# Snake id please



## bugeye23 (May 4, 2012)

Hi guys, I got home from work today to my elderly neighbour asking for my help because she had seen a snake in her back yard, this was my first capture and release anyway I think it might be a green tree snake but i just treated it like a poisonous one i'm not too familiar with other breeds besides the ones i keep myself.


----------



## Wrightpython (May 4, 2012)

Correct green tree snake and they are venomous but they really need to chew on ya to invenomate


----------



## lizardjasper (May 4, 2012)

Yep, a common tree snake. They're NOT venomous. only brown tree snakes are, and even then they're rear-fanged snakes.


----------



## bugeye23 (May 4, 2012)

why does it say they are venomous in this link on aussiepythons Dendrelaphis punctulata - Aussie Pythons & Snakes


----------



## lizardjasper (May 4, 2012)

I dunno. My Australian reptile book says that they aren't venomous to humans. Just give off a really bad smell when threatened.


----------



## thals (May 4, 2012)

They actually are venomous, it's just that with the tiny amount of venom they produce and of course being rear fanged, most bites are rendered insignificant to humans.


----------



## Danish (May 4, 2012)

Green tree snake,
They are not venomous and they are defantly not poisonous!


----------



## Wrightpython (May 4, 2012)

There in the colubrids family and all aussie colubrids are venomous, stop correcting people if you know naught what your talking about


----------



## Paul Atkinson (May 4, 2012)

Danish said:


> Green tree snake,
> They are not venomous and they are defantly not poisonous!


The link you give says that they are venomous!!


----------



## lizardjasper (May 4, 2012)

It's like saying that Sydney Funnel Webs aren't venomous just because their bite doesn't affect cats and dogs...

Yes, common tree snakes aka green tree snakes are venomous. Being rear-fanged they have to get a good back grip on you and chew to inject the venom, but even then, it shouldn't affect an adult human.


----------



## hilly (May 4, 2012)

Wrightpython said:


> There in the colubrids family and all colubrids are venomous, stop correcting people if you know naught what your talking about



Corn snakes are colubrids.....


----------



## richoman_3 (May 4, 2012)

lizardjasper said:


> It's like saying that Sydney Funnel Webs aren't venomous just because their bite doesn't affect cats and dogs...



? That is one of the worst comparisons ive ever heard of


----------



## lizardjasper (May 4, 2012)

richoman_3 said:


> ? That is one of the worst comparisons ive ever heard of



Well if their venom doesn't affect people, why call them venomous? If you tell people (that aren't reptile lovers) that they're not, then those people are more likely to not kill them and let them stay around.

Anyway, seriously, who cares?

Beautiful snake, I hope he wasn't too upset about being relocated!


----------



## imported_Varanus (May 4, 2012)

Thanks for cheering me up, people!


----------



## cadwallader (May 4, 2012)

haha typical APS argument... they are venomous as they produce venom in VENOM GLAND and transport it down the VENOM duct and then use it on their prey to me that is venomous... but in saying that bearded dragons have venom glands ...but thats another argument


----------



## richoman_3 (May 4, 2012)

lizardjasper said:


> Well if their venom doesn't affect people, why call them venomous? If you tell people (that aren't reptile lovers) that they're not, then those people are more likely to not kill them and let them stay around.



that is a stupid way to approach colubrid venom, ofcourse they can still affect people, people react differently to venom


----------



## Danish (May 4, 2012)

Didnt post a link


----------



## GeckPhotographer (May 4, 2012)

Does their saliva contain venomous proteins? What saliva doesn't? 

They do not kill their prey using venom. They do not administer venom using pressure from glands, using grooved or hyperdermic fangs, or through any form of venom administering apparatus. They have solid state teeth. They do not have fangs. 

For all intents and purposes they are as venomous as any animal that has a venomous protein which covers a hell of a lot of animals people don't call venomous.


----------



## Paul Atkinson (May 4, 2012)

Danish said:


> Didnt post a link


Click on "green tree snake" in your post. It links to an article that says they are venomous.


