whats your thoughts on creating hybrids to...

[axwielding1]

I do remember seeing a picture on the net of a ballxborneo...
Basically a ball, colored like a borneo... Very strange...
I hope these don't get out and someone ends up with a 7ft, 40lb. Ball Python! It was a Frankenstein bred animal..
Not Good...
ax.

[Yve]

gluttony...such an ugly trait....boredom...such an ugly trait...

[Boid_22]

Personally Grant.......I LOVE HYBRIDS......LOL
No really, I have a slight soft spot for some hybrids although i would NEVER attempt to reproduce for myself.
AS far as finding a TRUE Black Albino in the wild goes, I think finding a true specimen would astonish anyone even those who might have bred generations of these morphs.

P.S. Anything can happen in the wild......Life is totally unpredictable.

Regards.......Ed Holder

[Velvet Science]

For the record, i don't own any hybrids- nor have i created any. But if "toying" with nature is the issue to be discussed, then i think those who oppose it have a bit to look at. For example: it would not be hard for a hardline non-herper to make the case that in nature, there are no blood pythons that eat F/T lab raised rats, live on newspaper substrate, are warmed by helix controlled flexwatt heat tape, drink chlorinated water, live in polypropylene boxes with windowed views of the canadian snow while breeding with morphed-out siblings. Unfortunately, if supporting nature really were our first and only priority, i'm afraid that we we would have to put our much loved snakes back where they came from. I don't know that we need to do this, but i believe we do need to be completely honest about our real motives in this- and i would be HIGHLY skeptical of anyone who claims to have no self-interest in this hobby.
Furthermore, with proof of Amazon X Emeralds coming not from private breeders, but the Amazon basin itself, and Daimond X Carpet crosses being an endemic phenomena, it seems somewhat overly idealistic/ shortsighted to assume that such creatures as Sumatran Reds and Sumatran Blacks, living together for countless generations on an ISLAND, are not already doing what nature does best- propogate. I'm reminded of some our own mothers, who, when we were in high-school, were SO certain that their little angels were still haloed virgins.
I mean it when i say that absolutely no offence is intended to anyone with this post- i simply think that we all, myself as much as anyone, become better stewards to these incredible creatures when we contantly assess why we do what we do, and where we are honestly coming from in it all.

Best to you all,

Tyler

[JDouglas]

I realize there are areas where species interbreed but this doesn't mean everyone should do it.
Your argument is a very weak argument. For example...
Every day people die so its OK if I kill someone. This is the type of reasoning you are using.
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but many try to overlook or deny the fact that their opinions and practices may lead to the slow destruction of pure species. Many herpers enjoy "pure" animals and worry that hybrids will work there way into the bloodline and the "pure" form will become extinct.

[JDouglas]

But if "toying" with nature is the issue to be discussed, then i think those who oppose it have a bit to look at. For example: it would not be hard for a hardline non-herper to make the case that in nature, there are no blood pythons that eat F/T lab raised rats, live on newspaper substrate, are warmed by helix controlled flexwatt heat tape, drink chlorinated water, live in polypropylene boxes with windowed views of the canadian snow while breeding with morphed-out siblings.

Tyler,
Comparing captive husbandry with hybridization is the perfect example of a false analogy. Captive husbandry doesn't destroy the animal genetically and change it to a mutt. Captive care has nothing to do with keeping an animal genetically pure. Creating the same conditions that are found in nature is impossible but that doens't make hybridation OK. In many cases species are extinct in the wild (i.e. Hog Island Boas) and have a very small gene pool in captivity. Creating hybrids only compounds this problem by creating mutts that will eventually be bred back to "pure" animals.

[Velvet Science]

Originally posted by JDouglas

Everyone is entitled to their opinions,

You made an excellent point, and it's really the one i was trying to make. A "pure" captive bloodline is not a universal dictum. It's not written in stone or a law unto itself. It's really just a preference, or an opinion that's taken form- and though it's one that i share to a greater degree, i recognize that it's still just a personal choice. And there's no harm in that. Such preferences only become dangerous when people begin to support them with labels like "ethical" and threats against those who don't share their own opinion.

Tyler

[JDouglas]

Such preferences only become dangerous when people begin to support them with labels like "ethical" and threats against those who don't share their own opinion.

So you agree with me? From your last post I can't seem to comprehend what your position is on the subject at at hand? Are you saying creating hybrids is just a preference with no harmful effects? Do you feel it is not an ethical issue? You can't choose if it is an ethical issue. Either it is or it isn't. In this case it is because a large percentage of herpers feel that it is. Also, no one here has made any threats? I am having trouble understanding your postion and point of view?

And there's no harm in that.

I disagree because hybridization does cause harm and has negative repercussions. If someone thinks it doesn't they are only thinking of themselves and their own interest or monetary gain.

[Velvet Science]

Originally posted by JDouglas
So you agree with me? ... You can't choose if it is an ethical issue. Either it is or it isn't. In this case it is because a large percentage of herpers feel that it is. Also, no one here has made any threats?

I agree with you in as much as i have made a personal choice not to create hybrids. But that doesn't make it an ethics issue. Nor does many people sharing the same opinion suddenly exalt that opinion to the status of "ethical".
And in regards to threats- i can think of no more serious threat to a member of this community than blacklisting.


Tyler

[Grant vg]

How can you consider blacklisting, or in other words....Boycotting as a serious threat to a member of this community?
Its done ALL the time.
I do it daily....
I walk a little further to buy my smokes because the owner of the nearest convenience store is rude.
I boycott some pet shops because of there complete lack of responsibility for the care of their animals.
Others do not shop at certain stores because of the conditions and wages workers from abroad recieve.
Its done daily ....by everyone.
and should be looked at as a positive movement in most usages...

For me, Anyone who "knowingly" takes one species (talking bloods here) and crosses it to another species of blood to bring out a gene that they plan on breeding it "true" back to the rest of that species...will be boycotted by me. As in, they will be in my black book of ppl NOT to deal with in the future.
Now can that be considered a threat?
Perhaps, depending on how you look at it.
If every major breeder decided to hybridize everything they have in there collection, but all the buyers decided this wasn't "ethical" and boycotted any dealings with these ppl ...we would have a problem on our hands.. or should i say THEY would have a problem on there hands.
People will voice there opinions.
And people will act accordingly to those opinions.

If no one buys those hybrids, the people have spoken, and in most instances, the breeder will cease to produce anymore (assuming producing the hybrids was for monetary gain).

Now if you see that as a "major threat" thats your opinion.
I wouldn't mind being enlightened on your views, as my opinions are always changing...
If you feel me (or anyone for that matter) not supporting someone because of MY views clashing with THEIR practices as something negative or a threat to this hobby, then we obviously have totally different views on this subject.

I'm not in this hobby to see it evolve into a free for all breeding frenzy crossing this, crossing that because people get bored and want that new 2004 SUV or the next big morph to cross to something else.
If thats what it becomes, perhaps i will take up collecting stamps. Atleast "preservation" is valued there.

But i do agree with you that "whats ethical" is based on each individuals morals, values, etc... to a certain extent anyways...

And i apologize to you if you took my "blacklisting" comment any differently then what i have stated above.

Grant vg

[Velvet Science]

Grant,

I now see your side of it. Thank you.

Tyler

[Linds]

I think in the above posts, the original question was lost, as natural intergrades became part of the discussion. Mixing two different animals that may breed naturally in their wild state and mixing two animals for a certain look, shortcut, or dollar gain are two different things.

I'm sort of on the fence for natural intergrades. One one note, who am I to disagree with nature? However, are these animals interbreeding because we are forcing them together by means of (unnatural) habitat destruction? Also, just because it happens in nature, is not to mean that it will not cause impurity problems in captivity through misrepresentation, etc.

Now unnatural hybrids for monetary gain or shortcuts to certain looks, really make me sick. My favourite example of this is the albino BCI x BCC project. Now there are IS a true albino BCC, just discovered later than the BCI were. These species in their pure form can sometimes be difficult to tell apart... let alone the confusion with the common names... we are now seeing 75% BCC animals, etc. out there... one day if I were to purchase an albino BCC in the future, would I be able to rest easy knowing it was pure? Never Shortcuts like these bother me fiercely.

Personally, how I sit with hybrids is that, if someone were to produce a litter/clutch of hybrids, I would be fine with it AS LONG as those snakes NEVER left that persons hands... from the time they hatched til the time they were gone. That is the only way it can be guaranteed that those snakes don't contribute to the misrepresentation of a "pureblood" snake somewhere down the line. The person initially reproducing them can be honest to a fault, but it doesn't matter once those animals leave that person's hands. As soon as those snakes make their way out in to circulation, that is when the threat of contamination becomes a reality.

[JDouglas]

I don't think you know what <b>ethica</b>l actually means so here is its definition from Merriam Websters...

<b>1.)Involving or expressing moral approval or disapproval.
2.)Being in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of a profession.
3.)Conforming to accepted standards of social or professional behavior and conduct</b>

Clearly everyone in this forum is expressing moral disapproval and hybridization is not in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of breeding snakes. Those who create hybrids are not conforming to accepted standards of social or professional behavior.

Thus, it is an "ethical" issue.