Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Below in the discussion regarding over-collection in California, BigBrother posted the following in response to a question of which herps in Calif were in decline due to collecting.

"Yes, like it or not, species are in decline in California in part because of over collection. See the report:
Jennings, Mark R. and Marc P. Hayes. 1994. Amphibian and Reptile Species of Special Concern in California. Final report submitted to The California Department of Fish and Game, Inland Fisheries Division. Ppii-255.

The following is a partial list of the herp species in California that are reported to be in decline in part because of over collecting or poaching for the pet trade:
Breckenridge mountain slender salamander
Yellow-blotched salamander
Large-blotched salamander
Coast range newt
Northern red-legged frog
Western pond turtle
Banded Gila monster
San Diego horned lizard
Flat-tailed horned lizard
Sandstone night lizard
Sierra night lizard
Baja California rat snake
San Bernardino mountain kingsnake
San Diego mountain kingsnake
Rosy boa
So as you can see, there are species in California subjected to over collecting, and there are many papers published in peer-reviewed journals that also support this contention. Just because you may not think your actions do not have an impact on wild populations does not mean the impacts are not there. "

The problem with this document and this assertion is that none of it was supported by data. The involvement of collection in the decline of these species was pure speculation. In fact if you read the document you will find that a large number of the rederences it uses are Personal Communication references.

In a meeting between CHIAC (an old lobbying group for herp regs in Calif) and the Calif DFG back about the time this Jennings and Hayes document was produced, John Brode, then head of herpetology for the DFG, admitted that the DFG had no evidence to support that collecting was impacting herp populations.

It is interesting how herps are catogorized different from other species. Why can we remove thousands of deer annually without impacting the health of their population, yet the legal removal of quite probably a lot fewer snakes is thought to have an obvious negative impact? That is illogical.

I have linked the Jennings and Hayes document if you would like to read it. The section on the San Bernadino Mtn kingsnake is especially enlightening.
Jennings and Hayes

-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

Perhaps there is a booming underground market for night lizards!

Funny thing is, I was told by a person who allegedly helped write the CA herp regs as they currently stand that the reason the bag limit on certain lizards was higher was so that snake keepers would have a legal supply of feeders!

In other words, it's OK to go out and catch a dozen of those lizards, feed them all to your snakes, and then catch a dozen more the very next day ad nauseum, but by golly if you have two rosy boas you can't have any more unless you're a bad keeper and let them die first. A conscientious keeper is therefore restricted, especially if he's good enough to successfully breed them.
-----
Chris McMartin
www.mcmartinville.com
I'm Not a Herpetologist, but I Play One on the Internet

Yah, several of the species on that list have zero demand (or nearly so) in the pet trade. The only possible reasoning by which collection may impact them is if they are one of the few species that has an incredibly small range such as Hydromantes. Of course from a long term point of view for such a population, if their numbers are so low that the removal of a few individuals will significantly impact them, their long term survival is probably impossible. I cannot think of a species in Calif that is at that point.

You (I think it was you) was correct in regards to the necessity of having a valid fishing license in Calif each year when you own a native herp. This is a common misconception. The license is a take permit and is not a possession permit. Of course if you get caught in the field with a herp you better have a license irregardless of whether the warden actually saw you pick it up.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

>>You (I think it was you) was correct in regards to the necessity of having a valid fishing license in Calif each year when you own a native herp. This is a common misconception. The license is a take permit and is not a possession permit. Of course if you get caught in the field with a herp you better have a license irregardless of whether the warden actually saw you pick it up.

I think you meant I was incorrect. If you didn't, then I'm a little confused!

So if I'm a CA resident, I can buy 50 Cal kings at a pet store and sleep soundly at night knowing that DFG would not be able to bust me for having more than the possession limit? The way I understand it, that's not the case, but I'd be happy if I'm proven wrong.
-----
Chris McMartin
www.mcmartinville.com
I'm Not a Herpetologist, but I Play One on the Internet

If you buy 50 of them keep your receipt as you will need it to prove your animals are cb in origin and thereby excluded from the possession limit. If buying less then the possession limit than it is not so important as long as you never intend to get the commercial propagation permit and breed them. Either way a fishing license is not required. This would be similar to going down to the market and buying 50 pounds of salmon. You don't need a license for that either. Like I said it is a take permit so only applies when you are fishing or collecting herps.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

>>If you buy 50 of them keep your receipt as you will need it to prove your animals are cb in origin and thereby excluded from the possession limit. If buying less then the possession limit than it is not so important as long as you never intend to get the commercial propagation permit and breed them.

...but if I catch 2 Cal Kings, and they breed and produce offspring, I'm not allowed to keep the offspring (even though they were captive bred), as I understand the regs.

I'm not a CA resident, but am curious about the peculiarities of the regs.

-----
Chris McMartin
www.mcmartinville.com
I'm Not a Herpetologist, but I Play One on the Internet

I believe in that scenario you have until Dec 31 to give away or "dispose" of the offspring over and above your possession limit of 4 for Cal Kings in Calif. In order to keep the offspring you need to be a permit holder.
-----
Rick Staub
R&R Reptiles

If you are breeding any native species (native to California), you need to get a captive bred wildlife permit from the state fish and game dept. (It costs around $40 a year) I have had to have one for about 3 years now--for my cal king breedings. As a breeder, you can have as many animals as you like. The only limits I know of, are on collecting, and it is 4 animals (cal. kings) in your possession I believe. Other animals, have other limits--like one mountain king, or 25 side-blotched lizards, etc.) (This doesn't apply to me as all my animals are captive bred, so I don't really keep up on this part of the regulations.)

You can give away the offspring, if you like, but you can't release them into the wild--for disease reasons, they say. But, you still have to have a permit if you breed them, regardless of their origin and what you do with the offspring, and fill out forms, and give the forms to fish and game yearly,-- to account for all breedings, deaths, animals purchased, animals collected from the wild, and animals sold OR given away, and who they were sold to, or given away to, and for how much.

A fishing license is needed to collect any from the wild. (all mine were purchased as babies from breeders).--but pet owners and pet shops do not need to keep permits. (just the breeders). And pet shops must keep a record of their purchases on the premises for 3 years(I think that is the length of time). All sales invoices must have my permit number on the receipt I give.

Hope that clarifies it.--Oh, Yeah, only normal colored snakes apply (albinos are exempt from all permits and forms submitted to fish and game.)

Rodney

I honestly don't know either way, but I'll just point some wording here of a type that I see used to justify all kinds of things...

"Yes, like it or not, species are in decline in California in part because of over collection."

If 10,000,000 snakes die because of development and 1,000,000 are killed by people who are sure every snake is dangerous, if not the Devil himself, and ONE is "colleted" then the above statement is true. Since we can probably all agree that at least one specimin of any given species is probably collected now and then, no proof is required. The subtlety, of couse, is lost on anyone who has no interest in keeping snakes, which is most everyone...
-----
Larry D. Fishel
Side effects may include paralysis
and death but are generally mild.

Thanks for posting that - it's so very true, unfortunately.

Lisa