Reptile & Amphibian Forums

First off, I'd like to state that I do not support the massive collection of animals. But is there ever a time that collection can be justified? I think there is. During this past year I had moved into a neighborhood on the FL panhandle that was being rapidly developed. While driving to work one day I came across an Eastern Diamondback attempting to cross the road. I stopped, and after cursing out a school bus driver, that was actually TRYING to run over the snake, I quickly bagged the Diamondback. On the way to work I relocated it to a nearby reservation, but this incident got me thinking, "If there's one, there may be others." I never found another Diamondback, but I did come across two Scarlet Kingsnakes and many other colubrids.

Most of the snakes were found using the destructive method of bark ripping. I do not usually support this method, but seeing how 12 lots on my street alone were demolished in the last year; I felt it to be the best option. All but four of the snakes found were relocated to the reservation. I kept the Scarlet Kings and two Cornsnakes, and intend on keeping them unless I find that it is unlawful to do so. I do not believe that these herps would have survived if not for my efforts. I can only hope that the animals that were relocated have adapted to their new surroundings.

I am interested in hearing your response. This type of situation occurs each and every day, though it is difficult to know for sure if this type of collection is productive to the environment. If it is indeed lawful to keep these snakes (in FL), I plan on breeding them in the future for distribution (NOT for sale) to benefit the herp community and to provide these animals with a meaningful life. The pic is of one of the scarlets collected. Thanks for reading, and please share your opinion.-Smokey

I have to agree. The selfrighteous conservationist who talk about saving reptiles always seem to disagree. I do worry about the transformation of disease. I know that some california desert tortoise populations were destroyed because of RELEASED desert tortoises with respiratory illness. But animals that have never been in captivity I think would be fine. I have relocated spotted turtles, box turtles, painteds, and redears(feril of course). I have found some of these turtles 10 years later doing fine. (You kinda remember a box turtle that has a name carved in to it, or a 2legged painter). I went to a local nature center to tell them that a spotted turtle population was in the line of a road project , I was told that spotteds were not endangered so there was nothing they could do. I relocated 15 adults and 10 subadults to another swamp. My only regret is that I didn't find more. I did however fine 8 dead turtles is one day of walking after work had started. I have been scolded more than once by my peers ,but while they preech conservation people like us are doing it.

"I know that some california desert tortoise populations were destroyed because of RELEASED desert tortoises with respiratory illness. "

How do you know this? Do you have published reports proving this scientifically? I am open to all data which shows whether it does or does not occur. I simply want hard evidence to show that this claim is not merely speculation and would appreciate any evidence to demonstrate one way or the other.

Most of the grass in the cal desert is non-native and may be the cause of the decline of the torts and there imune system.
chuck

Personally, I think relocation in this sort of situation is one of those things that feels good, but doesn't really accomplish anything. Unless the area you're relocating the snakes to needs to be repopulated for some reason, the relocatees will probably just be outcompeted by the locals. Or, as some studies of relocation have found, many of them might get run over or starve to death while trying to leave the place you've released them and get back to where they were.

Patrick Alexander

Reptiles and amphibians do have home ranges. Releasing them into new areas may make it more difficult for them to survive. I read one study in which a few Bogetophis subocularis were captured, and then released in a new area to study their microhabitat preferences, if I remember correctly. I thought at the time I read the report that this investigation is somewhat flawed as the snakes may be more vulnerable to predators in an unfamiliar area and thus mortality rates may be higher and also because they may not be able to find shelter to escape the hot dry summer in an unfamiliar area.

It is certainly reasonable to suggest that released reptiles and amphibians may attempt to return to their original homes and thus suffer heavier mortalities than normal. It is not at all certain that the locals would automatically outcompete introduced individuals of the same species. Also keep in mind that the mortality rate in a habitat about to be destroyed is 100% and keep in mind that shrinking and fragmentation of habitats everywhere have reduced genetic diversity within many populations. It is thus a good idea to relocate the otherwise doomed animals. Unfortunately given the secretive habits of most amphibians and reptiles, only a very small percentage can ever be found at one time (even if repeated and intensive searches are made) and relocated.

