New England Herpetological Society

Speech Of Senator William Nelson, Of Florida In The United States Senate

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Mr. NELSON of Florida. Mr. President, I rise today to discuss exotic pythons and the devastating impact they are having on wildlife in my home state. To combat this deadly nonnative nuisance, I am also filing a bill that will ban the interstate commerce and importation of these snakes.

Pythons were first discovered in the Everglades in the mid-1990s, and now have a rapidly-growing breeding population within the boundary of Everglades National Park. They impact almost seventy endangered species living in the Everglades and threaten to upset the natural balance that we are spending billions of dollars to restore. When I toured the Everglades with Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer, we witnessed firsthand the damage pythons are causing, and the efforts researchers are making to eradicate them from the wild.

These snakes were brought to Florida to be sold as pets, and were introduced into the wild by owners who could no longer handle them. They eat animals ranging from songbirds to white ibises, as well as endangered and threatened species such as the Key Largo woodrat. Pythons can grow to be 23 feet long and weigh up to 200 pounds, and there is currently no effective way of eradicating them in the wild.

They can consume animals many times their size, and recently, researchers also found cougar parts in the stomachs of captured pythons. This development could signal a new threat to the endangered Florida panther, which we have been working so hard to save.

Python populations have also been discovered in Big Cypress National Preserve to the north, Miami's water management areas to the northeast, Key Largo to the southeast, and many state parks, municipalities, and public and private lands in the region.

Because climate range projections from the U.S. Geological Survey show that pythons may soon expand their range to include much of the southern third of the United States, getting their populations under control is even more pressing.

In the last year, the State of Florida has taken some actions to address the problems created by owners who release their pythons into the wild, and I applaud these efforts. The State now requires owners of animals they call ``Reptiles of Concern''--a category that includes two species besides pythons--not only to obtain permits for their animals, but also to implant a tracking microchip in larger pythons.

I believe federal action is also needed. That is why today I am introducing a bill that would amend the Lacey Act to ban the importation and interstate commerce of the python. This step is needed to reduce the number of pythons released into the wild by pet owners who don't understand the responsibility caring for a python entails. In 2007, preeminent environmentalist and former assistant secretary of the Interior Nathaniel Reed wrote, ``The dramatic increase in the number of snakes in the Park and Big Cypress call into question why it has taken so long for the Service to utilize its powers under the Lacey Act to prevent importation of the snake into an ecosystem where escapees and rejects have built a sustainable population.''

If we do not take action now, we will let python populations in Florida continue to grow and further ravage the already-fragile Everglades, as well as risk letting them spread throughout the Southern portion of the United States.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

To Avoid 'Giant Python In Everglades,' Lawmaker (US Senator Ben Nelson) Working To Ban Import, Trade

By Paul Quinlan, Palm Beach Post Staff Writer, Thursday, February 05, 2009

It reads like the plot to a budget horror flick: Pythons fill up the Everglades and spread across the southern third of the United States.

That's the nightmare U.S. Sen. Bill Nelson lays out in legislation he filed Tuesday to ban the import or interstate trade of the reptiles.

Since a handful of pythons first appeared in the Everglades in the mid-1990s, sightings have increased exponentially from year to year. The Florida Democrat's bill aims to block sales to inexperienced pet owners, who in many cases have either released the snakes or let them escape when the creatures grew too large.

Certain species, such as the Burmese python, can grow as long as 20 feet and weigh 250 pounds.

Nelson has worked to stop the snakes' spread, noting they have been found to devour wading birds and other endangered species and could disrupt the same Everglades the government is trying to restore.

"If we don't do something soon, we're going to regret it," Nelson said in a speech last month at an Everglades conference in Miami. "I don't want it to get to the point where they find a panther in the belly of an 18-foot Burmese python."

More than 300 pythons were found in and around Everglades National Park last year - three times the number in 2005.

"It's not unreasonable to think that represents 1 percent of what's out there," said park wildlife biologist Skip Snow. That would put their numbers at more than 30,000.

Snow has estimated that the park is capable of holding more than 130,000 pythons.

Florida law requires that owners of any of the four largest python species, including the Burmese, tag the reptiles with microchip identification and maintain a permit that carries a $100 annual fee.

Opponents of the federal bill say those safeguards are enough. They also warn of unintended consequences, such as driving snake sales underground or encouraging owners who might otherwise sell their unwanted reptiles to dump them instead.

Marshall Meyers, CEO of the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council, said the bill attempts to circumvent a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service review already under way to decide whether to clamp down on the snakes.

"This is basically legislation substituting itself for science," Meyers said.

He and others question suggestions that Florida's python population could number in the tens of thousands.

Andrew Wyatt, who heads the advocacy group United States Association of Reptile Keepers, emphasizes that nobody knows exactly how many snakes are out there, and the likelihood of encountering a python in the vast Everglades remains slim.

"The idea of a giant python in the Everglades is very scary," Wyatt said. "The reality is you'd be lucky to see one."

Warning- S373 Introduced into US Senate would BAN Import & Interstate Transport of Pythons

A new bill S373 has been introduced into the US Senate by Senator Bill Nelson of Florida. It would Ban the Import and Interstate Transport of the genus Python. In his introductory comments Senator Nelson used inflammatory language, and cited feral pythons in the Everglades and the USGS Map published By Rodda and Reed as his reasons for introducing federal legislation. His statements were sensational and inaccurate.

There is no credible scientific evidence to support wasting taxpayer’s time and money on this Bill. The only result if this bill was to pass is more harm to the US economy and its citizens. USARK is working closely with PIJAC to develop a strategy to move forward in dealing with this new threat to the families and small businesses that make up our community. A coordinated response will be in all of our best interest.

We are putting together a sample written response. USARK and PIJAC will not allow this to go unchallenged, but your help is required! These issues need to be responded to in writing and by as many people as possible. Right NOW, you can help by recruiting as many people as you know (herpers & non-herpers) to sign up on the USARK Mailing List. This will notify you the moment this response is ready. Or better yet, JOIN USARK's Reptile Nation and help make a difference! Do not wait... Act Now!!

***FORWARD THIS TO EVERYONE ON YOUR EMAIL LIST AND POST IT ON EVERY FORUM!

Thank you for your support!!!

Andrew Wyatt

President USARK

FLORIDA’S SENATOR NELSON PROPOSES CONGRESSIONAL BAN OF ALL PYTHONS UNDER THE LACEY ACT

PET ALERT - February 17, 2009

The Issue

On February 3, 2009, US Senator Bill Nelson (D-Florida) introduced Senate Bill S. 373 to add the entire Python genera to the “injurious wildlife” list under the Lacey Act (Title 18 US Code Section 42(a)(1)).  The Bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works.

Senator Nelson’s action was inspired by the publicity surrounding a feral population of Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) in the Everglades region of south Florida. His comments, which appeared in the February 3, 2009 Congressional Record, stated that Lacey Act listing was needed to “combat this deadly nonnative nuisance” by banning importation and interstate movement of every species of Pythons. He noted that “Pythons were first discovered in the Everglades in the mid-1990s, and now have a rapidly-growing breeding population within the boundary of Everglades National Park.”

He went on to state that “climate range projections…show that pythons may soon expand their range to include much of the southern third of the United States…”  The Senator’s statement failed to acknowledge that the US Fish and Wildlife Service is currently overseeing a risk analysis to determine which species in the genera Python, Boa, and Eunectes, if any, warrant inclusion in a formal, science-based evaluation as delineated by the long-established Lacey Act “injurious wildlife” listing process. S. 373 circumvents the normal listing process which affords the public an opportunity to submit written comments on the Service’s findings.

The Impact

S. 373 would unilaterally ban importation and interstate movement of every species of Python. Because the Congressional action would not be based on a scientific risk analysis, Congress would essentially be declaring every Python species “guilty” and denying stakeholders the opportunity to prove “innocence.”

Therefore, a species that might have the potential to become problematic in south Florida would be banned throughout the entire United States even though it would not be biologically feasible for it to establish in more northern climates. Such a ban will directly impact breeders, exporters, pet stores and pet owners across the country.

Recommendation

The bill has been referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. A list of the Committee members is reproduced at the end of this alert.  PIJAC urges you to constructively contact everyone in the reptile community and alert them of the potential impact of S. 373. Please ask your colleagues to contact members of the Senate Committee, as well as their own Senator (If they are not a member of the Committee). Remember -- This Bill affects retailers, breeders, manufacturers and pet owners in every state, not just Florida.

The talking points on S. 373 provided below will assist you in discussions with Senators or their legislative aides responsible for environmental issues. When communicating with these individuals, it is imperative that you present yourself in a professional manner and make it clear that this Bill would do nothing to increase the capacities of federal or state officials to address the feral population of Burmese
pythons in south Florida.

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 wellintended 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, haveunintended 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 US 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 ofthe 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 HabitattitudeTM) 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.

HOW YOU CAN HELP –

• Remain calm throughout the process and recognize that this is only the beginning of a long process.
• Be professional! It is paramount that all segments of the pet industry are perceived as highly professional throughout the course of this process. If perceived otherwise, we loose our credibility and without our credibility our collective voice as well as individual voices will have little to no effect.
• Alert your friends/colleagues in the reptile community to the potential implications of S. 373.
• Contact members of the Senate (Please use the talking points provided above and explain how S.373 affects you).
• Encourage your friends, employees, customers, suppliers to contact their Senators.
• Promote HabitattitudeTM – a PIJAC initiative that promotes thoughtful pet choice (Habits), responsible pet care (Attitudes), and alternatives to the release of unwanted pets so that they do not become invasive species (protecting Habitats). See www.pijac.org for more information.
• Stay tuned. PIJAC is launching a S. 373 Forum on the PIJAC website for informational purposes. Check it for updated information.

Visit PIJAC’s website at www.pijac.org for copies of S 373 and related documents. PIJAC will post any changes in status or other updates on the Bill.

If you have further questions on S. 373 or this PetAlert, contact Marshall Meyers by telephone at 202-452-1525, by FAX at 202-293-4377, or via email at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .