Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Most of you that are into ruthveni seem to be in agreement that there is no way to truely ID a ruthveni outside of plucking it from the wild yourself.

I'm not saying that's not true...but...I'm wondering what makes you so sure?

Has anyone tried scale counts / # of subcaudels / ventrals / number of saddles....etc.

to see if there is any constants with ruthveni that are not typical of mugitus / sayi / melanoleucus...etc?

I guess crossed bring up a whole different confusing situation,
but...

>>Has anyone tried scale counts / # of subcaudels / ventrals / number of saddles....etc.

Even if there was a way to definitely ID a ruthveni by some certain scale count (which there isn't - pull out your references and check), you still couldn't prove the one in your hands that keyed out as a ruthveni wasn't a hybrid that just lucked into having the right scale count. In other words, why try to rely on something, if it existed, that was NOT that reliable in the case of hybrids. We aren't trying to ID a wild snake - you know what those are depending on where it was caught. We are talking, in this thread, about IDing a captive one that might or moght not be pure.

Long experience has taught me that you can ID some by looks that are NOT pure LA Pinesnakes, but you can't ID them by looks AS LA Pinesnakes. You can only say that it COULD be one by the phenotypic appearance.

Here's a funny story. Back when I was in herpetology under Doug Rossman (the last class before he retired - I was lucky!) at LSU, we had to learn to ID (pickled specimens) every SPECIES of snake in Louisiana (among other things). Let me rephrase that to be honest: "He had to learn to ID (pickled specimens) every SPECIES of snake in Louisiana, EXCEPT one." Guess which one. You got it. We didn't have to learn to ID P. ruthveni by sight because Rossman felt that it wouldn't be fair. Why not? Because it is almost impossible to do! He recognized it as a species in the museum (we had long talks about that), but he didn't make the class learn.

I don't think I'm smarter than him. If he couldn't teach the class a way to ID them properly, I don't expect to discover one on my own....lol. Heck, very few people have held more WC ones than me....and I have no clue as to how to PROVE something is pure if it is plopped onto the table in front of me.

Sorry, but I REALLY wish I did. Heck, DNA won't even help completely if you look between the lines in the Robles paper. Face it, these guys are listed as a species because of their relative isolation and political pressure. One of those was more important than the other at the time....lol.

KJ

In reading papaers, articles, and numerouse conversations, there only seemed to be a few original w/c collected founding breeders. Several of the original people with breeding pairs that are direct from the wild or F1's either don't breed them anylonger; don't make offspring available to the general public due to being uncomfortable with the crossing and hybridizing that especially hits hard with this species; have them out on breeder loan; and a few other things. With a limited amount of original breeders, a few that were collected back in the mid 60's I believe, how does the future look for captive produced offspring that may become available? How are the the founding breeders and bloodlines doing if they were constantly inbred and backbred to each other? You and Daryl have acquired one of the most diversified and most verified (verified to the breeders requirements) distinct separate ruthveni bloodlines that I have heard or seen listed. I would imagine that would help the cause to start crossing verified pure to verified pure in some cases that will srtengthen those bloodlines. You can enhance some of the best traits of each. In short, I was wondering how the pure bloolines are holding out after years of breeding the original w/c and F1's together and is there some timeframe where we will see more captive bred offspring available? I realize that is a bad question from the standpoint of picking a schedule, but I was wondering it. I realize ruthveni only produce a few eggs in a clutch (at least that is what has appeared in captivity) and that contributes to only a few being produced each year. There seemed to originally be a little flow of offspring from the original w/c's and then captive bred pure ruthveni offspring availability almost was nonexistant because of the hybrdizing that appeared to have started.

