constrictorkeeper
12-11-2009, 10:57 AM
hey guys...
here is a real good "letter to senator" that i copied off the Save Our Snakes site (did you catch the S.O.S. connection...?...). it's pretty inclusive of all that needs to be said. i know how much we love copy and paste around here.
this should make it easy to start things off.
of course, i'm not recommending this in place of a visit, but in addition to, or as a warm up to.
so fire up the copier, (don't forget to type your senator's last name in, and type in your name and addy on the bottom, and sign)
ck
Dear Senator _________,
. If S. 373 is enacted as drafted, tens of thousands of American pet owners,
hobbyists, and business owners across the country will be adversely
impacted.
. There is no scientific justification at this time for banning any species
of Python; not every species is the same and there is a large difference
between the Burmese python that is found in the Everglades and other Python
species commonly possessed by reptile keepers and pet owners. The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service has a credible science-based review process underway
that should not be circumvented by simply imposing a Congressional ban.
. S. 373 should be amended to address Burmese Pythons in a scientifically
credible manner. Priority needs to be given to controlling the existing
population in the Everglades - resources are needed for developing baits and
traps.
. If the Congress decides to ban Burmese Pythons, it should limit the ban to
importation of that species into the United States.
. To prevent release of currently owned Burmese pythons into the
environment, provisions should be in final law to permit interstate movement
of existing U.S. population of Burmese pythons, subject to housing such
animals in secure enclosures and compliance with all applicable State and
local requirements and best management practices for housing and maintaining
large constrictors.
. The final law should also include provisions for financial support to the
USFWS and partners to expand the reptile component of the HabitattitudeTM
campaign to educate reptile owners not to release their unwanted pets.
Additional detailed talking points:
Current Status of Python Invasion in the US
. One population of one species. Over the last fifty years, millions of
pythons of nearly a dozen species have been imported into the US. Despite
the occasional escape or release of these animals, only one species of
python has established a feral population. And, the circumstances that
contributed to its establishment in the Everglades of south Florida are
rather unique and complex (see below).
Burmese Pythons in the Everglades and Keys
. Agreement on Control in South Florida. There is general agreement that the
feral population of Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) in the
Everglades and Keys of south Florida needs to be controlled, and if
feasible, eradicated.
. Unique, Complex Situation. Individual pythons have been documented in the
Everglades region since the 1970s and the establishment of the current
population likely resulted from a relatively unique and complex combination
of factors including the mass escape of pythons when holding facilities were
destroyed by Hurricane Andrew (1992); occasional escape of individual
pythons from hobbyists or commercial facilities; occasional release (often
well-intended but misguided) of pythons by their owners; subtropical
climate; large area of swampy habitat with relatively little human activity;
and ample prey availability.
. Collaborative Work Underway. A Python Action Working Group, consisting of
state and federal agencies, the Nature Conservancy (TNC), and the Pet
Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), has been working to design and
implement an Action Plan to limit the spread and impact of Burmese pythons
in south Florida. The greatest challenges to python management at this time
are lack of proven techniques for python trapping; funding for research on
baits/lures and traps for capturing the animals; and staff for Action Plan
coordination and implementation.
. The Pet Industry is Helping. PIJAC and individual python hobbyists are
helping to address these challenges by contributing ideas to lure/trap
development, promoting the need for additional staffing, and volunteering as
trainers and participants in python patrols. They are also promoting the
HabitattitudeTM campaign, state permit systems for large constrictors, and
Florida's Nonnative Pet Amnesty Day in order to help prevent the additional
release or escape of pythons.
. S. 373 Fails to Help the S. Florida Situation. S. 373 does not provide any
assistance to state or federal agencies for controlling/eradicating the
population of Burmese pythons in south Florida. It will have limited to no
conservation benefits for the Everglades and may, in fact, have unintended
negative consequences (see below).
Unintended Negative Consequences
. Facilitation of Mass Release and Euthanasia. S. 373 could greatly
facilitate the very problem that natural resource agencies and other
stakeholders (including PIJAC) are trying to prevent. The Bill would make it
illegal for pet owners, hobbyists, and businesses who currently posses
pythons to rehome them through sale or trade across state lines, or to take
them with them if they decide to move to another state. As a result,
hundreds to thousands of the pythons will likely be released or killed. The
animal welfare implications and potential risks for the establishment of
additional python species/populations are significant.
. Unemployment and families at risk. Thousands of businesses - snake
breeders, pet stores, and manufacturers - in the US rely on the sale of
pythons and python-related products. S. 373 would destroy these companies,
contributing to greater unemployment and putting families at risk. [Note:
PIJAC is currently conducting a survey in order to determine potential
economic damages to the reptile industry/snake keepers.]
Sending the Wrong Message
. S. 373 implies, "Science has little value in policy decision making." The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is in the process of conducting a
science-based assessment of species in the genus Python, Boa, and Eunectes
to determine if action to initiate a rule making process for any of these
species under the Lacey Act is warranted. As mandated by the Lacey Act, this
process has thus far been transparent and open to stakeholder input. The
introduction of S. 373 indicates that Senator Nelson and colleagues do not
place value and/or trust on the scientific process being conducted by the
USFWS. Nor do they acknowledge the findings by US Geological Survey
scientist, Bob Reed, who found that there are varying degrees of risk among
python species in terms of their potential to become invasive in the US (J.
Risk Analysis, Vol. 25, pp 753-666). S. 373 treats all Python species as if
they are highly likely to become invasive, but peer-reviewed scientific
findings do not support this conclusion.
. S. 373 implies, "If you are going to use science, use controversial
science." Senator Nelson largely justifies his actions by referencing a
climate matching study by Gordon Rodda and colleagues (2008) which projected
that Burmese pythons could inhabit nearly three-quarters of the US. Not only
have other scientists questioned the data and methodologies used in the
climate matching analysis, but this and all subsequent studies by other
scientists have included the range of both P. m. molurus (the Indian python)
and P. m. bivittatus. The Indian python occupies a much broader and more
temperate climatic range than the Burmese python and there are biological
and behavior distinctions where the two species overlap in Asia.
Furthermore, these snakes were originally considered separate species and
some pythons experts believe they are distinct enough to be considered
separate species at this time. There is no evidence that climate matching or
ecological niche modeling of the Indian python would accurately project the
distribution potential of the Burmese python.
. S. 373 implies, "The State of Florida doesn't have the competency to
manage its natural resources." After careful evaluation, the Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) concluded that responsible pet
ownership and facilities management are key to preventing the further
establishment of pythons in Florida. They regulate large-breed pythons as
Species of Special Concern which require permits and microchipping. They
have also been sponsoring: a) "Do not Release" campaigns (including ZX) to
educate pet owners on the negative consequences of pet release, as well as
alternatives to release, and b) Nonnative Species Amnesty Days to provide
people with the opportunity to surrender large constrictors if they can no
longer keep them. The FWCC has also been collaborating with other state
agencies, federal agencies, and stakeholders through the Python Action
Working Group. The FWCC's management challenges are likely to be made worse
by S. 373 as they will have to contend with the potential release of
hundreds to thousands of pythons that can no longer be rehomed across state
lines.
Setting a Dangerous Precedent
. Lacey Act listing on a whim. Previous Congressional action has resulted in
additions to the Lacey Act, including brown tree snakes (Boiga irregularis)
and zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha). In each of these cases, there was:
a) clear scientific evidence that the species were causing significant
biological and/or economic damages, b) no constituency that was
socio-economically dependent on the species, and c) consensus that the
species were highly likely to be able to establish and cause significant
harm in other parts of the US if translocated and released into the natural
environment (e.g., Hawaii in the case of brown tree snakes). Congressional
action was chosen because it provided a means to respond in the most timely
manner feasible under circumstances clearly consistent with the intent of
the Lacey Act. In the case of S. 373, Senator Nelson and colleagues have
chosen to take action counter to scientific evidence, state and federal
agency program initiatives, and a constituency that is socio-economically
dependent on the species. If it passes, S. 373 could set a precedent for the
listing of any species by virtue of an elected official's circumventing the
established statutory process.
PLEASE INCLUDE AT MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF S373 IS TO BE PASSED:
If Congress does decide to go forward with listing the Burmese Python under
the Lacey Act, or similar species at the federal level, then PIJAC supports
species specific language that would:
1) allow interstate movement (subject to certain standards),
2) allow exportation of live specimens to countries which allow importation,
3) allow possession, subject to certain conditions (i.e. caging,
recordkeeping, identification and disaster plan), and
4) establish a 1 year grace period, following enactment of legislation, in
which owners can, without penalty, take the necessary steps to comply with
government standards.
PIJAC is submitting to the Committee a proposed federal/state mechanism for
Burmese Pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) listed as injurious under the
Lacey Act (which could be used as a model if other python species are
included). PIJAC's proposal sets forth standards for possession,
transportation, exhibition and aging; as well as, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements and identification and escape plans.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. If this bill passes
it will eliminate a 4 billion dollar a year U.S. industry overnight and
destroy something I and millions of others care deeply for. What would be
next? Birds, fish, hamsters, dogs, cats, other reptiles?
