# Diamond Python



## lucyl (Jun 7, 2020)

Got a new sweetie and wanted to show someone. She's very jumpy which is expected as I only got her yesterday. She's settling down great. She has very beautiful patterns. She's a Murray Darling x Diamond but she doesn't have many noticeable carpet python features.












Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 7, 2020)

Plenty of Carpet Python influence showing 

Have fun


----------



## CF Constrictor (Jun 7, 2020)

Hi lucyl
Nice looking hatchie , congratulations and please post more photos as it grows , would be very interested to see how it matures. Best wishes


----------



## WilliamVC (Jun 11, 2020)

how beautiful he is! what does it eat?


----------



## nick_75 (Jun 11, 2020)

All features are carpet python, both parents are subspecies of _Morelia spilota_.

Also, as a heads up, most Australian keepers view the crossing of _M. spilota_ subspecies as a negative. It does happen within the Australian hobby, but is not common. Most Australian keepers pride themselves on the purity of their animals and cross breeds don't sell very well due to a lack of demand. I assume that, by the picture on your profile, you are overseas. Where crossing of Australian natives is common and encouraged. That not the case here.


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 11, 2020)

nick_75 said:


> All features are carpet python, both parents are subspecies of _Morelia spilota_.
> 
> Also, as a heads up, most Australian keepers view the crossing of _M. spilota_ subspecies as a negative. It does happen within the Australian hobby, but is not common. Most Australian keepers pride themselves on the purity of their animals and cross breeds don't sell very well due to a lack of demand. I assume that, by the picture on your profile, you are overseas. Where crossing of Australian natives is common and encouraged. That not the case here.



Not sure which rock in Australia you're living under, or if you've been in a coma for the last 20 years, but most Carpets getting thrown around in Australia these days are crosses. Jungle zebra albino this, lemon pepper hypo axanthic that. Often the non morph siblings are sold as 'Coastals'. You can still find genuine pure this and that around, but it it's not the majority of what's being sold or what's popular. Even a large percentage of what's sold as 'pure' isn't.


----------



## Herpetology (Jun 11, 2020)

I don’t really like crosses (might experiment in future with limited amount of eggs) but one thing I HATE is people not advertising as a cross


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 11, 2020)

Herptology said:


> I don’t really like crosses (might experiment in future with limited amount of eggs) but one thing I HATE is people not advertising as a cross



Haha, better get over that hatred or you're going to pop! Most people just cope by believing the lies. It's funny when people post pictures of unknowns which are often obvious mixes, and people post saying 'Definitely a Spotted Python!' or 'That's a Coastal!' and from then on that snake is believed by all to be a pure x.

This still bothered me 15 years ago, but I learned to accept the inevitable.


----------



## kernel_pan1c (Jun 12, 2020)

I'm still in the "it bothers me now" phase


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 12, 2020)

kernel_pan1c said:


> I'm still in the "it bothers me now" phase



Getting bothered by things you can't change just harms you with no benefit. I'm still not perfect at avoiding it, I never will be, but the better I get at not being bothered by things I can't or won't change, the better things are  This is a fight you won't win, the world is not perfect, most people are neither smart nor honest.


----------



## kernel_pan1c (Jun 12, 2020)

Sdaji said:


> Getting bothered by things you can't change just harms you with no benefit. I'm still not perfect at avoiding it, I never will be, but the better I get at not being bothered by things I can't or won't change, the better things are  This is a fight you won't win, the world is not perfect, most people are neither smart nor honest.



Do you think that the days of pure lines and real locale variations existing with some integrity in the hobby are basically over, or at least on their way out? That's a bummer. It just feels as though something would be lost if there was only a sea of mixed and matched in the hobby with no value placed on anything beyond the paint job. It kind of makes me want to purposely go against the tide and to dig up and favour the old stuff over the newer, more exciting morphs. Someone should be preserving those, no? Let me know if you know anyone who feels the same way as I do about it and who already does this. I reckon that I probably have a heavy dose of new-comer-naive going on. That "Australian Dream Python" from yesterday was a bit grim.


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 12, 2020)

kernel_pan1c said:


> Do you think that the days of pure lines and real locale variations existing with some integrity in the hobby are basically over, or at least on their way out? That's a bummer. It just feels as though something would be lost if there was only a sea of mixed and matched in the hobby with no value placed on anything beyond the paint job. It kind of makes me want to purposely go against the tide and to dig up and favour the old stuff over the newer, more exciting morphs. Someone should be preserving those, no? Let me know if you know anyone who feels the same way as I do about it and who already does this. I reckon that I probably have a heavy dose of new-comer-naive going on. That "Australian Dream Python" from yesterday was a bit grim.



