SWCHR BULLETIN Volume 5, Issue 3 Fall 2015

SWCHR BULLETIN Volume 5, Issue 3 Fall 2015

ISSN 2330-6025

Conservation – Preservation – Education – Public Information Research – Field Studies – Captive Propagation

The SWCHR BULLETIN is published quarterly by the SOUTHWESTERN CENTER FOR HERPETOLOGICAL RESEARCH PO Box 624, Seguin TX 78156 www.southwesternherp.com email: [email protected] ISSN 2330-6025

OFFICERS 2015-2016 COMMITTEE CHAIRS

PRESIDENT AWARDS AND GRANTS COMMITTEE Tim Cole Gerald Keown

VICE PRESIDENT COMMUNICATIONS COMMITEE Gerry Salmon Gerald Keown

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS COMMITTEE Gerald Keown [Vacant]

BOARD MEMBERS AT LARGE NOMINATIONS COMMITTEE Toby Brock D. Craig McIntyre Gerald Keown Benjamin Stupavsky Robert Twombley Bill White MEMBERSHIP COMMITTEE [Vacant] BULLETIN EDITOR Chris McMartin CONSERVATION COMMITTEE Robert Twombley ASSOCIATE EDITOR Ben Stupavsky

ABOUT SWCHR Originally founded by Gerald Keown in 2007, SWCHR is a 501(c)(3) non-profit association, governed by a board of directors and dedicated to promoting education of the Association’s members and the general public relating to the natural history, biology, taxonomy, conservation and preservation needs, field studies, and captive propagation of the herpetofauna indigenous to the American Southwest.

THE SWCHR LOGO JOINING SWCHR There are several versions of the SWCHR logo, all featuring the For information on becoming a member please visit the Gray-Banded Kingsnake (Lampropeltis alterna), a widely-recognized membership page of the SWCHR web site at reptile native to the Trans-Pecos region of Texas as well as http://www.southwesternherp.com/join.html. adjacent Mexico and New Mexico.

ON THE COVER: Southwestern Speckled Rattlesnake, Crotalus mitchellii pyrrhus, Yuma County, AZ (Bill White). With this photograph, Bill won the SWCHR 2014 ©2015 Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research. The SWCHR H. F. Koenig Award for Excellence in Herpetological Photography. Bulletin may not be reproduced in whole or in part on any web site or in any other publication without the prior explicit written consent of the Southwestern Center BACKGROUND IMAGE: Elephant Tusk, Big Bend NP, TX (Chris McMartin) for Herpetological Research and of the respective author(s) and photographer(s).

SWCHR Bulletin 25 Fall 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS

A Message from the President, Tim Cole 26

Thoughts on the Southern Rubber Boa, Charina bottae umbratica (Serpentes: Boidae), Richard F. Hoyer 27

Predation on a Pocket Mouse (Perognathus sp.) by a Big Bend Patch-nosed Snake, Salvadora hexalepis deserticola (Serpentes: Colubridae), Diego Ortiz 38

An Unconventional Path into the World of Venom Production, Rob Clark 41

Predation on a Bat by a Western Coachwhip, Coluber flagellum testaceus (Serpentes: Colubridae), Bill Love 44

A CALL FOR PAPERS

Are you a field herpetologist or a herpetoculturist working with species native to the American Southwest? Do you have a paper or an article you have written for which you would like to find a permanent repository? Want to be assured you will always be able to share it with the world? Submit it to the SWCHR Bulletin for possible publication. Submitted manuscripts from SWCHR members, as well as non- members, will be considered. There are NO page charges to have your articles appear in the SWCHR Bulletin, as some other publications are now requiring.

To be accepted for publication, submissions must deal with herpetological species native to the American Southwest. Such topics as field notes, county checklists, range extensions, taxonomy, reproduction and breeding, diseases, snake bite and venom research, captive breeding and maintenance, conservation issues, legal issues, etc. are all acceptable. For assistance with formatting manuscripts, search ‘scientific journal article format’ on the internet and tailor the resultant guidance to suit.

Previously published articles or papers are acceptable, provided you still hold the copyright to the work and have the right to re-publish it. If we accept your paper or article for publication, you will still continue to be the copyright holder. If your submission has been previously published, please provide the name of the publication in which it appeared along with the date of publication. All submissions should be manually proofed in addition to being spell checked and should be submitted by email as either Microsoft Word or text documents.

Send submissions to [email protected].

SWCHR Bulletin 26 Fall 2015

A Message from the President

I am honored to finish the term of President with Toby Brock changing his involvement with us, but not leaving us. Toby made a difficult decision to step down as President in order to focus on his educational and career goals. We wish him well and look forward to his continued involvement in SWCHR as a Board Member. I am looking forward to this issue of the SWCHR Bulletin, since I know all but one of the authors--and his reputation precedes him.

Exciting times are ahead for our organization! I am working on arranging a Spring field trip. If anyone has access to an area that is good for herping please share this information with me. I am especially interested if it’s in an area is lacking substantial data. One of the things we could offer property owners is setting up an iNaturalist project for their property if they are interested. I understand some folks do not want agencies to know what animals may be present on their property, so this may not be of interest to those landowners, but the opportunity should still be presented.

In addition to assuming the duties of SWCHR President, I am also a director on the board of the “Rattlesnake Preservation Trust,” which is also a non-profit organization putting on the inaugural “Lone Star Rattlesnake Days” in Texas April 30 and May 1, 2016. The motto for the event is “Changing the Way People Think about Rattlesnakes.” This two-day educational wildlife festival will feature live animal displays, speakers, and educational activities for the entire family in a safe, environmentally-friendly atmosphere. The no-kill event celebrates the magnificence of rattlesnakes and provides a sustainable alternative to the declining practice of the traditional rattlesnake roundup. The event is hosted by Rattlesnake Preservation Trust, a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization, whose mission is to share factual information and scientific data about rattlesnakes in order to promote conservation and respect for wildlife. SWCHR will have a table at this event. For more information, visit http://lonestarrattlesnakedays.org/ and join our Facebook group at https://www.facebook.com/groups/835373809870201/.

Next, we have “Snake Days” in Sanderson, Texas June 3-5, 2016, where SWCHR provides barbeque and drinks for attendees. Not only is this a great way to show support for this event (which will be in its 5th year!), SWCHR usually generates new members during the cookout.

Both of these events carry the same message as ours, with conservation and herping being a common denominator. Working together in the herp community seems to be a challenge lately. Refreshingly, SWCHR has been steadily professional, without the drama I’ve seen on most Facebook groups. I encourage you to visit our Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/SWCHR, and join in the discussion forums at our own website at http://www.southwesternherp.com/ which has a wealth of useful information.

I rarely text-message or private-message; the best way to contact me is by phone at (512) 83-SNAKE or [email protected]. I look forward to serving as your SWCHR President.

Tim Cole

SWCHR Bulletin 27 Fall 2015

Thoughts on the Southern Rubber Boa, belonged was not known. In 1973, Dr. Glenn Stewart found one live and one dead-on-road (DOR) boa on Mount Pinos, Charina bottae umbratica (Serpentes: Boidae) thus confirming the species’ occurrence there. That same year, Glenn confirmed the species occurred in the Tehachapi by Richard F. Hoyer Mountains. [email protected]

This article is an overview of the history of the Rubber Boa in southern California, with my personal take on the status of the subspecies from what evidence has become available. It is an adapted compilation of a series of posts appearing Summer 2015 on Field Herp Forum (www.fieldherpforum.com). Even though a great deal of what I mention is of an anecdotal nature and thus not valid from a purely scientific perspective, it nevertheless can provide some measure of understanding and insight along with how I view/interpret the existing evidence. Much of what I relate here is from memory although I did look up some of the details.

Despite there being many professional herpetologists in the greater metropolitan area of southern California, no one ever attempted to undertake a life history study of either the Rubber Boa in general or Southern Rubber Boa. Except for a number of published scientific notes or shorter communications that mentioned aspects of the species’ life history, almost all other published accounts addressing C. bottae pertained to taxonomy. I suspect the reason for the apparent lack of interest was due to the assumption the species was rare, and thus trying to acquire a A 35mm slide showing a Southern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae umbratica) found at a scout camp in the San Bernardino Mountains, San Bernardino County, decent sample on which to base research was considered to be California, on August 28 1970. Photo submitted by the author. too difficult.

