Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I am not a herpetologist or vet or any sort of educated person so take my comments for what they are worth. I do not understand the threat of captive produced snakes harboring some parasite or whatever that could harm a wild snake if establishing a release program. I certainly can understand a wild caught bringing something into a captive population. The captives have to be a cleaner bunch than what’s out in the woods. It often amazes me the condition of some wild caught parasite ridden, scared old boy has survived and thrived out there in such condition- you know what I mean. The captive produced are practically pristine compared to those wild things, aren’t they? What is this threat that captives harbor? Could someone please explain to me?

If you have read my posts, you will see an overlaying tone. That is, choices of temps and moisture levels. And more choices of all things.

Snakes in nature spend their lifes constantly making choices. From T&H(temp and humidity) to soical, consumed energy, absorbed energy, predator avoidance, and many more. They manage their life, using varying conditions and varying support.

yet in captivity you put them in a box(little, no choices) and offer them the most average of conditions. You know, one condition fits all.

The reason I bring this up with your queston is, captives develop chronic immune system problems and carry pathogens that only the weak in nature carry. So yes, there are common captive pathogens. Will these effect wild healthy animals, who knows. I do not think so, AT THIS TIME.

That AT THIS TIME, is very important. We do not know what will occur next and how that will effect nature. So indeed its a very good practice to not return captive snakes into wild populations.

Next, from a bioligical point of view. Once you remove a snake from nature, ITS DEAD. Nature considers it gone(dead) it then reacts with that approach. Other animals replace its presense. Just like if a predator consumed it. Others will take over its shelter, its feeding area, etc.

So reintroducing is upsetting the natural balance. I wonder what it would be like if people came back from the dead?

A stupid analogy, You live somewhere, a town, city, etc. What if there were no laws. None at all. Wait, there are laws, but those laws stated it is legal to kill. Not just other animals, but other people. So how would society function, if towns became a tribe. In big cities, the Hoods were suppose to kill members of other hoods and cities and towns.

You see, thats nature. So nature is designed to quickly replace the dead.

So the problem is, you think your captured snake is fine, while nature thinks its dead. ITS DEAD, nature wins.

So I say, if your going to remove an animal from nature, I least have the nads to except the fact that you killed it, as far as nature is concerned. Then take responsibility for your actions. That is, do not take(the term take= to remove, to kill) an animal thinking all will be fine because your going to return it. Its not good, its one of those two wrongs do not make a right.

How about this, I work on several field studies, one is a pit tag study(15yrs), in this study we have to handle the animals. We do so in the field and never remove them from the exact area of capture. We lose 65% of those, "immediately. I also do two studies(27yrs), that I do not touch the animals. There is about a ten percent or less, over each year. So, even simply touching them has a huge impact. What do you think removing them for an extented period does??????

Also, people do not have the brains god gave a stone. Most do not consider, genetics. In nature, all populations are purified, that is become homozygous. They have done so over thousands of years, tens of thousands. Releasing animals into "different" populations upsets this very very quickly. So for the future taxo and genetic boys out there, its not a good idea. I hope this helps, its only a start. Cheers

Interesting points. Do you think that in your 2 studies that maybe the pit tagging is responsible for the decline of the animals you handle ? I dont see how just regular gentle handling can bring about the demise of a snake but on the other hand jamming an electronic device into it seems to maybe put it over the edge lol. Some animals do fine upon introduction just look at Florida with introduced Burmese Pythons and Iguana's obvioulsy nature might consider them dead but Nature also seemed to have made room for return (albeit an alien type return lol) My point is just because somthing sat in a tank for years doesnt mean it wont thrive if released into the wild...its a fact some do. Its more obvious in alien type species bacuase they stick out like a sore thumb but my guess is native animals can do fine as well. Dont get me wrong Im not pro release CB specimens but just pointing out its not always a death sentence to re-introduce.
-----
Big Jack Bronson

I am not sure your examples are related in any way. Burmese are feral or invasive or what have you. They do not have an exsisting balanced ecosystem. That is, they are invading a disturbed habitat or a natural habitat without exsisting competition.

I assume people here are talking about releasing animals, WHERE THOSE ANIMALS NATURALLY OCCUR, Not cornsnakes in Sydney Harbor.

What most here and most biologists forget is, animals have behavior. The degree of behavior is for US to try and understand. Not simply tell animals what we think they are(behaviorally) In a thread below, I posted a pic of rattlesnakes behaving is some behavioral way. It appeared one was seeking protection from another. Then others posted wonderful pics of many types of snakes in many different behavioral situations. These situations appear behavioral and possibly social.

The above paragraph indicates snakes have behaviors, of which many we do not understand. Can you tell what those snakes were doing? They all had a different story.

So I ask you, what would you do if an ugly giant tugged on the roof of your house and ripped the roof up and grabbed you and stuck a radio or some device in you. Then stuck a probe up your bum and in your mouth and palpated your gentitals. hahahahahahahahahahaha Sir, If they released you, my bet is and I would bet a lot, you would move and move quickly. Now, what were you asking? why would a snake leave its area if captured.

