Classic forms.

[thesilverbeast]

What is your genetics background to be making such claims about inbreeding? And before you start, yes. I have a genetics background at a University level. Are you just personifying snakes because you can't understand that animals are all different? Most mammals are susceptible to negative effects from inbreeding. Snakes are not. Is it that hard to understand?

Plus you're talking about classic forms, but every python, unless specifically line bred (I.E INBRED!!) to be genetically pure to a locale will be a mix of captive populations.. and that would make them... yep... MORPHS! Classic morph is still a morph if its not a genetically pure locale.


You haven't made much sense and I don't know why you keep rearing your head in such a naive way that ends in you being banned.



Can't we just calm down and let everyone like what everyone likes? I may not like the car you drive, you may not like what I drive. But we don't need to argue about each others choices when we're not hurting each other.

 

[RedFox]

One of my womas has being line bred. He doesn't seem to have any issues and has the correct amount of toes, fingers and heads. He also came from quite a large clutch. So no fertility or incubation issues.

As for morph breeding, how does it destroy the hobby? Why do you think it should be banned? Our captive animals have absolutely no conservational value. Most 'wild type' as already said come from mixed localities, and so wouldn't actually breed in the wild.

For morph breeding to be banned would mean to basically start the hobby again (well in the eastern states anyhow), as it can be difficult to trace back our captive animals to their wild caught ancestors. Even those that have a locality attached to them may not necessarily mean they are 100% line breed from that locality (eg wheat belt Stimson, RHD woma) or the 'locality' attached to them may be too broad (eg. QLD bhp).

At the end of the day what people do with their animals has no effect on what I do with mine or our native populations.

 

[Bushman]

OK guys, chill out! There's no need for this discussion to get personal.
Stay on topic from now on please.

 

[Ramy]

At the risk of turning this into a serious discussion, this does provoke a few thoughts.

First, I'd like to state that breeding reptiles is rarely going to be profitable. Once you've paid the food and power bills, most people break even.

I've felt for a little while now that there is an increasing number of people who don't understand genetics and morphs have been buying "70% het" or "het for hypo" or whatever other het varieties of pythons that become available, but have little interest in breeding. Some people only want one python, but still say "oh, i've got a 70% het so-and-so" when actually they've got a classic that might throw a couple different babies IF they ever get a partner for it. It don't mind people who're into morphs, I personally prefer classics (apples, oranges...). I just think it's a little bit silly when people who just want a bredli decide to get a het for hypo bredli (Also, I've seen a lot of "hypo" bredli's who look classic).

Also, I noticed a thread a while ago from a guy talking a hypothetical about breeding diamonds with a single albino carpet and hoping that after years of breeding cross-bred diamonds, to get a close-to-pure diamond who's carrying an albino gene... When they're the same species, and the variations are only about locality and colour/pattern then surely if you want an albino morelia spilota you should just get the morelia spilota that's available in albino. It has neither the carpet nor the diamond pattern anymore because ITS ALBINO. Sometimes it feels like people are trying too hard. If a morph happens, then- cool- try to keep it around. Or if you like it, pay extra for an albino or for a breeding project or whatever you're into. But why do you need to go so far out of your way to find a new morph?

Ok... so that turned into a bit of a rant... I'll stop now.

 

[Troy K.]

I expected the usual lot to jump in and harshly defend such money hungry, abusive actions. There are plenty of reasons not to inbreed Reptiles such as: Doubles up on faults and weaknesses. Progressive loss of immune response. Increased reproductive failures resulting in fewer offspring. Emphasis on appearance means accidental loss of "good" genes for other attributes and genetically impoverished individuals. The pros are merely: They look pretty and they make lots of money. Only those that have lost most of their respect for Reptiles and desire profit and a name for themselves do this. But I suppose that is all it takes most people to convince them. Close relations produce almost certain defects and other issues in hatchlings. When inbred close relations such as siblings or offspring and mother will produce infertile eggs. Some embryos will die during incubation or during hatching and roughly half are likely to hatch at all. But again when there is money to be made from the few that survive then the others are acceptable losses to some. I merely have superior morals and there is no shame in that. The simple fact that health risks are increased would turn any true reptile enthusiast off inbreeding. Flame away.

I really think someone needs to read a few books and try and get half a clue about what they are talking about before putting up any more B/S info that simply isn't true. This forum is to help out the new comers to the hobby and when crap like this is posted as facts, well it just shows how much you really don't know.

 

[RedFox]

A lot of morphs are naturally occurring anyway. The majority of our albinos come for albino wild caught animals. Striped coastals are common in the wild and yet they are counted as a morph. There was a thread on here not that long ago about the wild caught pied childreni that was released. Etc, etc.

