Could the length/weight be real?

18 years ago

Hello everyone,

I'm a lover of all creatures and my FIL sent me this pic. I live in Texas and so he probably thought I'd find it interesting. I spend most of my time in the Farm Forum, but lurk here some. I thought y'all could settle a "is it real" question. I know diamondbacks get large, but goodness knows this snake would frighten even the most sturdy herper.

Sadly, it's obvious they've killed the poor thing. Some folks can't leave well enough alone.

Your thoughts will interest me on the size of the snake. Seems like a world record, but there's very little about it online.

Carla in Texas

http://www.moreliapythons.com/forum/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=49707&;

Sort by:Oldest

Comments (3)

blancse
18 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
The rattlesnake is a large one, but the photo is a bit mis-leading. This is and old photo trick to hold an object towards the camera to make it look bigger. I've done it myself to make the fish I caught look bigger. Something I need to do far too often. Judging by the size of the snake grabber I would say the snake was around six feet long. Still a big snake, and one that would cause even us herp lovers to be shookup. I once saw an Eastern Dimondback in Florida that was much bigger that this snake. I've yet to see anything close - even in a zoo. The guy that caught it lived way out in the sticks with his mother. He claimed to have caught the snake while crossing the road, using only his boot lace and a gunny sack. I would love to have seen that.
KeithB
18 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
While I can't vouch for this exact specimen, I can say these sort of photo shots with the snake extended forward and the size exaggerated are common on the web. The snake he is holding is a very large Western Dimaondback. But judging by appearance, my guess is that this snake is around 6-6.5 feet long and probably weighs about 10-11 pounds. The record size for a Western Diamondabck is just over 7 feet long and the largest rattlesnake ever recorded is an 8 foot 1 inch Eastern Diamondback.

a web example exaggerating a snake's size (and falsifying the location)....

http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/claysnake.asp

Clay County Snake

Claim: Photograph shows a 50-lb. rattlesnake caught in Clay County, West Virginia in June 2005.

Status: Real photo; inaccurate description.

Examples: [Collected on the Internet, 2005]

This Rattlesnake was caught in Clay County, WV on 5-21-05. It weighed over 50 IBS and was 8' long. Rumers of this snake filtered through our community for the last month, then this pic was found on clay County's web site. A shiver goes up my spine just looking at it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well, this would be an unpleasent surprise!!! Here is the news release that came in to me just the other day: Rattlesnake! 114 POUNDS FOUND AT FOLA COAL IN CLAY COUNTY 2 WEEKS AGO

I have to note that this is about 30 miles due east of the State Capitol here in West Virginia. Nothing to do with politics, I am sure, but this is one big snake, so much for so called records from the West!

Variations: Some October 2005 forwards of the photo include a text description that details the finding of a "Big Timber Rattler" "near an open path" in Potter County, PA, "2 weeks ago" by "Phillip Bowman."

Origins: There were several reasons to doubt the origins of the photograph displayed above matched the description that accompanied it on the Internet:
The snake pictured is a western diamondback rattler, a species that does not live east of the Mississippi River.

The apparent size of the reptile is exaggerated in the photograph because a stick is being used to position it much closer to the camera's lens than the men standing behind it are. An 8-foot, 10-lb. diamondback rattler is considered a giant for that species, so the snake pictured probably weighs no more than that.

Fola Coal Co. vice-president Keith Bartley has fielded many an inquiry about this image, stating: "It's unequivocally not ours. It's a false story. There is no truth to it whatsoever."
According to the Stephenville (Texas) Empire-Tribune, the snake was actually an 6-foot, 11-pound rattler snared by three hunters (Jim Bob Basham, Danny Fincannon, and Johnny McClatchy) in the Lone Star State in February 2005:
The Great Rattlesnake Hunter from Proctor has been out looking under rocks again, this time near Alexander. On Valentine's Day Jim Bob Basham, holding the snake, and his fellow hunters, Danny Fincannon and Johnny McClatchy of Dublin, uncovered a din of rattlers that yielded this monster. This snake is even bigger than the one Basham caught last November that made its rounds on the Internet. Big Charlie here is more than 6 feet (an exact measurement was not attempted) and weighs 11 pounds. He boasts 15 rattlers and a button. He was sharing the den with 11 other rattlers that were all caught alive.

Last updated: 24 October 2005

The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/photos/animals/claysnake.asp

