|
1-10 of 14 messages
|
Page 1 of 2
Next
|
|
Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on February 22, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here are just a few more of the links, as the news morons all jump on the python invasion bandwagon, in support of the PITA and HSUSA efforts to use nitwhits in the USFWS to ban pythons as inherently dangerous animals. You have to know that venomous keepers will be next once they ban those deadly ball pythons !
http://metrocolumnistsblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2008/02/bad-news-du-jour-giant-snakes.html
http://www.miamiherald.com/459/story/428037.html
http://sankei.jp.msn.com/usatoday/080222/usa0802220110000-n1.htm
http://newsok.com/article/3207429/1203662645
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/living/stories/2008/02/21/pythons_0222.html
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/21/MNABV5PP3.DTL
It is really amazing that the news papers and USFWS are listning to some Moron named Robert Reed, who works for the USGS as a research biologist,who made the following statements: "They ae going to chow down on deer," "They will chow down on pigs. They will chow down on turkey."
And it is even more interesting that the article written in the Atlanta Urinal and Constipation by the dimwhit Mark Davis does not allow me to cut and paste the factual parts of the story.........
And when John Jensen, the State Herpetoligist for the Department of Natural Resources says that pythons will not envade our state, they just ignore him. They try to sell him off as a "retired University of Georgia Professor who wrote a book about Southeastern snakes."
Folks, the propaganda campaign aginst private ownership of pythons and boids is in full force, and they are going at it this time at a federal level. The HSUSA and PITA folks are behind this, as they found a nitwhit running the USFWS who supports them.
Write those letters soon to the USFWS to protest this.
You will have one chance only. Do not think that since you signed a petition that you have done what you could. The only way to stop this if for individuals to write letters to the USFWS before the deadline.
The folks who are against us have a massive campaign going to get their false information into the national news papers. They have got tired of attacking us at a State level, and have now turned to a National level. And they have found folks in the USFWS and USGS who support them, despite what these folks should be doing from a scientific level. There is always a nitwhit at the top of most Government agencies. No matter how good the scientists are below, the nit whit above can cause terrable laws to be passed.
Write against the USFWS ban now.
Best Regards JohnZ
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on February 22, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
few corrections:
it is PETA not PITa
It is HSUS (or better H$U$) not HSUSA
anyway, if the US gov can not even stop illegal human Mexicans from coming to the USA, how will they stop Boa constrictors to slither into USA from Mexico if the weather really warms up (let's just play into their stupid games/predictions and let them answer and get themselves into their own stupid holes they dug themselevs).
As we know, boas are native to America after all, Mexico and south.
So what is next, demand that Mexican gov ban them as pets too and kil their wild ones so they stop immigrating to the USA?;-)
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by soberwolf on February 22, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good point John. Now we know how are boys oversees feel with all the B.S. media going on. Unfortunately the people with the real $$ and the politicians have a lot more influence over the media than do the people in the trenches here
Shelby
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by snakeguy101 on February 23, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
i wrote a VERY pointed letter to one of the authors in another such article, if you would like to read it, i would be glad to fowrard it to you, just let me know. it needs to be proof read anyways.
~Chris~
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on February 23, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
here is gordon's contact info
http://www.fort.usgs.gov/staff/staffprofile.asp?StaffID=125
there
are many people with credentials reading this forum, (credentials meaning nice package of zoo/bio degrees and hands on experience, he might not listen to somebody with experience only) contact him and try to educate him, maybe one of you can get thru to him, if that doesn't work, then we can go on full attack on his 'findings', lets try peaceful methods first
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by CAISSACA on February 24, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Maybe those of us with qualifications have a slightly deeper appreciation for the science that went into this map, and an understanding of what it shows and what it doesn't show, and aren't about to be stampeded by the fact that some people don't like the conclusions simply because they feel that their hobby is being threatened. The amount of totally unsupported knee-jerk anti-intellectualism and anti-science feeling that this map has generated has been a real eye-opener.
As to the "moronic reporting", some of those reports you showed are actually quite reasonable (in particular the Miami Herald one).
At the end of the day, herpetoculture as a whole has only itself to blame for its current predicament, due to its abject failure to keep exotic herps contained and out of local ecosystems. That's very unfortunate for the large number of conscientious keepers, of course, but the same pattern applies to most spheres of human endeavour, where the responsible majority are constrained due to the idiocy of a few.
Cheers,
WW
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on February 24, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
OK, is there anybody here with credentials who is humble and not biased toward global warming hysteria?
Let’s look for a moment who IPCC, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, really is.
Just like H$U$ or PETA are not true hands on animal experts, IPCC is not a true unbiased scientific institution.
In analogy, they are to global warming issues what AR are to hands on husbandry; just like AR to animals, IPCC is a non governmental political/politicized body.
It is pure politics, they decided global warming is happening and run with it, totally ignoring what real hands on scientists were saying. It is not a balanced unbiased group.
Now, Rodda’s report treats global warming as a fact and takes it from there, so it basically starts with flawed and unproven assumption/claims, on top of that Rodda personally supports ban on snake trade, so he is NOT an unbiased scientists. He had a conclusion in mind when he started his report and just made assumptions until he could prove he was right. This is NOT science, this is politics.
Roddas report claims Burmese are eating endangered animals, but the KEY here is these rodents were endangered BEFORE pythons moved in, so pythons are obviously not the primary reason for the endangered status of the rats, main reason seems to be humans and human activities. And I am sure other animals munch on the rats as well.
What about the alligators, will they move up north with the snakes if climate gets warmer? Personally, I rather have pythons than alligators on my NV property. And like I said in separate post, what about wild constrictors from Mexico and south.
Z
PS: Interesting article about the politics of global warming.
==
http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_4387552
Global warming?
By Mark Jaffe
Denver Post Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 12/26/2006 12:27:55 PM MST
Click photo to enlarge
William Gray, meteorology professor emeritus at Colorado State... (Post / Kathryn Scott Osler)
• «
• 1
• 2
• »
The words "global warming" provoke a sharp retort from Colorado State University meteorology professor emeritus William Gray: "It's a big scam."
And the name of climate researcher Kevin Trenberth elicits a sputtered "opportunist."
At the National Center for Atmospheric Research, where Trenberth works, Gray's name prompts dismay. "Bill Gray is completely unreasonable," Trenberth says. "He has a mind block on this."
Only 55 miles separate NCAR's headquarters, nestled in the Front Range foothills, from CSU in Fort Collins. But when it comes to climate change, the gap is as big as any in the scientific community.
At Boulder-based NCAR, researchers project a world with warmer temperatures, fiercer storms and higher seas.
From CSU, Gray and Roger Pielke Sr., another climate professor emeritus, question the data used to make those projections and their application to regional climate change.
Science by its nature is disputatious - with every idea challenged, tested and retested. It's always been that way.
In the 18th century, Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz sparred over claims to the discovery of calculus.
About 140 years later, Charles Darwin's theory of evolution was challenged - based on the science of the day - by Harvard University professor Louis Agassiz and the British Museum's Sir Richard Owen.
Now the battle is over global warming, or more accurately over myriad details - like temperature readings and the thickness of sea ice - upon which the larger idea is based.
On one hand, the fight is a natural part of the scientific process. But it also creates dissonance and uncertainty.
"Some of this noise won't stop until some of these scientists are dead," said James Hansen, head of the Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City, and among the first to sound the alarm over climate change.
While science is comfortable with uncertainty, policymakers are not, and that is what has turned this scientific debate into front-page headlines.
"I think there is a debate about whether it's caused by mankind or whether it's caused naturally," President Bush said in a July interview.
To be sure, Gray and Pielke are in a scientific minority. Still, their challenges remain part of the fractious scientific process.
"Science needs skeptics," said NCAR researcher Warren Washington.
Still, a broad scientific consensus has emerged that human activity is contributing to climate change.
Findings by panels created by the National Academy of Science to resolve disputes - such as conflicting satellite and ground temperature records - have supported the trends in global climate change.
And things that the NCAR models predict - such as thinning sea ice and melting glaciers - are coming to pass, although scientists say more data are needed to verify those trends.
After more than two decades of research, scientists, even most skeptics, agree that:
Since 1750, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, mainly from burning fossil fuels, has risen to about 380 parts per million from 286 parts per million.
It doesn't appear carbon dioxide levels have been that high in the past 650,000 years.
Carbon dioxide is continuing to build in the atmosphere by about 1.5 parts per million a year, and as a so-called greenhouse gas, it traps the sun's heat.
The Earth's average temperature has warmed about 1 degree Fahrenheit since 1880 and is now warmer than it has been in the past 400 years.
Average global temperatures are likely to rise - this is where the debate begins - somewhere between 2 and 10 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100.
The heat will cause global ocean levels to rise 3 to 39 inches this century.
In the film "An Inconvenient Truth," former Vice President Al Gore tends to fix on the upper end of the projections, while skeptics point out that the lower end may be as likely and less catastrophic.
But even small changes may have big effects. When the average temperature dropped by a little less than 1 degree Fahrenheit in about 1400, it ushered a period called the "Little Ice Age."
It was a time when advancing Swiss Alp glaciers crushed villages, England's Thames River froze and short growing seasons led to famines.
Most scientists also agree extreme weather events like Hurricane Katrina or Los Angeles' July record 119-degree Fahrenheit temperature cannot be directly attributed to global warming.
On this much there is some scientific consensus.
What the impact of rising temperatures or higher seas will be is more open to debate, according to skeptics such as Pielke, because most of the calculations are global averages.
"This tells you nothing about what's going to happen in any region," Pielke said.
While Pielke agrees carbon dioxide is forcing changes in the climate, he says, "It is not the only forcing."
Man-made changes to the land, in addition to about 30 other greenhouse gases - some man-made, some natural - may play an even a bigger role, he said.
"The public likes simple answers," Pielke said. "But there isn't any simple answer here."
Simplicity is hard to come by because Earth is a giant, complex heat-moving machine.
The sun's rays strike full force at Earth's middle and glance off the ends - making the equator hotter than the poles.
Ocean currents, winds, the jet stream and hurricanes are forces trying to balance out the Earth's heat.
Efforts to calculate what is going on in the oceans, the land and the atmosphere are an unparalleled exercise.
The task falls to mathematical models run by supercomputers like the one in NCAR's basement. These "general circulation models" attempt to keep track of a multitude of variables around the globe - such as ocean currents, air and sea temperatures, rainfall and the composition of the atmosphere.
"This is a unique exercise in science and a very difficult one," said Christopher Essex, a mathematician at the University of Western Ontario in Canada.
The models are trying to project a future world, Essex said, without a complete theoretical base on how climate works and the risk of small errors being amplified.
Another problem, Essex said, is in the inability to do controlled experiments - one of science's key tools.
"There's only one atmosphere, so you can't hold everything steady and change just one variable to see what happens," he said.
Essex offered his critique of the models at a Los Alamos National Laboratory climate conference in Santa Fe in July.
At the end of the presentation, CSU's Gray jumped up and demanded: "Should we base national policy on these models?"
"I'm not touching that," Essex replied.
And then Essex added: "At every stage of the history of science, there has been some element that was impossible, and we've found a way around it. I am sure we will here."
This did not assuage Bill Gray.
Gray is among the most strident critics, quick to use words like "fraud" or "gang" to describe the modelers.
Instead of model projections, Gray looks at the history and patterns of weather to find trends.
And befitting his 76 years, Gray has a long view. His first report on climate - on the return of the dust bowl - was in the early 1940s when he was in junior high school.
"We'd gone through a warming trend in the '40s, and everybody was saying we were going to win World War II but face terrible droughts," Gray said.
Soon after, temperatures went into a cooling trend and by 1975, Gray points out, there was talk of a coming ice age.
The Earth does have natural cycles of cooling and warming - during the past 740,000 years there have been eight cycles with four ice ages.
The cycles appear to be tied to slight variations in the tilt of the Earth toward the sun.
During the last ice age - which ended about 10,000 years ago - Earth was on average about 4 degrees Fahrenheit cooler, and what is now Manhattan was buried under ice.
At some point the Earth will wobble on its axis again, setting the stage for an ice age.
There are other phenomena affecting global temperatures over time, such as El Niño, a Pacific Ocean warm-water mass that appears in roughly five-year cycles and changes world weather patterns.
And there is the Atlantic thermohaline current, a conveyor belt moving heat north on the surface and then dropping it to the ocean floor and heading back to the equator - a 1,200-year trip.
Changes in the current lead to changes in temperature. Somehow the models have to account for these natural variations too.
Gray believes that the warmer temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere are linked to a natural slowing in the thermohaline current, not the carbon dioxide.
Some of the models also show the current is slowing and that, along with warming oceans, adds to hurricane risks.
This has sparked one of the biggest scientific disputes of the moment.
It is a debate in which NCAR's Trenberth and CSU's Gray are, of course, on opposite sides.
Hurricanes feed on warm water, and Trenberth says that warmer sea-surface temperatures and increased atmospheric water vapor - both of which have been measured - will contribute to more intense hurricanes.
Gray - and other hurricane specialists, including Chris Landsea, the science and operations officer at the National Hurricane Center in Miami - say that the link doesn't yet exist and that models overstate the case.
Trenberth concedes that the changes being measured are small, but he adds, "They are all going in one direction."
Gray argues that heat by itself isn't enough - that there are other variables: The air has to be cooler than the ocean, the winds have to be agreeable.
The dispute led Landsea, who is a former Gray student, to quit as a member of a working group of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC.
Trenberth, 61, is the lead author for that working group, whose report is due next year.
The IPCC was created to assess - through a set of working groups - scientific, technical and socioeconomic information on climate change. It does not, however, do research.
Landsea, in an open letter to the science community, said the science working group was being "motivated by pre- conceived agendas" and was "scientifically unsound."
Even with that, Landsea says: "I am concerned about the trend in global warming. It is a problem."
The IPCC science working group - with more than 100 members - has been trying to forge a consensus on the best science, Trenberth said.
"But it is a struggle to accommodate every viewpoint," he said. "I don't know why Chris Landsea acted that way."
Landsea isn't the panel's only critic.
"The IPCC has become an inbred process," Pielke said. "All the scientists I know are doing legitimate work and believe in what they are doing. ... Still, it's a narrow view."
Pielke, 59, says his doubts about the climate record began during his stint as Colorado's climatologist when he realized how inaccurate the state's thermometer network was.
Placing a thermometer close to a building or near an air- condition vent can compromise readings, Pielke said.
When the winds blow from Denver, a Front Range thermometer is influenced by urban effects, Pielke said, and by agricultural activities when it blows from the north.
Multiply that by tens of thousands of thermometers around the world and the temperature record is suspect, he contends.
The modeling groups say that what is important is the warming trend.
NCAR's Washington, 70, a pioneer in climate modeling, said that 30 years ago the climate models kept track of just the atmosphere and oceans. Today they include more than 10 measurements, including sea ice, clouds and forest growth.
This year NCAR even added human land-use impacts on climate to the modeling.
Pielke, who argues that when it comes to climate change both science and policy have focused too much on the carbon dioxide buildup and ways to contain it, said he felt "vindicated."
NCAR researcher Linda Mearns, however, said the land- use impact "doesn't obliterate or remove the greenhouse gas problem."
"Roger tries to present it as though he's the lone voice," Mearns said. "That's not true."
The models still have problems, Trenberth and the other modelers concede - particularly assessing regional impacts.
When the NCAR model tries to show Denver's weather patterns, for example, summer thunderstorms keep coming about noon.
"We all know they come in the late afternoon, so that's a problem in the model," said Trenberth, who was born in New Zealand and trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Mass.
Many issues still have to be resolved, said Chris Folland, a researcher at Britain's Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction, but the science continues to point in one direction.
"We've shown that the climate change is a true thing," he said. "We've done that with global averages, since that was easiest.
"The American government might not agree," Folland said. "Most American scientists do."
(Click to enlarge!)
Print Email Return to Top Share » Subscribe
Welcome back!
Article Comments (6 comments)
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by richardduckworth on February 24, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
science is one thing, but look at the assumptions that must be consumed just to make this map POSSIBLE:
-assumption that burmese and other tropical snakes can brumate (they cited a 40 year old study that i can't find and that i doubt says much of use)
-assumption that the temps are going to rise
-assumption that the temps are goint to rise X amount of degrees
-assumption that the snakes will continue to be dumped
now, here's the thing, any human who'd dump exotic snakes in their backyard aren't people who care one iota about herpetology or even animals. they're people who do what's convenient, whether that's dumping unwanted animals here or scraping against your minivan on their way out of wal-mart there. they will screw up everything that they come in contact with.
i don't think it's fair to lay the blame at "our" feet. for this COMPLETELY FABRICATED fiasco, we can lay the blame exactly where it belongs; these psudoscientists' feet who are just itching to make a name for themselves. this isn't science by any stretch of the imagination. it's a COMPUTER program that some kid came up with to faciliate an agenda.
real science looks for answers, no matter where they lie. this is looking for ANYTHING to support their agenda, not a just cause or even to answer a question. this is EXACTLY what crooked people do when the facts don't work out in their favor.
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by CAISSACA on February 24, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Some of the arguments here are frankly almost too silly for words:
"It is really amazing that the news papers and USFWS are listning to some Moron named Robert Reed, who works for the USGS as a research biologist,who made the following statements: "They are going to chow down on deer," "They will chow down on pigs. They will chow down on turkey.""
Errr... what exactly makes that statement moronic? What do you think they will eat? Broccoli??
The climate change argument is largely a red herring - the USGS people published two maps for potential Burmese python distributions, one under present-day climatic conditions, and one for a particular global warming scenario. The one for present day distributions is startling enough. If anything, they must have used a pretty conservative model for climate change to get so relatively little difference between the two maps. Most European governments and agencies (not in the pickets of the oil lobby) work under assumptions of considerably more severe climate change to come.
"Roddas report claims Burmese are eating endangered animals, but the KEY here is these rodents were endangered BEFORE pythons moved in, so pythons are obviously not the primary reason for the endangered status of the rats, main reason seems to be humans and human activities."
OK, so the pythons aren't what endangered them - nobody said they were. However, is having a novel introduced predator with a different hunting mode from anything these rats evolved with going to help?
"assumption that burmese and other tropical snakes can brumate (they cited a 40 year old study that i can't find and that i doubt says much of use)"
Check out climate charts for the northern parts of the range of molurus, like in Sichuan or the Himalayan foothills of northern India, Pakistan and Nepal. These are NOT tropical regions.
You may not like the conclusions, but they are based on the best data currently available. The authors of this report are in the business of trying to minimise damage to from invasive species. You don't do that by poo-pooing the potential for trouble. It is THEIR JOB to build worst-case scenarios for each case. It's called the precautionary principle - that's why cars have seatbelts and airliners have life vests. You are better off overreacting to a hundred introduced species that may turn out to be no big deal than to miss a biggie - e.g., cane toad, brown tree snake, etc.
Kneejerk squealing and name-calling without having even looked at the evidence (the paper is due out shortly) does not convey a favourable impression of the herpetoculture community.
Cheers,
WW
|
| |
|
RE: Moronic News Reporting !
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on February 24, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Zuzana/me/former European/now American wrote:
<<"Roddas report claims Burmese are eating endangered animals, but the KEY here is
these rodents were endangered BEFORE pythons moved in, so pythons are obviously
not the primary reason for the endangered status of the rats, main reason seems
to be humans and human activities." >>
CAISSACA/current European wrote back:
<<OK, so the pythons aren't what endangered them - nobody said they were. However,
is having a novel introduced predator with a different hunting mode from
anything these rats evolved with going to help?>>
===
I will only answer portion of ‘C’ email that referred to my comment.
