What do you think of hybrids?

[Amadeus]

What are your thoughts or opinions on the recent python hybrids like the "burmball" or the "bateater"
http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g361/412bro/19images-1.jpg (http://s1098.photobucket.com/user/412bro/media/19images-1.jpg.html)

Imo they shouldn't continue to be bred...

Go

Edit: This should be in the python forum but oh well.

[pdomensis]

Not my cup of tea, but then neither are labradoodles. If someone wants a designer animal I say whatever. Maybe they need their own category, like faux-snake.

[Mikoh4792]

I personally don't mind as long as those hybrid genes don't get mixed up into the general population. I'd put some regulations on that king of thing.

[Aaron_S]

I personally don't mind as long as those hybrid genes don't get mixed up into the general population. I'd put some regulations on that king of thing.

We can't regulate any part of our hobby, even the more dangerous venomous part and you think we could do hybrids? hahahahaha.


Bateaters aren't new but the albino burmball is new.

Neat looking but they all suck.

[formica]

hybrids exist in nature, they are part of the evolution of species, saying they shouldnt exist is bizare.

You also wouldnt have for eg, the beef in your burgers, or the milk in your coffee, or the wheat in your cereal, or...well you get the picture...if it wasnt for hybrids, selective cross breeding between species and sub species

I find the whole thing fascinating personally.

As for 'letting them out into the general population' - yes, but this should apply to any capitive breed species, cross bred or not, and espcially into countries where they are not native

[Starbuck]

i think if you dont like them, dont buy them. If you REALLY REALLY REALLY hate them, and think its some kind of moral sin to produce them, dont buy from someone who produces them.

I dont agree with hybridizing endangered/under-represented animals in the hobby (such as boleans pythons), because i think their reproductive efforts should be better spent on advancing the captive population as a whole. however, this becomes a gray area in some cases, such as peregrine falcons. Many distinct subspecies were interbred in the 80s and 90s in a frantic effort to repopulate the US, and we lost a lot of the diversity of the birds. I could see this becoming an issue with locality morphs/subspecies at some point, but just an interesting observation.

Personally, i think there are a lot of really beautiful colubrid hybrids out there, and since most of my snakes are pets, and i keep them because i think they are beautiful and interesting, I WOULD be likely to buy a hybrid that i considered beautiful and interesting.
the end.

[formica]

Imo they shouldn't continue to be bred...

Neat looking but they all suck.

can you qualify this a bit? would like to understand what the problem is from your perspective - as I said, to me its fascinating, both aesthetically and from a natural sciences perspective

[Mikoh4792]

We can't regulate any part of our hobby, even the more dangerous venomous part and you think we could do hybrids? hahahahaha.

What do you mean by this? How does regulation not work for venomous reptiles?(Serious question)

[Aaron_S]

hybrids exist in nature, they are part of the evolution of species, saying they shouldnt exist is bizare.

You also wouldnt have for eg, the beef in your burgers, or the milk in your coffee, or the wheat in your cereal, or...well you get the picture...if it wasnt for hybrids, selective cross breeding between species and sub species

I find the whole thing fascinating personally.

As for 'letting them out into the general population' - yes, but this should apply to any capitive breed species, cross bred or not, and espcially into countries where they are not native

Hybrids don't really exist in the wild. Natural intergrades do though. We have imaginary lines that animals don't know about and cross them on a regular basis. If it's caught in one such imaginary boundary than it's labeled as that.

Hybrids that are an animal from Africa (ball python) and another from Australia (Woma python) are not natural and would never occur. I don't see how that is evolution when it never could happen.

[Aaron_S]

can you qualify this a bit? would like to understand what the problem is from your perspective - as I said, to me its fascinating, both aesthetically and from a natural sciences perspective

The problem is simple.

Best example is Australia.

Legally we can no longer import their animals. Such as jungle carpet pythons. We no longer have a gene pool, it's a gene puddle that's muddied by other animals like the "carpondro". For what purpose? For the sake of saying "I did it".

We will lose what nature gifted us for the sake of us being egotistical and wanting to play God.

