• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

CornSnake in the wild.... :)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks Rats n Corns. I remember my 'davesfiles' account username/password. I'd rather keep my real name. ('dave partington') (if kathy and Robbie and a slew of others can be comfortable being who they truly are in real life, so can I). My second ID on this site. Keeps it 'real', so to 'speak'. Got fed up with hiding behind a username that wasn't true to myself. Makes me more "accountable". Thanks for the info. ;D dave partington
 
Last edited:
Have we all forgot in the wild there are plenty of pathogens as well? I have to say I wouldn't release a native or other non native species into the wild because I believe their chance of survival would be lower and I'm a gymp and would feel bad. All animals carry bacterias and other pathogens whether in the wild or in captivity so the germ theory is just not doing it for me personally. These snakes have been released onto his property in a controled geographic location, and prior were kept in a clean facility unlike their new life in the wild. Sure they could be harboring something, but its nothing thats not already out there- snakes don't get certain illnesses in captivity and others in the wild for the most part bacterias are native to both locations.
 
Hi Dave, I'm new here. With all due respect to you, Rich Z and the rest of his forum's participants- it simply IS irresponsible for Rich to release his captive monstrosities into the wild. In fact, this behavior is illegal in many states. Unfortunately it seems as if many people involved in this thread are just so stubborn and biased in favor of Rich that they will not listen to reason. That's how it appears to me, an impartial observer who knows none of you.

Just out of curiosity, what is your definition of "opinion"?

"Captive monstrosities"? I believe your bias is showing regardless of any actual issues concerning space alien pathogens that might have snuck into my closed collection via airborn particulates from passing comets.

So people are stubborn and unwilling to listen to reason simply because their opinions differ from yours? Therefore yours MUST be the only voice of reason based on that lone fact? Got news for you, fella, impartial observers can be just as incorrect in their beliefs as partial ones can be. Me thinks you need to look up the definition of "impartial", because although you may not know anyone in this discussion (which I rather doubt anyway), your statement aboud "captive monstrosities" most certainly paints you as being partial to whatever you happen to define as "non-monstrosities". So I believe your opinion must be taken within that light of prejudice, regardless of your actual claims to the contrary.

I believe that Rich has a responsibility to rid himself of his burden (his excessive snake collection and progeny) through legitimate, responsible means that do not unnecessarily put the native wild population of herps at risk of contracting something from his collection that they aren't prepared for.

And what exactly would be those so-called "legitimate, responsible means" you speak of? And what sort of divergence in genetic heartiness could have possibly taken place in the matter of years that would cause the wild populations of corn snakes to become debilitatingly defenseless against pathogens that are most likely endemic in both populations? By using logic similar to what you are stating here, then releasing human prisoners after they have been locked away for several years or more can be detrimental to the rest of the human population because of some undetermined biological shift that takes place in populations that are not free and unfettered compared to those populations that are freely mobile geographically. Certainly if this were the case, I believe we would have heard about this devastating turn of events long before now.

This IS a matter of interest for all herp enthusiasts because our image is being heavily scrutanized at the moment. The python debacle has been sensationalized by the media and now herpers are being mischaracterized and demonized for the exact same behavior that Rich is guilty of.

Releasing pythons outside of their natural range is in no way similar to releasing corn snakes that are WITHIN their natural range. Sorry, but such a comparison simply defies any attempts at having a rational discussion. Which colors this discussion by your bias once again in trying to forge illogical associations that really do not exist.

BTW, I note that you are using a proxy server in an apparent attempt to hide your real identity. Certainly this doesn't give much credence to your own committment to your opinions. And certainly lends the possibility to the discussion that you are merely someone who has already thrown their hat into the ring here, attempting to support by numbers alone an untenable and unpopular side to a discussion.

Say what you will about my complaint being idiosynchratic or unsavory in a place where Rich is so popular, the reasoning behind it is obvious whether it's a matter of consensus or not.

