Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Reading the below posts, I get the impression that an animals look is what is considered to be a "quality" animal. This is just my opinion, but I find it hard to state any certain breeder has "quality" animals simply based on the appearance of one, or even several animals shown publically. I'm not saying these breeders don't have quality animals, I just think an animals appearance is highly variable even among siblings. Within almost any litter, you will see "keepers" and you will see what most would consider ugly animals. Why is the ugly animal of less "quality" than the "keeper"? I just think it's a mistake to start using the term quality to describe an animal that is above average.....in one persons OPINION. After a while, people will be coming by your table at a show, and viewing your left over stock since you've already sold your better looking animals earlier in the season. Now, these buyers start telling people that you have "low quality" animals simply based on looks. Can you see where this trend will go? Just my opinion on the subject, hope it makes sense. Take care

Paul

I think of a healthy CBB animal that feeds with no problems. I also like to know the exact local of an animal. Extreme looks have little to do with it for me. I like animlas that look like a perfectly average representative of its locale...

Just take the ugly ones to the show....just kidding.

I consider quality animals as healthy, feeding with no hesitation on rodents, not inbred...etc.

Some folks are looking for that "look"....Some folks have different desires when it comes to traits and some folks may like high speckling compared to a clean patterned animal....I do see what you are saying though.

Well..... not really. Depending on what types of boas your breeding, you might not get that many "quality" animals if you only go by looks.

I go by a few things. First I look at them. In every litter you'll have a few, more than a few if you're lucky, that will "stand out". They'll have a "LOOK" that makes them "SPECIAL". I tend to like colorful or unusual looking animals.

Second I look at the genetics. Even an ugly/average boa can give birth to a SCREAMER as far as looks go. I look to the parents or siblings from previous litters. I want to see if the traits I'm looking for were passed on consistantly or just a fluke. I want to get a boa that will pass on the desired trait.

Third I look at the size of the boa. Some babies are born HUGE!! They'll be considerably larger than the average neonate. I tend to like babies that were, on average, 22 to 26 inches at birth. These are normally aggressive feeders and are quite hardy animals. They grow up to be stronger, in my opinion, breeders. Also this is a sign that they came from larger or more mature female.

Fourth I look at how the boas are kept. I prefer to buy from someone that treats boas they're selling, like ones they're keeping. I look at temperament and feeding records. BTW most people don't seem to keep feeding records. If they don't have feeding records, I don't buy from them anymore. BTW there's nothing worse than going to a reptile show and seeing all these "pencil thin" babys.

Fifth I go with my gut feelings about a particular boa. It can be the ULTIMATE SCREAMER, but if something feels "off"..... Well, if it doesn't "feel right" I don't buy.

Maybe using the term "quality" is wrong. Quality comes in many forms. Ultimately each person has their own opinion of what a quality animal is. A boa that one person might see as average/ugly could be a quality/special to another. So, if someone has sold what they feel is their quality animals and have only "left overs"...... Someone could still feel that some or all of those left overs are quality animals.

"So, if someone has sold what they feel is their quality animals and have only "left overs"...... Someone could still feel that some or all of those left overs are quality animals."

This statement puts it in a way that the breeder considers quality to be based solely upon looks, and the buyer may go by some of the better indicators that you stated. Which, I agree with most except for the size of the baby indicating the size of the adults. I have had my smallest females drop some of the largest babies. What this usually meant was that the female was a quality animal that produced good quality(and by that I mean healthy/lively babies) just in smaller numbers. Then, by contrast you can get much smaller babies in much larger numbers. In this case the size vs. numbers would indicate a large female. So, size can be misleading. I think looks are something to consider when buying a baby, don't misunderstand what I'm trying to point out here. My only point is that, if quality becomes synonymous with awesome looks only, where does that leave the 30" baby that feeds it's first time at 4 days old and takes FT right off the bat, but has the ugliest pattern/color you've ever seen? I really need to put up some sibling motley pics. At one end you have a killer motley and at the other a motley that looks almost normal. Same parents, same care....an outcome that was beyond my control, or the control of any breeder. Take care

Paul

I know size doesn't mean larger babies.

That's why I said larger or more mature female. I've found that my older females normally have larger babies regardless of the litter size. I've also have a few large females that also have larger babies.

This year I had a 9 year old, 6 foot, female give birth to 28 HUGE babies. The smallest one was 20 inches while the largest was 25 inches.

I'm giving her a year off.

So... Can a younger female also give birth to larger babies, if it's a small litter??? I've always thought that larger babies meant they came from a larger or more mature healthy female.

First you said you know size doesn't mean larger babies, and then ask if a small younger female can give birth to larger babies if the numbers are small. I couldn't tell if your question was sarcastic or sincere since the two sort of contradict each other....unless I'm just confused. In my last reply I stated I've had larger babies from smaller females that produce smaller litters. So, I guess the answer is yes. Really though, this is way off of my original point. Is quality simply based on looks? I don't think it is, and I don't think you do either even though your reply starts out with looks are everything. If that becomes the general thought process, I hope all your litters are full of "keepers". Thanks for the replies, take care

Paul

Not being scarcastic. I've never really had a smaller female give me a small litter. I've never had a younger female, a boa under 3 years old, give birth. So, I was wondering if a smaller female that was on the "young side" could also give birth to larger babies if the litter was small.

I normally attribute larger babies to larger or more mature females, since that's how it's been with my females. I didn't take into account that a smaller litter, from a smaller or younger female, might also produce larger babies.

