Eastern foxsnake (Elaphe gloydi) (Carolinian)COSEWIC assessment and status report: chapter 13

Technical Summary

Elaphe gloydi (Carolinian Population)


Eastern Foxsnake

Couleuvre fauve de l’Est

Range of Occurrence in Canada: Ontario


Extent and Area Information

Extent of occurrence (EO) ( km2 )
Simple Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP) computed using Ontario Herpetofaunal Summary records as per COSEWIC methodology adapted from IUCN 2001
18 117 km 2
Specify trend in EO
No Trend--because of the way an MCP areal value is calculated, only the loss of one of the regional populations would have a significant impact on EO values
Are there extreme fluctuations in EO?
No
Area of occupancy (AO) (km 2 )
(see section Habitat Protection/Ownership and Figure 5 for details)
A 2 km x 2 km grid of cells was overlaid on the distribution of the species and the AO was calculated as the area of all the cells that intersect known occurrences. Occurrences from 1984 to present were used, and from that subset, the dataset was further restricted to those records determined to be valid for distributional analyses (Willson and Rouse 2006). The dataset was considered in 5-year intervals (5 years = ~1 generation) to evaluate both current AO (past 10 years) and trend in AO.
From all NHIC
1984; AO=860 km 2
1988; AO=580 km 2
1993; AO=300 km 2
1998; AO=188 km 2
Specify trend in AO
Decline (see above)
Are there extreme fluctuations in AO?
No
Number of known or inferred current locations
~50
Specify trend in #
Declining (see above)
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of locations?
No
Specify trend in area, extent or quality of habitat
Both area and quality are declining


Population Information

Generation time (average age of parents in the population)
~5 years
Number of mature individuals
Unknown
Total population trend
Likely declining
% decline over the last/next 10 years or 3 generations
Unknown
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals?
No
Is the total population severely fragmented?
Yes
Specify trend in number of populations
Likely declining
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of populations?
No
List metapopulations with number of mature individuals in each
Essex-Kent
Haldimand-Norfolk


Threats (actual or imminent threats to populations or habitats)

  1. Mortality on roads
  2. Loss and degradation of habitat especially loss of hedgerows and wetlands
  3. Persecution by ophidiophobes
  4. Illegal wildlife trade

 

Rescue Effect (immigration from an outside source)

Status of outside population(s)?
USA: MI S2; OH S3
[other jurisdictions or agencies] None
Is immigration known or possible?
May be possible across Detroit River or Lake St Clair
Would immigrants be adapted to survive in Canada?
Presumably
Is there sufficient habitat for immigrants in Canada?
No
Is rescue from outside populations likely?
Highly Unlikely


Quantitative Analysis

N/A

 


Current Status

COSEWIC: Carolinian Population - Endangered (2008)
COSEWIC: Species considered as a single unit – Threatened (2000)
COSEWIC: Species considered as a single unit – Threatened (1999)

 


Status and Reasons for Designation

Status: Endangered
Alpha-numeric code: B2ab(ii,iii,iv)

Reasons for Designation: The species is confined to a few small increasingly disjunct areas that are subject to intensive agriculture, high human populations and extremely high densities of roads. Roads fragment populations leading to increased probability of extirpation. There are no large protected, roadless areas for this species in this region. The species is also subject to persecution and illegal collection for the wildlife trade.

 


Applicability of Criteria

Criterion A (Declining Total Population):
Not applicable.

Criterion B (Small Distribution, and Decline or Fluctuation):
Meets Endangered B2ab(ii,iii,iv) as the area of occupancy is < 500 km2 and severely fragmented. The AO is declining (ii), the area and quality of habitat are declining (iii) and locations are disappearing (iv) as habitat is lost

Criterion C (Small Total Population Size and Decline):
Total population size not known.

Criterion D (Very Small Population or Restricted Distribution):
Population too large

Criterion E (Quantitative Analysis):
Not applicable.

