Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Welcome to kingsnake.com's message board system. Here you may share and discuss information with others about your favorite reptile and amphibian related topics such as care and feeding, caging requirements, permits and licenses, and more. Launched in 1997, the kingsnake.com message board system is one of the oldest and largest systems on the internet.

Click for 65% off Shipping with Reptiles 2 You
Southwestern Center for Herpetological Research
Click here for Dragon Serpents

hybrids, integrades, and truth?

stu Jun 10, 2010 07:13 AM

Hey All,

I am not the old hand at kingsnakes like some of you guys so I thought I should get your take on some things I've been hearing.

I am not against hybrids / integrades as long as they are labeled as such and not just willy nilly mixed into breeding groups but....since folks have been doing this since forever, how "pure" can folks really claim all these lines and morphs are? How can anyone be sure that the albino florida they just bought wasn't originally crossed with california kings to get the albino into the floridas?

I heard recently that one of the bigger florida king morphs actually started out as a king / corn hybrid and has been bred back into the floridas since. Is this true? Would anyone say if it was true or would folks just keep quiet to make the sales?

I'm sure it wouldn't be anywhere near as popular if folks knew that it was originally a hybrid and wasn't "pure". That point makes me wonder how many "backroom bred hybrids" have actually hit the market as "pure" morphs with some silly story about where they came from that can't be proven, you know....." I got these snakes from X..but he's dead now" or " A local kid found it and brought it to me".

I've heard stories about all sorts of "pure" morphs out there but noone can pony up pics of the adults that made them? Can't tell where they were collected at...etc...

So..the actual end of this post. How many of you guys think that there are a good number of hybrids out there right now being pushed as "pure"? Does it bother you?

Thanks for the input
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

Replies (77)

snake_bit Jun 10, 2010 07:47 AM

Great point......Unless you found your snake yourself you will never know.Many of the people here have no idea who found the orginal breeding stock to what they just bought.They will name some well known guy and that is suppose to mean its real.Where there is money to be made there will be people ready to rip you off.
I once asked someone on this forum where he found his cool looking kingsnake.He named some reptile show down south.I was thinking he actually found it in the field.
Many guys have big bucks invested in snakes or make big bucks selling them so they wont want to believe their snakes are not totally pure.

Keep it real


-----
I went to a bookstore and asked the saleswoman, "Where's the self-help section?" She said if she told me, it would defeat the purpose.
George Carlin

>--%< > < > < > < > < >~~~

Doug L

stu Jun 10, 2010 08:46 AM

You bring up an interesting point -

"so they wont want to believe their snakes are not totally pure"

I think there is a big difference between a guy who spent a lot of coin and wants to believe his animals are what they say they are and the guy who knows his animals are not "pure" but sells them as such anyhow.

at the end of the day how much does that alleged purity really matter except in the minds of the "purists"?
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

a153fish Jun 10, 2010 08:53 AM

Touchy subject. I guess you didn't read my warning several posts earlier. (Sorry inside joke) I don't have a real problem with some intergrades or hybrids as long as there's honesty. Problem is I can be 100% truthful and the guy I sell to is not or doesn't care. I have very mixed feelings about this whole subject and have actually flipped flopped back and fourth. I think that purists who are trying to keep things pure will only buy from another breeder whom they trust and usually who doesn't have any hybrids in their collection at all. This is at least my observations. If you even smile at a hybrid the purists won't buy squat from you. I am actually glad there are people like this who insist on purity so we can have some expectation that there are actually pure lines out there. Indeed I believe there are many which come from Lemke and beard and Love to name a few. How provable is it that the one I buy is actually from those sources? You have to trust the seller! Plain and simple. There are Mexicana and Alterna Breeders who will only buy amongst themselves in order to attempt to maintane their stock pure. I think I can own both and label them truthfully as best I can. I would not hesitate to buy a Brooks X Blaze Goins mix. But I do shutter at buying a Brooks X Rat snake mix. That's just me. The average kid or even adult who just wants a pet snake or two will not pay hundreds to be able to say my snake is pure! But a serious collector will. It's like dogs I guess. If you want to breed them and be able to say my babies are a champion blood than your gonna pay big bucks for that. Dogs at least come with papers but believe me papers can be falsefied at most Kennels. My wife breeds Chihuahua's and it would be easy to cheat. We don't but we could. I think most of the old timers have a good sense for what is real and what is BS. You can sometimes look at an animal and tell it's a mix, other times it's not so easy. If all people were honest we would not have a problem, but even Scientists have been known to falsify data in order to gain notoriaty and funding, so we do our best. In some cases a lot of these Purists actually go out and catch their stock. Let's see how long this one gets?
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

stu Jun 10, 2010 09:03 AM

It is a touchy subject, because of the folks that knowingly create hybrids in order to make a new morph for their "pure" animals. A little honesty and this wouldn't be the big deal that it is.

Totally agree. I am glad there are purists out there, I just hope they are keeping their stock outcrossed with animals from the wild too. Inbreeding will be just as much a danger to them as a hybrid.

I don't want to see a day when all these snakes are hybrids, but I would like to see the day that they don't get looked down on either. I think there is room for both hybrids and pure animals without one being considered "less".
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

FR Jun 10, 2010 09:14 AM

All dogs are the same, they are called breeds, because each breed is the product of crossing and selecting for traits. There are no bulldogs in nature, or german sheperds, or collies, or snakefood dogs(little ankle bitters).

All dogs are a product of captive hybridizing. Cheers

a153fish Jun 10, 2010 09:28 AM

Chihuahuas are completely useless and would die quickly in nature, lol!

You know you make some good points here. I have a group of Corn snakes that I collected myself or were caught by relatives and given to me. All within a 25 mile radius. They have some interesting attributes. They tend to me hypo-ish and have reduced checkers on the belly. In just one generation of selectively breeding these I now have some animals that don't look too much like any Corn I ever caught around here. So what will they look like in a couple more generations? Granted as a friend pointed out to me they are still genetically from local snakes, but you won't find one like these very easily around here.


-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

Dobry Jun 10, 2010 11:35 AM

I have mtDNA evidence that three different lineages of rattlesnakes live in less than a five mile radius. These animals do not migrate like birds, and likely don't move very far at all over long periods (thousands of years) of time.

