Breeding then releasing?

[philthechil]

I had a thought that if I do get like 5 Garter snakes, (I would only allow this is they were the same species: Eastern) males and females, I would not let them hibernate, but I would let them breed. I wouldn't exactly want it to happen, but if it does, I don't mind. Anyways, if I do get Babies on my hands, I would let them go near my house. There is a valley within like half a mile of my house with a water supply and I bet plenty of yummy insects for them. Thoughts?

[guidofatherof5]

Not yummy insect. Not for Garters. Not brumating doesn't assure they will not breed. Last year I had a couple non-brumaters breed. If this valley is a good location, why not take them to it?

[philthechil]

What do you mean "If this valley is a good location, why not take them to it?"

Well, the point is not to have them not breed, because if I really wanted them not to, I'd seperate them by gender. :P It's just that in the rare case that they do, I'm wondering if I can released them soon after birth.

[guidofatherof5]

Releasing soon after birth. The older and larger they are when they hit the food chain gives them a better chance at life. Newborns are like popcorn chicken in the wild. Why not keep them until they have put on some size and then release them. This way they have a better chance at survival. Granted there chances are still slim but at least they have a better chance. Are Easterns native to your area?

Having mixed sex will as a rule= babies.

[philthechil]

Yes, I got mine about 6 hours north of my house, and one of my cooworkers who lives like a mile away from me said him and his siblings caught like 50 of them last summer, did a science report on them, and brought them somewhere safer. :P

[tyflier]

Better check your local regulations. Releasing captive bred animals without a permit is HIGHLY frowned upon by both regulating authorities AND *most* hobbyists.

Doesn't matter if they are a local species or not...releasing captive animals into the wild is a VERY bad idea...and usually illegal, to boot...

[aSnakeLovinBabe]

Better check your local regulations. Releasing captive bred animals without a permit is HIGHLY frowned upon by both regulating authorities AND *most* hobbyists.

Doesn't matter if they are a local species or not...releasing captive animals into the wild is a VERY bad idea...and usually illegal, to boot...

what he said!!!
it is a bad idea for the risk of spreading pathogens that you impose, or possibly burdening an area with more snakes than it can handle, who end up eating all the prey and causing a chain collapse!!!

[OregonHerpaholic]

>>Doesn't matter if they are a local species or not...releasing captive animals into the wild is a VERY bad idea...and usually illegal, to boot

Most states it is ILLEGAL to release anything born IN CAPTIVITY.. If you grab a gravid female or end up with breeding, you might just end up stuck with LOTS of babies.. You can give away, but most states, that can be illegal as well.

Better to just pick ONE.. OR instead of catching your pet, try captive bred garters..that way you are not harming the wild population.. There are several GREAT garter breeders in US, and Abroad.. no reason to risk breeding problems.

[aSnakeLovinBabe]

Yes, I got mine about 6 hours north of my house, and one of my cooworkers who lives like a mile away from me said him and his siblings caught like 50 of them last summer, did a science report on them, and brought them somewhere safer. :P

I don't want to nitpick here... but they removed 50 snakes from their population where they were happy and thriving and moved them somewhere "safer"? Actually, what they did was decimate a population of snakes in one area, and stuffed a whole bunch of un-needed ones into an area that already had its own population, and they probably broke the law to boot... unless they had a permit for a field study and even then, they should definitely have not been released elsewhere. If they found 50 snakes in a certain area, that means that the area they were in was obviously "safe" enough for those 50 snakes to thrive.....so how is the new area safer? In fact it's not. You do not decide what is "safer" or "better" for those snakes, mother nature does and if they were thriving, then their area was plenty safe enough. It's a strange environment to them first off, so they will spend time wandering aimlessly wondering where the heck they are and many will be eaten in that process... the ones that survive, they have no idea where the food and water supplies are, and the parasites and "germs" there are more than likely foriegn and more likely to cause them harm than the ones they were used to, and since they are so stressed out, their immune system is suppressed and they are even MORE likely to fall victim to that. The major risk here, is that the snakes they introduced were carrying something that the existing snakes in that population cannot handle. That is how endangerments and population extinctions occur. Amphibians being released into the wild and contaminating healthy wild animals are why the worlds amphibians are now dying off thanks to chytrid fungus. usually, when conducting scientific research on live animals you would at least release them back where you found them.

And please know that I am not yelling at you, just venting in general and attmepting to educate all, including yourself, who may not know the effects of these types of ordeals. Knowledge is power and the more we spread it the further we will go in life. I get kind of upset when I hear mass exodus's of populations of animals and people thinking it is a good thing. Kind of was actually an understatement

[philthechil]

Ok. Will do... I don't know what I'd do with the snakes otherwise. Maybe freeze 'em, but if I had to do that, I'd just keep the males and females apart.