Reptile & Amphibian Forums

As some of you may be aware, I recently hatched the first clutch of kingsnake eggs I've hatched since I was a teen (I'm in my 30s now so that was awhile ago).

This was an extremely clutch, with the last two emerging December 2.

During thanksgiving, before the clutch hatched, I visited my parents in the Bay Area. Little brother has a baby Okeetee corn bought 9/10 at Sac show. It didn't look much bigger to me than when he bought it. Looked like it had grown some, but not much. They feed it twice a week.

Anyway, after my eggs hatched, my little babies reminded me just how small that cornsnake really was - and how much she really has grown. When I went down for Christmas bringing one of my king neonates, I saw that corn snake must be at least 4 or 5 inches bigger. Yet I can see from pictures of her in the deli cup when purchased, she was about the same size as my new king neonates. Until I hatched out the neonates though, she still seemed like a little worm to me.

-=-

I just checked on my brumating snakes, changed their water, listened to breathing, etc. - I'm trying not to disturb them. My two young males are under 30 inches. One of them scared the bleep out of me, it looked like its face was falling off. So I removed it to look at it. Turns out - there was a flap of shed on the nose that had not completely come off (came off in my hand), no eye caps, snake is fine.

But handling this 27-28 inch snake after my neonates - my perspective of it totally changed. Both of those little boys seem a lot bigger to me now than they did when I started brumation. They look like adults. If they were female, I have no doubt they could produce a nice clutch of 6 decent sized eggs if they wanted to, maybe even more.

I still have my doubts about how often 18 inchers actually breed in the wild, but I have to confess, my perspective on breeding size was totally skewed on how big my young snakes actually were, and it was skewed because they were my smallest snakes and I still saw them as babies despite their growth.

They most certainly are not.

Apologies to FR and Bluerosy for my lack of sight.
-----
3.3.4 L. getula californiae
1.1 L. getula nigrita
1.0 Boa constrictor constrictor (suriname, fostering/rescue)
2.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata

I just looked at my record book, that length measurement is actually old enough that they are probably closer to 30 inches now. But still - they look a lot bigger to me now then when they started brumating. They look bigger, thicker, etc.

Interesting how perspective can change how one sees the same snake.
-----
3.3.4 L. getula californiae
1.1 L. getula nigrita
1.0 Boa constrictor constrictor (suriname, fostering/rescue)
2.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata

I understand you are coming or came from a position of theory. You wondered, if they could. You thought this or that, you were told, etc. You had no first hand experience. So you were armed with theory and thoughts, no facts. No knowing or not experiencing, is not knowledge, its lack of knowledge.

I(we, Bluerosy) on the otherhand, had seen it, experienced it, practiced it over decades. That makes my/our position one of experience. I should never be influenced by someone coming from a position of naivity or theory. So it did not bother me.

It then only becomes your problem or not. You asked a question, we answered from experience, you can believe it or not, use it or not, its up to you. Its nothing personal. Cheers

You do need to consider that even though your males were bigger than you thought, and that is cool and something I have seen with my snakes as well, the thought of breeding an 18 inch female is still unrealistic, no matter how much selfish candy coating is pronounced to justify.

I am not saying you are doing that, which I don't think you are straight up saying, but due to the previous thread a while ago, I had to comment.

Take care!
Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

I'm not going to breed at that size.
I don't have the husbandry skills to risk it IMHO (IE I have to expect my snakes will not lay within a day or two of prelay shed, but will retain for a week, thus increasing risk)

But I do think they are definitely breedable much smaller than I originally thought - and that my mental idea of how big a juvenile king is was definitely skewed from how big they actually are.

I also remember the eggs being bigger. Maybe that's because I was younger, maybe I am remembering my pituophis eggs. I also had forgotton how much eggs expand in the weeks after being laid.
-----
3.3.4 L. getula californiae
1.1 L. getula nigrita
1.0 Boa constrictor constrictor (suriname, fostering/rescue)
2.3 Elgaria multicarinata multicarinata

" I'm not going to breed at that size. "

Good for ya and good for the snake!

