Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Dedicated exclusively to field herping.

Moderator: Scott Waters

Shane_TX
Posts: 603
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 6:44 pm
Location: Upper TX Coast

Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Shane_TX »

Cruise the first thread here:

http://www.fieldherpforum.com/forum/vie ... 20&t=14348

Yada, yada and yada.

Another yada-esqe thread:

http://www.fieldherpforum.com/forum/vie ... 12&t=14367

Media report from a month ago:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/02/11/3 ... arget.html

Abstract:

- 50-ish pythons captured
- $25 entry fee and 1,600-ish participants (= $40,000)
- 50 pythons observed by 1,600 participants

No facts intended, just an FYI.

Shane
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

And still nothing whatsoever about collateral damage, i.e. snakes of non-target species killed by dumb/drunk/kill-happy python hunters? I thought surely at least a few native snakes would suffer from this program despite the organizers' efforts to educate folks before setting them loose.

Gerry
narrowfellow
Posts: 77
Joined: December 9th, 2010, 9:21 am

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by narrowfellow »

deleted
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

narrowfellow wrote:So far there have been zero reports of any native species being killed. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, of course, but I feel like the potential for non-target snake killing was seriously overblown by some folks.
I suspected as much, myself. Still, I expected to hear of at least some of this occurring. I expected more than a couple of folks to get so lost that they needed rescue, too, though.

Gerry
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

I expect there will be some entrants of the attitude that the only good snake is a dead snake.
However that mentallity will kill snakes regardless of whether there is an organized python hunt.
scott s
Posts: 144
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 5:36 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by scott s »

Am I the only one who thinks that 1600 participants finding only 68 pythons translates into the idea that a very large percentage of pythons were killed in that Winter freeze a couple of years ago?
User avatar
Josh Holbrook
Posts: 2196
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:11 am
Location: Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Josh Holbrook »

scott s wrote:Am I the only one who thinks that 1600 participants finding only 68 pythons translates into the idea that a very large percentage of pythons were killed in that Winter freeze a couple of years ago?
There were certainly a bunch killed in 2010, but I think this number speaks more to the poor conditions during the hunt (hot and sunny, mostly) and the fact that most of the hunters weren't herpers.
User avatar
muskiemagnet
Posts: 1253
Joined: June 11th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: kaukauna, wi

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by muskiemagnet »

scott s wrote:Am I the only one who thinks that 1600 participants finding only 68 pythons translates into the idea that a very large percentage of pythons were killed in that Winter freeze a couple of years ago?
could be, and it would be nice. or the participants didn't know what they were doing.

one thing to say. BOUNTY the bastards. with regulation of course. we have proven we can eliminate a species. let's take precautions so natives do not suffer(and i think this may be fairly easy), but let's get them out of the glades. stop spending hundreds of thousands of dollars studying them. spend the money on a bounty per head. knock them down enough, and a hard freeze could wipe them out. the mammals will love you for it.

-ben
scott s
Posts: 144
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 5:36 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by scott s »

My guess is that if the hunt had taken place BEFORE the big freeze and everything else was the same, 1600 hunters would have found hundreds of Burms.

Sixty Eight strikes me as a very low number, with that much ground being covered.
Reptiluvr
Posts: 258
Joined: April 23rd, 2011, 7:49 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Reptiluvr »

Anyone know how many man hours there were? If there were 1600 participants but each only did one weekend or something, then not that much effort was really put forth. Me personally, I like the idea of spending the money on something other than research confirming the obvious, but predicting the ridiculous. They should at least start with being able to kill them year round without having to jump through too many hoops to do so.
User avatar
VanAR
Posts: 590
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:36 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by VanAR »

could be, and it would be nice. or the participants didn't know what they were doing.
Based on the area of ENP and Big cypress alone, even an estimate of 100,000 pythons still translates to just one python in every 20 acres, if randomly distributed. Even if there are a lot of snakes out there it doesn't mean they are easy to find, and I'm sure their crypsis and the relative featurelessness of much of the wet prairie doesn't help.
MonarchzMan
Posts: 341
Joined: September 8th, 2011, 6:12 pm
Location: Oxford, MS

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by MonarchzMan »

Josh Holbrook wrote:the fact that most of the hunters weren't herpers.
And the fact that the winners of the prize money accounted for what? 14 pythons? I would guess those guys were the herpers of the group. Given that a significant number of the count was dominated by a couple people points to poor experience looking for the snakes, to me, by most of the participants.
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

I'd like to see a bounty system tried, too, not in the hope of eradication (which seems a pretty remote hope) but as an attempt at some measure of control. I don't doubt that collateral damage will occur, but it's hard for me to imagine that it could be anywhere near as great as the harm that the pythons themselves are causing to south FL's native fauna.

