Notes to Species Descriptions

Common Names and Alternate Names

Common English names used on this site are taken from the following sources:

Douglas A. Rossman, Neil B. Ford and Richard A. Seigel, The Garter Snakes: Evolution and Ecology (University of Oklahoma Press, 1996);
SSAR Committee on Standard English and Scientific Names, Scientific and Standard English Names of Amphibians and Reptiles of North America North of Mexico, with Comments Regarding Confidence in Our Understanding (SSAR Herpetological Circular No. 29, 2000);
Ernest A. Liner, Scientific and Common Names for the Amphibians and Reptiles of Mexico in English and Spanish (SSAR Herpetological Circular No. 23, 1994); and
Joseph T. Collins and Travis W. Taggart, Standard Common and Current Scientific Names for North American Amphibians, Turtles, Reptiles and Crocodilians, Fifth Edition (2002).

In the event of a conflict, preference has been given to the name given in Rossman, with the alternate name listed separately.

Common names have been rendered grammatically correct — i.e. “black-necked” instead of “blackneck”.

French Name

French common names for Canadian reptiles and amphibian species were first published in Henri Ouellet and Francis R. Cook, Les noms français des amphibiens et reptiles du Canada: une list provisoire (1981), and appeared again in Francis R. Cook, Introduction to Canadian Amphibians and Reptiles (1984). Subspecies names follow vernacular usage.

Spanish Name

Spanish names were taken from one of the two following sources:

Philip R. Brown, A Field Guide to Snakes of California (Gulf, 1997); and
Ernest A. Liner, Scientific and Common Names for the Amphibians and Reptiles of Mexico in English and Spanish (SSAR Herpetological Circular No. 23, 1994).

Conservation Status

Indicates a species’ conservation status as evaluated by a federal, state or provincial wildlife authority. Does not address whether a species may be collected from the wild or kept in captivity in that or any other jurisdiction; consult the relevant state or provincial page for whatever laws we know about in that regard.

Disclaimer: There is no guarantee that the information on these pages regarding a species’s legal status is accurate. I do my best, but mistakes can occur. Contact your local wildlife agency or municipality for a more definitive answer.

Maximum Length and SVL

Maximum length is that given in Rossman, Ford and Seigel (1996), where occasionally snout-vent length (SVL) is used where the largest recorded specimen has an incomplete tail. Unfortunately, maximum SVL is not given for every species.

Maximum length is not an indication of average length, nor does it take into account the fact that female garter snakes reach larger lengths than males. Nor does it reflect the lengths that captive garter snakes may reach.

Availability

A rough estimate of how likely it is to find this species in the pet trade, whether collected from the wild for pet stores or bred in captivity.

Here are some examples of what each of the ratings mean:

Not available: As far as I am aware, this species is not generally available. It is not collected from the wild and is not bred in captivity.
1 – Rarely available: This species has been kept in captivity, primarily by specialists, but it is not commonly available in the pet trade.
2 – Sometimes available: This species is sometimes available in the pet trade. It occasionally shows up on dealers’ price lists, and it is kept by more than a few specialists. Captive-bred specimens might be available every now and then, but wild-caughts, or captive-born offspring from gravid females collected from the wild, are more likely.
3 – Frequently available: This species is relatively easy to find, at least as far as garter snakes go. It may be bred in captivity by garter snake enthusiasts. Colour and pattern morphs may be available.
4 – Readily available: This species is readily available. Wild-caught specimens may be found in pet stores. It may be frequently bred in captivity by garter snake enthusiasts.

These ratings are based on my observations of the pet trade, and as such may not be accurate. If you know better, contact me and set the record straight.

Captivity Rating

A rough evaluation of this species’s suitability for captive care. Species that are generally docile, feed well, and are willing to accept mice score better than species that, generally speaking, dislike handling, remain nervous and demand a more specialized diet.