Reptile & Amphibian Forums

So I purchased two new kingsnakes yesterday. One is a Mexican Black and the other was a brooks x goini cross. Since they were small I used plexiglass to subdivide a 20 gallon long aquarium. I know that kings should never be kept together but I figured that the divider made it safe and that the snakes wouldn't be able to cross over. But I was wrong. When I woke up this morning and went to check on how they were settling the Mexican black was oddly swollen and misshapen and the cross was nowhere to be found. On closer examination, to my horror, I realized that it had eaten the cross. Mind you this is a ~14 inch snake that ate a ~13 inch snake.
Now I am worried that the Mexican black has taken on more than it can handle. I figure that if it was going to die it would have done so already but the last time I assumed something about these snakes the above happened. Anybody have any advice on making sure I don't lose two snakes instead of just the one?

Sorry to hear about the accident. If the meal is too much for the snake then it will just regurgitate. Just make sure you have the temps. right so it can digest the other snake. I have fed dead frozen thawed snakes to kings before and sometimes they would regurgitate the meal after a couple of days with no ill effects. If it does regurgitate I would wait ten days or so before you feed it again. Just my opinion.

You were right on! The snake regurgitated this morning (pretty nasty I might add). I was a little surprised at the state of the regurgitated snake. The very front was fairly well digested but the rest of it looked almost untouched, with the exception of a bunch of bones and such being out of place. Weird stuff. I have pictures from some points along the way if people are interested though it might be a while before I can post them.

That smell with linger for days!! Sure does stink. (Nothing like what I was used to in Crime Scene work though) Wait a while before feeding it again. 10 days or so. My opinion.

What happened to your subdivider?Did he crawl right over it to get lunch?
-----
"You look like a guy caught smugling reptiles in his pants" John McCain to David Letterman
Doug L

The snake that crossed over is the one that got eaten. At least that is my hypothesis since the other can hardly move it's so full and is on the correct side of the divider. I didn't think that either snake could get over as the divider is as tall as either is (was) long, and I watched them for a long time when I moved them in and they were never able to get more than 2/3 up the walls before falling over. Never underestimate the power of critters I guess.

So.. What do all of you guys that advocate keeping kings together have to say about this??

Sorry to hear of your loss!

~ Mike Russo

So.. What do all of you guys that advocate keeping kings together have to say about this??

Put me in a cell with you and when I start to get hungry I might become a cannibal to. But maybe if we bonded (I would not eat a friend or family member)first you might get off the hook.

Seriously though,,IMO most people don't feed their kings large enough meals. Or they feed them small mice which does not offer the nutrition of a mature mouse (ie muscle, calcium ect).

It's OK to eat strangers.
-----
Diego

SWCHR

That's why you bring a compass when you hike in the woods in Canada. It's awkward to have to eat your friends.

It's OK to eat strangers.

Nothing personal but yes.

A hungry kingsnake might feel the same way. That is why I keep mine together to avaoid cannibalism.

I wasn't trying to be funny. I believe with many animals it's a social order that decides who gets eaten.
-----
Diego

SWCHR

That is the perfect way to get one to eat other. Its simply not what we are talking about.

What we are talking about is allowing snakes to BOND and form a pair or group. Once thats done, it takes extreme starving to cause them to eat eachother.

What you appear to not understand is BEHAVIOR. Animals that live in groups must bond and become part of that group. This can be done in many many ways. To not do that, makes any individual, NOT part of that group or pair.

What your really missing is this, only humans call animals a genus or species. Animals do not call eachother that. They only know who is us, and who is the others. If they are not one of us, they must be one of the others. And the others are fair game.

This is even pronounce in humans, Different people, kill eachother, different religions kill eachother, different races kill eachother, why? well you can make up all manner of reasons, but the base is, Those we kill are not us. They are the others.

Again, animals do not read books so they do not know kings from different areas are kings, they are simply the others.

Look at birds(very closely related) there are flocks that fight with other flocks. Hmmmmmmmm How do they know what flock they are from. There are birds that form huge flocks, small flocks, pairs and a few that may be solitary. This works with snakes as well.

Only snakes normally live in areas hidden from our view. So we rarely see them in groups. Of course with common snakes, we see it all the time. You know, like garders, waters, ringnecks, etc. But with fossorial snakes(kings) its normally hidden.

With varanids(monitors), the books call them highly solitary, But here, we do see many forms of this bonding. From what bluerosy says, pair them up and let them mate, to the males actually living their lifes with the female and helping in all stages of reproduction, including digging the nests. The quality of the bond determines the outcome.

Also we see monitors in groups with many females and several males and all get along and help with day to day activities. Again, they know what they are doing and we do not.

I do know, its all about how you allow them to bond. Sometimes, it takes nothing, but most of the time it takes being raised together.