Well, if the pythons were the major threat, I would see why they would be mentioned this way adnauseam, but they obviously are not the main threat, many other rat threats will remain in FL, rats are just used as another tool to turn public perception against pythons.
Furthermore, mentioning the words repeatedly “…pythons…endangered/threatened…” in their hysterical study creates a subliminal message in readers’ mind, and normal, average person not trained with how to spot and deal with this kind of distraction and mind playing with end up with the wrong impression that tense horrible pythons are wiping out US endangered animals and are the number 1 threat and need to be eliminated ASAP. If you opened up some outdoor cats bellies I am sure you would find the rat there too.
As for the muskrats whose main threat is the destruction of wetlands, native alligators eat them too; muskrats seem to be more of a threat to humans than any full size python, see the sources of info below
Z
==
http://books.google.com/books?id=jEdQHMrnSbMC&pg=PA122&lpg=PA122&dq=%22round+tailed+muskrats%22+florida&source=web&ots=vYf35iWrua&sig=Ra46zB3VNVpiQCIvkQqgIG7QHk8
Rabies, Lyme Disease, Hanta Virus: And Other Animal-Borne Human Diseases in ... By E. Lendell Cockrum
<snip>
Diseases isolated from muskrats include rabies, intestinal bacteria, leptospirosis and tularemia.
===
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0022-541X(198604)50%3A2%3C348%3AAAFHIN%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0
American Alligator Food Habits in Northcentral Florida
<snip>
Stomachs from 350 American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis) collected in conjunction with 1981-83 experimental harvests on 3 lakes in northcentral Florida were examined for food habits. Common invertebrate foods of subadult alligators were giant water bugs (Belostoma spp.), apple snails (Pomacea paludosa), and crayfish (Procambarus penninsulatus); common terrestrial foods were round-tailed muskrats (Neofiber alleni) and marsh rabbits (Sylvilagus palustris).<snip>
===
According to study I found on FWS regarding Key Largo Woodrat dated December 2003:
http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/images/pdfLibrary/Key_Largo_wood_rat_Conservation_Guidelines.pdf
<snip> The primary threats to the Key Largo woodrat are habitat destruction, degradation,
and fragmentation. Its extirpation in south Key Largo is generally attributed to land clearing
followed by residential and commercial development (Brown 1978, Hersh 1981). Surveys
suggest that fewer than 90 Key Largo woodrats now exist in the wild.<snip>
Conservation Measures
Habitat destruction, degradation, and fragmentation result in many adverse affects to woodrats,
including 1) genetic isolation of woodrat populations, which makes the subspecies more
vulnerable to natural catastrophes such as hurricanes or fire (Service 1993); 2) loss of food
resources and the ability of woodrats to forage; 3) changes in habitat structure and vegetation
species composition; 4) reduction of home range size and disruption of movement and dispersal
patterns; 5) loss of ability to build stick nests by affecting availability of nest material and ground
cover; 6) loss of arboreal habitat. Road construction also disrupts the integrity of the hammocks
and causes road mortality of dispersing woodrats. Other threats associated with human
encroachment include predation by feral cats, dumping of trash, and competition with black rats. <snip>
===
from the hysterical paper/map: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1875
<snip>
“Wildlife managers are concerned that these snakes, which can grow to over 20 feet long and more than 250 pounds, pose a danger to state- and federally listed threatened and endangered species as well as to humans," said Bob Reed, a USGS wildlife biologist at the Fort Collins Science Center in Colorado, who helped develop the maps. "Several endangered species," he noted, "have already been found in the snakes' stomachs<snip>
Burmese pythons have been found to eat endangered Key Largo woodrats and rare round-tailed muskrats. "This makes it that much more difficult to recover these dwindling populations and restore the Everglades," said park biologist Skip Snow,<snip>
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
