Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I remember seeing that "first" albino thayeri when it first hatched. The year was 1994. I believe.

Heres my question. When the Ruthvens albino gene was bred into the thayeri line. What happened to all the hets? As a person that has produced albinos for the first time and developed different lines, I fully understand, you have to produce lots and lots and lots of hets in order to recieve a reliable line. So in order to recieve good looking thayeri(X), you produce lots and lots of carriers or hets.

I know Steve, and I am positive he represented his animals accurately. And for the sake of this conversation, lets just say he did. My concern or question is, how accurate or reliable is the second or third hand information? Or fourth or fifth hand information?

What I am saying is, there were probably dozens to hundreds of thayeri appearing snakes, that were sold and resold and traded and retraded. So a person goes to a show and buys to inexpensive thayeri and they produce albinos. So they are called pure thayeri, is that possible? is that likely? Of course it is.

I am not saying this is what happened, but it could be what happened and by all means it should have happened a lot.

I remember when Steve first offered those pastal albinos, that was a very long time ago. So how many were sold and of those sold, how many were bred to normals to recieve hets? then what happened to all those hets. Over the years, this could amount to hundreds upon hundreds of individuals. Sirs, this is a valid question.

This can just as easily go for Albino easterns and Fla. kings as well. It would take a few generations to breed back to a species color and pattern. Where did all those go?

Again, I am not one of those purists, at least for captive animals. But from reading this and other forums, I often think some folks are overly concerned or plain CONFUSED or just odd or something. Some of these folks have snakes that do not represent any species from any locality. Yet, they call them pure. As a field guy, this confuses me. Someone has to explain how a hypo albino applegate thats het for snow and striped, can be a pure anything??? To confuse this, I collected an applegate pyro, long before they were known. But clearly it was a non surviving mutation. As no more have been seen since. I even have pics, someone send me a slide scanner and I will post it. hahahahahahaha heck, if I had a slide scanner, I could post all manner of cool stuff.

I think the time is coming that for an individual animal to be that animal. It must represent that animal. As I mentioned below, few captive thayeri represent natural wild occuring thayeri. Most captives represent "dreams" instead of reality. For instance, when collecting thayeri, I would dream of finding an albino or a super orange one or a mostly white one or ones with little to no black. Heck the reality was, I dreamed of finding individuals that were not ugly, as most wild thayeri were fairly drab. Of course I did find some nice ones. But not like these dreams of today.

Please understand that I am being all that complicated. I think if you took these fancy thayeri down and showed them to the locals where "culebre de pinta"(painted harmless snake)(thayeri) occur, the locals would not know what they were.

Just something to think about. Cheers

Hi Frank. It is interesting you brought this up as coincidentally this year I saw quite a few "what kind of snake is this?" posts with snakes looking kinda sorta like Thayeri. Someone commented it was probably Ruthveni/Thayeri cross and I agreed.......it could have been.

I think the thing that may have kept the Thayeri pure was 2 very well known breeders who really kept good records and offered unrelated stock. Snakes from them seem to be what most people are working with now. I know of a few other guys who have the more natural look that also apparently have been working with them for some time now and all of those breeders showed no apparent interest in the Albino Ruthveni crosses.

It's not often I think any snake is 100% "pure" anymore. If it is an obvious or honestly represented hybrid that's fine with me too. I do however think that if a known hybrid line and a pure line of a supposed morph both exist efforts should be made to keep them seperate.

Back to the Thayeri.....if it's one thing I have heard many breeders say it's " I took the rest down to a pet shop". That is for any reptiles in general....not just Thayeri of course. Many times someone comes on here asking for an ID the snake in question was obtained from a pet store.

This post reminds me of of why I don't mind line breeding at all. I feel it is a common mistake breeders make by moving on and outcrossing or rasing keepers to breeding age and parting with the parents. I like the idea of obtaining snakes from someone who has had those snakes in thier collection for 15 plus years, untainted or outcrossed. Too bad available snakes of that sort are not easy to come by. My oldest breeders are 7-8 years old. I hope they're still producing 10 years from now
Tom Stevens

-----
TomsSnakes.com

Hi Tom, if you keep feeding your snakes like you do, your going to need some large wharehouse space in the future.

about those what are they snakes, thats not a problem, but as those crosses I have are all thayeri in their characteristics. A lot of hets must appear normal as well.

