Reptile & Amphibian Forums

What does everyone think about the notion that these animals are labeled as one or the other after being sold as something specific first? For example...

If an animal is imported in a group of animals from Suriname and at some point, it or its progeny become labeled Guyana either by the original seller or by someone down the line.

Or the opposite occurs and an animal is imported from Guyana and it or its progeny are later labeled Suriname.

What about a baby that's produced from one "known" Suriname and one Guyana? How do you label those babies?

Is this something that bothers or intrigues the people here?
If it doesn't bother you, do you feel that it's up to you (as a seller/marketer) to decide what you sell the animal as and make the decision of provenance based on your opinion regardless of what a piece of paper says?

I'm not posting this to get into a discussion about what is, or what is not a Suriname or Guyana or whether they're the same animal. I'm also not interested in getting into a discussion about collection points VS CITES paperwork. So please keep that hush until another thread. Thanks!!
jb
-----
Jonathan Brady
*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

Well, if you have read my posts over the years, you know I cannot talk about anything without going into detail, but I will try, without too much rambling! The " Purist " mentality is becoming more and more rare these days; " however, I am a purist. " However, I am not dellusional when it comes to Locality Boas and trying to base a certain Locality, on a certain look " with a few exceptions " is rediculous and especially as it concerns Suriname and Guyana Boas number one. I have been to both countries years ago and it changed my whole perception. Both countries " wheel and deal " between each other all of the time and just because a Boa comes in a suriname shipment, does not mean that it was caught there or visa versa! I remember about 14yrs ago, I was at STRICTLY and Big Ray had just gotten a shipment in from Suriname. In this shipment, there were 4 Boas that were absolutely the most pink Boas I have ever seen to this day and all 4 of them had a stumpy little black tail that literaly went only two bands past the vent! They were between 3 1/2 and 4ft and had shorter tails than any Bolivian Amarali, that you would ever see. Me and Ray, both laughed, because we made the comment; " Some breeder/collector out there would actually believe that some Indian got in a boat and paddled to Bolivia to pick these Boas up in order to ship them in through Suriname! " Funny stuff and a guy actually walked in and said, " pretty much that. " I have been lucky enough over the years to receive Boas that for sure came from Suriname and Boas that for sure came from Guyana, but that was a very rare occasion. Most people are only concerned in a look that they like with these two Localities and that is pretty much the end of it. I come from a time when we actually thought that the one thing that seperated them, was that Guyanas would always be purple, now that is some funny and old school thoughts right there! So, is it possible to be a " Purist " when it comes to these two Localities? Yes, but it is extremely difficult and you have to know someone that hunts most of the Boas that they export, themselves and that is becoming a rare person too find; " I only know one at this point. " That is why, most of my efforts and loves go toward Peruvian Boas. There is no mistaking a Peruvian Boa from a Suriname or Guyana and with a little delligence, it is not hard to track down most Peruvian Boas lineage to either Iquitos or the more rare Pucallpa Boa. I feel, that in the end; " most Boas out of Suriname and Guyana will just continue to be refered to more and more as just good ole B.C.C. " and I am glad that I have finally become more open minded, to understand why that may wind up being best, outside of the rare occasion that you luck up on something that you know for sure it's origins between the two. In the end, most will just go for an aesthetic quality that they like anyway. However, it is still no excuse to breed them to B.C.I. I know Jonathan; " I will leave that one alone. " Couple of nice Guyanas for you, " at least that is were they were supposed to orginate?".......John J

Great post I agree totaly.

Why don't we refer to them as "Northern Shield" animals? If and when my group starts producing, that is what I'm going to sell them as. My animals were imported from Guyana, and are from Guyana, but my two big Females have a light backround like many "Surinames". I've seen animals from French Guiana that could pass for both. I do believe the animals that range from the Eastern Venezuela fringe to French Guiana to be one in the same, with many variations in between. The Guyana shipment that I picked some Boas out of had two types; one with a shorter, chunkier head, and the others had a longer, more slender head. Thier body type was the same. I can say that the Boas with the chunkier heads had nice eyelashes and bold arrows or crosses on their heads, the others were a whole lot less distinct. Then come the animals from Southern Surinam, which some could pass for Amarali. I wish we could bring more of those animals in, as I havn't seen any that were less than incredible. And more to follow about the whole Temp Vs. Metabolism deal when I get a chance

Eric,
I don't understand why you would generalize where your animals are from. I doesn't make any sense. If you KNOW where they're from, why be vague and elusive about it? Marketing?? C'mon man...