So unless they were both hatched from a wild-caught gravid female and that line was maintained, locality is hogwash.

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

a153fish Jun 10, 2010 08:10 PM

I'm not sure I get what your saying? Are you refering to the Corn snakes? Not clear, sorry.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

Dobry Jun 14, 2010 01:21 PM

25 miles does not mean anything. How do you know that they are from the same pop? If you cannot answer this they are not locality.
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

Aaron Jun 14, 2010 10:48 PM

What is a population though? Also isn't the usfulness mtDNA limited by the fact that it is only found in females and usually it is the males that migrate in while females usually stay close to where they were born?

I always look at several factors when I decide to add something to a locality project. One would be the habit, are there pysical barriers that would prevent or inhibit geneflow? The next would be the looks of the snakes, do they share physical characteristics which are not generally seen seen in other localities? The next factor would be time. I don't think it's neccessary for the two snakes to have been likely to have mated in the wild for them to be consider a locale pair. As long as there is a liklihood of geneflow within a reasonable period of time I might consider them locale. This geneflow could be via their offspring or their offsprings offspring, etc. It doesn't have to be limited to what might take place strictly within one generation because the characteristics of a locality are not likely to change in just one generation. A generation just means the time between offspring to offsping and with kingsnakes that can be as little as two years but usually is probably about three to five years. So the life of any given kingsnake can actually span several generations.

Dobry Jun 14, 2010 11:37 PM

mtDNA is only inherited maternally and it does not undergo recombination which means that you have your mom's mtDNA unchanged. Everyone has mtDNA not just females. This makes it an extremely reliable tool for tracing a lineage. That is why it is used so commonly.

If the males migrate out then I should find males with their mothers line outside of the "populations boundaries" (I say this very loosely as I do not know what the boundaries are, I just know where I find snakes and where I do not), however that is not the case. The populations are distinct, and independent, and I have data that spans over 20 years, so I am pretty sure multiple generations are represented.

You are banking on the "likelyhood" of geneflow???? Please qualify that? What does that mean and How can you say such a thing without evidence? Also how do you know that a specific "look/color/pattern" has anything to do with a given locality or geneflow? Where is the proof? How do you know it is not more time(geological)/habitat specific?

Maybe all you locality purists ought to start including time periods with your locality info. You know like these are the 90's Christmas mt. Alterna's and so on. It would have much more meaning then and you could have a timeline to go with it and see how the lines change.
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

Aaron Jun 15, 2010 03:09 AM

I am thinking about your questions but in the meantime could you answer the question I asked first, 'what is a population?'. The definition might be important to the discussion.

I will also raise another question, you say you have been studying those 3 rattlesnake lineages for 20 years but you make a statement about them probably not moving for thousands of years. How can you make such a statement based on only 20 years of observations? Twenty years might not even be long enough for one dominant male to be replaced. Also are these rattlesnakes all the same species or are they three different ones?

I am not saying your research is meaningless, I just think you might not have all that much more evidence for your beliefs than I do for mine.

Dobry Jun 15, 2010 10:17 AM

a population is all the individuals within a defined area. I already explained that I don't know the exact boundaries of these, but I know roughly where they are no longer found.

Also I did not say I have studied them for 20 years. I said I have 20 years of data. In addition, the way mtDNA studies work uses geological time to estimate the mutations in the non-coding regions of the mitochondria. These DNA sequences are passed on genetically unchanged - what that means is when there are difference in mtDNA between individuals those changes are a result of random mutation from DNA copy errors. These errors are estimated to occur very rarely in coding regions of the mitochondria because all the mitochondrial genes are critical to cellular function and any mutations are likely fatal. However, there are a few non-coding regions that can accumulate mutations without any overall effect, however the mutations still occur very rarely (estimated to be many thousands of years).

So when you find a bunch of snakes collect the blood, extract the DNA, amplify it, sequence it and analyze it and find out that all these snakes from a couple acre canyon came from one female, and the snakes from five miles down the road in either direction do not, and then you go and repeat that work on a long term laboratory colony of snakes and can tell where they were caught based on the DNA sequence, then you will have the evidence that I do.

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

Tony D Jun 15, 2010 10:54 AM

There is one aspect of mtDNA testing that I do not understand. If you are looking at the non-coding region how is it that this one ancestral female came to be the mother to the entire population? Wouldn't there have had to be some kind of survival advantage conferred for the frequency of a spontaneous mutation to completely replace the prior existing type?

Certainly you are not suggesting that these populations evolved independently based on a snippet of dna and the assumption that mutations don't happen very often.

BTW not picking a fight just asking questions.
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

Dobry Jun 15, 2010 11:24 AM

I'm not sure I understand your question. What I see is obvious genetic drift, a founder effect. It could very well be temporary situation for this population or a result of habitat fractionation, but it could also be a strategy for overall survival. And when I say temporary I mean in a geological sense, these canyons were carved out by glaciers roughly 10,000 years ago, so I doubt the snakes lived there then. The habitat is very harsh here, and very likely they can only survive the winters in very specific locations.

For that reason I imagine that there is intense competition for these key locations to survive. Also there were recent major disruptions to the habitat (last 40 years the building of 4 dams and the inundation of 100,000's of acres of this key habitat, turning it into several reservoirs.) So when all the right elements are in place for survival and the food supply is there, I do not believe these snakes go very far at all. However when those resources dry up or they are forced to move (floods, glaciers, ect) then there is significant gene flow. Other than that not so much.

I would imagine the Fl landscape has very similar disruptions quite commonly with the high frequency of hurricanes, causing major disturbances in population dynamics and geneflow ect, not to mention all the other major recent disruptions such as shopping malls and condo's and such.

My guess is there is a lot of two extremes right now. Small inbreed populations that are isolated, and huge melting-pot type populations that get lots and lots of migrants all the time from various escapes from these isolated populations. However I think that is a temporary state for a population to be in as well. It just depends on the current environmental conditions.

What I have is one very clear example of real data though, and not some imaginary theory. All kinds of speculations can be drawn from the data.

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

Tony D Jun 15, 2010 02:09 PM

we need to do this over a few beers!
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

Aaron Jun 16, 2010 12:35 AM

"You are banking on the "likelyhood" of geneflow???? Please qualify that? What does that mean and How can you say such a thing without evidence? Also how do you know that a specific "look/color/pattern" has anything to do with a given locality or geneflow? Where is the proof? How do you know it is not more time(geological)/habitat specific?"