 

[andynic07]

I expected the usual lot to jump in and harshly defend such money hungry, abusive actions. There are plenty of reasons not to inbreed Reptiles such as: Doubles up on faults and weaknesses. Progressive loss of immune response. Increased reproductive failures resulting in fewer offspring. Emphasis on appearance means accidental loss of "good" genes for other attributes and genetically impoverished individuals. The pros are merely: They look pretty and they make lots of money. Only those that have lost most of their respect for Reptiles and desire profit and a name for themselves do this. But I suppose that is all it takes most people to convince them. Close relations produce almost certain defects and other issues in hatchlings. When inbred close relations such as siblings or offspring and mother will produce infertile eggs. Some embryos will die during incubation or during hatching and roughly half are likely to hatch at all. But again when there is money to be made from the few that survive then the others are acceptable losses to some. I merely have superior morals and there is no shame in that. The simple fact that health risks are increased would turn any true reptile enthusiast off inbreeding. Flame away.

Just to pick up on one point you have made here about inbreeding doubling up on one fault, this can happen in unrelated breeding as well. Two unrelated snakes can have the same genetic deficiency causing all of the offspring to be guaranteed they carry the deficiency. What happens in the wild is usually this deficiency will decrease the chances that the snake lives and therefore will not pass the gene on but in captivity we keep them alive and pass the gene on to the next generation. That is all the time I wish to spend on showing you that a lot of your points are flawed as I really don't think you listen to what people have to say.

 

[B_STATS]

Having superior morals does not stop me from defending myself. And Snowman, I have simply started deleting your offensive private messages so don't expect me to bite any more. As for the topic. I've stated my ten cents. The points I made are valid and taken from other keepers who are also against it. I'll be over here appreciating reptiles properly rather than turning them into a designer hobby. I'm sure the breeders that do it will defend their business to the bitter end by insulting and trying to discredit me though. Predictable.

 

[andynic07]

Back on topic now, I love a nice pattern "classic form" but am also blown away from some of the designer snakes coming out. I also know that both classic and morphs can trow an ugly snake as well that I would not buy.

 

[champagne]

Having superior morals does not stop me from defending myself. And Snowman, I have simply started deleting your offensive private messages so don't expect me to bite any more. As for the topic. I've stated my ten cents. The points I made are valid and taken from other keepers who are also against it. I'll be over here appreciating reptiles properly rather than turning them into a designer hobby. I'm sure the breeders that do it will defend their business to the bitter end by insulting and trying to discredit me though. Predictable.

Can you show me one paper on how line breeding reptiles is a problem? I'm afraid the information you have been given on the matter is very wrong, Reptiles are not like mammals and don't have the same issues when line bred correctly.

 

[Ramy]

I would argue that plenty of people who breed morphs breed unrelated pairs. That plenty of people who buy classics buy a pair from one breeder. That just because you're breeding a morph doesn't mean you're in-breeding.

Also, the "doubling up on a fault" is flawed logic. Yea, sure, if two siblings are both carrying a recessive flaw, then it'll become more common in their offspring should you choose to breed them. But by the same token, hatchlings in captivity have a higher survival rate than in the wild. Which means we're increasing the prevalance of certain flaws by force-feeding difficult hatchies. I saw one reptile store who were offerring childreniis specifically bred from docile parents to try to make a good first-time python who's less likely to get snappy. By your arguement, that's specifically breeding pythons for a fault. Let's face it, if those hatchlings got released into the wild they've got nearly no chance of surviving (even if you ignore the loss of immune response from generations of living in tanks).

If you're concerned that one day we'll lose the natural forms, then I'd be far more concerned by mongrel carpets bred by people who're inexperienced and in it for curiosity's sake (and then get sold by said people as one or other cause mongrels don't sell) than by the people who've got organised breeding programs and keep track of ancestry in order to breed morphs efficiently.

 

[thesilverbeast]

I'll be over here appreciating reptiles properly rather than turning them into a designer hobby. I'm sure the breeders that do it will defend their business to the bitter end by insulting and trying to discredit me though. Predictable.

My favourite snake is a "classic". I own first gen (i.e not inbred) captives from a locale specific population. I also have had morphs. If theres anyone who's right down the middle its likely me. The only difference is that I have a university level education in topics covered in this thread and I'm not stuck trying to personify reptiles before understanding the science behind their genetics and conservational value in the hobby.

I also haven't started any name calling or anything like that so don't start that on me. You think you're making valid comments but your opinion is naive and you need to do more research on both sides before making such highly strung conclusions.

