Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Just because I am bored... lemme just say for those who wanna stir the pot about morphs vs normals.
I personally do not have time to be a field herper and I live in Texas where herps are abundant. I have caught a million snakes in my life and love wild types but I will breed morphs over wild types any time. I like them better and that's that.
I have the same appreciation for a snake in the field as I do for the ones in cages.
Being a breeder there's also the fact the offspring must be sold. For all the mumbo jumbo I hear out of wild type fanatics those same people are usually irritated if they have to pay more than 20 bucks for those animals they cherish.
I like morphs. The more over the top the better. If people want to think I am "ruining" these snakes let them get a room full of normals and then tell me if they could afford to breed them without dipping into their own pockets as opposed to a business type situation where a profit is possible.
I look forward to continuing working with morphs. Good luck with your "normals"
Tom Stevens
-----
TomsSnakes.com
twitter.com/TomsSnakes

or the other? There are several herpers/breeders (myself included) that appreciate both locality/WC animals, and the various morphs available. To each their own when it comes to the hobby or business. If some want to keep and breed locality animals only, thats great. Their market will be whatever it is, if they are even looking for a market. They may be doing it with no thoughts about selling. Just the thrill or challenge of being able to capture, successfully keep in captivity, and breed may be more than enough. Some folks like the morphs they LIKE, and do not delve into morphs they really dont care about simply because they are HOT and can make the most money. I fall into that category regarding morphs. I dont keep morphs I dont like regardless if "popular" and move well at shows, etc. I also dont work with hybrid or integrade morphs. Just dont like them for personal reasons. On the flip side, I also work with non-morph animals, but only the species I LIKE. NOT the most sellable, etc.

I personally feel it takes all types of folks in the hobby to keep it interesting and alive. No one train of though is correct IMO as long as the animals are properly represented and no one is getting ripped off one way or the other. This happens enough with non moprhs as well as morphs.

It doesn't. While I didn't go out this weekend (it broke 110 at my house on Labor Day...WTF?!!), I like both, and I'll field herp pretty regularly in spring and fall. Heat of summer is a bit much though!

and I enjoy both morphs and wild types. Some species I prefer one over the other (speckled kings I like wild type...Fl kings I dig the morphs...retics I like both...), but I haven't noticed any real ryme or reason to it.
-----
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

Varanid, apparently to some it does need to be one way or the other. I think much of the disagreement about morphs comes from appreciating morphs of known subspecies vs. morphs involving more than one subspecies. How many new morphs of various subspecies have been produced by man by introducing a recessive trait from subspecies A into normal subspecies B, than backbreeding these hybrids/integrades to produce "subspecies B" that now expresses the desired recessive trait? To me, the fact these morph traits showed up in subspecies makes that much more special. There is no quess work being done on the lineage or purity of subspecies. When you have to guess, or actually KNOW a morph is a hybrid or integrade, it takes the uniqueness out of the equation for me. But once again, thats my opinion and everyone needs to enjoy the hobby as they see fit. My only PERSONAL gripe is when KNOWN hybrid/integrade morphs are represented as a pure subspecies, or labled in a way that eludes it is a pure subspecies when in fact it is not!!

or the other? There are several herpers/breeders (myself included) that appreciate both locality/WC animals, and the various morphs available. To each their own when it comes to the hobby or business. If some want to keep and breed locality animals only, thats great. Their market will be whatever it is, if they are even looking for a market. They may be doing it with no thoughts about selling. Just the thrill or challenge of being able to capture, successfully keep in captivity, and breed may be more than enough. Some folks like the morphs they LIKE, and do not delve into morphs they really dont care about simply because they are HOT and can make the most money. I fall into that category regarding morphs. I dont keep morphs I dont like regardless if "popular" and move well at shows, etc. I also dont work with hybrid or integrade morphs. Just dont like them for personal reasons. On the flip side, I also work with non-morph animals, but only the species I LIKE. NOT the most sellable, etc.

I personally feel it takes all types of folks in the hobby to keep it interesting and alive. No one train of though is correct IMO as long as the animals are properly represented and no one is getting ripped off one way or the other. This happens enough with non moprhs as well as morphs.