Gerry
User avatar
Mike VanValen
Posts: 2074
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:41 pm
Location: Connecticut
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Mike VanValen »

gbin wrote:I'd like to see a bounty system tried, too, not in the hope of eradication (which seems a pretty remote hope) but as an attempt at some measure of control. I don't doubt that collateral damage will occur, but it's hard for me to imagine that it could be anywhere near as great as the harm that the pythons themselves are causing to south FL's native fauna.

Gerry
I tend to agree. The system would *probably* get better over time as far as folks getting good at finding and identifying pythons.
User avatar
Josh Holbrook
Posts: 2196
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:11 am
Location: Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Josh Holbrook »

Mike VanValen wrote:
gbin wrote:I'd like to see a bounty system tried, too, not in the hope of eradication (which seems a pretty remote hope) but as an attempt at some measure of control. I don't doubt that collateral damage will occur, but it's hard for me to imagine that it could be anywhere near as great as the harm that the pythons themselves are causing to south FL's native fauna.

Gerry
I tend to agree. The system would *probably* get better over time as far as folks getting good at finding and identifying pythons.

Yeah, but there remains the problem of the million+ acres of ENP/Coastal SFL that's mangrove swamp and isolated keys, which in my experience can be the densest burm populations, but also can be the areas toughest to survey if there's no roads.
Shane_TX
Posts: 603
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 6:44 pm
Location: Upper TX Coast

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Shane_TX »

Yeah, but there remains the problem of the million+ acres of ENP/Coastal SFL that's mangrove swamp and isolated keys, which in my experience can be the densest burm populations, but also can be the areas toughest to survey if there's no roads.
Isn't florida going to be flooded in the near future due to global warming?
User avatar
Mike VanValen
Posts: 2074
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:41 pm
Location: Connecticut
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Mike VanValen »

Josh Holbrook wrote:
Yeah, but there remains the problem of the million+ acres of ENP/Coastal SFL that's mangrove swamp and isolated keys, which in my experience can be the densest burm populations, but also can be the areas toughest to survey if there's no roads.
Let's form a python removal service, I'll move down there, we'll get a boat and spend forever hunting pythons. :thumb:
User avatar
Josh Holbrook
Posts: 2196
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:11 am
Location: Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Josh Holbrook »

As soon as they get that python bounty going, I'll take you up on that.
User avatar
muskiemagnet
Posts: 1253
Joined: June 11th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: kaukauna, wi

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by muskiemagnet »

Josh Holbrook wrote:As soon as they get that python bounty going, I'll take you up on that.
screw a bounty then. proposition the feds to let some folks in there to do it. charge them. start a company. deer snipers in wisconsin get a thousand per deer. that's good ching.

john, no disrespect, but, "better management"? they do not belong, so management is not the issue. the issue is removing them completely. i understand that this is probably a pipe dream, but if a bounty were to knock populations down to small numbers, then a hard freeze might help take care of them even further. at this point, it could happen.

as far as helping protect natives, charge for a "bounty permit". make them take an in depth native education course. help them understand why this needs to happen.

-ben
User avatar
John Martin
Posts: 515
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 10:57 pm
Location: North end of Lake Okeechobee, Florida

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by John Martin »

muskiemagnet wrote: deer snipers in wisconsin get a thousand per deer. -ben
Uh, a thousand what?
User avatar
chris_mcmartin
Posts: 2447
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 12:13 am
Location: Greater Houston TX Area
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by chris_mcmartin »

John Martin wrote:
muskiemagnet wrote: deer snipers in wisconsin get a thousand per deer. -ben
Uh, a thousand what?
Internets.
User avatar
muskiemagnet
Posts: 1253
Joined: June 11th, 2010, 8:43 am
Location: kaukauna, wi

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by muskiemagnet »

i heard that some municipalities are paying upwards of a thousand dollars per deer shot.. this does seem a bit high to me, but i read this in the newspaper a while ago.

the only thing that they do differently is use bullets that disintegrate on impact with anything they hit that is hard in any way. sure, one needs a night-vision scope as well.

-ben
User avatar
Bryan Hamilton
Posts: 1234
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 9:49 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Bryan Hamilton »

In Utah there is $50 bounty on coyotes. Its enough incentive to get folks to participate.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=24370069
User avatar
Knightkrawler5
Posts: 257
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 6:54 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Knightkrawler5 »

Mike VanValen wrote:Yeah, but there remains the problem of the million+ acres of ENP/Coastal SFL that's mangrove swamp and isolated keys, which in my experience can be the densest burm populations, but also can be the areas toughest to survey if there's no roads.


I think most people fail to see Josh's fact when arguing about the python problem. Plus I don't think people understand how thick the vegetation is down there and how easy it is to walk right past a 10 ft+ python without ever seeing it. Plus, after the 2010 freeze, I did two one week trips to Florida that year and found over 20 pythons (with T2K) and one was almost 17 feet long. They are there to stay, but obviously cannot move north due to the colder weather.
scott s
Posts: 144
Joined: August 13th, 2010, 5:36 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by scott s »

""SALT LAKE CITY — The state of Utah wants to pay you $50 for every coyote you kill. Known as the Predator Control Program, this incentive-based initiative is intended to eliminate coyotes that prey on young deer. According to John Shivik, mammals coordinator for the Division of Wildlife Resources, "If people remove coyotes where deer are being limited by coyotes and not other factors (habitat, weather), there may be localized increases in deer populations.”

The $50 bounties are being paid from a fund established by the Mule Deer Protection Act (Senate Bill 245), which was passed last year. The fund tops out at $750,000 a year, which authorities believe is sufficient to cover all the coyote bounty payouts.""

.......................

We need to start a donation based fund for all the poor native Floridian species that are SQUEEZED to death and swallowed WHOLE by Burmese pythons every day.

All the money that is raised can then be used to pay out "bounties" for Burms collected and killed.

We need to run commercials on TV with an 18 foot Burm slowly squeezing the life out of Bambi and we need to zoom in on Bambi's face as Bambi sucks in her last breath of air while a coil contricts her neck.

Call 1 800 SAVE BAMBI and donate to help save Florida from the evil clutches of the INSIDIOUS Burmese pythons!!!!!!!
Reptiluvr
Posts: 258
Joined: April 23rd, 2011, 7:49 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Reptiluvr »

Umm, don't coyotes naturally exist in Utah? Why in this day and age would a state or federal agency allow bounties like that? Forgive me if I'm wrong about where they exist(ed) naturally.
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

Reptiluvr wrote:Umm, don't coyotes naturally exist in Utah? Why in this day and age would a state or federal agency allow bounties like that? Forgive me if I'm wrong about where they exist(ed) naturally.
Bounties may be necessary if the wolf population has declined. Wolves kept coyotes in check, they may be over populating resulting in other problems.
luv_the_smellof_musk
Posts: 55
Joined: December 4th, 2012, 6:19 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by luv_the_smellof_musk »

I don't think the Coyote comparison is a good one. I have them around my home and they are easy to call in or attract with food. I think the results show this idea is pretty much worthless.
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

luv_the_smellof_musk wrote:I don't think the Coyote comparison is a good one. I have them around my home and they are easy to call in or attract with food. I think the results show this idea is pretty much worthless.
How would you measure its success?
Jimi
Posts: 1955
Joined: December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Jimi »

Why in this day and age would a state or federal agency allow bounties like that?
A fine question, but missing something important. The answer is - to comply with the (state) law:
Senate Bill 245), which was passed last year
So, the agency isn't allowing anything. It's doing what the lawmakers told it to do.

cheers,
Jimi

PS John Shivik is yet another veteran of brown treesnake control
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

Jimi wrote:
Why in this day and age would a state or federal agency allow bounties like that?
A fine question, but missing something important. The answer is - to comply with the (state) law...
And the law was passed in the hope of maintaining ecologically unsound game populations, protecting livestock beyond reason and/or safeguarding people from something that really represents no threat to them. That's always been the reason for predator control. If folks want to manage predators as a hunted/trapped species - and it's done well, with the understanding that predators are as important to an ecology as its other native species - then ok, but bounties and other predator control schemes are indefensible in this day and age. I know it's not the agency's fault, Jimi, but I hope you guys avail yourselves of any opportunities you have to tell legislators what a terrible idea it is.

Gerry
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

While I don't agree with bounties, there have been problems with over-populating coyotes preying upon domestic dogs in some urban areas.
I'm not keen on bounties in urban areas though because I'm not keen on hunting in urban areas. Out in the more rural areas where hunting isn't as dangerous, I don't believe coyotes attacking domestic dogs are a major problem.
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

Sorry, but:
  • - I don't see a problem with coyotes preying on unattended (and especially unrestrained and unattended) dogs. People should know better and manage their pets better than that, to keep them from falling prey to cars if nothing else. (Maybe there should be a bounty on cars in urban areas? ;) )

    - I very much doubt there's any scientific evidence to back up the claim that coyote predation on dogs is due to overpopulation.

    - There's no way I believe that a bounty system or any other broadscale means of predator control was truly implemented because of predator overpopulation, even if some idiotic legislator pays the idea some lip service at the time a relevant law is passed. In the case of coyotes becoming more abundant in the absence of wolves, that's actually a good thing from an ecological standpoint, as various prey species' populations can really get out of whack and really whack environments in turn when they're freed from predation. As I said, those archaic anti-predator laws are passed for personal pleasure (hunters want inflated game numbers, even at cost to the environment), personal profit (livestock producers don't want any losses they can possibly avoid) or foolish notions of personal safety (all those children being snagged by those vicious varmints, don't you know).
We can of course agree to disagree, though.

Gerry
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

gbin - they don't only prey upon un-attended dogs. They enter people's yards and even have attacked dogs while the dogs are being walked by their owners.

Coyotes in urban areas lose their fear of people and can become very dangerous.
User avatar
chris_mcmartin
Posts: 2447
Joined: June 9th, 2010, 12:13 am
Location: Greater Houston TX Area
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by chris_mcmartin »

Is there precedent for this particular scenario? In other words, has a bounty ever been used for an invasive species? That seems like a more valid comparison, rather than biologically-bad bounties on native components of the ecosystem.
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

chris_mcmartin wrote:Is there precedent for this particular scenario? In other words, has a bounty ever been used for an invasive species? That seems like a more valid comparison, rather than biologically-bad bounties on native components of the ecosystem.
Given that bounties have contributed to if not caused the local extinction of native predators, clearly it is possible to hunt a species to extinction. I have doubts that burms in the everglades could be hunted to extinction, but clearly predators can be under certain conditions.
User avatar
mrichardson
Posts: 127
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 5:12 am
Location: Yorkshire, England
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by mrichardson »

chris_mcmartin wrote:Is there precedent for this particular scenario? In other words, has a bounty ever been used for an invasive species? That seems like a more valid comparison, rather than biologically-bad bounties on native components of the ecosystem.
The Nutria (Coypu) gained a foothold in the Norfolk Broads (England) in the 1930’s and caused all kinds of ecological problems, much like they do in other countries where they are not native. They were successfully eradicated by a team of hunters who were paid on how well they performed (almost like a bounty). I think the last Nutria was killed in the 1980s (?)

Although this example is different in many, many ways to the Florida python issue, it does show that an invasive wetland species can be eradicated so long as they’re restricted to a relatively small area.

One fact I find interesting is the hunters received a huge bonus once the last animal was killed. Without this there would be a temptation for the hunters to keep the last few Nutria alive (and ultimately produce more offspring) otherwise they would be out of a job.

This last issue must be considered with any bounty based eradication programme of a non-native species. In other words, people that have grown accustomed to earning a wage from killing a particular species will not be too willing to hunt themselves out of a job without a bonus at the end (ie, once all pythons have been eradicated from a certain area – not sure how this would be measured). This would be less of an issue if people hunt pythons more for ‘pocket money’ as opposed to a full time source of income. It won’t matter too much either if a python hunting programme is implemented merely to reduce numbers.

Another point to consider (and this might have been mentioned many times before)is with reptiles there will also be the temptation to breed more of a particular species, either to restock the wild (future money from bounties) or just hand them in as wild caught. I’ve always wondered why Australians don’t offer a bounty on Cane Toads (e.g. $1.00 for 20 toads). It would be a great source of income for the unemployed, students and backpackers and would at least limit their spread/impact. Then I realised every man and his dog would be breeding the toads for easy money!

