Reptile & Amphibian Forums

There's been a lot of "talk" on this forum about hybrids and how unnatural it is. I understand that it may be difficult to market certain "discoveries" as a result of interbreeding and cross breeding. but is that the real issue? we do lots of "unnatural" breeding within certain subspecies. Now tell me are snow and ghost morphs natural? what would be the probability that this would occur in the wild... I thing rather slim to not at all! yes it's the same subspecies being bred back to its "own kind" and don't get me wrong I'm fascinated by all the Brooksi and Honduran morphs, but mixing -n- matching different morphs is still "unnatural." Albino Hondurans may not have originated from an actual Honduran milk snake, yet they are excepted as pure, so do we have reservations for certain snakes? would selectively breeding snakes of different locale be considered "unnatural" as well?

I'm new to the hobby, and my opinion is... hybrids aren't as bad as some make them seem. as long as hybrids are represented correctly and genetic are disclosed what is the issue? if you don't like um don't purchase um, very simple.

P.S. Don't "bite my head off!"

~ZF

I recently looked through a Reptiles mag with a Honduran article by Terry Dunham and if I am not mistaken it says the first ALbino Hondos may have been referred to as Polyzona but when some detective work was done they were true Hondos. They would have been worth more as the other type of Milk or something to that effect. If that is true than the poor Hondos have been taking a bashing for years for no reason LOL. I believe they're not hybrids myself. Even if they were, I wouldn't be getting rid of mine! Tom Stevens

Your advice on not buying hybrids if you dont like them is sound but the problem is that you may inadvertantly buy a Hybrid. Ive seen some Hybrids that didnt jump out right away as hybrids so it can happen.

Keith

>>There's been a lot of "talk" on this forum about hybrids and how unnatural it is. I understand that it may be difficult to market certain "discoveries" as a result of interbreeding and cross breeding. but is that the real issue? we do lots of "unnatural" breeding within certain subspecies. Now tell me are snow and ghost morphs natural? what would be the probability that this would occur in the wild... I thing rather slim to not at all! yes it's the same subspecies being bred back to its "own kind" and don't get me wrong I'm fascinated by all the Brooksi and Honduran morphs, but mixing -n- matching different morphs is still "unnatural." Albino Hondurans may not have originated from an actual Honduran milk snake, yet they are excepted as pure, so do we have reservations for certain snakes? would selectively breeding snakes of different locale be considered "unnatural" as well?
>>
>>I'm new to the hobby, and my opinion is... hybrids aren't as bad as some make them seem. as long as hybrids are represented correctly and genetic are disclosed what is the issue? if you don't like um don't purchase um, very simple.
>>
>>P.S. Don't "bite my head off!"
>>
>>~ZF
-----

Zee,

I don't want to bite your head off. But with all due respect, sometimes there ARE good reasons for the conclusions of the majority, and especially when they are the positions of people far smarter than you and I.

It is naive to argue "as long as hybrids are represented correctly and genetic are disclosed what is the issue." There are people knowledgeable enough about snakes to have found this forum, and yet uninformed enough to know that they have a milksnake or two but not what kind it is. There's nothing evil or malicious about that, but it's just one example of how once a group of hybrids is in the marketplace, there is NO likelihood the majority are going to be represented correctly and disclosed honestly. Yet every time it's not, the gene pool is harmed. If herpers had been doing ten and twenty and 30 years ago what some are doing now, and what you're saying you consider harmless, you and i would not be able to enjoy some of the animals we enjoy now. A hugely incredible, valuable resource would have been lost.

One argument is that there are already some hybrids out there, so why worry about it any more, the "cat's out of the bag," so to speak. Why care whether a person with a venereal disease has intimate contact with someone without disclosing what they're carrying, since there's a lot of it out there anyway? Another argument is that some of the hybrids are beautiful. I agree that some are, but that's the shallowest kind of argument for making more of them at the expense of the hobby and the science and the pure animals themselves: There's street crime; that's not a logical defense of committing more street crime. I'm not saying hybridizing is the moral equivalent of some of these activities, i'm just trying to find dramatic examples that might help you realize why the argument that some hybrids are already out there is not an argument in favor of creating more. If anything, it's a cry for more vigorous effort to stop the practice.

Now, before any one wants to hit me over the head for non-disclosure, yeah, i think it's fair to ask, "well terry, what about those morphs you reproduce?" Fair enough.

