Immorality of morphs/selective breeding

[kathylove]

I think it is PARTIALLY due to sunlight, because I have seen captive offspring of corns, gators, basilisk lizards, and other species that seem much brighter, with less melanin, than their wild parents. And humans also produce melanin as a result of sun exposure, so it seems reasonable.

BUT - I also noted that the first couple of generations of captive okeetees seemed to show much more melanin, both in general "dirty wash", and in dark, longitudinal striping than subsequent generations. Not surprising, since I kept back for breeding the animals most lacking in those traits.

So I suspect it is a combination of lack of sunlight exposure and selective breeding.

 

[Dreamsnake]

Why is it that so many new keepers are so ready to question the methods of those with experience? One thread is on the benefits of co-habing so corns can have friends, one thread insists that racks and tubs are evil, and now morphs are under the harsh spotlight of critique. Many of us want to see what is new in the breeding world, or understand the complexities of genetics and pigmentation. I want to breed pink and purple snakes. Why? Because the genes are out there and I can. I intend on getting a few snakes and starting a breeding line, adding fresh blood as I progress.

As for genetic variation...
My first corn was a normal. He seemed to suffer from some sort of neurological disorder, then kinked up and died in my hand. While my snow is the healthiest snake I've ever owned. I know nothing of the history of both snakes, but it seems that the snow is genetically superior.

 

[lilwing89]

Why is it that so many new keepers are so ready to question the methods of those with experience? One thread is on the benefits of co-habing so corns can have friends, one thread insists that racks and tubs are evil, and now morphs are under the harsh spotlight of critique.

Why are you criticizing me for asking a question?

Cohabing so corns can have friends? Come on, that sounds like an extremely childish topic. Racks and tubs are evil? Well, what about in a sewer/under a dirty old house? My question is on a completely different level and I think lumping it together with the other silly questions and disregarding it is a little close-minded...

Okay, I did expect some breeders to [understandably] get a little defensive on this topic. But please give me some credit. I did admit that I do not have a lot of personal experience with breeding and I'm not being pretentious... I did look up quite a bit of information before I bothered to post this. I'm not criticizing any methods of breeding or having an unnatural morph - I simply raised a question of debate; a topic of controversy and my personal opinion. What is wrong about having ethical concerns about breeding?

Many of us want to see what is new in the breeding world, or understand the complexities of genetics and pigmentation. I want to breed pink and purple snakes. Why? Because the genes are out there and I can. I intend on getting a few snakes and starting a breeding line, adding fresh blood as I progress.

This is a perfectly fine curiosity to harvest and a perfectly fine goal to have. No criticisms on that here.

Let me put my question into simpler, hypothetical terms:

(replace "purple/pink" with morphs/patterns you find desirable)

Are purple/pink snakes worth more than non-pink/non-purple snakes?

If yes, then is [intentionally] killing non-pink/non-purple snakes in the process of breeding morally justified through acquiring purple/pink genes that make it possible to have purple/pink snakes?

My opinion is:

No, pink/purple snakes are not worth more than non-pink/non-purple snakes. (I do not expect anyone to agree with that.)

And if they were, killing non-pink/non-purple snakes would not be justified even if pink/purple snakes would somehow result from that. That's fairly reasonable thinking, isn't it? I'd like to imagine everybody here is on the same page, at least.

Some of the herpetologists that have responded have provided some great insight (thanks!), that their breeding methods have resulted in generally healthy clutches. Furthermore, some posters have added that they find there is an amount of research on genetics so insignificant on inbreeding that it is really ambiguous and there are a lot of uncertainties in determining what exactly causes death in [inbred] neonates, when natural death or environmental circumstances may be more likely.

But suppose that certain methods did put your clutches at a significant risk? Would you disregard that risk and continue those methods, with the mentality that everything eventually dies and the snakes wouldn't survive in nature anyway in order to justify your morality behind that?

I know that nobody to think about these sorts of things... but I am just asking a question that begs an honest answer!

As for genetic variation...
My first corn was a normal. He seemed to suffer from some sort of neurological disorder, then kinked up and died in my hand. While my snow is the healthiest snake I've ever owned. I know nothing of the history of both snakes, but it seems that the snow is genetically superior.

I'll end this post with some positive insight. Breeders DO produce a lot of healthy snakes, whether they are inbred or not, and that's a good thing! In fact, that's all I really care about - as long as inbreeding doesn't put a clutch in significant risk of death/deformity, I am not bothered by it.

 

[Dreamsnake]

I've tried posting a few time, but the connection dropped before I got a chance to submit. So here I go again...

I found it unusual to read a thread about the problems of line breeding from the owner of an Okeetee, one of the highest line bred morphs that exist.

