|
1-10 of 16 messages
|
Page 1 of 2
Next
|
|
Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by Rugha on October 28, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I was wondering which snake the experts here would rank as the most dangerous to keep. Consider aggression, potency of venom, after effects of envenomation, unpredictability, temperment, speed, etc. Please rank your top three.
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by Chance on October 28, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'd have to say the coastal taipan, or rather the Papuan subspecies of the coastal taipan (Oxyuranus scutellatus canni) would have to be the most dangerous snake to keep. I recently did a speech over this species so I had to research it pretty well in-depth. My decision about this is based on fang size (as they have the largest fangs of any elapid), venom potency (actually slightly more toxic than the mainland Coastal, putting them solid at the 3rd most toxic snake on the planet), size (upwards of 11 feet or better), speed (no comment really needed), tendency to bite 3 to 4 times in a go and inject huge quantities of venom, actually increasing with each bite rather than decreasing, and aggression. The last thing, aggression, I would consider the least worrisome part, as most stories surrounding the species are myths. My two juvenile canni are flighty and can be snappy if scared, but the most I've seen out of them has been a flattening of the rear part of the jaw to make their head look larger and a little bit of neck arching, but nothing too scary yet. However, my little guys are still just about 20" or so, so we'll see how that changes as they age.
The snake I'd personally rank second as the most dangerous to keep would be the black mamba, for amazing speed, difficulty to handle, venom potency, potential to be huge, and potential to be high strung and aggressive.
I'm honestly not sure exactly what I would rank third. I'd probably say it would be the eastern brownsnake (or the New Guinea version that we're able to get here in the US, though I've never kept them) due to their extreme venom potency (2nd most toxic snake on Earth), extreme speed, aggression, and rapid multiple strikes like the taipan. However, browns don't inject anywhere near as much venom as the taipan, so even though they are quite a bit more toxic, the danger level just isn't the same. Anyway, hope this helped answer your question a little.
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by LarryDFishel on October 28, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Just to add my limited experience to what Chance said: I've worked with 3 black mambas and one coastal (papuan) taipan. One of the blacks was hand raised from a hatchling and is one of the calmes snakes I've ever met. The other two were wild caught snakes that were just nuts. They would gape and make thier little hood, charge at you or climb your hook! Not fun at all. They would charge straight at you, head raised, apparently knowing that you would back off and then hang a 90 degree turn and make for the nearest hiding place. The one taipan is just as fast and jumpy, but shows no obvious signs of sggression (except towards food or anything that might be mistaken for food). He just tries to get off the hook and then picks a direction and goes. If that happens to be straight between your legs, so be it. Again this doesn't seem to be aggressive, but it can make things more than a little "exciting". Of course he's currently half the length of the crazy mambas, and boy do I hope he calms down as he gets older (but I'm not counting on it).
|
| |
|
K lemme give this one a shot,
|
Reply
|
|
by jared on October 28, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Top 3 eh, hmmmm toxic likely to bite and pretty pissy snakes in general. The ones who immediately popped in my head were,
Eastern Brown Snakes
Tercipelo (B.asper)
Coastal Taipan
Just right off the bat,
Jared
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by Nightflight99 on October 30, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The question of which species can be regarded as the "most dangerous" is a very subjective one. The answer depends in part of your definition of "dangerous". The common definition of this terminology refers to something that is able or likely to do harm, involving or filled with danger, ready to do harm or injury, perilous, harzardous, or unsafe. According to that interpretation, the most dangerous species to keep would be the one that is most likely to cause harm or injury, regardless whether this is due to the level of toxicity or its level of physical capabilities.
Despite this definition, there is no clear-cut answer. Snakes display an enormous degree of individualism, which makes it difficult to generalize with a reliable degree of accuracy. In a nutshell, the following species can "generally" be regarded as the most dangerous to keep:
Russell's Vipers (Daboia r. siamensis) - while the nominate form tends to be much more calm and docile, D.r.siamensis can be extremely wild and unpredictable, displaying sudden violent eruptions that can be very dangerous to the keeper. I have witnessed specimens of this species zipping through their enclosures at a speed that is normally reserved to large elapids. In addition, their venom is extremely potent and antivenin can be hard to locate. This combination easily makes them one of the most dangerous vipers to keep.
Terciopelo (Bothrops asper) - lanceheads are known for the lightning fast strike, and terciopelos certainly aren't an exception. To the contrary, they are the largest members of the genus, with large females being able to reach over 8ft in length. Like the Russell's vipers, terciopelos have a tendency to suddenly explode in violent outbursts, which can be a truly terrifying experience with a large adult specimen. They strike fast and far out, and can inject ungodly amounts of venom. This species clearly sticks out from all pitvipers and vipers as the one that can be regarded as the most dangerous per se.
Black Mambas (Dendroaspis polylepis) - one of my favorite species. Black Mambas are legendary predators of mythical status in many parts of Africa. Their sheer size combined with an unbelievable agility and speed can make these snakes very difficult to handle. However, black mambas can be highly variable in their demeanor. Some specimens are very calm, only getting jumpy when roughly disturbed. Such specimens can be handled with relative safety, until they decide that it has been enough for that day. Other specimens are extremely jumpy, and will explode in a fury upon being touched. Their speed is many times too fast to react, which makes such specimens very dangerous to handle. Nervous animals will constantly jump, and start gaping if one as much as looks at them.
Taipans (Oxyuranus sps) are the Aussie equivalent to Africa's black mambas. They pack the size, speed, agility, toxicity, and just about any other characteristic that could possibly relocate you downwards by approximately 6ft. I would consider keeping taipans to be more dangerous than keeping mambas, simply because the antivenin can be much more difficult to locate. However, taipans seem to be more prone to retrieving to their trapbox than black mambas are. Many of the blacks that I have worked with would stop using their trapboxes entirely upon reaching adult size.
Forest Cobras (Naja melanoleuca). Cobras are generally relatively slow and often too clumsy to be a serious competitor for the "most dangerous" species award. However, there are exceptions. Clearly the most noteworthy of such exception is the forest cobra. If we disregard the normal variation in these snakes, many tend to be nasty, flighty, and at times downright aggressive. They are very large, pack a big toxin gun, and *can* have an attitude that can make you remember a given specimen for life. While they can still be clumsy, they are much faster than most of the other cobras and seem to have a general disliking for Home sapiens altogether. Some specimens can easily be regarded within the same category as mambas and taipans.
In the end, the most dangerous snake to keep could be of any species. You could have a huge taipan that does nothing but hide in its trapbox, and always acts calm and docile; yet you could have a rattlesnake that will use every opportunity to strike with all its might at you without warning.
The most dangerous snake in your collection is the one that is most likely to bite you - regardless of whether it is a copperhead or cape cobra.
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by TAIPAN78 on November 3, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Correction for Chance. O.s.canni/O.s.scutellatus are not the third most toxic snakes!!! Check BGF's website. They sit 6th on his list and there are many, many sp of venomous he has not tested. Plus, it all done on mice anyway!!! Dont trust everything Steve Irwin states.
Also, as NF pointed out, 11ft is extream for Taipans! The record is about 11ft but that was just one monster of a specimen. They average around 7ft. They are also much more shy then most of the other pinicale elapids although I would bet they are pretty damn close to the top when pressed hard.
Regarding fang size, nope, not the longest elapid fangs either!! O.hannah has the record in that department. They dont even have the longest fangs in porportion to their body size. That would go to the death adders. Polylepis fangs are about on par with Taipans and both have the similar, movable maxilla which is one of their most intreresting charcteristics.
BTW, since you now keep Tiapans may I ask what you plan to do incase of a bite? Have you a source of AV?
Dang man, what source were you useing for your speech? Ray Hoser?? :-D
Go back to the drawing board dawg.
Regards,
Jeremy aka Taipan freak!
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by Chance on November 4, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>Correction for Chance. O.s.canni/O.s.scutellatus are not the third most toxic snakes!!! Check BGF's website. They sit 6th on his list and there are many, many sp of venomous he has not tested. Plus, it all done on mice anyway!!! Dont trust everything Steve Irwin states.
Because the issue of venom toxicity is always a highly debatable one, I guess one can usually just pick a source to go with. Dr. Fry's information is probably some of the more up-to-date info, but his, like anyone else's, may be off. I was getting my information of Paul Masci's book, "The Taipan. The World's Most Dangerous Snake." Irwin certainly had nothing to do with it.
>Also, as NF pointed out, 11ft is extream for Taipans! The record is about 11ft but that was just one monster of a specimen. They average around 7ft. They are also much more shy then most of the other pinicale elapids although I would bet they are pretty damn close to the top when pressed hard.
Here, I'm going to cite Mark O'Shea and Tim Halliday in their Dorling Kindersley Series book on herps, the length can be anywhere from 6.5' to 12', so the record would actually be a foot longer than your guess. In fact, if I remember correctly, there is currently a taipan in captivity, I believe it's a mainland coastal though, that is right around 12'. Certainly they have the potential to reach huge sizes. The Masci book cited Papuan taipans as having a tendency to be larger than the mainlands.
>Regarding fang size, nope, not the longest elapid fangs either!! O.hannah has the record in that department. They dont even have the longest fangs in porportion to their body size. That would go to the death adders. Polylepis fangs are about on par with Taipans and both have the similar, movable maxilla which is one of their most intreresting charcteristics.
Again here, I'm going to cite Masci's book where he states that taipans have the longest fangs in proportion compared to any other elapid. Considering that he was in Australia when writing these books I'm going to assume that he took Acanthopis into account, however we all know what assumption can do so who knows, the book may be wrong on that. I'm sure a giant O. hannah would have the longest elapid fangs on record, but again that doesn't come into play when speaking of proportionalities. And also, having personally seen both the fangs of a 7' polylepis and a 7' canni, I can vouch for the fact that mamba fangs are tiny in comparison to taipans. There is a reason taipans give you the "evil grin," they know they have impressive weapons.
>BTW, since you now keep Tiapans may I ask what you plan to do incase of a bite? Have you a source of AV?
That's "taipans," and to my knowledge Florida's venom bank (Venom 1 and such) carries the Australian polyvalent that covers Oxyuranus. These are not the first taipans I've kept, I had a large male at the beginning of this year but he didn't fare so well being a fresh import and all. So this time I decided to go with the cbb route, and lucked out in finding the first cbb in the states to accomodate that.
>Dang man, what source were you useing for your speech? Ray Hoser?? :-D
Don't even need to dignify that remark.
>Go back to the drawing board dawg.
Perhaps I shall, as long as you promise to take a few English and grammar classes at your local community college :)
-Chance Duncan, keeper of your "dream snakes" and the apparent bane of your existance, lol
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by TAIPAN78 on November 4, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You did use Irwin's reffernce though. That bogus info came from the same list, written back in the 50s! Same list Irwin used when doing his top ten most venomus snake in the world show. Dr. Fry's list is by far a better source of info. The book your useing is basicly full of crap in a lot of regard. Ask any profesional who has worked with Taipan's aboiut it. Good pics but thats about it.
Regarding size of coastals, the record is about 9 1/2 ft comfirmed if the unit converter I used is acurate. Check the fallowing link
http://www.qmuseum.qld.gov.au/features/snakes/taipan/biggest.asp
BTW, I personaly know a guy who has cared for this snake in the past. He was good freinds with its owner and had many pictures of him tailing the big boy.
You are correct about the max size being alittle larger for canni (Even though you used the same 11ft measurment! Duh!)but dont tell me they average over 7-8ft! I know people who were keeping specimens since you were still going through puberty and they still arent over 8ft! Im talking averages here. They say the max length of polylepis is around 14 but how often do you see one over 10?
Regarding fang size, again, that book is bs!! Ask around! Though Taipans have the longest fangs of any oz elapid, Kings by far own the record for the world. Hell, if African garter snakes got 15ft plus they would have the record too! Also, ask around about the death adder. I cant remember the source but it has been written and in a much more reliable publication then the book you are useing. Never asume anything!!
Oh yeah, I didnt say polylepis fangs were larger, just alittle closer in comparison. BTW, if you belive pans give you an evil grin because they are confident in their ability to bite then you are an......! Taipan's are the most shy out of all of them! Atleast this can be said for the 10 plus specimens I have observed.
You are very foolish to rely on Fl's venom bank to save you arse being that you live in AK!!!! Good luck lasting that long or not haveing your blood chemistry f -ed up so bad you feel the effects for years to come. This, BTW, is the reason I dont keep them yet Jr! Its ok though, I will just wait a few weeks for you to get scared and place them for sale like you do with everyother one of your venomous animals. I will just make a killer deal to whom ever buys them from ya and give them a good home with a compitent handler who isnt going house them in a wire mesh cage or be to scared to medicate and have them drop dead!!!
Oh yeah, one last thing. Sorry man, I dont have anytime for English 101. Im too busy studieing herpetology, a class you are obviously not fimilar with. I could use spell check but why waist the extra few mins on somone who obviously did not want to hear the advice I gave him in the past.
Good luck not getting killed!! BTW, still useing your cape and face mask to handle mangroves?!?!
Regards,
Jeremy
|
| |
|
RE: Top 3 Most Dangerous
|
Reply
|
|
by stopgetinpopped on November 4, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't want to get involved in this match, but do have a couple of questions.
How many Taipans of any species and how many Black Mambas have the two of you actually worked with? I have 4.0 Coastals and 2.1 New Guinea's and at one time had a total of 17 adult Taipans, I am in the process of LEGALLy aquireing 3.2 Inland Taipans. At one time I had 33 mambas of all 4 species. So my one statement is it doesn't really matter......Dead is Dead!
My question is I would like to know if anyone is Keeping Coastals outside of Australia and if so in what country?
Thanks.
T-
|
| |
|
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.
|