In 1962 I had success in maintaining two boas and by 1965, the In the late 1970s and early 1980s, Glenn had some of his male had reached mature status and was noted courting the adult graduate students conduct surveys for the boa, mainly on Mount female. At that point I made the decision to pursue research on Pinos and the San Bernardino Mountains, but they also the species as a serious hobby. I went to the Oregon State performed some searches in the San Jacinto Mountains and a University library and found little had been published on the couple of other mountains near Mount Pinos. Those efforts boa. In less than a week, I became acquainted with all that had primarily were meant to assess the distribution of C. b. umbratica been written on the species. in the San Bernardino Mountains and potentially determine the relationship of the boa populations on Mount Pinos and the Tehachapi Mountains. The samples Glenn obtained from the Presence in Southern California latter two regions did not allow him to make any definitive statement as to the relationship between those two populations I will start with a recap of some observational history, then later and the C. b. umbratica populations. relate more recent developments and add my personal perspectives. Keep in mind that “perspectives” can change with the revelation of new information. Field Work

In his 1943 paper, Klauber mentioned a boa had been found on In the early 1970s I became acquainted with Dr. Glenn Stewart Mount Pinos (see Fig. 2, page 29) in the mid-1930s and taken to due to our mutual interest in the Rubber Boa. In 1973, Glenn the University of California—Los Angeles, but it escaped before sent me information he had recorded on, I believe, all preserved it could be examined. Therefore, the species was assumed to Southern Rubber Boas at the time—about 19 in all. In occur on Mount Pinos, but to which subspecies that population reviewing that data, I noted the lengths ranged from about 11

SWCHR Bulletin 28 Fall 2015 inches to 19 ¾ inches. A random sample of Oregon boas surely During my 10-day stay in mid-May 1993, I found no boas as it would have included specimens in the neighborhood of 24 was too hot and dry. In 1994, I arrived in mid-April and spent 3 inches or greater. In my response to Glenn, I wondered if C. b. weeks making searches and setting up sites with artificial cover umbratica was a ‘dwarf’ form of the species. objects. During that time, I found a single C. b. umbratica. Each of those summers after returning to Oregon, I wrote Glenn that Fast forward to 1992. I had retired in October the previous I was still very enthusiastic about the project, as all indicators I year, and in the spring I contacted Glenn to propose a 4-5 year had observed suggested the boas had to exist in decent densities. field/laboratory study of the Southern Rubber Boa in the San In 1995, I arrived at the U.S. Forest Service’s Arrowhead Ranger Bernardino Mountains. Glenn accepted my proposal and thus in station on Friday, March 31st at approximately 6 p.m. which was mid-May 1993 I traveled to the San Bernardino Mountains and after hours. I thought I was going to spend the next three nights began the study, which lasted until early fall 1997. During those in the back of my pickup. By luck, a receptionist was still in the years, I would come down for anywhere from 10 days to 3 headquarters building so I could get a key to the fire barracks weeks and make searches, then come back the following (the only perk I had during that study was the fact I was allowed September or October to release any boas I had taken to to stay in the fire barracks at the ranger station each year!). She Oregon. Our results were published in two papers in 2000 (see recognized me and acted extremely surprised to see me. When I below). inquired why that was the case, she said I had been the laughing stock of all the Forest Service personnel, as here was this “hot shot boa guy” from Oregon, and in two years had come up with but a single Southern Rubber Boa. That is why no one expected to see me back in 1995, and my lack of finds was all the proof they needed to confirm that C. b. umbratica was indeed rare.

In about 8-10 days at the beginning of April that year, I captured 26 boas. That number equaled or exceeded the number of voucher specimens of the subspecies in all collections. Glenn’s Memorandum of Understanding, a legal document with CDFG, indicated we could retain up to 20 boas per season for up to 180 days. Therfore, I retained 18 to take back to Oregon and released the other 8. Glenn had pretty much adopted the conventional wisdom that C. b. umbratica was rare, despite the reasons I had proposed in earlier years as to why that likely wasn’t the case. After all, that was the same conventional wisdom that had considered the species rare throughout its distribution. In Oregon, I had demonstrated with C. b. bottae the perception of ‘rarity’ was a myth.

At any rate, through 1997, I was able to record data on a representative sample of 83 initial captures and 21 recaptures, large enough so that the data could be treated statistically by Glenn. The sample size was also large enough to provide solid clues to the first three goals mentioned above. We reported new information on various aspects of C. b. umbratica life history, and Fig. 1. Distribution in the United States of the Rubber Boa (Charina bottae), the life history of the species in general. Second, instead of adapted from various sources. Map by Chris McMartin. being rare, the Southern Rubber Boa was shown to occur in appreciable densities in comparison to all other species of snakes encountered during the study. In fact, the data suggest the boa When I initiated the study, I had four goals. The first was to is most likely the most abundant species of snake in the San record as much life history information as possible on C. b. Bernardino Mountains from approximately 5500’ feet elevation umbratica. Second, I hoped to determine if the boa was truly rare, and above. Third, we confirmed the Southern Rubber Boa was as I had my doubts. Third, I wanted to determine if C. b. indeed a stunted or dwarf form of the species. As for the last umbratica was indeed a dwarf form of the species. And finally, I goal relating to taxonomy, to help resolve that issue, planned to record information pertaining to taxonomic issues. representative samples from boa populations elsewhere in

SWCHR Bulletin 29 Fall 2015

Southern California were needed—and that is precisely what I In 1966, Dr. John Cunningham recorded data on 137 preserved have been trying to accomplish since late 1997. Rubber Boas as follows: 48 C. b. utahensis, 79 C. b. bottae, and 10 C. b. umbratica from the San Bernardino Mountains. Dr. During 1997, the last year of our study in the San Bernardino Cunningham’s report supported Klauber’s subspecies Mountains, I began making searches in the Tehachapi Mountains arrangement: and on Mount Pinos. By 1999, my sample of captured boas from the Tehachapis was large enough to realize that population The percentage in which the partietal was divided, the supraoculars also was of the dwarf form of C. bottae. Obtaining a penetrated deeply between the frontal and the parietal, and the posterior of the frontal was straight are as follows for umbratica, representative sample from Mount Pinos took much longer but utahensis, and bottae, respectively: 60.00, 28.30, 67.94; 40.00, 92.45, was finally achieved due to the help of some great field herpers. 97.40; 60.00, 15.09, 9.99. It is now clear the Mount Pinos boas are of the dwarf form as well. Noteworthy is where Dr. Cunningham writes, “Between 1956 and 1961 approximately 30 C. b. umbratica were collected in the In May 2000 I began accumulating data on the boa population San Bernardino Mountains at an elevation of approximately on Breckenridge Mountain, due north of the Tehachapi 2000m between Running Springs and Skyforest.” He also Mountains and approximately 35 miles east of Bakersfield. Then mentions smaller numbers of boas were collected at five other in 2001 and 2002, I began gathering data on the boa populations localities in the San Bernardino Mountains. in the Greenhorn Mountains, due north of Breckenridge Mountain; the Piute Mountains, due east of Breckenridge Mountain; the Scodie Mountains, due east of the Piute Mountains; and the Southern Kern Plateau, north of the Piute and Scodie Mountains and Lake Isabella. Getting along in age, I made the decision to concentrate what time I had left trying to acquire data on samples from Breckenridge Mountain and the Southern Kern Plateau. Because of this, my samples from the southern and northern parts of the Greenhorns are not large. I decided not to tackle the Piutes, visiting them just twice, and have data from only one or two specimens. Similarly, I only visited Alamo Mountain, Frazier Mountain, Mount Abel west of Interstate 5, and the Scodie Mountains once or twice. However, with great fortune, a week before I arrived at Kernville in 2002, a group of herpers including Brad Alexander and Herpetological Review editor Robert Hansen visited the Scodie Mountains, and Brad found a gravid female boa. That female produced five neonates later that summer, from which I was able to record pertinent information.

Taxonomy Issues

In 1943, Laurence Klauber proposed the subspecies Charina Fig. 2. Distribution in California of the Rubber Boa. Red dots indicate bottae umbratica, the Southern Rubber Boa, based on his approximate locations of the mountains discussed in the article. Yellow shading examination of two preserved specimens, one each from the San indicates C. b. bottae and purple indicates C. b. umbratica. All Rubber Boa populations in Kern County (denoted by gray shading) have tentatively been Jacinto and San Bernardino Mountains. Klauber also resurrected considered by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife as C. b. umbratica. the Great Basin subspecies, C. b. utahensis, which had been The author notes there is a complete lack of evidence in support of the agency’s discounted by previous authority. In 1966, Dr. John position (see article for taxonomic issues). Map by Chris McMartin. Cunningham of the University of California—Los Angeles published a note on C. bottae where he recorded scalation data on In 1974, D. B. Erwin made comparisons between 28 C. b. a number of specimens from the San Bernardino Mountains. umbratica (1 live, 27 preserved) and the data Klauber had Cunningham’s report supported Klauber’s subspecies published on the other two other subspecies. Erwin agreed with arrangement. both Klauber and Cunningham with respect to recognizing three subspecies, and suggested the Southern Rubber Boa be elevated

