Effectiveness of Short‐Distance Translocation and its Effects on Western Rattlesnakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Short‐distance translocation (SDT) is commonly used to mitigate snake‐human interactions, yet little is known about its effectiveness or its effects on behavior and welfare of snakes. Between April 2004 and October 2005, we evaluated SDT as a conservation and management tool by investigating how 500‐m SDT affected spatial ecology, body condition, and behavior of western rattlesnakes ( Crotalus oreganus ) surgically implanted with radiotransmitters in a field study near Osoyoos, British Columbia, Canada. Of 14 rattlesnakes subjected to SDT, 12 (85.7%) returned on ≥1 occasion (range 1–7 times) to the general area they were removed from. Rattlesnakes that underwent SDT showed an increase in total distance moved over an active season compared to non‐translocated snakes, but there was no evidence to suggest SDT had an effect on activity range size. There was no evidence to suggest SDT affected body condition, behavior, or mortality rates. Short‐distance translocation to high‐quality undisturbed habitats was unsuccessful as a long‐term solution to snake‐human conflict because most translocated snakes returned to conflict areas within a short time (x̄ x = 19.9 ± 8.7 days). However, SDT may be an effective short‐term tool to manage snake‐human conflict in areas where human presence is seasonal or short‐lived if careful attention is paid to species‐specific biological needs, habitat quality at the release site, and the location of the release site in relation to conflict areas.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".