Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ttngx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-09T00:26:09.883Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rattlesnake collection drives—their implications for species and environmental conservation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 July 2009

Clifford Warwick ,
Catrina Steedman  and
Tricia Holford
Clifford Warwick
Affiliation:
The Institute of Herpetology, College Gates, 2 Deansway, Worcester, WR1 2JD, UK.
Catrina Steedman
Affiliation:
The Trust for the Protection of Reptiles, College Gates, 2 Deansway, Worcester, WR1 2JD, UK.
Tricia Holford
Affiliation:
The Trust for the Protection of Reptiles, College Gates, 2 Deansway, Worcester, WR1 2JD, UK.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Every year large numbers of rattlesnakes (Crotalus spp. and Sistrurus spp.) are collected from the wild in several states in North America. Some of these are collected purely for commercial reasons while others are collected for the traditional, although now largely commercial, ‘rattlesnake round-ups’. Together these activities may remove 300,000–500,000 snakes each year. The high level of hunting together with capture procedures that destroy habitat as well as snakes are damaging rattlesnake populations, other species, and habitat quality.

Type
Research Article
Information
Oryx , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , January 1991 , pp. 39 - 44
Copyright
Copyright © Fauna and Flora International 1991

References

Barker, D.G. 1988. Rattlesnakes. Dallas Morning News, 13 03 1988.Google Scholar
Black, J.H. 1981. Oklahoma rattlesnake hunts—1981. Bulletin Oklahoma Herpetological Society, 6 (2), 39–43.Google Scholar
Campbell, J.A., Formanowicz, D.R. Jr, and Brodie, E.D. Jr, 1989. Potential impact of rattlesnake round-ups on natural populations. Texas Journal of Science, 41 (3), 301–317.Google Scholar
Dodd, C.K. Jr 1987. Status conservation and management. In Snakes, Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (eds Seigel, R. A., Collins, J. T. and Novak, S. S.), pp. 478–513. MacMillan, New York.Google Scholar
Lawler, H.E. 1975. A zoo perspective on rattlesnake round-ups in the south-eastern US. Presented to the AAZPA Southern Zoo Workshop, Knoxville, Tennessee, 27–29 04 1975.Google Scholar
Seippel, A.J. 1988. Rattlesnake round-ups. Oklahoma Herpetological Society Newsletter, No. 3, 1–6.Google Scholar
Speake, D.W. 1986. In Vertebrate Animals of Alabama in Need of Special Attention (ed. R. H. Mount). Alabama Agricultural Experimental Station, Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama.Google Scholar
Speake, D.W. and McGlincy, J.A. 1985. Response of indigo snakes to gassing of their dens. Proceedings of Annual Conference of Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, 35, 135–138.Google Scholar
Speake, D.W. and Mount, R.H. 1973. Some possible ecological effects of ‘rattlesnake round-ups’ in the southeastern coastal plain. Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Game and Fish Commissioners, 1973, 267–277.Google Scholar
Warwick, C. 1990. Observations on collection, handling, storage and slaughter of western diamond-back rattlesnakes (Crotalus atrox). Herpetopathologia, in press.Google Scholar
Young, F.N. and Goff, C.C. 1939. An annotated list of the arthropods found in the burrows of the Florida gopher tortoise. Florida Entomol. 22, 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar