Why Relocate Harmless Snakes?

Along with many hundreds of rattlesnakes each year, harmless and beneficial reptile species are often captured and moved a short distance at the request of Arizona homeowners. Gophersnakes, Kingsnakes, Groundsnakes, Coachwhips – even lizards such as Chuckwallas – are gently stuffed into a bucket and escorted elsewhere.

This leads to an obvious and common question that we are asked when this is discussed. Why would anyone want to move a harmless species of snake from their yard? And, why would an ethical wildlife services business do so when asked? These are very good questions, and rather than mention it in our social media comments, I’ll address the topic here so it can be answered in detail.

Before diving in, it’s important to understand the goals of snake-relocation and prevention as a practice. There are many ethical considerations that sometimes conflict with one another, and having clear criteria laid out can help form best-practice procedures. There are many masters to serve, and balance between them is not cut and dry. Some are of equal importance, where any action must take multiple priorities into consideration.

Primary considerations of equal weight for any action:

  1. Benefit to the snake. Is the action impact survivable and justified?
  2. Benefit to the homeowner. Are residents and pets made safer by action?
  3. Benefit to community. Is the public perception of wildlife positively affected by action?

Additional considerations that help shape decision-making, but are always secondary to the primary goals:

  1. Benefit to education/research. Is there information or a teachable opportunity gained by action?
  2. Benefit to ___insert relocation org here___. Does action help advance the operation and ability to positively affect primary goals?

Ultimately, capturing and relocating snakes must progress one goal above all else: peacefully mitigate immediate wildlife conflict while providing long-term, sustainable alternatives. Snake relocation is the quick fix, snake fencing, education, research, and ongoing outreach are the long game; the latter category should perpetually attempt to put the former out of business.

These Coachwhips were requested to be removed by a homeowner, though they are harmless and eaters of rattlesnakes, and that is OK.

Why would a homeowner want to get rid of a beneficial snake, like a Kingsnake or Gophersnake?

Desert-savvy homeowners know that there is no better friend to have in the backyard than these large, harmless snakes. They are amazing, free pest control, in the very least. Some, like Kingsnakes and Coachwhips, even eat rattlesnakes (not Gophersnakes, contrary to popular belief, but that’s a subject for a different article). They don’t hurt anyone, including kids and dogs, as they quietly patrol the neighborhood looking to take out rodents wherever they find them.

The only downside? Simply, some people just do not like snakes. That dislike is most often synonymous with fear. Regardless of the type, aside from any knowledge, a deep cultural-phobia persists for many (I covered much of this in an earlier article about pre-summer mental preparation for the snake-phobic along with some resources if you’re firmly in the “hate snakes” crowd.)

Fear of snakes runs deep – at an individual basis and as part of our culture – and it is not easily fixed. From the outside (as occasional criticism from armchair conservationists seems to indicate) it may seem like all that’s needed to convince someone that the Gophersnake in the backyard is nothing to worry about are some quick facts. The reality is much more complicated.

We do our best to educate and provide as many alternatives as possible. We make sure that people know that the snake in their yard is harmless and will leave on its own. We also have the experience to know when that knowledge alone isn’t enough. In these instances, the situation is best handled by action. The snake can be safely escorted from the property and is not killed by terrified homeowners, who likewise benefit from the educational experience.

Why do you relocate harmless snakes instead of just educating the homeowners?

Based on the goals detailed in this article, sometimes offering knowledge alone will not create the desired outcome. It is important to understand the motivation of the caller, and be able to approach the situation regardless of the most ideal scenario.

In a perfect world, someone calling a snake removal group, who learns that the Gophersnake they’re looking at is harmless and will leave on its own, will thank the hotline operator and ignore the snake. This does happen quite often, but not always.

Fear of snakes is often not a purely logical process. While lack of knowledge and experience is a large component of fear, why and how it affects a person is not so simple that it can be eliminated by throwing interesting facts at it.

Apathy is another foe of education-only conflict mitigation tactics. Many people simply do not care or want to think about the snake in their yard – they just want it gone. It doesn’t mean they’re bad, ignorant, etc. … most people just don’t think all that much about snakes. That’s an odd expectation to have as a prerequisite prior to helping them. New information will not be valued by a person who doesn’t value non-essential knowledge, and that’s ok.

A person with a deep fear of snakes is not likely to be positively affected by learning that the Kingsnake on the patio is harmless and eats rattlesnakes. “I know, but I have kids.”

The guy that just moved into a home on a golf course and doesn’t know who David Attenborough is doesn’t care how cool the Nightsnake in his kitchen is. “It eats scorpions? Cool story bro. I’m killing it.”

We have learned the hard way what happens when idealism supercedes reasonable action. – dead snakes. We get emails and texts every day of decapitated and hacked-up snakes, many of which were well known to be entirely harmless.

