There really are no very reliable statistics on the relative importance of the major venomous snakes worldwide. We only have a few glimpses from regional clinical studies. In different parts of India, different snakes are important. I remember dicussing it with Rom Whitaker, who reckoned that cobras were the most important source of mortality across India, by virtue of being common throughout (D. russelii is generally patchily distributed), but Russell's viper, Echis and kraits all claim a lot of lives in many areas.
In Sri Lanka, Russell's viper, followed by Bungarus caeruleus are themain culprits, cobras seem less important.
In Thailand, the chief killers were Naja kaouthia, Calloselasma rhodostoma, Bungarus candidus, and D. russelii was of somewhat lesser importance due to its restricted distribution (but was the most important species within that distribution).
In Burma, D. russelii lets everything else pale into insignificance (but there are no Echis there).
For Asia, I would guess that D. russelii may be ahead of Echis, but globally, Echis is likely to beat anything, particularly due to the havoc wreaked by E. ocellatus in W. Africa.
I'd agree with you that you are a lot less likely to be bitten by a cobra than a Russell's viper or Echis, as cobras tend to shift out of the way, and also do a lot of bluffing instead of nailing everything that moves. In Sri Lanka, there are even various folk legends about nasty Russell's vipers killing people and nice cuddly cobras coming in to avenge or protect them by eating the Russell's viper... not an altogether erroneous comparison of the relative personalities of these snakes.
Cheers,
Wolfgang
-----
WW Home
.
