CornSnake in the wild.... :)

[wstphal]

Or are you claiming that everyone should just assume everything is illegal unless or until they can find proof otherwise?

Most governments around the world would probably like it if that was how it worked! And in many cases it does seem that that is how things work.
Whether that applies to this topic, I don't know & don't care to venture an opinion.

 

[Rich Z]

Basically Rich, because that is YOUR responsibility. It is you that is releasing, not me, and it is your responsibility to check with your local authorities before releasing any organism into the wild. In my very first post in this thread, I asked a simple question, and you have yet to answer. That's why I I will ask the question again. Does the FWC condone the release of your captive bred animals?

Your use of the word "condone" is irrelevant and misleading in this context.

1. to disregard or overlook (something illegal, objectionable, or the like).
2. to give tacit approval to: By his silence, he seemed to condone their behavior.
3. to pardon or forgive (an offense); excuse.
4. to cause the condonation of.
5. Law. to forgive or act so as to imply forgiveness of (a violation of the marriage vow).

It is not what FWCC may "condone" that is relevant. It's what is LEGAL that is relevant. And as best I have been able to determine it is NOT illegal to release a native species such as corn snakes in Florida.

 

[Dinah]

Mainly that's because a study has not been done to determine that, not by FWC, nor by Rich. Simply stated is there is the possiblitiy for long term negative effect.

Again, this is the reply I got from the FWC when I emailed them to ask whether it is legal or not to release captive bred corn snakes and their morphs into the wild. Please note their answer.

If you or Rich wish to verify the legality of releasing captive bred corn snakes and their morphs into the wild, why not just contact your local Florida Wildlife Commision office? Just because you weren't successful in a Google search doesn't provide exemption from the law. I Googled to find the info and found the resource contact on the first page of the search. Better yet, here is their link, you can email them the your question as to the legality and post thier reply here just as I did.

http://myfwc.com

Yes I am aware that no such study has been done, I am the one that said that I doubt a study has been done, and that is why you can't say "it is causing harm", without other people saying to you oh yeah prove it. The fact is that without a study there is no right side to this argument. There is a lot of possibilities of unintended consequences in a lot of things people do, but you are going to be hard pressed to convince a person of anything on speculation and possibilities. People do not have to prove that there will be no harm before they do anything and it is a good thing because nothing would ever get done

In terms of the FWC letter, to be very honest I am one of those persnickety American's in terms of rights and such. And I am not required to just trust my government or even an officer of my government. If you read my post, I did not just do a Google search, I went to the FL site where FL has all of their laws/statues posted online, and I read through the pertinent sections, after the reading I also used the find function to search for the relevant key words to make sure I had not missed anything. To my understanding if it is not in the state laws then it is not a law regardless of what some cheese ball official says.

I personally find the whole FWC response suspect because if there was an investigation they would not be allowed to talk about their investigation and they would be stupid to show their hand and tell someone that an investigation was going on, and it is silly to think that just because you asked a question about corn snakes that they would just tell you all of this other info and I find it surprising with the inefficient way that our government works that this respondent would even know about some simple investigation that likely is taking place in a different department. Now when I posted that I had looked through the statues in regard to you FWC email, I politely did not point out all of the problems I have with this FWC email. But if you want to use it as the end all be all of answers then I am going to just call it bull because that is how I see it. Now just because sometimes things on the internet are not as clear as when things are explained in person I will say this to be clear. I am not saying you made up the email, I am saying you got a reply from some sort of typically stupid government employee who thinks they know what they are talking about when very probably they do not. This is exactly why FL lists their laws online so that citizens can look them up and so that citizens do not have to just trust their government officials. Now lets say this person is right and there is a law, I would bet good money that since it cannot be found online at the FL statutes website that Rich could easily get out of any trouble that might exist. Because that is the way the law works our government cannot keep them a secret from the citizens and then also punish the citizens for not following them.

Now I have to say I am confused how somehow I am now seen as being against your side when I have said, that I don't feel especially knowledgeable regarding snakes, and for the most part I feel like I am on the fence about the subject until I know more, and that I have been mostly following the thread to learn about the topic. My post was only trying to point out that it is obvious why Rich's position did not change because there has not been any evidence addressing his specific points.

 

[Rich Z]

Oh, and about this "investigation" email. What sort of investigation can they possibly be doing if they have not even contacted ME about it?

It's not like they don't know how to get in touch with me. I wrote some of the programming code they use for their licensing department....

 

[ComoxCorn]

Your use of the word "condone" is irrelevant and misleading in this context

Sorry Rich, I'll rephrase my question then.
Have you contacted the FWC to ask whether or not it is legal to release captive bred corn snakes and their genetic morphs into the wild population?
I can only make an assumption on this, but I think if you actually contacted them, they would be able to give you an answer as to the legality of release.
Again, to say you have searched the legality, without finding anything online, then to say "it didn't actually say it wasn't illegal" without contacting their office directly and speaking to a conservation officer doesn't exclude the legality.

to Dinah

and that is why you can't say "it is causing harm", without other people saying to you oh yeah prove it.

Sorry, but I have stated possibilty, not fact, so there is nothing here to prove. What I think is more important, is that Rich prove his hypothesis before putting his plan into action. So far, all he has offered is hypothesis without scientific findings. I think before he decides to interfere with the genetic integrity of a wild population, he at least should run a study on a control group of wild specimens before tossing captive bred snakes into the bush. Whatever the effect, positive or negative, once he does the release, the effects are irreversible.

I believe in every province and territory in Canada, and my Canadian collegues can chime in if I am in err, that it is illegal to possess, let alone release any wildlife that is indigenous to the province or territory. The reason, protection of the wild stock from private collection, protection against introduction of disease, and protection of the genetic integrity of the wild stock.

 

[Rich Z]

Sorry Rich, I'll rephrase my question then.
Have you contacted the FWC to ask whether or not it is legal to release captive bred corn snakes and their genetic morphs into the wild population?
I can only make an assumption on this, but I think if you actually contacted them, they would be able to give you an answer as to the legality of release.
Again, to say you have searched the legality, without finding anything online, then to say "it didn't actually say it wasn't illegal" without contacting their office directly and speaking to a conservation officer doesn't exclude the legality.

Sorry but no. I am satisfied that I have done enough research necessary to determine the legality of my actions. Since this is all past history, I have no reason to expend any more time nor effort in that pursuit.

to Dinah



Sorry, but I have stated possibilty, not fact, so there is nothing here to prove. What I think is more important, is that Rich prove his hypothesis before putting his plan into action. So far, all he has offered is hypothesis without scientific findings. I think before he decides to interfere with the genetic integrity of a wild population, he at least should run a study on a control group of wild specimens before tossing captive bred snakes into the bush. Whatever the effect, positive or negative, once he does the release, the effects are irreversible.

Sorry, this isn't meant to be unkind or belittling, but it is merely my reaction to the above.... :roflmao: I'm assuming it won't take a rocket scientist to understand that reaction. But think "time machine".......

I believe in every province and territory in Canada, and my Canadian collegues can chime in if I am in err, that it is illegal to possess, let alone release any wildlife that is indigenous to the province or territory. The reason, protection of the wild stock from private collection, protection against introduction of disease, and protection of the genetic integrity of the wild stock.

Fortunately, I don't live in Canada. For more reasons then just this current issue. The cold would wear me down for certain.....

 

[ComoxCorn]

Sorry, this isn't meant to be unkind or belittling, but it is merely my reaction to the above.... I'm assuming it won't take a rocket scientist to understand that reaction. But think "time machine".......

Whatever Rich. Because you are someone who people look up to here, and people look to as an authority on corn snakes and their genetics, I'm a little surprised at the irresponsibility and disregard you show for the environment. You have offered up absolutely no scientific data, no research, disregard for the law, and a whole lot of word twisting to justify releasing captive bred animals into the wild.
The message to just about anyone who lives in corn snake country is clear, when you're done with your projects, and your snakes are no longer of use to you, go ahead and toss them out the door. True disposibility without accountablity.

 

[danielle]

CC- if Rich were to do a "study" wouldn't he have to release the corns first? It's obvious you don't agree, but why argue the same point over and over? The truth is you can't prove these CB corns are harboring a deadly bacteria thats going to contanminte the whole population of wild corns and if a population of snakes did become ill you also can't prove it was from a CB corn. All people and other animals harbor bacterias, virus's, and other pathogens period, and our bodies as well as theirs have a way to fight many of them off- ever have a cold?
This is Rich's property he lives on and his snakes so why become so bent out of shape about something that boils down to pure opinion- yours vs. his? Would his opinion about somehting pertaining to your property sway you? I would hope not. The bottom line is you can speculate all you want about the potential destruction you feel this practice may cause, but its purely speculation and not a fact you can prove.

 

[Dinah]

to Dinah

Sorry, but I have stated possibilty, not fact, so there is nothing here to prove. What I think is more important, is that Rich prove his hypothesis before putting his plan into action. So far, all he has offered is hypothesis without scientific findings. I think before he decides to interfere with the genetic integrity of a wild population, he at least should run a study on a control group of wild specimens before tossing captive bred snakes into the bush. Whatever the effect, positive or negative, once he does the release, the effects are irreversible.

I believe in every province and territory in Canada, and my Canadian collegues can chime in if I am in err, that it is illegal to possess, let alone release any wildlife that is indigenous to the province or territory. The reason, protection of the wild stock from private collection, protection against introduction of disease, and protection of the genetic integrity of the wild stock.

See this is where we disagree, I don't think it is ok to tell someone what to do based on possibility or because of something you think. If you are going to tell someone what they should be doing or what the right thing to do is then you need to be able to back that up with substantial amounts of proof. This is what I believe across the board (not this forum board, I mean in life across the board). No matter what the issue is it is not ok to tell other people what to do based on how you personally set your standards, or what you personally believe to be the right course of action. People don't get to tell other people how they *should* run their lives. Besides if everyone had to prove that their actions would not cause harm before they did an action then nothing would ever get done. And heck Rich doesn't need me to stick up for his rights to do as he wants but I am here reading for the debate/information and as I have said I just haven't found the counter arguments to Rich's as very persuasive, I am not taking sides and saying this is right or this is wrong.

As for the laws in Canada, well to start with I fail to see how they apply because Rich as best as I can tell lives in FL. I can only assume that you are stating it as more proof as to why it is bad that this happens in which case I say that is terrible proof the fact that a government says it is not ok (even if it where my government saying it) that does not prove to me that said thing is bad, just that said government doesn't want it happening. I am a law abiding citizen and I obey the laws of my State and Country, but that does not mean I have a lot of faith in the intelligence of governments mine or anyone else's. A law does not mean that said thing is wrong, it just means that said thing is against the law, and in this case I have read through the statutes and don't see a law stating that said thing is even illegal in FL. I will just add your Canada laws as another reason along with temperature why I don't live there. Please don't take this personally its just I am a native Floridian and those kind of temps just do not agree with me, I am also one of "those Americans" who gets her feathers ruffled when a government tries to run my private life. Canada is a great country its just not the right fit for me.

 

[ComoxCorn]

The truth is you can't prove these CB corns are harboring a deadly bacteria thats going to contanminte the whole population of wild corns and if a population of snakes did become ill you also can't prove it was from a CB corn. All people and other animals harbor bacterias, virus's, and other pathogens period, and our bodies as well as theirs have a way to fight many of them off- ever have a cold?

I think my main point is upsetting the genetic integrity of the existing wild population.
I think in most cases, the disease factor will work to the detriment of the released snakes, although, some will survive.

CC- if Rich were to do a "study" wouldn't he have to release the corns first?

No, this is a long term study he could have done over the past several years using WC specimens in a controlled environment. First off, he could have taken 10 male and 10 female corns, bred them together to see if there was any underlying genetics. Adding his own genetics into the wild will inevetably put new genetics into the existing wild gene pool. Why tamper with the natural balance? There is no scientific thought into what's been done. It's all about "I got this idea". I just hope someone doesn't get the same brainstorm to toss a bunch of genetically engineered snakes around the perimeter of the Okeetee Hunt Club, or the Lower Keys.

 

[danielle]

I think you lost me. If he took 20 of his own snakes, or 20 wild ones genes could still remain hidden since you need two copies of the same gene for it to be expressed. Since every genetic mutation came from wild stock and the luck of putting the right two together hence new morphs popping up every couple of years this experiment would prove nothing unless I missed your point in this experiment to begin with which I may have.
I do agree releasing corns back into the wild will add to the gene pool, but it is more like putting it back since it came from there in the first place. I also have to argue the odds of those right two hooking up is slim and even slimmer is the chance of many of these morphs surviving to procreate in the wild. Genetically engineered is also not the best term since Rich doesn't create the genes, and instead just puts them together but either way genetic diversity in small areas if anything benefits the species. Weakened genes may meet stronger genes theres no way to tell, but I doubt we're going to see a rack of plasmas taking over Tallahassee

 

[Rich Z]

No, this is a long term study he could have done over the past several years using WC specimens in a controlled environment. First off, he could have taken 10 male and 10 female corns, bred them together to see if there was any underlying genetics. Adding his own genetics into the wild will inevetably put new genetics into the existing wild gene pool. Why tamper with the natural balance? There is no scientific thought into what's been done. It's all about "I got this idea". I just hope someone doesn't get the same brainstorm to toss a bunch of genetically engineered snakes around the perimeter of the Okeetee Hunt Club, or the Lower Keys.

Sorry, but such an experiment makes absolutely NO sense at all. What you are suggesting is just a frivolous waste of time and resources. And then what would I do with all the babies from those wild caughts? Sure as the sun will rise tomorrow, someone would be complaining about releasing THEM back into the wild...... Then others would complain that 10 pairs wasn't a large enough of a sampling.

BTW, would you suggest that all those babies taken from the wild caughts, and therefore out of the natural population, just be euthanized? So tell me, do you SUPPOSE that taking 10 pairs of animals out of a local population might be considered as "tampering with the natural balance"? But that is OK in this instance for some reason?

Why don't you just do us all a favor and quit beating around the bush and just state flatly that YOU don't like the idea of captive releases, but have no real factual basis other than an emotional gut feeling about the practice. That would be a whole lot more to the point, accurate, and much less wordy.

And I guess my reference to the "time machine" went over your head. You DO know that I have retired from the business this year and those snakes have already been released over many YEARS, don't you? Or didn't you bother actually reading this thread? And yes, amazingly, I caught a wild caught corn snake outside the reptile building last year, and it didn't glow in the dark nor was it covered with warts and lesions. But I will say he was quite tame and fed readily when I offered him mice....

 

[CaptBogart]

The breeder I got a lot of the Milk and King Snakes from, kept a group of Florida Kings that a farmer pays him to breed and release the hatchlings on his property every year. The farmer noticed that as a kid they were everywhere, then when he inherited the farm and moved back he found they weren't around, but he did find quite a few rattlesnakes. With the practice of reintroducing Kings, he cut the venomous population down to almost nothing. I think I'd rather have released Corns and Kings taking advantage of the local resources than venomous any day...

 

[Rich Z]

The breeder I got a lot of the Milk and King Snakes from, kept a group of Florida Kings that a farmer pays him to breed and release the hatchlings on his property every year. The farmer noticed that as a kid they were everywhere, then when he inherited the farm and moved back he found they weren't around, but he did find quite a few rattlesnakes. With the practice of reintroducing Kings, he cut the venomous population down to almost nothing. I think I'd rather have released Corns and Kings taking advantage of the local resources than venomous any day...

I wonder what made those kings vanish in the first place? I have heard that the exploding fire ant populations is playing hell on all egg laying reptiles. Heck, can you imagine what happens to a box turtle disturbs a fire ant mound? What is their natural defense mechanism to threats? Yeah, pretty useless against the fire ants.....

 

[CaptBogart]

I wonder what made those kings vanish in the first place? I have heard that the exploding fire ant populations is playing hell on all egg laying reptiles. Heck, can you imagine what happens to a box turtle disturbs a fire ant mound? What is their natural defense mechanism to threats? Yeah, pretty useless against the fire ants.....

I believe that's why he keeps having him release hatchlings, which I believe will continue until he sees naturally produced populations appear before the established releases...

 

[Dinah]

I wonder what made those kings vanish in the first place? I have heard that the exploding fire ant populations is playing hell on all egg laying reptiles. Heck, can you imagine what happens to a box turtle disturbs a fire ant mound? What is their natural defense mechanism to threats? Yeah, pretty useless against the fire ants.....

Can I just take a second here to say how much I HATE fire ants, we live on the high ground in terms of our surrounding area and every wet season/storm/heavy rainfall it is always the same problems fire ants! They are enough to make a person crazy :headbang::crazy02:

 

[Shaky]

as to fire ants - diotomaceous earth may work

Now, exactly what genetic changes have been wrought in corns? All I can say for sure are cosmetic ones - colors and patterns. As far as I know, (unless someone is line breeding for size) that is all.
Color and pattern differences have already been weeded out by nature. Any interbreeding will result in wild-morph corns, who harbor these recessive color genes. The odd-colored F2 babies will likely disappear quickly. These "genetic aberrations" being released will have a really tough time harming populations in this way, as the only ones harmed will be themselves as they are culled by every predator around - even fire ants.
Releasing captive corns is, in many ways, more like throwing food out the door.
Any survivors? Maybe, but this is where nature excels - weeding out the unworkable, keeping the good stuff. Maybe some of these morph combos will work out.
As I said, I'd love to revisit the site in 20+ years.
The argument about the danger of introducing new genes, I think, is faulty in this case. There are no modified genes, as in many plants we currently consume.

