New Boa Questions...

[Herpocrite]

Hey guys... I'm a new snake owner and new to this forum... so Hi for starters. I also have some questions. I just bought a 4 month old, captive bred, red-tailed boa (that's what poster thing at the pet store called it). It's beautiful, about 18" long, eats wonderfully well and is actually crawling up the sleve of my sweatshirt as I type this. I think the best thing about it is that its disposition is so friendly. When I open the tank up it actually comes out of its sanctuary and will climb up its tree to be held.... really friendly. So on to the questions:

1) I have no idea what its sex is. Is there an easy way to tell just by looking at it? Do I really have to get it probed? (sounds like it's not fun... I mean if you went to the doctor and they told you they were going to "probe" you... how happy would you be about it?) I'd kinda like to know thought, even if just so I can stop calling it "it".

2) Like I said, the thing at the pet store called it a red-tailed boa. But as I understand, there is a lot of confusion about the real RTBs (BCC) vs. what are often called RTBs but are actually BCIs. The lady at the pet store seemed to know a lot about snakes (she owns four), but is there any way I can tell whether it's a BCC or a BCI just by looking at it? I hope there's not some other sort of probing necessary to figure this out as well.

3) What should the humidity be for it? Seems to be doing fine, but I want to make sure it has the best possible environment and it's really dry in my house. Right now it's in a 30 gallon viv with bark substrate, two sanctuaries (one in a hot zone and one in the cool zone), a water container and a tree to climb on. The temp is about 85 in the hot end (air, not surface) and around 78 in the cool end. What can I be doing better?

Thanks and I'll try to get some pics as soon as possible.

Herpocrite

[Linds]

Welcome to the site and welcome to snakes! :)

Chances are very high that you what you have is a Colombian BCI. This is what they are commonly labelled as in pet stores, and this is the most common form of B.c available in pet stores as well. Typically B.c.c. are at least twice the price and will be have a locale attached to the label (ie- "Guyanese"). Also, captive bred B.c.c. are not as readily available, especially in stores. They may occassionally be offered for sale in reptile specialty stores, but rarely, if ever, available in general pet stores.

You cannot visually sex your boa. Your best bet is to have an experienced vet or keeper probe your snake. At that size, they can also be popped, however this is only semi-accurate. Of course you cannot falsely identify a male if he everts his hemipenes, however, if they do not, they can be mistaken as a female.

I find BCI to well with a humidity level of around 50% - 55%. This may be difficult to properly acheive in an aquarium, or any other enclosure with an screened top. What you want to be measuring is the surface temps, not the air temps. The cool side isn't as important as the cool side, but shouldn't be any lower than 75 (I keep mine at about 80). The basking spot shouldn't drop below 90. I keep mine at 95 for adults, however babies do best with slightly lower temps, as they are prone to dehydration and overheating.

Good luck with your new little guy! :thumbsup:

P.s.- I just had to make a correction on one thing - sort of a pet peeve of mine. Snakes are not "friendly". They do not enjoy companionship and express emotions, they are solitary animals that merely tolerate us to a degree, some better than others. We all too often mistake their actions for something they are not. What may seem like the snake enjoys our company, may be something as simple as security or warmth.

[Herpocrite]

Thanks... I called the pet store and they told me that the snake is Columbian... which almost assures that he's a BCI.

I had one more question though... I fed my snake on sunday (two days ago). He ate a full-sized mouse and I didn't mess with him for 24hrs after that.. I haven't seen any feces in the tank though. How long after they eat do they usually poop? By the end of the 24hrs the lump in him had gone away and I keep expecting to have to clean up after him... but nothing yet. Just wondering. Thanks again.

Herpocrite

[Dark_Angel_25]

my Red Tail usually poops anywhere from 5 days to a week after she eats depending on the size of the meal. with Boa's you don't necessairily need to wait for a poop to feed again either like oyu would with a Ball Python for example.

[Ed_r]

BCI.
You can get an idea of sex by comparing tails , only really works if your very experience and have a known female to compare to. Probing is 100%. Make sure the snake gets probed by someone experienced. Not all vets know how to probe.

Columbian usually means BCI but there are Columbian BCC but not common. YOu can tell this by scale counts, head structure, and markings. If you had one of each side by side it would be a no brainer.

Temps- Hot side 88 degrees cool side 78-82 ish. Never use a heat rock! Humidity is moderate for a BCI usually 50-60 % Is more than addequate. Raise humidity up when snake is going to shed (eyes cloud up).

Feeding- Feed One prey item of equal diameter to the thickest part of the snakes body, with a baby you can actually feed slightly larger. You don't have to wait till it poops to feed again. Some babies use almost all their prey they wont poop regularly. Feed snake every 5-7 days weather it poops or not. Snake may not eat during a shed, dont worry.

DON'T FEED LIVE :D Boas take f/t prey very easily.

[Ed's Boa Caresheet (http://www.geocities.com/ed_rzewnicki/Boa_Constrictor.html)

[Herpocrite]

Originally posted by Linds


P.s.- I just had to make a correction on one thing - sort of a pet peeve of mine. Snakes are not "friendly". They do not enjoy companionship and express emotions, they are solitary animals that merely tolerate us to a degree, some better than others. We all too often mistake their actions for something they are not. What may seem like the snake enjoys our company, may be something as simple as security or warmth. [/B]

Hey... this isn't really a correction.... it's speculation. The truth is that no one has any idea whether or not snakes, whales, mice, or even oaks are sentient species capable of feeling love, hatred, sadness or joy. When I say the my snake is "friendly" it may be anthropomorphic, but that doesn't make it untrue. We simply don't know, and if I like to think that my snake likes me and is actively being friendly then there's no evidence against that conclusion. Sorry... just one of my pet peeves. ;-)

[Herpocrite]

Originally posted by Linds


P.s.- I just had to make a correction on one thing - sort of a pet peeve of mine. Snakes are not "friendly". They do not enjoy companionship and express emotions, they are solitary animals that merely tolerate us to a degree, some better than others. We all too often mistake their actions for something they are not. What may seem like the snake enjoys our company, may be something as simple as security or warmth. [/B]

Hey... this isn't really a correction.... it's speculation. The truth is that no one has any idea whether or not snakes, whales, mice, or even oaks are sentient species capable of feeling love, hatred, sadness or joy. When I say the my snake is "friendly" it may be anthropomorphic, but that doesn't make it untrue. We simply don't know, and if I like to think that my snake likes me and is actively being friendly then there's no evidence against that conclusion. Sorry... just one of my pet peeves. ;-)

[Linds]

Originally posted by Dark_Angel_25
with Boa's you don't necessairily need to wait for a poop to feed again either like oyu would with a Ball Python for example.

It isn't important with Ball Python's either ;) Actually BP tend to defecate even less than BCI, so you would really be waiting around much longer than need be. The only species you really need to monitor their defecation schedule are strictly arboreal snakes, such as ETB.

Originally posted by Herpocrite
Hey... this isn't really a correction.... it's speculation. The truth is that no one has any idea whether or not snakes, whales, mice, or even oaks are sentient species capable of feeling love, hatred, sadness or joy.

Actually they do not possess the part of the brain that is responsible for those feelings, so it isn't so much speculation as it is science :)

[Herpocrite]

Actually they do not possess the part of the brain that is responsible for those feelings, so it isn't so much speculation as it is science :) [/B][/QUOTE]


Actually, as a biologist/behavioral evolutionist I've gotta tell you that it is not known where in the brain sentience, and therefore the ability to "feel" in the emotional sense, lies. It has been shown that a functional prefrontal cortex is necessary for complex planning and consistency of personality, but individuals who were either born with abnormalities in this region or have had significant portions of it removed are still aware of their own being, can postulate their own death and can certainly still feel (even if we would call much of this feeling irrational).

