are absolutely correct, except that we (the United States) are already very socialist (ie, Social Security ponzi scheme, Dept. of Education, welfare, etc., etc.) Progressives/liberals "started small" a hundred years ago. What I find really sad is that many people do seem to believe the false premise that if something is run by "the government" it is somehow more secure or immune to corruption (ie health care), which history has shown us not to be true. The sad reality, imo, is that "we the people" have let our system of government become exactly what the founding fathers fought so hard to avoid - a huge, centralized, federal power that strives to control every aspect of people lives and make laws to "protect" the "unwashed masses" from every possible bad event (real or imagined) that might ever occur. IMO, all the stuff you've cited is dead accurate, but it's not the beginning of socialism. It's just yet another manifestation of it, one among many.

First off, thanks to both of you…

Second, I know that some folks that read my posts probably scratch their heads regarding the relevance to herps but, it is completely relevant in that, our issues (H.R.669, S.373, ROC’s in Florida, etc) are what they are because of a “quasi-shadow government” that is not only domestic but international in nature. Our issues here are only a small element of the big picture and it is the one that they want us to see…This is their propaganda banner to demonize to further what they are really up to. A giant snake is an easy demon…Especially when it can scare the public into contacting their representative to encourage them to vote for something that they (the citizens) are concerned about…They have no idea what they are actually going to allow to happen…

A case in point is the Brown Tree Snake on Guam. The legislation that was passed to fund eradication, control, etc for FY2006-2010 is not completely “honest” about what this funding was really intended for. Notice one of my previous posts on the same subject – NASA partnership and a new computer system to create a new database…

In total, this “not more than funding” provides for $126,713,000 for a National Mapping Program and $88,036,000 for Facilities ($214,749,000 total between the two)…These items are “Capacity Development (CD)” – infrastructure – and have very little to do with “eradication” of the Brown Tree Snake…By at least 2000, the UN determined (probably much before then) to start their database and information management with the Oceanic Islands and then use this a pilot for further implementation…Does Guam meet the criteria of an Oceanic Island?

Without going into too much background, in 2000, the UNDP (UN Development Program) and the GEF (Global Environment Fund) – as “strategic partners” – had a report written (link below) to analyze Capacity Development (CD) of UNDP’s CD projects. Keeping things simple, CD is the development of the infrastructure of the program and not the program itself per se. In other words, this about money to fund the support “structure” (i.e. computer, computer database, etc)…The issue at hand (Brown Tree Snake) is the propaganda “crisis” to bring to the attention of the policy-makers (politicians) for tax-payer monies. It is that simple after you cut through all of the mumbo-jumbo surrounding the “crisis”. Which begs the question of, is the US tax payer funding the voluntary “partnership” of our government and the UN? You decide for yourself…

One of the major problems that the UNDP, UNEP (UN Environmental Program), etc has is the lack of information on their projects – projects that support sustainable development, Biodiversity Conservation (Invasive Species is part of this agenda), Climate Change, etc – is that the agencies of the UN are on the outside regarding the information loop. What I’m beginning to learn is that they have an agenda and they are attempting to track its progress over time to measure its success or failure. This is where CD comes into play. By using the private sector (DOT-ORG’s, NGO’s, etc) and academia (colleges and universities) they gain access to the information that they need. If this strictly a US government project, depending on who is leading congress at the time, obtaining the information could be obtained voluntarily…If the US governmental agency did not agree to do this, then the UN is out of luck.

I believe that we already know that the eradication of the Brown Tree Snake is not in the cards because there is a quantifiable and successful method of eliminating “pest” species…Bounty Hunting. What happened to the Gray Wolf and the Grizzly Bear (and would have happened to the Buffalo) in the lower 48? With this historical evidence readily available, it is clear that “eradication” is not what they are really attempting to do…The articles that have been discussed here on this forum indicate they’ve “considered” it but, downplay it at the same time…As they already know that it would work over time…

Just my 10-cents worth and that won’t buy a cup of coffee…

Later,
Jim.

PS: Go read it for yourself…I can’t remember where exactly you’ll find what I’m talking above…I remember that there is a LOT of interesting information in pages 50-93 (of the document itself, not as it appears on the computer) – particularly the Environmental Law, Invasive Species and Information Clearinghouse information…Note what’s at the very end of this report…The World Bank Group’s Portfolio…An investment “portfolio”? Ummm.

Capacity Development Initiative, Assessment of Capacity Development in the GEF Portfolio, by the GEF-UNDP Strategic Partnership, GEF, UNDP, September 2000
http://www.gefweb.org/Documents/Enabling_Activity_Projects/CDI/documents/Consolidated_CDI_IA_portfolio_assessment_reports.pdf
-----
CSRAJim

Ever notice that exterminators no longer use the term "exterminate"? It's "pest control. There's very little money in extermination, but lots in "control". Same with Guam.

Hey, I just started getting that "socialist" social security money, and I LIKE it, lol. A free $1100 a month? You betcha!

I earned it, anyway.

>> Hey, I just started getting that "socialist" social security money, and I LIKE it, lol. A free $1100 a month? You betcha!

To rain on your parade, look at how much you put in over your career, figure in the time value of that money, and you'll see you're getting out LESS than you put in.
-----
Chris McMartin
www.mcmartinville.com
I'm Not a Herpetologist, but I Play One on the Internet

I haven't put anything into it for the past 10 years, and I'm taking it early. No rain on my parade, and it still comes to me. It's money I didn't have, and it's going to good use....buying snakes

I'm getting mine this year.I'm investing in the Remmington Corp. Its not just for "BIG SNAKES" ......Go head... click/click ....pic caption... I'm next...

Sorry,I've been watching to much Eastwood. Or the news. Not enough tongue in cheek. Vic