Just some thoughts....
User avatar
Ribbit
Posts: 601
Joined: June 12th, 2010, 10:28 am
Location: Monterey Peninsula, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Ribbit »

mrichardson wrote: The Nutria (Coypu) gained a foothold in the Norfolk Broads (England) in the 1930’s and caused all kinds of ecological problems, much like they do in other countries where they are not native. They were successfully eradicated by a team of hunters who were paid on how well they performed (almost like a bounty). I think the last Nutria was killed in the 1980s (?)

Although this example is different in many, many ways to the Florida python issue, it does show that an invasive wetland species can be eradicated so long as they’re restricted to a relatively small area.

One fact I find interesting is the hunters received a huge bonus once the last animal was killed. Without this there would be a temptation for the hunters to keep the last few Nutria alive (and ultimately produce more offspring) otherwise they would be out of a job.
How could they tell that the last one had been killed?

John
User avatar
mrichardson
Posts: 127
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 5:12 am
Location: Yorkshire, England
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by mrichardson »

Ribbit wrote:How could they tell that the last one had been killed?

John
Good question! I guess they surveyed the area looking for sign, perhaps for many months before they issued the bonus. Not really sure without looking it up. One thing's for certain, it will be much harder to know when the last python has been killed in Florida.
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

FunkyRes wrote:gbin - they don't only prey upon un-attended dogs. They enter people's yards and even have attacked dogs while the dogs are being walked by their owners.
Attended dogs have indeed been attacked by urban coyotes - with incredibly low frequency, doubtless far lower than the frequency with which such dogs are snakebit, and far, far lower than the frequency with which such dogs (and sometimes their owners as well) are hit by cars. Time to set up/restore bounties on our native venomous snakes in addition to cars, eh? ;) I live with urban coyotes in my neighborhood, by the way. I've never had one of my pets nor personally known of any others taken by them in the several years we've lived here, but in my lifetime I've had two pets hit by cars (when I was a kid, before I was old enough to be responsible for the management of my family's animals or we knew how to do it properly) and have known many other people who have had pets hit by cars; a couple of years ago I even watched out my window from where I'm sitting right now as a woman's dog got run over by a car and killed while she was calling to it. (I ran out to them with the intention of getting them safely out of the road - she was hysterical, as I might well have been in her situation - and took them in my car to an emergency vet less than a mile away, but it was obviously too late.) Heck, I myself was hospitalized as a child after being hit by a car that blew through a stop sign while I was crossing the road. I've known a handful of people who have lost pets or had them seriously injured due to snakebite, too, though it's never happened to me (quite possibly because I've made considerable effort to make sure it doesn't). We're all fine with the carnage that cars cause because of their importance to us. We should be fine with the far lesser harm that native fauna do for the very same reason, as well as others.
chris_mcmartin wrote:Is there precedent for this particular scenario? In other words, has a bounty ever been used for an invasive species? That seems like a more valid comparison, rather than biologically-bad bounties on native components of the ecosystem.
Market forces and kill harvests are a powerful combination, so powerful that numerous formerly widespread and abundant native species of bird and mammal have been extirpated over large areas or even driven extinct by them. But an animal as cryptic as a snake (even one that gets very large), in an environment with as much cover as the Everglades?... I frankly doubt the snakes could be eliminated this way (though I'd be delighted to be proven wrong), but I think they might well have their numbers knocked back appreciably if enough people were attracted to the hunt and the restrictions placed on them were kept as light as possible. I think it's worth a try, anyway.

I'd say that throughout history it's been rather rare for folks to be foresighted enough to voluntarily maintain their hunting/fishing stocks rather than wipe them out, by the way, especially when the aforementioned market forces are also at work. Even if this handful of people here have it in mind to leave some for the future, that much bigger group of people there have it in mind to cash in while the cash is flowing, with no restraint. I think it's a real possibility that captive breeders might cheat the system by producing snakes specifically to collect the bounty on them, but if the bounty is set on a sliding scale proportional to the snake's size, it would minimize their return on investment. Besides, it seems that at least some people always find a way to cheat a system, but that doesn't mean the system doesn't work or isn't worthwhile.