Sincerely, your constituent,
name
addy
signature
here is a real good "letter to senator" that i copied off the Save Our Snakes site (did you catch the S.O.S. connection...?...). it's pretty inclusive of all that needs to be said. i know how much we love copy and paste around here.
this should make it easy to start things off.
of course, i'm not recommending this in place of a visit, but in addition to, or as a warm up to.
so fire up the copier, (don't forget to type your senator's last name in, and type in your name and addy on the bottom, and sign)
ck
Dear Senator _________,
. If S. 373 is enacted as drafted, tens of thousands of American pet owners,
hobbyists, and business owners across the country will be adversely
impacted.
. There is no scientific justification at this time for banning any species
of Python; not every species is the same and there is a large difference
between the Burmese python that is found in the Everglades and other Python
species commonly possessed by reptile keepers and pet owners. The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service has a credible science-based review process underway
that should not be circumvented by simply imposing a Congressional ban.
. S. 373 should be amended to address Burmese Pythons in a scientifically
credible manner. Priority needs to be given to controlling the existing
population in the Everglades - resources are needed for developing baits and
traps.
. If the Congress decides to ban Burmese Pythons, it should limit the ban to
importation of that species into the United States.
. To prevent release of currently owned Burmese pythons into the
environment, provisions should be in final law to permit interstate movement
of existing U.S. population of Burmese pythons, subject to housing such
animals in secure enclosures and compliance with all applicable State and
local requirements and best management practices for housing and maintaining
large constrictors.
. The final law should also include provisions for financial support to the
USFWS and partners to expand the reptile component of the HabitattitudeTM
campaign to educate reptile owners not to release their unwanted pets.
Additional detailed talking points:
Current Status of Python Invasion in the US
. One population of one species. Over the last fifty years, millions of
pythons of nearly a dozen species have been imported into the US. Despite
the occasional escape or release of these animals, only one species of
python has established a feral population. And, the circumstances that
contributed to its establishment in the Everglades of south Florida are
rather unique and complex (see below).
Burmese Pythons in the Everglades and Keys
. Agreement on Control in South Florida. There is general agreement that the
feral population of Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) in the
Everglades and Keys of south Florida needs to be controlled, and if
feasible, eradicated.
. Unique, Complex Situation. Individual pythons have been documented in the
Everglades region since the 1970s and the establishment of the current
population likely resulted from a relatively unique and complex combination
of factors including the mass escape of pythons when holding facilities were
destroyed by Hurricane Andrew (1992); occasional escape of individual
pythons from hobbyists or commercial facilities; occasional release (often
well-intended but misguided) of pythons by their owners; subtropical
climate; large area of swampy habitat with relatively little human activity;
and ample prey availability.
. Collaborative Work Underway. A Python Action Working Group, consisting of
state and federal agencies, the Nature Conservancy (TNC), and the Pet
Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC), has been working to design and
implement an Action Plan to limit the spread and impact of Burmese pythons
in south Florida. The greatest challenges to python management at this time
are lack of proven techniques for python trapping; funding for research on
baits/lures and traps for capturing the animals; and staff for Action Plan
coordination and implementation.
. The Pet Industry is Helping. PIJAC and individual python hobbyists are
helping to address these challenges by contributing ideas to lure/trap
development, promoting the need for additional staffing, and volunteering as
trainers and participants in python patrols. They are also promoting the
HabitattitudeTM campaign, state permit systems for large constrictors, and
Florida's Nonnative Pet Amnesty Day in order to help prevent the additional
release or escape of pythons.
. S. 373 Fails to Help the S. Florida Situation. S. 373 does not provide any
assistance to state or federal agencies for controlling/eradicating the
population of Burmese pythons in south Florida. It will have limited to no
conservation benefits for the Everglades and may, in fact, have unintended
negative consequences (see below).
Unintended Negative Consequences
. Facilitation of Mass Release and Euthanasia. S. 373 could greatly
facilitate the very problem that natural resource agencies and other
stakeholders (including PIJAC) are trying to prevent. The Bill would make it
illegal for pet owners, hobbyists, and businesses who currently posses
pythons to rehome them through sale or trade across state lines, or to take
them with them if they decide to move to another state. As a result,
hundreds to thousands of the pythons will likely be released or killed. The
animal welfare implications and potential risks for the establishment of
additional python species/populations are significant.
. Unemployment and families at risk. Thousands of businesses - snake
breeders, pet stores, and manufacturers - in the US rely on the sale of
pythons and python-related products. S. 373 would destroy these companies,
contributing to greater unemployment and putting families at risk. [Note:
PIJAC is currently conducting a survey in order to determine potential
economic damages to the reptile industry/snake keepers.]