Now consider snakes are relatively safe, once they established a known(home) area. They know where and when to go. Most(over 95%) perished before finding such a place. When you chase them from their home area, you have put them back into a 95% chance of perishing rate. Kinda like you walking in the back streets of Bagdad, you can do it, you just do not want to do it to often.

In the past, biology taught behaviors such as fight or flight. That is, an animal will either fight an opponent or flight(run) from an opponent. When we break their defenses, and handling however gentle, is without question, breaking their natural defenses, they must either defend themselves or leave. To break their defenses is for them to lose the fight. You picking them up, takes them out of their own control and are not AT YOUR MERCY. put yourself in that position and again see what you do.

What we find is, 65% leave their home range and disappear(die), immediately. 30% are tolerant enough to stay in their home range, but constantly move about to avoid recapture. 5% are dumb as a stone and will return to be recaptured. But, they are only so dumb, they will not tolerant constant recapturing. They will eventually leave.

For you casual folks. You would never know, you turn a snake loose and thats the end of it. Studies have clearly shown that removing snakes over a few hundred yards, critically increases their rate of failure. In otherwords, relocated snakes(over that distance) have a near 100% failure rate within a year.

When folks such as yourself ask me this. You forget you have an understanding of your intentions. But you forget, the animal does not. It only thinks of you as a giant predator. You have to prove your a gentle giant and that takes time. You have books to read about them, they do not know you from wily coyote or Bob the bobcat.(bobcats have a behavior of chewing on the heads and butts of snakes, then rubbing all over them then leaving them)

For us who go back to see what the effects are, its not pretty. Cheers

I used to catch animals and keep them for a few days or weeks, feed them a few times, and then release them back where I found them. I felt pretty good about myself. But two events made me see the error in what I was doing. One was a garter snake that lived on my neighbors property. I saw him on a regular basis for nearly 2 years on top of a wood pile or the adjacent stone wall. One day I caught him to show my neighbors kids and gave them a tank to take care of it for a few days. When we released it a few days later, directly into his old hole, that was the last time I ever saw him.

Another time I caught a water snake that I had seen every day in a debris pile beneath a bridge. I caught him to photograph him and put him back the next day. I never saw him again either.

After that I stopped keeping animals that I found. Its very interesting to hear your data. I think that this type of information really needs to be made available to more hobyists. So many well meaning people catch and release animals and this is encouraged by many biologists, nature centers, etc. Its a real shame.

I once caught a ribbon snake and released it in front of my house.
It was there until I moved from that house. I spent many mornings watching it chase anoles through the shrubs on the walkway.
Jason
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

I hear what you are saying but Im hung up on this point. If a Burmese is realeased in Florida and they tend to thrive and even breed from some accounts but if released in its native habitat the Burm wouldnt thrive ? That to me seems illogical. Whats the difference ? Same with Tokay Gecko's or Cuban Tree Frogs or any of the other untold amount of alien species that have taklen hold in Florida. My point was maybe the snakes that do get loose or are released do live and do fine but its just impossible to find them or tell them from ones that never left.Im trying to understand so maybe you can explain why these invaders do very well in the wild but re-introduced animals in their own habitat do poorly ??? Would these same invasive species do poorly if released in their own habitat ? If yes why FR why ?

You have data backing your point but also you are doing minor surgery to them so that may make a difference and taints your observation in regards to the untouched animals. I know of a guy in Wisconsion that tags Bullsnakes and he has been tracking and finding the same ones for years. I dont know about how many he hasnt been able to find though so that number may be large ??? Also wouldnt your data showing tagging and doing whatever you do to an animal you catch for study is harmful to the population ? Maybe thats not such a good idea ? What are your thoughts and do you plan to still tag animals with the feeling it may be wiping out a large percentage ? Also sounds like you have some cool things going on studying snakes must be a facinating job. What snakes are you studying ?
-----
Big Jack Bronson

The reason a native snake would have a hard time surviving if released into it's own habitat is because it's own kind will be competing against it in it's exact micro habitat. This assumes that the population it is released into is already at maximum carrying capacity leaving the newly introduced individual having to fight for a spot.
A snake like a Burmese released into Florida would have the advantage over natives because they are larger and can take suitable homes away from local snakes and because the local prey base has not adapted or evolved a defense against them. Some nonnative species will not survive because of improper climate or for other reasons but those that have become established such as Bullfrogs in CA do so because they possess some advantage the local species don't have.

Thanks that makes some sense. Appreciate the explanation.
-----
Big Jack Bronson

What your missing is competition. Each animals FILLS an area, it uses up the resources in that area. When a habitat is mature, all available resources are in use. Any added individuals will be driven off or drive off a resident animal.

Snakes do live in colonies, but also understand snakes of the same species are not members of that colony and drive them off, kill them, etc. And no sir, its not size dependant. Its status dependant. Smaller individuals and even females will drive off other animals.

