RAUK - Archived Forum - A simple question!

Hi all,

I hope that those of you that visit here regularly will make a small effort to reply to this. Question; from what you know / your experience, what species would you say has the greater population within the UK:

A). The Grass Snake

B). The Great Crested Newt?

Cheers

Rob

Come on Rob - a simple question ? no such thing in herpetology !   This sounds like a loaded question - eg if there are more GCN then why are they more highly protected than grassies ?

Basically, in absolute terms there must be more GCN individuals (not least because grass snakes are higher up the food chain); but in terms of populations / metapopulations it's possibly not so clear cut.  On the other hand, a good GCN population may have 100+ adults - a grass snake population of 100+ adults would be really very good, I guess.

All the usual caveats apply, such as grass snakes perhaps being over-recorded due to their relative mobility and the lack of standard methodology for estimating reptile populations compared with the methodology such as torching ponds for GCN.

In summary, more GCN than grassies, but GCN get protection because of rate of decline since WW2 and European context.  Maybe if Natrix natrix helvetica were elevated to full species status you'd get the same flurry of protection which Triturus cristatus got when the 'crested newt' was split into its various separate species a few years ago !

Cheers

Will

Well I avoided replying but as Will just posted exactly what went through my mind when I read the question and you were looking for responses from us Rob..

Full protection for the adder first, grass snakes readily populated our tiny square of wildlife garden along with common lizards, frogs, toads and smooth newts.

Not a snowballs chance in hell of ever finding an adder there or a GCN, despite the fact the nearest populations are only a couple of miles away - the species that need the most protection are the less vagile - in such terms I would put adder and then slow-worms higher on the list than Natrix.

Like Gemma I would never get an adder in my garden nor probably a GCN although there are probably some less than half a mile away. Adders more particular for habitat?

Wandering on our local heaths though I would be lucky to see a grass snake - although they are there - but would see adders lying out. If I want to see grassies I'd have to look under tins there. Rarely see grassies lying out and they are much more flighty, as you'll all know!

Hi all,

I hope that those of you that visit here regularly will make a small effort to reply to this. Question; from what you know / your experience, what species would you say has the greater population within the UK:

A). The Grass Snake

B). The Great Crested Newt?

Cheers

Rob

[/QUOTE]

Hi Rob,

To be honest, having lived in this area now for around six years only, so far I would say that GCNs are very much localised here, then again so are grass snakes.

I intend to find out more, but if you are driving towards whether grass snakes should recieve further protection, then I would say that judging by the amount of habitat destruction of late in this area alone, that I would agree with you and go so far as to say that they do need more protection and awareness cultivated in the area local to me for sure.   Then again, so do adders, although they are far more common here than grass snakes.

Where do we stop though?

"Common" frogs are also pretty localised here it would appear.

The list seems like it could go on.

As regards the issue of protection, if Grass Snakes and Adders had the same protection as GCN then a lot more planning applications that come into the council could be refused and this would also give us a stronger case as regards management of Country Parks etc.

This is an issue that was only discussed today and it was agreed that translocation seems to be used as the only option but its finding suitable sites.  I was told that if Grass snakes/Adders had the same protection as GCN then the outcome for this particular site we were discussing today would be completely different and the same goes for similar sites in this area.

sorry if i've moved away slightly from your original question Rob

I'm not sure that would really be the case Chaela. I have never seen GCN stop a development, or a wildlife conservation organisations (I use the term very loosely) stop trashing habitat because of GCN. Usually they are moved, or squeezed into a smaller space or simply their presence is ignored. So would the same level of protection for Nn or Vb really make a difference to their conservation status on the ground? Already much of the habitat trashing is illegal due the presence of protected species but no prosecutions, animals simply must be dieing in the process.

The argument I've always heard is that GCN have their current status because of the European decline. Vb has the largest distribution of any snake in the world, Nn is not a rare animal on the European mainland. I wish it were a case that those responsible for the legislation would consider the declines in this country and act accordingly, though I do not believe for one second that will ever happen as the WCA was simply the UKs response to European legislation, without that legislation we would have no wildlife protection acts in this country at all.

I would be all for protection of common frogs and common toads. 30 odd years ago when I first became active in field obs both species were common, not now and it is rare to find the huge populations now that I knew so well then. Some still exist but they have been lost at an alarming rate and I can count on one hand the new populations I've seen established in that time. In my mind protection against killing for Rt and Bb would actually benefit a mobile species like Nn more than changing its own legal status of protection!

