Talk:Burmese python
 | Myanmar B‑class Low‑importance | ||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
 | Indonesia B‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Southeast Asia: Laos B‑class Mid‑importance | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Poor Science
I find this whole paragraph very offensive and riddled with flaws:
The captive breeding of Burmese Pythons in the Americas has led to some rather serious problems. People who grow tired of their pythons, or whose pythons have grown too large to be kept in their houses, have been known to release their pets into the wild rather than have them re-homed. This has been particularly problematic in Florida, where a large number of pythons have made their way to the Everglades.[2] They have thrived there, begun to reproduce prolifically, and become an invasive species. Over 230 (National Geographic - October 28, 2005) have been captured in the Everglades where they are competing with alligators as the dominant predator. In recent years this competition has resulted in what officials describe as a draw.[3][4][5] Since they have been known to eat endangered birds and alligators, these snakes present a new danger to an already fragile ecosystem. In February 2008, one scientist predicted that, after several generations, these snakes could eventually migrate to and flourish in as much as a third of the continental United States.[5]
Let's break this down.
"The captive breeding of Burmese Pythons in the Americas has led to some rather serious problems." Really? Exactly what serious problems? And make sure you're serious!
"People who grow tired of their pythons, or whose pythons have grown too large to be kept in their houses, have been known to release their pets into the wild rather than have them re-homed." One person, two people, exactly how many. You don't know do you? I do know one thing, Animal Rights activists have intentionally released exotic animals into the wild to further their own agenda.
"This has been particularly problematic in Florida, where a large number of pythons have made their way to the Everglades.[2]" Really? From where? Pensacola perhaps?
"They have thrived there, begun to reproduce prolifically, and become an invasive species. Over 230 (National Geographic - October 28, 2005) have been captured in the Everglades where they are competing with alligators as the dominant predator. In recent years this competition has resulted in what officials describe as a draw.[3][4][5] Since they have been known to eat endangered birds and alligators, these snakes present a new danger to an already fragile ecosystem." There are hundreds of invasive species in the Everglades, but none so sensational as the Burmese Python, I guess. However, I can assure you that the Burmese Python is not the most destructive to the ecosystem. Can you say feral cats?
"In February 2008, one scientist predicted that, after several generations, these snakes could eventually migrate to and flourish in as much as a third of the continental United States.[5]" Pure hogwash! This USGS map has been completely discredited. Even an elementary school student could reason that "If its true that irresponsible pet owners are releasing their Burmese Pythons into the wild, then why are they only found to be thriving in the Everglades?" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Webwheeler (talk • contribs) 08:10, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- First, your rebuttals are 'original research', thus not permitted in WP articles. Get it published elsewhere and we can include it.
- Second, your first four points are all semantic quibbling of little to no value, and your last point neglects numerous subtle complexities, including the fact that invasives may "fly under the radar" for decades at a time, or that the Everglades provides a large, contiguous minimally disrupted environment (in contrast to highly fragmented habitats elsewhere in the US).
- Lastly, I know the person who did this study, and he is more than well aware that "all models are wrong, but some are more useful than others". The context of this work was predicting at-risk areas for invasion by particular species based on climate, in order to avoid wasting money screening cargo going to areas that are uninhabitable.
- I suggest you familiarize yourself with how science actually works. You aren't nearly as well-informed as you think you are. Mokele (talk) 21:29, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
- Fine! If you still want to publish this rubbish, then go right ahead.Webwheeler (talk) 14:51, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
- I would also suggest you familiarize yourself with how science actually works. Neither the original USGS Python Study (2008), which you are citing, or the new USGS Python Study (2009) are peer reviewed, unlike this article which was:
Claims of Potential Expansion throughout the U.S. by Invasive Python Species Are Contradicted by Ecological Niche Models, http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0002931
Diurnal or Nocturnal?
Is this snake diurnal or nocturnal? I find both in the article, as well as in a web search. I think the "diurnal" sentence is probably wrong, though, since it reads "Burmese python is diurnal, equally at home on the ground and in trees." I have deleted it. --Hcethatsme 23:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Not a species
While it's acknowleged early in the article that this is not a species, but a subspecies of the Indian Python, later on I can see "As an introduced species" and "In Hong Kong, it is a protected species under Wild Animals Protection Ordinance Cap 170" – I don't think there's a concept of introduced subspecies, and subspecies protection too is unusual; but if these are references to the species Python molurus they should be on the Indian Python article. This said, do subspecies really deserve their own articles? Since they only represent the geographical variation of species, most of the information (likely 90+ %) will be overlapping with that of the nominate form, and therefore the bulk of subspecies articles' content are bound to be repetitions of species articles. --Anshelm '77 17:25, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- If there is enough information about a subspecies, it can warrant its own article. Considering that the Indian Python was/is a CITES 1 animal for many years...the most commonly available subspecies were those from Burma and Sri Lanka (although Ceylonese are far rarer). Some information may be repeated, but in the case of Indian vs Burmese pythons, the two are different enough in many ways that each rates its own article. As you pointed out, the Burmese grows much larger than its parent species. Its large size and availability have also made it somewhat of a nuisance in certain areas where they've been released (notably in South Florida). You will find more printed material on Burmese than Indians and on Indians than Ceylonese.--Mike Searson (talk) 05:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Picture
The fourth picture down on the right titled "Burmese Python in India." appears to be an Indian Python rather than a Burmese. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steve Ray (talk • contribs) 05:55, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
Questionable content
I find the line, "People who grow tired of their pythons have been known to release their pets into the wild rather than have them euthanised" terribly offensive. While this IS an option, it's not the best option. I can't say I know anyone that would do this to their dog or cat. They'd "re-home" them, right? Why is it different for a reptile?