To me, it can be better explained in this scenario.
Let's say that I'm from Charlotte, NC. Which I am. That would be like me meeting someone from NC who knows ALL about NC and where Charlotte is and has even visited there, or has family, or whatever. They ask me where I'm from and I say...

"I'm from the Southeast US".

Uhhh....??? Would that make ANY sense at all???
-----
Jonathan Brady
*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

Whats in a name, if the general consensus is that the animals are the same? I do beleive it would help define the stigma that has been created over this debate. The lines are too blurry ( at least in my eyes ) to define the animals that come from Suriname, Guyana, and to a certain extent French Guiana. Unless they were hand collected with locality data. I do wish Venezuela would loosen up, as that country has MANY different Boa Populations. On another note, does anyone have any decent pictures of BCC from Trinidad?

Most people wouldn't flinch at the idea of breeding a Suriname to a Guyana and labeling the offspring either locality. But what about bordering countries in other areas. For instance, a Panamanian X Colombian (I know this has been done with the salmons, but there was a morph involved and that changes the customer base and their interests). How many Panamanian keepers (specifically those that purchased the recent imported animals with CITES documents) looking to add to their collection would be PISSED to find out that an animal they bought as purely Panamanian was in fact a cross between the localities?
I can answer that... ALL OF THEM.
What about a Bolivian X Argentine? They share a border and to many people outside of the hobby, they're both boas and are no different from each other. Assuming some of the offspring will show more of the traits of one parent or the other and could presumably be passed off to someone. Just like the Kahl albino's X Surinames that looked a LOT like Surinames.

Just like I've said with some of the morphs that are minimally expressing certain traits (low expression jungles, or the eye thing w/ het albinos);

=======================================================

"our inability to discern a difference in "normal" and "different" doesn't change the fact that the animal IS different."

=======================================================

And that sums up my thoughts on Suriname and Guyana.

Bottom line is, if you buy it as one or the other (or know of it from someone higher up the transaction ladder than the person you bought it from), then you are morally and ethically responsible for disclosing that information to buyers of that animal or its offspring. Anything less than that is not only bad business, but you should also feel ashamed. You also obviously don't value your customer base. If of course you're uninformed, it's not really your fault, just unfortunate.
jb
-----
Jonathan Brady
*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

Take it all with a grain of salt. some people just will never listen. some will always be a pain no matter what you do.
-----
My Photobucket
My Myspace

Hi Jonathan,

It's just semantics, nothing dishonest about it. To make the point, why are you stopping at "Suriname" and "Guyana?" Isn't that too broad of a brush. Shouldn't we further classify these snakes into provinces/states, maybe even particular cities, or even specific forests? And I'm curious, how do you determine
that these snakes (Guyanas vs. Suris) are different? What if
there is a war between the countries and Suriname takes over Guyana?

If a gravid BCC is lying across the border of Suriname and Guyana, and has it's babies, what would you classify the babies as?

Obviously if you know where the snake (or it's wild lineage) was found, it doesn't hurt to mention it. Problem is, how do you really know for sure, unless you caught the snake yourself?

Thanks,
Ed

>>Eric,
>>I don't understand why you would generalize where your animals are from. I doesn't make any sense. If you KNOW where they're from, why be vague and elusive about it? Marketing?? C'mon man...
>>
>>To me, it can be better explained in this scenario.
>>Let's say that I'm from Charlotte, NC. Which I am. That would be like me meeting someone from NC who knows ALL about NC and where Charlotte is and has even visited there, or has family, or whatever. They ask me where I'm from and I say...
>>
>>"I'm from the Southeast US".
>>
>>Uhhh....??? Would that make ANY sense at all???
>>-----
>>Jonathan Brady
>>*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

why does the federal government make you list a specific tribe if you call your self a native american? I guess if you want to broaden it though then we can just throw boas in a few categories. Central Boas. South American Boas and Boas from one of them floaty places. for the fun of it we can also take away all labels on dog breeds and just call them mutts because nothing can be pure nowadays.