[Aaron_S]

What do you mean by this? How does regulation not work for venomous reptiles?(Serious question)

Simple, there is no regulation or extremely little or relaxed. Florida has it but doesn't mean it's not abused or ignored.

I can go and buy a venomous snake right now if I wanted to. No one would stop me. It's only against a local by-law so as long as no one said anything I could keep it forever.

[Mikoh4792]

Hybrids don't really exist in the wild. Natural intergrades do though. We have imaginary lines that animals don't know about and cross them on a regular basis. If it's caught in one such imaginary boundary than it's labeled as that.

Hybrids that are an animal from Africa (ball python) and another from Australia (Woma python) are not natural and would never occur. I don't see how that is evolution when it never could happen.

It depends on what you consider natural. I find it natural that with our brain capacity we can choose to breed different types of animals together to create hybrids. Just because they don't do it on their own out in the wild doesn't make it unnatural.

[Mikoh4792]

Simple, there is no regulation or extremely little or relaxed. Florida has it but doesn't mean it's not abused or ignored.

I can go and buy a venomous snake right now if I wanted to. No one would stop me. It's only against a local by-law so as long as no one said anything I could keep it forever.

ohhh I see.

[pdomensis]

can you qualify this a bit? would like to understand what the problem is from your perspective - as I said, to me its fascinating, both aesthetically and from a natural sciences perspective

The biggest problem in my opinion is when species of animals or plants are altered and then get released (usually accidentally) back into native populations. The result is outbreeding depression, reduced vigor, breeding ability and survivorship.

[Aaron_S]

The biggest problem in my opinion is when species of animals or plants are altered and then get released (usually accidentally) back into native populations. The result is outbreeding depression, reduced vigor, breeding ability and survivorship.

We can look to "killer bees" for an example.

[Amadeus]

I believe that it is unnatural for a python found in Africa to be bred to python from Southeastern Asia purely for one's own amusement and financial gain. (all for capitalism though)

[formica]

Hybrids don't really exist in the wild. Natural intergrades do though. We have imaginary lines that animals don't know about and cross them on a regular basis. If it's caught in one such imaginary boundary than it's labeled as that.

Hybrids that are an animal from Africa (ball python) and another from Australia (Woma python) are not natural and would never occur. I don't see how that is evolution when it never could happen.

hybridisation has nothing to do with where an animal comes from - the most obvious example is the As-s (scuse the hiphen, forum is filtering the word lol), which is found frequently in the wild, fish are another group of animals which often hybridise naturally, the list of natural hybrids is endless, sometimes they are able to reproduce and if well adapted will form their own species or sub species as time goes on

[Aaron_S]

It depends on what you consider natural. I find it natural that with our brain capacity we can choose to breed different types of animals together to create hybrids. Just because they don't do it on their own out in the wild doesn't make it unnatural.

That's actually the definition of unnatural.

Our nice, cozy sterile environments are NOT natural. We mimic natural parameters but doesn't make it natural.

Our "brain capacity" your talking about is just our arrogance.

Would you care how breeding two species who have evolved for their own habitats together creates "evolution" as you stated? I don't see how that's evolving considering patterns and colours have a lot to do with natural habitat and their survival.

[Mikoh4792]

I believe that it is unnatural for a python found in Africa to be bred to python from Southeastern Asia purely for one's own amusement and financial gain. (all for capitalism though)

I think it's natural. It's not right by any means, but nature doesn't have to be right.

[Aaron_S]

hybridisation has nothing to do with where an animal comes from - the most obvious example is the As-s (scuse the hiphen, forum is filtering the word lol), which is found frequently in the wild, fish are another group of animals which often hybridise naturally, the list of natural hybrids is endless, sometimes they are able to reproduce and if well adapted will form their own species or sub species as time goes on

Again, intergrades and hybrids are two distinct things.

You are confusing the two.

[Amadeus]

I think it's natural. It's not right by any means, but nature doesn't have to be right.

If it were natural then these species would already have been found in the wild...

[Aaron_S]

I think it's natural. It's not right by any means, but nature doesn't have to be right.

Sure it does. If by nature it's not right, it dies. That's the law of nature. If you're not right, you die. It's exactly what evolution is too.

[formica]

The problem is simple.

