Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Greetings from the Peruvian Amazon.

Since my name, business and facility were mentioned in this forum, I thought I would comment about myself, the business, the product, the subject of using Peruvian as an adjective to describe snakes and the Epicrates cenchria subspecies of cenchria and gaigei.

My name is Ryan Richards, I’m American and I have resided in the city of Iquitos, Peru for the past 20 years. Iquitos is located about 2,300 miles up the Amazon river. As Terry mentioned, when I started this business in 1992, I had almost zero experience or knowledge about what I was getting myself into. I appreciate Terry’s help. I have learned a lot in 10 years and I have had handled a lot of B.c. and E.c. I am not a snake expert nor an authority on the subject. I know something about B. constrictor, E. cenchria and C. caninus. I think of myself as an eager student learning a lot.

Captive Breeding EIRL, has been in business for 10 years. We are authorized by the CITES Management and Scientific Authority of Peru, INRENA. We are the only legally authorized facility for the breeding of snakes for commercial purposes in Peru. We have been exporting our product annually since 1997. We captive breed and export Boa constrictor and Epicrates cenchria. Corallus caninus is also authorized for breeding and exportation. If you want the real thing, you know where to find it.

The proper use of “Peruvian” for Epicrates cenchria (or any other snake) is based on birth or ancestry. It includes those individuals born in Peru and those born outside of Peru with documented Peruvian origin. The only internationally accepted document of Peruvian origin is a CITES permit which is issued by INRENA.

Arco Iris bought our first shipment in 1997. We still have a copy of the CITES permit and the invoice. The document states the genuis and species as Epicrates cenchria. It does not state subspecies. Subspecies are not stated in the appendicies of CITES. The official list of the snakes of Peru (published in 1995) which is recognized by INRENA does not mention a subspecies for Epicrates cenchria. However, It does mention three subspecies for Boa constrictor; constrictor, ortonii and longicauda.

People can claim they have a Peruvian Epicrates cenchria but can they produce a copy of the Peruvian CITES permit? If it is the subspecies gaigei, as described by Stull in 1938, it depends on whether you believe it is a legitmate subspecies (we are not qualified to comment on that subject).

E. c. cenchria and E. c. gaigei are found outside of Perú. Stull’s description was based on five specimens; four from Bolivia and one from Peru. They were collected from Santa Cruz, Bolivia to Tingo Maria, Peru, If you look at a map of the region, you will notice that Brazil shares a common border with Bolivia and Peru. The Brazilian states of Amazonas, Acre and Rondonia could also have gaigei. Has anyone looked?

We use the scientific names (genuis species) when refering to our product. Common names can cause misunderstanding. We are located in Iquitos, Peru, our snakes are native to the locality, they are bred and born here, they are exported from here and their CITES permit is issued here. They are Peruvian!

Jeff Clark contacted us by e-mail a few years ago and asked what the difference was between cenchria and gaigei. At the time, we had a copy of the original description made by Stull in 1938. The basic difference between the two subspecies is the mid-body scale count.; 40 to 45 for gaigei and 47 to 50 for cenchria. Since the Peruvian specimen was collected in Tingo Maria, about 500 miles south of us, we didn’t think gaigei would be here in Iquitos. Well, we selected 10 E.c. from our breeding stock and counted scales. We discovered that 7 had 47 or more (cenchria), 2 had 45 or less (gaigei) and 1 had 46 (?). Based on that, it’s resonable to assume that they are here in the locality of Iquitos. Also, the description mentioned the difference between the Bolivian and Peruvian specimens. The Bolivian has 13 supralabials and the Peruvian has 12.

Look me up if you come to Iquitos.

Sincerely,

Ryan

I really enjoy reading post like this one, Thanks for sharing some of you experinece with gaigei, It may be better for me to answer you in Spanish. Muchisimas Gracias ojala podramos disfrutar de mas articulos como este.

.
-----
"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance- that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer

Ryan,
. Good post. I would like to someday visit your facility. I also greatly appreciate the help you gave me with identifying my Epicrates cenchria gaigei.
. Are you sure about those numbers from Stull's paper? I do not have the paper but I was thinking it had E.c.gaigei at 44 or fewer scale rows at midbody and E.c.cenchria at 45 to 52. I have counted a bunch of E.c.cenchria which I think are from the Surinam/Guyana/Extreme Northern Brazil area and have found a great deal of variation with counts from 46 to 51. All five of the snakes I have which I think are E.c.gaigei have 42 to 44 scale rows at midbody. Perhaps if I ever get them to successfully reproduce I can count scales on a larger sample size and I will come up with the expected greater variation. These snakes just seem too different from my E.c.cenchria to be given the same name as them. The scale counts that you report and that Terry Vendeventer has told me about in Rainbow Boas from the Amazonian area makes me think that we do need someone to do more work on the subspecies of Epicrates cenchria. Terry questions the validity of the gaigei subspecies and he makes a pretty good arguement. There are also many taxonomists who question the use of subspecific nomers. But I think there is enough difference between the currently recognized E.c. subspecies (including gaigei and also the unnamed subspecies from Guyana) to differentiate them to subspecific level. We just do not have enough information to state for sure what is the range of each of the subspecies and if there should be fewer or perhaps more subspecies. We also do not have enough morphological information to identify all of the subspecies.
. I question your statement; "The proper use of "Peruvian" for Epicrates cenchria (or any other snake) is based on birth or ancestory". If that was correct then we should call the Florida Brown Snakes (a recognized subspecies) which I find here in southeastern Georgia the "Georgia" Brown Snake. The same could be applied to Texas Longnose Snakes captured in New Mexico or to Eastern Kingsnakes captured in northern Florida. It would be a mistake to apply common names to snakes based solely on which side of a political border they came from. The differentiation of species and subspecies occured long before we humans applied political names such as Peru and Florida to geographic locations. Our political borders are only man made lines drawn on maps and the animals evolved before we drew any of these lines. IMO it is a mistake to call a snake which is obviously Epicrates cenchria cenchria a Peruvian Rainbow Boa even if it is found in Peru. It would be an application of the same "mistake" if we were to call the Brazilian Rainbow Boas from Surinam, Surinam Rainbow Boas.
Respectfully,
Jeff

>>Greetings from the Peruvian Amazon.
>>
>>Since my name, business and facility were mentioned in this forum, I thought I would comment about myself, the business, the product, the subject of using Peruvian as an adjective to describe snakes and the Epicrates cenchria subspecies of cenchria and gaigei.
>>
>>My name is Ryan Richards, I’m American and I have resided in the city of Iquitos, Peru for the past 20 years. Iquitos is located about 2,300 miles up the Amazon river. As Terry mentioned, when I started this business in 1992, I had almost zero experience or knowledge about what I was getting myself into. I appreciate Terry’s help. I have learned a lot in 10 years and I have had handled a lot of B.c. and E.c. I am not a snake expert nor an authority on the subject. I know something about B. constrictor, E. cenchria and C. caninus. I think of myself as an eager student learning a lot.
>>
>>Captive Breeding EIRL, has been in business for 10 years. We are authorized by the CITES Management and Scientific Authority of Peru, INRENA. We are the only legally authorized facility for the breeding of snakes for commercial purposes in Peru. We have been exporting our product annually since 1997. We captive breed and export Boa constrictor and Epicrates cenchria. Corallus caninus is also authorized for breeding and exportation. If you want the real thing, you know where to find it.
>>
>>The proper use of “Peruvian” for Epicrates cenchria (or any other snake) is based on birth or ancestry. It includes those individuals born in Peru and those born outside of Peru with documented Peruvian origin. The only internationally accepted document of Peruvian origin is a CITES permit which is issued by INRENA.
>>
>>Arco Iris bought our first shipment in 1997. We still have a copy of the CITES permit and the invoice. The document states the genuis and species as Epicrates cenchria. It does not state subspecies. Subspecies are not stated in the appendicies of CITES. The official list of the snakes of Peru (published in 1995) which is recognized by INRENA does not mention a subspecies for Epicrates cenchria. However, It does mention three subspecies for Boa constrictor; constrictor, ortonii and longicauda.
>>
>>People can claim they have a Peruvian Epicrates cenchria but can they produce a copy of the Peruvian CITES permit? If it is the subspecies gaigei, as described by Stull in 1938, it depends on whether you believe it is a legitmate subspecies (we are not qualified to comment on that subject).
>>
>>E. c. cenchria and E. c. gaigei are found outside of Perú. Stull’s description was based on five specimens; four from Bolivia and one from Peru. They were collected from Santa Cruz, Bolivia to Tingo Maria, Peru, If you look at a map of the region, you will notice that Brazil shares a common border with Bolivia and Peru. The Brazilian states of Amazonas, Acre and Rondonia could also have gaigei. Has anyone looked?
>>
>>We use the scientific names (genuis species) when refering to our product. Common names can cause misunderstanding. We are located in Iquitos, Peru, our snakes are native to the locality, they are bred and born here, they are exported from here and their CITES permit is issued here. They are Peruvian!
>>
>>Jeff Clark contacted us by e-mail a few years ago and asked what the difference was between cenchria and gaigei. At the time, we had a copy of the original description made by Stull in 1938. The basic difference between the two subspecies is the mid-body scale count.; 40 to 45 for gaigei and 47 to 50 for cenchria. Since the Peruvian specimen was collected in Tingo Maria, about 500 miles south of us, we didn’t think gaigei would be here in Iquitos. Well, we selected 10 E.c. from our breeding stock and counted scales. We discovered that 7 had 47 or more (cenchria), 2 had 45 or less (gaigei) and 1 had 46 (?). Based on that, it’s resonable to assume that they are here in the locality of Iquitos. Also, the description mentioned the difference between the Bolivian and Peruvian specimens. The Bolivian has 13 supralabials and the Peruvian has 12.
>>
>>Look me up if you come to Iquitos.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Ryan