I mean by the same basis I can breed a panamanian to a "central" and call it a honduran because it may or may not be able to be born in honduras.
-----
My Photobucket
My Myspace

>>why does the federal government make you list a specific tribe if you call your self a native american?

I think this is a flawed analogy. We are talking about snakes and arbitrary lines on a map, not humans that form social entities. But if you want to use this analogy, let's continue.
So if a man from Tribe A marries a squaw from Tribe B that lives across the river, would the lives of their children be less valuable than the kids of two Tribe A parents?

>>I guess if you want to broaden it though then we can just throw boas in a few categories. Central Boas. South American Boas and Boas from one of them floaty places.

Yes, someone can have that opinion. That's my point. It's all arbitrary. The level of granularity you prefer may not be the same as someone else's. Some may want to be less granluar. For Rosy Boas, a lot of folks want to know the specific valley/gorge from which the snake came, not just the country. It's ARBITRARY, or a personal opinion.

>>for the fun of it we can also take away all labels on dog breeds and just call them mutts because nothing can be pure nowadays.

Again, I belive this analogy is flawed. I'm not talking about selectively breeding genetic mutations, or even breeding at all.
I never mentioned anything about "pure." Personally, I wish that word would be stricken from herp vocabulary. If geographical location is what determines things, I think "locale" is a much better term. "Pure" doesn't mean anything to me, especially in the context of sub-species that look identical and live in adjacent, mainland countries.

Thanks,
Ed

>>
>>I mean by the same basis I can breed a panamanian to a "central" and call it a honduran because it may or may not be able to be born in honduras.
>>-----
>>My Photobucket
>>My Myspace

I guess asking for history of an investment is too much. I guess people like you go for the shiny product instead of the one that works properly. Look at the local as more of a brand name. I would say about 85% of buyers buy product for the name. If you are an honest person and can give at least some of the history on your product you will sell more.
-----
My Photobucket
My Myspace

Because you go with the best information you have.
There are VERY few certainties in this world and I as a hobbyist and occasional customer understand that when I keep, sell, or buy an animal, I'm only privy to a certain amount of info. I do everything possible to learn and disclose as much of that info as possible. That's it.

As for breaking them up into further regions, that's not info we're GENERALLY privy to, so it's not possible so we've gone with the most exact data we have which is, in general, the country of origin (with some degree of certainty).

Obviously an animal from Western Guyana has probably evolved at various levels to have more in common with animals from Central Guyana than it does with animals from Eastern Guyana/Western Suriname and even less in common than animals from Central Suriname, Eastern Suriname/Western French Guiana and the rest of FG. I understand that and I think most everyone else does too. I think antagonistic questions like "what would you classify the babies from a gravid animal laying across the border?" and "how do you know a certain animal wasn't smuggled across the border to be exported?" have no business in a discussion aimed to be PRODUCTIVE. There are ALWAYS outlying circumstances. The answer to both questions is that we go with the BEST info we have. Why? Because the majority of us are nothing more than hobbyists and the majority of the time, that's who our customers are. We are just looking to keep animals that we know their origin with SOME degree of certainty.

Back to the whole point of this thread, CHANGING an animals origin to something you know to be false or contrary to what you're told is still pretty crappy. For instance, the male that sired one of my litters last year came from a gravid imported female from Guyana. Several animals from that litter were sold to a person who immediately advertised them as Surinames. Ethical? No. Moral? No. Were Suris bringing in more money than Guyanans at the time? Yes.

I feel like I'm done with this, but we'll see... jb
-----
Jonathan Brady
*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

Apparently I stepped into something between you and someone else.
I am NOT advocating lying or dishonesty, nor am I defending anyone. (I don't know any of you guys.) If a seller calls a snake a Suriname when it was sold to them as a Guyanan, that's obviously dishonest and few people would advocate that. Why would you think anyone would defend that? Does anyone defend that????