First of all, you're right, it is unlikely an albino and an anerythristic honduran, for example, would happen upon each other in the wild and breed as would be necessary for snows or ghosts (anery & hypo) to occur in the wild. But just because that may be true constitutes no argument whatever in defense of hybridization, does it? Some medications might not happen in the wild but yet are capable of saving thousands of lives. That's not an argument for breeding color morphs, either. It's just an example of how this "not in the wild either" argument is irrelevant.

Secondly, people often say "well, that morph couldn't exist in the wild." Let's consider that for a minute. First of all, they can and do--because they're found in the wild. Example: the first two anerythristic hondos that we know of in captivity were wild-caught specimens. They're a simple recessive trait, so no, they won't occur frequently, and they're not logically going to displace the dominant wild type, but they will happen on each other occasionally. That's why more than one of any number of color varieties for various species have been collected in certain locales. HEck, the high-yellow brooksi you so admire might just be a naturally occurring color morph.

The first hypo honduran came from the wild, too. So who's to say it and an anery might not have come into contact some day and a ghost to have occurred in the wild? The odds are far greater against that happening than a single recessive morph recurring, but it could. And the fact that it could doesn't mean it would be a good thing or a bad thing. It's again just an expression of the irrelevance of some of the arguments.

there's also the argument that the color morphs couldn't survive in the wild. That's just--i think the technical term is "bullcrappie". Let's think about evolution for a minute: the original change doesn't occur because it NEEDED to occur for the snake to survive, the original mutation occurs by accident. It persists because it proves itself to improve surviveability. But if there were ONLY one appearance, one phenotype with which a snake could survive in the wild--if all color changes were lethal-- there would not be florida kings, red rats, yellow rats, etc., etc., occupying the same habitats. EACH has found a way to survive in the wild, and given the existence of gray rat snakes, for example, i find it silly to argue that an anerythristic honduran couldn't survive in the wild.

Lastly, we often forget some phenotypes we consider "wild type" may at one time have been the first specimen of a new color mutation. this isn't wild thinking. There are not one but TWO examples of this in the Australian Gouldian Finch. Maybe the tangerine honduran is a mutation of an original wild-type tricolor hondo. Or wait: Maybe the tangerine was the original and the tricolor evolved from it. Those aren't simple recessive examples, but they are examples of evolutionary change, and who's to say which is "normal" and which is not? Oh, they both are? Why? And what if the subspecies changes in the future. Those changes will start with a single specimen, if it's a recessive trait.

Two last points and to everyone's relief i'll go away:

YOU SAY: "Albino Hondurans may not have originated from an actual Honduran milk snake, yet they are excepted as pure, so do we have reservations for certain snakes? "

A: We should have reservations about anything and everything. That's why i am asking you to have some reservations about hybrids. Always doubt, always question, always seek the truth. With the albino honduran, the facts that have been collected and reported are that the group bought by Louis Porras originated from Hondurans; the history of the group bought by Brian Barczyk as polyzona was researched and discovered to be from the same origins as Porras's, but they occurred from normal looking specimens sold into the pet trade and re-labeled as polyzona in the course of commerce perhaps because they would fetch a higher price and because some people figured "it couldn't matter". It did matter so people went back, dug for information, and reported what they found. And THAT is a more scientific method, and more to be respected, than someone who throws potshots at the morph because some rings look different to him on some specimens (on a subspecies as variable as hondurensis!) but without any further evidence. sure, it's frustrating when people denigrate the morphs i work with or any other (examples recently on this forum) without facts, or when newbies--i am NOT talking about you, but every few months somebody comes online to express their opionions about the albino hondos, for example, and they're completely in the dark about the history and research, though it's been reported in print in 99 and 02 and repeatedly here on the forums!) I just have more resepct for people who pursue the truth, by digging up facts, making logical arguments to connect a to b, etc., than for people who (and I don't mean you, here, zee) take potshots without supporting them. Yes, some of the hondurans we deal with today (not albinos specifically, just hondos generally) may have had a subspecies or two bred into some of them at various points in the past and some may someday prove not to be 100% pure, when we have definitive DNA tests to measure such things. But that's no argument to cheerfully do it again and again now. I'd argue the cat's NOT out of the bag yet with our various triangulum, and that that is why so many people are trying so hard right now to deter those who would simply not care about the future.

Lastly, YOU SAID, "I'm new to the hobby, and my opinion is... hybrids aren't as bad as some make them seem." You're acknowledging you're a newbie. You're recognizing you have much to learn. Your questions on the forum show you WANT to learn more. You're listening, I just urge you not to come to conclusions too quickly, because you strike me as the kind of person who a year or five down the road will, because of your love of the animals, also see what some others argue here: The fact that some hybrids are beautiful aesthetically is the shallowest of arguments for perpetuating an act that can harm the rest of the creatures from which they spring.