Furthermore, individuals with whom communication is impossible due to massive paralysis might well be called unaware or not sentient following your line of thought. The truth is that self-awareness or sentience is a tricky thing to define and in virtually any way you decide to define it it's a VERY tricky thing to either prove or disprove. I might as well say that you're not self-aware. You have no proof, and you could offer me none that would be conclusive.

I really appreciate that you have a lot more experience with snakes, and probably all reptiles than I, but when it comes to the biology, chemistry and philosophy of sentience; I'm currently in the process of acquiring three little letters which go a long way towards proving I spend far more time ruminating on such issues. It's what I do man.

Herpocrite.

[Jeff_Favelle]

Hmmm....not sure I agree. As of my last class in Animal Psych (ha ha, don't ask how long ago...), only certain mammals of certain ages were thought to have self-awaremenss (self consciousness). And sentience was just the ability to feel pain or pleasure, which all animals that aren't paralyzed have.

I doubt that snakes/reptiles/birds /fish/monerans/protists, etc etc are "aware" that they exist and that their actions have future consequences. It just doesn't seem rational to think so. It would raise FAR more questions about why they do the things they do if they were self aware than if they weren't. I believe that they are just hard-wired (instinct), facilitated by their genetic code, for certain actions and reactions when faced with certain stimuli. I think its egotistical to put one of our characteristics on different animals in hopes that they share these traits. But they don't. Sorry.

[Jeff_Favelle]

*side note*

As our last project of the year, the class split into two groups for a debate. After being taught that self-awareness was a quality of certain mammals at a certain age, and believe that to be a true statement, one group had to advocate the "right" to exterminate mentally/physically challenged people, and the other group had to defend that particular group as just a different group of people with the same rights, BUT advocate the hunting of animals. It was kind of morbid, but it raised some serious questions. I mean, do we have rights (as governed by our laws) because we are of the species Homo sapiens or do we have rights because of our self-awareness and consciousness-of-existence? Weird. Not really politically correct, and I don't suggest bringing it up at party, but it did spark some serious debate.

[Herpocrite]

Originally posted by Jeff_Favelle
Hmmm....not sure I agree. As of my last class in Animal Psych (ha ha, don't ask how long ago...), only certain mammals of certain ages were thought to have self-awaremenss (self consciousness). And sentience was just the ability to feel pain or pleasure, which all animals that aren't paralyzed have.

Actually, sentience, as usually defined by behavioral evolutionists and virtually all biologists, is "the state of elementary or undifferentiated consciousness" which then begs the question, "What is consciousness?" Well, consciousness is defined as "the quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself".


Originally posted by Jeff_Favelle
I doubt that snakes/reptiles/birds /fish/monerans/protists, etc etc are "aware" that they exist and that their actions have future consequences. It just doesn't seem rational to think so. It would raise FAR more questions about why they do the things they do if they were self aware than if they weren't. I believe that they are just hard-wired (instinct), facilitated by their genetic code, for certain actions and reactions when faced with certain stimuli. I think its egotistical to put one of our characteristics on different animals in hopes that they share these traits. But they don't. Sorry.


"It just doesn't seem rational to think so." Interesting sentence... but what seems rational to you may not be to others. If you make it a logic problem sentience is like god and you must first believe in its existence before you can prove it exists. As for the additional questions it would raise... just because an organism is sentient doesn't mean we would necessarily understand it. Heck, I don't understand a lot of people with whom I share species, gender, sex and culture. Your next sentence is much more reasonable. You believe. I do too. But neither of us have any proof.

As for ego... lol... Which is more egotistical: Thinking you are the only sentience species or allowing for the possibility that other organisms are sentient in a way humans in western culture don't understand?

Herpocrite.

[Invictus]

5 years ago (or so) I was reading in a psych textbook that NO mammals other than humans, mokeys, and dolphins were sentient and capable of feeling. Now this has been expanded to include dogs, cats, parrots, etc. which are now believed to be sentient.

What does not make sense here, is when a snake will literally go out of its way to come directly to its handler, and this is referred to as "tolerance".

SPARE ME. There are a plethora of humans on this earth who I merely tolerate, and let me tell you... I don't go out of my way to be in contact with them. If snakes are as primitive as people love to believe, it's inconveivable to me to believe that a snake exhbiting this behavior is "tolerating" his handler. This just does not follow logic, as the snake obviously is not concerned about hurting our feelings. If you had to reach into the cage to get it out, I could understand this, but when IT comes to YOU, come on... you're not warmer than their habitat, or at least you shouldn't be, so don't tell me it's because of warmth.

I knew this would happen too... we would get someone on here who DOES have a degree (in this case, working on a PhD) in biology and behavioral evolutionism, and the people who are SO attached to their belief that snakes exhibit no feelings or merely "tolerate" us would still utterly dismiss anything that said biologist would have to offer. This, to me, is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen on this board. It's really sad. Especially when you take into account it was only within the last few years (maybe as many as 10, I don't know when the textbook was written) that dogs were discovered to actually possess feelings. Is it so inconceivable that snakes could have some glimmer of feelings too?

Herpocrite - perhaps you can shed some light on this. While I agree that in mammals a functional prefrontal cortex is necessary in order to have emotions, is this true of all animals? The reason I ask is because of a paper I read quite some time ago on neuroscience which suggested that many creatures with smaller brains actually have a completely different "mind map" than we do, and that the areas of the brain responsible for certain human functions are not in the same literal location on smaller creatures. Can you confirm/deny this? As I mentioned, it was quite a while ago, and this could possibly have been disproven.

[Invictus]

Further to refuting the snakes being "hard-wired" garbage... if this were the case, there would be NO behavioral differences among the species whatsoever. In fact, there would be no differences in behavior among Serpentia at all. Look at bees for instance. Here is an example of a hard-wired creature. There is literally no variation in behavior whatsoever with the different classes of bees. Every worker bee behaves exactly like every other worker bee. Every drone behaves exactly like every other drone. There is no variation based on location, no variation based on anything - they are all the same.

So if snakes are hard-wired and driven purely by instinct, why is it that I have 3 Macklott's pythons, all from the same clutch, 1 of which is what you would consider "typical" - aggressive, skittish, not something you want your kids handling - but the other 2 are as gentle as corn snakes? If they were hard-wired, there would be no behavioral differences in them at all, ESPECIALLY given that they are all siblings.

Here's another example - my female blood python who is even more docile than our ball pythons. Were she a hard-wired creature, she would strike at anything that touched her. But I can touch the top of her head, and she doesn't even flinch. I can touch her nose right along the heat pits, and she doesn't bite. If she were driven purely by instinct, it would stand to reason that her heat pits would sense the warmth, her eyes would see the movement, and I'd be on my way to get stitches. But oddly enough, she doesn't. Why is that?

Hmmm.... maybe because she is AWARE enough to know that human finger does not equal food. Maybe my 2 gentle Macklotts are AWARE that humans are not a threat.

If a snake is self-aware enough to "tolerate", they are self-aware enough to feel. Tolerance is something that requires analysis. It involves being aware of something that is happening and making a conscious choice not to do anything about it. If they are aware enough to do this, and given the overwhelming proof that there is HUGE variation in behavior among the different species, I think dismissing snake sentience is utterly ridiculous.

[JonD]

Good post Ken!

[Herpocrite]

Originally posted by Invictus
Herpocrite - perhaps you can shed some light on this. While I agree that in mammals a functional prefrontal cortex is necessary in order to have emotions, is this true of all animals? The reason I ask is because of a paper I read quite some time ago on neuroscience which suggested that many creatures with smaller brains actually have a completely different "mind map" than we do, and that the areas of the brain responsible for certain human functions are not in the same literal location on smaller creatures. Can you confirm/deny this? As I mentioned, it was quite a while ago, and this could possibly have been disproven.