How about spending a day or ten, watching anoles of any type. They are in constant motion of maintaining a balanced population. Adding unwanted animals indeed upsets the balance. Cheers

First off, I find the fact that the majority of pit-tagged animals died off quickly to be an interesting piece of data. I've wondered about the survival of an animal thats been removed from its habitat for a couple days and then reintroduced. A lot of herpers will do this in order to take good pictures...

What if instead releasing wild-caught snakes back into the wild, you released their just-hatched offspring back into the same locale the adults came from? I've thought about doing this with kingsnakes that I've collected in close proximity of each other. I figure they wouldn't have any more trouble find their own niche than snakes that hatched there naturally, would be fairly disease free, and coming from the same genetic stock, shouldn't introduce any counterproductive genes. Of course, if they make it to adulthood, thats probably a good enough test for counterproductive genes.

We do not remove them from the exact spot of capture. We process them on the spot. We have been doing this study of 16 years. So we may have a different information set then many short term studies. I would not do this study if we had to remove them.

Let me also say, we have many that have been recaptured many many many times and have gone thru many reproductive events.

A funny example is a large male Willards, we recaptured him many times, on his ten year anniversary he was found 18 inches from his original capture.

We have five small adjacent canyons, Not a single individual has moved from one canyon to the other. When they disappeared, they simply disappeared. We originally started with three canyons, but added two more just to see if we could find individuals wandering away.

Also of note, we have found gravid females in every month of the year, in some stage or another.

There are many interesting numbers, such as, we normally find 30 to 50% previously tagged animals. Cheers

....interesting facts.i stated elsewhere recently that "'mother nature' usually tends to successfully weed out/'deal with' the worst we throw at her,with the likely exceptions of complete destruction of habitat"....on the same note(but maybe a smaller scale),the same could be said for localized extirpation of a species(success of reintroduction attempts is debatable/remains to be seen)which brings me back to the topic.....what comes to mind when reading FR's post is a friend of mine-this guy admittedly 'spends way too much time in the woods' to borrow his own phrase-and he makes a point of GENTLY prodding with a walking stick any rattlesnakes he finds out in the wild,be it anywhere at a den,on the crawl through the woods,etc. until they move away/take cover...i of course asked him why he did so,and he said it's to discourage them from getting too comfortable/accustomed to human approach(lots of poachers/rednecks/punks with guns,etc. in his neck of the woods).....i could definitely see his point but had some doubts at the same time;some well known authors/biologits have stated that repeated touching/picking up/'molesting in any manner'(perhaps even repeatedly coming within their sight??) over an 'extended period of time' has been shown to disturb the snakes enough to cause them to relocate/abandon the use of a den site...but to be fair,i have myself observed-as well as some gathered thru 'personal communication'-data that disputes this(i know of dens that have been actively used for over thirty years,not that 30 years may seem all that long to the species crotalus horridus in relation to the length of their current time on the planet,lol)....both theories seem credible/make sense on paper;i would like to hear what FR and others' experience about this has shown..........

-----
"with head raised regally,and gazing at me with lidless eyes,he seemed to question with flicks of his long forked tongue my right to trespass on his territory" Carl Kauffeld

The problem and beauty of behavior is, its not science. Which is why biologists should not comment on it. hahahahahahahaha harsh hey.

Biology seems to be about mechanics. Its how something is made. Its suppose to react in a consistant manner, like, 1 5=6. Its suppose to happen every time you add it up. But when 1 6= something other then 6, somethings wrong.

With behavior, its not the same. 1 5=6 or 8 or 1 or 0, the result will depend on stimulus or combinations of stimulus. Plus the previous history of adapted stimulus. Fortunately with behavior 1 6=(0-8), a normal range of results, but the results are subject to change with a change in stimulus. Now the problem, we are added stimulus. Does our presences in the equation effect the result? the result is yes, but that result is subject to change.

In your example, the touching of snakes at a den(simply put). If you touched every individual you saw, would it cause change in their expressed behavior, the answer is simple, YES. But over time, this stimulus would become normal and behavior would return back to normal. This is the beauty of behavior, it has a base and extremes. Simply put, individuals will be lost, but the local population will adapt and continue. The population will not treat this poking as normal.

What I have found, and surely because its behavior, there is ALWAYS a range of responses. If you allow a snake to defend itself with its own behaviors, it will not change its basic range. If your break its defensive behaviors, it will move. Its simple, you defeated it. It has to move as its behavior failed.

Also its about degree, seeing you will cause behavior changes/usage, but to a minor degree, you removing them and installing radios(surgery) will cause drastic changes in behavior. It has to, its science. Just a different kind of science.

In your case, thirty years of of humans impacting a single site, has indeed caused changes. Such as individuals with extreme behavioral sets will leave, other individuals will stay. After thirty years, you've eliminated the extremes. That is, the population has adapted to the presences of humans, as it would a skunk or minors cat or harris hawk, etc. But bull dozers, thats another story. Cheers

Of course, theres more!