Terry Parks

>>>>Has anyone tried scale counts / # of subcaudels / ventrals / number of saddles....etc.
>>
>>Even if there was a way to definitely ID a ruthveni by some certain scale count (which there isn't - pull out your references and check), you still couldn't prove the one in your hands that keyed out as a ruthveni wasn't a hybrid that just lucked into having the right scale count. In other words, why try to rely on something, if it existed, that was NOT that reliable in the case of hybrids. We aren't trying to ID a wild snake - you know what those are depending on where it was caught. We are talking, in this thread, about IDing a captive one that might or moght not be pure.
>>
>>Long experience has taught me that you can ID some by looks that are NOT pure LA Pinesnakes, but you can't ID them by looks AS LA Pinesnakes. You can only say that it COULD be one by the phenotypic appearance.
>>
>>Here's a funny story. Back when I was in herpetology under Doug Rossman (the last class before he retired - I was lucky!) at LSU, we had to learn to ID (pickled specimens) every SPECIES of snake in Louisiana (among other things). Let me rephrase that to be honest: "He had to learn to ID (pickled specimens) every SPECIES of snake in Louisiana, EXCEPT one." Guess which one. You got it. We didn't have to learn to ID P. ruthveni by sight because Rossman felt that it wouldn't be fair. Why not? Because it is almost impossible to do! He recognized it as a species in the museum (we had long talks about that), but he didn't make the class learn.
>>
>>I don't think I'm smarter than him. If he couldn't teach the class a way to ID them properly, I don't expect to discover one on my own....lol. Heck, very few people have held more WC ones than me....and I have no clue as to how to PROVE something is pure if it is plopped onto the table in front of me.
>>
>>Sorry, but I REALLY wish I did. Heck, DNA won't even help completely if you look between the lines in the Robles paper. Face it, these guys are listed as a species because of their relative isolation and political pressure. One of those was more important than the other at the time....lol.
>>
>>KJ

>>In reading papaers, articles, and numerouse conversations, there only seemed to be a few original w/c collected founding breeders.

Yes, but don't forget about the ones in the zoo studbook registry.

> Several of the original people with breeding pairs that are direct from the wild or F1's either don't breed them anylonger; don't make offspring available to the general public due to being uncomfortable with the crossing and hybridizing that especially hits hard with this species; have them out on breeder loan; and a few other things.

Yep. The hybridization going on out there has discouraged a LOT of people. On top of that, these things aren't as easy to reproduce as bullsnakes or something. That means a LOT of good animals don't produce eggs in any given year even for the best breeders. Eggs can be difficult, too, but i think I MIGHT have that trick figured out...I hope...lol.

> With a limited amount of original breeders, a few that were collected back in the mid 60's I believe, how does the future

Bah! That's a stupid rumor. Most of the ones that are ancewstors to those available in captivity were capture a couple of decades past that date. That silly rumor someone keeps throwing up about animals from the 60s being to source of all of the zoo stock animals today is just silly. When we say zoo stock, we mean studbook registered animals. They've got the dates those guys were collected. They are much later than the 60's in all of the animals I've specifically looked up....lol, but it isn't funny.

The breeders that first started making them available to the public got their's long after the 60's, too. This stuff isn't a secret - it is in the published reports. I'm not sure why nobody wants to accept that, though.

> look for captive produced offspring that may become available? How are the the founding breeders and bloodlines doing if they were constantly inbred and backbred to each other?

Withj all of the hybrids out there, I don't see Louisiana Pinesnakes being aviable in their pure form for many more decades. Maybe in my lifetime if I don't live too long, but not much later than that. That is VERY upsetting. It just proves that herpetoculturalists can do what we first said we wanted to do by breeding snakes in the first place. Sad.

> I would imagine that would help the cause to start crossing verified pure to verified pure in some cases that will srtengthen those bloodlines.

The pure rapides locale bloodline is the only one I know that might be showing signs of inbreeding depression. The others haven't gotten that far yet, but they will without some care. See below for my thoughts on this.

> There seemed to originally be a little flow of offspring from the original w/c's and then captive bred pure ruthveni offspring availability almost was nonexistant because of the hybrdizing that appeared to have started.

That's because most of the WC animals collected were old males that frequently wouldn't breed in captivity. Those are the ones that seemed to be ran out of the good area. That's why they were on the surface to be caught or something. Not true in every case, but it is true in some! The supply would be getting better, but too many people are hybridizing them to other lines of hybrid LA Pines or selling them without paperwork. We are probably LOSING pure specimens faster than they are being produced right now. We hope our colony, once it is going full-steam, will be able to produce a couple dozen per year. It's a dream that'll never happen, probably, but we all must have goals. Even if we do reach that goal, it'll be a decade or so from now.