Jeff,

What I understood from Ryan post is that calling Peruvian Rainbows to all Epicrates cenchria imported from Peru do not means they are Epicrates cenchria gaigei, this is why i prefer to call any snakes by their scientific names, but here in USA almost everybreeder prefer to use commun names, and using names just for the location of the snakes is when start all the confusion about species and sub species, like you said nature does not understand political limits just geographical limits, just my two cents

First, the point Jeff made regarding the common name 'Peruvian rainbow' being applied to rainbows mearly because they were found in Peru is a good one. Like Georgia blind salamaders that are found pretty much ONLY in Florida!
Still, the Latin or scientific name is better since it is more specific.
However, I personally doubt the validity of gaigei if it is based solely on scale counts that are minor at best. A few scale rows at mid-body aint much! Especially if it can be demonstrated that the variation is clinal. In other words, the futher south you go, gradually the scale rows diminish, but that is the only real difference between the named 'subspecies'. For me, if you have to count scale rows to tell them apart...big deal! How different are they really? Again, the scale rows are not that far apart anyway.
One other thing. The original post seemed to indicate that the ONLY Peruvian rainbows in the country are those imported by Terry. That isn't true at all. Maybe the only LEGAL ones, or documented ones, but I can assure you there are a number of others with EXACT loacality data too. And although they do not have CITES documents, they WERE declared at U.S. Customs and were allowed into the country.

Speaking of rainbows and original discriptions, etc.
I have a copy of Afranio Do Amaral's "Sub-especies de Epicrates cenchria" from the 1954 edition of "Memorias do Instituto Butantan". In it are the original discriptions of E.c.xerophilus, E.c. polylepis and E.c. hygrophilus. Unfortunately, this is in Portuguese. Do you have an English translation??
It also contains a discription of the other subspecies as well as type localities and so forth.

Mayday,
. I do not have that text. Is there any chance that you can scan all of the pages that have Rainbow Boa info and email them to me? I can find someone to translate it and I will then post excerpted info here.
Thanks,
Jeff

>>Speaking of rainbows and original discriptions, etc.
>>I have a copy of Afranio Do Amaral's "Sub-especies de Epicrates cenchria" from the 1954 edition of "Memorias do Instituto Butantan". In it are the original discriptions of E.c.xerophilus, E.c. polylepis and E.c. hygrophilus. Unfortunately, this is in Portuguese. Do you have an English translation??
>>It also contains a discription of the other subspecies as well as type localities and so forth.

send address

Jeff Clark
10608 Sugar Bush Rd
Savannah, GA
31406
Thanks very much.

I have a book from 1966 Taxonomy and geographic of Venezuelan snakes by Janis Roze Epicrates cenchria cenchria description is 256 - 271 ventrals, 56 - 66 subcaudals and 43 - 51 dorsal. Another book snakes of Venezuela by Abdem lancini,1986 with the same description for Epicrates cenchria cenchria 43 - 51 dorsal

Albinoman,
. This confuses me??? I am wondering if perhaps those 43 to 51 numbers might mean 43 scale rows behind the neck and/or in front of the vent and 51 scale rows at midbody. I will do some scale row counts behind the head and see what I get. If you have been watching the classifieds there is an ad for a Peruvian gaigei with 37? scale rows. I think we may have a case of people counting different things and also counting them differently. I somewhat agree that if two snakes look alike there is not much point in calling them something different but to me a Rainbow Boa with 43 scale rows at midbody looks very different from one with 49 scale rows at midbody. In a general sense an Emerald Tree Boa and a Green Tree Python "look" alike.
Jeff

>>I have a book from 1966 Taxonomy and geographic of Venezuelan snakes by Janis Roze Epicrates cenchria cenchria description is 256 - 271 ventrals, 56 - 66 subcaudals and 43 - 51 dorsal. Another book snakes of Venezuela by Abdem lancini,1986 with the same description for Epicrates cenchria cenchria 43 - 51 dorsal

n/m