Bangkok Herps

I'm planning on taking the Bangkok-Chiang Mai train in March, but our schedule leads to us having to land in Bangkok and get on the train same-day.

First off, is it really true that you can get tickets via email from State Railways of Thailand like seat61 says? Has anyone done it?

The next best option I see is 12go.asia - minor problems there are that the ticket is a few hundred baht more (not a big deal) and the trains available are limited.

Second question, how much time do I need to give myself between scheduled landing in BKK and scheduled departure from Hualamphong? I assume I would take the metro once I got off my plane, and we would have checked baggage. Is 3 hours enough leeway time? How about just 2 hours?

I will be in Chiang Mai from around March 20 to April 10. The timing of my trip is unavoidable.

When I last visited Chiang Mai several years ago in October/November, I had a fantastic time taking rickety hotel mountain bikes up and down Doi Suthep, as far as the summit. I was hoping to replicate that experience frequently this time around.

However, I've now been reading unfortunate news that Chiang Mai's air quality is horrendous in March.

So, what should I do? With absolutely no chance to have the trip at a different time, will I do okay just going up the mountain anyway? Or will I choke so badly on the smoke that it's just not worth it? Is there anything I can do (time of day, mask, etc.) to improve the experience?

Prostitution has been suppressed?

Can somebody enlighten me as to whether or not Soi Cowboy and Patpong are still in full flow everynight, with thousands of girls standing in the street half-naked and blatantly pouting at each and every passer by?

How many of those girls do you think are really being forced to be there?

I know some from small villages near me that come and go as they please.

When they need money, they work.

When they don't, they come home, for months or even years at a time.

Not exactly what I would call trafficking!

This isn't Kansas Toto!

Knowing anecdotal examples of people who weren't trafficked doesn't mean that no one else was. I have a friend who is a shrimp fisherman willingly. That doesn't prove that others aren't forced into it.

Even if 90% of the workers in a local started willingly, and 10% started via trafficking, that would be a horrific human rights situation. And I think the numbers for prostitution in Bangkok are far, far over 10%.

How did the girl start out? Was she underage and a fee was paid to her parents? That's human trafficking.

How did she get to Bangkok? Was she told falsehoods about the work she was going to do (either that she wasn't going for sex work, or lies were told about the nature of the sex work she'd be doing), and then didn't find out the truth until she got to Bangkok and was in a seriously vulnerable situation? That's human trafficking.

When she first arrived, was she told that she could not leave until she had worked off a certain amount of debt? Has that occurred at any time? Has there been any impediments to her free movement or choice to just get up and leave at any point? That's slavery.

The fact that some girls never faced that, or that some girls only faced that at one point but currently are doing it willingly because it's the life they know, doesn't change that a huge number of girls have faced trafficking at some point in their journey to the streets.

Right now new palm oil plantations are the leading cause of deforestation in Indonesia and Malaysia both.

Why is it they focus on palm oil. Oil can be made from rice....and there is plenty of rice at the moment. Maybe they need to refocus!

That is almost like asking why do we need chicken meat when pork meat is available. Yea it would work but what of all the people who prefer chicken. Not sure I can tell you what rice oil tastes like or how compatible it would be to palm oil but it would be a grain and palm is a vegetable based oil.

I don't remember all the details of the change but remember McDonalds changed the oil they used to make their fries ... if I recall it was early 2000s and they went from an oil with animal fat to a vegetable oil because of some issue with false advertising or something because they promoted the fries as vegetarian ... again not sure if I have the details right but bottom line the fries IMO are not nearly as good and addicting as they used to be (thankfully).

I am not sure why Palm oil is so popular but know a lot of people knock it for health reasons. Found this link that shows a little of just how popular palm oil is worldwide ... http://www.save-wildlife.com/en/our-work/save-the-forests/rainforest-deforestation-for-palm-oil-in-cameroon/why-is-palm-oil-so-popular

Like bggg says - Palm Oil is a horrificly destructive product for the environment. There's little more that you can buy that screams "rainforests were destroyed to bring you this" more than palm oil does.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/harvesting-palm-oil-and-rainforests/

http://news.mongabay.com/2014/0509-obama-palm-oil.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/earthpicturegalleries/8296131/Rainforest-is-destroyed-for-palm-oil-plantations-on-Malaysias-island-state-of-Sarawak.html

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/15/orangutans-fight-for-survival

It is true that oil palms produce oil more densely than some other oil crops. It is also true that they tend to be grown in areas with the most sensitive ecosystems, and only via the complete destruction of those ecosystems.

