>>Neither have I. How I picture Louisiana Pine Snakes is based entirely on literature, and how I remember them before they started to "change".



Most of the scientific literature I have seen through 2007 does not have photographs or illustrations only descriptions. The only pictures I have seen are in popular magazines or field guides. If you have peer reviewed literature that has pictures of specimens I would love to see it!





>>Actually, it isn't that hard to believe at all. Really, I want to believe this, I want them to be Louisiana Pine Snakes, so I can put the species back on my wishlist. I want to believe in God and Santa Claus too. But I can't. It's just that the alternative scenario is by far more plausible.





I kept ruthveni for 10 years, bred them successfully for six. Over the course of six years I produced a little over 50 hatchlings. In 2006 I produced 12 hatchlings. Tom Agosta produced 15 or 16 hatchlings. If my memory serves me right, Terry Vandeventer produced 3 or 4 clutches that year. John Ginter produced a clutch. Eric Richter produced hatchlings. That is estimated close to 50 animals from a small handful of breeders. Never mind all of the people I don't know that have bought animals from TV/JG/ER in previous years that were also successful. The numbers of offspring are there. You have to know where to look. As far as I'm concerned, there is no reason to hybridize these animals. Feed them well and pay attention, and they will breed. And continued breeding will show variations, such as Karl's male.

Again, I will have to look back through the literature, but I do seem to remember that Steve Reichling (Memphis Zoo, head of P ruthveni studbook) made mention of variance in captive bred animals and was a potential focus for future study. When I find it I will post it. If I am wrong I will correect my statement.





cheers,

daveb



-----
odelay odelay odelay hee hoooo...

heeeeya huhhhh!

~Back in the saddle (Aerosmith)

[ Show Entire Thread ]