Non-feeders to breeders?

[psychoprimate84]

I know some people do not try the "lizard scenting" trick. I don't view snakes only wanting to eat lizards at first really a problem eater because in their natural habitat, you find them everywhere. Refusing to eat anything no matter what you scent it is a problem though.

 

[vetusvates]

I just had this peculiar frisson that made me think in a deja vu manner of history and the mass extermination/culling of the not so pretty ones, or the "contextual others"....to preserve the prettiness and desirability of the perceived/contextual "better" ones.
All culminating in the Nuremberg Trials.

 

[Drewby07]

Eloquently put, Eric....

 

[TripleMoonsExotic]

I'd realy like to see evidence of the $200, $300, $500 plus non-feeders that have been culled by breeders that "don't sell/breed " nonfeeders as well.

I've spoken before about culling almost an entire clutch of Lavender Motleys (back when they were in the $250-350 range) because of kinking (Drew actually mentioned it in this thread). I would have done the same thing if they had been non-feeders (in fact I did cull a Lavender Motley in '08 season for being a non-feeder). I'll be producing morph ball pythons this year ($200-500 range), I'll do the same thing with them. It all depends on a breeders personal ethics.

 

[ForkedTung]

I've spoken before about culling almost an entire clutch of Lavender Motleys (back when they were in the $250-350 range) because of kinking (Drew actually mentioned it in this thread). I would have done the same thing if they had been non-feeders (in fact I did cull a Lavender Motley in '08 season for being a non-feeder). I'll be producing morph ball pythons this year ($200-500 range), I'll do the same thing with them. It all depends on a breeders personal ethics.

Kinking is a deformity with very little, if any, room for rehabilitation and is visually obvious as well as unappealing. Have you retired both parents from any and all breeding, considering the thinking that obviously both must have the kinking gene and therefore their offspring, although not showing it would would likely carry it as well? What is your definition of non-feeders? Steph, I see you breed Spider Ball Pythons ( I also had one) now there is one animal that is absolutely famous for genetic neurological problems (stargazing, spinning to the point of almost incapacitation) some consider that every one, as well as their morphs are affected to one degree or another and there are many breeders that won't touch them for that very reason, as well as the Caramels Albinos.

 

[TripleMoonsExotic]

Kinking is a deformity with very little, if any, room for rehabilitation and is visually obvious as well as unappealing. Have you retired both parents from any and all breeding, considering the thinking that obviously both must have the kinking gene and therefore their offspring, although not showing it would would likely carry it as well?

Kinking is unappealing, but so is a non-feeder, IMO.

Certainly did retire them after two consistent seasons of producing a varied amount of kinked offspring!

What is your definition of non-feeders?

A snake that would require force feeding or "assist" feeding (as some like to sugar-coat it) to get to eat. I would identify a snake that needs started with one of the scenting tricks (lizard, toad, tuna, etc) as a difficult starter...But certainly not a non-feeder. I would not sell a snake that needed scenting tricks until it is feeding consistently on non-scented food items.

Steph, I see you breed Spider Ball Pythons ( I also had one) now there is one animal that is absolutely famous for genetic neurological problems (stargazing, spinning to the point of almost incapacitation) some consider that every one, as well as their morphs are affected to one degree or another and there are many breeders that won't touch them for that very reason, as well as the Caramels Albinos.

If my Spiders showed any signs of spinning, I would not breed them. As it stands now, my male that is being bred this year does not show any signs of any type of spinning (I've closely monitored him and tried everything I can think of to get him "excited" enough to show even a little bit of a spin). That of course doesn't mean he won't develop it later in life or produce offspring that spin. No one has any idea why some Spiders spin nor has their been a consistent method to it. Some spin from hatchling, some spin when they reach adulthood...Some have severe spinning, some just have small "tremors." It's a big who-the-heck-knows right now.

As far as the Caramel Albinos...IMO, the kinking in them is so common and so bad because greedy people are breeding the kinked animals instead of culling. Their is a BP breeder not too far from me that was breeding a kinked Caramel male and showed people.