The best way for kings is to be raised together. After that, it gets more and more chancy. Of course this is behavior and as such, its not a all or nothing proposition.

So with that said, I would not expect you, all or nothing, kind of people to have any understanding of this. Behavior DOES NOT FIT INTO tight pigeonholes. Cheers

"That is the perfect way to get one to eat other. Its simply not what we are talking about."

Agreed!

"What we are talking about is allowing snakes to BOND and form a pair or group. Once thats done, it takes extreme starving to cause them to eat each other."

Still can't buy the "extreme starving" claim but do agree that you must allow animals being kept together to habitualize to each other. In my experience some will and some wont. It's an old point but older and more similar sized animals are more likely to tolerate each other. Of course being well fed is critical.
-----
Darwin Rocks!

Tony, The reason I brought up the starving or "extreme starving as you put it is that I found most people are realy scared to feed there kingsnakes to much or especially to LARGE a meal. The result is snakes that are either malnutritioned from feeding on pinkies and fuzzies to long or they put their snakes on a schedule ( 1x wk ect)of feeding. We all know most people are told to feed there "pet" snakes once a week. Heck even 2 times per week is not enough when the meals are to small or do not contain enough nutrients.

I have proven this theory out on the forum over the years. Tom Stevens can also attest to these past discussions when we suggest that someone feeds a snake a larger meal and this whole place erupts into a fracas. Terms like "Poewer feeding" and I " like to grow my snakes and a slow pace get thrown out there. Even seasoned breeders have make these statements and follow their own advice-which includes keeping kingsnakes apart because they will eat each other (duh )

I can and do raise males and in some cases females to breed in one year. While other peoples snakes are still feeding on fuzzies at 6 months to 2 years in age.

sorry about all the typos but it seems to be the norm for me . Hope you can extract what i meant to say.

Points taken. Interesting that the only reason I jumped in on this one was becasue of the "starvation" comment. If starvation had been replaced by "under fed" I would have likely not jumped in. And yes the old feeding topic gets crazy too. For me its not a one menus fits all thing. I have some animals that need more than my base schedule and some theat can do with less. I just observe the results and track for animals that are robust but not fat. I also shoot for 18 - 27 month to sexual maturity but most times they are on at least weanling mice by 6 months. for kings anyway.
-----
Darwin Rocks!

This is even pronounce in humans, Different people, kill eachother, different religions kill eachother, different races kill eachother, why? well you can make up all manner of reasons, but the base is, Those we kill are not us. They are the others.

So, what your saying that domestic violence does not exist in your world? And, that people that are "alike" or that live with one another don't kill each other??? I guess you don't watch the evening news?

Once again, your story has holes.

~ Mike Russo

Doesn't that depend on individualism? I mean, sure there's Jeffrey Dahmers around but that's not the majority in our society. If it were, our survival as a species would have a rather grim outlook...

I know some of my snakes, within the same genera and even within the same ssp., have different preferences, from food, to shelter, to temp and humidity. Even though I try and stick to a certain keeper's "formula", I still find myself having to treat them as individuals. Aren't herds, flocks, prides, and societies made up of individuals?
-----
Diego

SWCHR

Although Frank may be more of the so-called "expert" in reptilian field work, I can certainly speak as an expert in human behavior. Humans are creatures of higher intelligence and of thus more developed brain functions particularly in the realm of expressed/felt emotions. The taking of another life (whether it be one's own or another's...) is broken down into two major components within human behavior -- either despair or psychopathology. Despair meaning socio-environmental factors such as extreme poverty and duress leading to a nulled sense of self and quality of life, as well as the severe strain it puts on one's emotional ability (or lack thereof) to cope with such daily survival stressors than is oft projected onto others, thus the ability to take a life as it has "less value", OR, psychopathology -- meaning either the BIOCHEMICAL INABILITY to sustain optimally and function in everyday life (i.e. psychiatric diagnoses ranging from clinical depression as is most common in our society to sever bi-polar disorders or schizophrenia and it's sub-disorders) or the prolonged, traumatic exposure to brain-chemical-altering experiences (i.e. post-traumatic disorder.....think Vietnam Veterans for a moment....). Homo sapiens, although directly related to much more primitive beings via evolution, are by definition much more advanced in cognition and rational/emotive abilities than, say, a reptile given the conversation. SO, the use of humans in such a conversation is rally useless given the VAST differences between us and snakes, for example. Snakes likely engage in consumption of their own kind for chemically-related reasons versus some form of "decision-making processes".....thus a very natural, survival-related, and primitive function.

What round is this by the way??? LOL....