Best example is Australia.

Legally we can no longer import their animals. Such as jungle carpet pythons. We no longer have a gene pool, it's a gene puddle that's muddied by other animals like the "carpondro". For what purpose? For the sake of saying "I did it".

We will lose what nature gifted us for the sake of us being egotistical and wanting to play God.

why will the gene pool be lost? if anything, it is expaneded with every hybrid - evolution favours a wide and complex gene pool, which is not what you get if you try to maintain pure genetics within a particular species

[formica]

Again, intergrades and hybrids are two distinct things.

You are confusing the two.

no. I am not, for example, Rudd and Roach, two seperate species, both of which hybridise naturally, Roach and Bream are another common example. the list is endless, and they are hybrids

[Mikoh4792]

That's actually the definition of unnatural.

Our nice, cozy sterile environments are NOT natural. We mimic natural parameters but doesn't make it natural.

Our "brain capacity" your talking about is just our arrogance.

Would you care how breeding two species who have evolved for their own habitats together creates "evolution" as you stated? I don't see how that's evolving considering patterns and colours have a lot to do with natural habitat and their survival.

I never said anything about evolving. I just find it natural that humans want to toy around with nature.

We tend to separate ourselves from nature but in actuality our cozy sterile environments are natural. We create these environments like beavers make dens, and ants make ant hills. Our system is just more complex and advanced.

You can not seriously think our brain capacity is just our arrogance. We are smarter than other animals. I don't mean to point out the obvious.

[Mikoh4792]

Sure it does. If by nature it's not right, it dies. That's the law of nature. If you're not right, you die. It's exactly what evolution is too.

I meant right in a moral context. Right as in good, ethical...etc.

Nature doesn't have to be good.

[Aaron_S]

no. I am not, for example, Rudd and Roach, two seperate species, both of which hybridise naturally, Roach and Bream are another common example. the list is endless, and they are hybrids

You are.

If they are not artificially introduced then it's not a hybrid. It's simple.

You have yet to talk about evolution as you stated in the first post and answer my question regarding as such.

[formica]

evolution is not a thought process, it is not designed or manipulated in any kind of intelligent way - it is completly random, survival of the fittest relies on randomness to produce as many options as possible so that one may have a chance at surviving in whatever enviroment it happened to end up in - hybrids are the ultimate way to increase the gene pool and therefore increase the odds of survival


as for the morality of it, to be honest thats a pointless road to go down, I think religous ideals ought to be kept out of forums which are not about religon.

[formica]

You are.

If they are not artificially introduced then it's not a hybrid. It's simple.

You have yet to talk about evolution as you stated in the first post and answer my question regarding as such.

perhaps you should look up the word Hybrid before you continue this line of argument. - it has nothing to do with human intervention

[Aaron_S]

I never said anything about evolving. I just find it natural that humans want to toy around with nature.

We tend to separate ourselves from nature but in actuality our cozy sterile environments are natural. We create these environments like beavers make dens, and ants make ant hills. Our system is just more complex and advanced.

You can not seriously think our brain capacity is just our arrogance. We are smarter than other animals. I don't mean to point out the obvious.

I didn't talk to you about evolution.

Since you touched upon it it's arrogance to believe we are smarter than other animals. Pretty sure we kill our own kind for no reason at all. I'd at times, think other animals are ahead of us in intelligence. They don't destroy their own habitat either.

Also, I wasn't talking about intelligence when I was talking about arrogance. It's arrogant for us to just play God "because we can".

[Amadeus]

I know rhinoceros vipers and gaboon vipers breed naturally in the wild but it would be totally different if I took a rhino viper and bred it to Sumatran pit viper because that could not possibly happen.

[Aaron_S]

perhaps you should look up the word Hybrid before you continue this line of argument. - it has nothing to do with human intervention

Answer my question regarding how breeding these species, the woma and the ball pythons is evolution.


This is my last post.

We'll agree to disagree is all.

[formica]

Answer my question regarding how breeding these species, the woma and the ball pythons is evolution.


This is my last post.