I was not being antagonistic, just pointing out the arbitrary nature of this whole "purity" thing. Personally I think it totally ridiculous that somehow an arbitrary, man-made line on the map means anything in this case, much less determines whether a snake is worth $1000 or $100. That's all I'm trying to say. So personally, as a buyer/hobbyist, it's not relevant to me in this case of mainland sub-species of adjacent countries. I'd buy the $100 "mutt" if it looks identical to the $1000 "pure" snake.

Thanks,
Ed

>>Because you go with the best information you have.
>>There are VERY few certainties in this world and I as a hobbyist and occasional customer understand that when I keep, sell, or buy an animal, I'm only privy to a certain amount of info. I do everything possible to learn and disclose as much of that info as possible. That's it.
>>
>>As for breaking them up into further regions, that's not info we're GENERALLY privy to, so it's not possible so we've gone with the most exact data we have which is, in general, the country of origin (with some degree of certainty).
>>
>>Obviously an animal from Western Guyana has probably evolved at various levels to have more in common with animals from Central Guyana than it does with animals from Eastern Guyana/Western Suriname and even less in common than animals from Central Suriname, Eastern Suriname/Western French Guiana and the rest of FG. I understand that and I think most everyone else does too. I think antagonistic questions like "what would you classify the babies from a gravid animal laying across the border?" and "how do you know a certain animal wasn't smuggled across the border to be exported?" have no business in a discussion aimed to be PRODUCTIVE. There are ALWAYS outlying circumstances. The answer to both questions is that we go with the BEST info we have. Why? Because the majority of us are nothing more than hobbyists and the majority of the time, that's who our customers are. We are just looking to keep animals that we know their origin with SOME degree of certainty.
>>
>>Back to the whole point of this thread, CHANGING an animals origin to something you know to be false or contrary to what you're told is still pretty crappy. For instance, the male that sired one of my litters last year came from a gravid imported female from Guyana. Several animals from that litter were sold to a person who immediately advertised them as Surinames. Ethical? No. Moral? No. Were Suris bringing in more money than Guyanans at the time? Yes.
>>
>>I feel like I'm done with this, but we'll see... jb
>>-----
>>Jonathan Brady
>>*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

I'm confused too. All I'm going to do when I produce animals that could be from both Suriname and Guyanan origin(s), but not documented, is call them Northern sheild animals. I don't really see the dishonesty in that? It is where they come from?

Eric, I still don't understand your motivation. You said the following:

"My animals were imported from Guyana, and are from Guyana"

If that's where they're from, sell the offspring as "Guyana". No need to take a 30,000 ft view of something that's clear at 1000 ft. Right? To me, you'll actually be hurting the marketability of your animals. If I didn't know your animals were exported from Guyana and saw your ad, I wouldn't buy from you with a tag of "northern shield".
Actually... I sell in the same market (although only occasionally), now that I think about it, go ahead and devalue yours (via demand) by slapping a name on them that no one will identify with and will only cause confusion. That'll just drive up demand for animals with a proper label Have fun!
jb
-----
Jonathan Brady
*You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted, then used against you.*

Just the same, I don't feel confident labeling animals produced from undocumented Surinam/Guyana breedings as either/or. Just because I have animals from Guyana doesn't mean that they are going to be bred to a male from the same area. I'm in this to produce a certain look, and I may chose to breed these girls to a FRT male, or a male from the Essiquibo river. In my eyes anything produced from these breedings would be non-locale, generic BCC. If an animal comes from a certian locality, it should be labled as that; but these animals that were talking about come from a wooden crate labled "Land Boas". So again, as defined by my definition of locality, these are generic "Northern Sheild" BCC, nothing less, nothing more.

What JB was trying to get at is simply this. You HAVE animals from guyana. If you breed them to a FRT male simply put that down. No dishonesty and the buyer will have a grasp at what exactly is going on with your "line". It isnt that much more typing to say "Babies from FRT Male bred to Guyana Female".

Specifics is what gets things sold. Saying "Northern Shield" leaves it too vague in my opinion for a buyer. Makes it seem like you have no idea really what the history on your snakes is and you just threw two snakes together.

Selling things is my life right now its how I make money. Sure I dont sell snakes. I am still buying my collection for the most part. I know the more information you can give about your product the more likely it will take away any doubt the buyer will have and you can sell it easier.
-----
My Photobucket
My Myspace