Tasked with resolving the conflict between a snake and a person, it is not useful or reasonable to abandon both when the scenario is not convenient.

Conservation outreach is not a job best performed by robots.

For people who enjoy snakes, it can be difficult for us to empathize and act appropriately in these situations. Those who choose to work with the public need to not forget that “the public” is made of people. They should remember that, outside of nature centers and Facebook groups where people intentionally seek and value information, is everyone else.

Do you have anxiety when you fly? Here are reports and data that show how amazingly safe flying is, reading the entirety of which will not make a dent in how a nervous flyer feels on the runway. If this situation doesn’t apply to you, replace flying with whichever fear you have. Does anything change? Would it still change if you perhaps thought differently or had a different personality?

If you’re the type that creates or shares memes and information online to educate people about snakes (or anything, really), consider who you are talking to and why they should care before you do. If you routinely say “herp” or find yourself annoyed when someone mixes up venomous and poisonous, this article is for you. Don’t forget that educating people involves, primarily: people.

Sidenote: the elephant in the room.

Yes, we make money from it. We do try our best to provide as many free services as possible to teach people what these harmless snakes are and that they can just be ignored, but if the situation requires one of our team to spend time on-site, there’s a fee involved to cover our time. That can be seen as an issue for some, but it allows us as an organization to exist and be staffed by experienced professionals with more than a passing interest. That potential for ethical conflict is understood and great care is taken to make sure that whenever possible, these situations can be resolved by information alone. There’s always going to be the “all business is evil; all profit is corrupt” sect of young conservationists who dislike what we do, and that is ok.

Bird Netting Sucks

This is something we have to do many times each year, and it’s never fun for anyone. This Western Diamondback Rattlesnake was found by a home owner in the East Valley sitting in one spot, and reportedly not moving for a few days. Brandon went out to check it out, and here’s what he found: a snake tangled in bird netting, still alive, but doomed without intervention.

Rattlesnake stuck in bird netting – this stuff kills!


Brandon brought it to our facility in North Phoenix, net and all, for the careful and dangerous work of getting it cut out of the net. While being cut out of the rest of the fence, the snake got further tangled. The nylon netting was cutting into the body skin, and all around the head, mouth, and neck.

Ouch 🙁


The snake was obviously stressed, striking at any opportunity, which is more than understandable. Normally, these jobs are difficult, but are a standard process: remove the netting in layers while controlling the head by either pinning it down, or even better, using a tube. The tube is the clear plastic device seen below, which can be used to safely manipulate rattlesnakes without needing to actually touch the pointy end.

The ‘fun’ part

This one, however, was not so easy. The netting was all around the head, even in its mouth at this point, to the tube was not much more than a shield. Lot’s of careful scissor snips and position changes later, most of the body was free. Removing the final strands from the mouth itself, however is the most difficult and dangerous part. Using the tube, hook, and another long tool not pictured here, the final strands were cut away until the snake was able to free itself.

Free! The snake has no outward damage and is not bleeding, so left with Brandon to go back and be released to another part of it’s probable home range in the East Valley. Hopefully this is the last bird netting this little guy will ever see. I can’t imagine that will be the same for us this season.

It’s not just snakes and us that hate this stuff, too. Over the years we have seen many dead animals tangled in them, each slowly starving or dying of exposure in the desert sun. Birds, big and small, rabbits, and more lizards than I can count. The dead animals caught in the nets may also attract other animals that are looking for an easy meal, who are then also caught in the net and die an agonizing death. If you use bird netting or know someone who does, please be aware of the often unseen danger that these pose to the wildlife, and evaluate if this is the best and ethical way to keep birds out of the garden.




Help Us Stop a House Bill to Allow The Shooting of Snakes Within City Limits: HB 2022

Update: Here’s a petition from Advocates for Snake Preservation.


Recently, a bill has been introduced that would allow people to shoot guns within city limits, as long as they are firing in the direction of a snake or rodent. Personally, I don’t feel comfortable with people in apartment complexes, in populated areas, near schools and shopping areas, and right next door firing guns in random directions. There’s also the dangerous precedent that this sets for our native wildlife; to be treated as pests rather than something to be respected.

If you’d like to help, email members of the committee, or state Representative Jay Lawrence to let them know your concerns.

Here is the relevant information.

RE: House Bill 2022


Rep. Jay Lawrence


Committee (email or call these people):

Paul Boyer

Kirsten Engel

Eddie Farnsworth

Mark Finchem

Sally Ann Gonzales

Daniel Hernandez

Anthony T. Kern

David Stringer

Maria Syms

While form letters can be useful, individual letters and arguments are better. Form letters are often treated as one letter and accepted/dismissed as one. We have a lot of experienced, knowledgeable people interested in this, so please take time to email, tweet, or FB Rep. Lawrence on this issue.

