Relocation?

When animal control is called in my area to remove venomous snakes from peoples homes/yards they show up with shovel in hand to kill them on the spot. Many people in my area know of my passion for these animals and would prefer that the snakes just be removed from their property and not be killed. I have told many if they need to be "rescued" to give me a call and I would be more than happy to come pick up the snake and relocate it.

Well, it's middle of the snake season and they are starting to come down to peoples homes for relief from the heat, etc. and I'm getting calls. I am just a "regular" person though without extensive knowlege of the possible repercussions or these reloations. I have extensive remote property of my own that I have generally used as my release spot. The habitat and elevation is the same but certainly already populated by other snakes in the area..... so, my bottom line question is .....

Should I take the chance that the animals relocation may NOT be successful and go ahead and continue to relocate, or just get out of the way and let animal control kill the animals when they are found.

It's hard to let a beauty like this be killed just because it was in the wrong place at the wrong time....

Cathy,

Given those choices, I don't see a choice. Relocating to a remote area somewhat closer may be a better choice. That's what I do around here, but typically I rescue non-venomous species in my locality. Of course, that may not be feasible for you and may not have the desired long term effect of keeping them away from predators (ie Animal Control and their shovels).

One of the biggest hazards of remote relocation is not an issue in your case. In colder areas, the subject of denning comes into play. Shift an animal too far from its den (yes, they return year after year) and it may thrive throughout the summer, only to perish with the changing seasons. The goal of relocation should not be to put the animal so far away that it will never encounter people, only to take it out of a threatening situation and let it live it's life in peace (obviously, there needs to be some consideration of the distance...but you get my point)

Doing right by whatever animal I get involved with has always been the highest priority and the line isn't as clear when it comes to dealing with these native species. It just "feels" right to relocate and great to watch one of these guys as they crawl away.

So... this snake has now been released into this locale:



This Ruber has been with me for 3 days and during the entire time NEVER once sounded a rattle warning. Hopefully this remote location will give this snake a chance at a full, productive life. One of my concerns was to try to relocate near a source of water. Original location was in housing track that has man-made lake nearby..... new location has several "washes" in the area and I'm hoping will have adequate water as needed.

Thanks for the replys! My parting shot.....

I remember hearing (and reading) somewhere (not sure where, will have to check) that a study done in FL showed that relocation further than a kilometer or so from where the snake was found resulted in high mortality rates among all species studied (not sure which ones). Anyone else hear about this and care to verify?

Originally Posted by psilocybe

I remember hearing (and reading) somewhere (not sure where, will have to check) that a study done in FL showed that relocation further than a kilometer or so from where the snake was found resulted in high mortality rates among all species studied (not sure which ones). Anyone else hear about this and care to verify?

I'm not sure if it's the same study you are speaking of but somewhere I have heard/seen something similar. The high mortality rate wasn't only due to not being able to find an adequate area to den in the winter but the inability to escape from predators in known boroughs.

Ideally they should be relocated nearby, of course. On the other hand, if that is not feasible, the shovels are 100% fatal.

I've heard of a few similar studies. I believe that in colder zones, the mortality increases at a much shorter relocation distance.

Here's a place which mentions it...this is from Tanith's page, someone who obviously knows what she is talking about.

Originally Posted by From Snakegetters.com webpage

Relocation is the first and best option, assuming there is sufficient habitat left near the capture site. If you cannot realistically relocate the animal within 500 feet of the capture site, captivity is a preferred option. Do not relocate wild animals more than 1 kilometer from the capture site as the mortality rate is extremely high in displaced adult snakes of all species studied to date. Animals recovered from recent construction sites should generally be taken into captivity if there does not appear to be any sustainable habitat left around the site.

While most snakes identified on the phone as venomous are actually harmless, if you do identify a snake as venomous you should not attempt to capture it unless you are properly experienced and licensed. Alert the hotline and we will dispatch a second volunteer who has the appropriate skills. All volunteer activities are conducted at your own risk and you should always use good judgement and put your safety first. Minors may not go on calls unless accompanied by their parent or guardian.

Here's the page: http://snakegetters.com/volunteer.html

Please note that what is on my page is suggested policy for the volunteers who were working with me to relocate venomous snakes in Florida. I believe they are rational decisions for these circumstances, based on the studies I have read and the field biologists I have had a chance to talk to. I would not want to state that these conditions would be ideal for all snakes everywhere.