----------



## Nathan_T (May 4, 2012)

lizardjasper said:


> Well if their venom doesn't affect people, why call them venomous? If you tell people (that aren't reptile lovers) that they're not, then those people are more likely to not kill them and let them stay around.
> 
> Anyway, seriously, who cares?
> 
> Beautiful snake, I hope he wasn't too upset about being relocated!



That gives me another idea. We should stop calling them snakes too, that way people won't be scared of them and then won't kill them. 

Venomous. Adjective. Containing venom. 

I'm a big fan of using the english language to convey meaning, rather than pretty descriptions. I have absolutely no idea whether or not GTS's have venom, but if they do, they're venomous


----------



## GeckPhotographer (May 4, 2012)

> Click on "green tree snake" in your post. It links to an article that says they are venomous.



And if you go to the sources of that article and click on the more reputable of the two, Australian Reptiles Down Under, you will have a page that contains the info "non venomous" check the sources you nitwit.


----------



## Danish (May 4, 2012)

*danish*



Paul Atkinson said:


> Click on "green tree snake" in your post. It links to an article that says they are venomous.



oops didnt meen that.
there a non venomous colubrid,no fangs or glands.
They eat there prey live
Is this a gee up???


----------



## SouthSydney (May 4, 2012)

Direct quote from "A Complete Guide to Reptiles of Australia" By Steve Wilson and Gerry Swan... *Third edition* - but 2nd edition also states the same, and I'm sure (if i had it or looked at a mates copy) the 1st edition would also state it too... 



> *Colubrid Snakes
> Family Colubrinae
> 
> *...
> ...



I'm sure this isnt the only book/publication that would confirm this information... I could also quote where "Field Guide to Australian Reptiles" By Stephen Swanson or where "Encyclopedia of Australian Wildlife" By Reader's Digest, or the other Field guides and such states identical confirmations of this information too, but I'm sure its unecessary... It is, afterall... Only APS...



Paul Atkinson said:


> Click on "green tree snake" in your post. It links to an article that says they are venomous.



I'd say this is just an automated thing (linking to that kind of thing) that APS does with words it recognises as snakes or frequently mentioned snakes/common names etc... As I didnt link anything, yet I'm pretty sure it linked/hyperlinked to one of its "FAQ" type article things (I couldnt be stuffed to see what it actually links to as I'm not interested)...


----------



## Paul Atkinson (May 4, 2012)

GeckPhotographer said:


> And if you go to the sources of that article and click on the more reputable of the two, Australian Reptiles Down Under, you will have a page that contains the info "non venomous" check the sources you nitwit.


Those 2 links at the bottom of the article BOTH say that they are non venomous. They are related links not sources. If you check my posts you will see that I have not said whether they are venomous or not. I was merely pointing out to Danish that the direct link in his post contradicted what he said in that same post. I'm not sure why that makes me a nitwit!


----------



## Frozenmouse (May 4, 2012)

So are they poisonous ?


----------



## Tsubakai (May 4, 2012)

EDIT - never mind


----------



## Paul Atkinson (May 4, 2012)

Danish said:


> oops didnt meen that.
> there a non venomous colubrid,no fangs or glands.
> They eat there prey live
> Is this a gee up???


No worries, I agree with you. The link is an automated one by APS. I was just pointing out the contradictions that occured in your post. Cheers.:lol:


----------



## moosenoose (May 4, 2012)

It took me a while to comes to terms with it, but D punctulata are most certainly venomous. I only thought it was the Brown Tree snakes, but recent studies have confirmed they do have venom and use it to subdue frogs etc.

I can't be chuffed finding the links...don't make me do it :lol:


----------



## Red-Ink (May 4, 2012)

Frozenmouse said:


> So are they poisonous ?



Yes but only if eaten raw


----------



## moosenoose (May 4, 2012)

Red-Ink said:


> Yes but only if eaten raw



Here we go :lol: ....again


----------



## Frozenmouse (May 4, 2012)

Red-Ink said:


> Yes but only if eaten raw


Why would you eat one ? I thought they were protected by the rspca.


----------



## bowdnboy (May 4, 2012)

Ahh...think i'm going to bed...lol

at the end of the day, I keep em and handle them regulary. If they were "venemous" as in - bite with fangs and inject venom that could do u harm, I definately would not be letting my kids handle them,,, which by the way I do!

Thye have little teeth. no fangs. Harmless, except for there lovely aroma that does stink if they get startled when getting them out occasionly lol.

As for the technical side of things and there classification nomenclature / true literature descripttion,, I'll leave that to people smarter than me.


----------



## Firepac (May 5, 2012)

Quote from Dr Brian Fry...



> Yep, Stegonotus have venom, as do the other Aussie 'colubrids' such as Boiga, Cerberus, Dendrelaphis, Fordonia, Myron, Tropidonophis. This is consistent with our research that shows that 'colubrids' worldwide are all venomous (with the very narrow exception of the temperate zone 'Elaphe-type' (e.g. Lampropeltis/Pantherophis/Pituophis and close relatives) which have undergone a secondary loss of venom and reverted back to the more primative constricting condition. We have a paper coming out showing that the toxicity of the 'colubrid' venoms is drop for drop as potent as comparative elapid venoms but the key is that the venom delivery is less efficient and the venom yield lower as well. So, they can deliver enough via their many sharp teeth to settle down a frog but typically not able to cause observable human effects. There are of course exceptions to this, with each of the various 'colubrid' families having at least one genus of snakes capable of causing severe or even lethal envenomations.


----------



## Bluetongue1 (May 5, 2012)

Colubrid snakes are not a homogenous group. They are what were left over when everything else was put into groups. So they are particularly variable as a family. So it is difficult to make generalisations about the group. A couple are highly venomous (e.g.Boomslang), some are mildly venomous (e.g. Brown tree Snake), and some are non-venomous (e.g. Keelback). However, we now know there is another group – they produce venom but lack any venom apparatus to inject it i.e. have no fangs. The Green Tree Snake falls into this category. 

At this stage only the existence of venom has been demonstrated. Its purpose is yet to be properly determined. As anyone who has observed one of these snakes eating a frog would know, the frog is eaten alive and not slowed down in any way, for it squeals until the last swallow. However, it is hypothesised that the venom component of the snake’s saliva helps to begin the digestive process once wallowed. So it is produced to coat the outside of the frog as it is being ingested. This would explain its absence from a defensive bite from these snakes.

So even though they technically produce venom, in terms of bites to humans they are effectively non-venomous.

Blue


----------



## snakerelocation (May 5, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> Colubrid snakes are not a homogenous group. They are what were left over when everything else was put into groups. So they are particularly variable as a family. So it is difficult to make generalisations about the group. A couple are highly venomous (e.g.Boomslang), some are mildly venomous (e.g. Brown tree Snake), and some are non-venomous (e.g. Keelback). However, we now know there is another group – they produce venom but lack any venom apparatus to inject it i.e. have no fangs. The Green Tree Snake falls into this category.
> 
> At this stage only the existence of venom has been demonstrated. Its purpose is yet to be properly determined. As anyone who has observed one of these snakes eating a frog would know, the frog is eaten alive and not slowed down in any way, for it squeals until the last swallow. However, it is hypothesised that the venom component of the snake’s saliva helps to begin the digestive process once wallowed. So it is produced to coat the outside of the frog as it is being ingested. This would explain its absence from a defensive bite from these snakes.
> 
> ...



Thankyou, bluetongue1, you bet me to it...they are solid toothed, not neddled, and not grooved. so they have no way of injecting venom. But like a lot of Australian snakes, again its not the venom that you have to worry about..