Obvious to whom? So the fact that a majority of people may agree with me can simply be blown off as a consensus of Rich Z groupies blindly agreeing with me in face of your own logic and reason? As for my popularity, or lack thereof, I believe that your complaint may simply be "unsavory" based on the "emotional and unsupported by facts" opinion that you have, rather then anything specific to me personally. Claiming that you have cornered the market in logic and reason, and everyone else is a dunderhead because they don't agree with you is really not a proven way to get support for simply a differing opinion.

Tell you what, show me one substantiated instance of a population of corn snakes being decimated because of the actions of someone releasing captive hatched corns into wild populations and you will get my support for your stance. Until you can do that, your OPINION carries absolutely no more weight then someone standing wild-eyed on the corner sporting a sign saying that "The End Is Near!" due to some nebulous and unspecified event.

Fact of the matter is, my OPINION is that you are just personally antagonistic towards anyone working with genetic "monstrosities" under any circumstances, regardless of what the final disposition of them may be. This just happens to be a small bandwagon of convenience at this time for you to jump onto.
 
Have we all forgot in the wild there are plenty of pathogens as well? I have to say I wouldn't release a native or other non native species into the wild because I believe their chance of survival would be lower and I'm a gymp and would feel bad. All animals carry bacterias and other pathogens whether in the wild or in captivity so the germ theory is just not doing it for me personally. These snakes have been released onto his property in a controled geographic location, and prior were kept in a clean facility unlike their new life in the wild. Sure they could be harboring something, but its nothing thats not already out there- snakes don't get certain illnesses in captivity and others in the wild for the most part bacterias are native to both locations.

Heck, I dunno, but if I were to get a wild caught corn snake to add to my population, would placing them into quarantine be to protect IT from the possible pathogens in my own collection, or to protect MY COLLECTION from possible pathogens that the wild caught may harbor?
 
Just curious here, do you have another ID by which by we know you as? Seeing you've made 3 posts to this site under this ID, the first being on this thread. A little credibility goes a long way, something I discovered under my first ID on this site, 'davesfiles'.

Dave- I don't have any other accounts on this site and my only psuedonym here is Crotalus (because seriously, rattlesnakes are the coolest organism to ever grace the cosmos, right?). I have a little university history in the biological sciences but nothing that would lend any credibility to my claims. I think they're pretty much self evident unless someone has a valid reason to refute them (and can make an absolute guarantee that transferring pathogens is not a risk).
 
So... what about the endangered animal repopulation programs? Some endangered animal species are captive bred in zoos, raised up a bit, and then released in the wild to help raise their numbers. I know that's not an issue with the corn snake, but really, what's the difference? Either way, you're taking an animal that was bred in captivity and releasing it into the wild in it's own natural range.
 
Seems that there are 2 basic camps in this debate, but I haven't heard any proof either way.

I suppose releasing them has an unknown potential of harm, whatever that may be, but which has not yet manifested. Perhaps time will tell, and people will cry, "I told you so!"

The argument against release seems based on the aforementioned potential. I guess it's based on the historical evidence that many human interventions have been deleterious. (Plus the many posts that have stated that its a terrible idea to release captive snakes back into the wild, again using potential as the basis.)
Since feelings and parroting warnings seem to play a big part in this debate, I find that I lean to the side that says, "No Big Deal."

Wouldn't it be a great opportunity for study, though? I bet someone would just love to get out there and monitor the fluctuations. It will be extremely interesting to see the corns in the area after twenty years or so.
 
"Just out of curiosity, what is your definition of "opinion"?"

The same one that's found in the Oxford English Dictionary.

"'Captive monstrosities'? I believe your bias is showing regardless of any actual issues concerning space alien pathogens that might have snuck into my closed collection via airborn particulates from passing comets."

Yes, I am biased. I'm not a huge fan of certain parts of the herpetoculture industry such as the manipulation of breeding for cosmetic purposes. I don't claim any validity in this opinion other than to state that it's a personal preference and fondness that I have for the animal itself and in its natural state. You and other herpetolculturists ought to be free to create, sell and proffit from these monstrosities, but I don't have to like it. I support the herpetolculture industry nontheless.

"So people are stubborn and unwilling to listen to reason simply because their opinions differ from yours?"

No, it's because their opinion supports irresponsible behavior and because they are demonstrating a greater bias than the one that you accused me of above. This is obvious to me, an outside observer who has nothing to lose or gain by supporting or not supporting you.


