Rock Python

[Kristy_07]

Steve & Michael - I think that you're both right. Or at least, you both have points that contribute to my point of view (which is right, I'm sure of it ).

Because humans are only advanced vertebrates, we are naturally inclined to treat our resources exactly as any other vertebrate - gorge ourselves in times of plenty. The problem is, because of our advanced thinking-power and problem-solving skills, we see the resources of our entire planet as our "time of plenty", and are naturally inclined to take what we can. We care more about our own self-preservation and improvement of our living conditions than we do about interfering with ecology. But, how does this make us different to any other species? It doesn't!

Apes, snakes, wolves, birds... none of them care about the state of the planet or whether they should take the environmental moral high-ground before they do what's necessary for their survival. That's a standard that humans place on ourselves.

Michael's right - it's our advanced ability to think that has caused such an imbalance in using the earth's resources, and that we are just another species of vertebrate. But, BECAUSE we are vertebrates, (Steve's right, too) we are naturally inclined to do what vertebrates do and use our resources to survive and improve our own lives, including interfering with and destroy our own ecology. Hope that made sense

 

[Waterrat]

Apes, snakes, wolves, birds... none of them care about the state of the planet or whether they should take the environmental moral high-ground before they do what's necessary for their survival.

I agree. However, other vertebrates, even the top predators don't have the ability destroy their environment so fast and so much as humans can. Dinosaurs didn't go extinct because they eat all there was to eat or because they polluted their habitats. The birds on Guam disappeared because humans introduced brown tree stakes - it happened frighteningly fast.

 

[jahan]

Hi Slick, In 1989 2 healthy neonates were hatched. Do you know if they are still alive?

 

[Pythoninfinite]

I can see a bit of Steve's reasoning, but if you followed it to the end point we wouldn't even have steering wheels in our cars because wherever it goes is where it is meant to go - just turn it on and hope for the best... To me, it seems to be simply a fatalistic approach, whatever you do is OK because that was the way it was meant to be.

We are only participants in a big and complex environment, where all species are irrevocably meshed together. Animals have become (gone?) extinct for reasons other than human influence, and will continue to do so, but the decline in species, caused by our poor stewardship of the planet, has been catastrophic in recent decades. To throw your hands in the air and suggest it's OK because it is a continuing natural event is the cop-out I was referring to earlier. I would sooner acknowledge some responsibility for what we are doing wrong and try to rectify the situation.

The car is heading for a cliff, why try to turn the steering wheel (because it was meant to be so)... I don't think so!

Jamie.

 

[Slickturtle]

No. I don't know anything about them. I even lost track of the sequence of events concerning the ones that Peter Krause had.

You could tell me more about this than I know. Living so long up here can put you out of the picture in other areas.

Cheers

Slick

Hi Slick, In 1989 2 healthy neonates were hatched. Do you know if they are still alive?

 

[Slickturtle]

From the canberra Times

Hi Steve - Slick again

I attach an article that was published in yesterday's Canberra Times. This is one of the early signs that scientists are saying what Pythoninfinite, Bushman and Waterrat and others are saying. Generally scientists don't say much because its not 'their brief' or, often they are in the pay of the very agency that needs criticising. Also, scientists are inherently cautious people.

What this guy is saying about mammals also applies equally to all the vertebrates. He is emphasizing mammals because that is where his research lies.

The point of this Steve is that in a sense it don't matter if this is a natural progression or not. It is a matter of how much loss you and I can live with before we feel sick! This article tells you (and the story is the same up here) that our wildlife is going so fast that your children and great grand children ain't gonna see much Aussie wildlife at all, except in picture books. UNLESS, people like you and I embrace and fight for captive breeding of our best and rarest. So this is being selfish (thinking of you and your family) - but it is a good selfish as everyone is a winner.

Cheers

Slick

 

[Elapidae1]

Jamie, I have great trouble putting my thoughts and ideas into words, and as a consequence I feel you are missing my point. I do not believe we should just "turn it on and hope for the best" or "throw our hands in the air and suggest it's ok because it 's just an on going natural event" I agree that would be a cop out, but from a conservation point of view there will always be the people who wish to conserve, to the point of putting in considerable time and effort to achieve that goal. For the people that have been involved in bringing a species back from the brink of extinction, I imagine they would quite NATURALLY feel a great sense of achievement and joy at being able to preserve something that they feel is of huge importance to our existence, what a great motivator to conserve, and all because of one aspect or another of our human NATURE.
On the other hand there are people who put these creatures lower down the scale of importance and destroy habitat etc ,whether it be mining or farming these people are motivated by other NATURAL human emotions like success, or pride from the fact they have built something that provides employment etc, and therefore creates the means for others to survive in modern society. Again actions and emotions that result from NATURAL human behavior and instincts.
Then there will be the in betweeners those who care and don't act or those who don't really care either which way, however their behaviour is still natural because they are human after all.
So sometimes animals will just survive, sometimes they will flourish, and sadly others will perish and become extinct, all as a result of human behavior, if our behaviour is not natural then what is it?
Just to clarify I fall into the bracket of caring, but my actions are minimal, I would describe them as being preventative rather than pro active. However as I grow older I take more and more notice of whats going on, as naturally and I suppose instinctively I am concerned about the world my children will be left with.

I am not attempting to bring people around to my way of thinking, I'm just expressing my thoughts, and I personally have a lot of hope and faith in people. I certainly don't believe we are doomed and should just give up on the environment. I do however feel that often humans have to higher a belief in their ability to destroy and rebuild, nature will take care of itself and at the end of the day humans are the only ones that care. If and when nature destroys itself and mankind is extinct, will we sit back and say wow what did we do with this opportunity? No I don't think so, nature will have run it's course and we will simply cease to exist.

 

[Waterrat]

I don't disagree with you steve, just like you, I am merely adding my opinion, using some of your expressions. LIVING IN MODERN SOCIETY is the key path to destruction of nature. There are human beings living in societies that practice sustainable living in harmony with nature, they have done so for millennia. Unfortunately they are becoming extinct one by one just like our fauna, due to the expansion of the MODERN SOCIETY and its greedy "nature". In my view, there is a difference between societies (and individuals within) that live NATURALLY and the MODERN SOCIETY that does live very unnaturally and individuals within have lost contact with nature. I don't see signs of evolution there though.

 

[Sigourd]

I find conservation efforts interesting, and although I would hate to see the Oenpelli become extinct or any animal become extinct for that matter, I sometimes think to myself isn't extinction just part of nature taking it's course? Some will argue no that man is interfering with nature, but are we? Or a we just behaving as nature intended? like humans, and if we are, then aren't these extinctions just the natural progression of life on earth.

Hi Steve. I have pondered such thoughts myself. Indeed species go extinct all the time. What is different is the rate of extinction is far more than normal background extinction, it is approaching the rate that saw the death of the dinosaurs. Never before has global mass extinction occurred due to a single species. Never before has the world seen a rate of species migration as we have now (Burmese Pythons in Florida, Brown Tree Snakes in Guam, Racoons in New Zealand and of course the invasive species we have here). These are not natural processes. I see where you are coming from and I know you are not suggesting that we let species go extinct. However I honestly feel that our intellect gives us a basis to decide what is our natural behavior.

 

[Elapidae1]

Sigourd good points, but once again I will argue that these are natural processes because they have resulted from natural human behaviour, our intellect may influence how we interact and react to nature, it is however in my opinion impossible to decide our natural behaviour because our behaviour is governed by nature.

 

[Waterrat]

our natural behaviour because our behaviour is governed by nature.

By nature or by society pressures?

 

[Elapidae1]

Waterrat, I have at different stages in my life pondered over the idea of living in such a society , the simplicity and peace of living in harmony with the rest of nature, I imagine most have pondered over this at some stage, Is it because we sincerely yearn to live this way or because our modern lives are sometimes to difficult. Why do you feel it is unfortunate that these society's are becoming extinct? is it because they serve as a reminder of where we have come from? or is it just that you feel like something else has been lost through man kinds greed? do you see them as being somehow different than yourself? Do they offer you a moment of escapism from the daily grind? Or are you saddened by the difficulty these people face when they come up against the modern world? Please don't take offense to this, but I suspect the only reason you care that these society's are in decline, are the same reasons it bothers you that the Oenpelli python may be in decline, that reason being that you or your future generations will somehow be worse of when they are gone.
I still don't believe that a suitable argument has been put forward that would suggest humans are behaving anything but naturally, I don't believe we have lost contact with nature, just that our ability to reason and think for ourselves allows are to perceive that we are somehow above it.

 

[Elapidae1]

By nature or by society pressures?

Whats the difference

 

[Waterrat]

Waterrat, I have at different stages in my life pondered over the idea of living in such a society , the simplicity and peace of living in harmony with the rest of nature, I imagine most have pondered over this at some stage, Is it because we sincerely yearn to live this way or because our modern lives are sometimes to difficult. Why do you feel it is unfortunate that these society's are becoming extinct? is it because they serve as a reminder of where we have come from? Yes, they are like museums now. or is it just that you feel like something else has been lost through man kinds greed? Most definitely, a lot has been lost though greed, just look around, our Cape York is going to be mined, oil pollution on the US, the list is endless. do you see them as being somehow different than yourself? Very much so, I would feel ashamed as a human being standing in front of these magnificent peoples. Do they offer you a moment of escapism from the daily grind? Not really, I can't reach them for there are so few left. Or are you saddened by the difficulty these people face when they come up against the modern world? That too, mainly because they had OUR religion trusted upon them. Please don't take offense to this I don't , but I suspect the only reason you care that these society's are in decline, are the same reasons it bothers you that the Oenpelli python may be in decline, yes, beautiful things that comprise this world we're living in are disappearing. that reason being that you or your future generations will somehow be worse of when they are gone. Of course they will be worse of - what kind of logic is that?
I still don't believe that a suitable argument has been put forward that would suggest humans are behaving anything but naturally, I don't believe we have lost contact with nature, really? You must be blind - please no offence but this statement is just way off the mark. Ask your average person in the street what is Oenpelli python and enjoy the blank faces - that is detachment! just that our ability to reason and think for ourselves allows are to perceive that we are somehow above it.

cheers for now.
Michael

 

[Bushfire]

I think if you ask the average person on the street about many things about nature you'll get blink looks because generally speaking the average person doesn't know and doesn't care. Its the biggest problem with any conservation effort, how do you get the public to care enough to actually do something about it. Unless somehow it is discovered the Oenpelli python has some magical cure for cancer or lays golden eggs, you aren't going to generation much interest at all. People like to talk things up and generally agree in principle but when it comes down to actually doing something or having them go out of their way for the benefit of the environment people don't do anything or find excuses not too.

Future generations may well be worse off but again most wont really care. You look at what is already gone and ask anybody off the street and I bet most wouldn't miss it or even know about them and once they stopped talking to you they wouldn't give it a second thought for the rest of their lives.

Are they detached from nature? Depends on your definition. You may walk through a patch of bush and see weeds taking over not as many types of wildlife but the average person would probably think wow thats the way its suppose too be. They still like going away camping / visiting the bush ("getting back to nature") but they perceive themselves as above it. They would most definitely see a different nature than their grandfathers seen but they would still get the same sense of satisfaction from a visit.

 

[Elapidae1]

It is hard to judge a persons tone through comments on a forum, but i feel I have somehow upset you. To tell me I must be blind and then just expect me not to be offended is a bit off the mark. My comment that I don't believe we have lost touch with nature, however is not off the mark, and until this thread was posted half the users on this forum would not have known what an Oenpelli python was. I do agree however that humans have become detached from some aspects of the natural environment, this however is mental and not physical, because no matter how emotionally detached from nature one becomes they still remain intrinsically attached in the physical sense. So therefore you still have not provided me with an argument that suggests in any way possible that we are behaving unnaturally. Our emotional detachment can be explained away quite easily by natural human behaviours. Please keep in mind that in none of my posts have I claimed that we are not responsible for the destruction to some degree of our natural environment. Our emotional detachment from nature, I think can be explained in that so many people including yourself seem to look at nature as if we are above it, looking down on it as If it was something that we are not a part of, but are the master of. Has the human race shaped our environment? or has the environment shaped us and the way we react to it both mentally and physically

 

[Elapidae1]

Sorry Slick, I almost forgot to come back to this, as for how much I can live with before it makes me sick, well that point has long been and gone, and for the most part I feel powerless. I would love to see oenpelli's established in captive collections, It's just sad this is the only way we can be certain of it's survival

 

[Bushman]

It's good to see this discussion and thread staying alive. It's broadened into an almost philosophical discourse about conservation and humanity, which is quite interesting.
Although you say you struggle putting your thoughts into written words Steve, you're doing a good job.
I wanted to add something to the discussion before but got pulled away from the computer. It was about responsibility. Since then the discussion has moved on and although you touched on it Steve, I think that this is the critical point here, rather than what is natural or unnatural.
As a staunch conservationist, I very strongly believe that we are responsible for the mess that we now find ourselves in, as far as the environment goes.
We tell our kids that if they make a mess, then they should clean it up! Are we so hypocritical that we don't do the same thing?
We should be ashamed at what we've done to the planet as Michael (aka Waterrat) quite rightly says, standing in front of tribal peoples. As the ones "in charge", we have to at least try and put it right, or at least stem the flow and ideally heal and repair the damage that has been done. It's NOT too late and I for one, as I'm sure many others here feel, that we should do our very best to fix things up.
The Oenpelli Python epitomizes the plight of beautiful creatures that are fast disappearing before they've barely even been discovered. We know so little about these by all accounts magnificent creatures, it would be a real tragedy and damned shame to stand by and do nothing to help.

 

[Elapidae1]

Thanks Bushman, I think I have done alright also, but these posts have taken considerable effort for me, on average about 1and 1/2 hours each, LOL.
You are right we do have a responsibility to take action, As I grow older and watch my daughter grow, these things gather growing importance to me, though admittedly anything that I have done for conservation is small fry compared to the efforts of others. I hold a great many of these people in the highest regard, I love to see the passion displayed by people for the environment and our wildlife, as it is often a display of human nature at it's best and most selfless. As a kid I loved everything to do with nature but somewhere along the way it was lost, only to be rediscovered in the last couple of years. My passion is for reptiles I don't know why, I just love to interact with them, I love to come across them and look for them in the bush, and I guess it naturally goes hand in hand with wanting to protect the environment in which they live. One day I hope to find away to devote my working life to reptiles and the conservation of them and their environment, I feel that it's my responsibility to. The question is HOW? It's with growing frustration that my desire to do this, conflicts with the need to provide for my family

 

[Slickturtle]

I too think this is a good airing of views ans all participants should be thanked for their thoughtfulness and civility.

But on a slightly different tack, I though you might be interested in the trouble they go to in the USA to reintroduce captive bred snakes to the wild. I have always thought that such an aim is a waste of time, but the Yanks are prepared to give it a go. The snake they are talking about is the Indigo Snake which is one of the bigger Rat Snakes. It is harmless but gets very big and is very strong. They were at Worrells when I worked there and they are a much more sensational snake than the attached item suggests. See

Outdoor News: How To Enjoy The Outdoors: The Eastern indigo snake