Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I am starting to fillout the permits I now need to keep PA native reptiles and I got to my black rat snake which is now called eastern ratsnake (Elaphe alleghaniensis). I started looking up what an Elaphe alleghaniensis is ........if I am reading it right ,my Deckert's,gulf hammocks,yellows,and gray ratsnakes are ALL LISTED AS EASTERN RAT SNAKES?? Is this correct????? ANY HELP WOULD BE GREAT..
Matt

"I am starting to fillout the permits I now need to keep PA native reptiles and I got to my black rat snake which is now called eastern ratsnake (Elaphe alleghaniensis). I started looking up what an Elaphe alleghaniensis is ........if I am reading it right ,my Deckert's,gulf hammocks,yellows,and gray ratsnakes are ALL LISTED AS EASTERN RAT SNAKES?? Is this correct????? ANY HELP WOULD BE GREAT..
Matt"

In the south, snakes from west of the Apalachicola River are not Eastern Rat Snakes. You could always claim that your Grays and Yellows came from areas west of this river. I also doubt that anyone from outside the hobby would know that your Gulf Hammock was not a normal Gray. The law was put in place to protect native populations. Using Burbrink's classification scheme for this purpose is absurd. There is also another problem with the law. Black Rats from states such as Ohio are not Eastern Rat Snakes, but you can't just look at two Black Rats and pick out what part of the country they came from.

Trying to protect native animals from over collecting is certainly a noble goal, but the Pa. method is absurd.

Burbrink et al did a lot of work that clearly shows that populations of Rat Snakes have been isolated from each other for a long period of time, but their work does not show that they have evolved into new species. Below is a link to a paper that argues against Burbrink's argument for their new classification scheme.

Hybridization between mtDNA-defined phylogeographic lineages of black ratsnakes (Pantherophis sp.)

A lot of that Herpetologist's opinion are, off the wall stupid. I am not genius, but his approach to proper Taxonomy is laughable (not in a good way). I don't recognize his "opinion" It is not just me either, a lot of other people in and out of the science community disagree with his supposed restructuring of the Zoological Nomenclature systematic's. Actually, I think I read that the supposed "changes" are not in any literature, therefore are not being excepted by his peers as the "new" deal.
-----
Thanks,

Frank Roberts
Roberts' Realm Of Reptile Research

I don't support his proposed changes either, but they are apparently recognized by professional groups such as the SSAR and the ASIH. Funny enough I do use the genera Pantherophis whereas the publishers of this list think more work needs done. I think it's funny that a group that believes two identical snakes from different sides of the Apalachicola River are definately distinct species, but two very different snakes that form monophyletic groups and are seperated by an ocean might still be in the same genera.
http://www.herplit.com/SSAR/circulars/HC29/Crother.html

Thanks for letting me know that those Hepetological Groups recongnize the changes.
-----
Thanks,

Frank Roberts
Roberts' Realm Of Reptile Research