Not quite sure what you mean by "banking" on the likelyhood of geneflow. Basicly I would say the goal of my locality projects is simply to produce specimens that look like what I have seen in the wild at those localities.

As far as the likelyhood of geneflow goes, I think if there are no physical barriers in the habitat to prevent geneflow then it is likely that some occurs on at least an occassional basis. The evidence I have for this is that my captive snakes are not very choosey about who they breed.

In my collection the willingness to breed essentially whoever is available has been demonstrated by captive born sibling to sibling, captive born parent to offspring as well as unrelated captive borns to each other. I also have bred wild caughts to wild caughts that were captured several miles and several years apart.

I have only had two instances of an ovulating female not being bred when put with a ready male. One was where I put a captive born ovulating female in with a captive born proven breeder male of an unrelated bloodline and the male would not show any intrest in her. After about ten or fifteen minutes of watching them not breed I put the female in with a sibling male and they bred right away. The other instance was where I put an young captive born ovulating female in with her much larger wild caught male parent. She did that tail lifting thing females do and he tried to line up with her but it he was unable to do so and after about a half an hour I separated them. Interestingly the following year after the female had grown some I tried again and they bred.

I realize these are just captive observations and they don't prove anything about what they do in the wild but I do think it is pretty strong evidence. The two instances of them not breeding seem especially significant to me because it shows that even in captivity they can "choose" not to breed. If I hadn't seen that I might think that captivity tends to break them of any natural instincts they may have about only breeding with specimens of their same family group or soemthing like that. The fact that even in captivity they sometimes "choose" not to breed seems to indicate that when they do "choose" to breed it is not somehow forced by captive conditions.

As far as color and pattern being tied to locality and genetics, the evidence comes from both captive and wild observations. The wild observations just show that certain colors and patterns are occuring in certain areas. Why that is so is something that is very interesting to me but I am not really trying to solve that puzzle with my captive collection. In my collection the babies I've produced almost always have had a very strong resemblance to the adults that produced them, or to other specimens that I have seen from the same locality. All on my breeders are kept in the same room, same type of cages, given the same diet, same temps, brumated in the same room, etc. and all the eggs are incubated in the same incubator, same substrate, etc. Basicly everything is the same environmentally speaking. To me this is evidence that genetics plays a strong role in how the babies look.

FR Jun 17, 2010 06:25 PM

I have been working on a pit tag study with two montane rattlesnakes, C.willardi and C.lepidus. We have been working them for 18 years.

We have five little ravines, each has its own "population" we know this because in 18 years, not a single animal tagged in one ravine(population) has showed up in another ravine. Consider, these ravines are less then 100 meters apart in some cases.

So by marking hundreds of individuals and recapturing them, they gave us a good idea of the boundries of their populations.

The point is, this is in one small tiny area, not miles or mountain ranges. Just some little side canyons.

We even see different populations within one canyon. Again, by marking them. In my opinion, tagging them causes them to move much farther then untouched naive(non radio or pit tagged) animals.

The point Dobry is trying to make is, the closer we look at these animals, the more we see localize populations that do not normally practice outbreeding. Outbreeding(geneflow) most likely occurs during ODD events like fires, floods, change in climate. Of course, some "other" species may practice outbreeding.

As I mentioned, those with localize pattern types(many kings, corns, etc), most like practice inbreeding, which is why they are locally unique. Those species with a consistant color and pattern over very large areas may practice out breeding. Its kinda common sense. Cheers

Jlassiter Jun 17, 2010 08:03 PM

>
-----
John Lassiter
Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...
www.coastalbendcaptivebreeding.com

BobS Jun 11, 2010 01:40 AM

And you don't have to worry about getting chewed on! LOL

a153fish Jun 11, 2010 09:37 AM

You know this is one reason I like working with Corns snakes. I can take a Corn from the Keys and bred it to one from Virginia and no-one cares cause it's still a Corn snake! Corn snakes are fun to breed cause you mix them all up and maybe make something new.


-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

ChristopherD Jun 11, 2010 10:56 AM

>>>You know this is one reason I like working with Corns snakes. I can take a Corn from the Keys and bred it to one from Virginia and no-one cares cause it's still a Corn snake! Corn snakes are fun to breed cause you mix them all up and maybe make something new.>>>

This is true with most Sp.,Cal kings, Fl. Kings,Mntn. Kings,and so on.....But people look for the Trait on a geographic variant as with cichlids species from the rift lakes of Africa,geographic mutts of the same species and genera are usually frowned upon because of worry of muddying up a collection of true breeding variants
The Florida king is just a peninsular variant of L.G.G.(IMHO)and the Goini is also just a Geovariant lgg that is so variable in appearance due to probably only being localized for a shorter period of time ,Outer Banks scream L.G.G..Evolution is a maker these variants such as tree snakes are green ,sidewinders are sandy , etc...... Which makes them appealing or not,i too like locality animals, as well as morphed sub species.

FR Jun 10, 2010 09:04 AM

I think most of you, that does mean you, have it very very wrong. As one of the pioneers of kingsnake breeding and kingsnake hybrids and as the pioneer of Albino cal kings, I have a little perspective on this subject.

First, you rationalize passing crosses, morphs, hybrids off as normal, IS ALL ABOUT SALES OR MONEY. Well, to a small degree, it may have happened, but the biggest problem is IGNORANCE. Most folks simply did not know what they had, did not care what they had and called it whatever they thought it looked like or wanted it to look like.

For every "expert/big name" you had a 1000 naive new keepers that just learned out to breed kings. This was something that occurred quickly and was something not expected or prepared for.

You see, snakes WERE hard to breed in the 60's to early 70's, then with the advent of basic husbandry that worked on all colubrids, even newbies without field experience could produce kingsnakes. Most did not know or care about one species or another. So they bred what ever they had and called them whatever someone else called them or they made up names.

To a VERY large extent, this occurs today. For everyone of you who cares or thinks you care about local types or species, there are 100's of thousands of snake keepers that buy their snakes from the local petshop or petsmart/petco type places. These snakes come from the giant colubrid breeders that produce aprox 70,000 snakes a year of all kinds and mixes. These places sell them to the large outlets for a few dollars. The folks are these large outlets, do not know a kingsnake from a doorknob and they give advice to those newbie keepers. Now consider.