About this, at a recent show, I talked to two different people who brought normal snakes and bred them, only to recieve all manner of offspring. From albinos to granites, to more. All in one clutch from normals. One thing for sure, they both liked it. hahahahahahahaha Cheers

Clearly there is a segment of people in this hobby that want to buy a "thayeri" and at the same time "know" it's parents weren't part ruthveni. We can not explain that any more than we can explain why someone would want to breed a ruthveni to a thayeri. Each is an individual preference or choice and neither should be condemned.

I am one of those odd ones. I never thought about "why". I just know that I want what I want.

I think there is plenty of room for both schools of thought, and if there is blame or condemning to do it falls on the shoulders of those second, third, and fourth tier owners / breeders that either didn't keep detailed records, didn't care, or intentionally misrepresented those animals.
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

Let me ask you something. Do you have field notes from Nuevo Leon?

There are quite a few examples of "vivid" coloration in wild thayeri. Many of the wild MSP thayeri were quite colorful (Blody & Heckard, UANL, Salmon & Vermilya, Hansen & Alexander). Ground color on wild and F1 leonis and intermediates phases ran the gamut including lemon yellow and orange (MCZ, Kardon, Garstka). Some leonis had "drab" ground color with vivid colored blotches (ITESM, Garstka, UANL).

I do not dispute that there were also very drab examples of thayeri from the wild, nor do I dispute that captive propagation has created "super" saturated thayeri in terms of coloration.

My point is merely that the genetic groundwork was already there to produce those super saturated captive gems, and the line breeders didn't have to work too hard to produce them. In fact I have already stated that some line breeders may have sacrificed the variability of the Variable Kingsnake to produce certain saturated colors (orange lines for example)

What if both leonis and thayeri are valid subspecies? That might designate about 99% of the "thayeri" in captivity as intergrades. Or what if leonis and thayeri are both valid and there are about 50 mountains and valleys down there where they naturally intergrade? Add another "type" of Kingsnake and alterna into the mix in nearly contiguous (separated by one valley) parts of the range in Nuevo Leon and things can get confusing real fast.

You are a Field guy, so I KNOW you care, otherwise you wouldn't have put in the effort to find those animals in those locations.
There is a part of the habitat, natural history, and behavior of those animals and populations that all the DNA in existence could never explain.

If we are going to go through the trouble to separate and identify those species, subspecies, and populations for science, why shouldn't we also have the responsibility to maintain accurate and true breeding representations of those animals in captivity?

Now before you answer (if you do) realize I'm not picking on you as much as I'm trying to pick your brain (take it to my e-mail if you wish - I'd be very happy with that
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

I not exactly sure what your talking about, hahahahahahahaha.

Without re-reading what I wrote. I only addressed a few things. One was the very real possibility that there are many many unknown Thayeri(X's) hets out there in the trade. Common sense says, there has to be. I asked about them, where are they?

Then I said, most of the thayeri pics do not resemble what I saw in nature. Do they resemble what YOU saw in nature?

If you look at all the morphs of these kings, they all came from nature, So the heck what. They still do not resemble naturally occurring snakes.

I like all those things, Heck, I like hybrids, crosses, morphs. I keep at that and normals. But I do not confuse them with natural populations or what natually pure is.

Lastly, I think my pics showed the value of an albino thayeri. I can now make and SEE, all kinds of albinos. Breeding the one albino male to the rest in those pics, would produce some very interesting possibilities. But again, that has nothing to do with nature.

What I am wondering is, pure may not be all that important or relavent in captivity. At least now from what I see here.

Most of the pics on this page are mutations, and yes, those genes came from nature, but do not normally exsist in nature, they are mistakes or even better, failed tests.

What I am not understanding is, why the pure this and that, and then keep mutations. Am I making any sense here? Cheers

"Am I making any sense here?"

For once Frank I get you! I think I need to lay down. LOL

>>I not exactly sure what your talking about, hahahahahahahaha.

I may have gotten too far off on tangents - but you can still address those things if you want

>> Without re-reading what I wrote. I only addressed a few things. One was the very real possibility that there are many many unknown Thayeri(X's) hets out there in the trade. Common sense says, there has to be. I asked about them, where are they?

Yes, they are all over the place, but they aren't at my house! hahaha BTW I'm sad, not because they exist, but because we have the confusion associated with trying to decipher which are mixed and which aren't.

