No Black Ratsnakes in Ontario

[Swampwalker]

I just finished typing a nice long post about the following info, the accidently shut the window before posting it. I'm not going to re-type it, but I will give the basic points with links to the info (sorry).

According to the NHIC's (MNR Natural Heritage Information Centre) website & Winter Newsletter, Black Ratsnakes (Elaphe o. obosleta) are now considered to be Central Ratsnakes (Elaphe spiloides).
....so does this mean Elaphe o. o. are now legal to own in Ontario ( :devil: I had to ask)

Common names will no longer be two words, they are now one, e.g. ratsnake, milksnake, watersnake.

Brownsnakes and Red-bellied snakes have each been broken up into two sub-species:

Storeria d. dekayi - Northern Brownsnake
Storeria d. wrightorum - Midland Brownsnake

Storeria o. occipitomaculata - Northern Red-bellied Snake
Storeria occipitomaculata pahasapae - Black Hill Red-bellied Snake


Please check out the links for more info:

NHIC Winter Newsletter (www.mnr.gov.on.ca/MNR/nhic/documents/winter2004/NHIC_NEWS_WINTER2004.PDF)

NHIC Species - Reptiles (http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/MNR/nhic/species/lists/reptiles_2003.pdf)

[Ontario_herper]

Those links didn't work for me Stewart :(

[Swampwalker]

The links are fixed. Your not back already are you Dave?

[Ontario_herper]

Back indeed. The trip went from Monday to Monday. Great time had by all! A few less species caught then last year but more serpents.

[Ontario_herper]

Interesting that softshells were listed as S3 while woods are S2. I would think they would be at a even level of risk.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding what is being stated but the article says that E. obsoleta does not range into Ontario. That in fact what we have been calling E. obsoleta is actually E. spiloides. Would that not make E. obsoleta originating from the states legal to keep in Ontario?

[Swampwalker]

Would that not make E. obsoleta originating from the states legal to keep in Ontario?

I asked that in my original post.
I thought you where going to be away for two weeks. I look forward to seeing some pictures.

[Stockwell]

Sounds like something Mr. Hathaway, will find an answer to.
It sounds problematic to me.
How the heck would poached specimens be identified, if this is the case. Local caught specimens could end up in the pet trade and if they're legally a different species but look like imported obsoleta, who would know the difference.
The same with wood turles and Fox snakes
Say a private breeder gets a pair of Fox snakes from Pelee, but then claims that they aren't Gloydi , but that they are US Vulpina???
I'm not sure how the law will deal with phenotypically identical animals that are only different at a molecular level

[Ontario_herper]

The good news is that all this confusion will likely mean that more MNR people stay "busy" while still ignoring real conservation issues.

Stewart - A smaller group stayed on for another week on the West Coast of Costa Rica but I had to come home for my mothers wedding. You'll see some pictures soon!

[Jeff Hathaway]

Hi guys,

The answer to the question- the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act has a catchall section that says if it can't be distinguished from the native type by a conservation officer, then it is also illegal to possess without authorization. So things that are different genetically but the same phenotypically can't be possessed. Fox snakes are interesting- westerns and easterns have different blotch counts, though they overlap. So, if one had a western that had enough blotches that it was outside the range for an eastern to have, it could be argued that it should be okay. I can't see how anything would be different for rat snakes, though.

Plus, the law has not changed. Only the names that the NHIC is using have been revised. So the law still reads 'Black Rat Snake- Elaphe obsoleta obsoleta', and it is unlikely to be changed anytime soon.

Jeff Hathaway
Sciensational Sssnakes!!

[Holy Mackerel]

Jeff, is proper "authorization" in these cases simply CITES papers?


I also find it interesting that wood turtles and spiny soft shelled are of a different S ranking. It seems to me that both should be S3 (based on the numbers criteria); unless the softshelled is S3 due to the high local population numbers in certain rivers??

I also find it interesting that the ranks are switched in COSEWIC's eye's with the Wood being SC and the Softshelled being THR. But having recently talked with a member from the COSEWIC reptiles sub-committee the wood turtle status as only SC does require re-analyzation. But apparently considerable evidence is required to ever increase the status of any of our species. The trend has been to reduce to lower statuses. This seems to be based on the economics surrounding an increase to a higher status.