Yes and no. Mostly yes. People don't care about locality. 15+ years ago I as a diehard locality nut. I was proud of my pure lines and I went to extreme lengths to source and verify locality pure animals. I lovingly bred them and put them up for sale. No one cared. Well, they loved that they were beautiful, healthy animals, but they almost never cared about the locality. I could tell you the exact sand dune my Knob-tailed Geckoes originated from, I could go and stand on the exact spot the founder animals of some of my python lines were collected on. No one cared. They just cared about labels. If I called something 'mega starglow lemon zap' people would have been excited and paid more, but if I said 'the 6th sand dune north of a town you've never heard of' they didn't care. I still love locality animals, a relatively vocal very small minority do, but even most of them have no concept of what locality means. To most of them, it's still about labels. Most people don't know where 'wheatbelt' is, they don't know where 'Tanami' is, they wouldn't point out Palmerston on a map, and 'locality' labels like 'sandfire' are used frivolously with no meaning. I used to sell my Water Pythons as 'Townsville' because Townsville was the closest place anyone would recognise to where the founder animals were collected (all within 1km of each other). When people hear these labels, do they imagine that the animals were collected from the middle of that town? Half the time these labels are deliberately misused, such as all the Renmark Mulgas which were sold as St George Mulgas because at the time St George Mulgas were all the rage (quite different animals, but both populations have similar colour...). I've seen wild 'Renmark Mulgas' across the state border in NSW which are clearly the same and part of the same population, and I'm guessing some of the Renmark Mulgas in captivity are from NSW not Renmark (which is in SA). The actual St George Mulgas aren't from the middle of St George anyway, they're from a large region.

So even if you want to be an actual purist, you quickly find that it was almost impossible from the start, and it almost completely impossible now other than a few specific exceptions.

Absolutely, the further time goes on, the more it will all be muddied. Look at the most common and popular captive snake in the world (Ball Python). Most people don't even know which continent it comes from, let alone care about locality. Same with the second most popular (Corn Snake). It's difficult to be sure a Corn Snake is a pure corn snake and not a hybrid. Other species were mixed in to introduce morphs. Now they're a big genetic soup.

I did say yes and no, mostly yes. The tiny bit of no is that wild animals for the most part are still pure (with notable exceptions around cities, with relocations being quite common now. I've seen plenty of local Brown and Tiger Snakes of the wrong type around the Melbourne region, especially in areas where snake catchers release things, just as an example, and it actually is a terrible shame for people to be relocating wild reptiles). As long as there are wild reptiles, some will make it into captivity through various channels.

Which lines of reptiles do you like? Do you honestly think you know the origins of your own animals? Do you honestly think you could source genuine provenance animals today or 10-20 years ago? You can find stuff with provenance labels, sure, but can you trust those labels? If so, that's pretty funny! 15-20 years ago I could still manage to track down who bred what and painstakingly find the origins of some things by talking to the people who collected the founding animals. That's now almost impossible for most things, and the trend will obviously only continue in one direction.

At some point you have to ask yourself why it matters? When I asked myself I honestly couldn't find an answer which held any weight. I just liked it for no sensible reason. I still do, but I can't think of any valid reason anyone else should. Do we care about the origins of domestic chickens? Where is the natural origin of chickens (Hint: They're hybrids!). Where is the natural origin of domestic cats and dogs? Can you point it out on a world map? What about goldfish? Guinea Pigs? The rats you feed your snakes? The crickets we feed our lizards? You can't even name the continent most of these things come from (most people wouldn't know any of them!) let alone anything about locality origin.

Until about 15 years ago I would have passionately debated for pure lines and against locality crossing etc. Heh, it's funny to think about how much has changed, especially myself.


----------



## kernel_pan1c (Jun 12, 2020)

Yip. Fair point, well made. I suppose that by definition this hobby is in fact a hobby and not herpetology. Given that I'm looking for an Elcho Children's and a Wheatbelt Stimson's, I'll make a point of making sure I can find them on the map  at the very least. 

Chooks is my area. Many, many people around the world are very committed to preserving heritage chicken breeds. These breeds are definitely no longer commercially viable, but heritage breeds and varieties (vegetables as well) preserve a genetic diversity that could be critical to future food security. The potato famine comes to mind. Food, not hobby. Patented hybrids, whether corn or chickens, controlled by Monsanto and their mates can't be all that we have left in the world.
[doublepost=1591937362,1591935983][/doublepost]


Sdaji said:


> At some point you have to ask yourself why it matters? When I asked myself I honestly couldn't find an answer which held any weight. I just liked it for no sensible reason. I still do, but I can't think of any valid reason anyone else should. Do we care about the origins of domestic chickens? Where is the natural origin of chickens (Hint: They're hybrids!). Where is the natural origin of domestic cats and dogs? Can you point it out on a world map? What about goldfish? Guinea Pigs? The rats you feed your snakes? The crickets we feed our lizards? You can't even name the continent most of these things come from (most people wouldn't know any of them!) let alone anything about locality origin.
> 
> Until about 15 years ago I would have passionately debated for pure lines and against locality crossing etc. Heh, it's funny to think about how much has changed, especially myself.



