Monklet Wrote
1. I don't see how entering glossy snakes for an area in which they are known to be abundant is going to "save" any herps, especially if that is in the context of salvation

.
Well UC DAVIS thinks they're not abundant, and thanks to the people not entering records, it looks like they will continue to believe that.

Because we didn't prove otherwise. Thank God some of us believe in what we are doing, because some of data we released to them is going to be used for habitat conservation efforts of the GLOSSY snake, but unfortunately I think they are going to protect them from collection now.. We did nothing to prove otherwise, or I should say those of you who don't help us did nothing to prove otherwise.
Here is a list of species Ventura county requested from us.
The nine snake species on the LISL are:
Arizona elegans ssp. occidentalis, California glossy snake
Diadophis punctatus, ring-necked snake
Hypsiglena torquata, night snake
Lampropeltis zonata ssp. pulchra, San Diego mountain kingsnake
Leptotyphlops humilis, Western blind snake
Masticophis flagellum ssp. piceus, red coachwhip, red racer
Tantilla planiceps, Western black-headed snake
Tantilla hobartsmithi, Southwestern black-headed snake, Smith’s black-headed snake
Trimorphodon biscutatus, Western lyre snake
Please notice the Glossy Snake, Night Snake, and Ringneck snake They believe they are uncommon or rare. AND WE DIDN'T PROVE OTHERWISE.. Mainly because so many of you guys don't believe in the project or entering your data. (You have your excuses)
The National Forest Collected data from us in June, and I talked the lady who requested it. She said, it was amazing how many of those records were from areas they we UNAWARE held those species. (Those National forest records are being used to help manage those habitats for those species..)
How's that for a hodge podge of records?
2. It is work, for which I expect return, be that monetary, a clear conscience knowing the herps will all be ok now, or whatever. Entering glossy snakes records from the middle of the Mojave affords no such reward.
Understood, I just care deeply about the herps I enjoy, and knowing my data is used or might be used to help agencies and the scientific community that have NO budgets anymore motivates me.
3. Those who enter data can only see locale details of their own entries. Ironic that certain priviledged others, who may never have entered any records, get to see everyone's locale data. I'd love to see all the records in a KMZ file, not so I can go "poach" but because that kind of information fascinates me as much as it does anyone else ...and of course, it may prove helpful in finding certain species. The BIG BUT here is that I DO UNDERSTAND THAT RESTRICTIONS ARE NECESSARY.
Only ONE person has the ability to view your records, and he has taken an oath not to do so.. I have EXTREMELY sensitive data on there.. YOUR DATA IS SAFE with naherp, and it can not be released without your permission..
Fundad