As of August 1st, I'm changing this line. Removing the incorrect spelling of "euthanize" & adding "re-homed" or something of the sort.
It just really rubbed me the wrong way. Quietpopcorn (talk) 22:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
A. Euthanizing IS an option. And regardless "re-home" is bad word choice. B. Don't edit out talk page comments. This is where we debate thea rticles wording. AHev a revert war in the article, not here. GRRRRRRRRRRR! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.82.44.253 (talk) 04:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Um, I didn't edit any comments. And, with the growing popularity of Craigslist, I feel that "re-home" is very acceptable. Yes, euthanizing is an option, but as you can see by my first comment, it's a terrible option. But if you think it's a good option, we should add it to the wiki pages for dogs, cats, birds, fish, pot bellied pigs, horses & all the other domestic animals. Quietpopcorn (talk) 16:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Improvement needed - urgently!
Hello! This article has several fatal errors! Please improve the fallowing points:
- 1. This Python not onely occures in rainforest areas. There are many more (mentione in the article a bit below)!
- 2. 2. In nature the average lenght of Python molurus bivittatus is 3,7 meters.[1][2] Specimen of more than 4 meters are uncommon[3], such of 5 Meters are rare[4] and such toward 6 Meters – like a specimen form Cooch Behar with 5,8 meters [5] – are very rare[3]! There are several measurements from the past of more than 7 meters. But those were with the outmost probability exagerations, stretched skinns ore confusions between Python molurus bivittatus and Python reticulatus. At the other hand there exist dwarf forms on Java, Bali and Sulawesi. At Bali they reach an average length of 2 meters[6] and on Sulawesi they get not longer than 2,5 Meters[7]!
- 3. The values of the Guiness Book about „Baby“ are doubted by several herpetologists! Especially the length of this specimen was just about 6,5 Meters!
- 4. Please use the fallowing Publication[8] (ore this File:Natural Range of Python molurus6.jpg [1]) for mentioning all countries where this snake lives!
- 5. „The pattern is similar in colour, but different in actual pattern to the African Rock Python (Python sebae), sometimes resulting in confusion of the two species outside of their natural habitats. Some of them are found on the border with India and Burma.“ Which species are found on this border? There are no cases where Python sebae and Python molurus overlap! But in northern India, Nepal, Bangladesh and probably also in norhtern Burma there are some interference areas between Python molurus molurus and Python molurus bivittatus.
- 6. „Larger snakes often save energy by swallowing small, easily-managed prey animals live, without constricting them first.“ This is absolutely nonsense and should be deleated emediately!
- 7. There is a photograph called „Burmese Python in India“. This is not a Python molurus bivittatus shown in this picture as already mentioned by an other visitor– it’s a Python molurus molurus! Python molurus bivittatus occures in India – thats correct, but Burmese Pythons of India look like other Python molurus bivittatus, too. Not like an Indian Python. Pleas deleat this picture emediately!
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Natural_Range_of_Python_molurus6.jpg){kind=link}
Please visit the German article of this Python: [2] There are many useful pictures and links to original sources. Good luck with this article and thanks for the improvements! 80.218.203.225 (talk) 15:03, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
- ^ M. A. Smith: Reptilia and Amphibia, Vol. III, Serpentes. In: The Fauna of British India, Ceylon and Burma, including the whole of the Indo-Chinese Sub-Region. Tailor and Frances, Ltd., London 1943, S. 102-109
- ^ S. M. Campden-Main: A field guide to the snakes of South Vietnam. City of Washington 1970, S. 8-9.
- ^ a b H. Saint Girons: Les serpents du Cambodge. Mémoires du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Série A 1972, S. 40-41.
- ^ J. Deuve: Serpents du Laos. Mémoire O.R.S.T.O.M. Nr. 39, Paris 1970, S. 61-62, 65-66.
- ^ F. Wall: A popular treatise on the common Indian snakes – The Indian Python. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society Band 21, 1912, S. 447–476; online ab S. 419.
- ^ J. L. McKay: A field guide to the amphibians and reptiles of Bali. Krieger Publishing Company 2006, ISBN 1-57524-190-0, S. 13, 14, 18, 86.
- ^ R. de Lang, G. Vogel: The snakes of Sulawesi: A field guide to the land snakes of Sulawesi with identification keys. Frankfurt Contributions to Natural History Band 25, Edition Chimaira 2005, ISBN 3-930612-85-2, S. 23-27, 198-201.
- ^ D. G. Barker, T. M. Barker: The Distribution of the Burmese Python, Python molurus bivittatus. (Zusammenstellung aus diversen Publikationen sowie Stellungnahmen von Experten), Bulletin of the Chicago Herpetological Society Band 43, Heft 3, 2008, S. 33-38; online, pdf.