Maybe conservation could be an argument in favour of at least trying to preserve something of the original lines. Perhaps most of the Australian snake species are pretty secure in the wild from a conservation perspective--but there are threats looming (I moved here from NZ so I'm kind of speculating a bit, I don't mind being corrected): cane toads (other destructive invasive species?), habitat destruction. If any endemic, small range species, of anything really, came under serious threat you could end up with a situation where the only place those animals are to be found is private collections. I reckon there are many flavours of animal which exist almost exclusively in zoos being kept in play by captive breeding programs. I can't take away from your point about the apparent futility of trying to keep lines pure in captivity, but it does seem there could at least be an argument to be made from conservation, for trying. What do you reckon?


----------



## GBWhite (Jun 12, 2020)

kernel_pan1c said:


> Do you think that the days of pure lines and real locale variations existing with some integrity in the hobby are basically over, or at least on their way out? That's a bummer. It just feels as though something would be lost if there was only a sea of mixed and matched in the hobby with no value placed on anything beyond the paint job. It kind of makes me want to purposely go against the tide and to dig up and favour the old stuff over the newer, more exciting morphs. Someone should be preserving those, no? Let me know if you know anyone who feels the same way as I do about it and who already does this. I reckon that I probably have a heavy dose of new-comer-naive going on. That "Australian Dream Python" from yesterday was a bit grim.



Hi Kernel,

"Mixed and matched" as you describe it is the way the hobby has been for some time and I think you'll find that's the way it will remain int the future. Remember herpetoculture is just hobby it's not herpetology and to be honest I rather like the look of some of the morphs that are being produced in Oz lately and consider some to even look rather spectacular.

Now in saying that, I don't possess any and I'm not really into buying critters so I don't imagine that I'll ever own any either. But there are "pure" lines out there if you know who has them. All the critters I currently have (which include Carpets, Olives, Red Bellied Blacks, Tigers, Collets, Ackie Monitors & Water Dragons) I can guarantee are all of "pure" blood lines because I know the exact location each of their ancestors originated. I can guarantee their heritage because back in the early 1990's I had a scientific license to collect live specimens throughout NSW and apart from the Olives, Collets and Ackies I collected their ancestors myself. I also know the location where my Olives originated from as their ancestors were given to me by a close friend who collected them in the company of renowned herper named Graham Gow (now deceased) near Graham's home in Humpty Do in the NT. The ancestors of the Ackies were caught by another close friend under license at a location in north/west Qld and I got my Collets from the same guy. So as you can see there are still some "pure" lines held in captivity but the ones I know of are owned by people who like to keep to themselves and don't really associate with anyone "new" to the hobby. I don't breed any of my critters these days and it's the same with most of my close friends so what happens to them when we are all gone is an open question but at this point in time and knowing their attitude toward the current crop of hobbyists I doubt very much that these reptiles or any of their offspring will make it to the open market.

As you suggest, conservation could be an argument to preserve "pure" blood lines, and it's a nice thought, however, I very much doubt that any of the Australian academic community or conservation authorities will ever rely upon private collections to acquire animals as stock to "save" any species identified as vulnerable, critically endangered or under threat of extinction.


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 12, 2020)

kernel_pan1c said:


> Yip. Fair point, well made. I suppose that by definition this hobby is in fact a hobby and not herpetology. Given that I'm looking for an Elcho Children's and a Wheatbelt Stimson's, I'll make a point of making sure I can find them on the map  at the very least.



Yeah, when I was first keeping reptiles everyone called themselves amateur herpetologists, and to be fair, back then most keepers to some extent were. Now it's a pet hobby, very different.

I was one of the first people to get hold of Elcho Island Children's and I was over the moon about it. As of shortly after being told I could get some, I was able to find Elcho Island on an unlabeled map. I get excited when I'm at an airport and see flights heading there. 'The wheatbelt region' is a pretty large area. I wouldn't even call one edge of it the same locality as the other edge, at least not enough to satisfy my desire to have a locality. Add to that the fact that the origin data of the captive lines is all lost, it's just a vague, descriptive term anyway. Also don't forget there are plenty of Elcho crosses and non Elchos being sold as Elchos.



> Chooks is my area. Many, many people around the world are very committed to preserving heritage chicken breeds. These breeds are definitely no longer commercially viable, but heritage breeds and varieties (vegetables as well) preserve a genetic diversity that could be critical to future food security. The potato famine comes to mind. Food, not hobby. Patented hybrids, whether corn or chickens, controlled by Monsanto and their mates can't be all that we have left in the world.
> [doublepost=1591937362,1591935983][/doublepost]



It's funny that you'd say chooks are your area and then go on to describe yourself proudly doing with chickens what you condemn others doing in reptiles!!!