 

[Kevin S.]

I know I stepped out of this, but the thread keeps getting bumped so I thought I'd pop back in. I'd like to address a few of the recurring themes that keep popping up (numbered for your convenience).

1. "Corns are native to Florida. How can releasing them cause problems?"

Pantherophis guttatus is native to Florida. {I]Pantherophis slowinski[/I] is not although this species wasn't elevated until 2002 (Burbrink 2002. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 25(3): 465-476) and it was thought to be just another of the many variable localities of corn snake before this happened. Taxonomy, especially herpetological taxonomy, is always changing. A few years from now, we may have several new species that we consider just another locality of corn snake today. I have no idea what the backgrounds of the corns Rich releases are, but unless they're all descended only from corns that were originally collected there, they really can't be considered native.

If you think they could, consider this. I live where there are black rat snakes. Releasing black rat snakes at my house should represent release of a native species right? Not necessarily-depending on the geographic region of collection, it could be one of 3 different species (P. obsoletus, P. alleganiensis, or P. spiloides). As it happens, only P. obsoletus occur on my property. If I released an albino black rat, it could be descended from pure P. spiloides stock or have a mixed ancestry including all 3 species-there's no way to know without genetic testing. In either case, it wouldn't be a pure P. obsoletus though and therefore, not native (though it would be a black rat snake by appearance).

Like it or not, genetics are becoming much more common in taxonomy and plenty of herps that were previously considered single species have been split based on genetic variations over their ranges. Slowinski's corn is just a single example of this. Genetic differences in different portions of a species' range can eventually lead to morphological differences, giving us those clear cut, visibly distinct species that we all love. Meddling with the natural distribution of these genetically distinct populations interferes with that process. The point in this case is that genetically, Rich's corns almost certainly differ from those that naturally occur in the area and by some definitions could be considered different species since they would be reproductively isolated from one another without human interference.

Just to bring up the pathogen issue again, I think we'd all agree that it would be foolish of me to breed a few hundred American toads in captivity and then release them to the wild in light of all the damage chytrid has done to amphibians worldwide, although they are native to my area. Turn back the clock a few years to the time when we didn't know about chytrid yet. Would it be ok to release them then? According to the "I haven't seen any harm yet, therefore there is none and will be none" mode of thinking, I guess it would...though it could still have devastating effects on the local amphibians later on.

There may not be any equivalent of chytrid in snakes, but we already know about cryptosporidium, stargazing, respiratory infections and other potential problems that could be spread to wild snakes by releasing captives. Speaking of respiratory infections, google "gopher tortoise URD" for a great example of how releasing captive reptiles, even with good intentions can cause major harm. While attempting to repatriate gopher tortoises with individuals raised in captivity, upper respiratory disease was introduced and continues to plague the species in many areas. Someone may try to poke holes in this since they're tortoises and not snakes, but it's a relevant example nonetheless.

2. "Habitat destruction is bad and kills many snakes. This isn't as bad as habitat destruction."

That may be true. Even if releasing these corns did result in some introduced disease that decimated corns in the area, it would likely never kill as many snakes as habitat destruction has. Does that make it a good idea though? I could go out searching for snakes and kill every one I see for the rest of my life and not kill as many as habitat destruction. It would still be stupid and damaging if I kill every snake I see from now on. Releasing these corns may not even introduce any pathogens that cause any mortality in the wild snakes. It will introduce genes to the area that would otherwise not be there, irreversibly altering the evolutionary process at work in the affected corn populations. I guess it's not as bad as habitat destruction though, so who cares right?

3. "Releasing them is better than euthanizing them."

I don't know why no one else posed this question yet since it seems like such common sense to me, but why are those listed as the only options? If a snake has kinks and you don't want it, put it on your table at a show free to a good home. There are plenty of kind-hearted people who will take in animals with minor defects like these. You're not gonna make any money freezing it or releasing it, so why not donate it to a good home? Also, if there's any genetic cause to these kinks, letting them spread their genes in the wild is definitely not going to do the native corn population any favors.

