Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Sometimes I see some ignorant things posted here. In my post on the topic of “Mutts and Fetishes” someone spoke of the Spotted Owl as not being endangered because there are plenty of Spotted x Barred Owls out there,(yes, I do know that the poster was quoting a friend in one of the services that has been doing census work on this bird, and that the poster never identified the species of owl that was hybridizing with the Spotted Owl), but this was an example of ignorance that should not go unaddressed. Since the poster was quoting a person that he thought of as an authority, that poster should not take this as an attack on him but as a challenge to the understanding of the person semi quoted. (How do you like that disclaimer?)

Saying that the Spotted Owl is not endangered because of the number of hybrids that are out there in the wild is crazy. Scientists are well aware that these crosses exist in the wild. The problem is that the range of the Barred Owl has expanded over the last century, so that a very large portion of the Spotted Owl’s range has become one big Spotted-Barred Owl hybrid zone. The fact that there are so many hybrids out there is in part of why the Spotted Owl is considered endangered.
Northern Spotted Owl Draft Recovery Plan Released

Yea. Alright. OK then. Sure. You bet ya. What ever you say. Can I get a amen. What? Randy

I totally agree Randy.

Not to continue relatively pointless discussion but I will clarify my post that is being reffered to above.

I never said spotted owls were not possibly endangered. I said the figures that were giving them the categorization of "endangered" and which were being used for political purposes were completely faulty/inaccurate. A subtle but extremely important difference.

You yourself state that part of why the spotted owls are on the endangered list is because of the number of hybrids.

Why should we interfere with nature/evolution by trying to prevent two naturally occurring species from competing? It's not like we brought them here from another continent or manually relocated them across the continent. They migrated on their own, AKA nature.

Now if you are wanting to preserve a particular look in an animal from nature by controling it's breeding in captivity then more power to you but I see no reason to interfere with nature in this case.

Sean.

PS: I sorta hope this thread gets removed or moved as it is really more a topic for other forums.

I couldn't agree more. If these hybrids would be inferior in any way, they would be selected against. Obviously, this is not the case. The only part in this we should allow ourselves, is to watch and learn. Species come and go, but sometimes they merge and change into something new. There's nothing wrong with that.

Some folks just don't get the point. Human activity has changed the balance of nature in that area. The fact that there are now so many hybrids demonstrates the problem. I have no idea if they are unfit or can reproduce. (I know almost nothing about the biology of birds.)

The post read: "A friend who worked for forestry and other groups in their range used to beat his head against a wall at all the misleading publicity because he saw the spotted hybrids in huge numbers but they could not be included in the population surveys." The post is inferring that because there are so many hybrids, there is not a problem. Well, that information is wrong. Not counting hybrids as members of one species or the other is the only way to do a population census. They have to be counted separately.

In no way do I claim that obsoleta intergrades are unfit animals. The only thing I claimed in my original posting was that Texas / Gray intergrades have no market and that getting a second lucistic Texas Rat for breeding was a better way to go because there is a real market out there for those snakes.

While I am sure that none of the readers of this forum would never let loose captive animals into the wild, the fact still remains that it does happen. And some of these animals do get established in areas where they were never intended. People only seem to value things that they paid real money for. Cheep things get tossed. No one is going to release an expensive animal into the wild; they will try to sell it, but a $5 rat snake is another matter. I for one think that we should encourage only responsible breeding. Just because one can do a thing doesn’t mean that one should do a thing.

Yes, but...

There isn't really a market for pure ratsnakes either, is there? So if one releases a bunch of pure Yellow Ratsnakes into Grey Ratsnake territory, isn't that just as bad as when one releases a bunch of Grey x Yellow mutts?

I still don't see the point in breeding 'pure' leucistic Texas Ratsnakes. Inbreeding is the real problem here, not crossbreeding. Sure, so you can also use another Texas Rat to do your outbreeding. We all know that. But what's so terribly wrong with a little experimenting? It's just a bloody mutant, for crying out loud.

If there was no market for pure rats then why does this forum exist?
-----
-David Harrison-
.1 Snow Corn "Hope"
1. Orange Albino Black Ratsnake "Chunk" (Goonies)
.1 Orange Albino Black Ratsnake "Peaches"
.1 Ball Python "Rocky Ballboa" (Didn't name her!)

"Have you ever tried simply turning off the T.V., sitting down with your kids... and hitting them?"

Oh, don't get me wrong. I like a good Everglades or White Oak, just to name a few. But just like you, I suppose, I'm not buying these snakes like all the time. But hobbyists do seem to be breeding these snakes all the time and, as a result, demand doesn't even come close to supply. So a lot of these snakes end up with retailers, and we all know what happens from there. A pure Grey would have about as much of a chance as a Grey x Texas has. Purity doesn't make any difference, when you're a low budget snake.

I for one think that we should encourage only responsible breeding. Just because one can do a thing doesn’t mean that one should do a thing.

And just who would determine what is responsible and what isn't?
YOU?
Why do we have to keep saying this?
Just because you don't agree with it, that does'nt make it wrong.
It can't get any easier then that.
Who's to say breeding emoryi/corns or even king/corns is worse then breeding two Texas rats to get a mutant leucy or any other suposed pure/pure pairing.
You?
Once again, just because you don't agree that does not make it wrong...or in your own words irresponsible.