You might find it interesting to learn the definitions of 1) Species 2) Breed 3) Locality. They are three different things. You are talking about preserving breeds while condemning their creation in reptiles. Chickens are literally the product of hybridising different species of wild birds and the breeds were then created by choosing ones with traits people liked. Literally the exact thing you are complaining about in snakes! Snakes are obviously at a much earlier stage than chickens, no one has yet labelled any captive reptile lines as breeds (although people often wrongly use the word 'breed' in place of 'species', but in the context of reptiles they always mean species, not breed, they're just ignorant).



> Maybe conservation could be an argument in favour of at least trying to preserve something of the original lines. Perhaps most of the Australian snake species are pretty secure in the wild from a conservation perspective--but there are threats looming (I moved here from NZ so I'm kind of speculating a bit, I don't mind being corrected): cane toads (other destructive invasive species?), habitat destruction. If any endemic, small range species, of anything really, came under serious threat you could end up with a situation where the only place those animals are to be found is private collections. I reckon there are many flavours of animal which exist almost exclusively in zoos being kept in play by captive breeding programs. I can't take away from your point about the apparent futility of trying to keep lines pure in captivity, but it does seem there could at least be an argument to be made from conservation, for trying. What do you reckon?



This topic has been done to death over the decades I've been working with reptiles. It's a moot point, captive reptiles have no direct conservation value in private hands. If you ever find one of those very rare specific exceptions, sure, by all means apply it to that exception. To do it properly requires the captive animals to be kept track of carefully (this will never happen in the amateur keeping world) with genetic integrity managed carefully (this will never happen in the open amateur keeping world). If you had something like, say, Rough-scaled Pythons which were vulnerable, okay, sure, but they have a restricted range which is simultaneously why crossing/locality is not an issue and why they may be relevant. You can't realistically come up with a real world example of where something like crossing Carpets with Black-headeds is actually of any problem. Neither species is at any risk of extinction, and if there was a particular unique population which was in trouble, then that particular population would need to have individuals brought into captivity and managed carefully. Any other Black-headeds or Carpets in captivity would be irrelevant.

You're really just pissing into the wind with this argument, believe me, I've spent many years analysing it to death.


----------



## nick_75 (Jun 12, 2020)

Sdaji said:


> Not sure which rock in Australia you're living under, or if you've been in a coma for the last 20 years, but most Carpets getting thrown around in Australia these days are crosses. Jungle zebra albino this, lemon pepper hypo axanthic that. Often the non morph siblings are sold as 'Coastals'. You can still find genuine pure this and that around, but it it's not the majority of what's being sold or what's popular. Even a large percentage of what's sold as 'pure' isn't.


I am fully aware that a there has been genetic tinkering going on for some time in the interest creating the next 'cool' morph for financial gain or bragging rights. A lot of the new people in the hobby probably don't care and don't know what it was like in the early days. When the hobby wasn't as popular and it was easy to trace lineages to ascertain purity. I believe that there is still a vast number of people in Australia, in the hobby, that care about purity. In my circle of friends for example no one has any morhps and animals are only bought from breeders that they trust and have been around a long time and know where their animals came from. I'm sure that there are many out there with the same view, some have responded above.
[doublepost=1591948077,1591947908][/doublepost]



Sdaji said:


> I was one of the first people to get hold of Elcho Island Children's and I was over the moon about it.


That is still one of my dream reptiles. Hopefully someone produces a clutch one day.


----------



## Lurker (Jun 12, 2020)

Well, I like the idea of locality reptiles and I think it’s because they represent the diversity of the same basic species throughout Australia. I enjoyed seeing many different patterns of snake that were particular to a particular area of the country, when travelling years ago, and it still surprises me when I learn of the different types and subspecies of snakes that we have. As a boy growing up in the central tablelands of NSW and lifting sheets if bark and old tin to find snakes - which got me into a great deal of trouble from my parents who thought their young son was destined for a certain quick death from snakebite - I actually thought that all of the snakes I knew from my own, 8 year old personal experience, were common all over Australia, apart from the pictures of the GTP’s in old encyclopaedias that mesmerised me . So you can imagine how it was for me when I realised that tigers, copperheads, and browns were actually different in other parts of the country and what was this broad-headed snake, or roughscaled python, or keelback.....you mean there’s more than diamond pythons in Australia? How long had this been going on for???

And so, that really never left me and I’m not the least bit interested in crossed lines and although I have to admit there’s some beautiful patterns out there, I’m not interested in jags or morphs or whatever. I know I’m in the minority but I do like the thought at least, of preserving locality lines for future generations to admire, and I do believe that there’ll always be those in the game who try to keep their lines pure. The hobby has bent to the will of what sells, because money talks and if the market wants morphs and jags, and that’s where the big money is, then that’s the way it has gone. That said, maybe the attention span of those who like bright and shiny things with new patterns, might fade and the purists can come back out and offer their reptiles to the market once again.


----------



## kernel_pan1c (Jun 12, 2020)

Sdaji said:


> It's funny that you'd say chooks are your area and then go on to describe yourself proudly doing with chickens what you condemn others doing in reptiles!!!