I completely agree, Kevin. Great post!
-----

Thanks Ross! I try to be diplomatic when it comes to things such as hobbys, etc. To each their own IMO. Like I said, as long as no one is getting screwed or animals are being mis-represented (locality, morph, or otherwise), then its all good LOL!!!

I just had to say it since I know from experience most of the guys who complain about morphs do absolutely nothing to preserve the precios locales they carry on about.
All guys like me do is line breed, the same as locale guys. Yet morph guys do not seem to take shots at thier projects... but they try to sound "more herpy" than the morph guys as if they're more serious herpers.
I am proud of every single snake ever produced here be it normal or morph but when I say here's one of my faves and someone has to take a shot at it... well, now you know why I don't post on here much anymore.
Tom
-----
TomsSnakes.com
twitter.com/TomsSnakes

I think I understand your point more Tom, and I agree to a point. I have some nice 50/50 desert phase cal kings I am raising to breed. They are nice IMO PERIOD. Do I care if they are from a known locality like a certain area of the Mojave desert, etc.? No, not really. I think it would be cool if I did know, but it doesnt affect the quality of the animals in my opinion. I do care that they are pure cal kings though, and not a mix of california and spendida king bred to get the pattern or coloration desired. Cornsnakes are a beautiful example of locality lost for the most part. However, regardless of the morph they are still E.g.guttata. Not guttata x obsoleta mixes, or anything else (OK, that we know of LOL!!). Do I think jumping on a stump and claiming all non locality snakes are unworthy is correct? Absolutely not!! Once again, cornsnakes are a great example of this IMO. In my own little personal world, breeding an amel cal king to an amel cal king is cool. Breeding an amel cal king to a spendida to produce "amel spendidas" is not. And that is what I think drives the wedge between the locality non morph lovers and the morph lovers.

Great post Kevin!!

Morph I like:

Non-morph I like:

-----
Genesis 1:1

Thanks DISCERN. I like those morphs and non morphs you posted too LOL!! Although, the 50/50 may be considered a morph since I believe it was line bred for the pattern LOL!!

totally agree
,,,,,,,thomas
-----
Morphs... just like baseball cards BUT ALIVE, how cool is that???

my website www.barmollysplace.com

I don't see where a shot at your morphs/project was taken. The closest thing would be a simple question of "why do you boys and girls do it".

I am no fan of morphs myself and have often wondered the very same question Peters has asked, not because I disagree with what you do but simply out of curiosity of "Why". I assure you there is no "shot" intended in this reply, if there ever was a person that lived by the adage "whatever floats your boat" it is me.

As was mentioned... if morphs are what it takes to get the masses to have a greater appreciation for snakes and reptiles in general then morph away.

Gerry

Gerry,
Seems that no one has an answer to a simple question. Why?
Looks as though you think along the same lines as I do.
theOLDherper
Pete

I have an answer, or at least MY answer as to why I like certain morphs. To me, morphs represent unique traits found in certain subspecies, whether in the field or randomly in a breeding colony. To me, that is pretty cool and in some cases astoundingly beautiful IMO. I do not find all morphs attractive. I am more partial to the amel and hypo traits in general. However, when morph traits are introduced into other species or subspecies, I do feel that trait and the animals are contrived and would never occur in nature and that forced breeding makes the trait loose its uniqueness TO ME. But thats once again my opinion.

Agree with you 100 percent. I certainly didn't mean to imply there weren't some very cool morphs out there... striped kings... splotched/spotted milks... leucistic rat snakes... basically those that can be shown to have occurred naturally. And yes I know that if somebody can produce a certain morph in their breeding program than it could also possibly happen in the wild.

The only point I wanted to make in my reply was simply I don't see were any shot was taken or offense intended at Tom or his morph projects.

Hopefully when all is said and done with this thread it will be seen that there is enough room for everyone with a passion for snakes no matter how that passion expresses itself... so far, thankfully, all the replies are proving that out.

