INTRODUCTION 



Snakes present a serious difficulty to ecologists wishing to 

 study them in the field. Due to their secretive behaviour and 

 cryptic coloration, they are generally difficult to find, and 

 because of their solitary lifestyle, they are usually only found 

 as isolated individuals. Whereas turtles, lizards, and crocodilians 

 lend themselves easily to marking methods, snakes are the most 

 difficult reptiles to mark effectively for field identification. 

 Nevertheless, researchers have ingenuously developed a variety of 

 techniques for marking snakes. No less than twenty different 

 methods have been used with more than fifty snake species 

 (Appendix) . These techniques fall into several categories: 1) 

 scale-clipping; 2) tagging; 3) painting/coloring; 4) tattooing, 5) 

 branding; 6) recording of integumentary and scale patterns; 7) 

 incising; and radiotelemetry . These are summarized in a subsequent 

 section. 



An ideal marking method for snakes should satisfy most of the 

 following criteria, as enumerated by Lewke and Stroud (1974) and 

 Ricker (1956). It should: 1) be as free of stress and pain as 

 possible; 2) not affect the mortality rate of the animals; 3) 

 afford minimal opportunity for infection; 4) not affect behaviour; 

 5) not inhibit normal movement; 6) not inhibit the shedding 

 process; 7) be permanent or at least long-lasting; 8) be easily 

 read to identify accurately individuals; 9) be adaptable to all 

 sizes of animals; 10) be easily employed in the field or laboratory 

 situation; and 11) involve equipment and materials that are easily 

 made or obtainable at a minimal cost. 



Discussions of preferred methods of marking can be found in 

 Brown and Parker (1976b), Clark (1971), Ferner (1979), Fitch 



(1949A; 1987), Kroll et al. (1973), Lewke and Stroud (1974), 

 McGinnis (1967), Pendlebury (1972), Pough (1970), Reinert and 

 Cundall (1982), Schmidt and Davies (1941), Spellerberg and Prestt 



(1978), Swingland (1978), Turner (1977), Weary (1969) and Woodbury 



(1948; 1956) . 



Considering the aforementioned references, enough information 

 is available for ecologists to choose an effective tagging method 

 for their investigations according to their budget and the 

 hypotheses to be investigated. To permit ready access and 

 evaluation of the different methodologies, I offer the following 

 summaries of the various marking techniques along with the 

 pertinent literature. 



