CB reps..Natural vs Morphs

[chas*e]

I have an ethical question reguarding Selective breeding of Reptiles(snakes for instance) VS -the keeping of species in the natural lineage that millions of years of evolution developed....I argued with an,"oldtime" herper, who made some valid points of NOT CB morphing of snakes(ball pythons, BCIs.ect..) because the snakes were not designed genetically/naturally to survive in the morphed selectively breed fashion and that one should keep the snakes true to the species....What are the thoughts of the sSnakeSs users

[jaybox_reptiles]

Well i do belive in getting the different morphs and what not i think it is a good learning expearince for all the herpers in the world but i strongly disagree with cross breediong species

[KrokadilyanGuy3]

Personally, I have nothing against morphs as an animal, Im a sucker for Leucistics.. I am however against the motive of what most of them bring.. As I see it, most people don't think an animal is worthy unless it was an expensive morph, like say ball pythons. I always hear, You got a ball? Normal balls suck, hell they only cost 30 bucks, so as I see it, not many are in it for the joy of the animal, just an easy way to make money, whether it is it's a ball or a corn, a morph is more pricy even if it is a few bucks.. I agree that snakes should be kept true blooded and clean, but then again as everyone says, this is a captive propagation at hand..
I prefer my animals in the wild/natural colors, I find them truely more captivating than "High-End" (Dont even talk as if they are living creatures) individuals..
Just my thoughts and hope it made sense.. Im hyped up on raisin bran and sugar..
Xain

[chas*e]

I am, personally, torn over this question. I believe that "we" should not mess with nature but there are many points that could be made in defense of Selective breeding...True most genetic anomalies such as amelanistic/albino reptiles do not survive in the wild. The albino would be picked off soon after birth, natural selection being what it is and all..but in most cases the "normal" creature is in grave danger at this time also, from "man-made" enviormental threats...So, it could be one of those,"lesser of two evils" type of answer.......also...on an economic side....the selling of morphs is more lucrative than selling of normal animals....who knows?

[jaybox_reptiles]

i dont no to many big workds for me lol

[justinO]

I think that selective breeding to bring out some traits is fine. However, when i hear of line breeding and inbreeding hets with their parents and stuff to get a specific morph, that just doesn't sit right with me. Sure, the genetic anomolies will occur in nature, as they have for thousands of generations, so, i don't see a problem with breeding them in captivity, just don't inbreed.

just my $0.02

Justin

[Jeff_Favelle]

Most morphs come from wild stock. We aren't creating any new genes. SO the arguement for not breeding morphs is mud. Its like saying, don't breed nice Jungle Carpets together because they wouldn't do that in the wild.

Dumb.

[ChunkyMunky]

Indeed.

[Lisa]

We already selective breed the nicest and brightest looking snakes to the point where sometimes the CB snakes don't look anything like the WC snakes...

[Linds]

I don't see any moral dilemma in breeding morphs. True in the wild they do usually get pegged of relatively early due to lack of camouflage, but most of the morphs *are* produced from wild animals out in nature, as Jeff mentioned. There are some designer morphs that are not naturally occuring, such as Bumble Bee balls. I don't really see any harm in this however, these animals are not in the wild, hence they do not need to look like the standard to survive. If ones wish is to preserve the natural look of the species then I wish them the best of luck... they will not be producing fantastic looking clean specimens... in captivity we start selectively breeding for appearances, this is not a natural thing. In the wild animals breed to survive and often wild models are not as nice looking as those that have been bred generation after generation to acheive a certain polished look. Don't get me wrong, you will find some beauties out there, but it isn't the standard. Personally, I prefer a great looking "normal" to a morph any day. That's just me though... morphs just don't do it for me. I don't see anything wrong though. It's not like these animals are being bred in an effort to replenish wild populations or whatnot. It's not messing with nature if nature produces them. If you want to take that arguement, then by the same token allowing an entire litter or clutch to survive would be the same, because that doesn't happen in the wild either

[Wuntu Menny]

Yes-- for maintaining genetic integrity in locale specific morphs and enhancing particular traits through selective breeding (no hillbilly bloodlines!)

No-- for "designer" mutants and inbred, linebred freaks.

my2bts

WM

[BigDan]

Great post Linds

I am going to base my argument on boas as that is what I am most familiar with so here it goes

I personally like morphs but I also really like and appreciate locality specific animals. Unfortunately many of the locales in captivity are not anywhere near pure often times. One mans suri is anothers guyanan or peruvian. Are they seperate locales or are they just different looks present in one population. Info on catch locations is often very poorly documented or is even falsified.

The other thing is that many locales are also very inbred most people do not realize that all of the Bolivians in captivity are descended from a group of something like less than 10 animals. Other locales which would be inbred would be the many of the Island boas, Hoggs, Crawl Cay, Corn Island etc. Many of the locales are also selectively bred for high widows peaks, partial striping, ladder tails, really red tails etc. The way some of the locales look now may not be what they actually looked like in the wild per say.

Sometimes I find the whole morph dedate rediculous we are not breeding these animals to release back into the wild. It would be like saying you are breeding teacup poodles in the hope of one day reestablishing a wild population in Banff National park. Additionally you could not even release a pure locality snake back into its so called original habitat if you wanted to. Are we releasing Hoggs back onto the Island to bring the population back from extinction.

Alot of times these so called locality purists slag the morph people but at the same time I have seen these self professed purists go ahead and breed a nicaraguan boa to a columbian boa because they did not have a mate for the nicaraguan at the time. And just for this reason many of of the wild type boas out their are a mish mosh of various locales and no more pure and sometimes more inbred than my snow boa. At least with the snow I know her grandparents were unrelated this cannot be said of alot of the wild type boas out there. I also beleive if you do breed morphs buy unrelated animals, outcross, ask where the parents came from etc inbreeding is not good for any type of animal or people why would inbreeding be all right in snakes or other reptiles.

Lastly it is the morphs that drive the hobby. It was not until people started looking at some of these animals as investments that we really made some strides in captive breeding and husbandry. It was the albino boa and ball python that really brought these snakes to the forfront, it was the albino leopard gecko which made people go nuts over these great little lizards. However you may feel about the morphs if it was not for them we would not have what we have today.


Just my 2 cents.

Dan

[KrokadilyanGuy3]

Lastly it is the morphs that drive the hobby.

So true, to bad most of the breeders aren't in it for the animals.. That's one reason why I don't care much for other areas of this interest, We have lazy herpers who 90% of the time hunt along roads, I see no glory in this and many others only dig the money an animal can bring.. Personally, I could do without what most of this interest of ours includes. But hey, easy way to make money; Who can argue with that?

[Jeff_Favelle]

I would much much much rather make money working with animals that I am absolutely enthralled with rather than joining the rat race and contributing to the depletion and abuse of the planet's resources. Find me ONE job that doesn't in one way affect the planet adversely. You can't. Even driving to work every day is bad. Not thanks. Working with animals is nothing to be ashamed of, I don't know why you think people should feel bad.

But hey, easy way to make money; Who can argue with that?

Yeah? Methinks you have never bred an animal before. Let alone hundreds, which is what it takes to actually make money. You seem to think its ok to keep animals in captivity, and I'm sure you like to acquire captive bred animals (if not, then let's stop this discussion). So people are supposed to give you these animals for free?

Wow, life must be grand at the top.

[Kurzix]

easy way to make money? breeding your own animals steps you up to the entrepeur level. Owing your own buisness for 20+ years IS where most millionaires come from. However for every 1000 new buisness, only one will survive for more than 3 years. Now with all the blood sweat tears and luck it takes to run your own buisness, and really profit from it, is it realy easy money? Or is easy money, going to work punching in doing the same thing over again, knowing you will make money?