SWCHR Bulletin 30 Fall 2015 to species status. With respect to the data he recorded on a The prior two reports of 1976 and 1978 misstated the Southern larger sample of C. b. umbratica, Erwin modified Klauber’s key to Rubber Boa as occurring on Mount Pinos. On Page 1 of Gary subspecies. Keasler’s 1981 report, the author correctly states, “The Southern Rubber Boa is found only in the San Bernardino and San Jacinto Also in 1974, I published my first paper on the boas from Mountains of southern California.” Oregon and noted the subspecies arrangement of C. b. utahensis and C. b. bottae did not work in Oregon. That same year, Dr. In Glenn Stewart’s 1988 paper, he concludes, “My examination Ron Nussbaum and I published a paper reporting on the species of four specimens from the Tehachapi Mountains and two throughout its range in the Northwest. That paper also dozen or so from the Mount Pinos area indicate they fall dismissed the Great Basin subspecies as not being valid due to somewhere between bottae and umbratica with regard to scale the large amount of overlap in defining scalation features. But counts and frontal plate configuration. These populations may Ron went a step further and dismissed C. b. umbratica as a valid represent intergrades.” subspecies based on what he mentioned as a non-concordance of key characters and clinal variation. Since I had not examined In 1988, one of Dr. Stewart’s graduate students, Cathy Marie any C. b. umbratica specimens, at the time and thereafter I always Weisman, conducted a “Morphometric and Electrophoretic felt a bit uneasy about that particular part of our paper. From Comparison between the Pacific Rubber Boa (Charina bottae that point on, the Great Basin subspecies was dropped but the bottae) and the Southern Rubber Boa (Charina bottae umbratica).” Southern Rubber Boa continued to be accepted as a valid Keasler, Stewart, and Weisman recorded morphological data on subspecies along with the Northern Rubber Boa, C. b. bottae. 134 live and preserved Rubber Boas. They noted a large overlap in midbody dorsal scale row and ventral scale counts between In a report entitled “Southern Rubber Boa Study on Mount the two subspecies. However, the study did show that “both Pinos, 1976,” Dr. Stewart’s graduate student Gary Keasler morphological and enzymatic differences do exist between C. b. indicated ten boas were found on Mount Pinos and one on bottae and C. b. umbratica.” Mount Abel. Noteworthy is an entry on page 9 indicating a boa had been sighted one mile north of the Mount Pinos By the late 1990s I had captured a sizeable sample of boas from campgrounds by Mark Hayes in June, 1972. In the ‘Discussion’ the Tehachapi Mountains and a few from Mount Pinos. The section is the following: “Dr. Stewart believes the rubber boas information I recorded indicated there was considerable overlap from Mount Pinos and the Tehachapi Mountains to be in scalation features in the boas from those two populations and intergrades between Southern Rubber Boas from the San C. b. umbratica. Specifically, an unknown but sizeable percentage Bernardino Mountains and the Pacific Rubber Boa (Charina of boas from the Tehachapis and Mount Pinos would key to be bottae bottae) from the Sierras.” Southern Rubber Boas, while the majority would key out to be Northern Rubber Boas. At the time, I was also aware that in In 1977, Dr. Stewart published the species account for the using Laurence Klauber’s key, there was a certain percentage of Rubber Boa. He did not recognize utahensis as a subspecies but C. b. umbratica that would not key out to match the subspecies’ recognized both umbratica and bottae. In his “Comments” section scalation characters. is the following: “Further study of the populations on Mount Pinos, the Tehachapi Mountains, and the Sierra Nevada is It should be noted that Klauber, Cunningham, Erwin, and to needed to clarify the status of umbratica, but it seems best now to some degree Weisman and Rodriguez-Robles were all retain two sub-specific designations and classify the Mount handicapped by a lack of geographical representation of the boa Pinos and Tehachapi Mountain populations as umbratica x bottae populations in Southern California, and not having large enough intergrades.” samples from each location. Klauber had established his key based on just 2 C. b. umbratica specimens. He was aware the Dr. Stewart provides a “definition’'’ of both subspecies as subspecies occurred on Mount Pinos but had no vouchers to follows: examine. Furthermore, the species had yet to be documented C. b. bottae: dorsal rows 39-53, mean 44; ventrals 188-231, mean 206; from the Tehachapi Mountains, Breckenridge Mountain, the subcaudals 24-43, mean 36; frontal plate usually with distinctly Greenhorn Mountains, the Piute Mountains, the Scodie convex or angular posterior margin; large size, average over 400mm; dark dorsal color, olive green to medium brown. Mountains, and Southern Kern Plateau. At that time, the furthest known southern distribution of the species in the Sierra C. b. umbratica: dorsal rows 32-42, mean 39; ventrals 182-217, mean Nevadas was in the vicinity of Sequoia National Park. Thus, 191; subcaudals 25-34, mean 31; frontal plate usually with straight or most comparisons Klauber made were between the two only slightly convex posterior margin; small size, average under 400mm; light dorsal color, usually camel tan in adults. Southern Rubber Boa specimens, boas from the main Sierra Nevada Mountains, and boas of the San Francisco Bay area. To

SWCHR Bulletin 31 Fall 2015 this day, such a comparison is striking and thus understandable Recognizing that problem, in late 1998 I began to collect tissue why, despite only having two C. b. umbratica specimens, Klauber samples from many boa populations. In 1999, I searched for an went forward with recommending a third (Southern Rubber investigator or laboratory that would undertake a molecular Boa) subspecies. study to help resolve the taxonomic relationships between the various boa populations. Someone at OSU gave me the name of Klauber’s 1943 key was supposed to allow a person to Drs. Javier Rodriguez-Robles and Ted Papenfuss at University distinguish Southern Rubber Boas (C. b. umbratica) from boas of California—Berkeley. When I contacted Javier, I found he belonging to the Pacific (Northern) Rubber Boa (C. b. bottae) and Ted Papenfuss were already in the preliminary stages of such populations. However, mainly due to the above two a study. I then got them in touch with Dr. Glenn Stewart at Cal considerations, his key has turned out to be less than reliable. Poly, Pomona. I had offered tissue for the study but Javier only This is very similar to the situation I discovered in Oregon. wished to use tissue from specimens that had been vouchered. Klauber’s key to subspecies was supposed to allow identification Since I release all boas for mark/recapture efforts, I believe only between the Pacific and Great Basin (C. b. utahensis) subspecies; one boa I had collected ended up in that study, a male boa from the former occurring west of the Cascade Mountains’ crest, and the Tehachapi Mountains which had died. I had given it to Dr. the latter occurring east of the crest. Here again, it is my view Robert Stebbins, then living in Kensington. that a lack of geographical representation and sample size resulted in a key that has turned out to be unworkable.

An excerpt from Klauber’s key is reproduced below.

Key to the Subspecies of Charina bottae

A. Scale rows 45 or more; parietal usually divided_____bottae

AA. Scale rows 44 or less; parietal usually entire

B. Ventrals more than 191; posterior edge of frontal sharply angular or semicircular; sharp point of surpaocular penetrating to some depth between frontal and parietal______utahensis

BB. Ventrals less than 192; posterior edge of frontal only slightly convex; supraoculars with blunt end, Typical male Pacific Rubber Boa (C. b. bottae) found on the western slopes of the penetrating little between frontal and parietal__umbratica Cascade Mountains in Oregon. Photo by the author’s son Ryan Hoyer; used with permission. Summary The rubber snakes may be divided into three subspecies, Charina bottae bottae of the Pacific Slope, C. b. utahensis of the Great Basin, and In 2001, Javier, Glenn, and Ted published their mitochondrial C. b. umbratica in southern California. The number of scale rows and DNA study of the Rubber Boa. Their results demonstrated that ventrals are the best key characters for segregating these subspecies. C. b. umbratica was a very distinct genetic unit exhibiting a significant degree of divergence from all other boa populations Javier tested. Javier placed all boas into two major clades: the What transpired is that 40% of the boas east of the Cascades in southern clade included the two Southern Rubber Boa Oregon that were supposed to be the Great Basin subspecies populations from the San Jacinto and San Bernardino would key out to be the Pacific (Northern) subspecies. Similarly, Mountains; and the northern clade consisting of all other boa the reverse also occurred in which 40 % of the boas west of the populations he had tested, or all Northern Rubber Boa Cascade crest that should have been the Pacific subspecies populations. For that paper, Glenn devised a key somewhat would key to the Great Basin subspecies. In this same vein, different from Klauber’s key. The authors were reasonably about two years ago I wrote Glenn and others that at that time, certain the key would allow an individual to distinguish C. b. about 38% of the Mount Pinos boas would key out to be umbratica from C. b. bottae. Glenn sent me a pre-publication draft Southerns, whereas the other 62% would key out to the northen of that paper, and I voiced a number of reservations, including subspecies. At the present time, because considerable overlap my concern his key of morphological traits was unworkable. At occurs in the key morphological traits between the C. b. umbratica any rate, based on the mtDNA results and the key the authors and boas from other populations, identification of subspecies thought was workable, Javier suggested elevating the Southern based on scalation features alone is not reliable. Ruber Boa from subspecies to species status.