 

[ghosthousecorns]

I've culled some really nice ones that I wish had eaten. I wouldn't want to sell one that was a non feeder no matter how valuable it was as far as rare genes or anything. This year I only got two hypo mots, and I ended up culling both. Not that those are scarce, but I would have done it even if they were hypo cinders... It really sucked but I felt it was the best thing to do.
I have on ocassion given away "runt" snakes (not non feeders, just runts) to people, and that's ok, but I have had people ask if I will give them non feeders to work with. I feel it is in the best interest of everyone however to cull these. First off, there is no guarantee that snake will never be bred even if the person you give/sell it to promises it will just be a pet. People can lose interest or end up selling their collections for other reasons, and then who knows what it will be bred to down the line (this is similar to the issues I have with hybrids ) And secondly, it is hard enough to sell snakes, why should I just give them away? So even though there are wonder workers out there who seem to have a talent to get the difficult ones started, I feel saving one snake to the possible detriment of all the future generations just isn't worth it.
This being said, Kyle makes a couple of good points - people have different definitions of what makes a snake a non eater. I have a high success rate with getting mine to eat, but I do a lot of tease feeding and if a snake refuses a couple of meals I keep working with it if it has eaten before. I try live, frozen, brained, don't do the lizards much anymore but have tried scenting too. And there are many breeders who would have culled some of the snakes I eventually get to eat. I have seen quite a few folks who have a "Three strikes and you're out" philosophy and I am a bit less strict than this about it. If nothing works and the snake gets to looking thin then I cull. I also give them some leeway with taking that first meal, they hatch with their first "yolk meal" already in their bellies and it often takes a while for them to get hungry.
I also agree with there are probably many factors completely unrelated to genetics - like incubation temps and environment that come into play. I've had hatchlings refuse to eat while housed in a glass tank that eat fine if they are in an opaque enclosure. Those who cohab hatchlings can also have poor eaters. Even something like the light being on in a room can make a difference.

 

[vetusvates]

Jen and TME, thank you very much for taking the time and effort to go to lengths to answer questions (Kyle's) I'm not even versed enough to ask. For a hobbyist like me it is always interesting, mesmerizing, and a pleasure to watch the discourse of the big-timers/old-timers. I say this sincerely and unreservedly.
( I have to keep a little notepad of stuff to google. )

 

[Kerri]

ForkedTung, in post #17 you stated, "I don't knowingly breed any animals known to be non-feeders." Okay....so I misunderstood the exact meaning of this statment, but you didn't really specify why you don't breed animals known to be non-feeders until post #20. I suppose the content of my phone calls to a few other breeders made me "jump the gun" and presume you meant that you would not breed known non- feeders. You also stated in post #20, "I never said I wouldn't breed a snake I knew to be a non-feeder." Am I right in assuming that this statement also implies that you would breed non-feeders? If so, I think that is great. I like a person who will stand behind what they believe in. I respect that so much that I would be willing to ship you a few non-feeders (I will even get them eating normally), so you can prove that breeding and selling non-feeders is not a "possible detriment of all the future generations."(GHC) Or maybe it is....there is only one way to find out. I am sure that everyone TRULY concerned about future corn snake generations would assist you in any way they could, as long as they believe you to be a credible breeder and person. P.S. I really hope I don't have any non-feeders to send.

 

[ForkedTung]

ForkedTung, in post #17 you stated, "I don't knowingly breed any animals known to be non-feeders." Okay....so I misunderstood the exact meaning of this statment, but you didn't really specify why you don't breed animals known to be non-feeders until post #20. I suppose the content of my phone calls to a few other breeders made me "jump the gun" and presume you meant that you would not breed known non- feeders. You also stated in post #20, "I never said I wouldn't breed a snake I knew to be a non-feeder." Am I right in assuming that this statement also implies that you would breed non-feeders? If so, I think that is great. I like a person who will stand behind what they believe in. I respect that so much that I would be willing to ship you a few non-feeders (I will even get them eating normally), so you can prove that breeding and selling non-feeders is not a "possible detriment of all the future generations."(GHC) Or maybe it is....there is only one way to find out. I am sure that everyone TRULY concerned about future corn snake generations would assist you in any way they could, as long as they believe you to be a credible breeder and person. P.S. I really hope I don't have any non-feeders to send.

OK Kerri, We're cool. I honestly don't know if I would breed known non-feeders. I'd have to think long and hard about it and even come up with my own definitive definition of what I think a non-feeder is. I do know that I avoid culling/killing/destroying if possible.
Here's something else to consider:
Does a non-feeder really have to be a dirty word?
Who is really the one whom is "inconvenienced" by non-feeders?
I'll answer that one. Breeders! they're the only ones inconvenienced.
Now, which breeders are more inconvenienced?
Large scale, the same ones that are probably more likely to cull.
Should we cull live feeders only ( I have and will sell these as such knowing that most can and will switch with time.) if all the big breeders decide trying to get them to switch to F/T is too much trouble?

Kerri, I'm a hobbyist breeder. I accept non-feeders as part of the process. I just don't believe in culling a living animal because other breeders believe it may be genetic or hereditary. It there was some actual proof of a link, I would be willing to reconsider my stance...willing is the key word in that sentence.

As far as sending me non-feeders thanks, but what I could really use is another pair of hands on cleaning day lol.

Look if you're at odds about breeding that Butter ( I think it was) just do it and see what you get. If you end up with some non-feeders by whatever definition you use then cull them or sell them with the disclaimer that they were at one time non-feeders...If any of that bothers you then don't breed again. You'll never know unless you do it.

 

[vetusvates]

Well, this is more of a testimony than anything else. Certainly not intended to be argumentative in any way. I am a relative newbie AND a non-breeder, and don't expect to become a breeder. But I am in a unique position, in that I did the following. The big Petco and the big PetSmart on the south end of town were without electricity for 5 days plus after hurricane Gustav, 01 Sep 2008. Lost a lot of inventory. Well, to do something to feel like I was helping somehow, I had friends at those two stores (as well as the several others here in the city) who know more than most pet store clerks, and I asked them to sell me the nonfeeders (actually in this case I guess poor feeders), to bring home with me to pamper during the ensuing weeks with no electricity, no internet, and trees and trash everywhere....you get the post-hurricane picture. They sold me, oh, 16-20 or so, at a reduced priced. Well, by now about half of those snakes have died due to failure to thrive or starvation (despite force feeding, and yes I did, and yes I have on occasion for 35 years forcefed---although I do not recommend or approve of a novice doing so) and the others are eating like monsters. So in a net way, I feel good. They have opened a door for me, and I have some very ordinary snakes that mean a lot to me. I'm glad they got sent to a pet store rather than culled. I have no idea what the het's are, probably never will need to know. But I think I am an excellent example of why not to wholesale or hastily euthanize "problem" hatchlings.

 

[vetusvates]

Look if you're at odds about breeding that Butter ( I think it was) just do it and see what you get. If you end up with some non-feeders by whatever definition you use then cull them or sell them with the disclaimer that they were at one time non-feeders...If any of that bothers you then don't breed again. You'll never know unless you do it.

Thanks for seconding my motion on post #8, Kyle.

 

[Kerri]

First off, let me just say that I am not a "breeder", well....maybe that's not exactly accurate, but it's getting to the point where I really don't want to be labeled as one. IMO "breeders", in general, are perceived to be "bad guys" in the eyes of a rapidly growing number of people in the general public. Look at Craigslist for example, "breeders" are not even supposed to place ads for animals that they have bred. Now, I'm not going to pretend I know exactly why that is, but.....I'm pretty sure it has something to do with the fact that so many "breeders" are solely in it for the profit and the vast majority of "breeders" don't even take the time to learn anything about genetics before they breed their animals, much less the possible genetics of their own animals. Many, many "breeders" don't even care if their animals are healthy enough to breed. Then, there is the ever growing number of unwanted pets. And yes, this perception is mainly due to dog breeding, but it doesn't stop there and will only continue to get worse, for "all breeders", even the great ones. Ok....I am new to this, in a sense, and obviously naïve, because, when I posted this thread I really expected to get a straight forward proven answer. I honestly expected that it had been proven not to be a genetic trait. It was a bit frustrating to learn that no one really knows for sure. We are either culling animals, that with some work, could become great pets or even great breeders because there is a possibility of genetic problems with the animal. At least I hope "possible genetic problems" are why animals are culled, and not just because they are a "headache", that would be just... cruel. Or, we are placing animals that "might not" have any genetic problems into the public where they "might not" be bred and the offspring of those animals "might not" have or carry genetic problems, and so on, and so on. If it is genetic, I really hope that this is not how we find out. For now, no matter how cruel it "may" be, I intend to cull my snakes when they reach the status of what I believe to be a non-feeder. I'm just not willing to take the chance that my non-feeders could possibly contribute to genetic problems in the future. IMO... A "breeder" should eleminate ANY and ALL possible problems that could possibly be passed on to future offspring, by means of not breeding these animals and being 100%.......100% sure that these animals will never be bred. BTW, my wife, Kerri, feels I am making enemies (I hope she's wrong) with this thread and she just wanted it to be known that it was not her thread, all post were written by me, her husband Jerry.

 

[TripleMoonsExotic]

Ok....I am new to this, in a sense, and obviously naïve, because, when I posted this thread I really expected to get a straight forward proven answer. I honestly expected that it had been proven not to be a genetic trait. It was a bit frustrating to learn that no one really knows for sure.