IMHO. OK forum, take potshots at what i've said, if you wish, but please, please use logical arguments on a foundation of fact. Thanks.

Peace
Terry

Terry,

No pot-shots from my direction but rather a hardy AMEN!! If only we could get everyone to look at the entire picture and truly do what is right and not what feels good or what will fatten the pocket book. We have a responsibility to the animals we keep and work with! Thanks for your comments and insight.

Matt

Chris' Colubrids

Terry,

I love when you post about something you feel strongly about Terry becuase you can do what I cant and thats to get your point across effectively. I try but I simply lack the skill. This is a great post and I plan on saving it as a word document as I believe this post hits home how I too feel about hybrids and my arguements against them.

P.s. You adressed this to Zee and its actually Zfelecian and not "Zee" who is a different regular poster here.
-----

Very well stated Terry.

sorry guys, i can barely keep people straight when they're using their real names! initials and nicknames and no names and pretty soon i'm lost. which is no doubt what some people think about my posts anyway! (but thanks for the kind words to the others of you--you know, those of you who are incredibly insightful)!

peace
terry

LOL! I have the same problem - already been a victim of it myself on this forum not too long ago, LOL! Won't be too long before I do it again, (And I don't even drink!)

Long way from perfect,

Zee

must we allways here of the"gouldian finch"? in your examples!,
your amel hondurans ARE what you yourself call hybrids
so grab a grip and quit the gripe!!!
its folks like you that encourage hybrids!!!($$$)!breeding snakes is NOT rocket science terry its a hobby and guess what folks WERE doing 10,20,30 yrs ago what they ARE doing now and thats producing living jewels,theres just more of us and more ssp.that are readily availible now.
perfect example,triangulum,getula,elaphe,pituophis,etc. how do you think the amel gene was spread to all those different ssp.groups terry?
do you honestly beleive that every ssp.or group that now has amels in it was derived from individual pure amels in that ssp.or from an individual from that group? therefore they are PURE ssp?.or are they???
its pretty funny watchin you purist type snake folks FLOP when a pic like rainer posted is posted,(gopherXking)
hmmmm lets critique this out of the water,,,sad really,,,
very sad.
i am torn on the hybrid issue i dont practice it, well according to you i do because i have crossed within getula a yumensisXholbrooki, but honestly i feel god has allot to do w/it whether you acknowledge that or not. some crosses just arent possible and there is a reason for that
just like there is reason for the crosses that do work!,its called EVOLUTION which btw is also one of my favorite beatles songs,number9,number9,,,
i also understand keepin pure representations of ssp.groups for our childrens future pure as we as responsible breeders can anyway. but it allways seems to be the "purist" are these bigdollar morph type breeders not all but really how much money would you be hatching with normal ole hondos, verses what you do w/your morph hondos?(lets see i can produce 50 or so PURE natural hondos at maybe 50bux each OR i can produce 50 morphs at 500bux each), answer seems pretty obvious.
and then ya try to warn newbies dont do this,do this, not as i do but as i say. but then they see the $$$ your doing lets chase the $$$,i mean thats human nature.so.
also the argument about tainted snakes escaping or being released and destroying nat.gene pools is at the very least laughable, how can anyone beleive that escapees would even survive to adulthood muchless reproduce, and omg what if a sonoran gopher keeper/breeder on the east coast let go all his/her gophers omg the pine population will be ruined!and gone forever!! its just not plausible esp. considering range within ssp.habitat,predation,etc,etc
an anery hondo surviving in the wild possible but very unlikely just like amels they dont blend, no camoflage, therefore cant hunt,eat,breed,etc & will more than likely be predated on but sure it happens,,,yeah right so does the lotto
anyone breeding should be as responsible&honest as they can in record keeping but really unless you collect the snakes yourself you have to take someones word for it,,that and fellow hobbiest,books,rangemaps,etc,,,
again my view is complex's,groups maybe thats why i feel as i do but if nature allows it whether or not it would happen in the wild,
is it really that wrong???
and i apoligize if it seems im attacking you its not nor is meant to be an attack ,,, its just how us texas folks type
peace
thomas davis

>>must we allways here of the"gouldian finch"? in your examples!,
ANSWER: probably. It's PERTINENT and it's a natural science example that factually REFUTES an argument many people make about color varieties. So yeah, expect to hear it again. Plus, I'm just a boring guy. Haven't had many interesting experiences so have to refer to the few I've had, over and over again. But if you're good I'll someday tell the tale of how i was kidnapped at gunpoint and rescued after a police chase; how i lost air diving on a wreck in the Atlantic (how much simpler this would all be if that fella hadn't shared his regulator with me on the way up!) etc. You've been warned. And there are others.... (sound the frightening organ chord....)
>>your amel hondurans ARE what you yourself call hybrids
ANS: this is an example of the dramatic statement with no substantiation whatsoever that i cited in my post. No, I don't call them hybrids. No, there aren't facts to support that contention. I hoped you were going to make that argument and then try to back it up, but you don't. If you can't do better than this--if you can't support your statement--it's just wasted space.