----------



## Wrightpython (May 5, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> Colubrid snakes are not a homogenous group. They are what were left over when everything else was put into groups. So they are particularly variable as a family. So it is difficult to make generalisations about the group. A couple are highly venomous (e.g.Boomslang), some are mildly venomous (e.g. Brown tree Snake), and some are non-venomous (e.g. Keelback). However, we now know there is another group – they produce venom but lack any venom apparatus to inject it i.e. have no fangs. The Green Tree Snake falls into this category.
> 
> At this stage only the existence of venom has been demonstrated. Its purpose is yet to be properly determined. As anyone who has observed one of these snakes eating a frog would know, the frog is eaten alive and not slowed down in any way, for it squeals until the last swallow. However, it is hypothesised that the venom component of the snake’s saliva helps to begin the digestive process once wallowed. So it is produced to coat the outside of the frog as it is being ingested. This would explain its absence from a defensive bite from these snakes.
> 
> ...



perfect explanation but im still confused


----------



## Frozenmouse (May 5, 2012)

Bearded dragons are more venomous than a green tree snake if you go by that logic.


----------



## eipper (May 5, 2012)

Green tree snakes are venomous, there is no debate. They have a toxin that is stored in a venom gland that is released into mouth of the snake while it chews. The sharp teeth cut the prey item and allow for tranmission into the prey item. This is not as evolved as in some other colubrids but that is not the point.

Cheers
scott


----------



## bugeye23 (May 5, 2012)

thanks everyone for your replys, great to see a good debate on APS lol


----------



## snakelady-viper (May 5, 2012)

Colubridae rear fang or solid tooth snake
My Eric Worrel and Gerry Swan books say non venomous


----------



## Frozenmouse (May 5, 2012)

Bearded dragon venom acts similar to rattlesnake venom


----------



## pretzels (May 5, 2012)

woah woah woah....bearded dragons have venom?!?! i did not see this in any of the research iv done O_O. 
but im guessing that it doesnt affect humans or they cant inject it or something right?


----------



## Frozenmouse (May 5, 2012)

Yes most lizards are venomous in some way or another, bearded dragons actually have well developed venom glands and have a very similar venom to diamond back rattlers its delivery system is pretty much useless unless you are a cricket and its quantities are tiny but hey while we are splitting hairs.


----------



## moosenoose (May 5, 2012)

It's all recent studies into areas that have never been looked into before. Most publications, including things like Worrel & Swan field guides are outdated and merely parrot off the same line that had never been investigated fully. Thats not anyone's fault mind you, luckily the recent research has been given substantial funding (supposedly??)

Thanks to the head of the Victorian Venom Research Unit, Dr Bryan Fry and his "messing around" with big dollar MRI equipment he's done some very extensive research into areas that had never been looked into properly. Frys team were the ones who finally lifted the lid on Komodo dragon venom, instead of bacterial poisoning, and then lifted the lid further on the humble bearded dragon, green tree snake and an incredible host of other names which have been found to have venom, venom glands, but poor delivery of the substances. These venoms are there, the research is also there, and proven beyond doubt. The exciting thing it appears is there is now a whole new world of untested toxins which could prove invaluable in the fight against a whole array of ailments. You gotta take your hat off to the guy, he's really living the dream.

Fry, Brian Grieg | Australian Venom Research Unit


----------



## bellany (May 5, 2012)

richoman_3 said:


> that is a stupid way to approach colubrid venom, ofcourse they can still affect people, people react differently to venom



Very good point, so far in my 32 years I've been chomped on by over 40 something red back spiders (32 were in one go, nest.. long story), numerous huntsmans, wolfs etc, and most recently a funnel web with milky looking liquid oozing out of the punctures. Every bite, not a single problem, no swelling, no heart rate or pressure difference, no pain or any other side effects. Even my daughter when she was 8 was bitten by a red back a few times and they had to sedate her at the ER because she giggled so much she hyperventalated?! Weird I know but the local uni has a few samples of my blood and have no idea why it doesnt affect me, if anyone wants to speculate or tell me I'd love to know !