For an example of the argument, here is my letter to the committee:

Here is what I am sending. If anyone wants to use or add to any argument made here, please do.

Dear Mr. Lawrence,

I am writing in regards to House Bill 2022: Creating an exception to statute 13-3107, Unlawful discharge of firearms, to allow discharge of firearms within municipality limits with the purpose of eliminating rattlesnakes or rodents.

I am the owner of Rattlesnake Solutions, a local rattlesnake education and conservation group. My team are frequent visitors of Scottsdale and serve your constituents on a daily basis. I am also an amateur herpetologist with specialization in local rattlesnake species, and a regular educational speaker at regional parks and wildlife-oriented organizations. I have 15 years of daily experience with the conflict that exists between our growing urban areas and native wildlife. I believe my knowledge in this area can be helpful to you when considering HB2022.

First, I very well understand the fear that some people feel about snakes. It is deeply rooted in our culture. To many, including, I believe, your constituent whose experience has fueled the creation of HB2022, this may seem like a common sense issue. However, the facts do not justify our fear or the perceived danger that snakes pose. In fact, the promotion of irresponsible wildlife handling methods actually creates new threats, and exacerbates existing ones.

Based on my professional experience, it is my estimation is that HB2022 will actually result in an increase of venomous bites within urban areas, and create the possibility for additional injury in the form of firearm-related accidents.

Please consider the following:

Each year in the United States, an estimated 7,000-8,000 people per year are bitten by venomous snakes, resulting in 8 to 15 deaths. The bite victims, as well, are often intentionally handling the snakes, herpetologists and professional handlers, and others who are not accidental bite victims. It is estimated that, of bite victims in Arizona, roughly 1/3 are attempting to kill, capture, or harass the snake. Bites managed by the Arizona Poison and Drug Information Center show 50% to 70% of bites happen to individuals in performing these actions.

This leaves bite victims that are accidentally bitten by snakes that are not seen, or not seen until after the bite has occurred. This means that individuals who would take action themselves under the exception offered by HB2022 will intentionally place themselves into the highest bracket of bite victims. Rattlesnakes are quite capable of delivering a venomous bite even after being shot, and if the numbers show anything, it is that subsequent handling and photo opportunities are irresistible.

In Arizona, there are numerous methods to safely handle the removal of snakes. In Scottsdale, in particular, this service is performed free-of-charge by the Fire Department, in addition to non-profit organizations such as the Arizona Herpetological Association and Phoenix Herpetological Society. Additionally, dozens more entities exist to service your constituents in the event that wildlife needs to be removed. With all of these options available across the state, there is no added safety to gain from allowing a homeowner to shoot a snake. HB2022 encourages behavior that any herpetological professional, emergency response, or venomous snake specialist would believe to be reckless and dangerous. If someone sees a snake, and chooses to keep their distance rather than approach it (armed or otherwise), all danger is negated. Rattlesnake bites are not a significant threat to Arizonans living in areas potentially affected by HB2022.

There is also the added danger of additional firearm discharge in populated areas. Does HB2022 consider densely populated areas of the city, apartment and condo complexes, and areas near schools? There is also consideration for law enforcement, and how to handle the introduction of legal gunfire in highly populated areas, fired with only the requirement that it be directed towards an animal. It is my hope that the concerns of the community has been considered in the creation of HB2022.

I know that, personally, I would have great concerns if my own neighbors were firing at rats in their backyard, rat-shot or otherwise. HB2022 must assume a common responsibility and understanding of firearm safety, which seems at odds with the purpose of 13-3107. I personally do not trust that every gun owner within city limits possess the level of safety awareness to prevent accidental gunfire mishaps. This is a high price to pay for what is essentially a feel-good action for some individuals who choose to ignore safer options.

My intention is not to convince anyone of the value of our native wildlife, especially in areas of urban conflict. I realize that these are not animals appreciated by many; it’s expected, and this nature of this irrational fear needs to be considered. It is my personal opinion that personal responsibility is an important factor here, being the choice for many to create homes within desert habitats and maintain naturalistic landscaping. This is a choice made by many of your constituents, and all the beauty come caveats of being a good citizen and neighbor.

If I or my organization can provide any information or aid on this matter to your staff or constituency, please assume you will have whatever help is needed. Likewise, I have a desire uphold the safety of Arizonans; HB2022 will not acheive that goal.

I will end with 2 links. One is an unfortunate incident where a child was killed by a police officer attempting to kill a (harmless) snake with a gun. The second is the complete list of venomous snake related deaths in the United States. Please take note of the number from Arizona who would have been helped by HB2022 in the last 20 years.




Bryan Hughes