Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Jeff,

In an earlier post I stated that I felt Captive Hatched animals had stronger blood than that of Captive Bred animals. I also stated that this was just MY opinion. You then came on and posted the following,

“And to say wild blood is stronger is not only assinine (correct spelling is asinine), it shows a complete lack of understanding of basic population genetics and genetic drift.”

Now as I understand it in the wild there is a basic law… survival of the fittest. To me this means that only the strongest and healthiest ball pythons are likely to survive, grow to adult size, and reproduce. These animals will pass on there genes and subsequently many of the characteristics that helped them survive and thrive on to their offspring. This simply means strong parents make strong babies.

Now in stark contrast you have captive bred animals, which are almost guaranteed to survive with proper care. Runts or weak animals are assist-fed and nursed until they are healthy, feeding, and ultimately BREEDING. In the Morph world many of the animals bred are siblings or closely related. This leads to some weak animals that would never have made it to breeding size in the wild ultimately breeding in captivity and passing on their inferior genetics.

Now based on the above stated (what I consider to be) facts I have come to the conclusion that Captive Hatched animals are LIKELY to have stronger blood than Captive Bred animals. This in turn will help me to produce stronger, better feeding, and more productive animals. As my response shows I actually put some thought in to the process of forming my opinion and ultimately making the statement that I did.

Now please enlighten me on how this was an "asinine" statement. By the way asinine is defined as utterly stupid in the dictionary. Also, please help me address my “lack of understanding” in basic population genetics and genetic drift by giving me and the rest of the community a brief tutorial. That is if you have the time.

Thanks,
Oz

-----

Wow, you spent utterly too much time 'formulating' that resonse; get outside, smell the flowers, chase the seagulls. Find a hobby...........

Especially if you have nothing worthy to contribute.

Oz
-----

That's not nice at all.

Frankly, I think it is a very good theory and would love to hear an equally eloquent response.

And, I'm pretty sure if someone called YOU stupid, you'd likely reply a little defensively as well.

Posts like these that say nothing about BP's or herps in general, and whose purpose is solely to insult, serve no purpose whatsoever.

Joel
-----
3.6 Leopard Geckos (1.4 Albino)
~~20 Leo eggs cookin'~~
1.1 Ball Pythons
1.0 African Fat Tail Gecko
0.1 Okeetee Corn Snake
1.0 Blair's Phase Gray Banded Kingsnake

I can understand both arguments on this matter and here is my $0.02
In the long term... yes wild caught has the stronger gene. If you allow w/c's to mate and propagate in the wild they will be stronger (let's assume 200yrs, approx. 70 generations). So the scenario is.... you have one male and one female in captivity and you continually breed brother to sister for the 70 generations. The other side is the continuous replacement of fresh blood. Yes the w/c's will be better (less risk of all possible problems, I shouldn't have to list the thousands of ways in which the problems may manifest itself).

Short-term or "now" thinking.... Jeff is correct. Do a search on "island" or "cross-mutation" or something like that. I posed a questions on inbreeding a month ago about some snakes that exhibit both male and female mutated sex organs rendering them sterile (thereby dooming the race, look it up for more info or email me). I disagree with Jeff on this topic, believing the mutation is a direct result of inbreeding (and still do, given more valid counter discussions I would be glad to open mindedly review my theories) but agree with him here on the statement he made (other than anything demeaning, if it offended you). Being a fellow Canadian, he must have had a very strong immediate feeling about what he wrote since Canadians tend to be VERY laid back and calm (but harbor great resentment for years). Don't take what he said as a personal attack yet, wait until its cleared up, get both sides of the complete story on the table. For some reason I just think Jeff would have an entirely different attitude towards you.

Thanks
Dave

First I must say I find this debate a little amusing, but I like to discuss things, so here's my take.

Since the animals in captivity have not been bred to the upteenth degree yet, they are still relatively close in genetic makeup to wild collected ones.

But here, we are talking about hatchlings. They are all equal at that point. Although the parents were obviously fit enough (and lucky enough) to survive to sexual maturity, they are still capable of passing along "unfit" genes to offspring.

think about it...all the stubborn feeders...CB or CH....would die in the wild. So that's just one way we perpetuate "weak" genes. I'm sure there are a myriad of others we don't yet realize.