INTERMISSION: No, no apology was necessary though gracious of you to offer one, and likewise i mean no offense. I'm just trying to be objective. So let me credit where credit is due: Your "bright future" shows great humor and i think an informed awareness of my NFL preferences--for those who didn't "get it" our coach John Gruden said that of the tampa bay bucs' future--just before they lost a couple more games and ended up 5-10 for the season. Not exactly a bright future. I wanted to get everyone to wear sunglasses to the game to spoof gruden but found other things to keep me busy instead.

NOW, on to your points:
>>so grab a grip and quit the gripe!!!
ANS: ooh, you got me there!
>>its folks like you that encourage hybrids!!!($$$)!breeding snakes is NOT rocket science terry its a hobby and guess what folks WERE doing 10,20,30 yrs ago what they ARE doing now and thats producing living jewels,theres just more of us and more ssp.that are readily availible now.
ANS: I hardly ever heard of hybrids until Steve Osborne began crossing the albino ruthveni to everything. Steve's a very knowledgeable breeder, he and i just disagree on the prudence of that move. But before that, hybridizing was almost never a topic of discussion to the best of my knowledge. Now it's rampant. I disagree with you if you think there was as much hybridizing going on 20-30 years ago as there is now but i can't prove it and maybe i'm wrong. My impression is people were so excited then about simply being able to reproduce the animals they'd kept without that prospect for so long, that they didn't need diversions like hybridizing, though sure, I'll accept that it happened sometimes. The impact of the practice is directly related to the volume of it.
>>perfect example,triangulum,getula,elaphe,pituophis,etc. how do you think the amel gene was spread to all those different ssp.groups terry?
ANS: tom, you're presuming i think it was "spread". While i think there are undoubtedly some instances of that, I'd be hard pressed to name many--maybe a getulus or two? But surely you're aware of wild captures of amels of numerous species and subspecies. Do you really believe the amel nelsoni is the result of a ruthveni cross? What about the anery hondo? Do you really think the hypo pueblan is the result of a hypo hondo cross? What about the amel scarlet king that's been documented...how exactly are you going to explain that morph's "spread"? No, I don't think there are amel elaphe because someone "spread" an amel getula (or whatever) to them, and I don't think Dr Bechtel, having worked with the amel red rats decades ago, would buy that premise either. Or are you arguing it was that group of amel red rats that was "spread" to pituophis, getula, triangulum? I just don't think it's a premise worth entertaining, but it's a perfect example of someone throwing out a contention with NO documentation. Somebody might read what you're writing and believe it all, you know! From other things you've written--i've benefitted from numerous posts you've made on OTHER subjects--i find it hard to believe you're fully serious here.
>>do you honestly beleive that every ssp.or group that now has amels in it was derived from individual pure amels in that ssp.or from an individual from that group? therefore they are PURE ssp?.or are they???
ANS: Do you believe that every ssp and group that now has amels in it was derived by crossing from another ssp or group? And if so, what do you credit as the original source from which all these other albinos have come?
>>its pretty funny watchin you purist type snake folks FLOP when a pic like rainer posted is posted,(gopherXking)
ANS: It's a little known fact, but "Entertainment" is my middle name.
>>i am torn on the hybrid issue i dont practice it, well according to you i do because i have crossed within getula a yumensisXholbrooki,
ANS: I do consider that hybridization....yumensis is synonymous with (but no longer in use) californiae, and its range does not abut holbrooki range so it would not be a naturally occurring "intergrade". I might be wrong--and i remain open to being better educated about it, or having my mind changed, but i THINK intergrades are crosses that occur naturally in the wild where ranges abut, and hybrids are crosses that do not occur in nature (the possibility of exceptions like the gopher x king cross shown in Rainer's photo notwithstanding.)
>>but honestly i feel god has allot to do w/it whether you acknowledge that or not. some crosses just arent possible and there is a reason for that
ANS:
>>just like there is reason for the crosses that do work!,its called EVOLUTION which btw is also one of my favorite beatles songs,number9,number9,,,
ANS: You are covering all the bases--God is accountable for crosses that aren't possible and evolution is accountable for the ones that are. Seriously though, Thomas--and despite my appreciation for your taste in music!--what i'm trying to discuss here is not what's POSSIBLE, it's what is good for herpetology and herpetoculture. Just because something is possible does not make it a defensible action.