It just sounds a bit childish to me.

I'm more interested in the fact that the NYPD mostly stopped doing their jobs recently:

NY Post: Arrests Plummet Following the Execution of Two Cops

Even the Post, one of the most conservative papers out there, thought that just plain was not okay:

New York’s Finest have no bigger booster than The New York Post.

We understand what it must be like for cops to hear protesters calling for “dead cops” or likening police to the KKK. We appreciate how they must feel themselves under siege, especially after the cold-blooded executions of Officers Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.

And we know how distressing it must be to watch their mayor talk publicly about how he’s raised his son to fear the NYPD and at times seem to side with protesters rather than his own police force.

Of course, all they're doing is proving the narrative - that they've been arresting people they don't have to. In fact, chances are they've just been making the problems worse the whole time. In fact, others are pointing out that the police are actually stopping the exact problems the residents were complaining about, and that this unwittingly may be the exact thing we need:

The Post, which enthusiastically championed the NYPD during this year's turmoil, portrayed this slowdown in near-apocalyptic terms—an early headline for the article above even read "Crime wave engulfs New York following execution of cops." But the police union's phrasing—officers shouldn't make arrests "unless absolutely necessary"—begs the question: How many unnecessary arrests was the NYPD making before now?

Policing quality doesn't necessarily increase with policing quantity, as New York's experience with stop-and-frisk demonstrated.

Pamela Geller isn't exactly a good source for knowledge about Islam. Even the CPAC, a quite conservative group, banned her from their meetings. She called Grover Norquist a "member of the Muslim Brotherhood and secret Islamic agent". (For those who don't know, Norquist is a famous American anti-tax advocate and conservative activist. And a Methodist.)

She also thinks Obama is some sort of secret anti-American agent and posts pictures of him urinating on the American flag.

Man Manis was a mentally ill person. It was his lunacy that precipitated this incident. He could just as easily have been Catholic,Jewish or a Buddhist.

Not really. He may be mentally ill, but the same could be said of many Islamic terrorists who carry out attacks. If he was Catholic, Jewish or a Buddhist, his religion would tell him to not hurt other people. The Quran calls for violence against unbelievers and Mohammad Hassan Manteghi Bourjerdi was only too happy to oblige.

Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them"

One of many verses taken out of context by ignorant violent Muslims and ignorant Muslim-haters alike. Why did you chop off the first half of the verse? Hmmm...let's see what the actual verse says:

Quran 8:12 - "When your Lord commanded the angels, saying, 'I am with you, so make those who believe stand firm. I will instill fear in the hearts of those who deny the truth: so strike their necks and strike all their finger joints.'"

Yes, the verse is talking about something that happened past tense and involves God speaking to the angels, NOT a command God speaking to human followers of Islam. And the whole chapter is about events that happened in the midst of a war.

The incident in Australia, has cause the Islamist Groups to televise a statement condemning this action by one of their own....WHY?

Because they know they were given a "Fair Go"....and blew it.

My condolences go to the Families of the 2 Australians who gave their lives to help save other Australians....

Every Australian will remember that, as thats what makes Australia what it is...

They were given a "Fair Go" and blew it?

As if no White people have killed anyone in Australia this year.

Heaven help you if every White Australian was judged by the actions of the other White people when they came to that country. Muslims in Australia aren't 1% of the way to the killings and massacres and horrific racist that White people unleashed on the country.

Sorry to be so blunt. But we shouldn't go around stereotyping other groups of people when we have enormous logs in our own people's eyes.

Here's more on the reaction after 9/11:

Mr Karas' death was not the first. A 49-year-old Sikh petrol station owner was shot dead in Arizona "for no other apparent reason than that he was dark-skinned and wore a turban", said the county attorney.

In Dallas, a Pakistani Muslim was also killed in an attack that was apparently racially motivated.

Washington's Council on American-Islamic Relations has recorded more than 350 incidents of anti-Muslim harassment, while the United Sikhs in Service of America lists nearly 200 examples.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1553796.stm

It's not too unreasonable to expect some kind of anti-Muslim backlash in Australia. It's not fair but it does happen in the wake of such incidents.

Why is it not fair

If the muslim population does not come out onto the streets in their tens of thousands to protest Islams name being taken in vein and denouncing these acts in the name of Islam how do they expect people not to think that they are complicit and SUPPORT that these people are doing .