I have seen the EXPERTS here label a snake that was purchased from one of these types of outlets. You know, what kind of king do I have, type of question, then four or five of you, give your GUESSES. So, many of you ARE THE PROBLEM as well. Any snake from unknown sources, cannot be considered a local genotype(pure as not a friggin thing to do with it)

The keeper then accepts advice from one of you(any one of you) and passes it along like it was accurate.

Another story read here is, the original albino this or that, came from a petshop(back east) and was the first pure, this or that. If it came from a petshop, its local type is a PETSHOP. Not an eastern or fla, etc.

Those are only a few examples of how this stuff became mucked up. Not by money or sales, but simple ignorance and maybe some excitement or hopeful thinking.

Yes, there are always folks that push the truth or lie to make a sale. But they are small in number, compared to the ignorant(not knowing)

So what you now have is, DOGS. Dogs are breeds,(of a common ancestor) If it physically appears like a breed, then it is. If it does not, then it isn't. There are no certified lines of snakes. NONE NADA, zero, like there is with dogs.

PURE, that word is bullbeans, as far as I can tell, less then 1% of you folks produce snakes that represent a wild phenotype. That is, snakes that are average for a local. You all and I mean all, select animals that are exceptional(not a normal phenotype) for a local. Or you select them for individuals that survive in captivity(pinkie feeders being an example)

So when you take the number of captive produced snakes from the big breeders, those that produce over 50,000 a year, and there are a handful of them. Lets say 200,000 thousand colubrids enter the pet trade each and EVERY YEAR. And they are mostly of unknown origin. And these go to newbies without any field or field guide experience, what the heck do you expect?

As I often say, very few of these PURE snakes you folks are now producing look anything like the originals. And I should know, I did collect and produce a number of the originals.

Another problem is ego, each new generation wants to be unique. They all want to be a pioneer and do something new. So over the years, names have been reapplied to captive lines of pure snakes. Things like Applegate this or Lemke that, etc etc. The problem is, they were not the first either. The problem is, many of the animals they started with, came from others, who got them from others. Those two wonderful folks are only used as an example. I know them, I sold them snakes many many years ago.

Heres the odd part, since I returned to this board, I have seen maybe ten kings labeled as Fla kings that look like ones I collected in Fla, in the early seventies. The rest labeled as pure, thousands, are spectacular but do not look like PURE.

Now for the biggie, the phenotype(the wild one you pick up) is one of a zillion possibilities that can occur from a pure local genotype. What is normal for a population is a product of genotype and selective pressures. This produces a temporary "normal" for each local. In this normal are always pioneers(odd patterned and colored snakes) that are looking to successfully alter the average phenotype. In the case of color and pattern, which is what we are talking about here. Local type is a ever changing event, and it does change quickly.

So, the Phenotype(the normal look at a local) is an ever changing character that fits the present conditions or disappears.

And you think you have pure what??????????????Thanks for letting another old guy rant. Cheers

stu Jun 10, 2010 09:46 AM

That was definitely a perspective I hadn't thought of, and I am glad you brought it up!

Excellent post!
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

bobassetto Jun 10, 2010 10:09 AM

aw.....BULLBEANS.....yo...frank ....this guy is pure west langtry locale

FR Jun 11, 2010 08:17 AM

So your THE ONE, hahahahahahahaha how do you compare to the hundreds of thousands of snakes purchased at the large chain petshops???????? The score is, 1000000000 to one, anyone else care to join Bob.

Also Bob, I am proud of you for having that beautiful Blairs. One of favorite of all time beautiful snakes was a Very dark blairs, with bright orange/red blotches. Cheers

Tony D Jun 10, 2010 10:17 AM

I would only add that there is nothing wrong with attempting to minimize further hybridization otherwise excellent post!
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

stu Jun 10, 2010 08:40 PM

I completely respect your position on hybrids. You don't dig them...got no problem with that.

But, trying to minimize any more hybridization....well...that ship has sailed. There are so many folks doing it quietly because they are afraid of the label that there is no way of slowing it down or stopping it.

Especially when the "big guys" are doing it to make new morphs and then trying to hide it again. That doesn't minimize anything...other than ethics.
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

Tony D Jun 11, 2010 08:25 AM

I don't have a bias against hybrids at all. I just was trying to say was there is also nothing wrong with the locality approach if that is what one wants to do. That is my way of rising above the fray. If any approach is well thought out and executed it is likely to have merit.

I will however say that I've come across few hybrid projects that I thought were well thought out. Only cream cycle "corns" and albino "thayeri" come to mind.
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

FR Jun 11, 2010 08:55 AM

I agree, I think its a bit like Las Vegas, What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas. What happens in captivity, stays in captivity.

Personally, I do keep more hybrids then pure species(about to change) But I have thousands of Local specific animals in my field studies. I work in the field with herps and they are all or nearly all pure. hahahahahahahahaha.

What is of interest is what makes US tick. I know what two animals from the same local do. Been breeding them for 45 years. What I do not know is what hybrid possibilities are. Consider, historically, these animals(colubrids) were from a common ancestor. So what they are now, is a product of what they were before. And that includes natural hybridization.

Consider, even now, many consider hybrids to all be mules, hmmmmmmmmmmm that worked with horses and donkies, but was not true with other species.

Scientifically, hybrids are far more interesting then local specific animals. But thats a horse of a different color. Cheers

FR Jun 11, 2010 08:30 AM

There is no attempt to minimize anything. If you actually read what I am saying, Its not about those few here they produce hybrids, its about the hundreds, even thousands that do that without knowing what they are doing. There are tens of thousands of folks that buy from petshops and they by animals that are produced willy nilly for the pet trade. Then for some reason man has to label something so they are called a THIS OR THAT. When in fact they are not.

As I mentioned many times here, I did a panel discussion With J.Collins, about zoos and hybrids. He was not concerned with intentional hybrids, but he was very concerned with un-intentional hybrids that Zoos were commonly doing. That is, they were buying animals from Exporters, animals dealers and taking their word for what they were pairing up. For instance, many of our western rattlesnakes were the same species a few years ago, now they are not, they have been divided into different species. In the past those producing these pure snakes were actually producing hybrids. Or pairing animals for extremely different parts of their ranges. Which actually were NOT THE SAME species. This is and was commonplace.

As I mentioned here, many of the first L.mexicana types produced in captivity were much like that. Back then, we did not have a complete picture of what was what. So some Thayeri were indeed unintentional hybrids. Same for many of the milksnakes. I am sure many of the animals we breed now, will in the future, be considered different species and that will mean many of what you call pure now will be hybrids in the future. Like North Fla kings bred to south Fla. Kings. MtDna will rock this captive world soon. Cheers

Jlassiter Jun 12, 2010 12:07 AM

MtDna will rock this captive world soon. Cheers

Nuclear DNA will rock this captive world soon.........
-----
John Lassiter
Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...
www.coastalbendcaptivebreeding.com

Tony D Jun 14, 2010 09:13 AM

There is no attempt to minimize anything.

I got what you were saying. I was indicating that I see some merit in not saying, "Oh well everything is #@!*^ up already so I'll just do whatever". To me its well worth doing some research to resolve what the base characteristics of, say thayeri, are before selecting potential breeders. I for instance look for a nice symmetrical tri-lobed patterns on the head and iris color among other things. There are also characteristics that scream other populations that I avoid. I also look for animals that are obviously well taken care of and a breeder is somewhat versed in the natural history of the animals he works with. This last bit somewhat subjective but if one wants to minimize further hybridization moving forward I don't think its something you can ignore.

For instance, many of our western rattlesnakes were the same species a few years ago, now they are not, they have been divided into different species. In the past those producing these pure snakes were actually producing hybrids.

I think this is THE legitimate point to locality breeding. I forget who said it but they were correct in stating "locality is the only thing that can be pure". If "purity" is your thing locality breeding is the way to go.
-----
“Nothing is at last sacred but the integrity of your own mind.” Emmerson

WWW.TDSNAKES.BLOGSPOT.COM

BobS Jun 14, 2010 10:28 AM

Thanks

Jlassiter Jun 14, 2010 08:02 PM

>>Thanks

mt stands for Mitochondrial.......
Mitochondrial DNA = mtDNA.....
-----
John Lassiter
Poor planning and procrastination on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part...
www.coastalbendcaptivebreeding.com

BobS Jun 14, 2010 10:32 PM

nm

PWalreadytaken Jun 10, 2010 10:30 AM

"DOGS"......I like that. Never quite thought of snakes being bred today like that, but it's about as accurate a description as one can get. I don't get involved in arguing either side on this issue; buy what you like from who you trust. Excellent post.

Upscale Jun 10, 2010 11:17 AM

The snakes in the hobby are eye candy period. Purity means absolutely nothing zero. It does not matter. Unless you are a scientist looking at the spurs on hemipenis differences or dna or neck bone joints or some pin head research, it does not matter. All the names used in the hobby are in keeping with the names in common use in field guides and other such consumer publications so you have a pretty good idea what to look up in the care manuals, if you need to. It is what it looks like as far as anyone in the hobby should care. It is of zero importance. Feed it and take care of it and call it Fred if you want.

texasviper619 Jun 10, 2010 11:51 AM

If u love snakes, love them all, beautiful and ugly, "pure" and hybrid. A 10 year old kid who wants a pet snake doesn't care about bloodlines, he just wants a snake because they are cool. Different species have different attributes, but they are all snakes and I've loved all of them since I can remember.
-----
Dustin Smith

stu Jun 10, 2010 12:05 PM

I feel better now, but that misses the point of my post.

There are a lot of folks out there that make wild claims about the purity of their bloodlines, lack of hybrids etc... and folks who don't know any better or don't know who to trust believe these folks.

The question remains. Is it right for someone to use hybrids to make a new morph and then pass it off as being "pure"? Does anyone care if this is being done?
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

texasviper619 Jun 10, 2010 12:19 PM

No it isn't right, it's dishonest and shameful but it is also irreversible at this point, there are too many people breeding too many snakes to know the true genetics of any of them, but there are a select few hard to find honest breeders out there, mostly those who breed their own wildcaught snake just because it makes them happy, not for profit. But even locality species can't be called locality anymore after a few years because the wild genepool in an area changes all the time, it would only take one snake in an area with a genetic morph to survive to adulthood and breed to change the entire look of a "locality" snake population after a few years. The answer is no it isn't right to pass off a snake with questionable background as pure, and even locality becomes false unless the breeding stock is refreshed from wild caught specimens every couple of years.
-----
Dustin Smith

stu Jun 10, 2010 12:36 PM

thanks!! good post!

would you say unethical would be the best term?

why are folks still letting it go on? lots of guys out there know it happens, why is nothing said?

I say be up front and honest...if your critters are hybrids then say so! What's the big deal?
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

a153fish Jun 10, 2010 08:06 PM

I brought up the subject of the white suded brooks and was told to shut up. People have a lot of time and money invested in certain snake morphs and don't want any "bad" publicity.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

stu Jun 10, 2010 08:30 PM

Unfortunately that won't work on me. I'm an obnoxious loudmouth! lol

They can either give in now, or give in later but eventually I'll get my way

I think if these guys were to just openly say..."Yes, my stuff has some hybrid blood in there" and stick to their guns it would very quickly open up the hybrid market like crazy. Just need the guys that are considered top of the pile to say it and the rest will follow.