SWCHR Bulletin 32 Fall 2015

Fast forward a few years. Sometime around 2005, Glenn However, at this point in time, and from a morphological contacted me indicating he had a graduate student, Richard standpoint, the boas from the Southern Kern Plateau cannot be Toshima, wishing to conduct an expanded mtDNA study similar considered as another Southern Rubber Boa population. Just to the one Javier had published. This was to be Rick’s master’s like the boas from Mount Pinos, Breckenridge Mountain, and thesis project. Rick was Glenn’s last graduate student, as Glenn the Tehachapis, morphologically the Southern Kern Plateau boas was near retirement. Glenn was aware I had saved a are basically a Northern population, but with mtDNA that considerable amount of boa tissue from many localities, and thus happens to nest within the Southern clade rather than with the wondered if I would donate tissue for that study. Northern clade. I know little about the finer points involved in taxonomy. Therefore, once (and if) all details are made available Once Rick was ready to receive tissue, I would suggest they test to professional taxonomists, they will be in a position to sort out tissue from this or that locality and give my reasons. Glenn these ‘irregularities’ and relationships. My personal perspective would get back to me as to what samples they wished me to and Rick’s findings, along with the information on send. Rick was borrowing laboratory space from another morphological features coupled with dwarfism occurring in boa professor at Cal Poly which meant he had limited time for populations within both northern and southern clades, not only conducting the study. There were also financial considerations invalidates the separate-species proposal, but also relegates the which would limit the number of samples he could test. I subspecies arrangement as less than meaningful. During my believe I began sending tissue sometime in 2006. study from 1993 to 1997, at first I was ready to concede that C. b. umbratica could be a subspecies despite my knowledge that the Rubber Boa exhibits a wide range of genetic diversity when it On July 12th, 2007, I sent Glenn and Rick 14 samples of tissue comes to scalation features. As I have mentioned, I can identify which turned out to be the last samples I sent, as Rick had to all specimens by their individual scalation traits, which from all give up the borrowed lab space. Of those 14 samples, 5 were indications are genetically controlled. from the Greenhorn Mountains north of Alta Sierra and 5 were from the Greenhorns south of Alta Sierra. The last recommendation of tissue I urged Rick to test were samples Geographical Variation in Scalation taken from boas on the Southern Kern Plateau. They agreed to run those four samples, so the last four tissue samples I sent Over the years, I have learned there is a ‘geographical were from the boa population on the Southern Kern Plateau. I component’ to certain scalation traits. As examples, boas from later urged they test the samples I had from the Scodie the Wasatch Range in Utah have a high incidence of possessing Mountains, but it was too late, as Rick had to relinquish his lab two loreals on one or both sides of the head, whereas in most space. boa populations, having more than one loreal is uncommon. Boas from the mid Sierras exhibit a high incidence of possessing Rick’s mtDNA results on those last four tissue samples 11 to 12 supralabials. In all other populations I have examined, produced a huge surprise: the boa population on the Southern the usual number is 9 to 10 supralabials, where 11 in uncommon Kern Plateau nests in the southern clade along with the two C. b. and 12 is very rare. umbratica populations in the San Jacinto and San Bernardino Mountains. One would more likely have surmised that the boas An extreme example of geographic scalation variation is the boa on the Southern Kern Plateau, which is the southernmost population in the Hyatt Lake region of southwestern Oregon. extension of the main Sierra Nevada Range, would nest with the Boas here exhibit an unusually high number of prefrontal plates. northern clade. This would have shown them similar to all other The normal number of prefrontals for boa populations is 2 or 3, nearby boa populations from the Greenhorn Mountains, Piute with 4 or more being uncommon to rare. I would estimate the Mountains, Breckenridge Mountain, Tehachapi Mountains, mean number of prefrontals in the Hyatt boa population lies Mount Pinos, and populations Javier and Rick had tested further between 4 and 5, with a range of 2 to 9. Finding boas with north in the main Sierras. Just like the boa populations on either 2 or 3 prefrontals in that population is far less common Mount Pinos, the Tehachapis, and Breckenridge Mountain, the than boas with 4 or more prefrontals. In addition, the Hyatt boas on the Southern Kern Plateau possess overlapping population exhibits a high incidence of specimens with divided scalation features with the Southern Rubber Boas, in that some frontal and parietal plates. I have found other populations with of those boas key out to be Southerns while others (I estimate a high incidence of split parietals but not split frontal plates, a half or more) key out to be Northerns. This is why there is a condition very uncommon in most other boa populations. I need to obtain a larger, more representative sample of boas from venture to say if Klauber or others had recorded data on the the Southern Kern Plateau. Hyatt Lake boas, they would have suggested subspecies or even species status. If my memory serves me correctly, in the late

SWCHR Bulletin 33 Fall 2015

1800s and early 1900s, a number of individuals had the Rubber If the raw data were to be treated statistically, such treatment Boa in 2 to 3 different genera and 3 to 4 separate species, based might find differences between populations to be significant at on the variation they observed in various specimens. Thus, some level of confidence. However, the two keys Laurence finding one or more traits that seem to be ‘unique’ to this or that Klauber and Glenn Stewart devised, using scalation features to geographical population, such as Southern Rubber Boas in the identify subspecies, are what I now consider as having San Bernardino Mountains or at Hyatt Lake, renders such a set questionable value. Another way to view the data would be to of traits not all that meaningful. chart the number of specimens in which overlap occurs between C. b. umbratica and other populations. By doing so, I believe it Furthermore, when I began finding that the defining traits that would become evident that the use of maximum, mid-dorsal were supposed to be unique to C. b. umbratica did not hold up scale row counts becomes unworkable when trying to classify (that is, many specimens from other populations would key out many individual boas down to subspecies. to be C. b. umbratica), I then questioned the validity of the subspecies designation as well. I have mentioned to Glenn and I recently undertook the task of charting the specific overlap that Rick that perhaps Ron Nussbaum had been correct all along, occurs between C. b. umbratica and the six other Southern that the Southern Rubber Boa did not deserve subspecies status California boa populations on which I have recorded such due to non-concordance of key characters and clinal variation. information. I recently informed Dr. Glenn Stewart of my Specifically, there is a clinal variation (decline) in maximum mid- results. Here is what I wrote Glenn. dorsal scale counts from the mid Sierras south to the Southern Greenhorn Mountains to Breckenridge Mountain, to the “With respect to ventral and mid body scale counts, the percent Tehachapi Mountains, to Mount Pinos, and then to the San overlap was as follows: Breckenridge Mt., 88.2% and 25.0%; Tehachapi Mts., 79.4% and 69.2%; Mt. Pinos, 86.3% and 76.0%; S. Bernardino Mountains. The same might be said for ventral Kern Plateau, 95.2% and 80.95%; Greenhorn Mts. S. of Alta Sierra, counts, as they too seem to decline in number as one ventures 83.3% and 41.7%; Greenhorn Mts. N. of Alta Sierra, 37.5% and southward. At this point, this is just conjecture on my part, as I 0.00%. have not analyzed the data from all populations. “From my point of view, the results render the subspecies scenario as no longer being meaningful. If one were to abide by the key Klauber Maximum mid-dorsal scale row count is one factor used to devised, the situation also becomes totally muddled. With respect to distinguish subspecies. From my recording data on a number of mid body scale counts, 85.6% of all boas from the above 6 non-SRB Rubber Boa populations in Southern California, there is far too populations would be excluded as being the Pacific subspecies and fall into the Great Basin / SRB subspecies categories. That is, 203 of much overlap in the range of maximum mid-dorsal scale counts 240 boas from those populations have 44 or less mid body scale row between those populations. counts.”

I took some time to very quickly review some of that data on maximum, mid dorsal counts as follows. Counts were taken Geographical Variation in Length from live samples (though I have data on preserved samples from some regions as well). One of the key indicators as to whether a boa population belongs to the dwarf or large phenotype can be made by N Range Mean information obtained from litters. I obtained data from 12 C. b. San Bernardino 74 36-42 39.69 umbratica litters during my study, which serves as baseline Mountains (C. b. information on neonates of the dwarf form. I also obtained umbratica) litters from the boa populations in the Tehachapi Mountains, Mount Pinos 53 39-45 42.01 Tehachapai Mountains 65 39-45 41.83 Mount Pinos, the southern Greenhorn Mountains, Scodie Breckenridge Mountain 76 40-47 43.51 Mountains, Breckenridge Mountain, and the Southern Kern South Greenhorn 12 40-45 42.92 Plateau. All of the gravid females that produced litters from Mountains (Note 1) those localities were well within the size range of gravid C. b. North Greenhorn 16 43-49 44.93 umbratica females, and the variation in length of all neonates from Mountains (Note 2) those localities is comparable to the variation of C. b. umbratica South Kern Plateau 21 38-44 41.30 neonates. Even without sophisticated analysis, a reasoned (Note 3) conclusion is that the boa populations from Mount Pinos, the

Tehachapis, Breckenridge Mountain, the Scodies, and the 1. South of Alta Sierra Southern Kern Plateau are all of the dwarf phenotype similar to 2. North of Alta Sierra the Southern Rubber Boa population in the San Bernardinos. 3. One specimen with 38; the next lowest scale count is 40 (not included is a neonate from one litter with 45).

SWCHR Bulletin 34 Fall 2015

The jury is still out for some of the other populations. This status appears to be about the same. In addition, the range and would include 1) the C. b. umbratica population in the San Jacinto mean lengths of neonates produced by each dwarf population all Mountains; 2) the boas known to occur on Mount Abel, Frazier appear to be close to equal. Far greater variation in those same Mountain, Alamo Mountain, and other associated peaks in the traits occurs between populations of the ‘large morph.’ I can greater Mount Pinos region; 3) the Piute Mountains; and 4) the think of two other factors that lend support to the distinct Greenhorn Mountains. However, by geographical proximity to nature of the dwarf phenotype, and that all such populations are known dwarf populations, it is reasonable to assume the above- likely to be related: mentioned populations are also of the dwarf form. The one exception might be the boas in the southern Greenhorn 1) As far as what is now known, all known dwarf Mountains (the southwestern extension of the main Sierra morph populations are clustered together in Southern Nevada range). The boas in northwestern Tulare County California on isolated mountain peaks and ranges. The (Sequoia National Park) are known to be of the large phenotype. exceptions to being ‘isolated’ are the boas in the With continuous suitable boa habitat from north to south, from Southern Greenhorn Mountains and on the Southern southern Tulare into northern Kern County in the Greenhorn Kern Plateau. There is continuous suitable boa habitat Mountains, there has to be some genetic influence of the large from the southern to northern parts of the Greenhorns morph from north to south. up to where the ‘large morph’ is known to exist in central to northern Tulare County. It is very likely that I would have thought that would be the case with the boas on if indeed the southern Greenhorn boa population is of the Southern Kern Plateau as well, but as of this writing, all data the dwarf phenotype, somewhere they must come in collected thus far strongly point to that population belonging to contact with the large morph and thus intergrade. This the dwarf phenotype. However, the sample stands at 21, which suggests large morph genes likely ‘infiltrate’ the south, is too small to draw solid conclusions. I urge readers that and dwarf genes ‘infiltrate’ to the north. I have some venture to the Kern Plateau to keep me in mind. Additional data in support of that scenario. As for the Kern specimens are needed toward achieving a more representative Plateau population, perhaps there is some sample that could then be treated in a professional manner. historical/geological explanation (volcanism, faults, ice age, large lake, elevation, weather) for that population seemingly having been isolated from populations of the large morph further north in the Sierras, and from other nearby dwarf morph populations nested within the northern clade.

2) For the most part, the separation in size between large and dwarf morph populations seems to be pronounced and consistent. That is, there is not a great deal of overlap with respect to a) adult male and female lengths, b) lengths at which males and female reach mature status, and c) the range of lengths of neonates. There are two exceptions (of which I am aware) in which there is a greater amount of overlap. Large morph populations further north occurring at higher Three typical sexually mature females from Oregon (C. b. bottae), and three typical elevations that have shorter active seasons tend to be sexually mature females from Kern County, California (though not C. b. umbratica smaller than their large morph counterparts at lower according to DNA analysis). Notice the smaller size and lighter color. This is typical of boas in the southern end of the range, and very similar to Southern elevations. Such higher-elevation large morph Rubber Boas (C. b. umbratica). Photo by Ryan Hoyer; used with permission. populations do not grow as large, and maturity is reached at shorter lengths than large morph populations at lower elevations. Also, high-elevation If I were to suggest subspecies, I would place all populations that large morph neonates tend to be smaller in their size exhibit the ‘dwarf’ phenotype into one subspecies, and all ‘large range and average lengths so there is a greater amount morph’ populations in a second subspecies. From the of overlap between the smallest of such neonates with information I have acquired thus far, all dwarf populations the largest of the dwarf morph neonates. The second appear to be quite uniform as far as their range and mean exception is the boa population in the greater Mount lengths. Also, the size at which males and females reach mature Saint Helena region, where Napa, Lake, and Sonoma

SWCHR Bulletin 35 Fall 2015

Counties converge. My sample size is too small to controlled crosses between dwarf and large-morph phenotypes reach any firm conclusions, but the maximum length that have also produced some puzzling results. attained by that population seems to be much smaller than the usual large morph populations, even at high Observations alone tell us that size and growth in all organisms elevation. Yet the largest adult female from that is under genetic control. That some environmental factors population has attained a greater length than the largest influence growth and ultimate size in organism is also a given. known dwarf females. Furthermore, the range and However, the overriding limitation to size is genetic. That is mean lengths of neonates are very similar to the dwarf why the Rubber Boa, regardless of age, never gets as large and form of the species. Then again, in one litter from that some species of garter snakes (Thamnophis spp.), gopher snakes population, two or three neonates were larger than any (Pituophis spp.), indigo snakes (Drymarchon spp.), etc. neonate I have recorded from the dwarf morph populations.

Up until recently, the maximum length I have observed of dwarf females was 22.25 inches. A boa Robert Hansen captured on Breckenridge Mountains and maintained for about 10 years had grown to that length when I measured it many years ago. A female boa captured in 2012 on the Tejon Ranch also measured 22.25 inches long, and a female from Mount Pinos measured 22.25 inches as well.

Then, on July 31st, 2014, I received a very thin, heavily scarred, and old-looking female a herper had found on the part of Mount Pinos in Ventura County. She weighed just 40.9 grams but was large, measuring 21.875 inches long. I told the herper I would see if she would eat for me, so that she would be in better condition to survive through the brumation period. As it turned Though not a C. b. umbratica, this specimen exhibits coloration typical of the out, she did take enough meals so that by October 3rd she was subspecies. Photo by Ryan Hoyer; used with permission. in decent condition at 80.4 grams. I shipped the boa back to its owner this past March 10th. From both boas that have been maintained for long durations, It was clear to me this female boa had lost part of the end of her and from specimens recaptured over a long period of years, it is tail as it was badly scarred, her caudals only numbered 26, and quite clear that once the species attains mature status, its growth her relative tail length (tail length divided by total length) was rate declines markedly. In fact, I believe some of my recapture only 7.91%. The average relative tail length of dwarf females is data on large (and thus old) specimens show growth becomes 11.1%. By applying that mean female relative tail length to his negligible and very close to zero. That being said, prey particular female, without the tail shortened by injury, her consumption clearly plays a role in growth. The amount of prey estimated normal length would have been 22.625 inches, making consumed during a boa’s formative (non-adult) years is her the largest of the dwarf morph females yet to be discovered. instrumental in 1) determining the length at which the snake It would be highly unlikely that this particular female represents reaches mature status and 2) likely determines its ultimate the largest length a dwarf female can attain. It suggests the maximum length. Even so, both of those factors have to be dwarf-morph females likely can reach maximum lengths of 23 governed by the basic genetic composition of a species. inches or so. Adult male Rubber Boas emerge from brumation first to The largest dwarf-morph males recorded thus far was a 18.875- thermoregulate. By March, it is very common to find two or inch male from the San Bernardino Mountains and a 19.5-inch more adult males together thermoregulating under the same male from the Tehachapi Mountains. One might suspect that cover object. This year, I recall finding eight adult males under a the largest dwarf morph males may attain a length of about 20 piece of tin about 18 inches square. The second situation in inches. which aggregations of boas sometimes occur is during the mating season. In the early 1970s on an Easter day along South As for speculation about molecular and nuclear DNA, that is Commercial Avenue in south Salem, Oregon, I stopped to turn a mostly beyond my grasp. However, I have made some large sign on the ground in a vacant lot. Under that sign were

SWCHR Bulletin 36 Fall 2015 two adult females in reproductive condition, along with seven Granted, a sample size of one (this hybrid female and the adult males. Though males emerge first, they attain a shorter neonates she produces) is hardly conclusive. Back in 2004, I overall length. made another cross between a dwarf-morph male, this time from the Tehachapi Mountains, and another local large-morph Logically, a shorter active season at high elevations should have a female. That female produced six neonates that were all large- negative impact on total length attained. At the same time, morph in size. I gave that litter away. In recognizing the results existing evidence discounts the notion that the dwarf morph of from the first hybrid female could be simply due to chance, I the Rubber Boa is a result of such environmental conditions. asked the herpetoculturist to whom I gave the litter if I might The active season in the Lake Arrowhead region of the San borrow the largest female hybrid he still was maintaining. On Bernardino Mountains is likely similar to my location in April 13th, 2011, he loaned me his largest hybrid female, which northwestern Oregon, and certainly is longer than up in the was an even 16 inches long at the time. Local large-morph Hyatt Lake region of southwestern Oregon. Yet the boa females normally become mature at 22 inches and above. The population in the Hyatt Lake area gets much larger than the boas female was a good feeder so by June 16th, 2012, she was at in the San Bernardino Mountains and elsewhere in Southern 22.375 inches long, and 23.25 inches by October 8th of that California, where the dwarf form occurs. year; in the type of robust condition necessary to produce a litter the following year. The information I have recorded on growth of captive specimens of both the dwarf and large morph phenotypes also In April 2013, I backcrossed that hybrid female to local large- supports the point that genetics, and not environmental factors, morph males and on August 8th, 2013, she produced a litter of are responsible for the two different size morphs in the Rubber four neonates which, again, were all of the dwarf-morph Boa. I have made some controlled crosses establishing that phenotype. In other words, the results were the same as what genes control the differences in the two size morphs. When a occurred with the first hybrid female. I gave the female and the cross is made between a dwarf-morph male and large-morph four neonates back to the herper from whom I had borrowed female, only large-morph neonates are produced. When the the female. Then, early last year, I borrowed that hybrid female’s reciprocal cross is made between a large-morph male and dwarf- hybrid sister that had yet to attain adult status. By late summer morph female, only dwarf-morph neonates are produced. 2014, the second hybrid female had not yet reached adult status, but her sister (the one I first borrowed) had again reached the From my perspective, the most interesting result are as follows. robust condition necessary to support a reproductive effort this From the first cross mentioned above, the one surviving hybrid year. Therefore, late last year I borrowed that first hybrid female female reached mature status at around the same length that again. She mated this spring to large-morph males and if all goes large-morph females reach mature status (over 22 inches). When well, should produce a second litter later this year. In the backcrossed to either dwarf or large-morph males, that hybrid meantime, her smaller hybrid sister has reached mature status female has only produced dwarf-morph neonates. F1 females and now is in a robust condition. I hope to get a litter from her from the reciprocal cross of a large-morph male and a dwarf- next year. morph female, at this point, have yet to attain mature status. One female was born in 2010 and the other in 2008. The latter female was 8.125 inches long when born on August 25th, 2008. Abundance As of June 22nd, 2015, she was 14.875 inches long. Based on what I have recorded thus far on all dwarf-morph populations, Numerous sources of information are available pertaining to the she will need to be close to, or a bit above, 17 inches long before issue of Southern Rubber Boa “rarity” and the numerical she reaches mature status. abundance. Cunningham’s 1966 publication (discussed under “Taxonomy” above) mentions that between 1956 and 1961, he The F1 hybrid female from the first cross above (dwarf-morph observed 35 or more C. b. umbratica in the San Bernardino male with large-morph female) was born on August 14th, 1996, Mountains. That number can be compared with data he and reached mature status at about 22.5 inches long by July 1st, presented on just ten preserved C. b. umbratica that may have 2003. She was backcrossed to a dwarf male in the spring of been the total number of such vouchers for the subspecies at 2004, and produced her first litter on August 5th of that year. that time. She has since been backcrossed a couple of times to large-morph males and, regardless of which size morph male was used in such As I recall, in either 1970 or early 1971, the California controlled matings, she has only produced dwarf-morph Department of Fish and Game (now California Department of neonates. Such results support the inescapable conclusion that Fish and Wildlife) convened a panel of herpetologists (and size is governed by genetic factors. perhaps others, such as wildlife biologists), to assess the status of

SWCHR Bulletin 37 Fall 2015 various herpetofaunal species of possible conservation concern. One of the panel members was Dr. Glenn Stewart of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. I believe Glenn mentioned that Dr. Robert Stebbins was another participant. I was not there, so I do not know what actually transpired, but from input I received from Glenn, the consensus of those individuals indicated C. b. umbratica to be of conservation concern as 1) the subspecies was infrequently encountered and 2) there were few voucher specimens in the various institutional collections.