We'll agree to disagree is all.

humans are just as much a part of the enviorment that an animal lives in, as everything else in this world, that manipulates the evolutionary progress of a species - just because we choose to use semantics to try and seperate ourselves from nature, doesnt mean that we are apart from it

[Mikoh4792]

I didn't talk to you about evolution.

But you did. This quote below.



Would you care how breeding two species who have evolved for their own habitats together creates "evolution" as you stated? I don't see how that's evolving considering patterns and colours have a lot to do with natural habitat and their survival.

Why did you say "as you stated"? I never stated anything about evolution. Which is why I responded to this quote by saying " I never said anything about evolving. I just find it natural that humans want to toy around with nature.


Since you touched upon it it's arrogance to believe we are smarter than other animals. Pretty sure we kill our own kind for no reason at all. I'd at times, think other animals are ahead of us in intelligence. They don't destroy their own habitat either.

Also, I wasn't talking about intelligence when I was talking about arrogance. It's arrogant for us to just play God "because we can".

It's not arrogant to believe we are smarter than other animals. It's reasonable to acknowledge it. We can be very destructive towards our own kind and the planet in which we live. We can be "stupid" in that way. But we are still smarter than other animals. If you can't get past this then it's just a matter of opinion for you.

[Aaron_S]

But you did. This quote below.



Why did you say "as you stated"? I never stated anything about evolution.




It's not arrogant to believe we are smarter than other animals. It's reasonable to acknowledge it. We can be very destructive towards our own kind and the planet in which we live. We can be "stupid" in that way. But we are still smarter than other animals. If you can't get past this then it's just a matter of opinion for you.

I was having two conversations within this thread. Not every comment was directed towards you. Sorry you couldn't see that and it confused you.

Last part, I think we're pretty arrogant as a species. We don't preserve our species very well compared to others so I'd question how "smart" we really are in certain regards.

[Mikoh4792]

I was having two conversations within this thread. Not every comment was directed towards you. Sorry you couldn't see that and it confused you.

It happens. One time I thought marvelfreak was you during a previous thread and I got confused as well.

Last part, I think we're pretty arrogant as a species. We don't preserve our species very well compared to others so I'd question how "smart" we really are in certain regards.

I think we are arrogant as a species as well. I don't really want to go into a topic about how smart we really are, but I was just saying I think it's natural for an animal that has evolved to have our "brain capacity"(I don't mean intelligence, I just mean the capacity to experiment with things as we do) to want to breed two kinds of animals that would never breed in the wild.

In other words, it's just nature playing out. It's become complex enough on our planet that species that would never be introduced in the wild are now being introduced by animals who have the capacity to do so. "Artificial" selection imo is still natural. I understand how oxymoronic that sounds.

[formica]

its not oxymoronic at all, the problem is that people have for too long see Humans as something seperate from Nature; everything that humans do, is Evolution, you are right

[Amadeus]

its not oxymoronic at all, the problem is that people have for too long see Humans as something seperate from Nature; everything that humans do, is Evolution, you are right

I do believe that we are different than conventional nature, we have written language, amazing technologies, space travel, advanced medicine.
I could go on...

[formica]

I do believe that we are different than conventional nature, we have written language, amazing technologies, space travel, advanced medicine.
I could go on...

animals can communicate, build air conditioned nests, produce antibiotics, farm their own foods, i culd go on to. we have bigger brains than most animals, and more dextrious fingers, but we are not that special

[Mikoh4792]

animals can communicate, build air conditioned nests, produce antibiotics, farm their own foods, i culd go on to. we have bigger brains than most animals, and more dextrious fingers, but we are not that special

And I don't see why what we can do is not considered to be natural. It's complex for sure, but why does that have to make it unnatural? Just because our systems are more advanced than the systems of other living things does that take us out of nature? It's just complex nature.

[smy_749]

The problem is simple.

Best example is Australia.

Legally we can no longer import their animals. Such as jungle carpet pythons. We no longer have a gene pool, it's a gene puddle that's muddied by other animals like the "carpondro". For what purpose? For the sake of saying "I did it".

We will lose what nature gifted us for the sake of us being egotistical and wanting to play God.

This is my take on the issue. We already muddy it up enough, we don't need to make it worse with hybrids or we are going to end up with freak show animals and no real species. I also don't agree with things/morphs with health issues because we think they look 'cool'.