Maybe I should do an article for Reptiles magazine???
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

Jeff Schofield Jun 10, 2010 11:51 PM

FYI, The Bells at [url ban], who produce thousands of babies a year for the pet market, are one of the originators of the line of hypo goini brooksi that I am condemned for. You will see alot of "little guys" railing me hard on where I spend my money....dont you have to ask why???

a153fish Jun 11, 2010 02:21 AM

Do they have a website? I've tried many times to find one but no luck.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

varanid Jun 11, 2010 12:38 PM

I think the're Repmart (or something similar)now.
-----
We wouldn't have 6 and a half billion people if you had to be beautiful to get laid.
6.6 African House snakes
3.2 reticulated pythons
.1 corn snake
4.2 Florida Kings
1.2 speckled kings
1.2 ball pythons
0.0.1 Argentine boa

PHFaust Jun 13, 2010 09:13 AM

>>I think the're Repmart (or something similar)now.
>>-----
Reptmart. They are one of the forum sponsors, so look up! I believe this is the secondary business for them.
-----
Cindy Steinle
PHFaust
Visit kingsnake on Facebook!
Follow Kingsnake on Twitter!

a153fish Jun 13, 2010 10:45 AM

Yeah thanks guys! I looked up the site and I couldn't find their names anywhere but I did se the Firecracker Goins which is one of their animals so this must be it.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

PHFaust Jun 13, 2010 11:30 PM

>>Yeah thanks guys! I looked up the site and I couldn't find their names anywhere but I did se the Firecracker Goins which is one of their animals so this must be it.
>>-----
>>King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
>> J Sierra

Promise its them, I bought a snake off the Bell's this year from their Reptmart booth. Was a python however.
-----
Cindy Steinle
PHFaust
Visit kingsnake on Facebook!
Follow Kingsnake on Twitter!

Jeff Schofield Jun 13, 2010 10:57 AM

But when it posted on the forum it had something like "name deleted"?? What happened?? Are we not allowed to post names of companies?

a153fish Jun 15, 2010 04:29 PM

You may have put the acyual web link name? I had the same thing happen when I put the name of another herp site forum.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

Aaron Jun 14, 2010 12:32 AM

"But even locality species can't be called locality anymore after a few years because the wild genepool in an area changes all the time, it would only take one snake in an area with a genetic morph to survive to adulthood and breed to change the entire look of a "locality" snake population after a few years. The answer is no it isn't right to pass off a snake with questionable background as pure, and even locality becomes false unless the breeding stock is refreshed from wild caught specimens every couple of years."

While I agree with your sentiments about honesty regarding hybrids I disagree with most of what you said above. One snake is not going to change the look of any normally functioning locality population. It takes environmental pressure to do that. The species that I have been hunting and/or observing(California Mtn. Kings, California Common Kings and Graybanded Kings) have not shown any significant changes in color or pattern in all the years(1996 to the present) I have seen them. Some years one might find more banded than striped or more light phase than dark but in my experience that is at the most merely swings within what is the natural range they have been exhibiting for a very long time.

As far as having to replace or refresh stocks every few years that isn't true either. Consider even if you start with just one pair of wild caught snakes they can probably produce about 10 clutches during their lifetimes. From those F1's it should be easy to holdback at least two or three pairs that closely match wild types. Those two or three pairs of F1's should be able to produce 20 to 30 clutches. If we figure most kings have about 3 to 10 eggs per clutch that is going to give you 60 to 300 F3 babies from which to chose for wild type looks.

For example, I collected a pair of graybands near Langtry, TX in 1996(female) and 1999(male). In 2001 I held back 0.1 F1. In 2007 I again held back 0.1 F1. In 2008 I held back 1.2 F1 offspring. All of these are within the normal range for that locality. In 2012 alone I should have 4 clutches from which to select for wild type looks, not to mention all the clutches the '08 holdbacks have ahead of them. It should be exceedingly easy for me to select wild type looks for many years, maybe even decades and this is all from just one wild caught pair.

Consider also the male I collected in 1999 is still alive. If he had not been collected he(or others of his same generation) would still be producing babies in the wild. This is why I say a locality is not going to change in just a few years without some extrordinary external pressure.

At the rate I have been going I will probably not need to collect another wild specimen for another 10 years. I should be barely starting to breed F3's by then.

I think the reality is most people choose not to maintain collections that represent wild type looks. Most people get sidetracked when they produce someting of exceptional color and they simply go that way.

BobS Jun 14, 2010 10:48 PM

Interesting...

Aren't folks that are serious into locality looking to keep a living keepsake from an area they like/visited/collected/admired?
If that's where they are coming from having a "living" keepsake to keep the hobby interesting for themselves does it really matter if the wild locality changes or not?
(In some locales like the Harris county Texas lemon yellow speckleds I own their habitat has been bulldozed and built on so there is no "wild type" anymore anyway.) Aren't they looking to preserve a "look" , like a photograph...A snap shot in time preserved? I'm not seriously into locality, just asking questions.

BobS Jun 14, 2010 11:10 PM

As Frank has said on occassion, these animals are never going back,they only exist in captivity.

If they are always "ONLY" going to live in captivity anyway and never going free would the "snapshot in time" analogy be an understandable goal whether they do or don't at a future time resemble the wild population? Isn't the retention of the "look" valid... I mean, I guess like an old 57' Chevy. It doesn't look like a modern 2010 Impala but you can't say it's not a valid chevy.
Again, I'm not trying to argue either side just asking questions I think many casual hobbyists like myself think but maybe don't voice.

thanks,
Bob.

Jeff Schofield Jun 14, 2010 11:24 PM

Oh, about 10 completely different lines of "Locality X". Then someone mixes "Locality X #1 with Locality X #5" and the locality guys stop talking to him.....how far do you really want to take it??

Aaron Jun 14, 2010 11:47 PM

Yes I think the "snapshot in time" is a very good reason to keep locality. I did not mean to imply it wasn't. I was in part saying that I don't think most locales will change much over the lifetime of the keeper.

In fact I have thought about this and I think the "snapshot in time" we get from keeping locality herps and from researching them does have scientific and edjucational value. In the case of ones like your speckled kings where their habitat no longer exists there might even be conservation value. Seeing living examples of diversity that has been lost probably has a more dramatic impact than photos and written words alone would to inspire people to preserve what remains.

I think another thing good about locality relates to "extinction" in the hobby. The locality stocks being bred today may never be used to replenish wild populations but ever changing laws might cause alot of species to become "extinct" to the hobby in the future. Myself, I would like to see as many forms available within the hobby as possible.

FR Jun 11, 2010 08:39 AM

of course some care. But there is no way to actually tell. The false belief in MTDna is funny. You cannot tell a hybrid unless you have the Dna footprint of its actual parents. If you had the actual parents, then you would know you had hybrids.

The problem is, DNA footprints vary from local to local, within a single species. And does as much as it does to different species. Or so I am told.

Also, morphs of any type are NOT normal in nature. Therefore, they are abnormal. So morphs, crosses, hybrids, are all treated the same in nature. Either they "fit" and establish something new(new phenotype) or they dilute or perish and the population stays the same.

Again, its selective pressures that determine the actual narrow phenotype from a large diverse genotype. And these pressures are the same for mutts, crosses, hybrids, etc. Fit or disappear. Cheers

Jeff Schofield Jun 11, 2010 12:32 PM

FR, I am not so strictly a field guy as you, but then again who is. I straddle the line between morphs and locality snakes, I keep both. I find alot of "locality nutz"(especially on the milk forum)a little off base because they consider F10 babies "locality".
My first point is that to be a locality breeder you have to continually infuse new blood from the wild to keep the line "valid".
My second point is that breeding for LOCALITY MORPHS is basically ridiculous to begin with, even if a single morph is found in the wild at that locality in very very few instances does the locality "support" morphs.
What say you on these 2 points?

BobS Jun 11, 2010 03:59 PM

"a little off base because they consider F10 babies "locality".
My first point is that to be a locality breeder you have to continually infuse new blood from the wild to keep the line "valid". "

Mostly you guys are talking over my head, I'm just a regular hobbyist that likes mostly what are considered traditional looking normals whether they be serious locality or "generics" that look like the ones we drooled over in the field guides as kids and I make room for folks doing their morph thing and I've had more than a few Amels over the years so I can't really get all weird at anyone.

My question is if you have F10s, why aren't they considered a "snaphot" of a select population, "locality" if you will. Like populations you read about that are seperated by some type of physical boundary and continue on...

Not arguing anything. Just fairly sure I'm not the only one trying to understand?

Thanks,
Bob.

a153fish Jun 11, 2010 05:23 PM

Yeah I was thinking that Jeffs statement about continually infuseing new blood from the wild to keep the line "valid". Would be better said to keep the line "current"? The line would still be valid just not reflecting the current sampling of animals. Especially if we pick the cream of the samplings to continue the refining process toward a conceptual target. Like reduced speckling or something similar.
-----
King Snakes! Who can make a better mouse trap?
J Sierra

Jeff Schofield Jun 11, 2010 10:26 PM

My point, in agreeing with FR, is that ANY selective breeding reduces locality. Especially morph breeding. Selective inbreeding 10 generations(F10)without new blood creates a manmade reflection on what the genes might have looked like 30 years ago. But not likely. Is that the definition of "locality"?? I think most "locality" breeders would like to incorporate new blood, I want to think they do. If they want to seriously differentiate themselves a standard might help? Otherwise we can end up with 10-15 DIFFERENT versions on the same locality.....and what good does that do anyone?

FR Jun 12, 2010 09:27 AM

Yes sir, Jeff, we do agree on this one. I believe I wrote this back in 1979. I said, after three generations in captivity, the captives do not represent the founders.

I was a little naive, as three generations is a questionable average. But it was my experience with lots of NEW species I was working with.

As I mentioned, I locality bred many of the original kingsnake species that are here today, like blairs, alternas, thayeri, ruthvens, pyros(I already had six generations but the time pyros were REGULATED in Az.) and of course others like greeri and mex mex. Only I did not originate those two types. Of course my speciality was Cal Kings.

By the mid to late 80's I moved to pythons, only with these, we had no idea what the local phenotype was.

Then by the early ninties, I moved on to varanids and captive produced many world first breedings along with many many generations of each species. With varanids, they also were very diffficult to maintain a consistent local pattern and color type, when line breeding. These animals migrated color and pattern VERY QUICKLY. Which means, these animals are very prone to phenotypic pressures to maintain a successful current successful population. They are genetically loose, so that something will "fit" in a changing or varying environment. This reflects why there are so many different local types of species like corns and kings, etc.

What you are seeing is, snakes like kings, corns, and many other species that have such defined local color and pattern types, is how they respond to local phenotypic pressures.

Examples are corns where every local has a corn named after it, Like, Miami corns are different then Long Key corns, which are different then Ft Meyer corns, which are different then Jacksonville corns(big dark unicolored) etc etc etc.

This is seen here with Eastern kings and Fla kings, etc etc. Yet other species like Eastern black racers, maintain a consistant color pattern over huge areas and over many different habitats.

Eastern Black racers would be easy to maintain a local color type, in captivity, that represents the wild local. For instance, if you captive bred local blackracers, and after some generations, you ended up with brown ones with black speckles, you could not call it a Blackracer. IT would be something else, like a buttermilk from texas. As they now reflect a different local. Yet with kings, we breed the beans out of them and select colors that do not represent what they appeared like in nature, YET, we are insistent that THEY ARE PURE. The question is, pure WHAT?

For instance, Thayeri have very specific local color types, even if they do vary like blairs. But the animals in captivity now, do not represent any local, or even wild thayeri at all. Yet they are called pure.

Like you, As a biologist, I have problems with that. As a private keeper, I love the beautiful colors that expressed characters from the genotypes called thayeri or other species, I just don't understand the PURE thing. Common sense says, if they do not look like the founders or the local, they are not pure anything. They are now captive toys. And toys are wonderful. Humans love to play with toys, but these toys are not representative of nature. Cheers

BobS Jun 12, 2010 09:46 AM

nm

CrimsonKing Jun 12, 2010 09:47 AM

Have you ever found that a local (wild) population has changed over time while the captives you have from that same locality (and bred together) have remained the same?
I ask because in a small area where we used to see rather dark (almost eastern king) looking FL kings I have noticed more than a few that are much lighter these days.
Of course, the captive line from the area looks very much the same year to year.
:Mark
-----
Surrender Dorothy!

crimsonking.piczo.com/

jeff schofield Jun 12, 2010 10:28 AM

A natural example of locality change over time is the southern Florida ratsnakes. Miami used to have Banana yellows and the glades used to have bright oranges. The draining and filling has homogenized them. This would be an excellent reason FOR keeping more than 1 locality line.

Milk snakes, with their 3rd color and more intricate patterns, have a more variable and therefore a "faster" change in locality phenotype. In my observation, the difference between St.Marys and Calvert county coastals has subtley changed in the past 20 years. But when I brought the subject up on the milk forum to talk about I was wholeheartedly blasted. Only a river seperates the counties, yet it is no wider or faster now then it was 20 years ago. Could pattern types reflect more than just color?? Could this be a reflection on rodent vs lizard feeders? Survivability? Predation? Or just simple variation? One type hasnt replaced the other, simply more common.

