Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I have a point I would like to make regarding herpetoculture. In defending against the arguments of anti-exotic politicians, we often say that breeding reptiles in captivity is one way to prevent the extinction of these animals. Since reptiles are disappearing across the planet, this is a very penetrating statement for someone who wants to conserve nature.

But is this really what we are doing? Let's look at the ball python, for example. Python regius has been bred en masse for decades, and this popularity has been fueled by the "production" of some very striking morphs, including albinos and leucistics. However, any biologist will tell you that such creatures cannot survive in the wild. Albinos can hardly be exposed to sunlight, or their health is threatened. Other morphs create problems as well; how on earth could a lavender ball python avoid detection by predators if its camouflage has been stripped away? Since many of these traits are recessive, the pythons' offspring wouldn't be any better off, though whether such an animal would live long enough to breed is debatable.

What I am saying is, if ball pythons were to become critically endangered in the wild, how could captive-bred individuals serve the wild populations if the vast majority of them were unable to survive in the wild? A reintroducing program would certainly be a dramatic failure if all of the captive pythons were genetically anomalous.

So is the captive breeding of such species as the ball python, corn snake, king snake, bearded dragon, and leopard gecko really giving us a reservoir of specimens in case wild populations were to become endangered? It would appear not. My point is this: perhaps it is unwise to continually be trying to "engineer" oddball reptiles simply because they are more visually pleasing to someone who cannot appreciate reptiles otherwise. Instead, why not concentrate on exploring "normal" animals for all their ordinary glory? Is a normal ball python really all that bad? And when the wolves come knocking at our doors with things like HR 669, can we really say that professional breeders are aiding conservation?

Best regards,
Pinstripe

You are right pinstripe, the argument that captive breeding reptiles (at least the way it's done here in the U.S.) would not hold ANY water. I have always looked at modern captive breeding as more of an art form, attempting to customize animals for unique color and/or pattern combinations. To some degree, we could make the argument that modern captive breeding eases the pressure on wild populations or makes certain species with restricted geographic populations more widely available. I am not one to talk though as I have two wild caughts currently and may end up with more eventually.

For a captive breeding program that was targeted as insurance against potential extinction to work and be substantive in the eyes of others, the program would attempt to preserve genetic diversity and would involve a controlled natural environment that was similar to if not identical to actual conditions within the species geographic range (minus predation of course). My two cents worth as I am involved with a semi captive breeding program for an endangered ungulate and deal with these issues up close and personal year in and year out...

Thanks for the response -- I understand that pituophis breeders aren't doing all of the morph-engineering, but I wanted to get a better hold on this issue that has been bothering me for a while (that is why you will see this post in several forums). I just thought that maybe all of this genetic mutation isn't such a good idea if people lose their appreciation for the wild animals.

Best regards,
pinstripe

I am not a breeder myself as I have often wondered what I would do with excess animals that I could neither sell nor give away. The Pituophis breeders represented here have had some remarkable results with morphing as with type locality animals. There are loyalists on the morph and normal ends of the spectrum and a goodly number that probably have a little (or a lot) of each. Morphs are not my thing particularly but I do admire some of them. I love the natural variation found within wild populations and the product of those attempting to breed and increase the availability of these "locality" or high colored individuals. The genetic code inherent in reptiles and the potential to produce stunning morphs from it is staggering. Probably attracts a number of people to the hobby that would not be in it otherwise though (as you stated)...

Although I personally am not a fan of various morphs it must be pointed out that captive breeding was not intended to provide stock for future release to the wild, but rather to take pressure OFF of wild populations, i.e., by breeding in captivity we'd be leaving more stock in the wild (it was good in theory at least). Over the years people stopped keeping track of locales and defeated the purpose, leaving people to produce "paper trails" to validate stock, an act I feel should never have come to fruition. As for those who do various morphs, it's their choice, and it does not means a lack of appreciation for natural occurring colorations. In addition it's going to make no difference to knee-jerk politicians if your intentions are honorable; votes and power are their only motivation.

Bart

Jease! if you post such a thing on the milk snake forum you'd get eaten alive, but you make the point that I have been making for years on all the forums here, it's a great piont too, I have to say selective breeding for color or pattern is not so bad but all the breeding of the albinos and hybrids is really way out of hand, and since the feds are protecting rare snakes out of exsistance by not better preventing road mortalities or exterminating the pigs that don't even belong in our woods. instead of their "hands off" approach they should "require" breeders to include a native rare snake sp. or two from whatever state they happen to be in, and the juvies should go to repopulate the state parks that are now over run with pigs, armoredillos, and other non native predators. Imagine going to a park here in fla and seeing indigos crossing the roads or the EDR or pinesnakes, years back folks did not want to see snakes when visiting but now that the "snake world" is so huge and growing every year by astronomical proportions I think it would be a great plan to restore snake populations. and the worry of the spreading of pathogens would be obsolete if the wild populations are as bleak as they seem. so lets not rule out the "breed and release" theory for now, oneday in the near future (10-15 years) maybe it wont sound like such a bad Idea.