As far as what I think we should be doing? Simple, maximizing diversity within the framework of what we have here. Everyone serious about these guys should ONLY have verifiable bloodlines (none of the Trumbower, etc. type of lines). Even pure lines that can't be verified should be "dumped." Heck, don't even keep the possible hyrbrids. Send them off as nonbreeding pets. Have at LEAST 2.2 where each male and each female are not too closely related to each other. If possible, get all 4 as mostly unrelated animals, but that is usually impossible. Cross them in alternating years different wasy to maximize the potential diversity in the offspring you are producing. Trade with other breeders for other pure ruthveni before selling off a valuable animal to someone that plans to use it to breed to an unverified line or just keep it as a pet. Pets are great, but valuable genetics shouldn't be lost in a pet - especially a pure female of an uncommon lineage! Sell to people already working with pure ruthveni successfully first since they have a better chance to reproduce them. Trade off or loan breeding adults, even if only for a single year, with other breeders to maximize the potential genetic diversity in the offspring available to everyone. TREAT THIS LIKE THE ZOOS DO - havd a type of "studbook" program! Don't risk losing an adult to bad shipping practices or quarantine practices, though. Pure ruthveni or not replaceable!

Whew! Dang, got me preaching there! Sorry about that. I don't think I can save the world and don't intend for the above to sound that way. I was just shooting from what I truly believe. I know the above case is impossible. I know it is, but I wish it were the case. That's a make believe, Utopian, Never-Never land type world that doesn't exist. Heck, we can't (or don't) even follow all of those guidelines ourselves. We do the in-house ones, but usually don't think it is worth the risk to do much of the out-house crap (pardon my pun...lol).

Man, that's more than I had time to say. Oh, well. That's life.
KJ

I was going to go down the DNA road next...but sounds like that's not even an answer.

Stud books are needed for sure.

And I would suggest that castration is in order for anyone who hybridizes these animals and tries to sell them as ruthveni. Or...just as bad, breeds an s. pine or n pine to a bullsnake and tries to sell it as ruthveni.

I'm on Terry V.'s list...but I'd like to get some unrealted (at least LESS related) animals at some point.

Thanks for you help...

now with other herps we keep that are not yet so rare as P. Ruthveni. Possibly learning from what has occured here with these pines in our personal development of diverse genetic foundation to work with of other herps in the hopes of keeping them pure. We may also go toward keeping this information readily available for others to know what exactly exists as reliable stock "today" so they know where to begin in their acquisition of just such a diverse foundation.

Rich Hebron

KJ.......Nice post with some insights that only someone out in the field can contribute. My earlier reply about the "ruthveni club" was tongue in cheek. However, the point I am trying to make is simply that it really is not that difficult to track stock from verifiable breeders if things are done right from the start. In this day of digital photography, a photo paper trail can follow all offspring from breeder to customer. The only reason these hybrid lookalikes are out there is the price that ruthveni command to pituophis collectors. If people only buy from breeders that follow this strict photo regimen, this secondary hybrid market will eventually dry up. In my opinion, this is the only way to insure that you have the real deal in your collection.

Good idea, definitely one proactive approach to instill such a paper trail right from the start into any future breeding project.

Rich Hebron

KJ,

Correct me if I am wrong but isn't collecting of ruthveni still allowed in Lousiana. If so are there any more new blood animals being collected to your knowledge. If so in the right hands that infusion of new blood would be worth it weight in gold to you and Dayrls project. As you know here in Texas the animals are protected and probally rightfully so as they are so rare, in all the years we have collectted here I have seen only one road kill.

Additionally you might want to share with the others here your thoughts on the rarity of this animal in the wild. Specifically is the animal rare or do its habits make it difficult to find etc. as we have talked about before.

Anyway with you and Dayrl's passion for this species I hope you can keep them going for the future pit folks to admire and enjoy.
I still think the biggest problem to face folks with this species in captivity is as you have mentioned before. It is indeed a challenging job to secure good breeding stock, then you still have to be really dedicated to provide them the husbandry needs they want or they will not produce in captivity and then there is the problem with the incubation of the eggs.

Another point you have brought up in the past and had some neat insight on is the problems you see effecting the wild population and its reported decline etc.

Get on your soap box for a few minutes if you will and respond for the public benefit if you will.

John Cherry
Cherryville Farms

>>Correct me if I am wrong but isn't collecting of ruthveni still allowed in Lousiana.

I'd never correct you, John....lol. Yes, sir. It is legal in Lousiaia, BUT you can't ship, transport, or cause it to be shipped out of state without a dealer's license. You'd need a dealer to ship it out for you to be legal.

>>If so are there any more new blood animals being collected to your knowledge.

I know of one guy posting the "Will buy LA pines" signs in the best habitat again, but no luck yet. Mine are the last ones - that I am aware of - to come out of the wild into private hands. I now of one guy that collected - and released! - one that he found in his neck of the woods up where they've been doing most of their research on LA pines. He caught it, like he had a couple before, to sell to the researchers, buttheir project was over. He released it back where he caught it. He has 20 acres of land in probably the best LA Pinesnake habitat left in the world. Lucky SOB. I'd marry him if he asked....lol.

>>If so in the right hands that infusion of new blood would be worth it weight in gold to you and Dayrls project.

worth more that gold to me, John. We've got an OLD WC female that'll probably never produce fertile eggs again (if she even ovulates any more), but we keep trying. That's all we can do. T. Agusta has one of her daughters. We've got 1.2 babies off of that daughter. Better than a sharp stick in the eye.

>>As you know here in Texas the animals are protected and probally rightfully so as they are so rare, in all the years we have collectted here I have seen only one road kill.

Count yourself lucky for even seeing that much. Don talks about being in a herp class in the 70's. They got from one to ten bonus points for each herp they brought into the class as a specimen. He actually found a DOR ruthveni. He got 20 bonus points for it. That is how hard it was to find in the 70's! They are rarer now. They probably haven't been "common" since pre-1950 or earlier.

>>Additionally you might want to share with the others here your thoughts on the rarity of this animal in the wild. Specifically is the animal rare or do its habits make it difficult to find etc. as we have talked about before.

You know not to get mne started on this. I won't shut up...lol.

In brief, John is right. These things are VERY reclusive. An animal that is tracked for a couple of years, is never seen on the surface, and never moves more than 10 m between samples would be hard to find even if they WERE real abundant! In other words, we might all be underestimating the population size greatly, but that would REALLY surprise me. They are probably a little more abundant than we think, but not a LOT more abundant. Heck, being so reclusive, they could be more rare than we think without us knowing it, too.

I'm confident that the number is low - even though they are so reclusive - because of the number of recaptures on telemetried samples. They found a couple transmitters in DOR samples, but it is almost impossible to see a DOR one when driving around that area. Not a promising sign!

>>Anyway with you and Dayrl's passion for this species I hope you can keep them going for the future pit folks to admire and enjoy.

Me, too. That alien-raped buffoon better do a good job with those puppies....or I'll hunt him down and shoot out both of his knees. I think Terry would beat me to it....lol.

>>I still think the biggest problem to face folks with this species in captivity is as you have mentioned before. It is indeed a challenging job to secure good breeding stock, then you still have to be really dedicated to provide them the husbandry needs they want or they will not produce in captivity and then there is the problem with the incubation of the eggs.

You said it better than I could. The problem is that VERY few people are willing to work with a snake that only has 4 or 5 eggs every other year and doesn't brred until probaby 4 years old. Sure, you can push them to breed younger or more often, but they'll get burnt out FASTER. That recipe is probably the best way to get reliable egg production out of these guys amnd gals.

That means you need to shorten your generation time which means problems with inbreeding are seen in few number of years. Ugh!

>>Another point you have brought up in the past and had some neat insight on is the problems you see effecting the wild population and its reported decline etc.

This was fun until you brought up the really bad side to this coin. I know I've told you before - I'd I've probably mentioned it on this forum - that I believe that I might actually see the day that the last one goes extinct in the wild in my lifetime if something drastic doesn't change soon. These guys are protected in Texas - good but not good enough. If one crosses a road, it still stands a better chance of getting hit than seen by a herper or researcher. There is one in a Texas collection right now from a lady that ran over it like 5 times to make sure it was dead. Nothing is ever done to people that run over an endangered species with thei car. I want to know WHY NOT??