Does anybody know off hand what was the deciding factor to call the Black Rat Snake, Elaphe spiloides?

[Holy Mackerel]

I ended up getting ambitious and answering my question on what were the deciding factors to the new taxonomic conventions.

The answer is not really simple, and the report by Burbrink (2001)was 53 pages long!!

It was based on mitochondrial DNA analysis and support for this from 67 morphological characters. So we're down to four species from the eastern ratsnake complex in North America, with one area of taxonomic uncertainty along the US eastern sea board.

Really kind of interesting, also interesting how many authorities in Canada, or I should say Ontario, are not yet accepting this convention.

[Ontario_herper]

Isn't taxonomy fun :)

[Jeff Hathaway]

It does take a long time for various authorities to update things to new taxonomic changes. Sometimes, before they get to it, things change again! The reality is that taxonomy is mostly for the scientific community.

CITES papers are not 'proper' authorization, and are in fact not applicable to black rat snakes, as they are not listed on CITES. Proper authorization (in Ontario) would be from the MNR- an "Authorization to Keep Specially Protected Reptiles and Amphibians in Captivity for the Purposes of Conservation and Education", or a "License to Keep Specially Protected and Game Wildlife in a Zoo". Both are very hard to get. If you have specific questions, just ask, but I don't have time to go into the details of these at present.

My thoughts (reasonably educated) on softshell vs. wood status. Softshells have a very limited range but within the areas they inhabit, I think they are fairly stable. Woods have a wide range (theoretically) but actually only inhabit a few localities within that. Numbers have been dropping, significantly so in some spots. Recruitment is virtually zero in some populations. Woods are far more susceptible to human influences (read collecting). I think this is the basis for the S3 vs. S2 rank by the NHIC.

COSEWIC rankings (different from the NHIC, as they're done differently by a different group, and they're national, not provincial)- woods inhabit large areas (again in isolated spots) in Quebec, NB, and NS. Some populations are doing just fine so far, mostly because they are fairly isolated. Softshells are only found in a tiny portion of Quebec, where they aren't doing well. Therefore, from a national perspective, softshells are in much worse shape! Also, COSEWIC rankings are based on reports that are done on each species separately. Sometimes they go long periods of time between updates. Which is why they now list Stinkpots as THR, since the update was recently done, and Woods as SC, since it has been a while. Look for woods to be upgraded to THR in the not too distant future.

Welcome to the site, Holy Mackerel! Love to hear from Guelphites! Maybe we can discuss this in more detail when I've actually got some spare time.

Back to work!

Jeff Hathaway
Sciensational Sssnakes!!

[BurmGuy87]

I'm a bit confused....so now I own a Central Ratsnake?

[Holy Mackerel]

Depends on who you want to beleive. The taxonomy has is under dispute. A study was done by Frank Burbrink stating that Eastern ratsnake complex (which did include the black rat snake) has been dissolved. Now that huge complex with all kinds of confusing subspecies has been resolved as four separate species. What would have been considered the black ratsnake, is now part of the central ratsnake clade (Elaphe spiloides).

However this is not completly accepted yet, and it seems that many people refuse to accept it! Many of our governing bodies have not yet accepted the new convention, and it may take some time before everything reads central ratsnake (if the convention is even accepted)

So really, it is up to you at this point, you can call it either central ratsnake or a black ratsnake, as neither are specifically the proper names at this point!

[BurmGuy87]

Thanks! I think I'll stick to the Black Rat Snake until something is definate:)

[Ontario_herper]

Jeff, I would agree that you could consider softshells to be "locally abundant". While woods are scattered into smaller populations. The major problem is that all the areas that softies are found, while they may contain numerous reproductive adults, they also nest in areas that heavily used by humans. It's tough for a very nervous turtle like a softshell to come up and complete egg-laying while there's motorboats and beachgoers in and around their choice egg-laying sites.

So while there are many adults the number of young may be few at best.

Anyways, I'm sure you know all this anyways!

I just figured they would have been at a similar level of not so great future. Just found it interesting that they weren't!!!