Upscale Jun 12, 2010 10:44 AM

Snakes probably do not understand why the skunk with poor eyesight passed them by, and the hawk with excellent eyesight passed them by, but old spot might meet another snake of the same fate and produce little ones with those same traits. If the snake could look in the mirror it might realize that it looks so much like the habitat in the background that it is nearly invisible, explaining the hawk getting new gaudy neighbor rusty red last week instead. If the same snake gets overconfident and wanders over to the other side of the hill, crawling curiously through the rusty red rocks, he will probably never know what hit him. I believe snakes can form clades as micro specific as from the top of the hill to the bottom, or east side to west side of the same hill, ravine, riverbank, etc. These should be those slight variations that can be easily line bred and easily bred out. Some might even be able to change within their lifetime, over the course of so many sheds, to the more favorable trait. They all have that range within their dna, I guess.

jeff schofield Jun 12, 2010 11:18 AM

Their DNA does NOT change. Their DNA doesnt change them over time. If milks have a range from 1-1000, eastern milks from 1-50, this locale will have a range like 1-10, and all snakes should fall within that range. The arent chameleons, they dont have those type of pigment cells to change color. But you are right when it comes to your "mirror" analogy. Just because type 1 pattern is more prevalent atop the hill and type 2 at the bottom does NOT mean a thing, maybe YOU find that type easier in those places. These snakes have been around a long time, longer than that hill, its survivorship in these places that define most people's ideal of "locale". If you bred type 1 x type 1 I'd still be that somewhere along the line that a type 2 would show up simply due to variation. With bicolor kings we dont see as much as we do in tricolors.

Dobry Jun 15, 2010 11:51 AM

That is not entirely true. We are finding out that the environment does have genetic consequences. Epigenetics and methlyation studies are suggesting that the environment does not change the DNA but can influence the regulation of genetic activity, and those changes can be inherited.
-----
"Relax, Don't Worry, Have a Homebrew!" Charlie Papazian

FR Jun 12, 2010 09:02 PM

Hi Jeff, Yes in my experience, nearly every population has changed color over time. I think this is very natural.

I think we need to consider what the genotype means, It is the genetic possibilities that any snake in a population or individual can produce. This would include, odd balls and albinos if they every exsisted in a population.

I think each population has a set variation that can occur. And over time, the phenotypes do change and then change again and back and forth again and again. All within the genotype.

Its odd, but snakes cannot make up new anything if its genetic. Not over a very short time. So all the morphs and color types we produce, MUST be in their genetic possibilities, the genotype, or they cannot express it.

When we see something new(to use) its actually something old and unused to them. Something they did in the past. Thats what inbreeding does, express unused traits.

This is a very very interesting subject. And we know so little about it. Cheers

jeff schofield Jun 12, 2010 10:43 AM

Very interesting! I too, came up with the same 3 generation demarcation line several years ago! Fairly arbitrary you will agree, but "locality" by the most common definition can definately be "lost" by continual selective inbreeding. Do me a favor, FOR FUN, go post this on the milk forum! LMAO! See if its me or what I say that gets people riled up! Have a great weekend!

markg Jun 10, 2010 12:46 PM

I think a funny scenario is when snakes are labeled as "so and so's stock" and then you find out that "so and so" got them from someone who got them from someone else who got them from yet someone else ..

Oh well, we all want recognition in one form or another. Good advertising to attach your name to a snake.
-----
Mark

Jeff Schofield Jun 11, 2010 12:05 AM

Some very good followups here. I will add that every year a new expert comes to the forum and demands that we upchuck the origins of every morph line. Sir, that is what the historical forum is for. Do your own homework, knock yourself out! Truth is many of the older morphs predate the internet or digital pics. Are there intergrades and hybrids out there? Sure, but the most you can do is pay the extra money and go with an established breeder you trust. Dont be the type to try and save $5 then complain that you dont have all the info. Take meticulous records and demand the same in the people you deal with. Otherwise, you can always get out in the field yourself and hunt up your own. I think it most ridiculous that anyone can slam something as "not pure" yet they cannot use the established key to do so.

stu Jun 11, 2010 08:43 AM

Wasn't aware that I had reached expert status that quickly. Thanks!

What I'm looking for is honesty. The folks that are making the hybrid morphs and then selling them as "pure"...and down talking anyone else that makes hybrids are doing themselves and everyone else a great disservice. They could be on the forefront ( publicly, not just in their basement ) of the hybrid market, but instead they are scared to come out and say they are making hybrids.

You said in another post that you got slammed all the time by new folks for making crosses. So what do you do about it? Anything? Try and change their mind? Explain to them what's really going on, or just get pissed and give up?

I say there is room for both the purists and the hybrid folks and that the market can easily sustain both. I applaud the folks that spend all their time keeping records of bloodlines and researching who they buy from, etc.. I think that is a very important aspect of the hobby and I hope there are always folks out there doing it.

I also think there is room for the hybrids...all the crazy patterns / colors that can be had....we haven't even seen the tip of the iceberg yet! There are so many different things that can be done in that arena...it is absolutely mindblowing!!

If you are going to make hybrids then don't hide it, if you are scared to admit it you probably shouldn't be doing it!
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

Jeff Schofield Jun 11, 2010 11:22 AM

Stu, another part thats important about intergrades, just like any other snake.....the truth. Its important to know everything in the past to honestly represent the snake. Something like Scotts breedings takes time to learn, to remember everything thats gone into it. Even if you dont care about it, its important for others to know if they want the babies and for you to be taken as a honest breeder. So write it down if you have to, pass it on!

stu Jun 11, 2010 11:36 AM

Believe me, I'm paying very close attention to everything Scott says and does with his critters. He has got so much going on that I don't have an option but to write things down and get him to repeat everything about 50 times! I want to make sure that any animals leaving my place are represented perfectly. No half truths and slippery answers here!

Ignore the idiots?? Nah.... I'd rather convert them! lol!
-----
Stu
Snakes N Gex.com

texasviper619 Jun 11, 2010 01:24 PM

Wow if there is a dead forum just drop a post about hybrids and things really take off! It's always a fun discussion lol
-----
Dustin Smith

Site Tools