Theres suppose to be, a plus, between the one and the fives. My computer sucks. Cheers

I think your 65% loss rate is due to the stress of pit tagging.
If there was a less invasive way to track them I think the mortality rates would be much lower. The first tracking devices were the size of D cell nbatteries and that must have caused much of the mortalitiy of early studies.

Captive snakes are exposed to a wide variety of pathogens that wild snakes never experience. Most people who keep kings also keep other snakes. Maybe boas and pythons. Boas and pythons can carry pathogens that captive kings could build up an immunity to, but would kill wild individuals. Even if someone only kept kingsnakes, a similar scenario could happen - maybe a Florida king could carry a pathogen that's lethal to wild Cal kings. In nature these two animals would never meet.

Reptile deaths have occurred on a cross-species level. There have been several cases of individuals attempting to keep green iguanas and box turtles in the same enclosure - only to wind up with dead iguanas the next day. Box turtles can carry pathogens that very quickly kill iguanas. That's one thing we do know. How many things DON'T we know?

You also need to consider "genetic pollution." Perhaps a wild population of desert Cal kings has evolved specific adaptations to survive in their microclimate. By releasing captives into their environment, you would dillute the characteristics that took years to evolve and potentially reduce the survivorship of offspring between the released captives and wild snakes, thereby damaging the population.

There's a heck of a lot that we do not know about snakes. One thing we DO know is that there have been very few (if any) successful "reintroduction" programs.

Tim

Third Eye

"There's a heck of a lot that we do not know about snakes. One thing we DO know is that there have been very few (if any) successful "reintroduction" programs."

I can name a few: California Condor, Mauitrus Kestrel, Black-footed ferret, Guam Rail, Grew Wolf. Also what are all those fish hatcheries doing, and have been for over 20 years.
I would like to see the evidence of releasing captive born native animals having detrimental effect. Where is the evidence? I call BS. All you people are stating is thoery.
I will agree that the "study effect" that FR described is a concern, but that is a different situation all together. Please, how many times have you brought in a WC snake and it died after being exposed to your CB counterparts? Another thing, if as FR said, your CB caged animals are immune suppressed how are they capable of fighting off a disease that the wild healthy snakes cannot? None of this makes sense to me. The last thing I would like to add, if some animal aquired disease resistance and is able to pass that characteristic to wild snakes how is that a bad thing even if half of the population does not survive? Do you know how evolution works? Why do we humans think that we are so separate from nature? Its funny, I have a friend who is way into plants (PhD candidate in Botany and ecology) I asked him what he thought about hybrids and he said "hybidization makes the world go round". Why are animal people so nieve? Why don't we want to allow nature to change? Its kinda like some fish people who don't like hatchery fish because they are different. Well my response is "I want to have fish in the river", the purists would rather preserve something that is being selected out by nature, and they will be left with nothing. When everything about environment is changing, how can we expect the fona not to?
Cheers,
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

I don't know about the other species you mention but California Condors are far from saved. There are a few that appear to be surviving but I don't think any have even been know to have bred in the wild and had their baies survive.
Fish farms are not a good comparision as they are managed and kept going by humans.
It is thought that the repiratory problems currently seen killing wild Desert Torises may have been from captive releases.
As was said a captive snake can become a carrier for nonnative diseases and still have no symptoms in captivity due to being kept in ideal conditions. It may even be released into a population and survive and the population may survive. But diseases can have outbreaks and who is to say 20 years down the line there could be a harsh year, too cold, too dry, etc. that pushes the snakes enough that this latent disease blooms and causes a massive die-off. That is why in most if not all states it is illegal to release captives without a permit, because we just cannot say what will happen in the long run.

None of those reintroduction programs that you listed are SNAKE reintroductions - which was my point.

Tim

That was my point as well. Can you name any unsuccessful SNAKE reintroduction programs? That is why all those reasons are crap. There is no data. All you are stating is theory. Fact is that true epidemics caused by disease are extremely rare in nature. That is because genetic diveristy is much greater and population denisities are much lower than domesticated ones. Think how closely animals and plants are to eachother in captivity. That allows disease to run rampant. This is not the case in nature. There is a lot of buffer in the wild to prevent that. All I am saying is when someone shows me good data to support this THEORY, then I will consider its validity until then it means nothing to me.
Jason
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

Wow,
Your lack, or unwillingness, to consider the "theory" of disease transmission in captive released reptiles is mind boggling (or is it mind numbing?). While there may be lower populations densities in wild versus captive populations all snakes LIKE TO BREED and this drive leads to them eventually coming into contact. Seems to me if I remember correctly that there is a bit of bodily fluid transmission during the act of copulation (or has it been that long?). Could this possibly be a risk factor in disease transmission??????? Some species share den sites during brumation in such numbers that it kicks the crap out of captive population densities. Anyone that has ever seen hibernacula will attest to the occasional odd species being present (this odd species that may behave abnormally, especially after having lived a cb existence, could be loaded with a variety of funky contagion). I'm sure with a bit more effort you/I/anyone could come up with many more scenarios that might "enlighten" you to a new understanding (one must have an open mind to become enlightened however). And as far as buffers reducing the effects of rampant disease, could YOU possibly show some evidence supporting this claim. If you do I would be happy to look up and offer a variety of cited sources that counter that theory. Lastly, the ability to detect the exact extent of damage to a wild population will never be known and that is why YOU SHOULD ALWAYS ERR ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION.

and don't even get me started on gene pool dilution.............

I hate to compare reptiles to humans, but we have to look no further than the annihalation of the Native Americans by diseases introduced by the Europeans as an example. The "civilized" Europeans brought the diseases of their big cities with them (measles, smallpox, syphillus, etc.). The Native Americans had no immunities to these exotic diseases and their numbers plummeted.

Our "civilized" captive bred snakes may carry diseases and parasites from which they have some immunity. Wild populations have no immunity from these problems, and could quickly die out if an exotic disease were to be introduced through a captive bred snake.

Not to mention what others have said about outside genes mixing with the genes of a local population that has been evolving in isolation for many generations.

In many states it is legal to kill your wild caught snake, but illegal to release it back into the wild. When you think about it, it makes sense.

I'm sorry if this has been answered, the forum is way too slow for me to check all responses.

The problem is *exotic* pathogens that do not already exist in the wild population, and may not even be known to science.

Kind of like how small pox had a devestating impact on native north americans.

For example - to the best of my knowledge, IBD does not exist in wild Rubber and Rosy Boa populations. If we released rubber and/or rosy boas that were infected, we could introduce it to the wild populations.

I believe there are documented cases of diseases entering wild population as a result of release programs. I believe it has happened with the California Desert Tortoise and with a species of rattlesnake.

Also, the fungus decimating frog populations world wide probably came from South Africa, carried by the African Clawed Frogs that were used as inexpensive pregnancy tests.
-----
3.3.5 L. getula californiae
1.0 L. getula nigrita
1.0 Boa constrictor constrictor (suriname, fostering/rescue)
2.1.2 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata

Thanks to all for the response so far, but as I stated when I started out I lack education so please could you name these mysterious pathogens? Is this some old wives tale being passed around endlessly as fact or a bunch of bull? I think this is all a scare tactic or something until I hear some actual named disease or something that is fact. I would like to hear from others- do you feel a captive born (bred in wild but born in captivity) has shown more vigor and immunity than captive produced (from complete captive breeding)? Better growth rates or feeding response or whatever from wild bred/captive hatch? My personal experience is anecdotal, just like your response will be, but I think the wild produced are usually smaller, eggs are smaller, babies are more delicate, etc, where is all this coming from that wild is somehow better? I think not.

What species are you talking about when you say that captive born specimens are healthier or somehow better than wild specimens? I have studied wild populations of rattlesnakes since the 1970's. I have also worked with several of the same species in captivity and bred them through several generations. My experience has shown me that we can't scratch the surface of excellence in captivity in comparisons to wild caught individuals. Wild specimens grow faster, behave more consistently among cohorts, yet will behave differently than their captive counterparts (even if these captives were removed from the same locality). Healthy breeding wild populations of snakes are not hampered by parasites (they may have them but they are controlled behaviorally and physiologically). Wild animals that are found with parasite loads are outcasts, sick, aged, or whatever, but they are no longer part of the breeding healthy part of the population. They may even have been "socially" stressed out of the group. I have spent the better part of my life (and still do) trying to come up with a captive set up that would yield natural normal wild behavior -- not just successful reproduction -- normal social group activity patterns... I have not come close. And rattlesnakes are easy....

A healthy captive reproduced baby snake that has been kept free from exposure to parasites and other non-welcome entities is a good accomplishment from a husbandry captive breeding point of view. That same animal has no business being released into the wild as it is not socially or behaviorally prepared for the adjustments it would have to make to have a chance of survival.

In the future, after lots of way more in depth study on snake behavior, there may be a time when captive reintroduction will be a useful tool... And there are some examples that show promise when there was no existing population to re-introduce into (Aruba Island rattlesnake as an example). This is a very different example than re-introducing captives into existing self-maintaining populations.

Frank said it best: captives are dead to nature. There is much to be learned from studying captives, and they yield us great joy from so many different aspects, but please, keep them in the cage until we really know what we are doing.

Thanks for posting such an interesting question. Cheers. Hugh

I really wanted to know the names of the evil pathogens that is the basis for the opinion that there is a threat to attempt a reestablishment program. Still think it’s bunk. I do see there is much negativity at the mere suggestion of it, and have to wonder why. I personally think the key difference in vigor and health, or the things you give the edge to in the wild is “sunshine”. The sun is a great germ killer. A snake kept in a cage is exposed to more dried ureates and feces, even in what we consider a clean cage, than a wild snake. I think that is the root of all captive woes. Too many germs, stress, lack of good exchange of air and sunshine. Wild snakes probably never touch their own feces, let alone live in it, breath the dust and spores of it, etc. I believe the most vigorous wild snake can quickly succumb to unsanitary captive conditions. I equally believe a vigorous captive produced snake can thrive in a suitable natural area. I’m not arguing it, just enjoying the info the question is bringing out, thanks to posts like yours. Thanks everybody!

