True length of "record" giant pythons.

[Jay]

Originally Posted by Wildside

Why????

Food, money, possibly safety.

[Wildside]

Originally Posted by Jay

Food, money, possibly safety.

Those are forgivable reasons.

I think the scales on its head are about the size of my palm

[StudentoReptile]

Originally Posted by Wildside

Those are forgivable reasons.

Indeed. Its easy to be judgmental of those in other countries who simply do not share our views of these animals. There's such a big picture to see that so many fail to.

[dave himself]

If you want to see a couple of big retics go to YouTube and check out big tiger retic sorry I don't know how to post the link its a guy called Steve who posted the videos

[StudentoReptile]

To address your question more directly, if 30 feet is impossible, what about 29 feet? 28 feet maybe? 27? see where I'm going? Yes yes, I know...the higher the number, the more unlikely the scenario, but to stick a definite number on the issue "Its IMPOSSIBLE for any snake to get 30 feet ever!" is a little premature, IMHO.

Hey Millertime! You haven't addressed this yet!

Just bumping the thread, since I'm sure inquiring minds would like to have a more in-depth explanation as to why it is scientifically impossible for a snake to get 30 feet, or if this is, in fact, only theory?

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by StudentoReptile

I certainly don't think 25 feet is out of the question. I really don't think 30 feet is completely out of the question either, although I concur very very unlikely.



I think one aspect of this discussion calls for a distinction between the "average adult size" of a particular species and the "maximum/record" size of said species. Indeed, 18-20 seems to be the norm for most adult female Burms and maybe 22-24 for female retics. But I don't think its utterly inconceivable they could get larger. Certainly not on a routine basis, but just the right combination of genetics, diet, and dumb luck could result in an abnormally huge animal. And that goes for captive and wild specimens alike.

To address your question more directly, if 30 feet is impossible, what about 29 feet? 28 feet maybe? 27? see where I'm going? Yes yes, I know...the higher the number, the more unlikely the scenario, but to stick a definite number on the issue "Its IMPOSSIBLE for any snake to get 30 feet ever!" is a little premature, IMHO.

Fluffy is a legend, I'm waiting for one of the 3 people with claims to the longest live snake in captivity to step up and have it verified. Medusa of Monster Snakes, Medusa in Kansas City, and Twinkie at Prehistoric Pets all have a legit shot. That said Medusa at Monsters had a successful clutch this year with some truly monster babies, I'm curious to see how big they are in a few years.

I see what you're getting at but 20+ ft female retics aren't exactly common. Jay at prehistoric pets refuses to breed his monster female because she's nearly irreplaceable. To find a snake like her is a long shot. There really aren't many examples of retics that long out there once they've been verified. Average female length for retics is definitely under 20ft. Usually around the 18ft mark. The right combination of diet, genetics, and dumb luck IS what is producing the 24-25 footers. The just don't happen as often as people would like.

Originally Posted by Donnie

Here's one caught in 2002 at 23ft and says that one was found in 1912 measuring 33ft but no evidence for this one.

LiveLeak.com - HALF TON PYTHON: A HUGE Reticulated Python weighing 447kg (985lb)

That's just it, there's no evidence for it. Even guiness screwed up when they measured Colossus (its in the pdf in the first post). That one in 2002 was originally quoted at 49 feet, but you see how so many people grossly overestimate a snake's length just because its REALLY BIG. 21-23 feet, more than likely on the lower side, but we'll never know unless someone is willing to accurately measure it.
snopes.com: Big Snake

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

I personally believe if people keep breeding these giants at smaller and smaller sizes that we're just going to dwarf the species anyway.

Breed monster Suliwesi locales. Raise up some babies for 5 years. Breed the biggest. Keep doing that. Nobody will though. They need their retics to fit into drawers and be popping out eggs by 15 pounds and 12 feet.