Neither of those factors are a valid means for assessing species. There are a number of explanations that can account for those two factors other than that a species is numerically rare. Historically, many amateur and professional herpetologists, The wide color variation of normal Rubber Boas—from pink babies, to tan, all the way to dark chocolate brown. Note: all of these individuals were found in wildlife biologists, and others have considered the Rubber Boa one locality. Color variation is not only large between locations, but within as being rare over its entire distribution. As a freshman at locations also. The dark individuals are nearing their next shed, and perhaps have Oregon State University in Wildlife Science, I was told that very not shed since emerging from hibernation; hence their dark color as compared to thing by one of my professors who was a herpetologist. others from the same area. However, this dark chocolate is common as a permanent color. Photo by Ryan Hoyer; used with permission. At any rate, based on the perceptions of those panel members, in 1971 the CDFG declared C. b. umbratica to be “Rare” and thus protected. Sometime in the early 1980s I believe, the agency Gary Keasler produced a report in 1981 entitled, “Rubber Boa changed the designation to “Threatened” to conform with Survey for the San Bernardino National Forest.” His survey was Federal designations. Without any valid scientific evidence but conducted from April 12 through May 31, 1981, above 5000 feet based solely on personal opinions, the CDFG listed C. b. in the San Bernardino Mountains. It mentions that at various umbratica in a protected status, yet the agency requires a times, five graduate students plus Dr. Stewart and George preponderance of scientific evidence in order to remove a Hesemann were involved. A total of 17 C. b. umbratica were species from the same listed status. found in 1981. Twelve were found by the graduate students and

six observed at night by George Hesemann. Keasler also In January 1972 a publication titled, “At The Crossroads: A produced a report in 1982 entitled, “Eastern San Bernardino Report on California’s Endangered and Rare Fish and Wildlife” Mountains, Southern Rubber Boa Survey.” The 1982 survey debuted. Under the status report of the Southern Rubber Boa took place from April 20 through June 12, conducted by Gary (Charina bottae umbratica) are the following: Keasler and three other grad students. A total of 18 C. b.

umbratica were found in 1982. “Distribution: This snake has been collected from near Lake Arrowhead and near Idyllwild, Riverside County, and has been reported from Mount Pinos, Kern County. In his 1981 and 1982 reports, Keasler identified the number of “Status: Rare. Only a few specimens have been collected, indicating all species of snakes observed during those surveys. The totals low population levels where present. are as follows (scientific names reflect current taxonomy): “Recommendations: . . . Provide strict enforcement of protective

laws to prevent collection. . . Authenticate reports of its presence in Mountain Kingsnake, Lampropeltis zonata—42 the Mount Pinos area.” Southern Pacific Rattlesnake, Crotalus oreganus helleri–36 Southern Rubber Boa, Charina bottae umbrataica–35 From July 10 to September 15, 1978, Gary R. Alden and Gary Night Snake, Hypsiglena ochrorhynchus–8 Keasler undertook another survey for the Rubber Boa in the Wandering Garter Snake, Thamnophis elegans vagrans–4 Mount Pinos District. They authored a report to the Mount Gopher Snake, Pituophis catenifer–3 Ring-necked Snake, Diadophis punctatus–2 Pinos Ranger District, Los Padres National Forest, entitled Striped Racer, Masticophis lateralis–2 “Southern Rubber Boa, 1978, Mount Pinos Ranger District, Los Speckled Rattlesnake, Crotalus mitchellii–1 Padres National Forest.” They found 14 boas night-driving roads—eight on Mount Abel and six on Mount Pinos. No boas From 1993 to 1997, Glenn Stewart and I also reported the were found during daytime searches. On page 7, they mention, number of all species of snakes observed during our Southern “However, rubber boas have been found during the day in this Rubber Boa study. We documented 102 C. b. umbratica area (Alten & Keasler, 1977).” (counting 21 recaptures) and found 56 specimens of seven other species as follows on the next page:

SWCHR Bulletin 38 Fall 2015

Mountain Kingsnake, Lampropeltis zonata–31 Nussbaum, R. and Richard F. Hoyer. “Geographic Variation Gopher Snake, Pituophis catenifer–7 and the Validity of Subspecies in the Rubber Boa, Charina bottae.” Ring-necked Snake, Diadophis punctatus–7 Striped Racer, Masticophis lateralis–4 Northwest Science 48:219-229, 1974. Night Snake, Hypsiglena ochrorhynchus–3 Wandering Garter Snake, Thamnophis elegans vagrans–2 Rodrigues-Robles, J. A., G.R. Stewart, and T.J. Papenfuss. Southern Pacific Rattlesnake, Crotalus oreganus helleri–2 “Mitochondrial DNA Based Phylogeography of North

American Rubber Boas, Charina bottae.” Molecular Phylogenetics and On April 29, 2001, between about 10:45 a.m. and 6 p.m., Brian Evolution 18(2):227-237, 2001. Hinds, his young son, and I searched for Mountain Kingsnakes in the San Bernardino Mountains. During that time, the Stewart, Glenn. “The Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) in California, following species were observed: with Particular Reference to the Southern Subspecies, C. b.

Southern Rubber Boa, Charina bottae umbrataica–19 umbratica.” Proceedings of the Conference on California Herpetology. Van Mountain Kingsnake, Lampropeltis zonata–2 Nuys, CA: Southwestern Herpetologists’ Society Special Gopher Snake, Pituophis catenifer–2 Publication No. 4, 1988. Wandering Garter Snake, Thamnophis elegans vagrans–1 Ring-necked Snake, Diadophis punctatus–1

It is noteworthy that the panel of professionals in 1970 that Predation on a Pocket Mouse (Perognathus sp.) assessed the status of the Southern Rubber Boa for the CDFG by a Big Bend Patch-nosed Snake, Salvadora seemingly overlooked the information mentioned by Cunningham in 1966. His observations of over 35 Southern hexalepis deserticola (Serpentes: Colubridae) Rubber Boas from 1956-1961 is comparable to the 35 specimens observed by Keasler et al. searching in 1981 and 1982. In by Diego Ortiz addition, the nearly 1:1:1 ratio of Mountain Kingsnakes, Southern Pacific Rattlesnakes, and Southern Rubber Boas during Saturday, August 7 2014 was a long, overworked day. I got the 1981-82 surveys clearly obliterates the notion the Southern home from work after 10 p.m., probably falling asleep sometime Rubber Boa is rare. after midnight. But I had promised my friends Kris Haas, Steve Tippet, and Steve’s 9-year-old son Jeremy we would meet at my house at 3 a.m. to head south from the Phoenix area and explore Additional References the mountainous southeastern recesses of Arizona. When my alarm went off at 2:30 a.m., I immediately sent ambiguous text

messages to both Kris and Steve, hoping they were asleep and Cunning, J. D. “Observations on the Taxonomy and Natural the whole trip would be cancelled. I was tired, to say the least. History of the Rubber Boa, Charina bottae.” Southwestern Naturalist Much to my dismay, they both replied telling me they were en 11: 298-299, 1966. route to my house, so I drug myself out of my warm and

welcoming bed and showered in cold water to get the blood Hoyer, Richard F. “Description of a Rubber Boa (Charina bottae) flowing (it didn’t work). I groggily exited my abode and went Population from Western Oregon.” Herpetologica 30:275-283, forth to meet my fellow adventurers on a warm summer’s pre- 1974. dawn morning as they arrived at my location.

Hoyer, Richard F. and G.R. Stewart. “Biology of the Rubber Before I truly begin to relay the day’s events, please allow me to Boa (Charina bottae), with Emphasis on C. b. umbratica, Part I: clarify that if it were not for my good friends’ tenacity to follow Capture, Size, Sexual Dimorphism, and Reproduction.” Journal through with our set plans, I would have gladly stayed home and of Herpetology 34:248-354, 2000. slept instead of experiencing the epic adventure awaiting us.

Therefore, I somewhat reluctantly found myself heading Hoyer, Richard F. and G.R. Stewart. “Biology of the Rubber southward into the best herping territories within the confines of Boa (Charina bottae), with Emphasis on C. b. umbratica, Part II: the American borders with some amazing folks again, for the Diet, Antagonists, and Predators.” Journal of Herpetology 34:354- umpteenth time in my life. We reached our target destination 360, 2000. outside of Parker Lake, Arizona, around 6:30 a.m. and

immediately began hiking the hills and washes. Temperatures Klauber, L.M. “The Subspecies of the Rubber Boa, Charina.” were a bit cooler than we had hoped, but we pressed on. After Transactions of the San Diego Society of Natural History 10:83-90, about an hour of fruitless meandering about, we regrouped and 1943. headed toward our vehicle for a snack and some strategic

SWCHR Bulletin 39 Fall 2015 adjustments. I wandered off into the woods to start looking again, and not five minutes later, I heard Steve and Jeremy performing some sort of primal celebration. Not more than a few feet from where they were walking, a Sonoran Mountain Kingsnake (Lampropeltis p. pyromelana) decided to cross the primitive dirt road. We photographed the animal and allowed it to move on in its intended direction.

Arizona Ridge-nosed Rattlesnake (Crotalus w. willardi), Cochise County. Photo by the author.