I think what most are saying is that we don't know what pathogens could be in our captives and what they could do if introduced to wild specimens. There are thousands of pathogens that have probably not even been discovered yet and bacteria and diseases can mutate very quickly.

Well, I can't speak for all snake species, but I have watched many different individuals, pairs and groups of rattlesnakes in the wild for years. And on occasion, although I have not done this for many years because the results were the always the same, but on occasion I tore up refuges of known breeding pairs or groups to see where they lived out of sight.... When you get down to home base, be it in rock piles or other animals burrows, they live in a mix of sheds, feces, urates and whatever substrate is there too. In the wild no one cleans up after them. If you are healthy this is not a problem. Want to have fun? Set up one of your cages exactly the same on two ends -- same heat options, cool options, light options, substrate, moisture, etc.... draw an imaginary line down the middle and don't clean one half. See where they go after time.

Almost all mammals piss and mark territories with feces... Bears sleep on their own turds.... Birds, well they are birds, and they mark everywhere... heck some build nests out of their own excrement... They don't get sick from it. Why should herps?

Oh yeah, after I dug their homes up, I put everything in their refuge back as close to exactly the way I found it as I could... And with rare exception, the residents were never seen there again.

You and Frank have some of the most interesting posts here. I suspect that these refuges also drain well, hence the sheds and fecals dry up quickly. I also wonder if water that drains through pine needles and possibly other plants that have antibactirial properties also helps sanitize these refuges. I have often wondered why one outcrop can harbor so many snakes and another outwardly similar one has few if any. I often suspect that underground seeps providing year round moisture and temperature regulation and drainage properties are as much a factor as sun exposure.

a Thought, snakes and particularly kingsnakes, but most if not all snakes, live only in well draining areas. Consider, they will visit, tolerate, hunt, swim, soak in non draining areas, but do not live in them. As in, keep a watersnake wet and see what happens.

Trunk snakes and relatives and sea snakes are exceptions. Cheers

Ophidian paramyxovirus effects Crotalids. I have seen it wipe out half of a lab colony. It came in on a pair of Cerastes cerastes and killed twenty or more snakes in a month or two. The vipers seemed unaffected by it, but the rattlesnakes didn't do well at all. I believe the origin of the virus was europe and it wiped out large colonies of Fer-de-lance in the mid 70's. That is one virus I know of, but how would it affect wild populations? Usually epidemics don't occur in wild populations unless genetic diversity is low.
Jason
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

I don't know of a released snake killing off a population with a pathogen yet, but the Desert Tortise on the west coast had it's population decimated by one. Respitory infection I believe.

The issue of what pathogen has done it is not the right one, but which pathogen could do it is. There are only a few really bad pathogens so far in the hobby but that is plenty. IBD in boids and crypto in colubrids come to mind, but in both cases the common answer is destroy your collection if you get it and hope that you didn't sell or trade any animals that carried the pathogen. It is kind of like finding out you have a STD, you are supposed to call everyone you sold to and tell them to get tested

If you go ahead and release a clutch, and then find out after you did, that you had crypto in your collection then what?? The few cases of reintroduction that have been done have been highly supervised with many vet checks. If you try it on your own, you could do more harm than good.

I wanted to breed Indigos for release when I first got back into snakes, when I was 20, and I found all the info against the practice stupid until I had the chance to talk to some people I respected. They took the time to explain it to me. It is a bad idea to ever release any snake once it has touched your snake bag. Period. Every step beyond that gets worse and worse. I do find it funny when all the non-collectors start talking crap after they post their posed pics from the morning after the snake hunt when the photo subjects have spent the night in their bags. What harm have they done? Or for that matter the field biologist that use the same restraining tools on multiple populations. You can take this idea as far as you want.

All that said, I know I have done some things mentioned above that put the animals I love at risk, but you live and you learn... or at least you are supposed to. As FR and Hugh have stated, touching a wild snake can alter its behavior and often cause its death. I have heard this from many sources besides these two, but for some reason the practice of tagging snakes is still the most popular. But then how far can you take the findings of biologist when they are studing animals that they have changed the behavior of???

Enough for now

Jason

Also, common captive gram-negative bacteria found in all captive colonies, is not found in many wild populations.

This brings my point of all captives being in some stage of stress.

Or simply behavioral limitations. Wild snakes seek heat when compromised, we limit the heat a captive can obtain. Also radio tagged snakes seek more heat then non radio tagged snakes. Its my GUESS that they treat a radio like a tumor or other injury. Cheers and this is fun.

Reestablishment is not only doable, I say it is a mustdoable.
If there were a volunteer program set up with a herp society in Florida, where qualified member keepers were allowed to keep a rack of indigos and give up a form of tithe back for reestablishment we could produce enough indigos to have their threatened status removed. If we could establish the protocol for captive production of acceptable animals we could make developers actually fund a breeding program. The bottom line is that the indigo would become a common species and it’s survival would be assured instead of the current management which insures it’s eventual demise. Maybe the folks on Gassparilla would welcome the indigos as a natural way to combat the invasive iguana there? Might make a perfect testing ground for an isolated repopulation. I think you would see the snakes instantly acclimate to the wild and they would thrive and survive. Maybe they would be slightly different, perhaps harbor additional immunities. I don’t buy into the notion that they are not going to be as good or better. Nature’s way has always been adapt, evolve or die. The natural population is the true living dead, not the ever adapting captives.

Re-introduction of Indigos has been tried since the 70's without success. There have also been attempts to re-introduce pine snakes in New Jersey and Louisiana. In the Lousiana case, 18 snakes were released and tracked. After three years, only one snake had acclimatized to it's environment, most of the others quickly fell victim to predadation.

The population of indigo snakes in Florida would naturally increase if there were enough suitable habitat. Over collecting may have hurt some local populations but habitat destruction is the real monster. Florida is being cleared and developed at an unbelievable pace. Huge expanses of indigo habitat are gone for good. In almost all cases the key to healthy populations is not reintroduction programs, it's the preservation of suitable habitat.

How will we ever know, but I highly doubt one in eighteen naturally hatched snakes makes it three years. Since they will reproduce in eighteen months or so, I would have considered that a major success. I say lets do a hundred next time. Indigos reportedly utilize a territory of 1000 acres. That makes them a tuff critter to find suitable habitat for in all but the places you can still find them. What is wrong with then having an equal population in captivity in the same range where they would have existed if not for the habitat loss? I have a neighbor that has a collection of orchids in her backyard you would not believe. I bet there are more in her one yard here in the city than ever existed in my neighborhood going back to the Jurrasic period. What’s wrong with there being twelve indigoes living in my neighborhood right now, in my snake room? Why must they be extinct here? When is non-existance preferred and who is deciding?

?

Question.

To re-established a species in an area that they are exstint from is different then releasing individuals into an exsisting population.

If they are gone, your seed stock will in fact replace what would be a seasons recruitment. So, you will experience the same loses. You can expect a low percentage to become resident. But thats how nature works.

You still have to worry about abnormal pathogens. I suggest you do some research concerning Australian animals. One of their fears with non native reptiles is their bacterial flora.

About that release project, you cannot say how good they are, or how smart they are, or how correct they are, until a later date. This is very clear with the results of many of floridas problems. There have been many projects by so called biologist, that ended in very unexpected failure.

The concern I have is simple and basic, why are they gone in the first place? If that is not corrected, all the releasing in the world can only have a negative impact. If the species still exsists, then stop what is limiting the population. If you do not know what that is, your project is also headed for failure. Cheers and keep us updated.

I agree with Frank and I'll throw in one more tidbit. If you have ever seen an indigo in the wild and seen it eat, you would know it is at the top of the food chain in that niche. How many gazelles does it take to feed one lion? How many king/water/all other prey items does it take to feed an indigo? Releasing more indigos without releasing the same ratio of prey items = indigo wiping the slate in an ever decreasing habitat. Forget the diseases for a minute.....they are freakin' killing machine never sated food mongers! Those pretty kings we admire so much would disappear very quickly. I know, I know, "have you ever seen all the garters, ribbons, and water snakes there are in Florida"? I live in Texas, please, erebennus rules the day and Agkistrodon piscivorus rules the night! With the shrinking of the habitat, the indigo pops are adjusting to what we leave them, little to nothing. Fix that and they will repopulate the place and Georgia and Alabama as well. Same with the pits in La and N.J.
The diseases are a whole nuther thing. How do you know what you have allowed to thrive in the gut of your prize animal that has recieved all your t.l.c? It has no contact with the outside and every generation delutes its' immune system. At the same time it has built an immune system designed to protect it in its' new environment. If you lived in Michigan for 25 yrs and moved to Mexico and had to work outside, you would fry! I see it all the time down here! Sure, you're a marine and will adapt and overcome, but you will fry and maybe your wife will say I want to go back home! I will listen to the more experienced and offer mine as I acquire it. I have seen many indigos in solitary and social behaviors, even a rookery, used year after year communaly. I have also seen many indigos with the most God awful blisters and tumors you have ever seen. I believe the outcast "theory" as I have seen healthy adult females in the exact same area as the afflicted snakes. Touching them does alter their behavior, and repeated touching either forces them to flee or they get used to it. More often than not they disappear, never to return. Just my dumb opinions and observations, no theories.
Todd Hughes

Upscale you sound like you are 14 in this post. Indigos are not doable because they are a animal that needs lots of space. The DORs of Indigos is major problem as well as genetic isolation of the populations that currently exist. The state doesn't want them around because it makes development a hassle and I am sure if you look in the right places you will find that you can optain a "take" permit for Indigos like everything else. You can buy permits to kill gopher tortises, cut down mangroves, and develop Sea Turtle nesting grounds. Why would Indigos be different??