"Therefore yours MUST be the only voice of reason based on that lone fact?"

You're just being silly. That's an entirely invalid conclusion drawn from an argument that I never made (a strawman).

"Got news for you, fella, impartial observers can be just as incorrect in their beliefs as partial ones can be."

Agreed, but what does that have to do with the validity or invalidity of my criticism of your irresponsibility?

"Me thinks you need to look up the definition of "impartial", because although you may not know anyone in this discussion (which I rather doubt anyway), your statement aboud "captive monstrosities" most certainly paints you as being partial to whatever you happen to define as "non-monstrosities". So I believe your opinion must be taken within that light of prejudice, regardless of your actual claims to the contrary."

I can see where you could think that, but my opinion that many cosmetic breeding projects are unsavory is irrelevant to the conversation, my claim of impartiality was meant to establish that I have no axe to grind with you personally. This is important on message boards because often times a good honest point is obfuscated by personal issues that create a distraction.
My opinion about color morphs has nothing to do with my opinion about your irresponsibility.


"And what exactly would be those so-called "legitimate, responsible means" you speak of? "

I would assume that anyone well established in the breeding industry would know how to get rid of these animals. One way to do it, as unfortunate as it seems, is to euthanize them. You could also give them to coral snake owners as feeders, things of this nature. The point is that you created the problem of excess offspring, you should be able to find a solution that minimizes risk at all costs.

"And what sort of divergence in genetic heartiness could have possibly taken place in the matter of years that would cause the wild populations of corn snakes to become debilitatingly defenseless against pathogens that are most likely endemic in both populations?"

Not sure, but do you know that there is absolutely no risk? Of course not. I wouldn't even have mentioned any of this is I didn't think the risk was serious enough to justify it. However several states have used hard scientific evidence to enact law changes to reflect the seriousness of this risk- are you certain that your state hasn't outlawed it?

"By using logic similar to what you are stating here, then releasing human prisoners after they have been locked away for several years or more can be detrimental to the rest of the human population because of some undetermined biological shift that takes place in populations that are not free and unfettered compared to those populations that are freely mobile geographically. Certainly if this were the case, I believe we would have heard about this devastating turn of events long before now."

This analogy is hard to take seriously Rich. But since you mentioned it, I don't think the comparison works very well because the amount of unknown variables is radically higher in the sitatuation with the corn snakes. I have no experience with the prison system, but I would imagine that the health standards within them are at least at a standard that attempts to reduce pathogens etc. After all, the O.S.H.A. and the F.D.A. both have their hands in inspecting prison facilities, this I do know.


"Releasing pythons outside of their natural range is in no way similar to releasing corn snakes that are WITHIN their natural range. Sorry, but such a comparison simply defies any attempts at having a rational discussion. Which colors this discussion by your bias once again in trying to forge illogical associations that really do not exist."

Please don't try to instruct me on logic. No offense, but you've made quite a few obviously illogical statements already in the quotes above. I'm wondering if you misunderstood my post. I made no formal connection between the python debacle and you other than to remind everyone that herpers are being scrutanized, demonized and misrepresented all over the place. I don't expect that your corn snake releases are going to reign in a bunch of bad publicity, but I do think that conversations like these ought to happen more so that our entire hobbyist group can establish some ethical standards from within rather than have them forced on us by the government.

"BTW, I note that you are using a proxy server in an apparent attempt to hide your real identity. Certainly this doesn't give much credence to your own committment to your opinions. And certainly lends the possibility to the discussion that you are merely someone who has already thrown their hat into the ring here, attempting to support by numbers alone an untenable and unpopular side to a discussion."

Rich the fact that you stated so declaratively that I'm "using a proxy server in an apparent attempt to hide [my] real identity" honestly makes me chuckle a bit. It really is comedic because I did no such thing. If I have a proxy server, I can assure you that I did nothing purposefully to get it (don't even know what it is) nor did I design anything to deceive anyone about who I am.