A guy danish guy drew a cartoon of their prophet with a bomb on his head as a turban and the whole Muslim population were out out on the streets all over the world burning flags shouting kill him I am talking hundreds of thousands of muslims from London to munich ALL OVER A CARTOON

Then again tens of thousands on the streets protesting Israels latest attack on the Palestinians and again there they are in their tens of thousands marching through the streets

Now lets look at the murder of Lee Rigby on the streets of London all in the name of Islam

NO MUSLIM protest on the streets

How about the 7/7 bombings

NO MUSLIM protests on the streets

THAT SENDS A MASSIVE MESSAGE WHERE THEIR ALLEGIANCES LIE and what is important to them

Cartoons

That's not true:

"British Muslim groups are organising marches and rally in memory of the soldier Lee Rigby, who died last week in Woolwich. A silent march will be held tomorrow afternoon from 5pm in Ilford, starting at Ilford Junction. A Facebook page for the event is here. A coalition of Muslim and anti-racist groups are organising a separate event for Friday afternoon, to be held in Woolwich."

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2013/05/29/british-muslims-to-hold-marches-in-memory-of-lee-rigby-woolwich/

Of course, with hundreds of anti-Muslim hate crimes being committed in the wake of the murder, it's understandable that most Muslims would just stay inside and keep a low profile in this situation.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/antimuslim-hate-crimes-soared-after-murder-of-soldier-lee-rigby-in-woolwich-9026977.html

Here's another related:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/young-uk-muslims-in-protest-at-islamic-terrorists.25351681

Racial hatred usually employs a simple, stereotypical approach. So if a Thai Muslim doesn't dress like a Muslim, no one will know that they're Muslim.

yes... however... if you are just a regular guy with arabic origin... it doesn't matter what religion you are... you are considered as a muslim anyhow.

I have three good friends who are brothers. They are Egyptian Coptic Christians and their father ran an arabic-language store in Los Angeles. One week after 9/11, three white guys walked into the store, murdered their father, and fled. It was just horrible.

For years all my Coptic friends insisted to all their relatives that they must plaster American flags and other patriotic symbols on their cars just so they wouldn't be mistaken for terrorists and killed.

While I'm NOT advicating all here carrying,,,, There IS something to the thoughts, that in areas of the States that allow carry permits,,, The crooks KNOW it's a possibility,, therefore, are less likely to commit a crime against someone,,, There's a saying in the States... "You meet the most polite people, in the parking lot of a gun shore",,,, There's a lot of truth to that,,,

It's a nice thought, but in practice it doesn't work out to the area being safer. States in the USA with high firearm ownership levels (like Alaska and the south) tend to have higher gun death levels. And homes with firearms are far more likely to have a gun death occur among a family member than homes without firearms.

The problem is, even if "maybe he has a gun" is a slight effect in some people's minds, it doesn't seem to have an actual impact on criminal behavior overall. And when a crime does occur, or when an argument starts, or a fistfight gets going, the action of someone pulling a gun tends to escalate rather than de-escalate the violence. Something that could have ended just with someone losing a wallet or getting a black eye ends with someone losing their life instead. Very few criminals, even armed ones, desire to commit murder - they usually just want to steal someone or beat someone up. But when an armed criminal sees a gun, he usually doesn't think, "Oh, I should go away now", he thinks "I've got to shoot this guy before he shoots me".

And, of course, criminals in regions with a high prevalence of guns are far more likely to end up with a gun themselves than criminals in regions with stricter gun laws. It's not nearly as easy to acquire a gun illegally as some people make it seem, and having an illegal gun puts someone in much higher risk of getting arrested when gun laws are strict, so criminals in developed countries with strict and well-enforced gun laws are much more likely to own guns than criminals in developed countries with loose laws.

And all that doesn't even count the increased prevalence of crime that happens when guns are accessible during elevated moments. My sister's good friend (a girl who I had known well in high school) was just murdered by her ex-boyfriend in a dramatic public shooting. He wasn't a criminal before he went over the edge, and if he hadn't had a gun, then he probably would have just ended up assaulting her before her friends pulled him off. But he already had a gun, and he was really upset, and in the heat of his emotions the worst case scenario occurred. A lot of people might get really angry or really depressed just for a few days or a few weeks, and the weapons they have easy access to during that time will determine a lot about what happens during that period.