>> Then I said, most of the thayeri pics do not resemble what I saw in nature. Do they resemble what YOU saw in nature?

Some do, a lot don't. I think I covered that part pretty well. If you just took what you or I saw in nature even those samples are too small to adequately reflect what occurs naturally in all the places what we call thayeri are found. We have to look at all the records of what has been found living in nature, and there are some knockouts. That is why they are so popular. Same with alterna. BTW we have the same ruthveni crosses with alterna floating around but they are a little easier to spot than the thayeri crosses.

>> If you look at all the morphs of these kings, they all came from nature, So the heck what. They still do not resemble naturally occurring snakes.

I'm one of those odd guys that prefers "natural" phenotypes. I like morphs too, just not as much.

>> I like all those things, Heck, I like hybrids, crosses, morphs. I keep at that and normals. But I do not confuse them with natural populations or what natually pure is.

Right, and I know that about you, and I certainly respect everyones right to do so. I guess I'm just moaning because all those hybrids and crosses got mixed up and misrepresented - not your fault.

>> Lastly, I think my pics showed the value of an albino thayeri. I can now make and SEE, all kinds of albinos. Breeding the one albino male to the rest in those pics, would produce some very interesting possibilities. But again, that has nothing to do with nature.

Right, that one would last about 5 minutes in nature. But I admit it is beautiful.

>> What I am wondering is, pure may not be all that important or relavent in captivity. At least now from what I see here.

That was one my points. True representations of what could be found in the wild are important to ME. That's why I said I was one of those odd ones you referenced. Line breeding for traits is fine too, but IMO we have a responsibility to represent wild phenotypes too. That doesn't mean YOU have to do it, it means that I think SOMEONE has to do it.
>>
>> Most of the pics on this page are mutations, and yes, those genes came from nature, but do not normally exsist in nature, they are mistakes or even better, failed tests.

I agree because you used the word most, and normally, but as you know there are plenty of successful mutations that survive, breed, and even establish themselves. Blond subocs come to mind.

>> What I am not understanding is, why the pure this and that, and then keep mutations. Am I making any sense here? Cheers

You make perfect sense. I say keep them both, and keep them separate. If you breed thayeri to ruthveni, label it as such.
Clearly your animals have been bred back to thayeri to the point the animals are mostly thayeri, maybe 7/8? Those animals are beautiful and should be labeled 7/8 thayeri and 1/8 ruthveni, just like a line bred bright orange thayeri should be labeled line bred bright orange thayeri.

I think that is all any oddball wild phenotype nuts can ask for, true representation.

Now am I making any sense?
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

Joe, who really knows if which came first, the blonde suboc or the "Normal"? We assume that blondes descended from "Normals" because of population numbers, but is that proof? Could it have been the other way around? Interesting you should use this example because ironically this thought has been on my mind the last few days. Interested in your thoughts. Rusty

I'm probably the last guy on earth that could prove that one way or the other.

Another example is a small population of Hypomelanistic Checkered Garter snakes living in NE San Antonio. I found 4 different individuals over the course of a few years and recently another adult was found about 8 miles away. It's a fairly bright snake especially compared to the normals and it seems to be established or at least reproducing like individuals.

I'm sure there are more examples.

>>Joe, who really knows if which came first, the blonde suboc or the "Normal"? We assume that blondes descended from "Normals" because of population numbers, but is that proof? Could it have been the other way around? Interesting you should use this example because ironically this thought has been on my mind the last few days. Interested in your thoughts. Rusty
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

Is more like wild thayeri then most seen here. Of course its cleaner. But wild ones shed out and get cleaner too.

Thanks for posting. Cheers

Awesome! Nice clean semi wild type generic thayeri! LOL

To me what a "pure" thayeri means is something that does not contain genes from another species or subspecies. When you speak of non-surviving morphs, that is fine...all species have mutations (morphs) that wouldnt survive in the wild. But if I can have an animal with bloodlines that trace back to wild caught ancestors, without other species blood intentionally mixed in, that is what I prefer to propogate. To me that would be a pure thayeri.
-----
Species kept:

Nuevo Leon Kings
Kunasir Island Rats
San Luis Potosi Kings
Axanthic Desert Kings
White Oak Gray Rats
Corns

Coming Soon:

Western Green Rats

Very true. I agree, I am no less a Homo sapiens because I have terrible vision and totally would not survive if I had to hunt and gather in the wild (atleast with out my glasses). So am I not a locality NY human because I have a mutation that would not survive in the wild?