Even in texas, where they are protected, the habitat isn't. They need very specific habitat (sandy soils & longleaf pine is the best) that is being lost. Clearcutting in the past was the worst danger, but now timber companies still cut longleaf and replant with loblolly pines. Summer burns aren't used anymore thanks to liability and pine beetle issues, but these pines need the habitat conditions that result from summer burns. Now, timber companies are selling their land and getting lumber from overseas (cheaper), so houses are gonna start going up in their habitat. That's another bad sign. What's worse? Farmers! Farmers can (and do) put out tons of poison to control gophers. Gophers die out, there goes the food source for these pines. Gopher that don't die but eat the poison (or are found dead) get eaten by these pines and die from the poison. Rodenticides are wiping these guys out. So, even in Texas where the animals are protected, many are being killed secondarily because they aren't protected enough.

In Lousiaian, they aren't even given that much protection. Still, it doesn't matter. The only difference is that people can legally collect them in Louisiana. I don't think enough are collected to do any damage. More are killed by vehicle traffic - a LOT more are almost definitely killed that way. So, this is a case where the protection offered to them isn't enough and may just do harm to prevent true breeders from acquiring more genetic stock.

KJ

you to talk a little about a subject, that you are really versed in. And you did it withiout help from College Station, which amazes me lol. Good Job. I wonder if that border patrol agent has recovered till today, I cracked up again with the mere mention of the incident. Good friends, good times and herping to boot, it doesn't get much better.

John Cherry
Cherryville Farms

>>And you did it withiout help from College Station, which amazes me lol.

Hey, I'm still mad at here for that "rumor" she started about us at ETHS.

KJ

The only comment that comes to mind is you should be so lucky. I still question for such an intelligent woman, how she had such a lapse of good judgement for such an extended time.

John Cherry
Cherryville Farms

...

I haven't posted here in a while because of late, all the post have been attacks outright or when a serious question was asked, it turned into a flame war.

Thanks God this post stayed civil and VERY informative. Hopefully everyone has benefited from it. I don't mean to sound like a lecturing father, just glad to see a good exchange on a sore subject.

As far as you marring the guy witht he prime Ruthveni habitat KJ, I think we all know the only thing that would make it better is if he were a goat farmer so you would have breeding stock huh?

John you are right, that was a great trip, good friends and good herping, not to mention the gas station sex (no matter that KJ says he didn't like it) and the dry humping at the pump. Man I bet the Texicans riding by thought you and I were probably the two biggest gays they had ever seen before, lol. I still laugh thinking about occifer spider boy and "he works for the state" and you having to pull over to keep from wrecking because you were laughing so hard. Ahh, well, good memories

Later all,

dc

PS: Just to brag a bit, it is great to know I am one of the few people who have been bitten by almost every status of Ruthveni. Not many can say that. Still glad you moved to Texas KJ, lol

you have been drawing strange symbols and always looking toward the southwest? I hope you are not now wearing all black clothing and experimenting with some new kool-aid recipes.

This has been one of the better threads to come out of this forum in some time. Glad to see it.

Rich Hebron

we shouldn't try to get as close as possible and stay around it. Thanks for a very indepth answer to my very long question. Sorry, but appreciate, to put you on the soap box. I think people can see now the magnitude of what started to happen to a species that is already regarded as one of the rarest snakes in North America. The fact that we could possibly be loosing pure specimens faster than we are producing them is alarming. Thanks for your post KJ to what I thought may be a difficult question when I posted it.

