Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Geez, ask a simple question and look what happens. Seriously folks, I really didn't expect things to get outta hand with the collecting stock question. But, I have another. [As a sidenote, in the collecting stock post, I noticed a couple people offering to buy others a beer?! Who's buying me a beer?!]

The question/s:

At what point is an animal tainted to the point that it should not be released (or re-released as the case may sometimes be) into the wild?

Is it only after it's been fed a meal (in our cases typically a farmed rodent) that could've introduced/affected its internal fauna?

Or is it after it's been housed in an environment alien to it, e.g., a terrarium in our homes--does the stress of the capture and the alien environment throw enough things out of whack within the animal to make it unsuitable for release? Does more time in captivity equal less suitability to being released?

AND what happens when people build an outdoor pond and throw captive raised froggies or turtles into it--a pond that would be utilized by surrounding nature? Should people not do that?

Again, these are questions I think are interesting enough to get serious opinions on--Not to start a flame war!!!

To some extent it depends on the animal and the type of habitat you are talking about. In most cases mature breeding adults have a specific microhabitat that they have found and adapted to that can support them. Once you take any animal out of its habitat you are not doing it any favors. Survival of relocated snakes is pretty low.

Twice I have caught snakes that I saw repeatedly at the same spots, kept them for a few weeks an released them, in the same spot. Never saw either of them again.

I am not saying that a rerelease is an immediate death sentence, but it is a risk. I think that if you remove an animal from the wild you are now responsible for its wellbeing and shouldn't just release him. If you are just talking about keeping a snake till morning to get some better photos and then release it in the EXACT same spot, then I don't think you do quite as much harm.

In my opinion, re-release should be done as neonates.

Eggs should be incubated in a building completely separate from where any adult snakes are housed to prevent disease transmission from adults to young. Neonates should be kept until their first meal and then released.
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

Are you aware that there are certain parasites that can be transmitted from the mother to the eggs?

Yup.
There are also a lot of parasites that use other vectors, such as a lab tech not being careful when he removes poop from an adult cage and then cleans a neonate cage w/o changing gloves - passing on the hookworm (or other) eggs.
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

>> At what point is an animal tainted to the point that it should not be released (or re-released as the case may sometimes be) into the wild?

I'm personally of the opinion that locality matching is a very minor consideration in re-introduction.

The first consideration - has the cause for the extirpation/severe decline been resolved? If the answer is no, then re-introduction very well may be a waste of time.

The second consideration - how much genetic variety are you able to provide?

If there is not enough of a gene pool, there's a good chance that a lack of genetic variety will take a heavy toll.

A locality will have many different genes present. Captive representatives of the locality may only have a small percentage of the genes that exist in the locality.

Someone posted a picture of a L p pyromelana and named the locality. Someone else piped in that he had extensively worked with that locality and that snake certainly was not that locality. The original poster then said "That's funny, the snake I photographed was wild at that locality, and I only kept it long enough to take the picture".

In my honest opinion, and scientist types here may or may not agree, captive bred snakes should only be released if repopulation is deemed necessary and workable (problem that caused decline resolved) AND it is done with a lot of genetic variety. That very well may result in a lot of genes that were not originally at the locale, but what it will allow for is natural selection to determine which genes are workable at the locale and to keep those genes.

The phenotype of the re-introduced snakes may end up being different, but it is the best way IMHO to ensure that the necessary genetic material exists for a succesful breeding population.

In Europe somewhere, I don't have link to article but someone probably knows it - there was a problem with a viper population that had been isolated. Numbers were dropping and they couldn't figure out why. It was suggested that lack of genetic variety may be responsible, so they released some males from another population, and the population became a lot healthier and grew again. Genetic variety is important, and if you can't provide genetic variety with locale specimens, it is better to add genes that were not originally there than to release young that may not make it long term because of too small a gene pool.

Ideally you would use as many locale specimens as you could, and if necessary, try to get genetic variety from populations as close to the original population as you can. IE if Cal Kings were extirpated here in Redding (north tip of the valley), using San Diego stripers would be a poor choice. Using desert banded would be a poor choice. Using banded cal kings from the valley would be better.

In my opinion.
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

You just rattled off so many conservation no-nos I don't even know where to start.

>> I'm personally of the opinion that locality matching is a very minor consideration in re-introduction.

WHAT! Why! Did you not read the monster post below entirely about how each subpopulation was different and unique?

>>>The first consideration - has the cause for the extirpation/severe decline been resolved? If the answer is no, then re-introduction very well may be a waste of time.

Who said anything about repopulating an area? If the area is suitable for release there are probably snakes still there, and those snakes should be the ones doing the repopulating not you

>>>The second consideration - how much genetic variety are you able to provide?

>>>If there is not enough of a gene pool, there's a good chance that a lack of genetic variety will take a heavy toll.

>>>A locality will have many different genes present. Captive representatives of the locality may only have a small percentage of the genes that exist in the locality.

Well now that we have a forum genetic expert we can all relax...