" But I do think they are definitely breedable much smaller than I originally thought - and that my mental idea of how big a juvenile king is was definitely skewed from how big they actually are. "

Males can breed a lot smaller than females that is for sure. Their job is easy. The females have to go through so much though with the eggs and laying.

Kingsnake eggs can get quite big. Most of mine were at least 2 1/2 to 3 inches long each year with each female at the time of being laid. Now pit eggs, those are dinosaur eggs!!!
-----
Genesis 1:1

Billy,

I don't know why you want to be so hard headed about this when people like myself have told you it has been done. I did it. Its really no big deal (at least not to me)unless you have a hard time believing anything until you see it for yourself..

seems kinda contradicory to what you should be all about. Its called a little faith in people who are eyewitnesses to what really is no big miracle of God anyway. Its just a naturally common occurance.

"I don't know why you want to be so hard headed about this when people like myself have told you it has been done. I did it. Its really no big deal (at least not to me)unless you have a hard time believing anything until you see it for yourself."

Hard headed? What is so hard headed about thinking that breeding a poor king at 18 inches is wrong? Think about egg size, maturity level for the snake itself, and then it really boils down to what is best for the snake to begin with. There is really nothing hard headed about it.

So you have told me it has been done? And your point to that is what??? Is YOU telling me that it has been done supposed to be different than someone else telling me this?? Also, I have breeding experience at that very thing as well that proved my point even more. That is why I have believed my point for years, as I have seen for myself what it can do. Yes, we can see it is no big deal to you. That speaks volumes to perhaps how you view your animals, as well as what I believe speaks volumes to how I view my animals.

" seems kinda contradicory to what you should be all about. Its called a little faith in people who are eyewitnesses to what really is no big miracle of God anyway. Its just a naturally common occurance."

Contradictory to what I should be about? You are kidding, right? That statement makes absolutely no sense in what you are trying to prove with this subject. If you are speaking about the subject of faith, it should be about a faith in God, which has nothing to do with this subject, instead of faith in people who seem to think it is no big deal to breed kings at 18 inches, like you said yourself. Please keep to the topic.
-----
Genesis 1:1

Contradictory to what I should be about? You are kidding, right? That statement makes absolutely no sense in what you are trying to prove with this subject.

Look I am not trying to "prove" anything to you. Thats on you. But please don't come on here like some sort of expert saying that this is bad for snakes ect. These old wife tales can really lead some people astray.

If you are speaking about the subject of faith, it should be about a faith in God, which has nothing to do with this subject, instead of faith in people who seem to think it is no big deal to breed kings at 18 inches, like you said yourself. Please keep to the topic.

Faith in God comes from men who wrote down their eyewitness accounts. Thats waht the "word" is.

Same thing in this instance with breeding snakes. savy?

" Look I am not trying to "prove" anything to you. Thats on you. But please don't come on here like some sort of expert saying that this is bad for snakes ect. These old wife tales can really lead some people astray. "

I am in no way claiming to be an expert, and I am not pushing any old wives tales. You say statements like that because it does not fit into your agenda, which is that you may breed snakes earlier than other people would. See, the problem is that you are not taking a difference in opinion well, so you say statements like the one previously mentioned. Under your request, I am not supposed to come on here and say that it is bad for snakes? Do you see how absurd that is? You are not being open minded to acknowledge that it may not be the best thing for an 18 inch female to be bred, due to their SIZE, AGE, and MATURITY. You have already stated that you do not think it is a big deal, which explains your opinion, which is fine.

The thing is, how is any of this leading people astray? Astray from what? Not having enough patience to WAIT until a snake is completely mature before breeding and receiving the best results, like more eggs, bigger babies, etc..? Every breeder I know disagrees with this 18 inch theory.

Again, we will have to agree to disagree.
-----
Genesis 1:1

No we are not going to agree to disagree. There are times when you are just plain wrong.

It will not hurt a snake to breed at 18" as that is what nature intended to do. This has been discussed here at length before. Why bring it up again?

You somehow think your in control of nature, it all centers around you. That is narcissistic, the world centers around you.

Nature designed kingsnakes, humans and YOU, have nothing to do with it. If you understood biology, you cannot breed a snake, you can only support it enough to allow snakes to breed eachother and support it enough to allow completion of that reproductive event. This is to recruit, to stay in exsistance. The prime purpose of a species.

A female snake must have developed ovaries, the ovum must first ripian, then drop. If that does not happen, all the breeding in the world will not do anything. When a female has these things, she IS big enough and OLD enough to reproduce. To reproduce is THE indicator sign of maturity. YOUR task is to support that. THAT is natures design. That you think of them as people, makes you not smart.

You should be in awe of nature, not TELL it what to do because of your primitive beliefs and lack of husbandry skills. Good day sir

Frank, I think you are right in a natural situation, however in captivity our snakes do not get enough exercise or the proper nutrition to facilitate successful egg laying at such a tender size. Who are we to say a proper diet of domestic mice is adequate. Quantitative analyses of domestic mice reveals that our captive snakes are not receiving a natural and proper diet like their wild counter parts.

Anybody that brings up “Quantitative analyses” is taking this way too seriously. It isn’t that complicated, sorry. I believe snakes regularly live to breed and die young and small in nature. We captive maintenance folk try to better that by having multiple clutches from long term successful maintenance. You could try to mimic nature in captivity, but I think we strive for optimum better than nature conditions. Some think that is impossible or wrong or something. I think some focus too much on nature and not very much on mans ability to exploit it. Sounds bad, but that is what we do. We push them to their limits of capability. We exploit them. If blusrosy has bred them at 18”, so friggin what? He is trying to pass on this information and it seems some don’t want to absorb it. Ethical thing aside- it’s a separate debate- listen to what is being said. Yes, some snakes can reproduce at 18”. Now with that information you may choose to try to reproduce them at 15”. That’s probably possible too!

This makes for good discussion. I do not think even the best of use keep our animals better then nature. Maybe a more consistand average. But surely not better.

Nature offers much much greater extremes. In their normal lifes, they experience greater abilities to regulate all needed conditions. The experience a much wider diet base. A more abundant diet base and a less abundant diet base.

They also experience rapid changes in these(their support) These changes occur on an hourly, dayly, weekly, monthly, yearly and over tens of thousands of years, BASIS. In otherwords, they live in a everchanging enviornment. Which is reason for them having a wide range of potentials. That is being a reptile(ectotherm).

Mammals on the otherhand, do not experience such extremes. They carry their base conditions with them(indotherm), they at times control their enviornment. Humans take that to the extreme.

What is sad about us keepers is, we act like reptiles are mammals. They are not. We make assumptions on their abilities based on OUR set of conditions, which in nowhere similar to their actual conditions.

Lastly, wild reptiles are taxed to the max. That is, they support a huge varity of life(parasites) My guess is, if we allowed those same parasites into your collection, your reptiles would fail in a most complete manner. Yet wild reptiles get a dose of parasites with every meal. They also have external parasites too. Darn they are tuff. Did I mention predators??? Oh yea, they have advanced lifeforms attacking from above, on the surface and below the surface. Double darn, they are tuff. How would your animals take this?

Yet, in spite of all these setbacks, they exsist. THat is, they reproduce enough to maintain a population. Through good years and bad years, etc. Yet, if it was not for vet medicine, and protection from all things, most all of your reptiles would be DEAD. hahahahahahahahaha yup we are good. Cheers

I would speculate that one of the reasons you he doesn't find any 18" gravid females in the wild is that kings hide and hise well, females do not move as much as males, they "protect" their clutch by hiding and that many females are eaten. I would further say the reason that you find large gravid females is because these females had many more years of experience and can move about more successfully, having gained experience over the years. I would imagine the large females you found were once gravid 18" snakes! Just some thoughts. I personally have not found any 18" gravid females in the wild and don't expect to, and I haven't bred any 18" females so I am maybe talkin' outta my butt, but I have seen many stranger things than this under the sun. The specks and splendidas I encounter frequently in my neck of the woods surely breed regularly at considerably less than 30"!!!!! How 'bout the mexicana complex? Again, surely at less than 30"!!! Cal kings and MBK's seem to fit the bill as well. Just because the snake can exceed 30" doesn't mean that there is a set standard in anyones snake room for everyone to follow. If you agree with someones opinions use them, if not, don't. Discussions good...argueing bad!
Todd Hughes

Who decides whats better? Nature vs. Captivity the survival rate is certainly much higher in captive king snakes than that in wild kingsnakes. But look at commonly wild caught animals IE some asain box turtles. If your judging on the respects of survival rate then captivity is better for most snakes.

I seriously doubt man could ever achieve what nature can provide in terms of record sizes, clutches, and overall anything. man can only copy and poorly at best. While we have done some amazing things, we can't build a self sustaining world, only destroy or at best, hold off the urban jungle for a while. I am not a pessimist, I believe nature will have us all for lunch, using the smallest of the small. That said, happy new year, lol! It's all mute, we can only imitate, not create. What we produce in our rooms has been done thousands of times. Nothing new under the sun. I just hope I can maintain my collection to procreate. Then, I think I will just enjoy them in the great outdoors. I am such a hypocrite! and a damn deep thinker, lol!
Todd Hughes

I think we can easily do better than nature. I think we do it all the time. If you think animals didn’t become extinct before man came along, well, I know you can’t think that. The natural world is ever changing and it is continuing to do so right in our collections. It is all a part of it. Man’s affect on things is part of the natural history of earth. Man can build better animals, that is proven. Hopefully we live to see what is to come- that will blow your mind with genetic engineering. We are just at the very beginning of a new industry of chemical and biological engineering that will make our hybrid talk a primitive cute little laugh riot. We will create. Things will change. The natural world will change. Think of every culture of mankinds existence, and a father saying to his son,”the world will change”. It would be true of every single culture. Some feared it, even 100,000 years ago. But we are still here to say it again. I mean for this to be a message of hope, not a bummer. The things that led up to what we produce in our rooms has changed a thousand times, the things we produce can be unique and never before done or seen. Accept your place in it all, and keep being a damn deep thinker!

HEHEH, I haven't began the drink yet, but that was my version of Deep Thinking, by Jack Handy! Well, I know albinos were not created, and I believe the white walls started in nature and hypos and all that. To some degree, hybrids as well, but I don't think you can take Dolly and put her out in the pasture and she will be better adapted to survive than any other sheep. She was a clone, and when we finally have a handle on all the biotech, they will be designed for more food, fur/leather, etc., but is more better? I think this world was wonderously and marvelously made, my opinion, by the Man upstairs, and I think he had a handle on the whole thing. Thank God we don't know everything and that there is still so much to learn! Wish we all could be right but we can't. Hope I don't step on toes, Billy, I apologize if I came off sounding rude, but every year we have this damn discussion and apparently we will all have to agree to disagree! I just don't see how you can trade thousands of experiences from a pioneer in the industry and try and debunk the facts! Be excellant to each other and party on!
Todd Hughes

Not true Don, I have not had a problem with snakes breeding at small sizes. OK let me clarify, I have not seen an increase in failure with small or young individuals. In fact, much the opposite. I experience more failures with OLD, LARGE, females. I also experience better success with young animals. That is a reflection of my husbandry.

What this means is, people who experience failures, are blaming the animal instead of their husbandry. If you believe that lack of exercise is the problem, then allow them to exercise, give them bigger cages and something to climb on and something to dig(burrow) in. Its not about the snake its about YOU(keepers). Personally, I do not think exercise is the problem. And in reality you do not either.

You do not because you know darn well, your have had really strong(physically) babies and young ones, even if they never exercised. You simply want to blame this failure on something you are not willing to change.

Recently you have been amazed at how fast my snakes grow. Yet, my snakes are growing half as fast as they did when I was really into kingsnakes. That your snakes are not growing that fast is based on you. You have to many animals to pay attention to any one individual. Your results are based on a schedule, not the snakes. You have so many, they get their food ration, not what it would take to test their growth potential. Its all that simple. IT does not make you good or bad, your simply basing your thoughts of schedules and not genetic potential.