Anyway getting back to quality. I've always thought that bigger babies meant they were from a "mature" female. One that hasn't been powerfed to get larger faster and bred much younger. I always thought that larger babies came from females that were mature and grew at a normal rate. They were better developed and therefore gave you larger and possibley healthier babies.

So I guess I'm asking if a powerfed female will also produce larger babies if the litter was small?

I don't powerfeed at all, so I really couldn't tell you that. All I can say is that some of my females at say 5 years old are 6' and some at 5 years old are 8'. The difference being their genetics in terms of growth/size, just as humans vary in size/height/etc. This is where I've seen smaller females of the same maturity drop smaller litters(say 12 for example) of larger babies than the larger female that dropped a bigger litter(say 30) and the babies were smaller. Not tiny runts, but not quite as large as those from the smaller litter. I would attribute this to the amount of energy needed to support 12 babies vs. 30 babies. I'm positive it can go the other way and you'll see 12 baby litters with tiny babies. I've had bad litters with slugs, stillborns, and tiny babies from mature females....we're all pretty much still in the dark when it comes to predicting boas with any certainty. I'm still confused, but that's normal-lol, take care

Paul

I think Motleys could be different, as far as what someone would consider quality. Too many people are into "perfection" as far as pattern and such on Motleys. I guess I really don't understand why. They're the most AMAZING boas. One of the mose unique I've ever seen.

Anyway, for me it wouldn't matter. I'd figure a Motely is a Motley. I've never seen an average/ugly Motley yet. Besides even if it's not a perfect specimen the genetics are still there. That's where you'd have to look at the parents/siblings. If the parents and/or siblings are SCREAMERS then this animal has the potential to produce SCREAMERS too.

I think regardless of what he/she looks like someone will look at him/her and see a Quality Animal.

BTW are you going to post some pictures?? I really hope you do. I'd really love to see them. Please post pictures.

Trust me, and we can even make a good hearted bet on this...I'll buy you a beer or something. I can post pics of one motley in particular and atleast one person will say she is not a motley!!! I can't get any pics of her tonight(batteries), but I'll shoot for tomorrow on her for you. Right now, I'm going to upload a pic of one of the male motleys that is almost as "bad". I agree, that genetics are there so it shouldn't matter, but the odds of me selling either one are slim to none, and slims out to lunch!!! LOL...pics coming! At last, someone will show pics of a motley that isn't a "trophy" specimen!!! Take care

Paul

Now, talk about "normal". I have pics of this guy next to siblings, and pics of certain traits that can prove this is a motley, but is this what you thought I meant by "ugly" motley? I'd rather e-mail you "proof" pics if you really doubt he's a motley because there's a lot of them, and uploading them all here would be a bigger pain than I think it's worth. Can you imagine putting this up for sale as a motley? People would think I'm full of BS. So, guess who becomes my keeper, lol! I'll post another pic of a motley and a super motley to atleast prove I have motleys and I'm not pulling a fast one. The female is WORSE!!!! But, there are some smokers as well. Can't wait on your thoughts on this guy!!! Take care

Paul

OK, the body marking don't say, "Motley". Of course, the head markings and some of the lateral striping scream "MOTLEY". If you add pictures of the siblings and parents to that it looks Motley. Of course, that's not everyone's "ideal" Motley.

BTW I LIKE HIM!

quality is a combination of many factors. It starts with an honest breeder, someone who bought good captive bred stock, and raised them well. The breeder must be someone who has all of their animals in perfect health, and takes great care of all of their animals no matter the dollar value.
The babies must be from healthy parents, and be in exceptional health, be well represented, and taken care of. No short cuts.

The above, and a few more things, classify a quality animal for me.

With that as my starting point, I will choose a boa that fits my opinion of ideal out of a group of such quality animals. Depending on the project I have in mind I want certain traits, and will pay for the animal with what I am looking for. However, these traits aren't what define quality.

Good Answer, Good Answer-lol, thanks for your thoughts Chris, take care!

Paul

I toatally agree as well Chris...

You cannot take short cuts...

Quality is more than just the animal as well...it is the SELLER...

Buy from reputable people who care about people and you will be fine...just do some research.

I have seen some very nice looking animals for some very cheap prices from people who made me want to run the other way...I would not buy from them no matter what the animal looks like...but then there are those who have a perfect attitude, who make you feel they will go the extra mile...I would rather give them my business...

I just think you have to look at the whole picture.

Thanks Andy
-----

What if the person doesn't have a reputation and their animals are just as nice if not better than what a breeder with a good reputation is offering??

Lumping quality into what's percieved as a good or bad reputation is probably not such a great idea. You may be passing up some great deals and animals/relationships. I have seen sellers with not so great people skills or no reputation but I would buy from them because they have quality animals and stock.

However, they should still fit the quality requirements.
The don't have to be a breeder of 20 years to have quality animals. In fact I know plenty of hobbyists that have better husbandry than breeders that have been doing this from the '70s.

It is just that I stated my choice...I would rather buy an animal from someone who puts the time into me...by that I mean ...he or she cares about their personal reputation and does what they can, to make it what they can.

The use of these forums can do that as well. I can tell a little by what people say here and on other forums as well, to help me determine if I would buy from them or not...I think people open up and you can really see if they will be there for you or not.
I would rather give someone that has been around and posts pics of their animals and enters discussions good or bad, I just feel better when I drop $5,000 of my hard earned cash into their hands...
If someone does not feel the need to enter forums and get to know others and let them know them....unless their animal is cheap enough I would not risk it...so hope you see my point.

I am willing to pay extra for customer service!

I would rather pay $100 per night at the Hyatt rather than $60 at the quality inn....

My 2 cents...Andy Federico
-----

I would definitely buy from you.....