Who I am doesn't matter. I think the attention that this subject (my identity) is getting stems from the nature of sites like this that participate in BOI-type message boards; everything remotely contentious becomes a witch hunt and a personal battle to the reptutative DEATH! I've peeked a little at the things that go on in places like the BOI and all I can do is sit back and shake my head as I see people hate each other over misunderstandings, egos and bullsh*t. It really shatters this hobby in my opinion. I'll have no part in that thank you very much. I would like my identity to remain annonymous (it's not like any of you know me anyhow).

"Obvious to whom? So the fact that a majority of people may agree with me can simply be blown off as a consensus of Rich Z groupies blindly agreeing with me in face of your own logic and reason?"

That's not how I would have put it, but sure.

"As for my popularity, or lack thereof, I believe that your complaint may simply be "unsavory" based on the "emotional and unsupported by facts" opinion that you have, rather then anything specific to me personally."

I don't mean to personally disparage you. I'm making reference to your behaviors as irresponsible and I chalk it up to a lapse in judgment or even a mistake in knowledge. I don't think it's a character flaw or personal problem. I know it seems like this conversation is about you letting corn snakes go into the wild, but it's really about you taking an unnecessary risk. No matter how hard you try to diminish the risk, you cannot fully escape it and to my knowledge it's high enough to warrant a long post like this to discuss it.

"Tell you what, show me one substantiated instance of a population of corn snakes being decimated because of the actions of someone releasing captive hatched corns into wild populations and you will get my support for your stance. Until you can do that, your OPINION carries absolutely no more weight then someone standing wild-eyed on the corner sporting a sign saying that "The End Is Near!" due to some nebulous and unspecified event."

I can't. Even if there were such a substantiated instance, I wouldn't put forth the effort to find it because my part of this discussion is more relevent to ethics than it is scientific evidence. It is unethical to release your captive born animals based on the principle that taking such a risk is unnecessary.

"Fact of the matter is, my OPINION is that you are just personally antagonistic towards anyone working with genetic "monstrosities" under any circumstances, regardless of what the final disposition of them may be. This just happens to be a small bandwagon of convenience at this time for you to jump onto."

I understand that you're probably irritated with me, but I would never invest even a second of my time or one molecule of my energy into a thread on a website that has no value to me over something so idiosynchratic and minute as my distaste for color morphs. I don't even care what color morphs are out there because I'm not even remotely interested. I also don't like Nissan cars and trucks because they are crap, but that doesn't mean that I go around to Nissan message boards in a giant conspiracy to misrepresent and slander Nissan users. Get me?

I'm not on a bandwagon and this isn't about me, it's about this hobby and the attitude of the people within it. Unfortunately due to this type of ubiquitous hubris, herpetoculture is threatened by the government and we have no organization from which to defend ourselves. Because there is such division due to giant inflated egos, we can't get organized and therefore can't combine resources to lobby in behalf of ourselves like organizations such as PETA have been so successful in doing. This isn't necessarily directed right at you Rick, but it's directed toward this attitude that once you get to a certain number of years in this business you're immune to correction.
 
Seems that there are 2 basic camps in this debate, but I haven't heard any proof either way.

I suppose releasing them has an unknown potential of harm, whatever that may be, but which has not yet manifested. Perhaps time will tell, and people will cry, "I told you so!"

The argument against release seems based on the aforementioned potential. I guess it's based on the historical evidence that many human interventions have been deleterious. (Plus the many posts that have stated that its a terrible idea to release captive snakes back into the wild, again using potential as the basis.)
Since feelings and parroting warnings seem to play a big part in this debate, I find that I lean to the side that says, "No Big Deal."

Wouldn't it be a great opportunity for study, though? I bet someone would just love to get out there and monitor the fluctuations. It will be extremely interesting to see the corns in the area after twenty years or so.

It's not just about the presence of the potential, it's about the degree of the potential. The degree is high enough that many states have enacted law changes to represent the high degree of risk.
 
Heck, I dunno, but if I were to get a wild caught corn snake to add to my population, would placing them into quarantine be to protect IT from the possible pathogens in my own collection, or to protect MY COLLECTION from possible pathogens that the wild caught may harbor?

Exactly my point nature is a lot dirtier than the controled environment of a facility.
 