Best,
Vinny
-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

So how do you know your thayeri are pure????? Kinda what I was asking.

As I am sure there are hundreds of cross hets out there. Cheers

Bottom line is, at some point you have to trust your sources. I have tried to buy my stock from like-minded thayeri enthusiast...those who endeavor to keep their bloodlines thayeri only. Alot of info can be gleaned from a few simple lineage questions.

Yes there are hybrid thayeri mixes out there. To me a "pure" thayeri is genotypically pure, not phenotypically pure. There are breeders who have been as careful as humanly possible not to get animals with any hybrid blood in them. Those people also make themselves quite apparent after just a short conversation.

Could some thayeri with a small percentage of mixed blood have slipped through the cracks and made it into their collections? It is possible...although not likely knowing how stringent some of these "purists" are.

I agree with Joe's assessment. There is room for hybrids in the hobby. But there is also something to be said for those who wish to keep the gene pool as close to that of the thayeri that occur in nature. I fall into the latter category.
-----
Species kept:

Nuevo Leon Kings
Kunasir Island Rats
San Luis Potosi Kings
Axanthic Desert Kings
White Oak Gray Rats
Corns

Coming Soon:

Western Green Rats

You use these terms like genotypically pure, and phenotypically and yet the snakes many of you have do not have the same colors and patterns as TYPICAL wild snakes.

What bothers me is, your all this and that about pure, but WHAT do you know about pure. Have you seen local specific typical thayeri first hand? If not, what characteristics do you know?

Also please understand this, I do not care what you do. Your welcome to it. But it appears to me, the distance between most keepers and wild animals is so great, they do not know what typical is.

On offense, but all the fancy names in the world will be of no help is you do not know the different between chocolate pudding and pig poop.

It appears to me, pure or otherwise, you fellas keep whats pretty, not whats normal. You breed for whats pretty, not whats normal. And normal does mean typical and typical is the back part of geno and pheno.

And pretty gets prettier and prettier until its far from typical. Geno or otherwise. Its to a point, that the extremes are as much a mutant as a cross/hybrid.

Again, Your welcome to keep or think what you want, as I said at the end of the first post, just something to think about. To think about something does not mean you have to defend what you do. It just means think. Cheers

Chocolate Pudding and Pig Poop?!?!?! You crack me up!!!!!!!LOL

Pat

Hi Pat, They both kinda look alike, but it ends there, ahahahahahahaha.

I forget, did i post the odd gophersnake pics(wild mutants) hahahahaha. If not I will post them. Cheers

O yeah!!!! Please do!!!
Pat

Hi Pat, These two were from a wave a babies that got murdered across our local roads about a month ago. We had a wet summer and it appears to have benefited gophers well, as they are everywhere, still, saw two yesterday.

The first one was hit right in front of us. The evening before, I found one with the spots down the top, but without the striping, in the exact same spot.

The second one, is very odd, as striping is at times very common with our local gophers. But this one is the wrong color and a very odd pattern or lack of or two much off. The one with it was from a couple hundred yards away on the same evening.

The second one is here and doing well, I am very curious to see what it grows up like. I hope you enjoy the pics. Cheers your old friend and still your friend, Frank

I kept these two because I just couldn't help myself. We had a killer year for Gophers in Texas too.

BTW I have a slide scanner. If you want me to scan your slides I'd be happy to Burn them to either CD or DVD for you. DVD's are cool because you can plug them into your DVD player and look at slides on TV (maybe CD's too, I don't know)
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

>>You use these terms like genotypically pure, and phenotypically and yet the >>snakes many of you have do not have the same colors and patterns as TYPICAL wildsnakes.

>>What bothers me is, your all this and that about pure, but WHAT do you know >> pure. Have you seen local specific typical thayeri first hand? If not, what >>characteristics do you know?

I think the point trying to be made is that genetic variation does not fall from heaven. Its present in the wild population that the individuals came from, and its very very abundent. In fact, there is more genetic variation (which gives rise to phenotypic variation) within a species than between. So how is breeding animals together that have a particular combination of alleles that come from the same population not keeping the species pure?

