100 BULLETIN Gl, UNITED STATES NATIONAL MUSEUM. 



Specimens of j^roximus with definite locality data have been exam- 

 ined as follows: Progreso and Cozumel Island, Yucatan; Orizaba, 

 Xalaj)a, and Tiix])am, Veracruz; Matamoras, Tamaulipas; Caderita, 

 Neuvo Leon; Tule Canyon, Dallas, Matagordo, Pecos, Fort Cobb, 

 Brownsville, Wheelock, Helotes, New Braunfels, Austin, Kerrville, 

 San Pedro, San Angelo, Fort McKavett, Devils River, High Bridge, 

 Pecos River, and Fort Stockton, Texas; New Orleans, St. James 

 Parish, Belair, Shdell, Prairie Mer Rouge, Calcasieu Pass, Perry, 

 and Grand Coteau, Louisiana; Green way, Arkansas; Butler County, 

 Montgomery County, St. Clair County, St. Louis, Missouri; Neosho 

 Falls and Dora, Kansas; Nemaha County, Nebraska; Ames and Des 

 Moines, Iowa; Chicago, Rock Island, Olney, and Mount Carmel, 

 Illinois; Fox River and Racine, Wisconsin. 



Boulenger (1893, 214) records specimens from Belize, Honduras." 

 Bailey (1905, 48) gives the following Texas localities: ''Brownsville, 

 Lomita Ranch (Hidalgo County), Sycamore Creek, Corpus Christi, 

 and San Antonio River, near San Antonio." Taylor states that he 

 has examined specimens from Nemaha, Saline, and Saunders coun- 

 ties, Nebraska. Branson writes that in Kansas he examined speci- 

 mens from "Wallace, Douglas, Franklin, Geary, Woodson, Clark, and 

 Shawnee counties." At present we consider all of the Illinois and 

 Wisconsin ribbon snakes as belonging to this form, but, as later stated, 

 more evidence may show that the specimens in this region are not 

 typical. Ribbon snakes occur throughout the former St ate, ^ and in 

 Wisconsin at least to Racine, and probably farther north, for a single 

 specimen in the U. S. National Museum (No. 731) is labeled "Fox 

 River." No definite Minnesota record has been found, the only 

 record being a single specimen (No. 6179) in the Academy of Natural 

 Sciences of Philadelphia, labeled "Minnesota." 



The distribution of this form (fig. 35) is thus in harmony with its 

 aquatic habits. In Mexico it is confined to the coastal plain, being 

 apparently unable to push out from this area. In eastern Texas, 

 however, it encounters the eastern forest, which, as would be expected, 

 apparently furnishes conditions somewhat similar to those of the 

 coastal plain and permits the form to extend its range throughout this 

 environment west of the Mississippi, and even to extend entirely 

 across the prairie region and into the great plains and northeastern 

 forest regions along the streams. Detailed evidence is not at hand 

 that proximus is confined to the vicinity of streams in the prairie 



a Boulenger (1893, 213) also records a specimen from the Atoyac River, Guerrero, 

 and Gunlher (1894, 132) gives the locality GuatemaUi, l)Ut as these localities are the 

 only ones outside of the eastern coastal plain of Middle America, the data and identifi- 

 cation of the specimens should be ascertained with certainty before the range is 

 extended to include them. 



b H. Garman (1892, 265) gives the following Illinois localities: Chicago, Cook County; 

 Peoria, Normal, Jersey County; Mount Carmel, Union County. 