----------



## Nes88c (May 5, 2012)

^^^^^ spiders are clearly not your kryptonite .... simple :lol:


----------



## slim6y (May 5, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> Colubrid snakes are not a homogenous group. They are what were left over when everything else was put into groups. So they are particularly variable as a family. So it is difficult to make generalisations about the group. A couple are highly venomous (e.g.Boomslang), some are mildly venomous (e.g. Brown tree Snake), and some are non-venomous (e.g. Keelback). However, we now know there is another group – they produce venom but lack any venom apparatus to inject it i.e. have no fangs. The Green Tree Snake falls into this category.
> 
> At this stage only the existence of venom has been demonstrated. Its purpose is yet to be properly determined. As anyone who has observed one of these snakes eating a frog would know, the frog is eaten alive and not slowed down in any way, for it squeals until the last swallow. However, it is hypothesised that the venom component of the snake’s saliva helps to begin the digestive process once wallowed. So it is produced to coat the outside of the frog as it is being ingested. *This would explain its absence from a defensive bite from these snakes.*
> 
> ...



Hey Bluetongue1 - can you please just elaborate what the sentence "*This would explain its absence from a defensive bite from these snakes.*" means.

I followed the rest of your post and it makes perfect sense, but I'm just not quite sure what that bit meant - I apologise in advance...


----------



## Wrightpython (May 5, 2012)

bellany said:


> Very good point, so far in my 32 years I've been chomped on by over 40 something red back spiders (32 were in one go, nest.. long story), numerous huntsmans, wolfs etc, and most recently a funnel web with milky looking liquid oozing out of the punctures. Every bite, not a single problem, no swelling, no heart rate or pressure difference, no pain or any other side effects. Even my daughter when she was 8 was bitten by a red back a few times and they had to sedate her at the ER because she giggled so much she hyperventalated?!  Weird I know but the local uni has a few samples of my blood and have no idea why it doesnt affect me, if anyone wants to speculate or tell me I'd love to know !


Maybe your actually a cat


----------



## Bluetongue1 (May 5, 2012)

*Slim6y*,
By a “defensive bite” I was referring to a quick bite and release designed to put-off a potential aggressor, in contrast to the type of bite you see with a feeding response in this species. 


*Bellany*,
Your surname isn’t Parker is it? That post is mind-boggling. What on earth were you doing to be bitten so often and did you know you were immune?

Blue


----------



## moosenoose (May 5, 2012)

Just when you think you know it all, you forget the fact that you don't :lol:


----------



## Elapidae1 (May 5, 2012)

Research on reptiles is ongoing and people need to understand there is so much still being discovered and it is extremely difficult to keep ahead of new research. 
What is considered correct today may be proven wrong tomorrow


----------



## Bluetongue1 (May 6, 2012)

A major problem with new information is it invariably gets misquoted when passed on from person to person rather than from the original source. Add to that, those that get their kicks from deliberately misusing such information, and it is little wonder people are left questioning the validity of it. 

Take the example of the Bearded Dragon. They have venom glands alongside top and bottom jaws. These glands remain in the early stages of development only. They are capable of producing a very small quantity of venom, which is considered to be quite weak (irrespective of amount). What the researchers found exciting about this venom was that it contained a toxin that they had previously only found in rattlesnake venom.

So we now have people stating that Bearded venom is similar to that of Rattlesnakes. People immediately presume this means similar in effects (rather than having one out of many toxins in common) and start worrying about serious necrosis should they be bitten. I have already seen a UK forum post on “the first recorded death from a Bearded Dragon” – which is meant as a joke but even other users had to ask. So if you don’t read the posts following it, you come away with entirely the wrong idea.

There is some good information and links about Fry’s work to be found here: Reptile venom evolution research

Blue


----------



## slim6y (May 6, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> *Slim6y*,
> By a “defensive bite” I was referring to a quick bite and release designed to put-off a potential aggressor, in contrast to the type of bite you see with a feeding response in this species.




Thanks - but still not 100% convinced I understand... A GTS does bite defensively, one bit JasonL when we did a relocation - several times - it wasn't trying to feed on him. Plus seen it against ol' Steve Irwin. So I am not 100% convinced - unless I am confusing feeding with defence (always possible with me of course).