What do you know about the genetic variability of your snakes? Captive stock is frequently line bred or inbred. Isolated endangered populations frequently survive bottlenecks. It is only in extremely small populations of animals that have been completely isolated for many generations that a lack of genetic diversity becomes an issue.

>>>Someone posted a picture of a L p pyromelana and named the locality. Someone else piped in that he had extensively worked with that locality and that snake certainly was not that locality. The original poster then said "That's funny, the snake I photographed was wild at that locality, and I only kept it long enough to take the picture".

This proves a great point... that skin color is only a tiny fraction of what makes up a snake. Are you trying to argue that because one snake had some extra black connecting saddles that it is totally different from that local population?

In my honest opinion, and scientist types here may or may not agree, captive bred snakes should only be released if repopulation is deemed necessary and workable (problem that caused decline resolved)

Absolutely, but you forgot the part where it is done by organized educated scientists with legal permission.

AND it is done with a lot of genetic variety. That very well may result in a lot of genes that were not originally at the locale, but what it will allow for is natural selection to determine which genes are workable at the locale and to keep those genes.

Absolutely horrible idea, and one that no conservationist, or ecologist would ever sign on to. This is the EXACT reason that it illegal to release cptive animals into the wild.

I don't think you understood what I was saying.

I'll try to be more clear.

Release of captive bred specimens should never be done unless it is done to repopulate an area.

In my opinion, such repopulation shouldn't even be attempted unless the reasons for the decline have been addressed.

-=-
Right there - that means that I certainly am of the opinion that only proper scientists should be involved in re-introduction. Not hobbyists.

If the habitat can support wild specimens, then they probably are there if they ever were, and if it can support wild specimens, the population of wild specimens will most likely be at the level the habitat can support.

There are exceptions, but that's for the realm of scientists to determine.

If a species has been extirpated from an area and re-introduction is to take place - then yes, I believe ensuring genetic variety is more important than preserving locale WHEN you do not have enough locale specific specimens to ensure genetic variety.

But even if you do, re-introduction should not be attempted unless you know there is a good chance it will work (problems that caused decline resolved) - otherwise, it is just a waste of my tax money - which most certainly is paying for it.

That's what I meant by least of considerations.

But if it is deemed that it can be done, it is better to have a viable population that meets the ecological niche the species provided than to "save locale" and introduce specimens that are going to reproduce poorly because of lack of genetic variety - and yes, genetic variety is a very real problem.

Saving locality has nostalgic value, but a viable breeding population with genetic variety is far more important.
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

So basically your post had nothing to do with the questions being asked about a HOBBIEST re-releasing COMMON species. No one even touched the locality issues, we are talking about releasing them in the same spot.

In most states it is illegal to re-release so that's a moot point. Catch and release is legal, re-releasing is not.

But that's not all his question was about.

"At what point is an animal tainted to the point that it should not be released (or re-released as the case may sometimes be) into the wild?"

I read that as specifically talking about two things - release (animal bred in captivity) and re-release - animal taken from the wild.

I addressed the first issue. It should only be done by scientists when it is absolutely needed because a local population has suffered extreme loss or extirpation. Second issue I didn't address as it is generally illegal.

by tainted in that case - I assume he is talking about how many generations of captive bred where it has been subject to human un-natural selection and no longer has the wild phenotype of the locale.

I apologize if I misunderstood the question.
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

Z he might have gone off on a tangent but he covered it pretty good! LOL

> It is only in extremely small populations of animals that
> have been completely isolated for many generations that a lack
> of genetic diversity becomes an issue.

Exactly what might happen if there is not enough genetic variety available in the captive specimens from a locale - and exactly why bringing in genes from other locales may be necessary and more important than "preserving the locale".
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

Theoretically, if you handled other herps that day without disinfecting, you contaminated the animal. I think they can fight cooties in their own domain, but when you slap it in a tank, treat it with Panacure, Flagyl, etc., you have fragged its' own gut fauna and flora, and when you don't give it enough therming choices, it can't do its' job. But I say if you catch it, photo it and release it, you are good to go, but if you keep it out of its' environment at all, you own it and are responsible for its' life thereafter. This is just my opinion, worth less than two coppers.
Todd Hughes

> AND what happens when people build an outdoor pond and throw
> captive raised froggies or turtles into it--a pond that would be
> utilized by surrounding nature? Should people not do that?

It depends upon the pond.
I think it is improper to introduce frogs that will get out into the local habitat. IE - don't put bullfrog tadpoles into your goldfish pond.

I don't personally have a problem with collecting a sac of frog eggs from a local wild pond and putting it in a backyard pond.

I also don't have a problem with turtles in the backyard - as long as you don't cry when a coon eats them.
-----
3.6 L. getula californiae - 16 eggs (Cal. King)
1.1 L. getula nigrita (MBK)
1.0 Pantherophis guttatus guttatus (Corn)
0.1 Pituophis catenifer catenifer (Pacific gopher)
3.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata (Cal. Alligator Lizard)

I would say they are no longer fit for release from the moment they are introduced to an environment that also houses exotics or animals that have been exposed to exotics. Better to be safe than sorry.