|
11-14 of 14 messages
|
Previous
Page 2 of 2
|
|
RE: speaking of big diamondbacks
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on November 24, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Its interesting that the size of the snake in the photo can vary 25.5 inches, depending on the difference between two persons hands!
(3/4 inch X 34 sections = 25 1/2 inch).
JohnZ
|
| |
|
RE: speaking of big diamondbacks
|
Reply
|
|
by Scott7590 on December 9, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm a cynic when it comes to large snakes. This looks like a big one, but I have three observations/questions:
1. From what I've read, a typical record length snake is 1/3+ longer than an average mature adult. This one is apparently 1/3 longer than the generally accepted record of 8'-plus.
2. How could such a hugh specimen escape the attention of herpetologists? A lot of real pros, like Ditmars, spent time in Florida when this photo was dated. How could the herpers have missed this guy?
3. I would think an 11' diamondback would be much heavier-bodied than this one.
Any thoughts?
|
| |
|
RE: speaking of big diamondbacks
|
Reply
|
|
by Cro on December 10, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Scott:
As far as your question #2, it is possible that the snake did not escape the attention of herpetologists, if it is the 9 foot 11 inch EDB record that was published in several old, old books from about the time of Ditmars.
Perhaps others discredited that measurement, as it was based on a photo, and started using the 8 foot 4 inch record, which might have been based on a preserved specimin.
I will try to find those old books to look up that record again, but I know it was repeated in several old books.
As far as #3, it does not look heavy enough to be 11 feet to me also.
As far as #1, that 1/3 rule sounds about right, but we can not rule out the occasional very rare individual giant, or dwarf that throws the bell curve all cattywhampus.
Best Regards JohnZ
|
| |
|
RE: speaking of big diamondbacks
|
Reply
|
|
by Scott7590 on December 11, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
John, thanks for your response.
If you can find a reference to this snake in an early text, I would be very interested in knowing about it.
It would be a shame if the snake was legitimate but failed to make it into the record books because its size was not properly documented. I don’t know what Palm Beach County was like in 1916 (fortunately, I wasn’t here back then – or I wouldn’t be here now!), but I think it was rather rustic. I don’t know if there was an area museum that would have been able to preserve the snake at the time.
I’m going to contact Wayne King, who is at the Florida Museum of Natural History, to see if he has any information about this snake. If I hear back from him I’ll let you know.
Regards,
Scott
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