 

[saintanger]

no one can ever discuss morphs and interbreeding with out people getting personal about it. come on we are adult, i think.

unless you are breeding specific localities then its not technically pure bred. and not many keepers breed specific localities as they are hard to find.
all my reptiles are so called pure bred but i doubt many are actually from the one locality.

these days you buy a diamond for example and not many people even know the locality and breed it to another diamond and they are from 2 different localities but they are still 'pure' diamonds.

if people wanna interbreed or breed with a sub species thats their choice, its not my snake so not my problem, i know people who do it just for the money and some do it to improve the look or keep a certain trait.

each to their own

 

[champagne]

They are all pet snakes with no conservation value at all, so what is the big deal? what is the difference between a jungle and coastal? they cant be split by dna testing so the only difference is colour, pattern and size. so if you have a pure coastal in one hand and a 87.5% coastal 12.5% jungle that looks like a coastal in the other, what is the difference? Im not having a go at you nor do I want to start a fight, asking a serious question.

 

[Troy K.]

The points I made are valid and taken from other keepers who are also against it.

Just because you and some of your friends don't agree with something does not make it wrong.

 

[Ramy]

They are all pet snakes with no conservation value at all, so what is the big deal? what is the difference between a jungle and coastal? they cant be split by dna testing so the only difference is colour, pattern and size. so if you have a pure coastal in one hand and a 87.5% coastal 12.5% jungle that looks like a coastal in the other, what is the difference? Im not having a go at you nor do I want to start a fight, asking a serious question.

I'm not sure if that's targetted at me, but I am the one who mentioned mongrel carpets. My issue with mongrel carpets is more about the people who sell a python as one sub-species when really it's another, or a cross, or whatever. It creates a lot of mis-information, especially for new herpers. You see it all over, people who buy a "bredli" and everyone on the forum says "coastal", you buy 2 turtles "a sawshell, and a ELN" and yet they both look the same. I don't know if it's wild-catching, or 3rd-hand-mis-information or what... but it happens enough.

My opinion is that we're unlikely to lose "classic" forms, because there's always someone who's interested in keeping them. For every breeder with morphs, there's probably another breeding locality specific forms and another classics. There are a few locality specific lines out there, but there is also a lot of variety even within a given area in the wild. There is no sure way of finding a "pure diamond" or a "pure darwin carpet" or whatever within captive collections. Unless you trust the breeder about the animal's origins and ancestry, you only know what it looks like. (I have seen some photos of mongrel carpets, especially jungle or bredli crosses, that just look dirty... just like I've seen some incredibly ugly things done with green tree pythons in america. Most of the time when you see someone's new python it just looks like a python and there's nothing unusual about it).

I think when you happen apon a naturally occuring morph, there's no harm it trying to keep it around.

 

[caliherp]

just like I've seen some incredibly ugly things done with green tree pythons in america.

Care to share any pictures?

 

[B_STATS]

A lot of you don't get it. There are first time and amateur breeders all over the place right now getting ready to inbreed any unusual coloured animals with their parents to get one of these 'pretties' everyone goes on about all the time. The image being planted is that basic forms are worthless and if you want to be a successful breeder you must try for morphs. It's already getting out of hand. Just read through internet forums and you'll at least start supporting that a specially earned license should be required to breed any reptile. Just look at what the other countries are doing to our wildlife when they get their hands on them. The future for reptile keeping looks sad. Never mind what they do in the wild. Look at what Humans are doing to them in captivity. Do you want Reptiles to become like mere dogs?

 

[MathewB]

So if a 2nd generation animal bred with a 1st generation animal and the subsequent offspring was 'funny lookin' then how do isolated populations of reptiles exist? By your logic they wouldn't and so any reptiles on islands would be disabled?

 

[andynic07]

A lot of you don't get it. There are first time and amateur breeders all over the place right now getting ready to inbreed any unusual coloured animals with their parents to get one of these 'pretties' everyone goes on about all the time. The image being planted is that basic forms are worthless and if you want to be a successful breeder you must try for morphs. It's already getting out of hand. Just read through internet forums and you'll at least start supporting that a specially earned license should be required to breed any reptile. Just look at what the other countries are doing to our wildlife when they get their hands on them. The future for reptile keeping looks sad. Never mind what they do in the wild. Look at what Humans are doing to them in captivity. Do you want Reptiles to become like mere dogs?

I agree that there a lot of amateur breeders out there trying to get lucky with mixing this with that and probably don't know what they are doing but I think that is due to the popularity in the hobby more than designer snakes. I am sure a lot of these amateur breeders will very quickly find out that there is not a lot of money in breeding snakes and there is a lot more thought to designer snakes and breeding programs than throwing together two snakes for one season.