Actually, a functional prefrontal cortex in animals is not necessary for emotions. It has been implicated in a loss in emotional stability (which the media then dumbed down to "We have FOUND the seat of all emotions!") but humans or mammals with severe lesions or partial removal/ablation of this portion of the brain in still have emotions. As for the whether or not all animals the same brain map... well.. most animals have very similar brain maps. It's like living rooms. If you go into a living room in the U.S. most of them are very similar.... there are some notable exceptions, but on average - almost the same. If you then go into a living room or community room in another culture, it has some differences - some furniture may be missing, some may be added - but functionally very similar. It happens that way because they function similarly. The same can be said for the evolution of animal brains. They have evolved functionally similar in structure and mapping - even if there are some pieces added or missing - because they have the same basic functions. I'm not sure if I like that analogy because I came up with it off the top of my head, but you get the idea.

If you want to continue to pursue the line of thinking in which we take as a corollary that emotions are the benchmark of sentience and that the seat of emotions is found somewhere in the brain (something that is not proven) then reptiles are almost certainly sentient.

New findings suggest that reptiles may have been the first animals to experience their emotions. Last year Michel Cabanac from Laval University in Canada showed that iguanas try to maximize sensory pleasure - they prefer to stay warm rather than venture out into the cold to get food. And when basking in a warm environment, they experience physiological changes associated with pleasure in humans and other vertebrates, such as "emotional fever" - a boost in body temperature - and a raised heart rate. Amphibians and fish do not exhibit these behavioral and physiological responses. Cabanac suggests that the first mental event to emerge into consciousness was the ability of an individual to experience the sensations of pleasure or displeasure. His research suggests that reptiles experience basic emotional states, and proposes that such emotions evolved somewhere between amphibians and early reptiles.

I don't mean to have stirred up all this just by mentioning that it is not a foregone conclusion that my snake cannot be "friendly". All I wanted was to figure out the sex, subspecies and humidity requirements of my new friend. I'm open to everyone having their opinion on this one... just don't tell me that mine is wrong.

Herpocrite.

[Invictus]

That's fascinating information about the physiological responses. I'll see if I can find Michel Cabanac's paper on the subject.

Whether or not reptiles are "friendly" or merely "tolerant", in my opinion, shows sentience either way. I don't see emotion as being the benchmark of sentience, but rather, the ability to analyze stimuli and decide on a reaction based on consequence. As I mentioned before, if all reptiles were hard-wired and driven by instinct, none of them would be handleable. :) Buta reptile deciding that human interaction has no consequence shows me that they do have the ability to analyze, on some level, the consequences, or lack thereof.

Do you have any more information about any actual studies that have been done on emotional responses in reptiles?

[Jeff_Favelle]

Further to refuting the snakes being "hard-wired" garbage... if this were the case, there would be NO behavioral differences among the species whatsoever.

Ken, are you for real man? That's like saying that morphs aren't the result of genetics! Of course there can be differences in the genetic code that goeverns instinct and behavioural mechanisms!! LOL!! Just like there's differences in the code that govern color/pattern/eye color, etc etc etc How do you THINK there came to be so much speciation? Slight arberrancies in the code that allowed certain groups to exploit OTHER niches, behaviouraly AND phenotypically. ITS WHY WE HAVE SPECIATION!

LOL! Sometimes I don't think you use your noggin man!

And I wouldn't be calling terms "garbage". Please; let's not let this debate escalate to the levels of other debates in the past. Just stick to the facts (and opinions) and everything will still be fun.



"What is consciousness?" Well, consciousness is defined as "the quality or state of being aware especially of something within oneself".

Then how do you define "self-consciousness"?

[Jeff_Favelle]

If snakes are sentient, why would they sit under a light until they are burned? If they are sentient, wouldn't they know the future consequences of their actions?

[Jeff_Favelle]

As I mentioned before, if all reptiles were hard-wired and driven by instinct, none of them would be handleable. Buta reptile deciding that human interaction has no consequence shows me that they do have the ability to analyze, on some level, the consequences, or lack thereof.

Being able to learn or to decipher danger is not the same as being "aware of one's existence", in my opinion. Just my opinion mind you.

[Invictus]

Jeff - this doesn't explain how 3 snakes of the same clutch, which have basically identical genetics, would be SO behaviorally different as to be almost like 2 completely different snakes. Also, you probably have a broader definition of "instincts" than the scientific community. Instinct is simple - eat, drink, survive, reproduce. Being handled by a human has nothing to do with instinct, and if it does, then the instinct would be to attack a handler, since that is what is more commonly seen in wild specimens. And as I mentioned, the proof is in creatures even more primitive than snakes. Every bee is the same. They are driven entirely by instinct, and there are ZERO differences between samples of the same type of bee. Snake, however, show so much diversity, it's impossible to believe that they are hard-wired and driven only by instinct. This simply does not make any kind of scientific sense at all.

And by the way, being able to learn is something that is a scentific impossibility without sentience. That is an accepted fact throughout biology, philosphy, and psychology. Yeah I know, you're thinking "What does philosophy have to do with science?" Nothing. But when certain things are accepted by both trades, there has got to be validity to it.

[Cruciform]

Could some snakes associate gentle handling and stroking the same way other animals would, and thus be more inclined to be handled, eg. it would stimulate pleasure response rather than displeasure, and they would repeat patterns of behavior that reproduced that pleasure situation.

Rats have chosen electrical stimulation over food to the point of starvation because they derived pleasure from it. And humans have done the same with drugs. Do we know enough about reptiles to say with certainty that a reptile can not "feel good"?

Sharks have been regarded as purely instinctual, solitary, eating machines.

Research done in the last five years (and reported on Discovery, best channel ever) has shown that some sharks hunt in well organized packs, including running patrols and scouting beyond the usual feeding ground. There was a whole documentary dedicated to sharks in one location that come up to divers and nudge them until they are petted. Whether the behavior is a quirk or something they learned isn't known yet.

Science makes great leaps and bounds constantly. Old theories get disproven and new ones take their place. Who's to know what we'll learn about animals tomorrow that we didn't know today.

[Jeff_Favelle]

Jeff - this doesn't explain how 3 snakes of the same clutch, which have basically identical genetics, would be SO behaviorally different as to be almost like 2 completely different snakes.


You're right, that is odd. I don't know how to explain back in the day when I hatched normal, anery, albino, and snow corns all from the same clutch. Why didn't they all look the same??

God-forbid that behaviours could be controlled by DNA, and that not every single snake is identical.

[Jeff_Favelle]

And by the way, being able to learn is something that is a scentific impossibility without sentience. That is an accepted fact throughout biology, philosphy, and psychology.

Cold you point me to the text or periodical that backs up that "fact".

Thanks man.

[tHeGiNo]

I would have to agree with Jeff here.

If snakes are sentient, why would they sit under a light until they are burned? If they are sentient, wouldn't they know the future consequences of their actions?

Thats exactly what I was thinking.

As I mentioned before, if all reptiles were hard-wired and driven by instinct, none of them would be handleable.

I, personally, do not believe this says a thing. I mean, I can hold tarantulas without being attacked or bitten, does that suggest that they have emotions?

If she were driven purely by instinct, it would stand to reason that her heat pits would sense the warmth, her eyes would see the movement, and I'd be on my way to get stitches. But oddly enough, she doesn't. Why is that?

Amazingly enough, snakes can smell too! Rub your hand with a rat for a few minutes, stick your hand infront of your snake, wiggle your fingers and let me know if you have the same results.

What does not make sense here, is when a snake will literally go out of its way to come directly to its handler, and this is referred to as "tolerance".

I can't say too much about that. However, when I am feeding worms to some of my reptiles, I notice when I stick my finger in the container, some will come out of their way to come on me. Or, my veiled chameleons are another example. They DEFINITELY do not like me, however if I hold my arm out, they will occassionally come to my, and crawl on my arm. Not sure what I am saying here, however I thought I would throw a few ideas out there.

[Invictus]

Whether or not they feel is less important here than whether or not they think. Like I said, the proof has already been offered by someone who WOULD be in the know about this kind of thing, and it is still being rejected by this community, just as I said it would in previous debates about the same subject. New ideas that challenge old beliefs seems to be the bane of the "old skool" herpers. So I guess it doesn't matter.

Neither you nor Jeff have touched on the MAJOR point I brought up which was comparing variation in snakes to variation in bees. Bees have been shown to be one of the most "intelligent" insects on the planet, yet there is zero variation with them. Why? Because they are hard-wired, instinctual, and non-sentient. Snakes on the other hand, exhibit signs that they do analyze on some level, even if it's only a single level deep. As for why some stay on a heat source until they are burned, hell I don't know... why do some humans walk out in front of moving buses?

Now, as for whether or not snakes "like" us depends on the level of their sentience. Obviously, they do not like us in a sense of an individual identifying with another individual. However, to say that they only "tolerate" handling is completely contrary to about half of the snakes in my collection that will go out of their way to be handled. This is not tolerance, this shows a distinct desire for a certain stimuli. When a snake is in its enclosure, perfectly calm, not moving, and you take off the lid or open the glass doors or whatever, and they look, and come right to you, even though you have no food scent whatsoever on you, this shows a desire that the snake is exhibiting - whether it's just getting some exercise, or a genuine curiosity, some snakes do show a desire for human interaction. Calling this "tolerance" is dismissive and completely contrary to the behavior.

[Jeff_Favelle]

I'm confused. WHO's opinion got "rejected by this community" again?

[Cruciform]

The burning of the lamp can be explained by the structure of the nervous system.

Take your hand and stick it into 80 degrees celsius water for a couple of seconds. Ouch! Damn hot huh?

Now start out at 30 degrees celsius and increase that over a period of time. Not nearly as uncomfortable is it?

And that's with a highly developed nervous system. Our ability to process sensations can still be deceived. It's not surprising the reptile wouldn't register the damage until it's already done. If you poke them with a sharp stick (sudden stimulus) you won't see the same delayed reaction.

[Invictus]

Herpocrite posted information about a scientific study that does show that Iguanas exhibit the same physiological signs as humans when they experience pleasure. In addition to this, even his ideas that snakes ARE in fact sentient on some level has also been outright rejected. As I said - finally we get someone who DOES have a degree in animal behaviorism, and you dig in your heels, refusing to admit that maybe the idea of reptiles being hard wired and purely instinctual, could be wrong.

[Jeff_Favelle]

Holy cow man, we're debating the freakin' subject! That's what these forums are for! Just because we don't take someone's word as gospel and try to have an intelligent DIALOGUE on the subject, all of a sudden we're rejecting him and throwing his opinions back in his face?

Can I hear a big "HUH"?

:confused: :confused:

I'm sorry that I don't believe that your snakes are your buddies and they come crawling to you because they like to play and be handled and that they miss you when you're gone and that some are mean because they hate you, and others are nice because they love you...etc etc etc. Sorry man, I can't buy that. If that means rejecting someone's ideas to you, that's your problem. LOL! I've just observed WAY too many animals at every level of the phylogeny to think that way.

But I do appreciate and read every word that everyone says. Just because I don't agree, does not mean I'm rejecting them! LOL! I'm sorry it can't be all bubble gum and pixie sticks man, but that's what having a discussion is all aboooot. :D

[Invictus]

Originally posted by Jeff_Favelle
I'm sorry that I don't believe that your snakes are your buddies and they come crawling to you because they like to play and be handled and that they miss you when you're gone and that some are mean because they hate you, and others are nice because they love you...etc etc etc.

Jeff, it is sarcasm like this that draws agression from people (namely me) and lands us with open mudslinging debates like the last one that we had, and makes you look completely pompous. You want to have an intelligent discussion? Then let's have one. Please, for once, let's have one. Leave these sarcastic and frankly petty remarks out of it. I'm sorry that you can't refute my position directly, so you need to nitpick on small details of the debate instead of looking at the big picture of what I'm trying to convey, and I'm sorry that you have to resort to remarks such as the above to try and dominate a discussion.

It has become quite obvious to me over the last 8 months that I've been on this site that your opinion would NEVER change on ANY subject, despite any proof to the contrary, so long as the proof was coming from someone with less experience than you - even if said person was working on a PhD in behavioral evolution, and has offered up scientific proof thereof. So, once again, because you can't prove me wrong, and you need to resort to sarcasm, there is no debating with you.

For the rest of you who do know how to debate without cheap shots, I would like to re-emphasize that I don't believe my snakes like *me*, because I don't believe that they have an ability to identify with humans as individuals, save for an individual scent perhaps. However, until someone can explain to me why some snakes go out of their way to be handled, I have to believe based on my observations of my own and other peoples' herp collections that some snakes do seem to enjoy the stumuli of human interaction. It could be because of the plethora of scents, the movement responding to their movement, a curiosity, etc. But though I do believe many, maybe even most snakes only have "tolerance", it seems to me rather futile to say that this is true of ALL snakes, especially when the behavior is contrary to any indications of mere tolerance.

[Invictus]

Still looking for the whole research paper, but here's a clip:

Emotion and Phylogeny

Michel Cabanac, Département de Physiologie, Université Laval, Québec, Canada, G1K 7P4 Email: michel.cabanac@phs.ulaval.ca

Gentle handling of mammals (rats, mice), and lizards (Iguana), but not of frogs (Rana) and fish (Carassius) elevated the set-point for body temperature, i.e., produced an emotional fever, achieved only behaviourally in lizards. Heart rate, another detector of emotion in mammals, was also accelerated by gentle handling, from ca. 70 b/min to ca. 110 b/min in lizards. This tachycardia faded in about 10 min. The same handling did not significantly modify the frogs’ heart rates. The absence of emotional tachycardia in frogs and its presence in lizards (as well as in mammals), together with the emotional fever exhibited by mammals and reptiles, but not by frogs or fish, would suggest that emotion emerged in the evolutionary lineage between amphibians and reptiles. Such a conclusion would imply that reptiles possess consciousness with its characteristic hedonic dimension, pleasure. The role of sensory pleasure in decision making was therefore verified in iguanas placed in a motivational conflict. To be able to reach a bait (lettuce), the iguanas had to leave a warm refuge, provided with standard food, and had to venture into a cold environment. The results showed that lettuce was not necessary to the iguanas and that they traded off the palatability of the bait against the disadvantage of the cold. Thus, the behaviour of the iguanas was possibly produced, as it is in humans, through the maximization of sensory pleasure. Altogether, these results may indicate that the first elements of mental experience emerged between amphibians and reptiles.

[Invictus]

For those of you who though that reptiles lacked the areas of the brain responsible for emotions or pleasure, I'm afraid you're grossly mistaken.

The limbic system is a group of brain structures that are involved in various emotions such as aggression, fear, pleasure and also in the formation of memory. The limbic system also affects the endocrine system and the autonomic nervous system. It consists of several structures located around the thalamus, just under the cerebrum:

(Skip ahead a little):

The limbic system is among the oldest parts of the brain in evolutionary terms: it can be found in fish, amphibians, reptiles and mammals.

Source:

http://mind-brain.com/limbic.php

So as you see, reptiles DO have a limbic system, and thus ARE capable of certain primitive emotions.

[Derrick]

Man I love these LePage-Favelle showdowns(debates:) ). There is always some good info and points to ponder. That and the fact that there is some entertaining rhetoric

[foman]

I'm with ya Derrick they're great, your aviator is sweet it just needs a police hat.LOL.;)

Invictus i don't believe your snakes come to u wanting to be held, I think they see u as a way out of the cage and then when they climb onto you they think why not chill out here for a while, it's warm and comfy. just my 2 cents. :cool:

[nicola_boulton]

great debates every1s always got such good opions, i just wish i had the patients and time 2 read every1s really long threads, :( would be nice if snakes reallly did love u though so much they'd bring you sandwiches etc.

[Jeff_Favelle]

LOL. I wish I was being sarcastic. That's the scary thing.....