I have provided a link to an article discussing the problems of relocating reptiles. Despite the potential problems, the author chose to release several of the snakes that were given to him. Besides, there is really no good alternative but to relocate rattlers found in and around human surroundings, if for no other reason than to ensure the safety of those people who frequent the area where the rattlers are found.
Relocating reptiles

The full citation for the Bogertophis study is:

Sawyer MW. Baccus JT. MOVEMENT ECOLOGY AND THERMAL BIOLOGY OF BOGERTOPHIS SUBOCULARIS FROM TEXAS (SERPENTES, COLUBRIDAE). [Article] Southwestern Naturalist. 41(2):182-186, 1996 Jun

Quoting from the paper:

"Eight B. subocularis, six males and two females, collected at disparate locations on roads in Terrell and Val Verde Counties, Texas, were...released at the same site (albeit foreign to the snakes).... The original design of the study was to release each snake at the point of capture, however, as collection began, the endangered species act became a major political issue in this area of Texas. As a result, only one rancher agreed to participate in the study. ...Because of predation, movement off the study area, unexplained death, and presumed transmitter failure [=removed by herper?], only three of the eight snakes (1,3,and 8) were tracked for more than 10 days. Owl feathers were found in the immediate area of two skeletal remains near transmitters.

Smoke:
Concerning your question, "But is there ever a time that collection can be justified?" it all depend on one's personal philosphy with respect to the utilization of species in the wild.

Some individuals take the position that no wild species should be taken by humans. At the other extreme are trophy hunters and those that over-exploit wildlife resources to the point of harming species' populations.

If you hunt or fish, then collecting herps is essentially identical in that the same principles that govern game and commercial species apply to all non-game wildlife species as well. If species are reproducing normally, nominal removal of specimens from the wild has no last impact on self sustaining populations be they earthworms, deer, snakes, crawfish, quail, salamanders, etc.

Richard F. Hoyer

I say that removal from the gene pool doesn't matter by what means--habitat destruction (development of housing tracts), running over with vehicles, or collecting. The only one of these three options which offers any potential of a positive outcome would be collecting, as captive-breeding could result which may ultimately lessen pressure on other, more-secure-from-habitat-destruction populations.

As far as relocation goes, I do it. My herp club has a whole mess o' people who do it. The cops call us to come get snakes out of homes, trees, schools, etc. On this topic, I again have to ask what is in the better interest of the local biodiversity--a snake cut up and thrown into a dumpster, or a snake which may or may not acclimate to new surroundings? My option is usually to relocate, because even if the individual doesn't make it, it may end up "giving back" to the local ecosystem by way of providing prey for another animal (hawks, coyotes, etc).

However, with the preliminary studies leaning towards one of my oft-rescued species, Crotalus atrox, not relocating well, I have pledged to personally EAT the next large rattler I get on a snake call. I figure the juveniles have more of a chance at successful relocation, plus they don't have as much meat on them.
-----
Chris McMartin
www.mcmartinville.com
I'm Not a Herpetologist, but I Play One on the Internet

This is the concept the TEACH us in biology classes. HOW that is applied to herps in the field isnt quite as easy as walking a greased pole.The dynamics are constantly changing,especially when PEOPLE are involved. Collection laws are set up to eliminate the commercial collector but SHOULD encourage the "trophy hunter"--this doesnt always happen. Many times single "trophy" specimens can be MUCH BETTER "used"in herptoculture than even becoming a jar on a shelf!Some old-time scientists STILL dont understand that, but with the advent of DNA sampling eliminates all but the most extreme NEED for preserved specimens. As far as relocation.....I would fall back to try and include the animal within its original homerange(if possible). IF this wasnt possible, I would suggest that unless you KNOW saturation and mortality levels of other SUITABLE habitat that it would cause NO HARM to keep them in collections to be studied/observed,and enjoyed by those of us in this community. I really dont think there is enough NEW blood trickling into existing lines of some animals to warrant against it unless specimens are endangered("threatened" to me has always been more of a case of habitat loss than anything else).For what its worth!Jeff

In the futear, whould it be best to keep all of the herps found? At the time that I found these snake there was no possible way to keep them all, but since then I have acquered a nice rack system. I am sure that most of the relocated snake have most likely not apapted well to their new habitats. So if this situation accurs again, whould it be better to keep as many as possible? I'm no expert, but do care vary much about our planets wildlife. please let me know of any tips that you may have, since there is still plenty of neigborhood developed each and every day, and many more species that need to be saved.Thans again-Smokey

Smokey, probably the best thing we can do to protect herps from vanishing from areas is to protect their habitat. That is really the only thing that works. It is also something that many land developers do not want to hear. While it may make us feel good to take a bunch of snakes and relocate them to an area that isn't under the threat of development, it really just loads many predators into an area that may not support them. While it is good that you are trying to save those that you can, we need to be careful to not give the idea that it is OK to destroy good habitat as long as we translocate or relocate those critters to somewhere else (where they probably will not thrive). Developers and others who make their living by taking decent habitat and then clearing it with bulldozers need to be held to a higher standard than what is currently done. Preserving habitat that already exists is how we save our herps.

Greg Henry

Thanks for your response. I totally agree with you that we should focus on preservation. I just have one question. For an area that is already being developed, would a better option be to keep all of the animals (if one has the space and income) or maybe give them away to adequate keepers? If so then I believe that developing land should become the new "hunting grounds" for all field collectors.

I am new to these forums, but defiantly not to the hobby. I believe that these forums are a great place to find individuals that would be more than happy to take in the rescues, as long as these individuals were chosen wisely. Let me know what you think. Because next year I plan on doing the same, and would love to have people who care lined up to take animals that they won't find in there area.-Brett

That is how you have to look at animals displaced by developments. Placing them into existing habitat only adds competition to other habitat that may likely be at capacity already. For NON-endangered wildlife I suggest that adoption or inclusion to ANY meaningful end is better than possibly over-burdoning our healthy stocks.
I can remember a few years ago up here in Mass when a local "illegal" damn was finally removed....it had created a huge reservior for years and all the turtles that could made it about 1/2 mile upstream to the smaller feeder pond.You could practically WALK on the turtles!! I had a colleague across the country that wanted to do a study on turtles so I went out and removed about 50 painteds in about 2 hours with a dip net.While there may never be an ideal situation for placement(not sure where these actually ended up)there are times that harvesting/culling IS the most biologically humane way to counteract other manmade mistakes. If you decide to take on such a project though...either let your DNR know about it from the beginning(they arent likely to care that much if there are no sensetive species included)or be VERY quiet about it.Anything in between will leave you open for others to second guess your actions. Good luck,Jeff

Brett, what are your thoughts on letting those animals move away from the disturbance and disperse on their own? Granted, there may be some mortality from heavy equipment moving over some of the animals, but some may actually disperse on their own within their own home range and thrive nearby. I think your intentions are good, but I'd probably only collect animals that I could use myself. Exercise caution in trying to "adopt" out surplus snakes to whomever wants them. Make sure that the recipient isn't wanting to just get some free snakes to enter into the wild caught pet trade and make some money for themselves. You also may want to check local and state laws about collecting, maintaining, and shipping certain species out of state. You don't want to get yourself in any trouble by unknowingly breaking any laws. This topic you've touched upon is a difficult one. There's always the struggle between trying to save what snakes you can versus hoping that they'll fair well on their own. Educating the neighborhood to the benefits that snakes provide re. keeping rodent and insect pests under control can start to change peoples' negative views about these critters. Then maybe with more supportive voices, development of the area can be addressed with a more vocal majority. Hope this helps.

Greg Henry

Free Developers in a free country usually develop private property. Unless you want to undo 227 years of US history and the US constitution, I suggest someone start buying up all the land so others with a perfectly ethical and moral profit driven motivation can't.
Chuck

Another wal-mart is going in on a 20 acre tract here in Brevard county Fl. City of Cocoa. It has wetlands and uplands but it makes me think I shold have collected there in the past not just photographed.

Thanks for posting what I would have said. We all have to look into the future, and I for one don't just want to wait until there is no more habitat left for our herps to go. The human species is NOT getting any smaller. If anyone wants to e-mail me privately then please do. I’d like to get to know some of you who feel this way, and since probability say's we most likely live in different parts of the country then maybe we could make a swap. NOTHING ILLEGAL.-Smokey p.s. Greg, I don't mean that you do not care. I just have a bigger agenda here on my post.

Although i will receive grief from the animal rights attitudes that watch this site, Collecting reptiles is no different than shooting big game, fishing or cutting down trees. They are renewable resources. As long as there are limits, non-endangered species will survive in numbers just fine. I will point to whitewater road in the Palm springs area as a good case. It is the most over-collected spot on the planet for rosy boas and has been for thirty years. Boas are still caught there on a regular basis.
chuck

Ps I don't think those animals are protected and you can send those scarlets my way if you feel generous!!

E-mail me and we can talk.-Smokey

Chuck, that is an interesting reply. Before they became protected, Eastern indigos also were considered very common and were available readily in the pet trade. I remember getting a price list back in the 70s from Thompson Zoo in Clewiston, FL, that sold adult indigos for $40-$50 each. Because of overcollecting for the pet trade, coupled with habitat destruction, the Eastern indigo is now federally threatened. There is also concern now for the Eastern diamondback as well. I agree that private land development has been going on since Heck was a pup and that it is difficult to change. Probably some day there'll hardly be any place for people to go to view and enjoy herps in the wild. However, I wouldn't refer to snakes as renewable resources. That sounds a lot like the guy who used to (I don't know if he still does or not) put out the newsletter Crotalus News and thought that rattlesnake roundups were totally OK because rattlesnakes were renewable resources.

Greg Henry

This is chuck jr. in case you know my dad. But herps are renewable just as all other game. Probably better than large game on a whole. If you clear cut a forrest it will take longer to renue and that is something to be taken into account when limits are placed on collecting (culling) on public land. But I get scared when the animal right/environmental movement permiates into mainstream thinking and I like to remind people of the reality of the greatest free society thats ever existed. Sometimes freedom has costs to the surrounding environment but I'll take that over socialism anyday!! That's why I support capitalism when it comes to herping, animals that humans gravitate towards will never go extinct. Cows, dogs, cats elephants are some examples. If a blind snake goes extinct, big deal! Something else will fill the void.

Chuck

Most herps are not game species, and are not renewable. If so, we wouldn't have endangered and threatened herps-- they'd be prolificly replacing their losses without anyone's help. Most herps also do not get proactively managed for like deer, elk, waterfowl, or turkey UNLESS they are a listed species. I am not an animal rights activist nor an environmentalist. Nobody likes extremists, and I certainly agree with you there. It's great that we do live in a free society. However, we also need to be responsible. As far as freedom having costs to the surrounding environment, we should be conscientious to that in light of how much we're losing all the time. Animals popular with humans may not become extinct as long as humans breed them in captivity. But their existence in the wild is a different story. If you're happy with pen-raised domestic stock like cows, dogs & cats, and zoo-maintained elephants, lions & tigers, then good for you. But I think the more diverse things are, the better. I like seeing things in the wild as they naturally occur. I agree that things do go extinct. But losing diversity if we've caused it, even if just a blind snake, IS a big deal. Would you feel any differently if the extinct snake was a larger, more conspicuous species like an EDB rattlesnake, an indigo, pine snake, or timber rattlesnake?

Greg

Great post. Just because we as humans have devised ways to keep certain animals from becoming extinct doesn’t mean that we can or even will try to keep other species from meeting a deadly fate. I agree with you Greg that the public needs to be educated on conservation, but since majority rules most likely even if the ignorant were given free courses on conservation most probably wouldn’t even show up. So I will plan to continue to breed animals that I believe will become threatened or endangered within the near or far off future to provide others in the herp community with animals that they them selves could not obtain in order to suppress over collection. This is MY opinion. I'm glad that this topic has been such a good thread, and I hope we can keep it up.-Smokey

Yes I would be disapointed to see something go extinct, but if evolution is factual (I don't buy the whole idea), then new species should be showing up anyway. The bottom line is something will fil the void. I gues we have to disagree on the renuing resource part. I don't think you'v folowedthe logic all the way but so be it. Think some more about it because animal species are growing in number or shrinking depending on the animal. Nothing is static. there are many many placesthat animals are hunted,not replenished or managed and still plentiful.examples;rats,mice, cockraoches, flys, rabbits, squirrels,carp,starlings,pidgeons,ants and I can keep going. The picture is very dynamic and will continue to be forever.

Chuck

ps my typoes are known,this program is screwy. It won't let me back up and fix stuff with out deleting whatsthere.

I go out every couple of years and bag a bunch of blue belly sage bruch lizards. (sceloporous?)They live great on my rock walls and breed every year. I'm sure the cats that my bb gun doesn't kill eat plenty, but many are here year after year. I mention this because relocation can work sometimes. I do notice when its over crowded they move around to the neighbors yard. This is a bottom of the food chain animal so my success shouldn't be a real suprise.

chuck

I'm a bit confused. What do you mean by-what your bb gun doesn’t kill? I assume your being sarcastic, but your post seemed unclear. Also, are you saying house cat’s territory is in your yard only? I have felines too, but don’t let them go out side, because the bottom of the food chain isn’t all they will kill, and half of the time they do it just for ‘fun’. No harm meant, just want to understand what your post meant.-Smokey

My cat is de-clawed and in the house. Any cats I see in the yard gets a pellet! They're an unnatural vacuum on the local fauna. I prefer the lizards,birds and snakes over cats that a-hole people let loose to roam and tresspas! I find it funny that mosy people won't tollerate a dog loose crapping in the yard but don't think twice about what their neighbors cats are doing in their yards.

Chuck

Hmmm. So cats harvesting sustainable resources get shot, but you get to collect them freely?

Curious logic.

Joe

your assumption is that the cats sustain on what they kill. They wouldn't survive in the numbers that they currently hold without a hand out from humans. I don't know where you point was going but its lost. I do believe in logical regulations on collecting as long as they're based on sound science and not poilitical beliefs as most are.

chuck