I'd also add that allele frequencies are changing every generation, that means once you take a snake out of the wild its combination of alleles will be different from that found in the wild population. Thats the same thing as selecting for a bright orange color. By your def. those local-specific animals are no more pure than line-bred and trait selected ones. If thats your point then I agree, if not I dont see your logic.

Best,
Vinny
-----
“There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that whilst this planet has gone on cycling according to the fixed laws of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” -C. Darwin, 1859

Natural Selection Reptiles

Frank,

What I am saying is that outward "typical" appearance does not equate to pure. The genes determine purity...not having them from other species. In thayeri, two very different looking snakes (phenotype) can have the same mom and dad (genotype). It is those genes, not its outward appearance that equate to purity for me. Animals with different alleles of the same gene can look very different.

As soon as you mix in DNA from another species, you mix the gene soup. Not only may they look different, but they have different underlying genes.

I guess that is where our repective opinions differ. You consider outward appearance to wild types to equate to purity, I consider underlying genes, not appearance to determine purity. Thank you for the dialogue. I enjoy hearing...and respect...your opinion.
-----
Species kept:

Nuevo Leon Kings
Kunasir Island Rats
San Luis Potosi Kings
Axanthic Desert Kings
White Oak Gray Rats
Corns

Coming Soon:

Western Green Rats

I sorry, but genetically, a population, has a wide variation to meet changing conditions. Genetically they throw all manner of attempts to fit their enviornment.

But what exsists in that enviornment is a combination of the genes and the enviornment. So, what occurs in any area is controlled by that area. Wet, dry, predator load, etc. habitat change is also very important. Even as simple as tree growth has changed the way snakes use their enviornment. All this predicts what a locality population expresses. NOT JUST GENES.

While you can consider this a horse(genes) and the cart(selection) type of thing. You know, the horse is more important, no the cart is more important. The truth is, whats expressed is a combination of both the horse and the cart.

As far as genes are concerned, snakes are equipmented with genetic memory of decades of expressed variation and they surface in an attempt to STAY CURRENT.

So yes, the natural genes that are carried in all snakes can be expressed to create mutations or simple non normal colors and patterns. And yes, you can say, its the genes from wild snakes that created these extreme colors and patterns. But again, they do not represent what is actually in nature. And genetically, thats a very timely matter. As genetically, they are in constant change.

Also in the case of Thayeri, I am somewhat familiar with the history. Much of the variation with this animal was based on crosses. That is, there was no attention as to localities. We simply bred a male to a female. They did not have to be from the same mountain range or even better the same canyon, or even the same population. They were from anywhere the books called them thayeri. And the books were and are very very very very very weak on that subject.

In fact, there is no animal thats thayeri. They are basically a kingsnake in transition. An intermediate between alterna types, and mex mex types. In fact, many keyed out to be mex mex.

That reminds me. While I was working this species in nature, I brought back many many sheds of this group and took them to the Universty herp dept. Not only could they not tell what type of mexicana they were, they even overlaped with milksnakes. More to think about. Cheers

This is what interests the most out of many things associated with these snakes that we call thayeri, so forgive me if I keep asking questions. But being of the curious nature and my interest in the subject, I have no other option but to ask you questions about it! It never hurts to ask, right?

>>>>> Also in the case of Thayeri, I am somewhat familiar with >>the history. Much of the variation with this animal was based >>on crosses. That is, there was no attention as to localities. >>We simply bred a male to a female. They did not have to be from >>the same mountain range or even better the same canyon, or even >>the same population.

What about Garstka's breedings with the animals from San Juanito? Were you able to review those animals in comparison to others found in that area? From San Juanito to Ojo de Agua naturally occuring phenotypes exhibit tremendous variation. Would you agree or disagree with this statement?

>>>>>They were from anywhere the books called them thayeri. And >>the books were and are very very very very very weak on that >>subject.

And they still are, which is just one of the reasons this interests me so much!

>> In fact, there is no animal thats thayeri. They are basically >>a kingsnake in transition. An intermediate between alterna >>types, and mex mex types. In fact, many keyed out to be mex >>mex

Can I assume that means many from a certain area had ventral counts in the lower range (190's)? Were those ventral counts in any way associated with elevation or latitude?