I would only venture so far as to say that wild caught juvies or adults would be superior in health and vigor...nobody helped them along and they made it anyways. If they can survive the stress of adjusting to captivity, there you would have your "superior genetic" beast. LOL

Anytime we take an animal into captivity we alter "survival".

Farm-hatched BP's are NOT allowed to undergo natural selection to kill off all the runts!!! They are ALL HATCHED AND SHIPPED!! So everything else being equal, its either a Farm-hatched BP or a Captive-bred BP. I don't know why people think there is some magical process of evolution going on in Afica where they hold all the gravid females and hatch the eggs. Its beyond me.
-----

First I want to say that I like both sides of this discussion ... its interesting "at work" literature.

Secondly, I think that a point that is (failingly) trying to be made is the following. A CB baby might be a result of CB adults which would have been runty or weak had they not been fawned over and cared for by humans. A CH baby, right out of the wild, has come from parents who overcame natural adversity and made it to maturity while (presumably) many other wild BP's did not.

I think that *may* be at the heart of the pro-CH "stong blood" argument.

I'm just providing clarity on what I think is a valid point.

For the record, in this discussion, I think that given the large numbers and rapidly dropping price of CB normal BP babies, I see no point in further depleting the natural numbers.

Joel
-----
3.6 Leopard Geckos (1.4 Albino)
~~20 Leo eggs cookin'~~
1.1 Ball Pythons
1.0 African Fat Tail Gecko
0.1 Okeetee Corn Snake
1.0 Blair's Phase Gray Banded Kingsnake

and you will never have to worry about me calling you stupid because you prefer CB animals. To each his own.

Peace,
Oz
-----

Ignoring inflammatory rhetoric I can also see both sides of the argument.

While the CH may be a few generations closer to natural selection I'm thinking we can do better with unnatural selection over time if we try. Since we don't and probably shouldn't completely reproduce the wild environment we should select for the best captive breeders without sacrificing basic health like the ability to hatch unassisted.

Feral dogs around the world are about 30 lbs and untrusting of humans. This is what serves them best in the semi-wild (small enough to get by on scraps but big enough to defend themselves). We selectively breed for temperament and size as we see fit for captivity and produce a wide variety of dogs for a wide variety of purposes. Through inbreeding and inattention to defects we have introduced genetic problems in many pure bred dogs but we live with some of those defects because the captive bred dogs are better suited for our purposes than the 30 lb skittish feral type. Sure a little new blood could help some dog breeds but it would be hard to avoid loosing the qualities we have selected over many many generations to make the pure bred what it is now.

I've culled about half of the adult females that I've tried to breed because they didn't breed for me as quick or easily as I hoped. If I where a better captive breeder or had more patience I probably would have gotten more of them to reproduce. I mainly got rid of them for space reasons but as a side product I think I have kept the ones that because of temperament or flexibility on breeding triggers or whatever are best suited to breed in perhaps less than optimal captive conditions. Over time I see lines emerging that produce significantly more babies quicker than average. You get what you select for. Since our captive bred animals don't have to run the gauntlets of predation, parasites, diseases, and famine we can concentrate on selecting for traits that might be more important in captivity such as a exceptional apatite and a disposition to breed under captive conditions. Maybe these super eaters would waste too much energy and starve in short times in the wild. Maybe wild conditions select for animals that breed only under the very specific season triggers so as not to breed out of season.

I'm sure there will be plenty of new blood coming in for some time to maintain the diversity the captive population needs. I agree that this diversity is very important. As imports grow up and show themselves suitable to captive reproduction the best suited will rise to the top and help keep the best existing captive bred lines strong and diverse. Hopefully we can avoid some of the problems that plague captive bred dogs while we strive to select the genes that best serve captives.

We are only at the beginning with captive bred ball pythons so I don’t see much difference yet but over time I would expect the captive and wild lines to diverge, we just need to make sure it’s for the best.

The one about skinny, runty wild dogs. What works for a BP in the wild, might not work for a BP in captivity. Just because a BP has all the tools and traits to live and exploit the niches in Africa better, what makes you think that its going to make a better captive?
-----

Don't forget Jeff, that those "skinny, runty wild dogs" are perfectly suited for their niche, and, more importantly, exhibit little to NO hereditary disease. compare that to the AKC list.