Terry Parks

>>>>In reading papaers, articles, and numerouse conversations, there only seemed to be a few original w/c collected founding breeders.
>>
>>Yes, but don't forget about the ones in the zoo studbook registry.
>>
>>> Several of the original people with breeding pairs that are direct from the wild or F1's either don't breed them anylonger; don't make offspring available to the general public due to being uncomfortable with the crossing and hybridizing that especially hits hard with this species; have them out on breeder loan; and a few other things.
>>
>>Yep. The hybridization going on out there has discouraged a LOT of people. On top of that, these things aren't as easy to reproduce as bullsnakes or something. That means a LOT of good animals don't produce eggs in any given year even for the best breeders. Eggs can be difficult, too, but i think I MIGHT have that trick figured out...I hope...lol.
>>
>>> With a limited amount of original breeders, a few that were collected back in the mid 60's I believe, how does the future
>>
>>Bah! That's a stupid rumor. Most of the ones that are ancewstors to those available in captivity were capture a couple of decades past that date. That silly rumor someone keeps throwing up about animals from the 60s being to source of all of the zoo stock animals today is just silly. When we say zoo stock, we mean studbook registered animals. They've got the dates those guys were collected. They are much later than the 60's in all of the animals I've specifically looked up....lol, but it isn't funny.
>>
>>The breeders that first started making them available to the public got their's long after the 60's, too. This stuff isn't a secret - it is in the published reports. I'm not sure why nobody wants to accept that, though.
>>
>>> look for captive produced offspring that may become available? How are the the founding breeders and bloodlines doing if they were constantly inbred and backbred to each other?
>>
>>Withj all of the hybrids out there, I don't see Louisiana Pinesnakes being aviable in their pure form for many more decades. Maybe in my lifetime if I don't live too long, but not much later than that. That is VERY upsetting. It just proves that herpetoculturalists can do what we first said we wanted to do by breeding snakes in the first place. Sad.
>>
>>> I would imagine that would help the cause to start crossing verified pure to verified pure in some cases that will srtengthen those bloodlines.
>>
>>The pure rapides locale bloodline is the only one I know that might be showing signs of inbreeding depression. The others haven't gotten that far yet, but they will without some care. See below for my thoughts on this.
>>
>>> There seemed to originally be a little flow of offspring from the original w/c's and then captive bred pure ruthveni offspring availability almost was nonexistant because of the hybrdizing that appeared to have started.
>>
>>That's because most of the WC animals collected were old males that frequently wouldn't breed in captivity. Those are the ones that seemed to be ran out of the good area. That's why they were on the surface to be caught or something. Not true in every case, but it is true in some! The supply would be getting better, but too many people are hybridizing them to other lines of hybrid LA Pines or selling them without paperwork. We are probably LOSING pure specimens faster than they are being produced right now. We hope our colony, once it is going full-steam, will be able to produce a couple dozen per year. It's a dream that'll never happen, probably, but we all must have goals. Even if we do reach that goal, it'll be a decade or so from now.
>>
>>As far as what I think we should be doing? Simple, maximizing diversity within the framework of what we have here. Everyone serious about these guys should ONLY have verifiable bloodlines (none of the Trumbower, etc. type of lines). Even pure lines that can't be verified should be "dumped." Heck, don't even keep the possible hyrbrids. Send them off as nonbreeding pets. Have at LEAST 2.2 where each male and each female are not too closely related to each other. If possible, get all 4 as mostly unrelated animals, but that is usually impossible. Cross them in alternating years different wasy to maximize the potential diversity in the offspring you are producing. Trade with other breeders for other pure ruthveni before selling off a valuable animal to someone that plans to use it to breed to an unverified line or just keep it as a pet. Pets are great, but valuable genetics shouldn't be lost in a pet - especially a pure female of an uncommon lineage! Sell to people already working with pure ruthveni successfully first since they have a better chance to reproduce them. Trade off or loan breeding adults, even if only for a single year, with other breeders to maximize the potential genetic diversity in the offspring available to everyone. TREAT THIS LIKE THE ZOOS DO - havd a type of "studbook" program! Don't risk losing an adult to bad shipping practices or quarantine practices, though. Pure ruthveni or not replaceable!
>>
>>Whew! Dang, got me preaching there! Sorry about that. I don't think I can save the world and don't intend for the above to sound that way. I was just shooting from what I truly believe. I know the above case is impossible. I know it is, but I wish it were the case. That's a make believe, Utopian, Never-Never land type world that doesn't exist. Heck, we can't (or don't) even follow all of those guidelines ourselves. We do the in-house ones, but usually don't think it is worth the risk to do much of the out-house crap (pardon my pun...lol).
>>
>>Man, that's more than I had time to say. Oh, well. That's life.
>>KJ

but there are many more...

I was wondering when someone was gonna go there.....

(I agree with you completely, by the way..just for the record)

we deemed them "hypo" for hypothetical since I have been waiting forever LMAO!!!!!!

Del...that freaking ruled bro!

By the way.....where were you guys? I wanted to meet you and Terry at the San Diego IRBA show!

LATER!
Billy
-----
Genesis 1:1

http://www.kingsnake.com/louisiana/species_louisiana_pine.htm