There's dwarf localities, the breeders that want to bring the morphs down in size just get (for ease of discussion, this is a future post I'm working on) "SD" localities and breed the morphs down. Likewise Anery is a dwarf and SD morph and those breeders that are working on bringing some morphs down in size are also bringing Anery (and any potential future dwarf/SD morphs) up. Genetic Stripe was originally a Selayer locality morph, but we're seeing 16+ Genetic Stripes popping up. I'll ask if anyone is bumping up the size of morphs with big Sulas, I know Jake Klotz in the Chicago area is working with them. His Sula Platty Tigers look awesome.

Is that a big snake head? Oh yeah. I wish there was something there for reference though.

[Pirarucu]

Originally Posted by moshirimon

is this the head?

No, the one I saw was taken directly from the side. It could be the same snake, but I don't remember it being as damaged, especially not the big slash on top of the head. I could be wrong though.

I stand by what I said. Titanoboa once existed. Snakes have grown bigger than 30 feet in the past. I believe it is certainly possible for a snake to grow to gargantuan sizes and larger. Extremely rare and we haven't seen it yet, but that doesn't mean it's impossible. We just found a monstrous croc in the Philippines, you would think that it would serve as a reminder that nature is capable of things we would never believe until we see them. It is ridiculous to say that the environment could not support an individual that big. The needs of one thirty foot snake are nothing. The environment will supply that with ease. I also think it's ridiculous to think that not one giant could exist when entire species of giant animals have existed throughout the paleontological record. A record is only a record until we find something bigger.

As far as your assumption that 24-25 footers are the result of luck, genetics, and diet... How many humans do you see that are over six feet tall, or maybe close to seven? Not exactly a huge percentage. If I had to estimate, that percentage is about the same as the percentage of retics over 20'. But look, the tallest human was almost nine feet tall, which is unbelievable. Look at how small of a percentage people that tall make up. Now consider that people stop growing sooner or later. Pythons don't.
Fluffy was eighteen years old and twenty-four feet long. Only eighteen. Pythons can live a lot longer than that, so how big would she be if she lived to a grand old age of thirty or forty? Just food for thought.

[lemon]

The longest ever Retic with proof was 23.5 foot and that really was a one in a million snake.

fluffy was quoted as 24foot but measured at 20 foot 1inch by the zoo that paid a lot of money for her from Bob.

Female burmese do not get to 18-20ft on average, baby the burmses again was quoted as 27 foot but measured shortly after her death at 18 foot 10unches and that at the moment is the known record for a burmese.

Most people dont appreicate how much bigger an 18 foot retic is compared to an average 15-`16 footer. i have a 15-16 ft 6 year old female retic and she is dwarfed by 18 footers both in lengh and girth. very few female retics get over 18 foot, i have two wild caught sumatran retics and hopefully as they are the biggest locale will reach over 18 foot but even then theres only a small chance.

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by lemon

The longest ever Retic with proof was 23.5 foot and that really was a one in a million snake.

fluffy was quoted as 24foot but measured at 20 foot 1inch by the zoo that paid a lot of money for her from Bob.

Female burmese do not get to 18-20ft on average, baby the burmses again was quoted as 27 foot but measured shortly after her death at 18 foot 10unches and that at the moment is the known record for a burmese.

Most people dont appreicate how much bigger an 18 foot retic is compared to an average 15-`16 footer. i have a 15-16 ft 6 year old female retic and she is dwarfed by 18 footers both in lengh and girth. very few female retics get over 18 foot, i have two wild caught sumatran retics and hopefully as they are the biggest locale will reach over 18 foot but even then theres only a small chance.

Sumatran or Sulawesi? Everyone I've spoken with said Salus get bigger. Regardless do you have pictures of yours? I would love to see them. Got a source for your claim that fluffy was only about 20? I know of 3 retics currently that IMO need to get measured because all three look very close to the 24 ft mark if not over.

I agree with everything else you said though, did you have a chance to read the article in the first thread?

[lemon]

Originally Posted by millertime89

Sumatran or Sulawesi? Everyone I've spoken with said Salus get bigger. Regardless do you have pictures of yours? I would love to see them. Got a source for your claim that fluffy was only about 20? I know of 3 retics currently that IMO need to get measured because all three look very close to the 24 ft mark if not over.

I agree with everything else you said though, did you have a chance to read the article in the first thread?

It's on youtube Fluffy being measured. I'll try and fnd it after work.

I would be very surprised if there are any known snaks at the moment over 24 foot, The biggest I know of is Fragant flower at 22ft 9 inches.

There was also a documentary on where they unfortunatley caught and killed a 23.5 foot retic and thats the longest proven so far.

I know Twinkie and Medusa are claimed as 22-24ft retics but the really dont look much over 20ft to be honest.

I really do hope there is a true 24/25ft snake but ive yet to see it.

Not had chance to read the article in the 1st thread mate :-)

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by lemon

I know Twinkie and Medusa are claimed as 22-24ft retics but the really dont look much over 20ft to be honest.

I really do hope there is a true 24/25ft snake but ive yet to see it.

Not had chance to read the article in the 1st thread mate :-)

There's another Medusa in Kansas City, Missouri that looks about as big, if not bigger than Harry's Medusa. Twinky is definitely 22+.
Using the serpwidgets tool, and the known width of the door being 3ft, Twinky in this picture measures around 22.5 ft.


Medusa in KC, yes she looks overweight.
Largest snake living in captivity: Medusa sets world record - YouTube
Largest snake living in captivity: 25-feet long Medusa sets world record (Video)

[exwizard]

Originally Posted by Aaron_S

The "weanies" are the loudmouths though and get far more attention in all forms of media. Youtube, news stories or what have you.

If it were legal, I'd have already had a Retic or two and yes, full size mainland Retic. I'm doing this with Burms and I fully expect them to get some size on them in a few years. As long as Burms are legal here, I'm going to keep them. I just wish the same were true of Retics here.

[Rogue628]

Originally Posted by millertime89

There's another Medusa in Kansas City, Missouri that looks about as big, if not bigger than Harry's Medusa. Twinky is definitely 22+.
Using the serpwidgets tool, and the known width of the door being 3ft, Twinky in this picture measures around 22.5 ft.


Medusa in KC, yes she looks overweight.
Largest snake living in captivity: Medusa sets world record - YouTube
Largest snake living in captivity: 25-feet long Medusa sets world record (Video)

I recently asked Jay about his feelings on Twinkie being considered overweight. He said he could see where she would look overweight in pics but assured me she wasn't, saying she ate less her weight in food a year. (what kind of formula is this? I've never heard of it...)

How does Medusa look overweight? What are you seeing that I'm missing?

Something doesn't add up. lol

Twinkie = 23' and 370lbs
Medusa = 25' and 300lbs
(so each animal's keeper says)

How can Twinkie be shorter and weigh more yet Medusa be overweight? I don't get it.....unless both animals are actually overweight....

[millertime89]

Originally Posted by Rogue628

I recently asked Jay about his feelings on Twinkie being considered overweight. He said he could see where she would look overweight in pics but assured me she wasn't, saying she ate less her weight in food a year. (what kind of formula is this? I've never heard of it...)

How does Medusa look overweight? What are you seeing that I'm missing?

Something doesn't add up. lol

Twinkie = 23' and 370lbs
Medusa = 25' and 300lbs
(so each animal's keeper says)

How can Twinkie be shorter and weigh more yet Medusa be overweight? I don't get it.....unless both animals are actually overweight....

watch that video of Medusa and see just how wide her back is. I think he's grossly underestimating the weight of her. Twinkie definitely looks thinner than the KC Medusa.

[Rogue628]

Originally Posted by millertime89

watch that video of Medusa and see just how wide her back is. I think he's grossly underestimating the weight of her. Twinkie definitely looks thinner than the KC Medusa.

Ahhh......yeah, I see it now. One or the other doesn't have a correct length/weight, but Medusa does look larger in girth than Twinkie. That's why it wasn't adding up to me.