Yes, we will most likely get better, bigger clutches and females that are consistent producers by means of selective breeding. I for one, most certainly intend to do so.

However, the point I'd like to get across is that we don't know what else we are accidently breeding for by "selecting" for the traits we desire. One only has to go so far as to look at the myriad of health problems displayed by each and every breed of dog...caused, or rather, exacerbated by the selective breeding for other traits, like size, color, etc.

For a really good example of what might lurk unseen, do an internet search on a Quarter Horse stallion named "Impressive".

We desire traits that are not so necessarily important for survival in the wild, so our idea of what is "stronger" or "better" is going to vary.

Yep, it will be a tight line to walk. You get what you select for and most everything else goes down hill. Maybe genetic testing will be available to help the pure bred dogs and future snakes too. I would think that the technology is here now if only the will and the money where to eliminate most of the worst problems in pure bred dogs with genetic testing. If all breeders where tested for all known genetic defects and only the few that are clear where breed you could make a lot of progress in a hurry. Genetic testing could produce a score for a potential breeder and then economics would see that the best are bred.

However I can’t imagine we’ll ever be able to identify every undesirable gene much less the exceptional ones so out breeding will always be a good if difficult thing. If, 50 years from now my granddaughter has a line of quadruple recessive ball pythons that regularly lay 20 egg clutches but is prone to repertory infections and missing eyes it will be hard to outbreed and then try to recover but I hope someone is willing to do it. Just on the quadruple recessive part you are looking at a 1 in 256 hit to get back to the quadruple homozygous when breeding quadruple heterozygous animals.

You're now talking about THOUSANDS of years of breeding now. I don't think we'll see any of that in BP's in our lifetime, ha ha.
-----

Actually, most breeds are less than 100 years old. Granted, they can breed at 6 months, gestate for 63 days, so you get a new generation in theory every 8 months.

Besides, it really doesn't matter if we are at that point now anyways, we are laying the foundation for that future to occur.

Doesn't mean the species is less than a 100 years old. Who cares if dog "X" is 20 years old if it came from stock that had 1,000 years of inbreeding?

I don't get your dog analogy. It simply doesn't apply to snakes. Dogs have been bred for hundreds of years and look at the results. Balls only have color morphs. They don't have the variation in size and demeanor like dogs. Great Danes vs Poodles?? That stuff simply won't happen in Ball Pythons. You are comparing apples and oranges, or, in this case, dogs and pythons.

Confused..........
-----

First I'd recommend reading the book "Dogs: A Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior & Evolution" by Raymond & Lorna Coppinger.

Our communication problem starts here: you are comparing ball pythons today with dogs today. I'm comparing ball pythons today with the first few generations of "domestic" dogs. I'm saying we are the foundation for the problems that will occur in the future (and they will, because we have no waying of knowing what is possible, much less what to look for).

O.k. What makes dog breeds different? Color, texture of fur, size, demeanor, and a few other details, like whether or not their ears stand or they have long tails.

Moving along. "Wild" or "Village" (Coppinger) dogs, which our domesticated companions descend from show a suprising uniformity worldwide, despite whether they themselves may have descended from wolves, or some other canid. They adapted to best fit their niche, which is scavenging around human settlements.

Take it back one more step to their "roots". We'll use wolves here because they have a popular affiliation with dogs. How much do wolves vary? Color, size, demeanor? There are black wolves, gray wolves, browish wolves, even white ones...I'm sure there would be more if they had more than just melanin to work with. Size varies little, correspondent with sex and bloodline, the later of which usually came about as an adaptation to their environment. Demeanor is individual and it's highly likely, although unproven that some behavior is genetic.

Ball pythons: granted, they have no ears or fur. Color: yes, that's obvious at this point. Size...not so dramatic as dogs, but certainly comprable with the "roots", varying genetically within a relatively small range. Demeanor? Absolutely...snakes certainly have individual dispositions, we're a little early on to determine if it's hereditary.

Wolves and Village dogs, on the other hand, do NOT vary in shape. We are already seeing this development pop up in ball pythons---stub tails.

