The whole post skated around the question, as in gave no real answers. No distances, no firm facts or opinions. In fact it would have been more meaningful to say, I don't know. This goes for Phils followup too.



Again, what you two said was, could be? some may?, others may not? different sizes, may or may not? different species, may or may not? etc.



The poster asked a specific question, to people, not to literature. I was named personally, but others included. This I believe means, give your experiences. Of cousre as a secondary consideration, citing related text is absolutely wonderful. But your experience is what is valuable here. Again, your experiences, not your paradigm(belief or confines), from what you think others wrote.



With that said, both you and Phil did not have real evidence for this question, only annodotal information, which is also suitable as long as you tell the reader that its annodotal. So while both of your followups were nice, they said little of help, is that true? or did I miss something?



For Phil, I absolutely agree with a couple things you said, snakes normally and habitually follow scent trails, their own and of members of their colony(as in your term, colonial). Neonates and adults do so. Its what they do and easily tested. And secondly, I agree with your term, colonial when you applied it to ringnecks. But I think it applies to most if not all species of snakes. There are differences like density and size. With larger species colonizing larger areas.(as suggested in literature you cited) I guess its depends on the distance you viewed it from. For instance, you can stand there and view a ringneck colony. Yet your standing in the middle of a kingsnake colony and under and in, a ratsnake colony. Its all about how you view your site. For our rattlesnake site, its easy to view it, we climb to a higher area(peak) and sit and discuss the colonies. From our view point, we can see the outer limits of our recaptures. Depending on which peak we climb to, we can view several colonies. I used to do this with Pyros as well. From these view points, you can start to see similarities and differences that may allow the colonies to be where they are. Please consider, I said, start to see. For you fellas, rent a helicopter, hahahahahaha, to many trees to see thru j/k. Consider, the distance you view from is important in judging or viewing a colony.



For Terry, I have to wonder about some earilier conversations. I suggested dens or hibernics were not about survival but more attuned to a reproductive behavior(hence not hibernation). Of course you flat fought that concept, tooth and claw. But now you expressed evidence of what I was talking about. With your massa's, you said, the adults(loyal to), moved to dens or hiber's or simply put, winter sites. Yet you found subadults still in the fields. Yes, you said this. I suggest you think about which individuals move to winter sites, dens/hiber's, I suggest, its the part of the colony that is planning on reproduction. So its not a hiber or dormant state, but a state and site to enhance reproduction. The other individuals stay in their foraging ranges and find different areas to winter. These individuals do indeed hibernate/brumate, by difinition. As they are staying dormant until suitable conditions arrive, for continued feeding and growing. Just something for you to think about. You mentioned you found a single individual under some buried logs in winter. You used that to verify your opinions on hibernation. I agree that individual was hibernating. But what about those that gathered in groups. Why did they go to a particular place and what are they doing there? Cheers FR

[ Show Entire Thread ]