" alt="Image">
-----
Jerry Kruse

"Yesterday is history.....tomorrow is a mystery.........but today is a gift -- that is why it is called the present". - Master Oogway

...however, I am not trying to compare humans to snakes. I won't even pretend to know what the heck goes on inside the human brain or the processes involved in such matters. I was responding to a post that said we kill our own in society and somehow that made the fact that some animals are social invalid!?!

I was not trying to anthropomorphize, although perhaps I came off that way. All I'm saying is that in social groups, whether higher order(humans) or lower order(animals), are still going to be affected by the choices of individuals who have different preferences and predispositions. Notice I stayed away from using the word "personalities", which in itself infers a human concept.
-----
Diego

SWCHR

Hi Diego,

I agree. Again, FR brings out some interesting points sometimes such as group/individual identification in battle between creatures. How do they know who's who? There is obviously some form of ability to identify/recognize "who's who" in multiple circumstances, and again, my school of thought is largely chemical but in some cases higher brain functioning may occur such as the ability to identify through visual and auditory means. But in snakes, I believe more chemical than anything else. Yes, the actions of a single individual may have subsequent effects in a number of ways, but what makes for that individual to behave in such a way? The research criteria for such a study is vast -- Dobry, you're a young buck still......any chance of entry into a Biology program at some university? Research funding is possible provided pending a strong hypothesis.

I am no zoologist but rather a hobbyist who WISHES he had the time to do what some of these guys are doing out in the field, but with enough passion to consider alternatives to sweater box herpetology, LOL, and other options to keep our critters as optimally as possible.

Eeeek, Jeffery Dahmer. Ever see Ice Man Cometh??? Just as warped if not worse. Largely a product of one's environment -- interestingly enough, as some of our snakes become conditioned in captivity to both positive and negative reinforcement thus the shaping of many-a-behavioral patterns/conditioned responses.

Just my .02 ........
-----
Jerry Kruse

"Yesterday is history.....tomorrow is a mystery.........but today is a gift -- that is why it is called the present". - Master Oogway

While I, too, am just a hobbyist and certainly no expert, I would agree that most of it is chemical as well.

For the record, I keep my kings separate, but simply for selfish reasons. It's not that I believe they cannot co-habitate, it's that I don't trust MY OWN abilities to keep them properly and give them the choices that they need in order to do so. It's a personal choice and I don't understand why no-one on here can accept that. They CAN and DO live together. The question is - are folks willing to provide the support system they need in order to do so? I am not, at this time and I freely admit it.

BTW, that movie was pretty freaky, but have you ever watched Dahmer's real interviews, describing how he would try and make zombies out of his victims? That's freaky stuff, man.
-----
Diego

SWCHR

I think the question is are the snakes harmed by keeping them individually. If their interactions are strictly chemical then likely not but itf there is some higher level brain function involved that is another matter. This is a great thread BTW. I think it finally gets to the heart of the matter.

-----
Darwin Rocks!

I think I'll steal it and start a new thread...
-----
Diego

SWCHR

Hi Jerry,
I did most of my "official" rattlesnake work at WSU. GO COUGS! I may go back to school, but I don't really like academia it is way to political for me. Right now I work in the biotech industry. My wife is in vet school so I gotta pay for that, which is big $$$$. However, once she is graduated I keep telling her that is when I retire to become house husband! Then I may have time to go back, but I'm undecided and I really like the work I do now.

Cheers and Merry Christmas...I'm headed to El. Paso maybe I can get luck a get some good photos, I hear its around 70F during the day, Perfect!

-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

You know snakes are individuals and do have different personalities. That is a key tool of nature. If they were all the same, they would all fail at the same time. Those differences is what keeps them evolving.

Its the cart and the horse. Personal individual differences may be what drives physical differences. I am sure the cart does flip around now and again. Anthropomorphic is the horse is always first. Not so with life. Including humans. Cheers

That's precisely the point I was trying to make, BTW.
-----
Diego

SWCHR

You are an expert on humans and beleive we evolved from apes?

This is what i said;

"Homo sapiens, although directly related to much more primitive beings via evolution..."

Where did I say that we were related to apes? And where did I say I was an expert on humans per se? I stated I was an expert on human behavior....and please don't ask me to post my resume, LOL.

And now, on to discuss the de la Hoya / Pacquiao upset . . .
-----
Jerry Kruse

"Yesterday is history.....tomorrow is a mystery.........but today is a gift -- that is why it is called the present". - Master Oogway

Maybe I misundertood .

You said :
"Homo sapiens, although directly related to much more primitive beings via evolution

'Via Evolution' to me means we evolved from apes.

Sorry~ just forget I mentioned it. It is not pertinent to this thread or this topic (great threads BTW). I apolgize for jumping in with an off topic statement.

Actually you sound very confused.

First lets start with primitive man. Not to long ago, there were canibils, except very few ate their own, they ate members of another tribe(the others) Of course this progressed and was rationalized into all that psychobabble you just said.

You are right, humans are complicate, snakes are simple. They do not need complicated reasons. They are living and exsisting in a very basic world.

For instance a friend from Norway was over a few years ago, I took him in the field and we found a beautiful Willards(ridgenosed rattlesnake) He said, its neat that these things still exsist in our world.

I looked at him and wondered, most of these animals do not know that there are freeways and all manner of human activity. There world still is "AWAY" from all that and much like it was for millions of years. In otherwords, they have not applied for their bus passes yet. Cheers

So in keeping with this area of your expertise, why not continue on with where you'd left off somewhere with:

"You are right, humans are complicate, snakes are simple. They do not need complicated reasons. They are living and exsisting in a very basic world."

This is apparently much more fitting for you, as I've never seen you bail out after two sentences. Again, we are just stating what is on our minds in a friendly discussion -- no harm no foul.

Getting back to herp-related context, I am putting together some small scale Retes stacks over the next few weeks for some hatchlings and some adults. This clicked for me, and I hope it works. Thank you Frank. I'll be sure to post a few pics and then please critique as needed -- whatever it takes for greater optimal care under captive conditions.
-----
Jerry Kruse

"Yesterday is history.....tomorrow is a mystery.........but today is a gift -- that is why it is called the present". - Master Oogway

The reason thses discussions are endless is direction and lack of meaning. For instance, keeping them in groups works because I have done it for decades(with kings and many other types of reptiles) And done so very successfully.

I have also seen it in nature.

So, for me its to go from the cart(box full of successful keeping events) back to theory, which is ways for others to understand OUR success.

others, go from theory and academics to determine why they think it will not work. So the two may never meet.

Tony keeps asking for Proof, the proof or results is always the key, and in this case, its that we have done it successfully for decades and still do it. That is proof.

That others cannot do this only means they are lacking some technique or understanding that does not allow them to have the same result.

In many cases, its not lack of technique or understanding, its more fear based. They are simply afraid to risk or afraid to fail, or other such thing.

Then you see a very strong protectist approach, that is, man(the keeper) must do everything for the snake, after all, we are their keepers.

So what would it be if the snakes already knew how to be snakes and we did not have to do hardly anything? Hmmmmmmmmm what is a keeper suppose to do?

So you do see and you should with your human behavioral training, that we most likely cannot agree, because we come from different directions, driven by different experiences. Therefore there is little common ground to agree on.

We do this daily and they are afraid to do it or have failed. hmmmmmmmmmmmmm cheers

I'm not "trying" to disagree with you wholly, just where the human behavior thing came into play with regard to outright culling/consumption as well as cannibalism as that is a cultural norm woven into a culture's system that has developed over thousands of years -- it IS different with animal/mammalian species, and I, too, am curious as to the core of this discussion as I, nor do many others including yourself, clearly understand such behavior. There are many variables, and as I have not paired getula ssp together under captive conditions nor have I had the luxury to spend countless hours in the field to attempt to come to any conclusion, I remain curious. So now that we are off of my area of expertise as it simply doesn't mesh within the conversation of reptile behavior, I am trying to listen and keep an open mind without coming to any conclusions or holding any certain absolutes as I don't necessarily think there are any.

Are your findings absolutes by your standards of experience, or are they more of a regimen of hypothetical suggestions that have conglomerated over time?

I'm not disputing anything by any means, I'm just trying to wrap my head around the theories, if you will. I agree to a certain point that the almighty kingsnake is not completely a solitary animal and that there must be some kind of ability to co-exist without depleting their own existence. So what does it boil down to after all? Do kingsnakes consume other "other populations" of kingsnakes that may cross eachother's "turf"? LOL. Do they simply feed upon the smaller or "weaker" ones which are detected via the emission of chemical "markers"? This still seems to be a question that remains, but then again, this subject matter can easily generate a multitude of questions that, unfortunately, may only be hypothesized and speculated upon at best without legitimate, empirical data.
-----
Jerry Kruse

"Yesterday is history.....tomorrow is a mystery.........but today is a gift -- that is why it is called the present". - Master Oogway

"Tony keeps asking for Proof, the proof or results is always the key, and in this case, its that we have done it successfully for decades and still do it. That is proof.

That others cannot do this only means they are lacking some technique or understanding that does not allow them to have the same result."

Hey Frank, just for the record I do not ask for proof that kings can be kept together. I know they can be. I do not however think that familial relations (as in clutch mates) are as big a factor as you indicate and I definatetly don't see a straight-line correlation captive behavior and what is happening in the wild. That said I have also not said you are wrong, just that you only have a working theory.
-----
Darwin Rocks!

Hi FR,
I like pigeonholes they are comfortable. Buddy.