I know I am not very good at explaining things, but I hope this clarified my point.

Now, I can understand why you would say "That stuff simply won't happen in Ball Pythons". I'm sure anyone would have said the same if someone had told them 10,000 years ago that a chihauha would descend from a wolf.

This conversation can go WAY farther than this, if you like. I'm game....

Doesn't mean the species is less than a 100 years old. Who cares if dog "X" is 20 years old if it came from stock that had 1,000 years of inbreeding?

I don't get your dog analogy. It simply doesn't apply to snakes. Dogs have been bred for hundreds of years and look at the results. Balls only have color morphs. They don't have the variation in size and demeanor like dogs. Great Danes vs Poodles?? That stuff simply won't happen in Ball Pythons. You are comparing apples and oranges, or, in this case, dogs and pythons.

Confused..........

We're talking about Ball Pythons here. Not dogs. Not cats. Not humans. Who cares what any other species on Earth does? I don't. Certainly not when I'm talking about Ball Pythons. Nothing matters except what Ball Pythons do. You can make inferences based on other animals that are in a completely different CLASS, let alone Family or Genus. Why you'd do it, I don't know.

Ball Pythons are small pythons from Africa. Not domesticated mammals that have been around humans for eons.

Don't infer what happens in one species and make the jump to another and take it as fact. That's dangerous and any good biologist will tell you its bad technique and irrelevant data.
-----

It's become apparent to me that you are not interested in discussing this, only defending your opinion. For you to say it is NOT going to happen is absurd to me, unless you're psychic. You can't seem to see past the physical characteristics of a given comparison species (it's called an EXAMPLE) and look at genetic trends. Regardless of what ball pythons look like and where they came from, they have genes, reproduce sexually, and therefore are subject to the laws of genetics. You simply can't refute that. You want an example that's "closer to home" try Boa constrictors. No, we have not positively liked the source yet, but don't you find it somewhat odd that an unlikely percentage of albinos are born with eye defects (or only one or none)? Don't fool yourself into thinking ball pythons are perfect and will remain the same forever.

I've seen several 1 eyed albino burms also so we are getting closer, at least a python.

I'm also thinking further off. I don't know if it will take 20 years or 200 but I bet inbreeding will expose problems eventually. It's just too hard to outbreed multiple gene combinations and get them back. The more progress we make toward the perfect captive ball against our selection criteria (morphs, large clutches, good captive feeder, good temperament, etc.) the more tempting it will be not to outbreed when needed.

Does anyone really know how quick problems started cropping up when dogs where first domesticated thousands of years ago? Right now it's worse in the pure breeds that have been inbred for a hundred or less years but maybe some of these problems started pretty quick after initial domestication. I agree that ball pythons are different than dogs but with the vast majority of captive bred ball pythons still being within 3 generations of wild we don't have much of a track record directly from them. We should look to other species to speculate what sort of problems we might see and keep vigilant just in case.

Because this is a Ball Python forum and as such, I come here to talk about Ball Pythons. I don't know why that's a hard concept to grasp.
-----

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain an idea without accepting it" -Aristotle.

Randy, It's been a pleasure. I've enjoyed your contributions. Jeff, I'm tired of trying to discuss genetics with you. Maybe later.

Precisely when you started to talk about dogs.

Genetics is one thing. I'll full discuss and debate Ball Python inbreeding if you want to use tools like Hardy-Weinberg Theorem, genetic drift, bottlenecks, founder effects, gene flow, etc etc etc. But as soon as you "try" to use examples from an animal that isn't even in the same Class and infer that the same things are going to happen, I lose interest. Real fast.

And that brings us to the here and now.
-----

Oh yeah, and you still seem to think I'm asserting the danger is IMMEDIATE by repeatedly reminding me that dogs have been around humans for "eons". Eventually, ball pythons will have been around for "eons" too. I think it's sad that you have no regard for the future, since it "won't happen in your lifetime". How considerate you are.

No, that was exactly my point. Man, I wish I was better at expressing myself...I thought I made it pretty clear that the only ones that could be considered superior via the "survival of the fittest" argument were WC adults.

..and its "Royer" not Royal

First off, thanks Dave (great post too) and no, the post wasn't intended to flame (I don't even know Oz).