[KORBIN5895]

Here is why hybrids ate wrong for our hobby. Someone has bred a royal python to a Burmese python and created the burmball. Now what is a burmball? Considering that burms are banned from crossing state lines die to the Lacy act are burmballs also banned? Who is making that decision? What happens when some idiot starts crossing burmballs with royals to introduce certain burm patterns to the royals? Are these 25% burms 75% royals illegal? What if law makers get scared and ban royals too? What is to blame?

[Amadeus]

Here is why hybrids ate wrong for our hobby. Someone has bred a royal python to a Burmese python and created the burmball. Now what is a burmball? Considering that burms are banned from crossing state lines die to the Lacy act are burmballs also banned? Who is making that decision? What happens when some idiot starts crossing burmballs with royals to introduce certain burm patterns to the royals? Are these 25% burms 75% royals illegal? What if law makers get scared and ban royals too? What is to blame?

I hadn't even thought about that...

[red ink]

Not a fan of hybrid... I find most of them to be a failure of what the holotypes look like. That being said I also don't care enough about them to argue over an internet forum.

[formica]

Here is why hybrids ate wrong for our hobby. Someone has bred a royal python to a Burmese python and created the burmball. Now what is a burmball? Considering that burms are banned from crossing state lines die to the Lacy act are burmballs also banned? Who is making that decision? What happens when some idiot starts crossing burmballs with royals to introduce certain burm patterns to the royals? Are these 25% burms 75% royals illegal? What if law makers get scared and ban royals too? What is to blame?

blame? illegal? what? this is not reasoning, this is saying, its wrong because its wrong.

[Lankyrob]

My view on hybrids is similar to my view on genetic engineering generally - just because we can, doesnt mean we should

[formica]

My view on hybrids is similar to my view on genetic engineering generally - just because we can, doesnt mean we should

I think that you are looking at it from a limited point of view, I think that the people who dedicate their lives to doing these things, do it for more reasons that 'just because they can', pretty insulting to put those words in their mouths imo

[Lankyrob]

I think that you are looking at it from a limited point of view, I think that the people who dedicate their lives to doing these things, do it for more reasons that 'just because they can', pretty insulting to put those words in their mouths imo

Not putting words in anyones mouth just expressing MY opinion

[formica]

Not putting words in anyones mouth just expressing MY opinion


you are saying that people do it 'just because they can' - that is putting words in their mouths, all I am asking you to do, is consider the possibility that this is not infact the reason that most do it

[Lankyrob]

I never said that they just did it because they can, i am sure the people that do have many good reasons in their opinion for doing so, MY OPINION is that because we can do something it doesnt mean that we should do it.

[KORBIN5895]

blame? illegal? what? this is not reasoning, this is saying, its wrong because its wrong.

Do you know anything about the Lacy Act and the bans going on in the states? I never said it was wrong but it is wrong for our hobby here in North America. Please try to comprehend what is being said before replying.

[formica]

Do you know anything about the Lacy Act and the bans going on in the states? I never said it was wrong but it is wrong for our hobby here in North America. Please try to comprehend what is being said before replying.

if the issue is these hybrids getting out into the wild, then yes I would agree that is a massive issue, and no-one should be putting any captive breed and non-native animals into the wild, it is a major danger to delicate eco-systems. but, that is nothing to do with hybridization in captive animals, it is down to irresponsible people doing irresponsible things

[red ink]

humans are just as much a part of the enviorment that an animal lives in, as everything else in this world, that manipulates the evolutionary progress of a species - just because we choose to use semantics to try and seperate ourselves from nature, doesnt mean that we are apart from it

if the issue is these hybrids getting out into the wild, then yes I would agree that is a massive issue, and no-one should be putting any captive breed and non-native animals into the wild, it is a major danger to delicate eco-systems. but, that is nothing to do with hybridization in captive animals, it is down to irresponsible people doing irresponsible things

So if we are part of nature... even the irresponsible ones letting hybrids go into an environment they are not natural then it's part of a "natural" evolutionary progress? Since even irresponsible people are not separate from nature and not apart from it then their actions that manipulate nature, irresponsible as it may be should also be deemed natural and not an issue or a danger to the natural environment as it is born of something that is part of nature (us)... or is that more semantics?