I can understand how someone who enjoys the personality aspect of a pet more then the look of the pet, but the more unusual colors and rare morphs are sought after by collectors. Supply and demand determines the price as well. Someday I'd like a tessera, this day is nowhere in the near future.

Why would anyone go through the stress of carrying for a clutch of eggs only to kill the healthy normals that are produced? The objective of a line breeding is to match the hets and create the double morphs. The normals are the carriers of these hets while the single morphs may have a 66% or 50% chance of packing the exotic pigment. I'm not purchasing any normal snakes for this reason.

Anytime you breed an animal there is a risk something horrible will go wrong. Many times females don't make it, or eggs are bad, babies die, there is always a risk. It is part of nature.

 

[rexracer]

It seems to me that corn breeding is some of the "best" and most humane out there. Corns are bred for color and patterns. All the breeders I've seen here are very careful that their corns are healthy, and if they ever breed unhealthy animals, they don't continue those lines.
On the other hand, look at the canine monstrosities that have been bred in the last 100 years. All of the tiny "pure" breeds, along with any breed with a smashed in face, and even many larger breeds have major health problems caused by selective breeding. Some of those breeds are miserable their whole lives due to chronic health problems.
When it comes to selective breeding of pets, I think corn breeders are the cream of the crop, and their animals are among the healthiest.
I would like to see corns bred for something besides color... anyone want to work on creating a 7-8 foot long corn for me??

 

[SnakeAround]

IMO it is ok to produce any clutch that won't put the female at a larger risk to die or suffer from laying then an average clutch (to your best knowledge). Hatchlings that suffer from birth defects should be humanely euthanized. The cause of the extra risk does not matter to me.

I think pairing up animals though that are likely to produce a clutch with a high mortality rate, is at least debatable morally. Why have a female go through the heavy burden of laying a normal sized clutch while most emrnyo's/hatchlings are not going to make it anyway? The same goes for culling healthy normals because they are too hard to sell, I know it is done. To me producing animals just to kill them when the make it through the developing and birthing process because you don't 'need' them and can't make money on them, is beyond morally acceptable.

 

[smallet]

It should be pointed out that in nature with snakes in breeding naturally occurs. Maybe not for mulitple generations. But it does occur. So having it happen in CB's is not an act against nature. Also it should be pointed out (I believe it is Kathy's book) that CB's should never be released into nature, for the reasons that human interference has changed the snake. There are a host of other reasons of course. So if you are going to breed an animal in captivity it should be done for a purpose, if it cannot be released back to the wild to propogate the species. Shouldn't that purpose be to have the snake desirable? I do understand we don't want to go to lengths that put the animals in genetic peril. And of course the side benefit of this is that by making them more desirable it hopefully takes the pressure of the wild population to be left alone and do as Mother Nature intended.
And as breeders have invested LARGE amounts of time, energy and funds in their collections, the vast majority are going to do whatever it takes to keep health and genetics on their priority list.
I can't say that is a guarantee as seen in the cat and dog world. The main difference I see there though is that dogs and cats were more mainstream. And larger numbers were far more desired than in the snake world. And what happened there was not always breeders inbreeding that caused issues as it was puppy and cat mills taking the easy route to recreate a desired animal for a fast buck.

 

[Dreamsnake]

I agree it is morally wrong to produce a large quantity of critters with the intention of profit. Based on the I've information I've gathered on this site we're not among this profit driven crowd. We are curious about genetics, captive propagation, and husbandry. Many of us keepers have no intention to breed and only want a healthy variety of different snakes. I'd just like to be a part of this community and do the best for my serpents.

 

[kathylove]

"I agree it is morally wrong to produce a large quantity of critters with the intention of profit..."

I don't think most people would agree with this (including me). Unless you are vegan, you are contributing to a system that requires a large quantity of critters to be produced and sold for profit (unless you raise all of your own meat, dairy, and eggs).

Why are snakes morally different than chickens or cows?

 

[Rich Z]

"I agree it is morally wrong to produce a large quantity of critters with the intention of profit..."

I don't think most people would agree with this (including me). Unless you are vegan, you are contributing to a system that requires a large quantity of critters to be produced and sold for profit (unless you raise all of your own meat, dairy, and eggs).

Why are snakes morally different than chickens or cows?

I'll take that a step further, if you don't mind. Why is "profit" for ANY endeavor undertaken "morally wrong"?

 

[Dreamsnake]

I agree it is morally wrong to produce a large quantity of critters with the intention of profit.

Sorry, I phrased that wrong. I meant to include "sub-quality" before critters. No offence intended to the large scale breeders. I love you guys, without you this hobby wouldn't be as diverse as it is.