Gerry
User avatar
VanAR
Posts: 590
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:36 am
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by VanAR »

I’ve always wondered why Australians don’t offer a bounty on Cane Toads (e.g. $1.00 for 20 toads). It would be a great source of income for the unemployed, students and backpackers and would at least limit their spread/impact. Then I realised every man and his dog would be breeding the toads for easy money!
It also probably wouldn't work. Cane toads are incredibly fecund critters (one female can lay 30 thousand eggs at a time), and their most successful predators are other cane toads. That means that they experience comparatively little predation pressure, most of which is focused on tadpoles and metamorphs by juvenile conspecifics that hatched earlier. Taken together, a large part of their success (in addition to their toxicity and generalist diet) is their explosive breeding and high recruitment.
User avatar
FunkyRes
Posts: 1994
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:19 am
Location: Redding, CA
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by FunkyRes »

One thing I would like to see tried with American Bullfrogs is some method of sterilizing males that does not impact their sex drive.

Idea being that if males are caught, sterilized, and released that any females they mate with with result in them shooting blanks and an egg mass that produced no tadpoles.

By itself this would not eliminate bullfrogs from a watershed but it could greatly reduce the numbers thus reducing the ecological impact and slowing the spread to other watersheds.

Basically catch as many bullfrogs as possible. Euthanize the females and juveniles, sterilize and release adult males.
Hunt for egg masses and simply remove them too when found. I could see remote operated small boats even being used to hunt for egg masses.

Hunting for egg masses would help determine how effective it is (what percentage are fertile) and obviously remove fertile egg masses that are found.

A big problem though is that bullfrog tadpoles keep ending up at places like petsmart. They come in with the feeder goldfish. People buy them and throw them in backyard ponds.
User avatar
Josh Holbrook
Posts: 2196
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:11 am
Location: Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Josh Holbrook »

FunkyRes wrote:One thing I would like to see tried with American Bullfrogs is some method of sterilizing males that does not impact their sex drive.

Idea being that if males are caught, sterilized, and released that any females they mate with with result in them shooting blanks and an egg mass that produced no tadpoles.

By itself this would not eliminate bullfrogs from a watershed but it could greatly reduce the numbers thus reducing the ecological impact and slowing the spread to other watersheds.

Basically catch as many bullfrogs as possible. Euthanize the females and juveniles, sterilize and release adult males.
Hunt for egg masses and simply remove them too when found. I could see remote operated small boats even being used to hunt for egg masses.

Hunting for egg masses would help determine how effective it is (what percentage are fertile) and obviously remove fertile egg masses that are found.

A big problem though is that bullfrog tadpoles keep ending up at places like petsmart. They come in with the feeder goldfish. People buy them and throw them in backyard ponds.
Try a NAFHA pilot program on it in a isolated pond - It could get some recognition for NAFHA.
User avatar
Josh Holbrook
Posts: 2196
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:11 am
Location: Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Josh Holbrook »

John Vanek wrote:
Josh Holbrook wrote:
Try a NAFHA pilot program on it in a isolated pond - It could get some recognition for NAFHA.
Que?

The Bullfrog sterilization thing.
User avatar
Josh Holbrook
Posts: 2196
Joined: June 7th, 2010, 8:11 am
Location: Western North Carolina
Contact:

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Josh Holbrook »

A pilot program/study run by NAFHA members.
Jimi
Posts: 1955
Joined: December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Jimi »

This thread ran around some trees and down some holes and back out, but sort of faded. I thought I'd bump it back up, since I saw something that allows me to reiterate a point I've tried to make here before, which I think is important.

So, this was said in response to a comment stating "In administering a coyote bounty program, the agency was just doing what the state legislature told it to do."
I hope you guys avail yourselves of any opportunities you have to tell legislators what a terrible idea it is.
The point I'd like to reiterate, is that wildlife is a public trust resource. There are 3 sets of participants in a trust - trustees, managers, and beneficiaries. Trustees set policy, managers execute it, beneficiaries get the proceeds AND ALSO need to interact with both the managers AND the trustees to make sure their resource - the principal and the interest - is being managed, to some balanced and limited extent, as they personally wish. On policy ("shall it be legal to...", "there ought to be a law to...") they need to interact with the trustees. On management ("what dates should we...", "how many can we...", etc) they need to interact with the managers. If the managers don't listen, they first need to try harder and smarter with the managers but at some point, might need to take it to the trustees and get some manager heads cracked.

Things get wrapped around the axle when roles are confused. Managers act as trustees at their peril - major smackdown ahead. Trustees act as managers at the resource's peril - yahoo at the helm. Beneficiaries not participating helps nothing. Beneficiaries prodding trustees and managers to act outside their proper roles helps nothing and hurts much.