EXAMPLE: WE COULD SELECTIVELY BREED FOR HORRIBLY KINKED AND CRIPPLED SNAKES. DOES THAT EXCUSE DOING SO? If it doesn't--if the fact that it CAN be done doesn't automatically excuse the exercise--then that argument has no validity in defense of hybrids, either, and "please, please me" (Lennon, McCartney, 1993) AND STOP USING IT! Isn't that logical?
>>it allways seems to be the "purist" are these bigdollar morph type breeders not all but really how much money would you be hatching with normal ole hondos, verses what you do w/your morph hondos?(lets see i can produce 50 or so PURE natural hondos at maybe 50bux each OR i can produce 50 morphs at 500bux each), answer seems pretty obvious.
>>and then ya try to warn newbies dont do this,do this, not as i do but as i say. but then they see the $$$ your doing lets chase the $$$,i mean thats human nature.so.
ANS: I'm guilty of being a "big dollar" breeder, I've been very successful doing what i do. Now, how exactly does that make what i'm doing wrong? Maybe i just missed something...
ANS: If you've watched my posts, talked to my customers, seen my articles and web sites, I've been a big help to MANY people to try their hands at making money breeding rare (but pure) hondurans and pyros. I coach. I spend hours and hours on the phone with people, whether or not they've ever bought anything from me. I keep no secrets about how to keep & breed them. I see nothing inconsistent with at the same time spending just as much energy trying to discourage them from breeding mutts. Fact is, there's MORE money in breeding the pure color varieties than in breeding mutts, so any newbies enticed by the $ prospects would be working to breed the real thing, not hybrid "jewels". I take issue with that word, too, because many use it to excuse their hybrids--isn't a pure honduran (wild type OR morph) a jewel? Maybe the problem is that some people have gotten bored and can no longer see the glimmering beauty and facets of the pure animal.
>>also the argument about tainted snakes escaping or being released and destroying nat.gene pools is at the very least laughable, how can anyone beleive that escapees would even survive to adulthood muchless reproduce, and omg what if a sonoran gopher keeper/breeder on the east coast let go all his/her gophers omg the pine population will be ruined!and gone forever!! its just not plausible esp. considering range within ssp.habitat,predation,etc,etc
ANS: I basically agree with you, i'll not be baited into arguing a point of little consequence! On the other hand, of course escaped snakes of many kinds can live and grow and reproduce in the wild, it's silly to think they can't.
>>an anery hondo surviving in the wild possible but very unlikely just like amels they dont blend, no camoflage
ANS: So if i could show you a snake species in honduras/nicaragua that's gray and black and white and thriving in those countries, you'd agree you're simply wrong on this point? Cause it wouldn't blend either, right, and would have no camo? I was trying to make this point in my original post when i mentioned the diversity of snake phenotyhpes, and mentioned gray rat snakes--how DO they survive in the wild, with that coloration that doesn't blend, provides them no camo, compared to other species in the same niche that are quite differently colored? Again: there's not ONE coloration that assures survival, or all snakes would look alike. Various accidents of evolution have proven capable of surviving.
>>, therefore cant hunt,eat,breed,etc & will more than likely be predated on but sure it happens,,,yeah right so does the lotto
ANS: Oooh, you got me again.
>>anyone breeding should be as responsible&honest as they can in record keeping but really unless you collect the snakes yourself you have to take someones word for it,,that and fellow hobbiest,books,rangemaps,etc,,,
ANS: We agree totally.
>>again my view is complex's,groups maybe thats why i feel as i do but if nature allows it whether or not it would happen in the wild, is it really that wrong???
ANS: (imagine homer simpson) : "Must....breeed....cripples....happens....in.....nature...."
>>and i apoligize if it seems im attacking you its not nor is meant to be an attack ,,, its just how us texas folks type
>>peace
>>thomas davis
PEACE back at you, thomas. I'm gonna re-read this one more time cause i don't want any offense taken either. I'm gonna try to just provide my best honest, objective answers. And the occasional sarcastic comments on my part are just my efforts at humor and lightening the tone so our exchange doesn't become one of those where we're soon at each other's throats. I think if you and i were sitting togethger we'd have much more in common than is evident to anyone reading this thread.
Terry