I decided that Shaky was right and that I ought to present something more than just a feeling of criticism for Rich's releases, so here's a start:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/20095276

"...upper respiratory tract disease in the Desert Tortoise (G. agassizii) is thought to have been introduced into populations of tortoises in the Mojave Desert in the southwestern U.S.A. by release of ill captive desert tortoises. A similar situation appears to exist for certain populations of the Gopher Tortoise in Florida, U.S.A.."

This is an example of captive animals transmitting disease to native populations through release. This piece of evidence establishes that the degree of risk in this behavior is serious enough to warrant criticism.

I bet I could find others...
 
I decided that Shaky was right and that I ought to present something more than just a feeling of criticism for Rich's releases, so here's a start:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/20095276

"...upper respiratory tract disease in the Desert Tortoise (G. agassizii) is thought to have been introduced into populations of tortoises in the Mojave Desert in the southwestern U.S.A. by release of ill captive desert tortoises. A similar situation appears to exist for certain populations of the Gopher Tortoise in Florida, U.S.A.."

This is an example of captive animals transmitting disease to native populations through release. This piece of evidence establishes that the degree of risk in this behavior is serious enough to warrant criticism.

I bet I could find others...

Doesn't sound like they are all too positive about their speculations, now does it? Emphasis added, btw. Heck, I could strike a decent argument against that hypothesis concerning the gopher tortoises in that it's been a well publicized practice for developers wanting to build on the tortoises' natural preferred terrain, to dig out those tortoises and relocate them to localities that are NOT preferred for development. Coincidentally enough, those localities are not preferred for the tortoises neither, otherwise they would already be living there. Generally, those relocated areas are low lying, damp, and (yes, big stretch of the imagination here) quite likely to increase the incidence of respiratory distress from the elevated moisture levels in animals already highly stressed out from the relocation process. Even discounting this scenario, it could quite possibly be the relocation of wild SICK animals into other populations that contributed to the problem, and had nothing at all to do with captive released tortoises. For that matter, I don't believe that the gopher tortoise was ever all that popular as a pet anyway, so such an incidence of captive releases would be an insignificant factor compared to the wholesale relocations during the booming Florida development frenzy.

Now, back to corn snakes, heck, before I ever got into the business of producing corns to sell, I thought it was a noble gesture to release most of my corns in various locales all up and down the eastern seaboard back in the early to mid 80s. In the 20 years or so since I did that, has there EVER been any incident of an unexplained epidemic or die off among corn snakes in wild populations?

So this all boils down to your apparent baseless FEAR about releasing captive animals into the wild and the fact that someone who disagrees with you MUST be irresponsible? And you claim that some states have established laws against such releases? What states and what was the actual basis for those laws?

I would assume that anyone well established in the breeding industry would know how to get rid of these animals. One way to do it, as unfortunate as it seems, is to euthanize them. You could also give them to coral snake owners as feeders, things of this nature. The point is that you created the problem of excess offspring, you should be able to find a solution that minimizes risk at all costs.

See? You don't even understand the circumstances under which I have released some animals. I have never had a problem with excess offspring and can sell every one I want to. But some animals that demonstrate that they are not compatible with being in captivity, or insist on feed items other then that I would prefer they take, or perhaps have spinal kinks that are not life threatening yet make them difficult to sell, well, I BELIEVE they are better off with being released rather then your apparent solution, which is to just kill them. At least I give those living creatures a CHANCE. As far as the corn snakes themselves are concerned, wouldn't a rational person, if they thought hard enough about it, come to the logical conclusion that providing an animal a chance at survival is much more ethical and responsible then simply killing them without providing such a chance? In my opinion, if a person can't have even that minimal level of compassion for the animals they are working with, well perhaps working with living animals is something that they are not really cut out to do.

Sorry to belabor this point, but you are only expressing an opinion that is nothing more then that. Simply an OPINION. It is based completely on conjecture and supposition, and you are distraught that everyone else is not swallowing your opinion wholesale without requiring that some PROOF would be nice to support your opinion. You are stating that it is your opinion that releasing captive hatched animals MAY be detrimental to the wild population and it is better to kill the animals rather than take that chance. My opinion is that captive releases PROBABLY will not harm the wild population they may come in contact, and with that in mind, it is better to give those animals a shot at living rather then just kill them based on an unlikely scenario that some may be inflating to the level of fact rather than what is really nothing more then wild guesses.