Gerry, IMO I think the morph haters and shot takers do it out of fear and worry. They fear and worry that bloodlines will be lost in captivity, forever tainted and not to be trusted due to hybridization and integration. This fear and worry is probably growing more and more as stricter herp laws are being put on the books and less and less opportunities exist to capture/purchase known stock. I dont think this fear and worry is just applied to morphs, but to normal specimens as well. Some hobbyists feel the selection will end up being "pet shop" lineage with questionable genetics, and the animals they oogled in the past will be lost forever. It is getting harder and harder to find verifiable locality animals, pure morphs, even pure normals in some species. Do I personally like this situation? NO. Do I feel the world is falling if someone crosses a sinaloan with an amel ruthveni? No. Still, the reality is I go to herp shows, etc. and look at certain species that are available and see that they look somewhat different than they first did back 10-15 years ago. This could be a product of captive breeding for several generations, or the fact tainted bloodlines are out there. Who really knows?

I figure this hobby is no different than many others in some ways.

Harleys/U.S.A. vs. Crotchrockets/japanese.
Ford vs. Chevy pickups.
Fender vs. well, whatever.
Active basses vs. Passive.
Conservative vs. Liberal.
Republican vs. Democrat.
Cages vs. Tubs.
Country vs. Metal.
Ball Pythons vs. Colubrids.
over the roll vs. under the roll (toilet paper)

It's human to have strong feelings about things and we usually need to be more tolerant of other folks perspective I guess.

But the most important divisive issue.......

Chocalate vs. Vanilla!!!!
THAT'S what I'm talking about! YUMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Just sayin........

You can have both...

Chocolate & Vanilla in the same clutch.

Kerby...

-----

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

>>Fender vs. well, whatever.

LOL, love that one.
-----
Mark

LoL Mark! Ha. Don't know how you took that... I must admit I like Fender. I had some shameful dalliances with Zon and Warwick Thumb Basses..I just can't talk about it now.... LOL but sold them and went back to Jazz and Precision. It's the sound I like and the necks are comfortable/familiar for me. Just feels/sounds right. I know they are not perfect and finding a special one is hit and miss but I found some I love. Just got a nice MIM J bass and put Dimarzio Model Js in it and it sounds like a P and a J! And best of all, they don't poop in their boxes!! YAhooo!

Fender produces nice guitars, no doubt! I like the feel of the Strats better than any guitar, for me they just feel so natural. Single coils have no crunch though.

You know, this music hobby is like everything else. You get a guitar and it has some great features, but then you want other features that another guitar has..

Kind of like kingsnakes, no? You get that nice crisp black and white Cal king but you look at those thayeri and think, yeah I want those because they are smaller and calmer.

Fortunately my will power is stronger now And with a daughter in an expensive college, all I can do is look and not buy. Guitar Center hates me.
-----
Mark

Mark, Ha! You are right. There are parallels!

Locale Kings/purists = Stock, unmodified. "I leave it stock because I want to play it the way it was intended" Finding a used/old stock guitar in good shape is VERY similar. Original sound.

Morphs/amels/designer = Boutique/modified high end guitars that some love and others would not go near.

Sometimes easier to sell Stock because they retain value. Frankenbasses are sometimes a great prize to some and a peice of junk to others.

Very similar forum types too. Nice easygoing types and the other kinds too.... LOL.

My daughter starts next year. Know what you mean.

Fender vs. well, whatever.

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

Although I prefer the wild type over the morphs in my personal collection, I don't think there is any harm done in creating morphs. These morphs, such as albino, are not going to be living in the wild, but safely in human made habitats, where the morph characteristics wont be a problem for their survival.

I think people in this forum are here because of the diversity of king snakes....and why say 'normal' like its a bad thing? I'm pretty sure there are MANY MANY versions of the 'normal' king snake, all naturally occurring and stunning. And there sure would be no morphs without the 'normals'. I agree with the general opinion that its all personal like and situation. King snakes are all beautiful and exciting, and should be enjoyed for there diversity, that being in BOTH normal phases and morphs(That being said, inbreeding between species like king/corn for color just isn't right...don't people consider the anatomical differences?)Anyways, I love keeping kings, normals and morphs alike