 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Todd Evans on July 13, 2002 at 01:50:31:
In Reply to: Back to you, Sir posted by Byron Larkin on July 12, 2002 at 14:19:47:
Hello there, first off, I must agree with Steve that his is probably the most mature subject I've ever seen on ANY of the KS forums.
I have a couple questions and points of discussion to bring up on the topic, yet maybe slightly off topic. First off, what factors determine the "home range" of any snake. I assume that they would include food sources, mate requirements, etc.
I wonder, first off, to EDBs ever "den" like their northern cousins (I'm from PA). The reason I ask is because from my knowledge of the timbers we have, they habitually leave their den but return every year. Other species rely on these dens as well, including Copperheads, Black Rats, Garters, and so on. We've discovered here that not only do we have to consider the den site as an ecological need for snake species but also the route that the snakes take to reach the den. Strategically placed roads have done their share of damaging the local population of EVERY species that utilizes these dens. I guess what I'd like to know in essence, is do EDBs have a home range and "another" range (up here the timbers home range is different than the den range)?
Another question I would pose is whether or not the range size has changed over the years due to changes on the factors of said range. In other words, WAY back in the day, when food may have been more plentiful, was the range smaller than it may be today? With not as far to go, did they? For instance, with the roads in Florida, are there OTHER DOR animals found that may lead to clues as to the declining population of the snake species? Has competition become a factor with other predatory animals picking off the supply before the EDB can get to it. As far as the Texas/Florida comparison, with a larger area of "untouched" land, I would think of it as a sort of spectrum of effect.
Say for instance that there was a 100 sq mile area encircled by a road. The animals directly in contact with the road would have the greatest effect on their population (estimate 1 mile into the territory) those within 2-6 miles within the area would have the fewer effects to their numbers. Those on the innermost mileage would be relatively unnaffected, but still adversely so. What I'm trying to say is that with a larger area, regardless of the cause for the decline (the road) the more "true" wildlife there is.
The problem with direct comparison, as you two are involved in, is that you don't seem to be taking in all the factors of the area. Although Byron DID mention that the area quoted was not prime EDB habitat anyway, the other areas that are may have OTHER concerns as well. Even though a road may be miles or hundreds of miles away, air polution in general MAY affect the plantlife in the general area (even a miniscule ammount) which then leads to other problems along the food chain. So you see, you can't claim that the main factor is the carload on the roadways, the development of the human utopia we're creating is what's causing the problems over the years. Perhaps, the EDBs we're debating about aren't getting the same size prey items they were 100 years ago. There are alot of factors to take into consideration.
Incidentally, we had purchased a "captive born" (althoug obviously not....skinny, parasitized, etc. EDB at a reptile show. This thing was a monster, the largest I had ever seen. It was a mere 6'3", but still an impressive size for an obvious WC.
Keep the comments coming, I like this post.
Todd Evans
Beyond Utopia Serpentarium