After we finished our photographs, we began to take notice that the sun was now out in full force and the area was heating up rather quickly. Satisfied with our finds, we made a beeline back to the vehicle. Along the way, Steve noticed some faint movement in the grass along the path, and upon closer

Sonoran Mountain Kingsnake (Lampropeltis p. pyromelana) from Cochise County, inspection, we identified the source as an adult Banded Rock Arizona. Photo by the author. Rattlesnake (Crotalus l. klauberi). Having absorbed much of the ambient heat at this point, the animal was moving at a fairly good clip and it disappeared into some foliage nearby. A cursory Deciding that was as good enough an omen as any, we glance of the surrounding area quickly revealed a second redoubled our efforts and continued hiking. Various lizards “klaub,” as we affectionately refer to them, peeking out from were out and about by this time, having reached satisfactory under a rock. body temperatures. Yarrow’s Spiny Lizards (Sceloporus jarrovii), Whiptails (Aspidoscelis sp.), and Mountain Short-horned Lizards (Phrynosoma hernandesi) were seen scurrying about the area, carrying on in their frantic movements as they tended to whatever lizard business in which they seemed to be involved. At one point in the late morning, as I was eyeballing a nice shady tree that looked like an appealing place for me to sit and rest for a spell, I heard Jeremy yell, “Snake! I hear a rattle!” I yelled at him to step back and wait for me to join him.

Rushing down the hill in his direction as fast as I could, I finally joined him and looked down to see a beautiful Arizona Ridge- nosed Rattlesnake (Crotalus w. willardi) slithering along between the grass and rocks. Kris and Steve ran to our location, and we observed and photographed the snake as it moved along and finally slithered under a large boulder, out of sight. Glancing around the immediate area, Kris spotted five tiny neonate Banded Rock Rattlesnake (Crotalus lepidus klauberi), Cochise County. The eye of the animal is barely visible on the far right. Photo by the author. Arizona Ridge-nosed Rattlesnakes hiding in plain sight all around the area where the adult had been spotted. They were so Being a protected species in Arizona (along with the Arizona small that a single leaf or blade of grass would completely Ridge-nosed Rattlesnakes mentioned above) we were content to conceal them from certain vantage points. We assumed the try and photograph the animals from a distance and observe adult was the mother and this was her brood, beginning to them before moving on. Some of the shots I was able to snap disperse. are fairly decent, while others are absolutely useless. But c’est la

SWCHR Bulletin 40 Fall 2015 vie—when dealing with hands-off herping, you cannot simply County and we should head over there to look for Northern pose the animals to suit your photographic needs. You just take Green Ratsnakes (Senticolis triaspis intermedia) on our way back the shots as best you can and hope for the best. home. Jeremy’s face instantly lit up and I knew that my bedtime had just been postponed by at least a few more hours. Having found so many fantastic animals in a short period of time, one would think it could be considered a successful herping trip and that I might be allowed to head back home and, more importantly, to bed. But that was not meant to be. Jeremy, being the avid young herper he is, decided since it was still fairly early in the day we should try a different spot and take advantage of the fact that we had driven down “ALL the way down here already,” so we might as well keep going. All the old, tired adults reluctantly agreed with him.

Thus, we soon found ourselves in southern Santa Cruz County, Arizona with some rather ominous-looking clouds above us, threating to burst open at any time and release all of their stored rain onto us. Flash floods are a very real threat in Arizona, having the sheer force to sever roads or make them impassable with fallen trees and debris instantly. We proceeded to cruise some dirt roads near the Mexican border with a cautious eye on Northen Black-tailed Rattlesnake (Crotalus m. molossus) as found on a road in Pima County, Arizona. Photo by the author. the sky, just in case things started to take a turn for the worse. We found two Western Black-necked Gartersnakes (Thamnophis We now found ourselves in a popular herper destination in the c. cyrtopsis) and a large Western Diamond-backed Rattlesnake Coronado National Forest. Driving in, we spotted a beautiful (Crotalus atrox) before we decided not to push our luck much Northern Black-tailed Rattlesnake (Crotalus m. molossus) sunning further with pending inclement weather. itself on the road. Before committing ourselves to what was sure to be a few hours of cruising up and down the winding mountain roads, I convinced the fellows to give me a few minutes to use the restroom in the visitor center at the base of the mountains. They all grumbled and made mention of me wasting “prime time,” but my soon-to-be emergency trumped them.

In-situ shot of a Western Diamond-backed Rattlesnake (Crotalus atrox) peering out from behind a pine tree in Santa Cruz County, Arizona. Photo by the author.

Sure enough, almost as soon as we decided to turn back toward the highway, the rain started coming down in sheets. I was relieved to finally be going home, much unlike Jeremy, who looked as if someone had just kicked his dog or something Big Bend Patch-nosed Snake (Salvadora hexalepis deserticola) consuming a Pocket Mouse (Perognathus sp.), Pima County, Arizona. Photo by the author. equally tragic had just occurred. I was just starting to think to myself that he would get over it soon enough when Kris, of all As I was sprinting down the steps leading to the restrooms, I people, announced that the weather didn’t look too bad in Pima instantly froze dead in my tracks. Splayed out two steps below

SWCHR Bulletin 41 Fall 2015 me was a Big Bend Patch-nosed Snake (Salvadora hexalepis An Unconventional Path into the World of deserticola), eating what appeared to be a Pocket Mouse! I immediately forgot about any physical needs I might have and Venom Production backed away slowly. When I felt I was back far enough to not disturb the snake with sudden movement, I began to run back by Rob Clark towards the car yelling for the guys to get out and bring their How I got into the business of producing venom is a question I camera gear. get asked often. It is a question I repeat to myself and even I

have a difficult time answering it. There are so many things that When we returned, the animal was still there, continuing the pointed me down this path, as well as many turns in the road in process of swallowing the rodent. I was able to snap one single arriving here; there is no simple answer. In this article I will try shot before the animal grew restless and started moving. Not to briefly answer that question the best I can and then give a wanting to cause it to regurgitate its hard-won meal, we all snapshot as to what life in the venom production world entails. backed away slowly and allowed it to continue undisturbed. I took a wide detour around to the restroom, and we continued in To say that I love animals would be a major understatement. As our attempts to find more reptilian critters. a little boy I was always fascinated with creatures large and small. I was desperate to know what made each one behave the way it did and the impact that behavior had on other species. If I spotted an animal in the wild I felt the uncontrollable urge to chase it down and study it. Even if it meant getting stung by a velvet ant (Mutillidae) at the age of five, or following a bear up a hillside in Wyoming at the age of fifteen. Luckily I wasn’t injured by any megafauna and I had no encounters with venomous reptiles until my brain developed better judgment.

No one else in my family shared my same passion for animals, let alone reptiles. My parents tolerated my interest but wouldn’t let me keep snakes. They encouraged me to have more typical hobbies, but all the while I dreamt of someday becoming a wildlife biologist.

Closer photograph of the Patch-nosed Snake consuming the Pocket Mouse, from which the likely genus was determined. Photo by Kris Haas; used with As a young adult, I still desired in my heart to work with animals permission. in a professional capacity, but choosing a college major and targeting a career path was difficult. I married in my early twenties (that’s when I was able to keep my first snake; my wife Only one more snake was seen by us that day—our target was so wonderful and understanding as she humored my animal, the Northern Green Ratsnake. Unfortunately, the interests) and finally settled on a major in marketing with a animal literally jumped off a cliff when we attempted to catch it minor in international business. I finished my degree at Utah for photographs, and one of us may or may not have sustained State University in 2003 and ended up in the medical device permanent injuries trying to go after it—but that is a whole other industry. I wanted to help people, so I thought that business in story best saved for another time. the medical field was a good place for me. I worked in the Western Idaho/Eastern Oregon area for my first three years out In the aftermath of such an amazing day with so many incredible of college. I would drive hundreds of miles throughout my sales finds, the picture that garnered the most attention on social territory and most of that time I spent scanning the roadsides for media was the one I snapped of the Patch-nosed snake eating. Gopher Snakes (Pituophis sp.). At that time I had no idea what I Several people asked me to write up the finding, but in order to was doing was called ‘road-cruising’ or ‘herping.’ do so I needed to identify the rodent. I must say, I never knew we had so many genera and species of similar looking rodents in After gaining sufficient medical sales experience, my career took Arizona, let alone that particular area! After consulting with me to the surgical equipment industry in Denver, Colorado. For George Bradley and Melanie Bucci at the University of Arizona’s about the next 10 years, I churned through life trying to meet biology department, it was decided that it is indeed a Pocket society’s expectations of what a successful businessman and Mouse, most likely of the genus Perognathus. Getting the species father should be. Although I was “successful” in my job, I still identification from the picture alone proved to be impossible. had a nagging feeling I wasn’t fulfilling my purpose in life. I also

SWCHR Bulletin 42 Fall 2015 began to see how the company I was with cared far more about Syndrome might be a better way to describe it to an outsider the shareholders than they did about the end users of their who doesn’t know him. Now that he is twelve, it is very much products. The passion for what I was doing was diminished. like living with Sheldon Cooper from “The Big Bang Theory”). Ultimately I wished for nothing less than to be able to run my own business working with animals to the benefit of others. But Realizing fatherhood had just taken on a whole new dimension, I I shoved those thoughts deep into the back of my mind, telling wasn’t quite sure how to move forward. I had visions of playing myself it was an unrealistic, childish, selfish dream. Though my catch in the back yard with him and being his little league choice for going into the business world was far from what my coach. It wasn’t in the cards. To deal with it, I went to great heart wanted, I am very grateful for those years of valuable lengths to study his mind, learn who he was, and ultimately join business experience and insight that made a big difference in my his world. His world consists of reptiles, bugs, biology, Legos, ability to start my own business. and Star Wars. I like Star Wars, but I realized we had a key overlap in a stronger interest. I decided I should further explore our mutual interest in reptiles. (This is one of the things in my life I treasure most. Today Hayden and I are best buddies, and are both very happy being able to spend so much time discussing and learning the aspects of herpetology together.) It didn’t take long for me to begin exploring the world of venom, and I began learning about all the great medical discoveries being made in the field.