Do you understand why no one knows 100%? It would take dozens of snakes (I would think no less then 50 myself) to get an accurate answer to the question. That's 50 snakes to raise for 3-4 years (feeding, cleaning and housing costs) that, if proven inheritable, should be be culled along with their offspring! That's a lot if you think about it!

A "breeder" should eleminate ANY and ALL possible problems that could possibly be passed on to future offspring, by means of not breeding these animals and being 100%.......100% sure that these animals will never be bred.

Exactly my feelings of why I cull non-feeding and kinked offspring!

BTW, my wife, Kerri, feels I am making enemies (I hope she's wrong) with this thread and she just wanted it to be known that it was not her thread, all post were written by me, her husband Jerry.

It would be advisable to cease using your wife's account to post and acquire your own. I'm not aware of any strict rules here that posting in an account of a spouse isn't permitted, but this is a pretty family friendly site and we like to know who we're actually talking to.

 

[ForkedTung]

Jerry, No enemy here ( yet...lol). Although I do think you should create a new account for yourself and then use it if you want to establish credibility. There is a history on many herp forums of people using other identities and it is generally frowned upon to have two people using the same account, does this make sense?
I can sense your frustration that there are no "hard and fast" genetics concerning non-feeders, but again, I don't think of it as the black sheep that many, including yourself, do.
Again, It is at most an inconvenience for breeders. If you want to be 100% sure you don't inadvertently pass this on and 100% sure that they don't breed then you might want to consider not breeding at all because I highly, highly doubt that there is any conceivable way you could be 100% sure of either of these.

 

[vetusvates]

First off, let me just say that I am not a "breeder", well....maybe that's not exactly accurate, but it's getting to the point where I really don't want to be labeled as one. IMO "breeders", in general, are perceived to be "bad guys" in the eyes of a rapidly growing number of people in the general public....
....IMO... A "breeder" should eleminate ANY and ALL possible problems that could possibly be passed on to future offspring, by means of not breeding these animals and being 100%.......100% sure that these animals will never be bred. BTW, my wife, Kerri, feels I am making enemies (I hope she's wrong) with this thread and she just wanted it to be known that it was not her thread, all post were written by me, her husband Jerry.

LOL. Jerry. And Kerri. Don't worry, you're certainly not making an enemy of me. And I don't presume to speak specifically for anyone else, but in general, since I've been here I've taken some stands....to the left....and to the right. And the big-timers/old-timers have been very kind and accommodating and respectful on my sometimes agreeable, sometimes dis-agreeing views.
This is probably the most philosophically sophisticated forum I regularly visit. There are places to be silly, and places to engage in deep, thoughtful discussions...even disagreements at times. With respect to the latter, you will find passionate people here and people who respect you perfectly well if your passion lies diametrically in the opposite direction.
You know, I rarely if ever think about Life anymore in the "who's the goodguy, who's the badguy" equation. It seems to oversimplify the complexity of situations at times.
So don't quit posting these thought provoking posts. When someone like you posts, and I have to stop and think, what do I believe and why, you are doing something right. LOL. And have Kerri read this post.

P.S. I agree with Kyle. Jerry and Kerri should be known as two separate entities with two separate thinking processes. Each with an account.

 

[Jerry L.]

Ok....I finally got my account activated. Thanks for making me realize I needed to do that. BTW...Forked Tung, I do comprehend that there is no guarantee that you will always get healthy offspring from breeding healthy parents and I'm perfecty capable of accepting that, thanks.

 

[ForkedTung]

Ok....I finally got my account activated. Thanks for making me realize I needed to do that. BTW...Forked Tung, I do comprehend that there is no guarantee that you will always get healthy offspring from breeding healthy parents and I'm perfecty capable of accepting that, thanks.

No problem, Jerry, no problem at all.

 

[Rotach]

WTF!? am I reading this correctly? Am I the only one here who is appauled at the idea of destroying an animal beacuse it is hesitant to eat? NO ONE has that right! I would let the animal go free before I would destroy it for such reasons. I'm discusted and I can't believe what I just read.

 

[TripleMoonsExotic]

Am I the only one here who is appauled at the idea of destroying an animal beacuse it is hesitant to eat?

No one is talking about "hesitant" to eat. We are talking about refuses to eat to the point where their health deteriorates and they are suffering. A hatchling Cornsnakes can safely go 6-8 weeks (in my experience) without eating. After that, they start getting very lethargic and obviously their health starts going downhill.

I would let the animal go free before

That is illegal in many states. Why do you think Florida has problems with large constrictors such as boas, burms and retics breeding in their wetlands? Not to mention that in many states a Cornsnake would never survive and more then likely suffer a more horrible death then being put down humanely.