I'm really getting lost on just what your point is.
I mean, you are obviously adamant against hybrids but nothing you say will change the fact that they are here to stay.
I'm just curious what nit-picking at the post about the owls
is going to accomplish.
You can't change progress. man moved west and the barred owl with them. As much as you would like to deny it, that is as natural as things can be in a world with man.
Nature is adapting.
But it still doesn't have any relevence in the discussion over CAPTIVE BRED snakes.
Show me one area RIGHT NOW where corn snake or rat snake populations are being decimated by hybrids. And natural intergradation obviously doesn't count.
-----
Corn snakes and rat snakes..No one can have just one.
"Resistance is futile"
Jimmy Johnson
(Draybar)
Draybars Snakes

_____

I used to be an avid opponent of crossbreeding and hybrids. then around 1996 i attended a symposium in Texas where Phillipe Devosjoli spoke about the subject. The main point of his talk was that crossbreeding is what humans have done with animals for as long as humans have been keeping and breeding animals. Instinctively, humans want to manipulate their environment to please them/us. Now I wasn't necessarily a Phillipe fan before or after i saw that presentation. however, i like to think that i am opened minded enough to explore and consider all arguments of a particular debate. my feelings toward people who crossbreed reptiles changed after i heard his talk. I still beleive that humans manipulating the pure bloodlines of reptiles is not good, however i understand why they do it and do not chastise them as i once did. as right or wrong as it may be, it is going to happen, just as introduction of some of those hybrids to the great outdoors will happen.

The Barred Owls are not naturally occuring there, they came west with humans and because humans altered the habitat. Many things humans have done have altered habitats and caused changes, many humans do not think it is right or in our best long term intrests to introduce species or modify habitats to the point where native species go extinct. We could probably exist in a worldwide monoculture of farm and ranchland or fill up the earth with ourselves and feed the human population almost entirely on plankton but is that what we want?

or maybe it just needed more spices the last time I had some. Good points.
-----
phflame
kingsnake.com host

"
I never said spotted owls were not possibly endangered. I said the figures that were giving them the categorization of "endangered" and which were being used for political purposes were completely faulty/inaccurate. A subtle but extremely important difference.
"
I guess its just me, but I would have categorized that as an irrelevant difference, not an important one

"
Why should we interfere with nature/evolution by trying to prevent two naturally occurring species from competing? It's not like we brought them here from another continent or manually relocated them across the continent. They migrated on their own, AKA nature.
"
While I am not more than vaguely familiar with owls, many other animals are able to occupy new habitats in regions due to changes in the environment that are due to human activities, AKA human interference.

"
PS: I sorta hope this thread gets removed or moved as it is really more a topic for other forums.
"
So do I

-Duncan

The difference between a statement of a title/classification and a statement about validity of data that was used for that title/classification seems rather significant to me. But maybe I just like to know on what grounds something is based and if those grounds were valid.

Bottom line is that the numbers of "pure spotted owls" being used for the census without documenting the "hybrid spotted owls" created an extremely inaccurate/misleading assessment of the situation. At the height of it's public attention you never once heard of the two species of owl hybridizing. All you heard was that they couldn't reproduce in the lands that had been developed at all. The implication and common opinion was that if they had unlimited undeveloped space then they would never have decreased in population. This was blatantly false as spotted owls were "successfully breeding" but the offspring not being counted(hybridization) and because even the "pure owls" could be seen nesting in fenceposts or other developed locations albeit in lower numbers then in wild habitat.

Because they refused to look at all the data and instead only made their endangered assessment by the number of pure spotted owls we were given a very false impression of the actual situation of the species.

PS: Since when does "Human interference"(in the case of generalized environment change) or any other environment changing event such as floods, glaciers, or volcanic eruptions have any say on whether something is a natural process?

All creatures in the world try to manipulate their environment to their own benefit just like us human animals. The only difference is the scale to which we change it. No matter in what way or to what degree the environment changes if the animal population is left alone in that environment to select for the beneficial traits then it is natural selection.

There never has been and never will be a environment or nature in stasis as long as there is life in that environment. Besides who are we to decide that the way nature was here in the recent past is the best state for it to keep?

Sean.

I have followed this discussion for a while and see a differing view from either side a third side if you will. The science behind hybrids to better understand genetics and relationships as it relates to phenotype in our supposed pure specimens. My ultimate hybrid would be a Cobra to a Cribo. Both fill the same ecological niche both eat other snakes both found on opposite parts of the globe but one has venom and one does not. The question is were all snakes venomous at one time or is venom a recent adaptation? Would a hybrid between these two help answer this question? Would the offspring if possible have venom? Have glands for venom but no delivery system? Would they be non venomous? Would they hood? Data, Data, Data, I for one see value in hybridizing but for the science.
-----
"Life without risk is to merely exist."

I assure you that there are better ways to answer all of those questions.

scientific knowledge is only gained by experimentation to test hypothesis. I know of no accurate way to test something without performing the test.

Sean.

Sorry if I was unclear, I do believe in science, just not the value of most hybrids to answer any questions.
While I would not be surprised to read a paper that found something through hybridizing cogeners, I fail to see how exactly a cribo/cobra hybrid would be of any value (other than being neat because it is so unlikely). I believe that the best way to answer these questions on the origins of venom in snakes and its importance would be better answered though phylogenetic work, maybe trying to determine if venom is an ancestral trait by determining if it would have had to evolved multiple times independently.