The sooner that civilians are allowed to carry arms the better what is needed is a Thai NRA, no more punch ups.

More guns will equal more deaths by gun violence, domestic abuse and accidental firing. Thailand does not need the NRA which is the lobbying arm of the American gun manufacturers messing in their country. We Americans should not import this cultural defect to other countries.

Since all these crazy people on ice, yaba etc, usually have guns or other weapons. they use them to rob people and kill people. I wish I could buy a gun here in Thailand legally. I know I can buy one but not legally. Now that the Aussies had to give up there guns see what will happen!!! according to Yahoo news the murder rate in Australia has already gone up 3.5%. Now the innocent civilians can no longer protect themselves.. Hopefully this hostage deal in Sydney is an isolated incident but wait and see. Consealed permit in America is great and most of my friends either have it or agree with it. Come to my house and try something in America and you will get a hollow point surprise, right between the eyes.

Yeah, because people who "try something" do it right in front of you and wait for you to pull the gun out.

There is a far greater chance that someone in your own gun-owning household will be injured or killed by a gun (either by accident, suicide, or intentional killing) than that you will ever use it on a criminal. That's been demonstrated by actual numbers time and time again.

As for Australia...no idea where you get your numbers from. But they're wrong.

So what have the Australian laws actually done for homicide and suicide rates? Howard cites a study (pdf) by Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University finding that the firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides. That provides strong circumstantial evidence for the law's effectiveness.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/08/02/did-gun-control-work-in-australia/

That decade was 1996 to 2006, when homicide rates had fallen to 1.3 per 100,000 people, the 2nd lowest rate ever recorded in Australia. As of 2012 they'd now fallen to 1.1 per 100,000, the lowest rate ever recorded and less than a quarter of the USA's rate. Also the percentage of homicides that involved guns has dropped below 20%, matching the all-time low from back in the late 1940s.

Meanwhile in the USA, gun deaths have been steadily increasing and are soon set to surpass automobile deaths for the first time since statistics started. Maybe we're doing something wrong, eh?

http://www.aic.gov.au/statistics/homicide.html

List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

I agree both sides, the public/police and also the criminals should all be allowed to carry guns.

I seem to recal a similar argument in favour of an escalation in the number of nuclear weapons.

The policy was called Mutually Assured Destruction, more commonly recognised by its acronym MAD.

Criminals will carry guns whether they are "allowed to" on not.

Remember, they are criminals.

That is why violent thugs are the greatest supporters of gun control.

Removes a lot of the risk in the business plan.

That's funny, why is it that there are so many more gun murders in countries that have more guns? The criminals all carry at the same rates in all countries, so they should be using guns to kill people just as often in the low-gun nations (or the low-gun states) as in the high-gun naions, right?

So why is it that your little attempt at logic is actually proved false by every bit of data out there?

A lot of very unthought through comments about this subject. All are just someone's personal opinions, so here's mine. First and foremost , the Thai policeman used very poor jodgement by shooting at a petty thief in a crowded street, two, guns are only tools in the hands of a human being who is the final judge to make it work or leave it at rest, three I believe in the conceal carry laws to people who are trained and respect that as a very serious responsibility .

Would those concealed carry people get more training than the cops who are doing things like this? (Or shooting 12-year-olds playing with toy guns, etc.)

Exactly what training would you get that would make you safe, accurate, and effective when engaged in a firefight in a public area? And how do we know that those people will cause more harm than good when we give them a licence before ever once seeing them in such a scenario?

I'm not a fan of banning firearms. I own guns myself. But I think you have to be ignorant or self-deceptive to believe that guns make you safer. Every bit of evidence and real logic (not the convoluted stuff that scared people try to tell themselves to excuse their fears) says that the streets as a whole, and we as individuals, are safer when there's fewer guns.

I carry my firearms inspecific situations (hunting and target practice), with extreme care, and with the clear knowledge that the presence of my gun makes nearly every situation more dangerous than it was before, not less so. I would never take a gun into a dangerous situation because I know that it could only escalate the damage.

Thank you for your input. The interview is done, so I won't be needing any more. Though anyone who has good photos of pythons or other snakes or frogs in Bangkok could contact me through private message and I may use them on my website.

That's a Burmese Python kkerry. 2nd one I've heard of in Rangsit. That's interesting, because I only know of one sighting anywhere within Bangkok proper. (Unlike Reticulated Pythons, which are commonly found both within the city itself and throughout the surrounding area.)