Urban Legends Reference Pages 1995-2005
by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson
This material may not be reproduced without permission
Related Discussions
postage on seed bubble envi's the real deal!!!
Q
Comments (28)
I finally found this page after lots of searches at usps. To my interpretation of what it says, bubble mailers do count as letters/flats if thin enough and are only subject to the .17 non-machinable rate (why else would they need the .17 cents still if all non-machinables were all parcels). This quote sounds like an exact description of a bubble mailer to me..."Items mailed in large envelopes cannot cause more than a 1/4-inch variance in thickness, to within 1 inch of the edges of the envelope. The outer edges of the mailpiece (up to 1 inch) are not considered when measuring variance in thickness." Here are a few more excerpts and link(note last one about securing small things like she mentioned earlier...) "Are items sent at First-Class Mail flats rates (large envelopes) required to be flexible and "uniformly thick"? --Yes. Large envelopes must be flexible (cannot be rigid) and uniformly thick. Items mailed in large envelopes cannot cause more than a 1/4-inch variance in thickness, to within 1 inch of the edges of the envelope. The outer edges of the mailpiece (up to 1 inch) are not considered when measuring variance in thickness. Also, envelopes must be rectangular-in-shape and the maximum thickness (at the thickest point) is 3/4-inch. A large envelope that exceeds any maximum physical dimension (length, height, or thickness) is classified and priced as a package (parcel). Bulky items placed in padded mailing bags generally will not qualify as a large envelope." "Is there still a nonmachinable surcharge for First-Class Mail? Yes. The nonmachinable surcharge applies to all First-Class Mail single-piece and presort-rate letters (up to the 3.5 ounce maximum weight), and is 17 cents." "Are large envelopes (flats) subject to a nonmachinable surcharge? No, since large envelopes now have their own price structure (flats prices); the nonmachinable surcharge will not apply." "What is the definition of "uniform thickness" for flats? If a flat is not uniformly thick, would it have to be mailed as a parcel, or NFM? All flats must be uniformly thick so that any bumps, protrusions, or other irregularities do not cause more than 1/4-inch variance in thickness. The outer edges of the mailpiece (up to 1 inch) would not be considered when measuring variance in thickness. Also, if the contents are significantly smaller than the envelope, wrapper, or sleeve, they must be secured to prevent shifting of more than 2 inches within the mailpiece. Flat-size pieces not meeting the uniform thickness standard must be mailed as either Not Flat-Machinable pieces or as parcels." What do ya think??? This quote is the hard one..."Bulky items placed in padded mailing bags generally will not qualify as a large envelope." I think the key is "Generally will not" not "WILL not" Here is a link that might be useful: usps ratecase faqs
...See More
oh no! first visit to 'real' aquarium store!
Q
Comments (26)
Here are some pics of my planted tanks....some have been posted on here before. This bottom pic is plastic plants and just one of those plastic picture backs taped to the back of the aquarium. I know you are sorting out the good info from the bad...but I really can't express enough that a quarantine tank is VERY IMPORTANT......it regardless of where you purchase your fish.....some fish diseases don't show up for a long time......such as 4 to 6 weeks.....Even if all the fish in the store look healthy....you don't know what they were exposed to before they were put into the store tanks. Sometimes just the stress of shipping causes illnesses to show up. Having managed fishrooms for two pet stores and having my own fishroom.....I have seen this. One time I purchased some huge georgeous swordtails....put them into a quarantine tank for less than a month...all looked healthy......so I didn't wait the 6 weeks or two months.....I added them........I lost the whole tank of fish. The store where I purchased them...was a very reliable fish store that always had healthy looking fish...they were not a pet store! He lost them all too. There was no guarantees in this store...so I had to take the loss........won't mention how many $$ I lost with this mistake.....and I did know better too. The tank had to be taken all apart and disinfected and recycled before new fish could be added.... I would never go without quarantining any fish before adding to a community now......and I quarantine for 6 weeks or more......its a safety precausion...that works. Again, its one of those decisions that you have to make for yourself. The size of the tank....is really up to you....what you want to maintain and the size of space you have. Any of the Innes books, or Axelrod books are good to read. You mentioned an Atlas.....is it the Axelrod atlas? There is also the Baensch Aquarium Atlas.....there are soooo many books out there.....again its difficult to just name one or two that might help. Are you anywhere near an aquarium club? Some clubs also offer long distance membership and usually there is a bi-monthly newsletter where members write about there experiences with plants and fish. Also there are mags such as Tropical Fish Hobbyist, Aquarium Fish Magazine and Freshwater and Marine Aquarium Magazine...there are probably others as well. Hope this helps and doesn't add to the confusion! Sierra
...See More
Real Estate Signs as a Trellis???
Q
Comments (6)
Zig zag would add great visual interest..less blocky. I'm not sure how clove a hitch would work? I've done it at the top of bamboo poles. I'm not envisioning how I could acccomplish a weave and how would I end it? Paint is a great idea, and a necessity if I want these clunkers to last. Maybe this year, in the interest of time and money I'll do a base coat of yellow, to attract pollinators, and next fall I can dress it up with more colors and patterns. Love the idea of different weave patterns. These little squares could really become some enviable garden art! Hadn't thought of peas and peppers, but I've been trying to figure out how I was going to trellis more peas. Glad to know these shorties can work, because I'd like to keep my cattle panel arch freed up for the earliest possible start on pickling cukes. It would be great if I didn't need to wait on the peas to finish to start the cukes. I may throw in an eggplant for good measure. I thought about stacking but could only envision having hubs weld them, and I always hate to impose on his weekend/evening time. Will be curious to hear ideas on how else to accomplish this. So many great ideas from just two posts! I hope to hear more. Gratefully, Seedmama
...See More
Thomas Jefferson Was a Failed Real Estate Investor?
Q
Comments (2)
Jefferson was notoriously bad with money. However, Washington and Madison were both quite good with it - then again they may have been considering their purchase a "donation" to the government. Jefferson was so broke that when he died he was deeply in debt and could not even afford to set his slaves free - they were sold to other slaveowners to settle a portion of his debts.
...See More
ccox
Original Author
18 years ago
last modified: 9 years ago
Thanks for your responses! I didn't think anyone but the very strong can hold 98lbs at arms length. What I didn't realize was that even large rattlers really don't weigh a whole lot. I would think something that is 8ft long would be pushing 25lbs. I'm just not a good judge.
Mostly, I'm sorry this big fellow is dead. I'm sure he/she parented many a baby.

Could the length/weight be real?

Comments (3)

blancse

KeithB

Related Discussions

ccox
Original Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

Could the length/weight be real?

Comments (3)

blancse

KeithB

Related Discussions

ccoxOriginal Author

COMPANY

BUSINESS SERVICES

GET HELP

CONNECT WITH US

ccox
Original Author