Honestly, I have had this same conversation many times before, and to date no one has provided any proof to me contrary to my own opinion on this matter. Not that it matters any longer, as I am out of the business of breeding reptiles, but I guess I still like to engage in a debate of this nature, even if it is only an academic exercise.

So if you have any further information that is actually based on fact, please let me know. Otherwise mere repetition of the same arguments using different wording is just not going to be of interest to me.
 
Heck, I could strike a decent argument against that hypothesis concerning the gopher tortoises in that it's been a well publicized practice for developers wanting to build on the tortoises' natural preferred terrain, to dig out those tortoises and relocate them to localities that are NOT preferred for development. Coincidentally enough, those localities are not preferred for the tortoises neither, otherwise they would already be living there. Generally, those relocated areas are low lying, damp, and (yes, big stretch of the imagination here) quite likely to increase the incidence of respiratory distress from the elevated moisture levels in animals already highly stressed out from the relocation process. Even discounting this scenario, it could quite possibly be the relocation of wild SICK animals into other populations that contributed to the problem, and had nothing at all to do with captive released tortoises. For that matter, I don't believe that the gopher tortoise was ever all that popular as a pet anyway, so such an incidence of captive releases would be an insignificant factor compared to the wholesale relocations during the booming Florida development frenzy.


They still do this here, well actually the developers won't lift a finger to help, they would prefer to just bulldoze them in and bury them alive. But just last a summer I was out digging up gopher tortoises as a volunteer so they could be relocated. The developer had to allow volunteers as a requirement of their permit to dig up as many as they could find, but any that weren't found by the deadline set by the developer were bulldozed. I am not by any means pro developer and to be honest I wish they were not developing there (a little to close for my comfort) also hopefully we were not spreading around any diseases, but it did and to me still does seem to me at least like a better option than just bulldozing the tortoises in.

Anyways just wanted to add this still happens.
 
I really think that presented with a compelling argument against release, it would stop. So far, though, we haven't seen it.

Again, I agree that the potential is arguable, but people have been catching, keeping, and releasing snakes for way longer than twenty years.

Crotalus, we all see the point you're trying to make, and perhaps in some species, or even some habitats, populations may be quite susceptible, but in this case, I still lean the other way.
 
Crotalus, we all see the point you're trying to make, and perhaps in some species, or even some habitats, populations may be quite susceptible, but in this case, I still lean the other way.

Okay, then how about this (these are Australian Laws, not to be confused with U.S. laws):

Release into the wild of any snake that has been in captivity — whether native or not — is not permitted without a licence under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974...

Such a licence would normally only be issued by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation for rehabilitation of previously wild snakes and only if:
• the animal(s) have been completely isolated during rehabilitation;
• the animal(s) are returned close to their point of capture; and
• there is a very high conservation need to return the animals to the wild.
Release into the wild is also not in the best interests of the individual snake as it may be unable to survive. More importantly for our native snakes, there is a great risk of inadvertently introducing a disease into native snake populations.


The above was taken from page 12/pt. 6 of this pdf:

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/biodiversity/faunapermits/pdfs/fape_pdfs_hygiene_protocol.pdf

Of course this isn't a US law and nor should it be (federally), but it does reflect a credible world government agency federally banning the release of captive and native snakes into the wild for the purposes I've previously argued.

Maybe tomorrow I will have time to look around for official state legal statutes that make this type of thing illegal.
 
Okay, then how about this (these are Australian Laws, not to be confused with U.S. laws):

Release into the wild of any snake that has been in captivity — whether native or not — is not permitted without a licence under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974...

Such a licence would normally only be issued by the NSW Department of Environment and Conservation for rehabilitation of previously wild snakes and only if:
• the animal(s) have been completely isolated during rehabilitation;
• the animal(s) are returned close to their point of capture; and
• there is a very high conservation need to return the animals to the wild.
Release into the wild is also not in the best interests of the individual snake as it may be unable to survive. More importantly for our native snakes, there is a great risk of inadvertently introducing a disease into native snake populations.


The above was taken from page 12/pt. 6 of this pdf:

http://www.environment.sa.gov.au/biodiversity/faunapermits/pdfs/fape_pdfs_hygiene_protocol.pdf

Of course this isn't a US law and nor should it be (federally), but it does reflect a credible world government agency federally banning the release of captive and native snakes into the wild for the purposes I've previously argued.

Maybe tomorrow I will have time to look around for official state legal statutes that make this type of thing illegal.

I hope you aren't convinced that the majority of the people who would make such laws are any more knowledgeable about the FACTS then a jelly bean would be..... :rolleyes: They, too, are driven more by emotion and rhetoric then by logical deductions made from hard facts.
 
Crotalus, I appreciate your stance: I really do. As a guy who has released some corns in my day, I am curious about where you stand on some "gray areas."

I hunted the Okeetee club for quite a while. If I caught an average (for the area) corn snake, bagged it, and after looking it over determined it was a male and released it within a couple of miles, is there a danger there? What if I put several in the same bag prior? What if I drove as close to the collection spot possible to release? All are real scenarios.

I live a full state away from the Okeetee club, and have intentionally turned more than a few poor feeders and extra males loose that I produced. I live in corn snake country, but corns are scarce (comparatively), and the prettiest ones here are much more drab. No man-made recessive genes have ever existed in a single one of these animals. So I know without question when I have seen one of my animals working in the yard, hunting, or DOR. What realistic problems do you see with this: an animal from South Carolina progeny being released in North Carolina?

Extrapolate from that scenario to Rich's, if you will. I'm not here to gang up on you. Just interested on your stances.
 
Australia has a real problem - practically their entire fauna is endemic. Any introduced plants or animals can be very detrimental, and it has in many well-known cases. This, I believe, is the reason for their laws. However, I didn't ask for laws, I asked for evidence one way or another on releasing a native animal into it's own habitat.
I'm not trying to defend Rich, either, I'm just staying pretty neutral. As I said, If there was hard evidence, I think it would stop.
 
I hunted the Okeetee club for quite a while. If I caught an average (for the area) corn snake, bagged it, and after looking it over determined it was a male and released it within a couple of miles, is there a danger there? What if I put several in the same bag prior? What if I drove as close to the collection spot possible to release? All are real scenarios.

I live a full state away from the Okeetee club, and have intentionally turned more than a few poor feeders and extra males loose that I produced. I live in corn snake country, but corns are scarce (comparatively), and the prettiest ones here are much more drab. No man-made recessive genes have ever existed in a single one of these animals. So I know without question when I have seen one of my animals working in the yard, hunting, or DOR. What realistic problems do you see with this: an animal from South Carolina progeny being released in North Carolina?

Extrapolate from that scenario to Rich's, if you will. I'm not here to gang up on you. Just interested on your stances.

Hello Chip- I'm nothing close to an expert on disease or pathogen transfer, but I think that the same criticism of Rich would apply to you. It seems as if the degree of risk is still high enough that taking it simply because you had extra corns is unnecessary and irresponsible. I do understand, though, that herpers aren't generally aware that this could pose a problem and if they knew perhaps many of them wouldn't do it at all.

I would say that a responsible herper would always try their best to avoid releasing animals in areas where they weren't collected or would try to avoid collecting a surplus of animals to begin with. It's also irresponsible to release a w/c animal at the place of capture if the animal in question was collected (according to what I've read). I'm not trying to sound like the ethics police here, yet in a way I am. At the very least we can set up a dialogue of herping ethics and the duties of responsible herpers.

I don't really blame anyone who does this sort of thing ignorantly, but once a herper has been made aware of this risk and if they continue to do take it, well, they are negligent.
 
So... what about the endangered animal repopulation programs? Some endangered animal species are captive bred in zoos, raised up a bit, and then released in the wild to help raise their numbers. I know that's not an issue with the corn snake, but really, what's the difference? Either way, you're taking an animal that was bred in captivity and releasing it into the wild in it's own natural range.


I'm still waiting for someone to answer this question. :shrugs:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top