Very cool AleG. That's an incredibly productive spot.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

Can't understand why anyone would want to interview you on a subject you clearly have no knowledge about. Hope it goes well.

So go on then David Attenborough: what are your qualifications for appearing as an urban wildlife expert? - a couple of links to YouTube wildlife vids would convince me - I can't speak for the other doubters,of course.

Ha - I'm not David Attenborough (not that that means anything exactly), but "clearly have no knowledge about" was just nonsensical.

Since two people have asked about qualifications now, I guess I'll give them, not that it should be too important. But...

I'm caught a wild python in Bangkok.

I'm familiar with a number of other python sightings in Bangkok.
I wrote the online field guide Bangkok Herps.
I'm in touch with several herpetologists who have shared information on pythons with me, some specific to Bangkok.

I've found wild pythons in several other Asian countries.

I wrote an article on finding reptiles and amphibians in urban settings in Asia, with a focus on Bangkok, for Herpnation magazine.
I'm involved with the Bangladesh Python Project research project in Bangladesh and wrote a four-part series about the project for the Living Alongside Wildlife blog.
I've published several new distribution notes on urban reptiles for the Herp Review journal, including one from Bangkok
I was asked by Nat Geo to help guide their "Python Hunters" for the Thailand-based episode of the show.

Okay, that last one isn't a real qualification, just bragging.

But the answer is that I have experience with urban wildlife, especially reptiles and amphibians and especially in Bangkok, I have some relevant personal experience and knowledge of pythons in Asia, I've spent a long time collecting information about reptiles and amphibians and am experienced in presenting it to the public. Is that good enough for a podcast?


http://bangkokherps.wordpress.com/
http://www.herpnation.com/issues/herp-nation-magazine-issue-9

http://www.livingalongsidewildlife.com/2014/09/snake-call-bangladesh-python-project.html

http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Michael_Cota/publication/263770486_Geographical_Distribution_Hemidactylus_parvimaculatus/links/0deec53bddedb77512000000

Thanks much metapod, Firemedic, and phazey!

I feel ashamed. I showed you my snake and you ignored me

Hahaha.

You might have missed my reply because it took me a little while to make it (I'm not on the internet most days). But I was interested because you posted a picture of a non-native python. Here's what I wrote on the other thread:

"Kurnell, that's a Green Tree Python in your photo. They are found in Indonesia, but not Thailand. Maybe an escaped pet? Or was your story and the picture two separate incidents?"

So the snake escaped from Indonesia and slithered all the way to Bangkapi?

Nah, I'd say that any sort of accidental introduction of a wild snake is very unlikely, even though it does happen from time to time. Much more likely is that someone in Bangkok had a pet green tree python and it either escaped or they released it. Coincidentally, the most recent post on my blog deals with someone releasing a bought snake in Bangkok.

http://bangkokherps.wordpress.com/2014/10/25/snakes-in-the-market/

It's nice to clear up a mystery!

From the 1st to the 4th, what was the time period over which the geese were eaten?

Can't understand why anyone would want to interview you on a subject you clearly have no knowledge about. Hope it goes well.

So here's your apparent question - this man was specifically chosen to take part in an interview about pythons in Bangkok...why?

I'll assume that you're a smart, logical person. Which means that if you are failing to understand something, it's probably because you lack pertinent information.

In this case, the information you lack (my knowledge of and experience with pythons and urban wildlife in general) is clear. So since that is so clear, I'm confused as to why you came in so hostile?

Thanks for the reply metapod.

I feel ashamed. I showed you my snake and you ignored me

Hahaha.

You might have missed my reply because it took me a little while to make it (I'm not on the internet most days). But I was interested because you posted a picture of a non-native python. Here's what I wrote on the other thread:

"Kurnell, that's a Green Tree Python in your photo. They are found in Indonesia, but not Thailand. Maybe an escaped pet? Or was your story and the picture two separate incidents?"

I asked this question on the pets forum, but I realized that it might be good to put it here. A little more than a week from now I'm giving an interview about pythons in Bangkok for a podcast on urban wildlife. To prepare, I'm looking for a bit more information from other Bangkok residents.

This is what I'm interested in:

Have you ever seen a wild python in Bangkok?
Approximately what part of the city, and what was the area like nearby?
Was it close to a canal, park, or green space?

How big was the python, and what was it doing?
What did you do?

Answers to any or all of those questions would be welcome. Thank you!