What that leads to is. Snakes have a reproductive potential. They can reproduce at a range of sizes and they can reproduce in a range of quantity. That is, have several large clutches or one small clutch, or of course, no reproduction at all. This potential is based on support and/or need.

This person stated that most wild gravid cal kings are three feet. I would argue that, I would think the average size for wild gravid Cal kings is 30 inches. But thirty inches is not the only size they reproduce at. They can reproduce from about 18 inches to slightly over five feed. That is their reproductive potential for size.

If you fine folks would stop thinking about yourselfs(narcissistic) and think about the REAL animals, you may want to ask a question. Why can they do this? whats the real use of such a wide reproductive potential? Those and other questions are far more appropriate that saying saying this or that is wrong. In this case, whomever is saying its wrong is WRONG.

They have this potential to exsist in a varity of conditions. On poor years, the smaller females can consume enough to complete a reproductive cycle. Large females take far more calories to exsist, therefore take a much higher energy comsumption to complete their base reproductive cycle. Smaller females have a much lower base energy comsumption rate, so it takes far less for them to complete a reproductive cycle.

This reproductive range, allows this species to exsist and recruit in a varity of conditions. And none of this is about you keepers. Its about the species.

Consider, these reptiles have been these reptiles since before man was man. Therefore they are not designed to fit your needs. It ain't about you.

So when you start to say, these animals are this and that, it takes it out of your hands and puts in in their hands. They do indeed have a large range in size for reproductive ability. Its too bad your not qualified to understand that.(a human comment)

IF you(all) had a brain and ever read anything, you would realize that all reptile books and all discriptions give a RANGE OF ADULT sizes. NOT one size, folks, there is reason for this. Cheers and get aware and stop thinking of only yourselves.

"That is narcissistic, the world centers around you. "

Actually..that sums up the theory of breeders who breed snakes at 18 inches. Thank you.

" When a female has these things, she IS big enough and OLD enough to reproduce. To reproduce is THE indicator sign of maturity. YOUR task is to support that. THAT is natures design. That you think of them as people, makes you not smart. "

So 12 or 13 year old girls, who have the capacity to " breed " and have babies should do just that cause their bodies can allow them to do so at that time? Of course the answer is a resounding NO but this theory and logic you propose says the same thing, and it is something that I and many others do not agree with. Wow, if they have it, use it, is what you are saying cause " nature " designed it and can allow that.

" You should be in awe of nature, not TELL it what to do because of your primitive beliefs and lack of husbandry skills. Good day sir "

Oh yeah, I do see what you are saying for the most part, but at the same time, my " primitive beliefs and lack of husbandry skills " you suggest due to me not agreeing with the selfish theory of 18 females being bred cause the breeder WANTS them to is basically just you being rude once again, like you have been in previous posts. You need to know FR that not everyone will agree with you. Not everyone will agree with my opinions but at least, I am not coming off as demeaning, like you have in your post here. Differences of opinion are common my friend.
-----
Genesis 1:1

Snakes are not 12 or 13 year old girls. Hmmmmmm not even close.

The problem with learning is context, all things have context. You are so far out of context you only have one option and that is to limit your own learning and understanding.

In that, I feel sorry for you and your animals. Oh and the people around you.

Also IF, and thats a big if, you were actually willing to learn, you could ask better questions.

Such as, it was mentioned a female must cycle in order to reproduce. You could ask about that. Then the answer to that would be, the female must produce enlarged ovum, in order to reproduce.

Then we could take this a step further, we could dicusee which is better for a small female, to successfully laid fertile eggs or to absorb/drop her enlarged ovum. Sir that would be a decent matter of discussion as I am sure there are many opinions on that. But then, those would be advanced thoughts or theories that actually have some merit.

You clearly show you have no ability to think and put things in proper(realistic) context. As you have shown placing teenage girls in the same catagory as 18 kingsnakes. Hmmmmmmmm

How about a better comparison, How old do tribal humans reproduce at?????????? Do you understand the differences between culture and biology. Just something to mix up your brain. Cheers