Hmm. I'm not sure I understand what my interest in protecting the genetic diversity of heritage breeds is the same as the idea of cross breeding everything and losing genetic diversity?
You're right that chickens are not the same as reptiles. For one thing they're domesticated which is why we're talking about breeds instead of species. Heritage breeds are not really hybrids because they can reproduce and have been line bread over hundreds of years in some cases. Those chicken breeds are really the definition of genetic diversity. The modern, genetically patented, commercial, hybrids are not the same as cross bred snakes but that is the alternative to the heritage breed chickens that I was talking about. Come to think about it, I don't think I ever saw the chickens and reptiles as having anything to do with each other really.... But still not clear how my interest in heritage chickens contradicts my interest in maintaining genetic diversity through non-domesticated wild types in reptiles. You'll need to clarify that one for me.



GBWhite said:


> ... So as you can see there are still some "pure" lines held in captivity but the ones I know of are owned by people who like to keep to themselves and don't really associate with anyone "new" to the hobby. I don't breed any of my critters these days and it's the same with most of my close friends so what happens to them when we are all gone is an open question but at this point in time and knowing their attitude toward the current crop of hobbyists I doubt very much that these reptiles or any of their offspring will make it to the open market.
> 
> As you suggest, conservation could be an argument to preserve "pure" blood lines, and it's a nice thought, however, I very much doubt that any of the Australian academic community or conservation authorities will ever rely upon private collections to acquire animals as stock to "save" any species identified as vulnerable, critically endangered or under threat of extinction.


Hi GBWhite,

That's really interesting. It sounds as though you have a really nice collection of animals. I guess that's the problem with being a new comer and talking about things above my pay grade  I'm glad to know about the disdain that some of the experts have for people new to this--I'll be sure to stay in my lane from now on. I can definitely see your point about the serious conservation bodies not being in the least interested in what amateurs are doing. Fair enough.
I definitely like the morphs as well. The first person I spoke to about buying snakes was actually Sdaji and I was interested in some of his spectacular looking animals. I've just discovered that I have a passion for the wild types as well I guess.



Sdaji said:


> You're really just pissing into the wind with this argument, believe me, I've spent many years analysing it to death.


Message received, loud and clear. Thanks.



Lurker said:


> That said, maybe the attention span of those who like bright and shiny things with new patterns, might fade and the purists can come back out and offer their reptiles to the market once again.


Hey Lurker. Here's to hoping.


----------



## Kate91 (Jun 12, 2020)

I'm very new to keeping reptiles, so with x breeds how do you know what temps etc to keep them at if both snakes require different? Or are these 2 breeds similar? 
Again I may sound silly but I'm wanting to learn


----------



## Herpetology (Jun 12, 2020)

nick_75 said:


> That is still one of my dream reptiles. Hopefully someone produces a clutch one day



Didnt someone on a older post mention a person was willing to pair their elchos, if someone took care of the eggs and babies?


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 13, 2020)

nick_75 said:


> I am fully aware that a there has been genetic tinkering going on for some time in the interest creating the next 'cool' morph for financial gain or bragging rights. A lot of the new people in the hobby probably don't care and don't know what it was like in the early days. When the hobby wasn't as popular and it was easy to trace lineages to ascertain purity. I believe that there is still a vast number of people in Australia, in the hobby, that care about purity. In my circle of friends for example no one has any morhps and animals are only bought from breeders that they trust and have been around a long time and know where their animals came from. I'm sure that there are many out there with the same view, some have responded above.
> [doublepost=1591948077,1591947908][/doublepost]
> That is still one of my dream reptiles. Hopefully someone produces a clutch one day.



I still love locality animals as much as ever, my favourite lines of what I work with today are still locality, but it's just not where the overwhelming majority of the hobby is now. It's morphs. That's just the reality. I find it difficult to imagine it being possible to have a reasonable number of friends in the herp scene without any of them owning a single morph, but if you're in that situation it's very cool and you're probably the only one. Your herp friends, if they have a reasonable number of other herp friends, will know someone with morphs.

I vividly remember a time when I had never seen a snake morph in the flesh. I remember the first morph that we'd recognise as a morph hitting the Australian hobby (albino Olives, first up for sale in 2002). I naively felt extremely resistant to the idea and had absurd hopes that unlike the Americans and Europeans, Australians would not embrace morphs! Haha! How ridiculously wrong I was. Amusingly, I wasn't alone, and it was about 5 more years before there was a critical mass of acceptance of morphs in Australia. I staunchly held hope until it was pointed out to me that the herp scene was clearly developing into a pet hobby rather than herpetology which it previously had been, and morphs would get the majority of keepers (a rapidly growing number) interested in working with captive lines rather than going out flipping rocks and wrecking habitat, etc. It was a good thing I changed my mind when I did because it wasn't much later that I fluked the first albinos of a new species of snake and was the fourth Australian to establish an albino snake in the hobby.

I sort of miss working with the Elchos. The thing about pure lines like that though, as with several other lines I decided to part with, was that there wasn't really anywhere to go with them. Elchos were notorious for being difficult to get feeding, but after a couple of generations of selecting the best feeders I had them producing clutches which mostly fed well. But, then, there wasn't really any room for progress. Great snakes, I loved them, but... what could I do? They weren't particularly popular at the time (and as soon as anyone bothers to breed a couple of clutches the market will be saturated again) and I couldn't develop them in any direction. I am not a fan of just having animals sitting around idle doing nothing, so a few years ago I sold the last of them, and while I enjoy seeing them in other collections I have no interest in keeping them again. That same outcome is fairly inevitable with most locality lines, and really, a lack of progress (or change of any sort) is the only goal which makes sense for them (personally, for reasons which aren't rational and are only sentimental, I still like to make pretty snakes from locality lines. It's silly, but hobbies don't need to make sense, right? Haha!).

Most of the time you won't be able to get the exact locality data. Like, even with Elcho Island (which is a fairly large island and might even have variation within it), I guarantee you won't get an exact locality for captive animals. Where on Elcho Island were they collected? New Guinea is an island and Chondros on it have been split into quite a number of taxa, with plenty of regional variation. Tasmania is an Island and the tigers there vary a lot. Heck, even looking at the topic of this thread, Diamonds, they vary significantly in different localitions in the Sydney region alone, so what's a locality?

Don't get me wrong, I really admire people with a love for locality animals and I share it. It's just that the reality is that the number and proportion of herpers who care about it is dropping, and that's not going to change.
[doublepost=1591970949][/doublepost]


Lurker said:


> Well, I like the idea of locality reptiles and I think it’s because they represent the diversity of the same basic species throughout Australia. I enjoyed seeing many different patterns of snake that were particular to a particular area of the country, when travelling years ago, and it still surprises me when I learn of the different types and subspecies of snakes that we have. As a boy growing up in the central tablelands of NSW and lifting sheets if bark and old tin to find snakes - which got me into a great deal of trouble from my parents who thought their young son was destined for a certain quick death from snakebite - I actually thought that all of the snakes I knew from my own, 8 year old personal experience, were common all over Australia, apart from the pictures of the GTP’s in old encyclopaedias that mesmerised me . So you can imagine how it was for me when I realised that tigers, copperheads, and browns were actually different in other parts of the country and what was this broad-headed snake, or roughscaled python, or keelback.....you mean there’s more than diamond pythons in Australia? How long had this been going on for???
> 
> And so, that really never left me and I’m not the least bit interested in crossed lines and although I have to admit there’s some beautiful patterns out there, I’m not interested in jags or morphs or whatever. I know I’m in the minority but I do like the thought at least, of preserving locality lines for future generations to admire, and I do believe that there’ll always be those in the game who try to keep their lines pure. The hobby has bent to the will of what sells, because money talks and if the market wants morphs and jags, and that’s where the big money is, then that’s the way it has gone. That said, maybe the attention span of those who like bright and shiny things with new patterns, might fade and the purists can come back out and offer their reptiles to the market once again.



Wild snakes will still exist in the wild, in greater numbers and diversity than in captivity. If you want to add to diversity, morphs are the way to do it! Wildtypes will always exist in the wild, morphs (for the most part) will only exist in captivity. Bright colourful snakes bring many benefits to the hobby. 8 year old boys like the ones you and I were will still exist, running around playing with snakes, falling in love with nature, etc.

Like it or not, morphs and hybrids are part of the future, and a bigger part of the future of captive herps than natural forms will be, especially with the most popular snakes. In fact, the morphs are what makes the most popular snakes popular. If the world's most popular snake (Ball Python, which for the record I absolutely loathe) only had one colour and pattern type, virtually no one would be keeping them. Same deal with the world's #2 snake. If Carpet Pythons all looked like Olive Pythons and Olives came in a range of colours and patterns, the numbers of Olives and Carpets being kept would be reversed.

Don't hold your breath waiting for people to stop liking bright, shiny and new things! Basic human nature will not change. Hobbyists who like wildtypes won't entirely disappear for as long as I'm alive, even if I'm the last one, but we will never again be the majority.


----------



## nick_75 (Jun 13, 2020)

Herptology said:


> Didnt someone on a older post mention a person was willing to pair their elchos, if someone took care of the eggs and babies?


That was my post, the current situation has curtailed the possibility of that happening now. The QLD border is still closed so I can't do the road trip to pick them up. Freight is not an option because he lives in far western Sydney, doesn't drive or own a car. The animals haven't been paired, this year is a bust. We'll try again next year.
[doublepost=1592018207,1592017168][/doublepost]


Sdaji said:


> I still love locality animals as much as ever, my favourite lines of what I work with today are still locality, but it's just not where the overwhelming majority of the hobby is now. It's morphs. That's just the reality. I find it difficult to imagine it being possible to have a reasonable number of friends in the herp scene without any of them owning a single morph, but if you're in that situation it's very cool and you're probably the only one. Your herp friends, if they have a reasonable number of other herp friends, will know someone with morphs.



They are all much older than me, they were in their 40's when I was getting started in the early - mid nineties. I bought both of my first snakes (both macs) from one of them. They don't use the internet much and just interact with each other. I do know one person that had a morph (albino darwin) for a few years, but he eventually sold it on.



Sdaji said:


> I sort of miss working with the Elchos. The thing about pure lines like that though, as with several other lines I decided to part with, was that there wasn't really anywhere to go with them. Elchos were notorious for being difficult to get feeding, but after a couple of generations of selecting the best feeders I had them producing clutches which mostly fed well. But, then, there wasn't really any room for progress. Great snakes, I loved them, but... what could I do? They weren't particularly popular at the time (and as soon as anyone bothers to breed a couple of clutches the market will be saturated again) and I couldn't develop them in any direction. I am not a fan of just having animals sitting around idle doing nothing, so a few years ago I sold the last of them, and while I enjoy seeing them in other collections I have no interest in keeping them again. That same outcome is fairly inevitable with most locality lines, and really, a lack of progress (or change of any sort) is the only goal which makes sense for them (personally, for reasons which aren't rational and are only sentimental, I still like to make pretty snakes from locality lines. It's silly, but hobbies don't need to make sense, right? Haha!).



Was there no thought of accentuating the darker appearance of the Elchos, say like the breeders that produced the 'Ebony' mac line? I have no idea if both are examples of increased melanin in those populations.
[doublepost=1592018661][/doublepost]


Sdaji said:


> herp scene was clearly developing into a pet hobby rather than herpetology which it previously had been


Yes, I became aware of that change first in the mid 2000s when someone I knew decided to get a licence and keep a snake. They applied online and got it in days. When I applied in nineties I was first directed to the QLD Herp Society. I spent time with various members who made sure that I was competent before I bought my first animal.


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 13, 2020)

nick_75 said:


> They are all much older than me, they were in their 40's when I was getting started in the early - mid nineties. I bought both of my first snakes (both macs) from one of them. They don't use the internet much and just interact with each other. I do know one person that had a morph (albino darwin) for a few years, but he eventually sold it on.



I guess you won't let me be your friend then, because then you'd have a friend with morphs! 



> Was there no thought of accentuating the darker appearance of the Elchos, say like the breeders that produced the 'Ebony' mac line? I have no idea if both are examples of increased melanin in those populations.



For all the talk, Elchos aren't really that dark. At the time I first got my Elchos, the friend who gave them to me was working on a line of locality pure Katherine Children's which was almost the same in appearance. I actually used his line to outcross to an unusual Katherine Children's Python I had (mine was lighter) which I worked on for about 20 years, and I suppose I actually still work on that line because we used it to outcross some of the morphs we work on now, including some of the marbles an T+, although I haven't kept any pure animals from that Katherine line, which was the first locality line I ever started working with. Anyway, not being the darkest Children's around (despite what some people say), they didn't seem a good candidate for that line breeding project, especially considering the fact that without the ability to introduce new blood (unless someone goes back to Elcho Island for some more animals), you're going to quickly hit a selection wall and be unable to make further progress. I actually was interested to see how patternless I could get my own Elcho line, I had one which was as good as any patternless Elcho I've ever seen (I remember posting pictures on this forum of her laying eggs, maybe 15 years ago), but when I got some true patternless it just seemed pointless as I would never get them anywhere near as good as the true patternless, and I was taking them further away from their natural appearance... so... what was I doing? That eventually inspired me to sell them. I think I sold my last trio about 3 years ago.



> Yes, I became aware of that change first in the mid 2000s when someone I knew decided to get a licence and keep a snake. They applied online and got it in days. When I applied in nineties I was first directed to the QLD Herp Society. I spent time with various members who made sure that I was competent before I bought my first animal.



Haha, when I was a teenager, 15 or 16 years old, I was given a license to keep elapids without doing anything other than filling out the form and posting in a money order. I'd never even used the internet at the time and nothing to do with the department was online. No parental permission, courses didn't even exist back then, it was great! We didn't have more bites then than now, and I think courses actually make people more likely to be bitten, by giving people false senses of security and ability.

I have a friend with a pair of Elchos, (he actually got them from someone who originally got his Elchos from me, and I'm pretty sure the ones I sold him were from that female I mentioned above, though I'm not sure how many generations went by in that intermediate person's care). I'll contact him now and see if he's interested in pairing them up.


----------



## nick_75 (Jun 13, 2020)

Sdaji said:


> I guess you won't let me be your friend then, because then you'd have a friend with morphs!


I'm not that against morphs, I didn't disown my friend that got the albino darwin. It was a very nice looking animal, I just prefer the wild types. My interest in the wild types comes from the wonder of seeing the natural adaptation of an organism over time to best suit survival in an environment. And yes, line breeding to enhance the desired characteristics is the same process (vastly compressed) but is not the result of of natural change for survival.

If you take the definition of what a morph is, all locality animals that differ from the main population are morphs. I guess that my interest in Elchos means that I am into morphs after all. As a distinction I'll say that I'm into natural morphs. Right, who's got an albino darwin for sale (no pms please).



Sdaji said:


> I have a friend with a pair of Elchos, (he actually got them from someone who originally got his Elchos from me, and I'm pretty sure the ones I sold him were from that female I mentioned above, though I'm not sure how many generations went by in that intermediate person's care). I'll contact him now and see if he's interested in pairing them up



That would be much appreciated.


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 13, 2020)

nick_75 said:


> I'm not that against morphs, I didn't disown my friend that got the albino darwin. It was a very nice looking animal, I just prefer the wild types. My interest in the wild types comes from the wonder of seeing the natural adaptation of an organism over time to best suit survival in an environment. And yes, line breeding to enhance the desired characteristics is the same process (vastly compressed) but is not the result of of natural change for survival.
> 
> If you take the definition of what a morph is, all locality animals that differ from the main population are morphs. I guess that my interest in Elchos means that I am into morphs after all. As a distinction I'll say that I'm into natural morphs. Right, who's got an albino darwin for sale (no pms please).



I was just joking, you said none of your friends have any morphs (other than people who only have 2-5 snakes I can scarcely think of anyone who keeps snakes without having morphs).

As I was reading this, I thought 'why suggest making Elchos darker if the appeal is seeing them as nature intended?'. You literally suggested creating a line bred morph, deviating from nature. I had similar thoughts 15-20 years ago. I wanted pure locality animals, but I still wanted the best looking ones, the brightest colour, boldest pattern, etc, and yet I balked at albinos. At some point I realised it made no sense other than sentimentality, and that's not something you can legitimately expect anyone else to care about.



> That would be much appreciated.



No worries. No promises, I can't be sure what he'll do, but keep in mind that if he does it, he'll be your friend and so will I and we both have morphs!!!


----------



## kernel_pan1c (Jun 13, 2020)

Sdaji said:


> As I was reading this, I thought 'why suggest making Elchos darker if the appeal is seeing them as nature intended?'. You literally suggested creating a line bred morph, deviating from nature. I had similar thoughts 15-20 years ago. I wanted pure locality animals, but I still wanted the best looking ones, the brightest colour, boldest pattern, etc, and yet I balked at albinos. At some point I realised it made no sense other than sentimentality, and that's not something you can legitimately expect anyone else to care about.


Turns out, if you ever make the mistake of expressing any interest in wild types you are forbidden from ever appreciating a morph...  Did I miss something? Are these somehow two mutually exclusive areas of interest? It feels as though expressing an interest, or god forbid a preference, for wild types is much the same as just coming out and saying "yeah, I admit it, I'm a sentimental, ignorant, moron"


----------



## Sdaji (Jun 13, 2020)

kernel_pan1c said:


> Turns out, if you ever make the mistake of expressing any interest in wild types you are forbidden from ever appreciating a morph...  Did I miss something? Are these somehow two mutually exclusive areas of interest? It feels as though expressing an interest, or god forbid a preference, for wild types is much the same as just coming out and saying "yeah, I admit it, I'm a sentimental, ignorant, moron"



A little melodramatic there! Haha!

Yes, you did miss something. No one said that having an interest in wildtypes is mutually exclusive with appreciating morphs, I'm a great example of someone who loves both, but maintaining nature and changing nature are mutually exclusive in the same thing. You can do both simultaneously, but only if they're done separately. I'm not against either and I love both, although I probably wouldn't bother preserving something in its natural form, I'd at least want the best feeder, the best character, etc.

Having a preference for wild types (or indeed morphs, or both) is an emotional thing, but not ignorant or moronic. There's no rational reason for wanting any particular colour or pattern. They won't cure cancer or build you a house or anything useful, we have preferences and perceptions of beauty for our own idiosyncratic reasons. There's nothing objectively right or wrong about having either preference or both or neither.


----------



## nick_75 (Jun 25, 2020)

Kate91 said:


> I'm very new to keeping reptiles, so with x breeds how do you know what temps etc to keep them at if both snakes require different? Or are these 2 breeds similar?
> Again I may sound silly but I'm wanting to learn


Hi Kate,

That can be hard to determine with crosses and would have to be monitored and adjusted as necessary. Also the same case with humidity. In this case although both subspecies ranges are close geographically, temperatures are different.
In captivity Diamonds are kept at lower temperatures than Murray Darlings.

In some cases where natural intergradation occurs (Coastal carpets and Diamonds for example), you could look at the natural environment for clues. But in this case both subspecies are separated by the Great Dividing Range with no natural intergrades.

Regards,
Nick


----------