>>must we allways here of the"gouldian finch"? in your examples!,
ANSWER: probably. It's PERTINENT and it's a natural science example that factually REFUTES an argument many people make about color varieties.
>>yeah in birds!
So yeah, expect to hear it again.
>>figures

Plus, I'm just a boring guy. Haven't had many interesting experiences so have to refer to the few I've had, over and over again. But if you're good I'll someday tell the tale of how i was kidnapped at gunpoint and rescued after a police chase; how i lost air diving on a wreck in the Atlantic (how much simpler this would all be if that fella hadn't shared his regulator with me on the way up!) etc. You've been warned. And there are others.... (sound the frightening organ chord....)
>>>"the looong and winding roooadyour amel hondurans ARE what you yourself call hybrids
ANS: this is an example of the dramatic statement with no substantiation whatsoever that i cited in my post. No, I don't call them hybrids. No, there aren't facts to support that contention. I hoped you were going to make that argument and then try to back it up, but you don't. If you can't do better than this--if you can't support your statement--it's just wasted space.
>>well reckon imma space waster,,your definition:hybrid: something that does not occur in nature.

INTERMISSION: No, no apology was necessary though gracious of you to offer one, and likewise i mean no offense. I'm just trying to be objective. So let me credit where credit is due: Your "bright future" shows great humor and i think an informed awareness of my NFL preferences--for those who didn't "get it" our coach John Gruden said that of the tampa bay bucs' future--just before they lost a couple more games and ended up 5-10 for the season. Not exactly a bright future. I wanted to get everyone to wear sunglasses to the game to spoof gruden but found other things to keep me busy instead.
>>> thats to bad woulda been cool ,,,,

NOW, on to your points:
>>so grab a grip and quit the gripe!!!
ANS: ooh, you got me there!
>>its folks like you that encourage hybrids!!!($$$)!breeding snakes is NOT rocket science terry its a hobby and guess what folks WERE doing 10,20,30 yrs ago what they ARE doing now and thats producing living jewels,theres just more of us and more ssp.that are readily availible now.
ANS: I hardly ever heard of hybrids until Steve Osborne began crossing the albino ruthveni to everything. Steve's a very knowledgeable breeder, he and i just disagree on the prudence of that move. But before that, hybridizing was almost never a topic of discussion to the best of my knowledge. Now it's rampant. I disagree with you if you think there was as much hybridizing going on 20-30 years ago as there is now but i can't prove it and maybe i'm wrong. My impression is people were so excited then about simply being able to reproduce the animals they'd kept without that prospect for so long, that they didn't need diversions like hybridizing, though sure, I'll accept that it happened sometimes. The impact of the practice is directly related to the volume of it.
>>>haha impact huh?,,,ok?,,,
>>perfect example,triangulum,getula,elaphe,pituophis,etc. how do you think the amel gene was spread to all those different ssp.groups terry?
ANS: tom, you're presuming i think it was "spread". While i think there are undoubtedly some instances of that, I'd be hard pressed to name many--maybe a getulus or two? But surely you're aware of wild captures of amels of numerous species and subspecies.
>>yes of course,,
Do you really believe the amel nelsoni is the result of a ruthveni cross?
>>probably yes,,
What about the anery hondo?
>>yes
Do you really think the hypo pueblan is the result of a hypo hondo cross?
>>yes i do,,,
What about the amel scarlet king that's been documented.
>>>no im sure its pure..
how exactly are you going to explain that morph's "spread"? No, I don't think there are amel elaphe because someone "spread" an amel getula (or whatever) to them,
me neither terry ya missed my point,,,
and I don't think Dr Bechtel, having worked with the amel red rats decades ago, would buy that premise either.
Or are you arguing it was that group of amel red rats that was "spread" to pituophis, getula, triangulum?
>>> by no means was that what i was implying,,
I just don't think it's a premise worth entertaining, but it's a perfect example of someone throwing out a contention with NO documentation.
>>>yeah ok terry,,whatever,,
Somebody might read what you're writing and believe it all, you know!
>>> oh god forbid anyone beleive me,,,geez,,,
From other things you've written--i've benefitted from numerous posts you've made on OTHER subjects--i find it hard to believe you're fully serious here.
>>do you honestly beleive that every ssp.or group that now has amels in it was derived from individual pure amels in that ssp.or from an individual from that group? therefore they are PURE ssp?.or are they???
ANS: Do you believe that every ssp and group that now has amels in it was derived by crossing from another ssp or group? And if so, what do you credit as the original source from which all these other albinos have come?
>>>i credit it to individual ssp. found and then spread within their group like an amel getula,pit,or triangulum ssp, id bet my entire collection that the amel easternkings came from crossing that amel gene into them via another ssp.& its alo my opinion thats how now more that half of all the ssp. have amels in them.

