There's a rattlesnake in your backyard: What do you do?
The western diamondback rattlesnake is the most common type of snake relocated by experts in the metro Phoenix area. Photo courtesy of iStock/Getty Images
A snake slithers onto your back porch one sunny morning.
What do you do?
Call a relocation expert, grab a shovel and try to kill the reptile, or do nothing?
That moral quandary is at the center of research co-led by Arizona State University researchers Kelli Larson, a professor in the School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning, and Heather Bateman, a professor in the College of Integrated Sciences and Arts.
One article, titled “To kill or not to kill? Exploring normative beliefs and attitudes toward snakes,” was published in the scientific journal Biological Conservation earlier this year. The second paper, titled “Varied motivations for snake removals in a desert city,” was published in the journal Human Dimensions of Wildlife in November.
The papers build on research Bateman and colleagues did in 2021, which analyzed the types, locations and seasonality of snakes removed in relations to demographic data from the census.
The current papers, which evaluate people’s normative beliefs about killing snakes, along with related attitudes and experiences, were based on surveys of 300 people who used Rattlesnake Solutions, a snake removal company, between the summers of 2021 and 2022. Bateman and Larson also surveyed Phoenix residents about their attitudes toward snakes.
ASU News spoke with Larson and Bateman about their discoveries.
Editor's note: The following interview has been edited for length and/or clarity.
Question: How do the two papers differentiate from each other?
Larson: The paper ("To kill or not to kill") is really trying to understand people’s normative beliefs about whether it’s morally acceptable or not to kill snakes across different contexts. It differentiates between finding a snake in a person’s home or in their yard or private property with killing snakes anytime, like out in the desert or in instances when someone’s actually been bitten.
The second one ("Varied Motivations") is more focused on the clients who have paid Rattlesnake Solutions to have snakes removed from their property. Why are they removing the snakes and what are the motivations underlying those (removals)? In that one, one of the major findings is that people’s opposition to killing snakes was a huge motivator for calling to have the snakes removed. They’re calling because they think it’s morally not OK to kill snakes.
Q: It almost sounds like you’ve surveyed two samples of Phoenix-area residents.
Larson: Correct. We essentially have survey data from two groups: the clients of Rattlesnake Solutions and a broader sample of residents in metro Phoenix. One of the things we’re finding, and one of the things we’ve been interested in exploring, is to what extent these snake removal decisions are driven by concerns for the snake’s interest. We do find that the clients who pay for the snake removal are more positive in their attitudes toward snakes and are far more strongly opposed to killing snakes across contexts.
Q: Your papers say that in different places around the world, 40–50% of people said they would kill snakes, but that percentage is much lower in the Phoenix area. Is that because we’re more accustomed to seeing snakes and, as a result, not as fearful?
Larson: There is an effect. People who are more familiar with seeing snakes here tend to be more comfortable around them and less likely to kill them. But I think what’s going on is that a lot of the research that’s been done on humans’ interactions with snakes and their potential to kill them or have them removed has been done in the Global South, and in particular, more rural areas. So in those more agricultural or rural settings, that’s where you’re seeing a high propensity to kill snakes out of concern for livelihoods. And, oftentimes, the research being done is in regions that have a significant (percentage) of venomous snakes.
Most of the work has been done in countries like Brazil and Nepal and India, where they have cobras and other venomous snakes, and people are more likely to encounter them while working in the field.
Q: Does the type of snake matter in terms of the percentage of people wanting relocation?
Bateman: The data that we have from the snake removal service is that 88% of those removals are in fact venomous (western diamondback) rattlesnakes.
Larson: The Sonoran gophersnake (which is not venomous) is the second most likely to be removed, and to the untrained eye they probably appear pretty similar to the (western diamondback).
Q: What are the drivers that influence people’s decisions on what to do with snakes they encounter?
Bateman: Thirty to forty-five percent of people cited fear-based motivations, whereas about 60% strongly said it was the desire to move the snake to a more appropriate desert habitat.
Larson: The perceived threat the snakes posed was one of the dominant reasons. That decision was largely driven by having a venomous snake on their property, and people are recognizing the potential threat to them or their children, pets, etc. But that was distinguished from a generalized fear of snakes. And the people who strongly stated that fear as a reason for killing snakes, they were more likely to just hate snakes and think they’re disgusting. And they were also more likely to think it’s morally OK to kill snakes.
Q: Would more education about rattlesnakes maybe impact the data and convince more people to relocate rather than kill a snake?
Larson: Education can be important, but it’s not really knowledge-based education as much as it is experience-based education. Seeing snakes in nature, seeing people handling snakes safely, maybe having handled or touched a snake yourself, whether it’s a friend’s pet or at a zoo. Those kind of experiences, that help diminish fear and increase appreciation, have been proven to be quite powerful in affecting people’s attitudes toward snakes.
More Environment and sustainability
Team wins $10M XPRIZE Rainforest competition for novel solution
Several Arizona State University experts are on a team that created a new way to put a price on the rainforest in order to save it, and on Friday they won the top award in the prestigious $10 million…
ASU President Michael Crow named to TIME100 Climate list
Arizona State University President Michael Crow has been named to the 2024 TIME100 Climate list of leaders and innovators driving real climate action.The list includes leaders across a range of…
Driving green desalination
Wilderness survival TV show hosts, pirates and water treatment researchers agree on one thing: Most natural water sources are not safe for drinking. Among the many potential risks is the high salt…