[formica]

So if we are part of nature... even the irresponsible ones letting hybrids go into an environment they are not natural then it's part of a "natural" evolutionary progress? Since even irresponsible people are not separate from nature and not apart from it then their actions that manipulate nature, irresponsible as it may be should also be deemed natural and not an issue or a danger to the natural environment as it is born of something that is part of nature (us)... or is that more semantics?

well, yes more semantics - infact evolution has no concern of human ideas on conservation, it is all part of the natural process of evolution (both the considerate and inconsiderate things we do as a speices), humanity trying to conserve nature is a task doomed to failure; but, that doesnt mean we shouldnt try to limit our impact on the natural world and we shouldnt stop trying to understand how our behaviour influences the world around us.

but consider our love affair with oil, the minute impact of conservation is vastly over shadowed by our destructive behaviour in other areas.

[smy_749]

So if we are part of nature... even the irresponsible ones letting hybrids go into an environment they are not natural then it's part of a "natural" evolutionary progress? Since even irresponsible people are not separate from nature and not apart from it then their actions that manipulate nature, irresponsible as it may be should also be deemed natural and not an issue or a danger to the natural environment as it is born of something that is part of nature (us)... or is that more semantics?

Don't even bother getting into this topic lol The strong survive and reproduce, and the weak die off and aren't able to pass on genetics. Survival of the fittest....last time I checked americans aren't exactly the most fit , the smartest, etc. and everyone able to have a baby seems to be doing so... Seems the stupid are reproducing more than the wise these days.:D

[formica]

Don't even bother getting into this topic lol The strong survive and reproduce, and the weak die off and aren't able to pass on genetics. Survival of the fittest....last time I checked americans aren't exactly the most fit , the smartest, etc. and everyone able to have a baby seems to be doing so... Seems the stupid are reproducing more than the wise these days.:D

there was an interesting study a few years ago, which came to the conclusion, that the Rich, Powerful, Intelligent people in this world, are not infact the ones which are the most succesful, because they tend to have fewer children than the 'average', infact the Poor, under-educated and minorities of humans tend to have much larger families - in evolutionary terms, they, are the most successful of our species

[smy_749]

there was an interesting study a few years ago, which came to the conclusion, that the Rich, Powerful, Intelligent people in this world, are not infact the ones which are the most succesful, because they tend to have fewer children than the 'average', infact the Poor, under-educated and minorities of humans tend to have much larger families - in evolutionary terms, they, are the most successful of our species

I dont care about rich or powerful. But its contradictory to say that the stupid are more successful than the intelligent. If the stupid continue to pass on genetics and the intelligent don't , then what? According to evolution, fat and unfit people are supposed to die off and the physically fit should be able to breed. Those with weak immune systems die off, those with strong ones prevail, etc. etc. etc.

None of it matters, we have medications for everything. Vegetables are just plugged into the wall and even they continue to live. We can keep everything alive these days.

[KORBIN5895]

if the issue is these hybrids getting out into the wild, then yes I would agree that is a massive issue, and no-one should be putting any captive breed and non-native animals into the wild, it is a major danger to delicate eco-systems. but, that is nothing to do with hybridization in captive animals, it is down to irresponsible people doing irresponsible things

Why don't you read up on what's going on in the states before you continue to comment on something you obviously know nothing about.

My questions have nothing to do with the wild. My questions are about the damage hybrids will do to our hobby.

[formica]

I dont care about rich or powerful. But its contradictory to say that the stupid are more successful than the intelligent. If the stupid continue to pass on genetics and the intelligent don't , then what? According to evolution, fat and unfit people are supposed to die off and the physically fit should be able to breed. Those with weak immune systems die off, those with strong ones prevail, etc. etc. etc.

None of it matters, we have medications for everything. Vegetables are just plugged into the wall and even they continue to live. We can keep everything alive these days.

you are assuming that fat and unfit people are weak - infact up until the invention of the Freezer and Refrigirator, fat and 'unfit' people would have had far more chance of making it thru the harsh winters than skinny 'fit' people. you cant view evolution and surivival of the fittest from a human perspecitive, because most of the time, humans perspective on whats good and bad has no baring whatsoever on evolutionary success.