Sending the Wrong Message
. S. 373 implies, "Science has little value in policy decision making." The
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) is in the process of conducting a
science-based assessment of species in the genus Python, Boa, and Eunectes
to determine if action to initiate a rule making process for any of these
species under the Lacey Act is warranted. As mandated by the Lacey Act, this
process has thus far been transparent and open to stakeholder input. The
introduction of S. 373 indicates that Senator Nelson and colleagues do not
place value and/or trust on the scientific process being conducted by the
USFWS. Nor do they acknowledge the findings by US Geological Survey
scientist, Bob Reed, who found that there are varying degrees of risk among
python species in terms of their potential to become invasive in the US (J.
Risk Analysis, Vol. 25, pp 753-666). S. 373 treats all Python species as if
they are highly likely to become invasive, but peer-reviewed scientific
findings do not support this conclusion.
. S. 373 implies, "If you are going to use science, use controversial
science." Senator Nelson largely justifies his actions by referencing a
climate matching study by Gordon Rodda and colleagues (2008) which projected
that Burmese pythons could inhabit nearly three-quarters of the US. Not only
have other scientists questioned the data and methodologies used in the
climate matching analysis, but this and all subsequent studies by other
scientists have included the range of both P. m. molurus (the Indian python)
and P. m. bivittatus. The Indian python occupies a much broader and more
temperate climatic range than the Burmese python and there are biological
and behavior distinctions where the two species overlap in Asia.
Furthermore, these snakes were originally considered separate species and
some pythons experts believe they are distinct enough to be considered
separate species at this time. There is no evidence that climate matching or
ecological niche modeling of the Indian python would accurately project the
distribution potential of the Burmese python.
. S. 373 implies, "The State of Florida doesn't have the competency to
manage its natural resources." After careful evaluation, the Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) concluded that responsible pet
ownership and facilities management are key to preventing the further
establishment of pythons in Florida. They regulate large-breed pythons as
Species of Special Concern which require permits and microchipping. They
have also been sponsoring: a) "Do not Release" campaigns (including ZX) to
educate pet owners on the negative consequences of pet release, as well as
alternatives to release, and b) Nonnative Species Amnesty Days to provide
people with the opportunity to surrender large constrictors if they can no
longer keep them. The FWCC has also been collaborating with other state
agencies, federal agencies, and stakeholders through the Python Action
Working Group. The FWCC's management challenges are likely to be made worse
by S. 373 as they will have to contend with the potential release of
hundreds to thousands of pythons that can no longer be rehomed across state
lines.
Setting a Dangerous Precedent
. Lacey Act listing on a whim. Previous Congressional action has resulted in
additions to the Lacey Act, including brown tree snakes (Boiga irregularis)
and zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha). In each of these cases, there was:
a) clear scientific evidence that the species were causing significant
biological and/or economic damages, b) no constituency that was
socio-economically dependent on the species, and c) consensus that the
species were highly likely to be able to establish and cause significant
harm in other parts of the US if translocated and released into the natural
environment (e.g., Hawaii in the case of brown tree snakes). Congressional
action was chosen because it provided a means to respond in the most timely
manner feasible under circumstances clearly consistent with the intent of
the Lacey Act. In the case of S. 373, Senator Nelson and colleagues have
chosen to take action counter to scientific evidence, state and federal
agency program initiatives, and a constituency that is socio-economically
dependent on the species. If it passes, S. 373 could set a precedent for the
listing of any species by virtue of an elected official's circumventing the
established statutory process.
PLEASE INCLUDE AT MINIMUM, THE FOLLOWING PROVISIONS IF S373 IS TO BE PASSED:
If Congress does decide to go forward with listing the Burmese Python under
the Lacey Act, or similar species at the federal level, then PIJAC supports
species specific language that would:
1) allow interstate movement (subject to certain standards),
2) allow exportation of live specimens to countries which allow importation,
3) allow possession, subject to certain conditions (i.e. caging,
recordkeeping, identification and disaster plan), and
4) establish a 1 year grace period, following enactment of legislation, in
which owners can, without penalty, take the necessary steps to comply with
government standards.
PIJAC is submitting to the Committee a proposed federal/state mechanism for
Burmese Pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) listed as injurious under the
Lacey Act (which could be used as a model if other python species are
included). PIJAC's proposal sets forth standards for possession,
transportation, exhibition and aging; as well as, recordkeeping and
reporting requirements and identification and escape plans.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter. If this bill passes
it will eliminate a 4 billion dollar a year U.S. industry overnight and
destroy something I and millions of others care deeply for. What would be
next? Birds, fish, hamsters, dogs, cats, other reptiles?
Sincerely, your constituent,
name
addy
signature