I really believe there is a huge anomaly regarding the current protection of widespread reptile species and no protection against killing of the widespread amphibians at all - however I also recognise that there are those who would resist any change in the law as they would view it as a 'downgrading' of the protection afforded to Natterjacks, GCN, Smooth Snakes and Sand Lizards if the more widespread species were given the same status (Not a view I share by the way)

I agree that it is the widespread amphibians such as Rt recieving protection that would probably have the most immediate benefit to today`s British Herpetofauna. Rt I am particularly concerned about locally to me at least. Bb sems to be doing much better than Rt where I am at least.

Egg laying sites, or rather lack of, for grass snakes concerns me also however, as does hibernacula destruction, and that`s just the ones that I know of.  I shudder to think at the amount of egg laying sites and hibernacula that get destroyed without knowledge of it happening.

I really have strayed of the original topic now, sorry.

So, a grand total of 12 replies! Hardly the voice of the people eh, no wonder Grassies are struggling.

I'm quite surprised at some of the thoughts surrounding the populations as I wonder if you lot are seeing more Grass Snakes than me generally? Mmmm.

But in another thread gemma, you said that you thought there were up to 2000 slowies in an acre! But you say here that you think that slowie should have greater protections than Nn??!!

I would be very surprised if the Grass Snake population in the UK relating to the very best of sites in prime locations would be any more than ten per acre. There wouldn't necessarily be more GCN's than Nn because Nn take more than just newts as prey items.

I do think Nnh is a special case as in all island populations - don't forget that Uk is an island! Natrix in Sicily has full protection because it is an island population.

And lastly, Kent will be the last strnghold of Natrix. That's how the stats have been going since 1963, or perhaps even 1901. Maybe they're working their way south because they know something we don't.

Cheers for responding anyway, those of you that took the trouble.

Rob

Sorry for not replying but I have had no experience with GCNs, so I cant actually answer your question, that may be the case for others..

Thinking about the point behind your question ... I think I have quite an extreme view in terms of protection of species and habitat.

I look at the UK and see so little habitat left for our wildlife, in my mind habitat that holds any diversity or has the potential to hold diversity should not be destroyed (developed). Sadly this is impossible with an increasing population that doesnÆt care about the environment.

In terms of what may be possible, I think it is important to give species more protection (such as the grass snake), but also to think about habitats. Everyone goes crazy over protecting the heath and it seems to be working. If we can have some sort of diversity index, highlighting the habitats which contain the most species, then make those habitats highly protected à.?

Not sure if IÆm making sense anymoreà

Mark,

makes perfect sense to me. I've argued for ages that it is the protection of the habitat that is just as important as protecting the species, because one without the other is like saying one minus one, it still equals nought.

Dispersal rutes and migration corridors are crucial to Natrix as are egg laying sites, ponds for food etc. Disrupt any of these and Natrix goes into to decline.

I don't know why people in this field of study can't see it, if I can see it. Perhaps its just that there isn't the will to protect. Anyone that argues that Natrix isn't in steep decline isn't seeing the full picture. I have been studying them since 1974/5 and in just over 30 years I would say the numbers are a quarter of what they were. Fact.

R

But in another thread gemma, you said that you thought there were up to 2000 slowies in an acre! But you say here that you think that slowie should have greater protections than Nn??!!

And why exactly do you see that as a contradiction Rob? Slow-worms are less vagile than grass snakes, simple isn't it? They may be locally abundant at some sites but are extremely poor at moving from one area to another. So when a site is lost, goodbye slow-worms and very little chance they will re-colonise, lost forever, finished, gone.

This isn't the case for Lv or Nn in my experience.

There is no comparison to be drawn between the population dynamics of species such as GCN and slow-worm and those of Nn which occupies a quite different ecological niche. It is like comparing sparrows with red kites, they are not the same thing. Of course per acre there are more slow-worms where they are present as the holding capacity will be higher, but this is because they are not as far up the food chain as Natrix - by saying there are more slow-worms in the country than Natrix and then making this a case for protecting Natrix won't impress many people Rob as it shows a very flawed understanding of ecology.

Also Rob don't think that I do not support you in raising the status of Natrix, I would be more than happy if all our herps were raised in status tomorrow, I'm just giving you a few counter arguments which it appears you are not ready for!

PS Sorry no more than 12 replies, I would have thought quality was more important than quantity  

[QUOTE=Vicar] Rob, One of the avenues where herp conservation can improve is public awareness of the issues. I'd suggest writing up your results and present them at one of the herp conferences (as a start), or even locally in newspapers.
[/QUOTE]

Rob - you will have a great opportunity for press coverage when you release your new book and pictures of the monster - although I guess this is your intention 

Paul