Scientific study, far outweighs opinion, and the studies have been done. It is a scientific fact, that people with large numbers of offspring, are more successful, on evolutionary terms, than those with only a few offspring.

Medications for everything? hmm no, not even close, did you know that for a Cancer treatment to be considered successfull/effective, a person has to survive only 5 years beyond the point of diagnosis? for sure some people live longer, but many many do not, despite that, if they live for 5 years, then the treatment is considered a success. There are many more examples; i wouldnt put to much faith in science to keep us alive - evolution is a far more powerful force, and evolution does not allow any single species to dominate its enviroment...something humans really need to start taking note of

[formica]

Why don't you read up on what's going on in the states before you continue to comment on something you obviously know nothing about.

My questions have nothing to do with the wild. My questions are about the damage hybrids will do to our hobby.


the law that you mentioned is about conservation - if you have more to add to it, then tell me about, saying you are wrong because you are wrong without any explanation is pointless. what has the conservation law you mentioned got to do with hybrids in captivity?

[LadyWraith]

I think what's trying to be conveyed about hybrids hurting the hobby is that when you start mixing already regulated species like burms with mostly non-regulated species like BPs, what would be the legal status of that mixed animal since technically some of the genetics are regulated. Also, lawmakers may start targeting non-regulated species in an attempt to dispose of the hybrid possibility as a loophole. This is how I think of it. Kinda like the law condemning "pitbull type dogs" in an attempt to wipe out even the pitbull mixed breeds.

[Mikoh4792]

I think what's trying to be conveyed about hybrids hurting the hobby is that when you start mixing already regulated species like burms with mostly non-regulated species like BPs, what would be the legal status of that mixed animal since technically some of the genetics are regulated. Also, lawmakers may start targeting non-regulated species in an attempt to dispose of the hybrid possibility as a loophole. This is how I think of it. Kinda like the law condemning "pitbull type dogs" in an attempt to wipe out even the pitbull mixed breeds.

So I guess another question that should be asked is what do you guys think about the regulation laws?

[KORBIN5895]

the law that you mentioned is about conservation - if you have more to add to it, then tell me about, saying you are wrong because you are wrong without any explanation is pointless. what has the conservation law you mentioned got to do with hybrids in captivity?

You think you're smart but your words prove your thoughts wrong. Go do some research then we can have a discussion. I don't waste my time trying to educate lazy people.

@Mikoh

I think the regulations are a good thing as I see way too many people that aren't capable of having such large species getting them and treating them terribly. Heck, we have members here that have them and really aren't qualified.

[formica]

So I guess another question that should be asked is what do you guys think about the regulation laws?

this is the question which I think people are trying to answer, but wasnt actually asked

You think you're smart but your words prove your thoughts wrong. Go do some research then we can have a discussion. I don't waste my time trying to educate lazy people.

LOL get over yourself.

[KORBIN5895]

this is the question which I think people are trying to answer, but wasnt actually asked



LOL get over yourself.

Let's make a deal. I will stop pointing out your lack of knowledge if you stop pretending you know more than you do and admit your ignorance.

[KORBIN5895]

Here is a heart warming story that supports how I feel about the bans.

http://www.ssnakess.com/forums/general-discussion/100491-just-wrong-number-levels.html

[formica]

got a better solution, i'll just put you on ignore.

[KORBIN5895]

got a better solution, i'll just put you on ignore.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Poor muffin is angry.... this'll be fun.

[StudentoReptile]

Here are my thoughts...

1.) in response to the question of natural vs unnatural, or evolution vs artificial selection, etc: we can have this debate all year long, but keeping snakes in glass boxes and plastic bins is NOT natural. The snakes living in their own habitat is. A black rat snake breeding with a grey ratsnake in the wild is called an INTERGRADE. Specifically, an intergrade, by definition, is a natural cross between subspecies. This happens with kingsnakes, box turtles, etc. It "occasionally" happens between 2 species, and can be labeled as a natural-occuring hybrid, such as a northern water snake crossing with a brown water, but this is rare. Putting a burmese python with a ball is NOT natural in any form (i'll cover the ethics later) but no one can make the argument that this is natural.

When it comes to evolution, one must understand that these species have all evolved into to fit into their specific ecological niches. For example, why do we have 7 different species of Nerodia (water snakes) in Alabama, instead of just one? They all achieve different sizes, have different coloration/pattern, occupy in different habitats, and/or may have differences in their diet. Obviously, there is a reason for this; evolution had this genus split into so any species for a reason. Making hybrids of them all completely defeats the purpose of ecological diversity; i.e. making a hybrid doesn't make a better snake, because that screws with whatever ecological role that animal provides.

2.) "Those who create hybrids just do it for the heck of it" - Again, let's look at why some hybrids are created in captivity. Comparing herps to other animal hybrids is not fair. For the most part, we hybridize livestock and poultry, etc. for applicable purposes (and remember these are domesticated animals I'm talking about, and herps are not domesticated). Ex: mules are bred from horses & donkeys to create a better working animal. We cross chickens to make some with bigger eggs or more meat, etc. - In contrast, why do we hybridize reptiles? These are not agricultural beasts that we eat, or use to farm, use for service animals, etc. We're talking "pets," creatures we keep predominantly for our own enjoyment. Thus, we DO breed hybrids for superficial reasons: just to make a "cooler-looking" mutation, just to see if it can be done, and/or to make money. Using the argument that it is "in the name of science," is not accurate because of the already described ecological issues. It is purely for the pet industry; something could be said for trying to make a "better" pet snake or lizard or whatever by crossing this with that, but I've yet to see a hybrid that really fits that bill. i.e. better pet for whom? Of all the snake species kept in the hobby (and their morphs), there isn't any pure species that can't appeal to a person that we have to breed two species that don't ever belong together to create the "perfect pet?"

3.) in response to whether burmball hybrids fall under the same regulations as pure burms: yes, both with most state laws and the federal rule from last year, any hybrid of the species in question is under the same law. Thus, you cannot transport hybrids of burms across state lines, just as you could not with yellow anaconda hybrids or Afrock hybrids.

4) Back to terms of conservation --- something also must be said about preserving localities. BCI is one such example. Yes, Hog Islands and Columbian boas are the same subspecies, but are very different. Lots of people don't give a flying crap and breed the two together indiscrimantly; so there's lots of hog/columbian crosses out there, and without paperwork from a reputable source, many times, you don't know what you have. People keep doing, it just encourages more of the same, and over time, it will get more difficult to find a pure specimen of one or the other. The same can be said for many species.

5) the parallels of the morph market --- much of what I have said can apply to mutations as well. Our hobby is very "morph" driven; if there are no known mutations to prove out, most people could care less about keeping the species. I'm sorry if I'm stepping on toes, but it all comes down to money. Those who think otherwise, ask yourself the question that if you love ______ (insert species of choice) so much, would you really keep a roomful of all normal genotypes of that species? I don't think many people would keep 50-100 normal ball pythons in their basement or whatever just because they like BPs so much. I'm not judging or anything, I'm just being real. Mutations are worth more money than normals, and that is the foundation of the contemporary herp hobby. --- People make the similar argument that "well, base morphs, like albinos were found in the wild, so they're natural, too!" Yes and no; yes, they were found in the wild, but what's the ratio of albinos to normals, something like 100,000 to 1? Remember, albinism is an ABERRATION, an anomaly of the natural thing. Albinos dno't survive in the wild for obvious reasons; it goes back to evolution. If nature wanted pink/white snakes to survive. it would be producing more of them. It doesn't.
---------
I'm not necessarily against hybrids or mutations, but we got to start looking at the big picture, and conserving the pure stuff.

[KORBIN5895]

I like what you said SOR. That helps put a lot into perspective.

On a side note I have 6 boas and four pythons. All of my snakes are a commodity to me but one. Her name is Gabby and she is a normal bci and she will be with me no matter what. All of my other boas are a triple gene morphs save for my female albino het snow. Why do I keep them? Because of the value of the off spring.