REPTILES. 67 



punctata and a list of the species known from Cheboygan County. 



32. Ruthven, Alexander G. Amphibians and Reptiles in A Bio- 

 logical Survey of the Sand Dune Region on the South Shore of 

 Saginaw Bay, Michigan. Mich. Geol. and Biol. Surv., Pub. 4, Biol. 

 Ser. 2, 1911, pp. 257-272. A discussion of the reptile-amphibian 

 fauna of the northern part of Huron County; fifteen species of 

 reptiles recorded. 



33. Thompson, Crystal. Notes on the Amphibians and Reptiles 

 of Cass County, Michigan. 13th Ann. Rept. Mich. Acad. Sci., 1911, 

 pp. 105-107. Records thirteen species of reptiles from Cass County. 



METHODS OF STUDY. 



The reptiles are a group which, in the opinion of the writer, 

 has been much neglected by students of natural history. The result 

 of this is shown by the small amount of material on habits and 

 local distribution that has accumulated. Much of this neglect of a 

 very interesting group is due to the wide spread aversion to reptiles, 

 particularly to lizards and snakes. The truth is that most of this 

 aversion is acquired and can be more or less easily overcome. It is 

 due in no small part to the absurd stories that still pass current 

 in the periodicals. We venture to say that if the statement were 

 published in the daily papers that there is in Michigan but one 

 poisonous snake (rattle snake), that the largest snakes we have are 

 the blue racer, fox snake and pilot snake, which seldom attain a 

 length of over six feet, that the breath of the '"blowing adder" is 

 not poisonous, that snakes do not sting with their tongues nor 

 swallow their young, it would call forth numerous protests and 

 snake stories by "eye-witnesses" exactly to the contrary. 



It seems absurd to one acquainted with these interesting animals 

 to have to deny such stories. Our reptiles are only dangerous as 

 they are poisonous, and the poison is only conveyed by large fangs 

 and only possessed by one species — the rattle snake. On the other 

 hand there are few groups that will better repay a study of the 

 habits, both for the reason that a knowledge of the natural history 

 of the forms is of value in the study of their distribution and re- 

 lationships and because so little is known on the subject. The work 

 on the natural history and distribution of the forms must be pre- 

 ceeded by a determination of the .species, but fortunately the latter 

 is not difficult for our forms are few and in general well defined. 

 The classification is based on structural characters, of course, but 

 the external characters are sufficient for the identification of Michi- 