I could write a book about the entire transition so I’ll try to spare most of the details. Long story short, it involved being laid off from work, a lot of soul searching, and gaining the unlikely consent from my wife before deciding that developing a venom operation was what I was meant to do. The most poignant moment affecting my ultimate decision to do so was when I viewed a picture (one I’m sure you all have seen) of the necrotized leg of a young Ecuadorian who had suffered a Bothrops asper bite. My desire to help kids in that situation became my motivation. I’d read all the World Health Organization snakebite statistics and was stunned at the enormity of the problem. For the next couple of years, I devoted thousands of hours studying everything involving venom production and keeping venomous snakes. I knew it was a far-fetched plan, and that the chances of succeeding were very low, but I wanted my kids to see that you can either sit on the couch and watch other people do amazing things, or you can work really hard and do them yourself.

The business of venom involves several integral pieces that, without proficient knowledge, one could be sunk very The author with his son Hayden, about to release an Eastern Black-necked quickly. Those pieces include animal husbandry, venomous Garter Snake (Thamnophis cyrtopsis ocellatus). Photo by the author. reptile safety, snakebite protocol, finance, marketing, and of course, the handling and processing of venom. As pieces of the In the strangest way, my family life began to sort things out for puzzle began to fit together, I set a necessary timeline to achieve me and point me in the right direction. When my oldest son was certain benchmarks. We sold our home and moved into a about five we started noticing his behavior wasn’t typical for kids smaller townhouse. Between the money I had saved and the his age. He spent most of his time by himself and rarely could I small amount of financing I was able to secure, I had barely coax him to interact with me. I started to think that maybe he enough to invest in the equipment I needed to get started. The didn’t like me or that I was a bad father. But over time, we state of Colorado required that I obtain a commercial wildlife started realizing there was definitely more to it as he was producers park permit. They told me I was the first person to eventually diagnosed with high-functioning autism (Asperger’s have ever applied for such a permit. I spent about a year

SWCHR Bulletin 43 Fall 2015 searching for a warehouse where county and city zoning would this point, I have sold all my venom directly to the allow my operation. About this time, I finally heard back from manufacturer. my first customer. Someone was willing to give me a shot even though they knew I was not yet operating (for that customer I am eternally grateful). The only warehouse available, affordable, and zoned for my business was a derelict burned out warehouse built in the 1980s. It was the perfect size, but it looked horrible. In exchange for two months of free rent, I spent the next two weeks cleaning, painting the walls and floors, fixing wiring, and framing and finishing a containment room for the snakes that would appease the city and landlord. I had exactly six weeks to accomplish everything in which I’d gained expertise, but had still very little hands-on experience. I had to get racks in place, bring in snakes, extract and process venom for the first time ever, have samples pass the customer’s requirements, and The author preparing to extract venom from a Western Diamond-backed Rattlesnake, Crotalus atrox. Photo by the author. sell my first batch—which would give me just enough revenue to stay in operation. (I was able to find some good herp people who were willing to collect snakes and keep them in proper Although building the operation from scratch was incredibly enclosures in time for me to pick them up.) Looking back, my complicated (there’s no school where you can be taught all you adrenaline surges just thinking about all that had to go right. It need to know), the day to day operations are about as simple as was my philosophy that extracting venom just for the sake of any business I can think of. The schedule goes as “practice” (even if it was with someone else who had experience follows: extract, process the venom, clean, feed, clean, and clean extracting) only increased my chances of getting bitten. As a some more—then extract again. There is always at least a 15-day matter of principle, I have never pinned (and will not pin) a rest for each snake. snake unless it’s absolutely necessary. Every part of what I do revolves around these two priorities: I officially began venom production two years ago while in the first, keep others safe as well as myself. Second, treat my Denver area. To begin, I imported Crotalus atrox from Texas and animals with gratitude and appreciation. To prevent bites to New Mexico and started with a colony of approximately sixty myself, I never work distracted, tired, sick, hungry, or snakes. Last year, my wife was offered a great job in the Austin, hurried. (If it were a perfect world, I’d employ an assistant to Texas area, and we both felt a move to Texas would be the right work along with me. I hope to be able to employ one soon.) I thing for both of our careers. I always knew we would take my time and strive to be deliberate yet patient. I have my eventually need to move to an area that better favored working “bite action plan” at the forefront of my mind and review it at in the venom indusstry, and the perfect opportunity was the beginning of every session I spend extracting. I also try to provided for us. Relocating, licensing, and expanding my stay in communication with the Emergency Room Resident operation in Texas has been no small endeavor, but I now Nurse Education Coordinator at the nearest ER. It’s important currently have about 120 adult Crotalus atrox on the venom to make sure you are on the same page when it comes to bite line. It’s not a huge operation, but it is now going well enough treatment protocols. I also have copies of the bite protocol at to where I can continue operating at a modest profit and let this my lab and an EpiPen on hand, ready to go with me, should the continue to be my full time employment. need arise.

The market for venom is very small and secretive. For the most When it comes to the day to day mission of my business, my part the only people who have real knowledge about who’s number one goal is to do no harm. That means allow no harm buying what venom are people who have a non-disclosure to come to myself or others, do no harm to the snakes during agreement with a company and are currently selling venom. In care or treatment, do no harm to other venom producers with the pharmaceutical world buyers are secretive by nature. There whom I “compete,” do nothing that would harm the reputation are still many things regarding the market I don’t know. It of venomous reptile keepers in the eyes of the public, and do no should go without saying, but it has to be mentioned that I have harm to the ecosystem when collecting snakes or herping. It was never had anything to do with “rattlesnake roundups”—I’ve not the snakes’ choice to be kept captive for this purpose and never even seen a roundup in person before. I have never the extraction process is stressful. Any stress is taxing on their worked for another venom producer; neither has anyone from immune system and therefore I do my best give them the best any other venom production lab worked for or with me. Up to care possible.

SWCHR Bulletin 44 Fall 2015

Barely after two years operating, I am only scratching the surface missed catching several of these beauties, I was determined to of what knowledge there is to be learned and experience there is catch this one just for fun. I backed my car away, drove past it to be had in the world of herps and venom. The one thing that I westward, and turned around to re-approach from the west am sure of is that the road ahead won’t be easy. again. This time I stopped 30 feet away and utilized the cover of the snake’s head being in a blind spot afforded by one of the wooden railing posts. I crept up on my hands and knees and easily grabbed it mid-body before it realized what was Predation on a Bat by a Western Coachwhip, happening. Then, with it squirming vigorously in hand, I could Coluber flagellum testaceus (Serpentes: see it was still swallowing its prize—a bat, apparently one it had just acquired from under the bridge. Colubridae)

by Bill Love

On May 27, 2015, approximately 11:30am, I encountered a “pink” phase Western Coachwhip (Coluber flagellum testaceus) on U.S. Highway 90 in the middle of a bridge over a small, dry creek crossing (perhaps Antonio Creek). This was just a minute or so after entering Val Verde County from Terrell County to the west, and just east of the junction with unpaved Ranch Road 1865 northward to Pumpville, Texas. The snake appeared to be a young adult between 4.5 and 5 feet in length. As I got a closer look while driving past, the head was not visible as it hung over the edge of the bridge on the south side between the guard rail posts. I assumed it was a roadkill tossed to the pavement's edge, but I circled around anyway (there was zero traffic in sight for a half mile or more in each direction) for a better look, thinking A closer view showing the wing of the bat still protruding from the snake’s maybe I could salvage the carcass for a museum collection. mouth. The snake was seemingly unbothered by the photography session. Photo by the author.

The snake continued engulfing the tiny meal within the next 30 seconds as I fumbled for my camera to record the event while still holding it (see photos). I cannot identify the bat species, but it left a barely noticeable bulge in the snake’s stomach once it was completely consumed.

Western Coachwhip (Coluber flagellum testaceus) in the process of consuming a bat of unidentified species. Photo by the author.

As I pulled up close with my car now pointing southwest, the snake popped its head up and looked toward me. I could clearly see that it had a mysterious black object in its mouth, with the object protruding from of each side of its mouth. I didn't guess at first what those odd “aberrations” were, but having previously

SWCHR CODE OF ETHICS

As a member of the Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research, I subscribe to the Association’s Code of Ethics.

Field activities should limit the impact on natural habitats, replacing all cover objects, not tearing apart rocks or logs and refraining from the use of gasoline or other toxic materials.

Catch and release coupled with photography and the limited take of non-protected species for personal study or breeding use is permitted. The commercial take and sale of wild-caught animals is not acceptable.

Collecting practices should respect landowner rights, including but not limited to securing permission for land entry and the packing out of all personal trash.

Captive-breeding efforts are recognized as a valid means of potentially reducing collection pressures on wild populations and are encouraged.

The release of captive animals including captive-bred animals into the wild is discouraged except under the supervision of trained professionals and in accordance with an accepted species preservation or restocking plan.

The disclosure of exact locality information on public internet forums is discouraged in most circumstances. Locality information posted on public internet forums usually should be restricted to providing the name of the county where the animal was found. When specific locality data is provided to one in confidence, it should be kept in confidence and should not be abused or shared with others without explicit permission.

Other members of the Association are always to be treated cordially and in a respectful manner.

SWCHR PO BOX 624 SEGUIN TX 78156