A reminder of what can happen

[moshirimon]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

That's just sad to read.

Selfishness ahead of respect for the animal we all "love".

90% of retics are overweight in captivity. "Keeping it small" being used the way it is by breeders, would actually in my opinion be the proper way of doing it as opposed to feeding a baby every 5 days. As long as the snake isn't underweight there is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping your snake small. And really it doesn't always keep them small, it just slows down the process.

All in all I think for any retic bigger than 5 foot, once a week feeding is ridiculous. (unless your bulking up a female for breeding)

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by moshirimon

90% of retics are overweight in captivity. "Keeping it small" being used the way it is by breeders, would actually in my opinion be the proper way of doing it as opposed to feeding a baby every 5 days. As long as the snake isn't underweight there is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping your snake small. And really it doesn't always keep them small, it just slows down the process.

All in all I think for any retic bigger than 5 foot, once a week feeding is ridiculous. (unless your bulking up a female for breeding)

I get your thought process and where you're coming from.

I disagree in slowing down a process of a snake that regularily hits well over 10 feet for both male and females. Regardless of breeding. In the context it was initially said was that the animals are kept smaller purely to keep them a more managable size for the breeder. Nothing to do with health except for their own. Selfish as I said.

The last comment needs more context.

Is it bad to feed a snake the largest meal it can possibly take every week? Most likely yes.
Is it bad to feed by weight and keeping the meals a healthy size so it keeps a very healthy growth rate/healthy size on the snake? No.

Example, I feed my snakes, multiple species now, the same way. I use a 10 - 15% of body weight in their prey item on a regular feeding schedule. This has shown me over years to give both males and females a healthy growth rate. For adults I feed the same way and it's maintained males and breeding females with ample weight gain to give me healthy clutches/babies.

[moshirimon]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

I get your thought process and where you're coming from.

I disagree in slowing down a process of a snake that regularily hits well over 10 feet for both male and females. Regardless of breeding. In the context it was initially said was that the animals are kept smaller purely to keep them a more managable size for the breeder. Nothing to do with health except for their own. Selfish as I said.

The last comment needs more context.

Is it bad to feed a snake the largest meal it can possibly take every week? Most likely yes.
Is it bad to feed by weight and keeping the meals a healthy size so it keeps a very healthy growth rate/healthy size on the snake? No.

Example, I feed my snakes, multiple species now, the same way. I use a 10 - 15% of body weight in their prey item on a regular feeding schedule. This has shown me over years to give both males and females a healthy growth rate. For adults I feed the same way and it's maintained males and breeding females with ample weight gain to give me healthy clutches/babies.

Ahh that's true. Smaller , but more often meals would work too. Wasn't on my mind at all lol.

Still I don't see anything wrong with slowing down as long as you don't do it to the point of stunting their growth. Then again I don't know what your idea of slowing down is. I just hate power feeding. And what I meant to say is that in the eyes of many of these "power feeders" which most people are now a days , slowing down isn't really slowing down much more than what it should be. Trying to make your snake the biggest it can be is just as selfish I think. I doubt miller meant to slow down a mainland to under 10 feet though.

Millertime should give us some input on this and clear up his idea of "slowing down".

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by moshirimon

Ahh that's true. Smaller , but more often meals would work too. Wasn't on my mind at all lol.

Still I don't see anything wrong with slowing down as long as you don't do it to the point of stunting their growth. Then again I don't know what your idea of slowing down is. I just hate power feeding. And what I meant to say is that in the eyes of many of these "power feeders" which most people are now a days , slowing down isn't really slowing down much more than what it should be. Trying to make your snake the biggest it can be is just as selfish I think. I doubt miller meant to slow down a mainland to under 10 feet though.

Millertime should give us some input on this and clear up his idea of "slowing down".

Power feeding has been around for a long time in many species and I would frown upon it as well. I don't like that practice either.

"slowing down" was originally put into context that a large, breeding mode male retic is very powerful and could be potentially dangerous thus the "slowing down" to be more managable for the keeper.

That's not respecting the animal for what it is and what it can do. It's putting the keeper's needs ahead of the animal and then just adding "it's healthier" as to sound like the animal is ahead of them.

[moshirimon]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

That's not respecting the animal for what it is and what it can do. It's putting the keeper's needs ahead of the animal and then just adding "it's healthier" as to sound like the animal is ahead of them.

Um no its not. I feed my retics every 10 days as babies. After 5 or 6 feet o switch to two weeks. In my opinion an adult retic should be fed every 4 weeks. The animal IS healthy. I don't do this because I can't manage a big snake, I can, and love them. But I know i believe it is healthier, and more natural. not saying a snake should live natural "wild" life on captivity, but overfeeding is incorrect and many if not most don't realize theyre doing it.

As miller said, and I don't mean to be rude or condescending, these are not ball pythons and different measures can be taken.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by moshirimon

Um no its not. I feed my retics every 10 days as babies. After 5 or 6 feet o switch to two weeks. In my opinion an adult retic should be fed every 4 weeks. The animal IS healthy. I don't do this because I can't manage a big snake, I can, and love them. But I know i believe it is healthier, and more natural. not saying a snake should live natural "wild" life on captivity, but overfeeding is incorrect and many if not most don't realize theyre doing it.

As miller said, and I don't mean to be rude or condescending, these are not ball pythons and different measures can be taken.

I don't get what ball pythons have anything to do within this thread.

Yes, my point stands. The original statement has nothing to do with healthy animals. It was in regards to keeping the keeper safe from being in a situation that not all keepers can handle. (Reality is very few could so kudos to you for being one of them)

If you wish to discuss healthy eating habits you're welcome to begin a new thread or PM me and I'd be more than happy to discuss the math and some science behind it.

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by moshirimon

Um no its not. I feed my retics every 10 days as babies. After 5 or 6 feet o switch to two weeks. In my opinion an adult retic should be fed every 4 weeks. The animal IS healthy. I don't do this because I can't manage a big snake, I can, and love them. But I know i believe it is healthier, and more natural. not saying a snake should live natural "wild" life on captivity, but overfeeding is incorrect and many if not most don't realize theyre doing it.

As miller said, and I don't mean to be rude or condescending, these are not ball pythons and different measures can be taken.

Don't waste your time arguing with him over his misguided opinions (And yes Aaron, that's what they are, opinions). He's not worth the bandwidth he takes up in this section. If the animal is growing and is healthy then there is no reason to stuff them full of food to make them grow faster. You just end up with an obese animal that is a bear to deal with for 1/3rd (if not more) of the year.

[Aaron_S]

Originally Posted by millertime89

Don't waste your time arguing with him over his misguided opinions (And yes Aaron, that's what they are, opinions). He's not worth the bandwidth he takes up in this section. If the animal is growing and is healthy then there is no reason to stuff them full of food to make them grow faster. You just end up with an obese animal that is a bear to deal with for 1/3rd (if not more) of the year.

I made a comment in regards to a statement you made about "slow growing" animals so as to keep it safer for the keeper.

As it was perceived (remember the saying it's not how it's said it's how it's perceived) that someone would "slow grow" as in to keep the animal smaller because the keeper can't or doesn't want to handle the animal at it's full potential which makes it a selfish reason.

In the original comment it was nothing to do with obesity and health other than the keeper.

The End.