As for your whining about not being allowed to have one as a pet. If you really want one, you can get one, but it will involve you getting involved in educational groups and situations that allow you to gain a reputable reputation with someone at a zoo or other educational center. At that point you could likely get a Fl permit with a letter of recomendation and then the Fed permit will look easy. At that point if you actually get a Indigo you would still need to perform educational talks to the tune of 50 hours or something like that every year to keep it. If all that is worth it to you you may want to look into the care requirement for a Indigo and the mess they make.

Like I said above I wanted to do just what you are saying but I researched it and found out what is really involved. You need to look into everything in this situation. Also if this is the snake you are wanting to reseed then you are way of base. If the habitat is good for Indigos and all the other animals they co-habitate with then they are already there. If they are not in a given area then introducing them is not going to do any good.

Jason

Hey I hear you, sorry about the whining. I mainly was using indigo as an example because I am from Florida and I am more familiar with them here as having their habitat destroyed, the fact that they are protected, they are an exceptional colubrid and all that. Plus the mandate that they can not be bred in captivity even if you could get a possession permit. It is a fantasy to think they could be reintroduced into our parks and remaining natural areas that probably do not have the area they would require to sustain themselves. That would be the dream, that people would become educated and not run them over with their cars but like stop and let them pass, etc. I think I see the reintroduction into this kind of coexistence thing is probably impossible. I would still argue there can’t be much wrong with maintaining captive produced ones here in Florida and selecting this local native for captive maintenance. The captive produced ones are not threatened, only the wild ones. Kinda mixing two arguments, one we can’t reintroduce snakes- why the hell not? I think the thread is done on that. And you can’t breed threatened snakes- why the hell not? Still not sure why not, but I’ll quit crying about it. I did enjoy the responses here.

from a biological point of view. Your really not concerned with that, you seem to be concerned with the political point of view.

Its my sorry arse opinion, that the Endangered species act and CITIES, and state protection are a method of smoothly getting rid of species, not saving them.

The problem is, saving them requires saving land. If saving land hinders economy, then economy wins every time. What the protection does is, it gets the individual species out of your mind. They normally pick a species, like in Flas case, the osprey. They will build nests, in obvious places and brag about how well these animals are NOW doing. Giving lots of air time, etc. All the while less obvious endangered species are slipping away, UNNOTICED. That is the PLAN. Again, make a stink about one or two species and let dozens slip away. Then pick one more, and let dozens more slip away.

Unfortunately for us, the general public does not like snakes, so they will recieve little REAL protection. Fur, feathers, cuddly, cute, will be the focus.

In the meantime, the STATE can make lots of money from fees, applied in the name of this or that species. Once that species is gone, they will simply name another and charge more fees. I only wish I could do that. YES, your right in some ways, its a sorry state of affairs.

Even the purchase of land for habitat has fallen to crime. Us older folks have seen land set aside for habitat, and in most cases that land is sold or traded to developers. The story goes something like this, Oh we traded that land for better land. Except the new land does not have the species that were in need of protection. Slippery bunch these politicions are. I guess thats why they call them that. Cheers

Great stuff, FR, always appreciate your participation here. I also would add a bit of what I have learned from a couple of web sites. The Association of Zoos and Aquariums is an organization that is there to help insure the survival of animals in zoos and aquariums, not in the woods and waters. It may be a cynical view, but it seems the best thing for zoos and aquariums would be them being the only place you could see certain animals. In other words, it would benefit those places if the animals exist only in their members attractions. The Species Survival Plan programs sounds good, but their real purpose it seems, is to also maintain the populations that are in the zoo community, not the wild ones. I really don’t see that there are any organizations there to promote private breeding and maintenance of threatened animals. As you noted, FR, the present plan is to manage and oversee the steady eradication of basically all native wildlife. That’s pretty obvious. Any interference in that plan is what is illegal. I think we would have a better chance of getting a permit to make indigo skin wallets than permits to breed and maintain live ones. Such is politics, it does make you want to cry! But I’m a big boy, so I only lament...

LOL, yeah they crap a ton and I am not sure what stinks worse Diamond back water snake or indigo musk/shat!
Todd Hughes

I have kept indigo snakes as a youngster, kinda like George Bush with those “youthful indiscretions”, as I live in Florida. I’m a total kingsnake guy now, because I have to pick something else. I am familiar with their feeding response, as well as their maintenance. They are the greatest North American colubrid and that is why I use them as my reference animal regarding the politics, habitat destruction and efforts to “unthreaten” this particular animal. They do have a special place in my heart. I believe if you don’t have experience with them, you just have no idea... I have spent time with them in situ as you have, a highlight of my outdoor experience as well.
I have posted this (very old) pic before, it’s my cool Mom holding a healthy little guy...