Now, let me get this out of the way right now: I cannot seriously believe we're having a debate on whether people should buy CB Ball Pythons or wild-caught. Wow. That kinda depresses me that in 2003, this discussion can actually take place. Sad.

Now, you state the in nature, its "survival of the fittest"? Yes, that's kind of how natural selection works (sort of). Basically, it means that the animal with the phenotype (physical characteristics) that exploits the desired niche(s) the best, has the best chance to breed and further its DNA production. Its the reason for living and is the underlying theme that ties together ALL biology.

Phew, got that nonesene out of the way early! Now, how does that make my argument when I basically just supported yours? LOL. Well you see, its not the strong that survive. Its the animal that can get the most resources and find the mate the fastest and produce viable offspring. This doesn't necessarily mean stronger blood and it most certainly doesn't mean a physically mightier/healthier animal that will beat up captive-bred counterparts, ha ha. Balls (and all other animals) have become adapted to a set(s) of conditions that they can exploit better than any other animal. If they didn't, then they wouldn't be there and another animal(s) would take its place and its resources. But just because they can find food better or breed at the right time in nature, doesn't mean that they will live better in a wood box in your reptile room. Unless you are God himself, you will not be able to distinguish what "blood" an animal carries in it in captivity. Ha ha, I'd be hella interested as to how you think you could.

Its not like BP's have been bred for 50 generations, or even 20 for that matter! You seem to forget (or didn't know initially) that evolution takes GEOLOGIC TIME to occur. Deleterious genes in captivity exist in nature. Its where they came from. Runts find food in nature, runts breed in nature, and runts die in nature. If they didn't, then the mechanisms and DNA to create them would not exist in our captive populations. Captivity doesn't CREATE genes, ha ha. It just uses the ones already available in nature.

Point is, the benefits of wild blood over captive blood is DWARFED by the fact that:

1) Its morally wrong to take an animal from the wild when captive-bred specimens of the same morph exist.

2) Captive-bred snakes are not parasite-loaded and if from a good breeder, won't have mites, ticks, or disease.

3) You cannot distinguish between the two "bloods" to begin with!

It may not be asinine to not have the same opinion as what I just wrote. Not at all. But I think its asinine to suggest buying wild caught Ball Pythons over captive-bred animals because you think that the wild ones will have better genes!! Ha ha. Do you know how wild BP's are collected? They collect gravid females, hatch the eggs and ALL the babies are sold. Is this your "natural" selection that you speak of? I'm interested as to how you think that this process acts in an evolutionary sense to weed out the runts and produce stronger blood? REAL interested.

So it boils down to either buying animals that were born in captivity by animals already in captivity as oppsed to animals that were born in captivity from animals that were caught in the wild (and then skinned) and then shipped 1/2 way across the globe in conditions that would make your skin crawl. If it makes you happy to think you have a "stronger" snake that ha the fortunate happenstance to by ON TOP of the pile of snakes in the shipment box from Africa, then buy all means, support the farmed BP trade.

I'll take the breeders any day for the reasons listed above.
-----

Good post Jeff,

Confirms what I, you and thousands of others know. I think this guy should re-think his comments using a third-person, unbiased view based on as many facts as he can obtain. Need to open the mind.... eg: we are nervous here on earth about global warming and CO2 increasing while in the reality of things life on earth is doomed to die due to not having any CO2 left in the atmosphere. No animals, no plants and eventually, no bacteria!!! It's reality, but our short term thinking is that it that CO2 is bad when is actually good. (our increase is at rates conducive to life here).

This is not the place for this speech. The point is that opinions are good, but make them educated, founded on fact and free of emotion. Thinking with emotion will screw you EVERY TIME whether in business, love or anything. Just think back to any rash decision you made and life... how did it turn out?

Thanks for reading and entertaining my thoughts.
Dave

Hi Jeff,

Thanks for the kind words. When this guy thinks it through I'm sure he will come to the right conclusion. Hey how many times have we done things in life to look back at it and say.... I should have, I could have,etc. I find as I grow up, experience more, learn more, I constantly re-evaluate what I believe/think. When he gets informed he will change.

My question...