----------



## snakerelocation (May 6, 2012)

slim6y said:


> Thanks - but still not 100% convinced I understand... A GTS does bite defensively, one bit JasonL when we did a relocation - several times - it wasn't trying to feed on him. Plus seen it against ol' Steve Irwin. So I am not 100% convinced - unless I am confusing feeding with defence (always possible with me of course).



what he is getting at is a quick bite and release apposed to being chewed on...


----------



## slim6y (May 6, 2012)

snakerelocation said:


> what he is getting at is a quick bite and release apposed to being chewed on...



That's exactly what I was getting at - the GTS that bit JasonL was not in the mood for chewing, he snapped in a defensive response... That's what I was getting at... Just not as sure how it related to the GTS being venomous v non-venomous. 

All the other information I am sure checks out - just that was the only bit I wasn't as convinced about because of what I had seen when we relocated the GTS. 

But I am sure there are plenty of circumstances where chewing would have been more appropriate... 

So incidentally - what is the outcome of this thread - a) we identified the snake in exhibit 'a' and b) we've identified that GTSs do in fact have venom but the use is somewhat undetermined.... Nice thread...


----------



## Bluetongue1 (May 6, 2012)

*The second outcome...*
Absolutely fascinating as it to discover the existence of venom glands in animals not previously thought to possess them, it will have ZERO effect on the status quo. It certainly isn’t go to change the effects of bites already received over the years. Nor will it alter any of the bites in the future. The medical protocol for such bites will remain unaltered. 

I cannot relocate the article on the green tree snake having venom. If anyone finds it, I would appreciate it if you could pm the addy. Thanks.

*FYI*. No skinks or geckoes have been found to contain venom glands. The Lace and Gould’s Monitors have been show to possess a large mandibular venom gland. Apparently there was a visible accretion of fluid (they stated was venom) around the teeth bases following application of pressure on this gland. I have not seen an analysis of the toxic effects but the Komodo Dragon venom works on the prey to stop clotting. Komodos normally eat carrion or smaller prey but will work co-operatively as a group to take on quite large animals. They usually attack the back legs, severing calf muscles or Achilles tendons, and leaving deep flesh wounds. The combined effect of the damage and the bleeding means the prey cannot travel too far before it bleeds to death. I have to wonder, given the very nasty wounds that Lace Monitors can inflict and the amount of blood produced from them, if perhaps venom effects are not part of this scenario.

Blue


----------



## imported_Varanus (May 6, 2012)

Concerning monitors, Blue, I've been bitten by wild storri and tristis and kingorum and was suprised how painful the bite remained after the event, kingorum particularly?! Needless to say, I'd hate to cop a bite from a large Lacie.


----------



## Bluetongue1 (May 6, 2012)

I would imagine that tristis in particular could deliver a nasty bite. Part of the issue with monitors is that their teeth are adapted for slicing. They are rather like a steak knife compared to the usual dinner knife. They have sharp serrated edges and use their long necks and well developed neck musculature to tear at whatever they bite. This is a particularly effective method for stripping meat from a carcass when eating carrion. But it also inflicts deep cuts into live tissue. The question is, does the degree of bleeding that results from such bites represent just the cutting efficiency of the dental appararatus? Or is there another elment involved in terms of venom being incorporated into the wound?

I don't envy you having been bitten by any of those animals. OUCH!

Blue


----------



## JasonL (May 9, 2012)

Ha Ha slim, I remember that rescue.... I have no problem with GTS's biting me, people jump up and down when they hear the word "venom" and have flash backs of hospital beds and coffins... A venom is just a protein, it may be designed to kill something three steps later, be used as a digestion tool, or be highly specific to affect a certain group of animals....As I have said before, I dont consider GTS to be venomous, now I know thats not technically correct, but I dont wear a white lab coat or a vagina.


----------



## Lockie_1 (Jun 23, 2012)

Wrightpython said:


> There in the colubrids family and all aussie colubrids are venomous, stop correcting people if you know naught what your talking about



Mate the slaty grey snake, common tree snake and the keelback are all examples of non venomous colubrids. I should know brother I've got a slaty



Wrightpython said:


> There in the colubrids family and all aussie colubrids are venomous, stop correcting people if you know naught what your talking about



And the colubridae family is the largest family of snakes consisting of over 1500 species. The majority are non venomous. The Elapidae family are all venomous so maybe you should do some research first?



lizardjasper said:


> It's like saying that Sydney Funnel Webs aren't venomous just because their bite doesn't affect cats and dogs...
> 
> Yes, common tree snakes aka green tree snakes are venomous. Being rear-fanged they have to get a good back grip on you and chew to inject the venom, but even then, it shouldn't affect an adult human.



So why are they on a basic license? There not venomous



Shambulah said:


> Direct quote from "A Complete Guide to Reptiles of Australia" By Steve Wilson and Gerry Swan... *Third edition* - but 2nd edition also states the same, and I'm sure (if i had it or looked at a mates copy) the 1st edition would also state it too...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You hit the nail on the head 



Frozenmouse said:


> Why would you eat one ? I thought they were protected by the rspca.



I think it was a play on words if something is poisonous it has to be ingested where as something venomous has to inject it.


----------



## eipper (Jun 23, 2012)

Lockie,

They are venomous 

Scott


----------



## $NaKe PiMp (Jun 23, 2012)

to all the people who are looking in field guides and books which describe them as non venomous,the discovery of the Common Tree Snake to actually having a venom is a relatively recent discovery and most books will not make reference to this fact,However as we well know they are incapable of harming a human with lack of the ability to deliver ,they have aglyphous dentition and no specific hollow fangs as such.


----------



## Firepac (Jun 23, 2012)

Lockie_1 said:


> Mate the slaty grey snake, common tree snake and the keelback are all examples of non venomous colubrids. I should know brother I've got a slaty



Quote from Dr. Bryan Fry "Yep, *Stegonotus* have venom, as do the other Aussie 'colubrids' such as Boiga, Cerberus, *Dendrelaphis*, Fordonia, Myron, *Tropidonophis*." (My bold)





Lockie_1 said:


> And the colubridae family is the largest family of snakes consisting of over 1500 species. The majority are non venomous. The Elapidae family are all venomous so maybe you should do some research first?



Quote again from Dr. Bryan Fry "This is consistent with our research that shows that *'colubrids' worldwide are all venomous (with the very narrow exception of the temperate zone 'Elaphe-type' *(e.g. Lampropeltis/Pantherophis/Pituophis and close relatives) which have undergone a secondary loss of venom and reverted back to the more primative constricting condition. (My bold).

Maybe your own research skills need a little sharpening.


----------



## NicG (Jun 25, 2012)

As I've said before, my problem with labelling (Dendrelaphis) Tree Snakes as "technically venomous" is that it will be misconstrued by the general public. There are some people that will err on the side of caution in an attempt to protect their kids/pets and simply kill them. That may be unimaginable to us but it happens now and will only happen more if it becomes common knowledge that they can be categorized as venomous. They're already struggling to live down the yellow-bellied black snake moniker.

As for whether it is only defensive bites that should be considered harmless, I conducted an experiment a while ago ...

Excerpt from http://www.aussiepythons.com/forum/australian-snakes-37/common-tree-snakes-venomous-tag-143636/



NicG said:


> So here I have an unequivocably full grown CTS chewing on my finger and now starting to, a little painfully, slice into the skin on my knuckle. Against my natural instincts, I let her be, wondering whether she'd let go by herself. She didn't. After at least 15 minutes, I figured that was long enough and resorted to the cold water tap in the basin.
> 
> When she did eventually release me, my finger was completely covered with saliva. So much so that there was very little blood at this point. It wasn't until, not without some effort, I cleaned off the saliva coating that I realized just how deep the main cut was. If there was going to be any adverse effects, then surely this is the optimal scenario.
> 
> The blood soon started flowing quite profusely. It took quite some time and several sheets of paper towel before it eventually subsided enough to apply a bandaid. So now all I had to do was wait and see if a) I felt sick at all, or b) there was any local reaction. The answer to both is a resounding no.








If someone asks and you don't want to technically lie, simply stress that they are solid-toothed and harmless.


----------