I'll summarize my position to make it very clear. There is nothing to gain from releasing these snakes, though it has the potential to cause many complications. You can focus on the word potential all you want and say there's no definite proof, and that may be true, but I still don't understand how it's worth the risk. Am I missing something or is the only payoff here the fact that a single individual finds it to be a convenient method of disposal for his unwanted snakes? Is that enough justification to risk the future of even a single population of wild snakes?

It's been said before, but I'll say it again: this is no kind of example to set for other hobbyists. This practice unquestionably alters the natural population dynamics as well as the genetic integrity of the surrounding populations. Whether or not these changes will have any lasting, damaging consequences is uncertain. Is finding a caramel on your driveway instead of a normal really worth the risk though?

It's clear to me that Rich has made up his mind and won't be changing it based on what I or anyone else has to say, but for those that are still on the fence or don't understand how this could hurt anything, I hope this has helped a little.

 

[ForkedTung]

as to fire ants - diotomaceous earth may work

Now, exactly what genetic changes have been wrought in corns? All I can say for sure are cosmetic ones - colors and patterns. As far as I know, (unless someone is line breeding for size) that is all.I guess you're not aware of the scaleless corns then, or the fact that hybridization and or intergrades exist.
Color and pattern differences have already been weeded out by nature. Evolution/via natural selection is an ongoing and ever changing process, there is no foreseeable end to it, So speaking as if cornsnakes are at an evolutionary standstill is incorrect.Any interbreeding will result in wild-morph corns, who harbor these recessive color genes (don't forget Tessera, a dominant pattern gene). The odd-colored F2 babies will likely disappear quickly. These "genetic aberrations" being released will have a really tough time harming populations in this way, as the only ones harmed will be themselves as they are culled by every predator around - How can you possibly know this.The point I was trying to make with my examples is that we don't know what will happen, we just don't know and as has already been pointed out there are no specific studies to refer to. The only thing we can say for certain about releasing CBB cornsnakes is that we don't know what is going to happen and if we don't know then maybe we shouldn't do it until we do know.even fire ants.
Releasing captive corns is, in many ways, more like throwing food out the door. Along with any pathogens they might be carrying, possible genetic defects like kinking and stargazing and "invisible" genes that we may have unknowingly bred right along with them
Any survivors? Maybe, but this is where nature excels - weeding out the unworkable, keeping the good stuff. Maybe some of these morph combos will work out. If that were to happen then a scenario similar to the one I presented could occur.
As I said, I'd love to revisit the site in 20+ years.
The argument about the danger of introducing new genes, I think, is faulty in this case.Right we are not introducing new genes. We are selectively breeding genes that have occurred naturally, crossing them with other mutations, hybridizing them, intergrading them, and then breeding all of those to an unnatural proliferation until the animal only resembles the original wild type in a purely physical way. There are no modified genes, as in many plants we currently consume.

Humans have been selectively breeding/ modifying flora and fauna for thousand of years. Are you familiar with corn? We've been selectively breeding (modifying) that for thousands of years, it was at first a mostly grass-like weed, not to mention the many other plants we've domesticated, and then of course there's the animals as well...

 

[Dinah]

Humans have been selectively breeding/ modifying flora and fauna for thousand of years. Are you familiar with corn? We've been selectively breeding (modifying) that for thousands of years, it was at first a mostly grass-like weed, not to mention the many other plants we've domesticated, and then of course there's the animals as well...

I asked a question about this a while back ago. And since plants where brought up, I want ask again to anyone who might know. How is this different from what people are *encouraged* to do with plants? I am not an expert on snakes or on oranges, but here is an example. If I go and buy an orange tree and plant it in my yard, it will flower and spread its genetics to the surrounding orange trees, thereby affecting the native population of orange trees in my area. Essentially I am releasing captive unnaturally occurring plant genes into my environment. Additionally orange trees as well as other plants can have diseases some of which in the case of orange trees I know for sure can be very devastating to the local population of orange trees. Yet despite what seems like a parallel to me between what Rich is doing and the tree example, one is apparently ok but the other is not. Tree planting is encouraged but what Rich is doing is outright condemned by some people.

As I have said in past posts I don't really have a position on this, I am not going to say I think one side is "right" or the other, because I am following this thread trying to learn about it, however this example seems like an obvious contradiction and certainly it would help if someone could explain it. Why is releasing captive genetics and possible disease from trees ok while releasing captive genetics and possible disease from snakes is not ok?

And that doesn't even start to cover the issue that corn snakes belong in FL where as many of the plants available to buy/plant do not belong in FL.