>>
>> That reminds me. While I was working this species in nature, I brought back many many sheds of this group and took them to the Universty herp dept. Not only could they not tell what type of mexicana they were, they even overlaped with milksnakes. More to think about. Cheers

I want your theory on what is going on down there. Seriously, tell me what you think. I can tell you what you seem to be hinting right here is probably not too far off from one of my theories. I realize it will be conjecture, but give me an idea what you were seeing.

You were so right about this being poorly understood which also makes the observations you made over 30 years ago very important. Several good herpetologists could spend a lifetime down there and not get it sorted out, but it's still interesting and fun to hash it out.
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

"...all the fancy names in the world will be of no help is you do not know the different between chocolate pudding and pig poop."-Frank Retes

Someone should use this as the words of wisdom in their signature..

Thanks Frank!!

Rob Nixon

-----
"All the fancy names in the world will be of no help if you do not know the difference between chocolate pudding and pig poop." -Frank Retes

I think the lack of albino thayeri popping up from all those hets and possible hets that were sold traded and retraded, speaks to the survivability (or lack of) of animals in the second tier market. For years I produced some killer Bairds rats from Val Verde county stock. When my kids were born I moved many of my adults including the bairds out on breeder loans. Tragically, the bairds were lost one winter during an extended power outage. Despite having produced and sold these guys for a decade I’ve only been able to locate one guy who still has some and he isn’t breeding them!

I do agree with you on this. I have had the very same experience. But surely many are still out there.

Are those crosses from Steve, not being bred by anyone? are they producing hets? I would think many folks buy an albino and then bred it to a normal(inexpensive and fun). They must be all over. But I do not hear of them.

Consider, Steve has produced these thayeri crosses for one very long time. Cheers

And Steve is not the only one to have done this. Its odd that you don't see such "albino thayeri" more often. Personally I think that by a large margin those who tend to like things more pure are more succesful as breeders but even that shouldn't account for the near complete lack of albinos being produced second and third tier markets.

It may be more about cheap skates then tears(tiers) hahahahahahaha

I take offense at your statements, and so should Steve. As I pioneered some albinos and so did Steve and I would like to think we are OK at this breeding stuff.

I no little of third or fourth tier, as I watch people at pet shops and some are the most pure of keepers. They buy a snake because they like it. End of story.

A little story, the very first Leonis Bill Garska found was one of the nicist I ever saw. One day, I found a ugly, and I mean bun ugly blairs across the street for Chamberlains gas station. IT was right at the edge of the pavement. Is was dark on dark with more dark. Heck, it wasn't even black, just muddy. Bill saw that blairs and offered that leonis in trade for the ugly female blairs. Guess what, I owned and bred that leonis. hahahahahahahahahahahaha. Cheers

"I take offense at your statements, and so should Steve."

No he shouldn't and neither should you. My statement was not an absolute. If it were how would I account for all the morphs in the hobby? I simply ment that the average Joe going into a pet shop who picks up an albino corn is most likely looking for a pet and might only try to breed it as an afterthought. As such he is in my experience much less likey to succeed than the kid who starts out collecting his own stuff in the local country side. Take a poll and see how many breeders got their first snake from a pet store and how many caught and had to plead with their parents to let them keep their first snake. Perhaps I assume to much but, as the latter type myself, I still get a bigger thrill out of a fat black rat stearing down at me from the rafters of an old barn than I do from any cb albino in a deli cup. That doesn't mean I don't like albinos or don't breed them just that I still have a spot for my first love. I'd wager that most here do as well.

He had pastel kings from Jeff Cerula the very same season I had mine.

I think he just prefers WC phenotypes.

Chris

PS...keep those ruthvens crosses, Frank. They're awesome.

-----
"All the fancy names in the world will be of no help if you do not know the difference between chocolate pudding and pig poop." -Frank Retes

Why are those called pastels? And not albinos? I kinda see that where black was, its not always translucent, which is the case of albinos. Your pic and the "first albino thayeri pic" both have yellowish at the borders of the red bands, which should be translucent in albinos. Thanks

...that Steve Osborne coined to differentiate between "pure" thayeri and the Ruthvens/thayeri hybrid.

It's an industry term, now for that exact hybrid.

Chris

-----
"All the fancy names in the world will be of no help if you do not know the difference between chocolate pudding and pig poop." -Frank Retes

I see what the problem is, you’re a field guy. You are a realist and you know what is really out there from seeing with your own eyes. I see a lot of “field guide” experts that will argue about how far south a southern hognose can be found (Florida guy example). As you might point out you will often find snakes that are not familiar with the field guide. The snake might have the nerve to not look right too. Maybe they fell off a wagon, but the field guide experts look at you like you just did. I think when they say that the snake has never occurred there, they mean none of the pickled preserved ones at the University have never been labeled as being from there. Or some such. I think the dumb look on our faces goes completely over their heads, which is where you’ll have to take some satisfaction.

>>>I think the dumb look on our faces goes completely over their heads, which is where you’ll have to take some satisfaction.

amenupscale

YOU ROCK FR!!!

,,,,,,,,thomas
-----
Morphs... just like baseball cards BUT ALIVE, how cool is that???

my website www.barmollysplace.com

I agree, there must be many hybrid thayeri out there. Not just because of the albinos though. I think it has been going on since the very begining. Many thing could have caused this from putting multiple specimens in a single container then forgetting what was what, incubating two different clutches in one container then separating them based on "best guess". I suppose back in the day when all mexicana were worth money there was probably more than a few with a lone female this or that who paired it with whatever other mexicana they had and just called the babies whatever they most closely resembled.

A while ago I proposed something on this forum. It didn't really take off but I think it would help. Not help with producing pure snakes per se but help with clarifying what we have now so maybe there wouldn't be so many fights. What I proposed was that any snake that looks pure but has no lineage of record be called "generic". This is sometimes done but my addition to it was that I thought we should consider anything labeled "generic" to be considered "looks pure, has no known hybridization or intergradation but could be a cross". In this way we wouldn't claim nor expect too much from "generic" snakes. Of course my opinion is also that anything that is known to have been crossed, even if in the distant past, it should be labeled as a cross. Of course I also realize that scientific definitions will change as our knowledge changes but I think we can still make attempt to define stuff within the limits of our existing understanding of the animals and that is the best we can do.

I consider all of my thayeri, greeri, mex mex, ruthveni and knoblochi "generic" as per the definition I stated above. My personal efforts lie mainly with producing specimens that match as closely as possible what my own research has shown them to look like in the wild. My knowlege is limited so I am sure I don't have a complete representation of all the various looks but at the same time I think many of my snakes resemble extremely closely what you would sometimes find in nature. I could not tell you why but I just like looking at my snakes and thinking that somewhere out there in the wild is an animal that looks almost just like this and it is part of a great process of nature. I can tell you that it started in 1996 on my first trip to Texas, before that I used like candy canes.

Good post Aaron. Still doesn't solve the issue of the guy who thinks he did his homework better than you and is willing to say so to give himself a market edge.

I don't think that a "market edge" is an issue for you Aaron and as a guy who tends not use the locality distinctions anymore this issue is moot for me as well but it isn't for some. There is an obvious difference between people who likes locality stock as a personel preference and who use the concept to differentiate their stock from that of everyone else.

I am not understanding the "market edge" as I had a booth next ot Don shores for three years strait and there is no market for normal colored and patterned snakes of any colubrid species.

Oh you can see them for pennies(under cost) but no business considers that a market. You can give them away, but its not easy, many will not even take them.

The only things that sold were eye candy. Nothing wrong with that, but again, it has nothing to do with whats normal in nature.

I am kinds enjoying this trend, as it means so many more wild snakes are left wild as they are not pretty enough to be put in a cage. Cheers

some people keep or produce (certain) snakes / strains because they like them and some people keep (certain) snakes / strains because they think they can make a lot of money by breeding and selling them.

Of course that is a generalization and there all types of snake keepers that fall in between or fit both categories.
-----
http://www.hcu-tx.org

"I am kinds enjoying this trend, as it means so many more wild snakes are left wild as they are not pretty enough to be put in a cage."

Agree whole heartedly! As for the other I don't have a hard time moving normals. Granted, they are not wild types in the true sence but they are not as line bred as some. Then again I wouldn't really call what I do a business in the strict sence either. I run it that way to make sure I track expences and justify the time I take from my family for it. If there was not some sort of financial return I do believe I would scale back even further and give the time back to my family.

Costco does a good job of scanning slides for like 50 cents a slide.

Now you do not have an excuse.

-----
Rick Staub