Contextualizing this generalization to the quote above - there ain't no way in hell it's a good idea for a state wildlife agency to tell a legislature that an idea the legislature already made a decision on, was and is "terrible". Carrying that water is the job of the beneficiaries.

It's not a good idea because it's contrary to the legal doctrine, and it's not a good idea because of the practical aspects. In this example - would anyone like to share their ideas on what good they think it would do for coyotes, for constituents, for the agency, for anything - if the wildlife agency went to the legislature and said "hey, that was a terrible idea"? Survival Rule #1 for an executive-branch agency dealing with a legislative body - don't talk back.

Just so it's clear nobody's passing the buck here: BEFORE the law was passed, during the legislative session, we worked our butts off trying to get that bill killed or amended to something less, um...just LESS. We said "This is not a good idea because it will not generate the desired outcomes - more deer. Virtually all the science - good USGS co-op science, not so-called "junk" - says 4-5% max of the mule deer fawn recruitment puzzle here is coyote predation. Way more mortality is due to roadkill and poor maternal condition. Which is related to summer range habitat quality. We're working on those problems. Again - you can't move the recruitment needle no matter how hard you pound the coyotes, and you can't pound the coyotes very hard. They're very well-educated at this point. Furthermore, coyotes are not "protected wildlife" - a previous legislature gave management responsibility for those to the Ag Dept. Why are you even talking about giving us this program we do not want and do not think can possibly work?"

Sometimes you work your butt off and you still lose. That's life. Sometimes you have to hold your nose, shut your mouth, and soldier on. That's life.

Finally, ecology aside, there's social carrying capacity. The simple fact is, the social carrying capacity of coyotes in the rural west is low. Somebody in the hunting and/or ag community got a legislator's ear. His REPRESENTATIVE'S ear. Welcome to the republic. Is it improper that a representative did his constituent's bidding? We may not like the outcome, and, it went through our official process and that's that.

There's a process to get stuff like this undone, and the state wildlife agency talking back to the legislature ain't no part of that process.

Hope this clarifies some stuff. Beneficiaries, do your thing.

Cheers,
Jimi
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

I've never worked for a state wildlife agency (though I've worked for another kind of state-funded wildlife institution), myself, but I've worked with a number of such people, and I've been lucky enough to know some as personal friends, too. Some in lower positions, some in middle positions and at least one in a very high position.

Opportunities do indeed occasionally arise for wildlife agency personnel to speak from their knowledge and understanding on a given program/piece of legislation/what-have-you, regardless of one's level. Higher-ups, and sometimes lower than higher-ups, do indeed have chances to interact with legislators, sometimes they're even sought out and queried by legislators. At the very least, people lower in the hierarchy have access to those higher up within their own organization. Being asked outright "What do you think of this situation? What should we do about it?" actually happens, and it isn't the only time one can and should speak up. I'm not talking about taking a lead role in a political campaign, talking in unapproved fashion to the press, blathering on a public internet forum, etc., I'm talking about simply availing oneself of real opportunities to give useful, in some cases even important, feedback, just as I said.

I would say doing so, in fact, is a life obligation among people with good intent and knowledge about a subject at hand, to be fulfilled regardless of the specifics written into one's job description. Every one of us is not just a single thing but actually many things, an employee, sure, but also a citizen, a spouse and/or parent, a student, etc., and some responsibilities are shared among pretty much all of us. I would argue that when one is busily trying to apportion responsibility (all too often done in such a manner as to leave themselves personally responsible for little or none of what they're talking about, in my experience), what they should do is shoulder at least as much as is justified by their knowledge and experience.

"Speak truth to power," don't you know, especially when it matters. People can choose to instead act as nothing but waterboys ("Sorry, Ma'am, that's not my job."), but that's what it is - their choice. It's also more than a small part of the problems we face today.

Gerry
Shane_TX
Posts: 603
Joined: June 8th, 2010, 6:44 pm
Location: Upper TX Coast

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Shane_TX »

Hope this clarifies some stuff. Beneficiaries, do your thing.
Give more money to veterans, teachers and police. Or maybe invest in radio-controlled bullfrog patrols and NAFHA. Does NASA get any money these days? So many decisions, but coyotes and burms and even nutria are a real problem to some.

Shane
Jimi
Posts: 1955
Joined: December 3rd, 2010, 12:06 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by Jimi »

Being asked outright "What do you think of this situation? What should we do about it?"
Those questions, if managers & beneficiaries are lucky, come BEFORE decisions are made about "this situation".

