Reptile & Amphibian Forums

The last few years, there has been an effort in the area where I live to restore certain areas to the native vegetation. This is a good thing, because some of these areas were slated for homes, and now they have been saved. Patially because land movement is a problem, so homes are not ideally suited. West Coast California.

What they did was to essentially clear most of the vegetation, installed some irrigation and planted new. Already these areas are well-grown. The lizard population has swelled as a result. Western fence lizards. And now in some areas, there are large populations of side-bltched lizards where before they were seen in very small pockets in very few areas.

One of the areas appears to have a healthy population of Cal kings. Kind of a nice thing to see. Just when I thought every square inch of land was going to be homes and strip malls, this happens. Makes our area much more desireable IMO.
-----
Mark

That's very cool. Here in San Antonio I have much better luck finding kings in fields undergoing secondary stages of succession, as opposed to climax communities, especially if there is creek or ditch in proximity.

I was wondering what they were going to do about those hillsides that would slide loose and take the million dollar homes with them.
-----
Bob/Chris
Pyromaniac AKA Greatballzofire

Yep. The sliding has accelerated more recently, so the snakes will be allowed to go on with their lives.

That and alot of people who donated money to save the land. It is in a private fund now. I donated money too. Never thought it would actually work, but this time it did.
-----
Mark

That's good to hear. I live in Los Angeles and there is very little habitat left to look for kingsnakes. Before the economy took a dive, Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties were being developed fast.
-----

Enjoy it while you can. As an experienced herper(old) I have seen that many times in Cali. Areas set aside for conservation reasons.

But sadly, as humans are the ultimate invasive species, when the need for the land outweights the problems, that land will be developed. It really is about that simple.

As long as the local economy is slow, land will be safe. But if the economy changes and that land has a benefit(any benefit or then being vacate) It will be used for whatever will benefit man. Sorry to say, but that is the history.

If this land is in the area I am thinking of, it should be safe from development in the future as it is very prone to massive landslides. People would be idiots to build on this type of topography. It may also be all that sea coast land that is falling onto the beach below. These sorts of lands are very pretty but best left to the wildlife.

Its very common to build housing sub divisions on flood plains in California. Another dumb thing. Such lands are best left to either agriculture or wildlife.
-----
Bob/Chris
Pyromaniac AKA Greatballzofire