The recent discussion about where our hobby has been and where it’s going has got me thinking. Dell and I alone spent almost 4 hours on the topic over drinks last night, so I’m sure there are others who are still trying to take in and analyze many of the ideas presented in that recent discussion, too. Overall, I found it sobering.
The 1980s and 1990s saw the heyday of herpetoculture. Re-reading publications from that time by guys like Bob Applegate, Ernie Wagner, and Dick Bartlett is like a ride in a time-machine. Things were different back then. We had forms of triangulum what we can only dream of acquiring now: micropholis, dixoni, blanchardi, ect. Imports regularly came in from Latin America and individuals made trips across the border to collect the animals they wanted. Many books and articles from the ‘80s and ‘90s also speak of the ready availability of forms like syspila, stuarti, and gentilis.
Fast forward to today. Where have they all gone? When was the last time, honestly, that anyone has seen those forms offered? What about oligozona, conanti, taylori, or celaenops? How many times per year are multistrata, polyzona, or even annulata available? I can reliably state that the number of multistrata offered to the public in the past year has been less than a dozen animals. The same goes for captive bred gentilis and syspila. I can count on two hands the number of people in the US seriously working with the North American forms and about the same number who are working with some of the more obscure Latin American subspecies.
What happened to the interest in these beautiful animals? Did the ready availability (real or imagined, as it may have actually been) produce a sense of complacency among hobbyists that what was available would always be available? Was there a feeling that there were so many forms so easily obtainable that it was a waste of time to work with them? Or did people just lose interest in favor of a smaller subset (Hondurans, nelsoni, etc.)… especially when the money was in morphs? Even the forms that maintained popularity have been hit hard – the hardy and prolific Pueblan Milk (L. t. campbelli), for example, is almost never seen in pure form, almost always having obvious visual signs of nelson, hondurensis, or even L. getula. Finding pure representatives of just about anything in the Colubrid market can be a chore, let alone acquiring a variety. So much has been lost.
So, what do we do about this? How do we ensure that the animals so many of us care about will be available in 10, 15, or 50 years? I can’t speak for anyone but myself, but I’m going to continue my efforts with more obscure, harder to find triangulum with a renewed vigor and sense of purpose. Verifiable, locality stock will remain my major focus and I will pursue that endeavor with enhanced passion. My only suggestion (or plea, if you will) is that you keep what you like and be passionate about it. Don’t let your choices be swayed by market value. That’ll always be come and go. Enjoy the animals for what they are. Let your interest guide your collection. Whether that means “stepping out of the box” and jumping on that oligozona, gentilis, or celaenops that shows up in the classifieds, or standing firm by refining your collection of amelanistic nelson, if we don’t want to lose the what’s available, we have to take some positive action. We need the Milk-a-thon, ID contests, and in-depth discussions on genetics. We need field reports, photos, nostalgic stories, and a better sense of community. We need people to work with animals they genuinely care about.
Reignite your interest!
-Cole
L. t. syspila - Perry Lake, KS
L. triangulum - Salina Cruz, Oaxaca
L. t. gentilis - Golden, CO
L. t. multistrata - Pennington Co., SD