Elaphe gloydi (Great Lakes/St. Lawrence Population)


Eastern Foxsnake

Couleuvre fauve de l’Est

Range of Occurrence in Canada: Ontario


Extent and Area Information

Extent of occurrence (EO) (km 2 )
Simple Minimum Convex Polygon (MCP) computed using Ontario Herpetofaunal Summary records as per COSEWIC methodology adapted from IUCN 2001
1984 km 2
Specify trend in EO
Possibly declining
Are there extreme fluctuations in EO?
No
Area of occupancy (AO) (km 2 )
(see section Habitat Protection/Ownership and Figure 4 for details)
A 2 km x 2 km grid of cells was overlaid on the distribution of the species and the AO was calculated as the area of all the cells that intersect known occurrences. Occurrences from 1984 to present were used, and from that subset, the dataset was further restricted to those records determined to be valid for distributional analyses (Willson and Rouse 2006). Also, the AO was calculated from all observations from the past 10 years (since 1998).
AO from all NHIC observations since:
1984 = 276 km 2
1998 = 188 km 2
Specify trend in AO
Declining
Are there extreme fluctuations in AO?
No
Number of known or inferred current locations
~50
Specify trend in #
Declining
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of locations?
No
Specify trend in area, extent or quality of habitat
Loss of habitat from cottage development, increased number of roads


Population Information

Generation time (average age of parents in the population)
~5 years
Number of mature individuals
Unknown
Total population trend
Likely declining
% decline over the last/next 10 years or 3 generations
Unknown
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of mature individuals?
No
Is the total population severely fragmented?
Yes, by recreational shoreline development
Specify trend in number of populations
Unknown
Are there extreme fluctuations in number of populations?
No
List metapopulations with number of mature individuals in each
Unknown. Scattered along coast.


Threats (actual or imminent threats to populations or habitats)

The main threat to these snakes comes from rapidly increasing recreational development along the Georgian Bay coastline and on the shores of the Georgian Bay Islands. Increases in power boats, and roads and traffic are killing more snakes. Housing developments particularly in the southern part of the snakes’ distribution are also destroying their habitat.

 


Rescue Effect (immigration from an outside source)

Status of outside population(s)?
USA: MI S2; OH S3
[other jurisdictions or agencies] None
Is immigration known or possible?
No
Would immigrants be adapted to survive in Canada?
Unknown
Is there sufficient habitat for immigrants in Canada?
Likely yes
Is rescue from outside populations likely?
No


Quantitative Analysis

N/A

 


Current Status

COSEWIC: Great Lakes / St Lawrence Population - Endangered (2008)
COSEWIC: Species considered as a single unit – Threatened (2000)
COSEWIC: Species considered as a single unit – Threatened (1999)

 


Status and Reasons for Designation

Status: Endangered
Alpha-numeric code: B1ab(iii) + 2ab(iii)

Reasons for Designation: In this region, the species swims long distances often in cold, rough open water where it is subject to mortality from increasing boat traffic. It is uniquely vulnerable to habitat loss because it is confined to a thin strip of shoreline where it must compete with intense road development and habitat modification due to recreational activities. This species’ habitat is undergoing increasing fragmentation as development creates zones that are uninhabitable.

 


Applicability of Criteria

Criterion A (Declining Total Population):
Not applicable.

Criterion B (Small Distribution, and Decline or Fluctuation):
Meets Endangered B1ab(iii)+B2ab(iii) since the known extent of occurrence (1984 km2) is less than 5000 km2 and the area of occupancy (188 km2) is less than 500 km2. The species’ habitat is fragmented by recreational developments along the species’ coastal habitat. Important shoreline habitat is also being lost to cottage and other development.

Criterion C (Small Total Population Size and Decline):
Numbers not known with reasonable certainty.

Criterion D (Very Small Population or Restricted Distribution):
Population too large

Criterion E (Quantitative Analysis):
Not applicable.

Page details

Date modified: