Sharp-tailed Snake (Contia tenuis)

Created: January 13th, 2011 - 06:12 PM
Last Modified: January 14th, 2011 - 02:13 PM Entered by: Natalie McNear
Record 60552

Comments

Haha, don't worry, I'm not mad or anything.

Whew, I am really glad your not mad at me.. :) There are some herps that are doubles that are undoubtedly slipping by some, including me.
But I catch a lot of them. So there is going to be a margin of error.
+5/-5 % or so.

But many of us are doing our best NOT to enter duplicate herps. (I don't think I have any any more) As I have a number of entries I don't put in, because I am NOT sure.

If everyone does this its going to be a nightmare, just sayin..

We need a recapture check box or something..

Anyway, thanks for not taking it personally, I am really happy to see you representing nor cal, "and sharp tails" so well.. :) I value your entries..
Thank You.

You're right, there are other reasons herps can disappear from the habitat. The point still stands, though, that as long as people aren't marking animals or at least photographing unique markings (in species where that is possible), there is no way to tell if the animals being entered are the same individuals or not. This is especially the case with Sharp-tailed Snakes... They all pretty much look the same. I know there are a lot more than four individuals in my yard, but because I can't tell them apart from the ones I have recorded, would it make sense to just stop recording them in my yard?

That is what I'm trying to explain, is that in the end it doesn't even matter if they are the same individuals or not. A scientist doing a study on the species and using this information wouldn't care about which individuals have already been recorded, they would just want to know the habitat/conditions of each sighting, so that is of the utmost importance to me and why I make a new record every time. It's just not a numbers game to me.

I know you've done a lot for NAFHA/HERP (thanks, BTW :) ), and it seems like this is just coming down to matters of opinion. Unless this issue is brought to the attention of the higher-ups and a rule is passed one way or another, I would prefer to just keep making entries as I have always done (if you look in late 2009/early 2010, there are more records of one individual Contia from my house), and my name be removed from the contest if the numbers are being screwed up.

Also, I would actually prefer if all the comments on this record remain as-is (yeah, I fall into the "leave it" crowd, LOL), because it's an interesting debate that will surely come up again in the future.

When were done here I ll remove my long replies ok?..Not to cloud your record..

habitat destruction is not the only reason herps disappear. There are other reasons too, see Horned lizard as one example. See frogs as another example (fungus) Skink numbers are down in some places that have Argentina ants. Eastern Kings numbers are seriously declining in areas, and no one knows why. The list goes on and on. In the last 10 years in many places, in so cal. I have seen dramatic habitat changes with non native weeds and grasses as they change the habitat types. I see possible problems ahead, at some local areas..

So no habitat destruction is not the only way our herps are disappearing.

More and more people are entering lizards and manders. This conversation isn't about the contest. I have very active in the database since the day it went live, Common Names listed on the database my idea, DOR's My idea (including annual DOR count), Qty equals voucher my idea.. and so on..

Give me a little more credit than bringing this up for only contest related proplems..

The numbers are meaningless, however, if people aren't marking the animals to make sure they aren't finding the same ones more than once. And I don't understand the emphasis on the numbers either... Why does it matter? We know they are there, we know we will only ever find a small fraction of them, and we know they will stay there unless their habitat is destroyed.

These snakes were not under those rocks a week or two ago when nighttime temperatures were regularly dropping below freezing, they were probably deep underground brumating. I have a variety of rocks in that area that heat up at different rates and to different temperatures, so if I go out there one day when it's 60 degrees and they have moved to one of the warm rocks to digest a meal, we'll have an idea about what kind of temperatures they need to become active and hunt. On the other hand, not much is learned if the only thing stressed is the number of snakes - I already know there's tons of them around here, that that doesn't help much at all.

And that's another point about the numbers thing - how many people are going to count, photograph, and enter every Scelop or Uta they find? Not many, I would suspect. Therefore you get really high numbers of the "cool" herps like California Kings and Rosy Boas, but very low counts of the most abundant species. This has been a problem in some areas with some species already (some counties missing even the most common species just because people don't want to enter them). What useful information is gained when there are 500 records for California Kings in LA and only 20 for Garden Slender Salamanders (just an example, I didn't look up any actual numbers).

If this is just about the contest, which it seems like it is, then my name can be removed from the contest list (or just ignored) so I don't mess up the numbers. I would much rather keep contributing as much information as possible than stop making entries simply because they are the same individuals. If that doesn't solve the issue, do bring it up on the forums.

The count is automated, its not manually done, hence why its impossible to keep track of these kind of entries. You could walk out there with a flashlight at 32 degrees and they will be there, they will stay under those tiles until it gets to hot. I have done it to many times to count. Honestly there isn't a lot of scientific information involved there. The numbers of herps is much more important, as it gives us the ability to monitor them numbers wise.

What "numbers"? I wasn't aware there was some sort of reptile count going on. Even if there is, I don't see why entering more than one record for the same animal would affect that, since whoever is doing the counting would have to open the record anyway to see the quantity of animals (and then they would see that they have been found before and just ignore the record if they want).

To me this database isn't about who can find the most herps, who can score the most points, who can win a contest, etc. - it's about contributing useful information for a scientific purpose. If I find these Sharp-tailed Snakes again in May when it's 80 degrees, that information is just as useful to scientists as the original record, so I'm going to make a new entry.

Well I wrote a long reply and it didn't go through.. frustratin

Unfortunately, (sorry) I have to bring it up. We will not be able to do the annual counts we want to do if people are entering data this way. It messes up the counts tremendously.

It also messes up contest counts.

So its going to be messy either way. There is no doubt that on occasion a person may enter the same animal twice by mistake.

I could rack up some serious numbers, as Helleri, gopher snakes, ringneck snakes, manders, Utas, gators, and fence lizards stay under the same cover 24/7 all winter and most of the sping, not to mention the same boas and kings for weeks in the same cracks and boards.. The numbers that can be produced with this method is Amazing. I could wake up every morning and get 25 enteries of the same herps. Not to mention people like Taylor, who can go in there back yard and record the same herps twice a day.

Basically, to sum it up, I see each entry not as a profile of an individual herp, but a valuable documentation of a herp sighting.

I'll have to disagree with that - I consider dates and environmental conditions much, much more important than raw numbers. If multiple entries for the same animal are prohibited, we would have to mark every animal in the field to make sure we would never make another entry for it again. I suspect I am going to be re-finding these animals on a regular basis well into spring, and simply adding information to the original record every time I found them would make things very messy. Making a new entry each time keeps things organized and better navigable.

I think this issue has been covered on the forums before (creating an entry for each date you find the animal), but if you see fit you can open up the discussion again. I'd certainly be interested to see what everyone has to say about this topic.

It's never been covered in depth, but it shouldn't be allowed, as it gives false numbers if we did that. (BTW I would win EVERY contest if we did allow this LOL) Notes of the conditions can be made in the notes field.. Numbers of herps is far more valuable info
than conditions found.

Thanks for the comment. I will add a note to the first record, but I think this one should stay as well - AFAIK it is fine to enter animals more than once if they are found on different dates and in different conditions.

Great entries Natalie.. I think Notes should be added to 60350 with these pictures and date of recapture.. And this entry removed.... Other wise if we counted how many Sharpe tails were found in 2010 it would say 8, but only 4 would be the true number.