>>its pretty funny watchin you purist type snake folks FLOP when a pic like rainer posted is posted,(gopherXking)
ANS: It's a little known fact, but "Entertainment" is my middle name.
>>> sos mine!
>>i am torn on the hybrid issue i dont practice it, well according to you i do because i have crossed within getula a yumensisXholbrooki,
ANS: I do consider that hybridization....yumensis is synonymous with (but no longer in use) californiae, and its range does not abut holbrooki range so it would not be a naturally occurring "intergrade". I might be wrong--and i remain open to being better educated about it, or having my mind changed, but i THINK intergrades are crosses that occur naturally in the wild where ranges abut, and hybrids are crosses that do not occur in nature
>>>like your hondo morphs,,,

(the possibility of exceptions like the gopher x king cross shown in Rainer's photo notwithstanding.)
>>but honestly i feel god has allot to do w/it whether you acknowledge that or not. some crosses just arent possible and there is a reason for that
ANS:
>>just like there is reason for the crosses that do work!,its called EVOLUTION which btw is also one of my favorite beatles songs,number9,number9,,,
ANS: You are covering all the bases--God is accountable for crosses that aren't possible and evolution is accountable for the ones that are.
no ya missed it again,,,nevermind
Seriously though, Thomas--and despite my appreciation for your taste in music!--what i'm trying to discuss here is not what's POSSIBLE, it's what is good for herpetology and herpetoculture. Just because something is possible does not make it a defensible action.
>>>i totally agree,,

EXAMPLE: WE COULD SELECTIVELY BREED FOR HORRIBLY KINKED AND CRIPPLED SNAKES. DOES THAT EXCUSE DOING SO? If it doesn't--if the fact that it CAN be done doesn't automatically excuse the exercise--then that argument has no validity in defense of hybrids, either, and "please, please me" (Lennon, McCartney, 1993) AND STOP USING IT! Isn't that logical?
>>> no its not logical at all imho,,,
>>it allways seems to be the "purist" are these bigdollar morph type breeders not all but really how much money would you be hatching with normal ole hondos, verses what you do w/your morph hondos?(lets see i can produce 50 or so PURE natural hondos at maybe 50bux each OR i can produce 50 morphs at 500bux each), answer seems pretty obvious.
>>and then ya try to warn newbies dont do this,do this, not as i do but as i say. but then they see the $$$ your doing lets chase the $$$,i mean thats human nature.so.
ANS: I'm guilty of being a "big dollar" breeder, I've been very successful doing what i do. Now, how exactly does that make what i'm doing wrong?
>>>not at all,,,
Maybe i just missed something...
>>> actually ya missed allott,,,

ANS: If you've watched my posts, talked to my customers, seen my articles and web sites, I've been a big help to MANY people to try their hands at making money breeding rare (but pure) hondurans and pyros. I coach. I spend hours and hours on the phone with people, whether or not they've ever bought anything from me. I keep no secrets about how to keep & breed them. I see nothing inconsistent with at the same time spending just as much energy trying to discourage them from breeding mutts. Fact is, there's MORE money in breeding the pure color varieties than in breeding mutts, so any newbies enticed by the $ prospects would be working to breed the real thing, not hybrid "jewels". I take issue with that word, too, because many use it to excuse their hybrids--isn't a pure honduran (wild type OR morph) a jewel? Maybe the problem is that some people have gotten bored and can no longer see the glimmering beauty and facets of the pure animal.
>>>yeah well i beleive ALL living snakes are living jewels and of course nat, phenotypes should be preserved ,,
>>also the argument about tainted snakes escaping or being released and destroying nat.gene pools is at the very least laughable, how can anyone beleive that escapees would even survive to adulthood muchless reproduce, and omg what if a sonoran gopher keeper/breeder on the east coast let go all his/her gophers omg the pine population will be ruined!and gone forever!! its just not plausible esp. considering range within ssp.habitat,predation,etc,etc
ANS: I basically agree with you, i'll not be baited into arguing a point of little consequence! On the other hand, of course escaped snakes of many kinds can live and grow and reproduce in the wild, it's silly to think they can't.
>>>then i reckon im just sillyy,,,,
>>an anery hondo surviving in the wild possible but very unlikely just like amels they dont blend, no camoflage
ANS: So if i could show you a snake species in honduras/nicaragua that's gray and black and white and thriving in those countries, you'd agree you're simply wrong on this point? Cause it wouldn't blend either, right, and would have no camo?
>>> sure show me terry an axanthic/amel hondo type that lives in the EXACT environment lives on the EXACT food source and even if there was one im sure there are differances as its not gonna be a triangulum,,
I was trying to make this point in my original post when i mentioned the diversity of snake phenotyhpes, and mentioned gray rat snakes--how DO they survive in the wild, with that coloration that doesn't blend, provides them no camo, compared to other species in the same niche that are quite differently colored?
>>> sure gray rats blend and blend quite well actually in their nich
Again: there's not ONE coloration that assures survival, or all snakes would look alike.
>>> DUUHH,,,
Various accidents of evolution have proven capable of surviving.
>>> please state an ACCIDENT that has occured in evoltion,,

>>, therefore cant hunt,eat,breed,etc & will more than likely be predated on but sure it happens,,,yeah right so does the lotto
ANS: Oooh, you got me again.
>>anyone breeding should be as responsible&honest as they can in record keeping but really unless you collect the snakes yourself you have to take someones word for it,,that and fellow hobbiest,books,rangemaps,etc,,,
ANS: We agree totally.
>>again my view is complex's,groups maybe thats why i feel as i do but if nature allows it whether or not it would happen in the wild, is it really that wrong???
ANS: (imagine homer simpson) : "Must....breeed....cripples....happens....in.....nature...."
missed again oilwell i tried to convey my thoughts, but ya missed most of'um,,,oilwell,,,,,,
>>and i apoligize if it seems im attacking you its not nor is meant to be an attack ,,, its just how us texas folks type
>>peace
>>thomas davis
PEACE back at you, thomas. I'm gonna re-read this one more time cause i don't want any offense taken either. I'm gonna try to just provide my best honest, objective answers. And the occasional sarcastic comments on my part are just my efforts at humor and lightening the tone so our exchange doesn't become one of those where we're soon at each other's throats. I think if you and i were sitting togethger we'd have much more in common than is evident to anyone reading this thread.
>>> so do i and maybe if i make daytona(i gotta take my son to disney) we will be able to do just that,,,,,thomas

- the accident is mutation!!!!mutation is an accident!!!many are insignificant sites on the proteins and don't even cross the radar, but most at significant sites on the protein are lethal. those that aren't lethal provide the opportunity for something new to make it or break it in the environment through many generations...evolution is a series of accidents...

>>

huh?
I have been following this thread for a while but I am kind of lost as to who is saying what with all this text copying. Thomas, would you please summarize what your position/statement is?
thanks, and DUH! back at ya!!!!
dave

I appreciate the reply. Yeah, we seem to be talking different languages at times, I realize we both think that from time to time! Sorry for my part in that, but it would be fun if we can meet in daytona. my daughters used to go but haven't been able to lure them the past few years (they're now 16 and 19 and--imagine this--think they have better things to do!)
peace
terry

it was mentioned about an Anery not being a wild morph IM SURE IT IS but it lacks the Venomous appearance as a tri color or Tangerine so they are propably more targeted by predators.Needless to say about the Amels.
And the Polyzona accusations were clarrified by Terry from what i understand they are from Hondo Zone and were HETS but by different collectors
Collectors being the operative word wheres the Science maybe the originals are still out there for taxonomy.
heres a hypomelanistic & hyperxanthic brook IMHO ..L8r Chris

Hi Chris,

Your terms for the snake in the pic are certainly descriptively correct. Maybe the yellow "brooksi" are an example of a mutation becoming a "wild type".

As for the anery tricolor, remember that mimicking a coral snake is not the sole reason for a snake's coloration nor necessarily a factor at all in its survival. Here's a simple excerise: Get one of the field guides and look at the range map for coral snakes in the U.S. Then look at the range maps for the more than 30 Lampropeltis tricolors. Interesting, huh?

peace
terry

>>it was mentioned about an Anery not being a wild morph IM SURE IT IS but it lacks the Venomous appearance as a tri color or Tangerine so they are propably more targeted by predators.Needless to say about the Amels.
>>And the Polyzona accusations were clarrified by Terry from what i understand they are from Hondo Zone and were HETS but by different collectors
>>Collectors being the operative word wheres the Science maybe the originals are still out there for taxonomy.
>> heres a hypomelanistic & hyperxanthic brook IMHO ..L8r Chris
>>

there are a few central south american corals too i think?Chris ps dont eat the dart frogs or the pretty berrys