For the rest of you who do know how to debate without cheap shots, I would like to re-emphasize that I don't believe my snakes like *me*, because I don't believe that they have an ability to identify with humans as individuals, save for an individual scent perhaps. However, until someone can explain to me why some snakes go out of their way to be handled, I have to believe based on my observations of my own and other peoples' herp collections that some snakes do seem to enjoy the stumuli of human interaction.

After the snake "comes to you", quickly put it on the floor in the living room, and see if it gravitates towards being picked up. I mean, if it WANTS to be handled...........

[Invictus]

Odd that you should mention that Jeff because I experimented with this with my 7' male boa on several occasions, and guess what... he did gravitate directly towards me.

[marisa]

So if snakes love their owners then why do they escape? Or is it only some snakes that love their owners?

I am not saying the hate being handled or don't enjoy a specific person holding them. Human interaction is 100% not needed to have a healthy snake in captivity and its not needed by wild snakes. So why does it even matter? Is it going to stop someone from trading a herp in fear it will miss its owner? Or?? I am just not sure what the implications of this are, for either side.

Personally my snakes have no personal attachment to me and I will not assume they do until I can train them to follow me donw the street or "stay" LOL ;)

Marisa

[daver676]

Originally posted by marisa
So if snakes love their owners then why do they escape? Or is it only some snakes that love their owners?

Marisa

But you could say the same thing about dogs. Some dogs run away while others are perfectly happy to stay put.

[marisa]

A dog also shows emotions clearly though. Vocally, using body language, and its a proven fact dogs can be trained to noy only do tricks, but be used in many many occupational and theraputic ways. I highly doubt we will ever see a snake missing an owner if the snake has been sold, sniffing out drugs or anything else.

Not trying to argue I just don't see the point. If snakes do in fact have emotions, it seems we all agree they are obvioulsly minimal and put to little if any use during the course of their lives in regards to achieving food, heat and breeding. So what implacations would there be for captive snakes? I can't really see any for people who are already using educated husbandry etc because the simple fact is they do NOT need to he handled to be healthy. So even if they liked it, I don't see how this changes much. Just a thought. Personally I don't believe EITHER side knows enough yet about these animals to say for sure "They hate it or dont like it" OR "They love me"

Marisa

[Invictus]

Ok people... please quit putting words in my mouth, despite the fact that I have been PERFECTLY clear throughout this whole debate. I NEVER ONCE said that snakes love their owners. Love is a complex emotion that involves individual identity and characteristic knowledge, which snakes do not possess. So I have been perfectly clear that what they experience IS NOT LOVE, and they do not like *us* as individuals. I was merely pointing out the scientific evidence that snakes (and all other reptiles) can experience pleasure.

Got it? Should I go over this again?

Such being the case, studies have shown that certain lizards do experience pleasure from gentle handling. (Read up on Michel Cabarnac's paper if you can find it. I was actually looking for sources other than him.) Since snakes evolved at the same time, or pehaps even later than lizards, and their brain also has a limbic system, which means they are also capable of experiencing pleasure from human interaction. I've given several examples of why this could possibly be - and offered up examples such as the exercise, the different scents they experience, the movement of the handler reflecting their movement, the warmth... MANY things. Do you see "love" anywhere in that statement, Marisa?

Bottom Line: The previously accepted notion that ANIMALS (not just reptiles) do not feel emotions has been proven to have evolved between the evolutionary time periods of amphibians and reptiles. Thus, reptiles do have the limbic areas of the brain which are responsible for primitive emotions such as pleasure, fear, agression, etc. "Tolerance", though more common, is not the ONLY thing a reptile can possibly experience with a human handler.

[Linds]

I wasn't going to reply to this thread, as it looks like it's going the same way as that heating pythons thread, but since I started I felt I should follow up with another response.

I have never seen any evidence that supports the arguement that snakes enjoy our companionship, enjoy handling, or have "feelings" or "thoughts" towards us, only instinctual or (within reason) conditioned responses. Everything I have experienced supports the belief that snakes are not sentient. I always welcome someone to prove me wrong, but so far nobody has been able to provide any evidence without anthromorphic explanations. Yes, I have snakes that crawl out on to me as well, but I don't dismiss that as a sign that they are "friendly" or enjoy being handled. Despite those motions, they still display many subtle (and sometimes very obvious) signs that they do not enjoy being handled. Furthermore, it doesn't even begin to make sense that these animals would ever care for humans. For arguements sake, even if they -were- capable of feeling those type of feelings: They do not even enjoy the company of their own kind, why would they develop those kind of feeling towards a natural predator/threat? Snakes do not have friends, so why would that change with us?

[Jeff_Favelle]

Exactly Linds. I agree. I mean, what's the evolutionary advantage towards it? How does the characteristic help the animal on a day-to-day basis?

Snakes don't have time for crap. Their lives revolve around seeking out heat, avoiding heat, avoiding water loss, gaining calories, and breeding. That's it. I don't see any hard evidence of anything otherwise. I'm glad for it. If they were sentient, I don't think I'd feel right keeping them as pets. Not at all.

[joshm]

I do believe the people have spoken.

[tHeGiNo]

Bees have been shown to be one of the most "intelligent" insects on the planet, yet there is zero variation with them. Why? Because they are hard-wired, instinctual, and non-sentient.

Oh ya? Well how come when I smack one bee, he comes and attacks me, while sometimes others don't? LOL!

Frankly, I do not think it is fair to compare an iguana to a snake. They are two totally different animals.

Inviticus, I don't know man. I am not saying your lying, but frankly I will believe it when I see it. Maybe could you describe the context better in which your snakes come to you?

Like I said, the proof has already been offered by someone who WOULD be in the know about this kind of thing, and it is still being rejected by this community, just as I said it would in previous debates about the same subject. New ideas that challenge old beliefs seems to be the bane of the "old skool" herpers. So I guess it doesn't matter.

No offense, but just because someone who has an education throws something out in the open, I don't think thats means to make his word fact and him the god of snake psyche. And I mean, your saying how they just found out that dogs have emotions. Look at a dog, and look at a snake. I mean, from my perspective, you would have to be a moron to not notice that dogs have emotions.

And again, no offense and please don't take this for me calling you a liar. But I mean, its so weird that SEVERAL of your snakes love your companionship, however I have never heard of someone else saying the same thing. Unless of course you take the newcomers who think because a snake doesn't hold up a sign saying I don't like this, they are loving the interaction. Really, I would love to see this.

When a snake is in its enclosure, perfectly calm, not moving, and you take off the lid or open the glass doors or whatever, and they look, and come right to you, even though you have no food scent whatsoever on you, this shows a desire that the snake is exhibiting - whether it's just getting some exercise, or a genuine curiosity, some snakes do show a desire for human interaction.

Who is to say that they see you as a means to get the hell out of the enclosure? Just throwing some suggestions out there.

Odd that you should mention that Jeff because I experimented with this with my 7' male boa on several occasions, and guess what... he did gravitate directly towards me.

Seriously dude, thats crazy. I have GOT to see that.

[djc3674]

Well..this topic is far beyond my level of experience with keeping snakes. All I can say is I do think that reptiles to a point, experience mood or emotion.

Like I'm sure most of you (at some point) went to pick up one of your snakes and it hissed real loudly or maybe even stuck at you...this would make me believe that it doesnt want to be bothered (hence showing a form of emotion/mood). Other times...they want to come out of their enclosure, and while they are being handled, they are totally relaxed and seem to like the excercise. Because when you try and put them back in...they fight like hell and dont want to. So they are displaying a form of mood between those two scenerios.

Also, if a snake has mites...it seems to be uncomfortable to them...so they go into their water dish for a soak and this helps relieve their discomfort. They will do this over and over again...is this instict or do they remember that a nice soak helps relieve their discomfort??

[djc3674]

oh and one more thing.....snakes definately cannot decipher right from wrong.....have you ever put a nice clean hide box in their tank. They slither into it and stay there for days....and the next thing you know..they crap and pee in it..ruining the whole thing!!!! Now why on earth would they poop where they sleep??? LOL (know what I mean)

[Herpocrite]

Originally posted by joshm
I do believe the people have spoken.


And they have said, "We don't know."

Seriously folks, this is pretty much where the scientific comunity stands on this issue. No one really knows. Many people have very stong opinions, (as we have seen in this forum) and there is good evidence on both sides of the argument. A lot of it draws on many scientific discinplines for insight. Most of it depends upon how the concept of sentience is defined. Almost all of it is pretty fascinating.

Oh.... and one other thing....

I'M RIGHT AND ALL OF YOU ARE WRONG!

Herpocrite.

[Jeff_Favelle]

Seriously folks, this is pretty much where the scientific comunity stands on this issue. No one really knows. Many people have very stong opinions, (as we have seen in this forum) and there is good evidence on both sides of the argument. A lot of it draws on many scientific discinplines for insight. Most of it depends upon how the concept of sentience is defined. Almost all of it is pretty fascinating.

Totally man. Fascinating is an understatement! But its reptiles. How could we expect anything less, right?!! :D

Cheers man. I hope we can further our knowledge about this, whether its proving or disproving whatever paradigm is existing. Its still fun either way.

[Cruciform]

Gino,

He hasn't said his snakes love him, but that they will come back to him if he puts them down.

It doesn't indicate an emotional attachment on the part of the snake, but say if the snake is returning to him because it realizes that:

a) it will be fed or warmed up by coming back.

b) that it will be petted in a way that relaxes it.

then there is a thought process going on. Not abstract thought by any means, and not a sign of sentience, but the capability to absorb information doesn't have to be accompanied by a sense of self.

There's a very basic thought process used in escaping from a cage. If it pushes where there is air flow, something may give.

But if you put a string on a lever that the snake could pull and have the door open for them they wouldn't get it. Too abstract.


(More opinions folks? This has been an interesting topic.)

If an animal of any type adapts its behavior to meet unnatural (wild) situations, is it learning on some level, or acting purely on instinct?

I've seen people say "Rub a mouse on your hand and put it in the cage" to see if a snake thinks. But that's assuming that the ability to learn will always trump instinct.
Even in complex animals like people you'll still see them completely forego logic and training to react instinctually to some stimuli.

I'm open to both sides of the debate. But I think we sometimes give animals too little credit, and people too much :)

[Jeff_Favelle]

Dynamite post Cruciform! Now get off the fence and tell us how you REALLY feel!!!! LOL!!!

Just kidding man. That was a well thought-out post. :D

[tHeGiNo]

I meant love as a relative term, not literally.

[Invictus]

Linds - You say you've never seen any evidence of your snakes liking you. You also admit that you don't handle your collection. I'm sorry, but those two factors combined are the very reason you have seen nothing. You treat them with indifference, they will treat you with the same. You have to handle them often to be able to create a desireable response from the handling, so I'm afraid you've literally created your own lack of evidence there.

I, on the other hand, spend ALL of my time with my snakes, studying their behavior, and trying to figure out what their individual stress responses are, and what their contented responses are. They are primitive creatures, and if you can't figure out when a snake is content and when it is stressed, you're a fool. That's all there is to it.

TheGino - As for your "I'll believe it when I see it", no you won't. You've proven that already. I've posted excerpts from scientific studies on the matter, which have all been rejected. I've posted my own experiences, which have also been rejected. I could probably post a neurological thesis proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that snakes do feel pleasure from handling, and you and Jeff would still reject it. So there is absolutely no point in my posting my personal experiences anymore, nor contributing to these debates, because they are starting to give me a headache.

For my OWN enlightenment, and for those who don't mind having their ideals challenged, I will continue to research any scientific findings about the limbic systems of reptiles, and any studies done on pleasure responses.

What I think is ultimately sad is, I post scientific research to back up my findings, and all you old skool people can say is "Well I haven't seen any evidence." Sad. Maybe it's because you're not looking for it.

[Retic chic]

I have only one thing to contribute to this thread.

I was excused from University anatomy and physiology class for the afternoon for challenging the prof when he suggested dogs and cats are color blind. He could not provide proof, but told me that he knew for a fact that dogs and cats are color blind.

When I asked him when in the he!! he was a cat, he excused me from the class. So unless you are, or have been, a snake, it is ridiculous to speculate on their perception and feelings towards us, if any. Like they say, opinions are like a$$holes, everybody has one, and they usually stink.

[tHeGiNo]

Hey inviticus, talk about jumping to conclusions! LOL!

TheGino - As for your "I'll believe it when I see it", no you won't.

I meant, I will believe your snakes come to you when you open their cage, and come to you after you put them on the floor - when I see it. I am open to both sides, I have seen no evidence that says snakes are capable of 'liking' their owners.

[Jeff_Favelle]

I, on the other hand, spend ALL of my time with my snakes, studying their behavior, and trying to figure out what their individual stress responses are, and what their contented responses are. They are primitive creatures, and if you can't figure out when a snake is content and when it is stressed,
you're a fool. That's all there is to it.

I think that's the problem man. You're searching for something to explain reactions and observations, and you've come up with this zany idea that your snakes enjoy being petted. IMO.



I could probably post a neurological thesis proving beyond any shadow of a doubt that snakes do feel pleasure from handling, and you and Jeff would still reject it

No, you post something like that and I won't reject it. Not at all. I'll wait and see if it gets peer-reviewed and passes and gets published, but I won't reject. However, theses are a dime-a-dozen. Published papers, for the most part, are not. But show me a link to one, and definitely I'll think differently. Of course. Just because we don't agree with you, doesn't mean we refute and reject ALL evidence from ALL sources. LOL! Nice ego though. :rolleyes:

[Invictus]

Originally posted by tHeGiNo
I have seen no evidence that says snakes are capable of 'liking' their owners. [/B]

And here's the other reason I am through debating this. You don't read what I type. I DID NOT SAY THAT SNAKES LIKE THEIR OWNERS, BECAUSE THIS WOULD INVOLVE PERSONAL IDENTITY WHICH SNAKES ARE NOT CAPABLE OF. Do I need to make this any more clear to you? I said snakes can, and have been proven to, experience pleasure from being handled. I didn't say they like us. I never said that. Now either read what I write or stay out of the debate, ok?

[tHeGiNo]

I've posted excerpts from scientific studies on the matter, which have all been rejected.

I was not going to bother posting this, but why not.

Exert #1:
Gentle handling of mammals (rats, mice), and lizards (Iguana), but not of frogs (Rana) and fish (Carassius) elevated the set-point for body temperature, i.e., produced an emotional fever, achieved only behaviourally in lizards.

Please show me in that section, or any other section of that article where snakes are mentioned?

The limbic system is a group of brain structures that are involved in various emotions such as aggression, fear, pleasure and also in the formation of memory. The limbic system also affects the endocrine system and the autonomic nervous system. It consists of several structures located around the thalamus, just under the cerebrum:

The limbic system is among the oldest parts of the brain in evolutionary terms: it can be found in fish, amphibians, reptiles and mammals.

A few things with that. So, that article is telling me that fish has emotions? And what kind of pleasure can a fish feel? I just don't see in nature, where snakes induce pleasure. The only thing I can see is being pleasurably hot, pleasurable full (food wise), and pleasurably comfortable. I don't see where it relates to human contact. I just cannot comprehend why snakes have certain aspects that they don't use in nature, but are readily available when a human comes along and handles it.

[Invictus]

Of course you don't. *shrug* I bet you haven't bothered to look for any studies on the matter either.

And no snakes are not mentioned, but if you knew anything about evolution, you'd know they came AFTER iguanas, and their mind maps are identical. But whatever. You're gonna believe whatever the hell you want to believe, so as I said, I'm through.

[tHeGiNo]

I never said that. Now either read what I write or stay out of the debate, ok?

Relax bro! I accidentally used the wrong term, but whatever the case I have not seen proof of anything.

And no snakes are not mentioned, but if you knew anything about evolution, you'd know they came AFTER iguanas, and their mind maps are identical. But whatever. You're gonna believe whatever the hell you want to believe, so as I said, I'm through.

So your trying to tell me a snake is the same thing as a bearded dragon. Dude if your such a genious, why don't you stop yelling and being eratic, and explain yourself.

[Invictus]

Been there done that. Explained myself a million times in this thread alone. Getting a headache. Moving along with my research.

[tHeGiNo]

LOL, ok man.

[Scales Zoo]

Holy Cow! I just read the whole thread, my eyes are sore.

Thanks again to Invictus and Jeff for the open debate. These really make a person think, and are a bit entertaining as well.

Jeff, debating with you sucks. I feel sorry for poor Kenny. You know how to “get someone’s goat”, something I know how to do to you, and have enjoyed myself doing so. You know enough not to say a lot, and you know how to make your words count, you have a talent – too bad you couldn’t type better because I’d like to see you able to debate fairly, and offer more good information.

Anyways….I too have some input about the whole thing. Since I started this hobby, I’ve kept 600 snakes from 75 or so species. I fully believe that some snakes do in fact “like” people, some people more than others.

One thing I’ve noticed over the years, are the really special snakes tend to be captive bred for many generations.

I do know someone who breeds Burmese pythons based on temperament (Vern Ruml). In fact, Elvira and the Triplets come from Ally, the “friendliest” snake in Canada. Elvira is on of those very rare “special snakes” that I referred to above. We’ve documented, on video and from eyewitnesses – that she will come towards Sheila and myself, and in a very doglike fashion, seems to me to recognize people that she has been around before.

I am not trying to turn the issue anthropical (uncommon words seem to work well in these threads), but I do believe there is something going on there. We’ve speculated that she associates our smells with a “safe feeling” – but, really, any conclusion drawn from the behaviour is purely that, speculation.

There are a handful of snakes that we own, or have owned – that I would really like to have studied for this, however that would be done. You see, doing the educational displays we have, we have gotten a lot of reptiles from other reptile educators. Some of the animals we have gotten are truly amazing in the way they act around people. Many of these truly great snakes came from the same few people. Like I said, I know in my heart that there is something going on there – whatever that is.

My gut feeling tells me that it is likely related to the consistant good experiences they may have had from other people, as well as being selectively bred from the “tamest” of babies from a “tame” founder stock. Some of my long term snakes, that we use for education, I believe are the way they are because they’ve always been treated very well by us.

I personally could care less about what science already has written on the subject. To limit our knowledge to what has already been learned by others is “GARBAGE”.

As I’ve said before, usually in a Jeff / Ken thread is “you don’t learn nuthin, if you never ask nuthin”.

Ryan

[djc3674]

I meant, I will believe your snakes come to you when you open their cage, and come to you after you put them on the floor

gino..I can kinda see your point on this, because in most cases a snake would retreat from you and try to find the nearest hiding place. However, I know what Invictus is saying about a snake coming to you. I have also put my male bci on the floor (after handling him for a while) while I sit on the couch...he has come back over to me and climb up and over my leg wrapping his tail around me. I dont think they do this because they "like" their owner and need to be close to them. I think its more of a security feeling (especially sprawled out on an open floor with nothing much around it). I think snakes recognize their owners to an extent and will feel a certain sense of security when they are being handled.

[Invictus]

Thanks for the input Ryan and djc.

Ryan - Interesting point you bring up about the really special reptiles being bred for their dispositions. I had a conversation with Henry Piorun about his blood pythons one day. He said that the parents of his bloods are totally tame, and NOT coincidentally, every baby they have ever spawned has been the same in disposition. In talking with many other breeders, there seems to be a great deal of agreement that disposition most certainly is "inherited".

[Herpocrite]

That's awesome! Do you guys know of any breeders of BCIs in New England that breed for disposition? If you read the thread I just posted you'll see why I'm interested.

Thanks,

Herpocrite.

[Linds]

Well, if you had paid attention to what I say, I handle my snakes whenever I clean, or if they are at all nervous animals, with some exceptions of animals that just showed no signs of improvement over time. I like to acclimate my animals to me so that all future dealings, be it just general maintenance or vet trips and tests, are less of an ordeal for both of us. I don't like getting bit and crapped on, and I don't like having my snakes so threatened that they will bite or musk. Once they acheive a level of calmness I just handle them for cleaning or when taking pictures. Years ago I DID handle my snakes for the pleasure of it, and I still have those animals today, so if you feel you want to compare your handling schedule with mine, I have been there and done that too. Just because I don't pester my animals on a daily basis, does not invalidate my arguement. Handling is just conditioning, not to be confused with snakes actually enjoying us.

[M_surinamensis]

Now I see why I was told not to go here again...

But now here is here rather than there... So I'll jump in.

I think that there are two very big points which are frequently missed by both camps in these arguments, with a few associated smaller matters which may be of interest.

It's impossible to observe something without altering it and it's impossible to observe something without a certain bias towards the slant an individual will apply to the results.

By this I mean that trying to test instinctive responses experiments with captive animals are inherently fawled to start, this is a greater problem when the individual making the observations is predisposed towards obtaining a certain set of results. I had an argument for about a week with Melissa Kaplan (I really shouldn't have bothered, she's... not... good people) about a contention which she made about her burmese python. She stated two things... that it would sit on the microwave when it was hungry, because that's how she heated her rats (She keeps a free roaming burm and microwaves rats, this should indicate how worthwhile this conversation was), so when it sat on the microwave, it was communicating to her that it was hungry. When presented with an alternate explaination of "Burms are instinctive predators, they don't eat just because they are hungry, they eat because food is avaliable" she refused to acknowledge it. She has also continued to make an absurd claim that the inner timpanum allows snakes to hear, despite being disconnected from the rest of the nervous system and not connected to the animal's brain and that further, her burm knew it's name and would come when called "If it felt like it." Essentially she admitted that she would yell at it for an hour and a half and if I finally looked in her direction, it was responding to it's name.

While the situation with the boa crawling towards someone when placed on the floor isn't anywhere near as extreme, it's also nowhere near conclusive when it comes to determining what, if any attachment the animal might have. Heck, the floor is cold, instincts say that sunlight is up and you might have just coincidentally been the nearest thing to climb on.

When observing other species, ANY other species, it is important to try and avoid ascribing human reasons and emotions to an action unless these are directly communicated.

On the other side though, I believe that there is frequently too much of a tendency to ascribe "Simple" with "Instinctive" instincts may be predictable when an exactly identical stimulus is applied but the near impossibility of applying an identical stimulus makes it difficult to test in any reliable fashion. There are far too many variables when it comes to replicating a situation to make it something which can be tested, especially when dealing with an animal which is outside of it's natural environment and confronted with things that it may not have evolved an instinctive response to. While I believe behavioral deviations in the wild to be the result of differing applied stimulus and genetic drift, in captivity we can see the development of a rather unusual situation... The application of an instinctive response to a situation that it did not evolve to meet.

Humans are a great example of this and the macklotts pythons were a good way to express it... Humans don't behave like predators in most instances, the movements are all wrong, the approach is wrong... they don't behave like prey too often either. This creates a situation where the responses generated would be almost random in how they are applied... Some snakes will be inclined towards agression, others will remain docile as there is no obvious threat. If the stimulus is changed slightly, it becomes much easier to predict the response. Ever try to tease feed when you're not holding a prey item? Jerk your hand around like food and you can cause a bite. The same goes for picking an animal up... a smooth, even movement won't generally cause much response from many species. Dart in and squeeze with your fingertips and see if the results are the same. Different species and different populations have evolved to meet different conditions and the ingrained responses will show a vast array of deviation.

If one wants to see more uniformity in the responses of a given species, it's best to work in the field with wild populations. When in an environment where the stimulus match the instincts which have evolved, the responses are much closer to being identical. For instance, I KNOW if I grab a broad headed skink out of a pile of leaves in the field, I'm going to be bitten if it can reach me. In captivity, instincts can be perverted and the prediction becomes more difficult.

I obviously take the instinctive side of the argument as being as true as can be determined, I've arrived at these conclusions based on personal observation and, admittedly, through learning about the opinions of others... I am also willing to change any views that I hold IF given sufficient evidence to overwhelm the evidence I previously had.

Incidentally, the study which has been mentioned with the iguanas response to handling and light... Heartrates go up when an animal is stressed too and the entire metabolism of the animal changes depending on temperature- where Iguanas are very much heat powered, amphibians and fish, while also dependant on external temperatures, generally have less control over the ranges which their body is able to cope with and use (when the change happens rapidly). Saying that iguanas will seek out a warm area and that their heart rate goes up when they've found one doesn't act as proof that they feel pleasure.

Of course, I think that most of the emotions people experience are instinctive too- there to control our behavior and prevent us from being eaten. We just have bigger words to describe the sensations.

[tHeGiNo]

M_surinamensis, that was an awesome post! Very well said.

[Jeff_Favelle]

That was a DYNAMITE post, for sure. And I think SteeveB was totally talking about the same thing you were in this monitor thread. Certain species are encoded to watch out for certain movement patterns that would indicate an enemy or predator. Like a deep-sea fish isn't going to be wary of bird-like movement, but a shallow carp-like fish might be. It makes perfect sense. Why do baby Ball Pythons love hopper mice? Because they look and act JUST like the native rodents that their hard-wired to gobble up in Western Africa.

Monitor thread (http://www.ssnakess.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=37191)

[M_surinamensis]

The monitor post is an excellent one, no question. It expressed what I was trying to in a much more accurate and specific manner as it relates to a few species.

The manner of approach is something I think most herpers realize fairly quickly after entering the hobby but they don't realize that they realize it... The knowledge becomes somewhat intrinsic to their approach when handling or interacting with their animals but they don't put it into words ot think about it much. Everyone knows you don't stick your hand in an ETB enclosure after dark when you're warmer than the air temperature and approach it from above and the front... but most people don't take that and really apply it to other species as much as they should perhaps.

When you deal with more than a certain volume of animals, bites are inevitable but... You generally know when they're coming if you're paying attention and it's fairly easy to take any individual animal and get it under your control without bleeding if there's a bit of thought put into the approach.

Similar to the thread about varanids, Robyn at P.E. has a great article about the best way to handle blood pythons, a species generally thought of as extremely agressive.

It's human nature to want to apply some measure of humanity to other objects, we define everything by our own standards, constantly. Heck, even when dealing with people who "know better" we'll all resort to a certain degree of anthropomorphizing in casual comversation ("My GTP was really pissy today." "My bearded dragon thinks he's a tough guy")... There are a lot of old informational sources that reccomend daily handling to "get an animal used to it" or calm them down, these all imply that the change is inherent in the animal's behavior. I personally tend to think that most of the change is in the keeper's approach. The animal's responses don't change, the stimulus we apply when dealing with them does. I know that many of you have to have observed someone who's new to reptiles touch their first one, right? That hesitant motion, sometimes even with a slightly shakey hand, the two fingertips to the side of the body from above, ready to rip their arm back if it shifts position... These are the same people who have stories about how their california kingsnake was super agressive when they first got it but they managed to "tame it" through regular handling. I think they tamed their jittery nerves in most cases.

Instincts can be tough but there's a certain predictability if a good amount is known about the species that's being dealt with. The ball pythons quick responses to hopper mice is a perfect example. If you have a problem feeder, you change the prey to match what they should reccognize as food. Scent, color, size, behavior, these all form a kind of round hole in the snake's brain... cramming a square peg into it won't always work.

The important thing though... instincts don't have to be simple. The "active" instincts are constantly changing depending on the situation... a male won't always respond in the same was as a female, neonates have their own set for surviving while bite sized, the time of day, the temperature, the length of light cycles, the avaliability of food, the humidity, the barometric pressure all play a role in which instincts will be active and displayed for any given stimulus.

I also think it's something of a mistake to identify "instinctive" with an automatic "unfeeling" There are certain emotions which can be easily demonstrated to be active in herps (even snakes, as sedimentary as most of them are). Fear and pain are easy ones, although pain may or may not be a pure physical sensation. "Desire" perhaps... the single minded purposefulness of an animal in breeding condition is difficult to describe any other way, as are the strong feeding responses of some species. That burm WANTS that rat and that Sulcatta WANTS any object with good leverage that can't get out of the way quick enough... While I think ascribing human emotions to animal behavior is inherently somewhat flawed (note that I say this immediately after doing so), there seems to be a lot of validity in associating animal behaviors with human emotions. There's a reason we get pleasure from certain activities... it's a throwback to a time when humans weren't smart enough to use symbols and understand the concept of "future". We eat because it's satisfying to have a solid meal... taste is there so we know what's good for us (or used to be, the daily caloric intake would need to be higher for a species that was regularly chased up trees by predators than one that invented desk jobs) there's a reason that fatty foods taste good... it's so we'd eat them. Without taking it to a crass level... there are reasons that sex is a pleasureable activity. If it wasn't, who'd take the time to bother producing the next generation?

We, as a species, tend to place a lot of importance in the acchievements of being human. We seperate ourselves from all other living things and insist that we're above the rules which govern "lower species" I'll agree that much of what we are is an evolutionary high point but I disagree that we're completely different. We're just able to describe the results of the instinctive responses in a way that other species can't.

Which is meandering a bit off topic... so... I believe that reptiles can feel, to a degree... I don't believe that they can really think. This means that they can't have feelings related to abstract concepts. A reptile can never feel nervous about the future or remorse about it's past. I don't believe that they are capable of being self aware in that they can't control actions independant of instinct (If we try hard enough, we can. As can certain other species.) and as such they aren't capable of ideas like "trust" or "hate" or "love" It's awfully cocky of us to assume that their brain can't release endorphins (spelling?) as a reward for performing an action which instinct dictates though.

The seeming inability to feel pain from heat is a bit of a puzzler though. They can obviously feel pain from other sources (Clip a quick in a nail sometime or touch an injured area to assess the damage and you'll know what I mean) but they will allow themselves to smolder and fry. Even if the temperature can't be directly felt as being the source of the damage, the physical injury which results wouldn't seem to be different.

[Derrick]

Originally posted by M_surinamensis

Dart in and squeeze with your fingertips and see if the results are the same.

hehe my 6 year old learned this leason pretty quick while holding our calm JCP baby in one hand and scratching her nose with the other...hehe.

[tHeGiNo]

Holy moly M_surinamensis! That was yet another magnificent post. I haven't seen you around prior to this, and I hope you plan on staying here in the community. Your apparant knowledge and experience is well welcome here!

[JDouglas]

Earlier the lymbic system was mentioned and thought it had some validity to it. I would just like to add that this system is wired directly to sense of smell and memory. Both are very important factors in snake behaviour. Although I don't think my snakes love me or even like me I know they are capable of feeling one basic feeling, FEAR. Fear is a feeling and I have seen it many times in my snakes and in snakes I have captured in the wild. If you quickly uncover a snake and watch closely it will show you fear. Bloods breathe faster and flatten out and ball pythons ball up. Other snakes try to flee. In the wild snakes are crazy with fear when first captured but after just a few minutes they calm down and realize they will not be harmed. Fight or flight is strong in snakes thanks to their limbic system.

On another note, when I place one of my boas in the middle of the floor and walk a few steps away she does come to me. I think she sees me as something to climb or hide behind. Now if I put her along the wall and walk a few steps back to the middle of the room she doesn't approach me. She stays along the wall where she feels more comfortable. Then she heads for furniture.