Those questions, throughout my experience, DO NOT come after decisions are made "a situation".

Afterwards, the deciders have moved on to the new situation du jour. They have new, unrelated situations coming at them fast and hard. They don't really care to go back to the situations of yesterday which they think they've already dealt with appropriately. It is not managers' job to question the decisions of deciders. Beneficiaries are free to do so, and SHOULD when they really think something's badly awry, but they need to know such questioning may cost them some credibility and future access. Deciders do not like to be second-guessed, especially by those they consider to be uninformed, lacking "standing", or subordinate. If you want to second-guess, you need credibility, which needs careful cultivation and stewardship. Do not piss away credibility tilting at windmills.
"Speak truth to power," don't you know, especially when it matters.
This hopelessly naive aphorism presumes power doesn't know what the hell's going on. Which is IMO a most unjustified presumption - how else would power assume or maintain a position of power? Get real. Power knows the truth, and IME almost always has a commanding grasp of what's actually going on. Power isn't interested in whatever the truth may be, power is interested in maintaining and increasing its prerogatives, which suggests various ways of dealing with what's going on. Power has an insatiable appetite for more power. You do not try to challenge power head-on. You do not tell it "Hey, you know what - you're flat wrong!". You have to triangulate in. Or you get hammer-squashed, or sent out to the salt mines. Say hello to the end of the possibility of effectiveness. Who wants to go there? Only the clueless.
I've never worked for a state wildlife agency
This is quite obvious. And it's quite OK, to the extent you're able to restrain yourself from making ridiculous, ignorant recommendations. If you cross that line, it isn't really OK any more.

Among we 310 millions very few ever have worked for a state wildlife agency. Fewer still currently do. It is crucial IMO for those few of us who do, to step up and try to relate with - to speak "truth" to - the vast unempowered (by passive or active choice) but potentially powerful majority who presently do not care about, and frankly couldn't be bothered with nature and wildlife. IMO it's even more important to succeed in relating with with the minority (e.g., FHF community members) who care deeply about the things in which we share an interest.
Give more money to veterans, teachers and police. Or maybe invest in radio-controlled bullfrog patrols and NAFHA. Does NASA get any money these days? So many decisions, but coyotes and burms and even nutria are a real problem to some.
All fine ideas. The key to actualizing any one of these ideas is to plug into their controlling mechanisms and take effective action. Which you cannot do if a) you don't know what they are and b) you don't know how they work. Which is the point I continue to attempt to make, and continue to offer to help with, and...what? You tell me. Keep failing to make? Is it me or is it you? Do you not care, or is my technique all wrong?

When I say "beneficiaries do your thing" I mean play your role, and demand the 2 other actors play their role and not anyone else's. Don't ask managers to do the job of trustees. Don't ask managers to make your requests to trustees for you. Don't allow managers to play-act as trustees. Don't let trustees play-act as managers. Don't let trustees or managers side-step their responsibilities. Know the difference, as well as your own responsibilities. It isn't that complicated. It's just work.
what they should do is shoulder at least as much (responsibility) as is justified by their knowledge and experience
That's what I'm all about. It includes trying to inform folks about the domains and limits of responsibility, power, etc. This is not acting as "nothing but a waterboy." It is trying to help people understand where they can be effective, and where they will just be frustrated because they're not engaging in the right location or in the appropriate manner.

Cheers,
Jimi
User avatar
gbin
Posts: 2292
Joined: June 10th, 2010, 4:28 pm

Re: Success! Florida Python Bio-Blitz

Post by gbin »

I'm not interested in any kind of personal fight with you, Jimi, even when baited by your repeated misrepresentations of my stance (e.g. whatever windmills you think anyone is tilting at exist only in your own head, likewise the idea that anyone suggested childishly arguing "Hey, you know what - you're flat wrong!" rather than responsibly offering expert advice) and of the situation (too bad for you, I'm more than familiar enough with state wildlife agency folk at various levels to spot your BS). You can view me as "hopelessly naive," "ridiculous," "ignorant" or whatever else, as you wish, just as I can view you as obviously much more committed to CYA than to conservation - unless someone else can be persuaded to shoulder the responsibility, of course. It's all fine with me.

Agreeing to disagree ;) ,

Gerry
Post Reply