Below is a post on one of my snakes escaping last night... could you please comment? You can do it there or email me at piebaldpython@hotmail.com

Thanks
Dave
BTW, have you made any shipments to TO? I still want him if you do, just want to wait for others to combine.

I haven't shipped any animals to Ontario this summer yet. All my pythons just hatched and the BP eggs are all still cooking. Things get cooking soon though and the boas are due to drop any day. Only thing I have available is Jungle Carpets and monitor babies right now.

I'll check out the post right now...
-----

I checked your site and the "Yellow Ackies" section is blank.

Are these the monitors you have available? I would be interested in anywhere from 1 to a trio. I live in Montreal.

If you can, please email to joellowsky@hotmail.com with some info.

Thanks
-----
3.6 Leopard Geckos (1.4 Albino)
~~20 Leo eggs cookin'~~
1.1 Ball Pythons
1.0 African Fat Tail Gecko
0.1 Okeetee Corn Snake
1.0 Blair's Phase Gray Banded Kingsnake

Because almost the whole site is blank, LOL!! I had this grand scheme to post every animal individually on its own species page. But then, everything started to hatch and I was like "oh crap" and now I'm sitting on a hundred baby snakes and lizards and no time to do such things. I will post pics of the more expensive stuff singly, but stuff has been flying out of here that I haven't had time for all the other things. Sorry bud!!

That's also funny you should ask about the monitors, because I dug up 11 more eggs today!!

I have babies ready to go in a week. All are spoken for except 2. I'll post them in the Canadian Ad section of kingsnake.ca next week.

Thanks man, talk to you soon.

-----

Dave,

You are right about emotions... they impair logical thought. My notion about CH animals was based on clear thinking and reasoning. It's MY opinion and I should be able to express it on a public forum with out being called stupid. Also, I think I have defended my opinion pretty well.

The ecology of our Earth and the environment is another topic all together.

Later,
Oz
-----

Ah yes the impending death of mother earth. Too bad but cycle of life....
Sure you defended yourself well. Valid points of view, based upon valid, substaniated facts. Both sides. God bless a free and democratice society. I see both sides of the story here and agree with both sides which you can infer from my posts. I agree with you on the long term and with Jeff on the short.

Never stop asking questions,

Dave

Jeff, you say flaming was not your intention but your original post and even this one is a little offensive. You basically called me stupid. But let’s not dwell on your ill manners. I think thoughtful debate on this topic is a much better way to spend our time.

Okay first you say that the benefits of wild blood are dwarfed by the following:

1) Its morally wrong to take an animal from the wild when captive-bred specimens of the same morph exist.

Response: Interesting that this is your first point. Believe it or not I don't support the importation of certain animals such as Boas because I feel that wild populations are threatened. But I don't think it's a great crime to import Ball Pythons because they are abundant as I understand. Also, I have been told that the Governments in Africa regulate the number of animals farmed and exported ensuring the continuation of what is a profitable industry and natural populations of ball pythons. By supporting this trade you may be putting a meal on a poor African family's table. Is that morally wrong? Also, some may say that keeping animals in a wooden box whether they are CB or WC is immoral. What do you say to that?

2) Captive-bred snakes are not parasite-loaded and if from a good breeder, won't have mites, ticks, or disease.

Response: The CH animals I have purchased have never shown any signs of parasites. Also, I believe that Ball Pythons coming from Africa NEVER have mites. They acquire them from private collections. Now ticks are prevalent among wild-caught adults, but I have never seen them on my CH animals. Whether you are buying CB or CH they will be as good as the dealer, period.

3) You cannot distinguish between the two "bloods" to begin with!

Response: No you can not distinguish between the two bloods, but you can distinguish the hardiness of an animal. To me animals that grow fast, eat well and breed successfully have GOOD BLOOD!

You go on to say,

"Its not like BP's have been bred for 50 generations, or even 20 for that matter! You seem to forget (or didn't know initially) that evolution takes GEOLOGIC TIME to occur. Deleterious genes in captivity exist in nature. It’s where they came from. Runts find food in nature, runts breed in nature, and runts die in nature. If they didn't, then the mechanisms and DNA to create them would not exist in our captive populations. Captivity doesn't CREATE genes, ha ha. It just uses the ones already available in nature."

Response: Yes evolution and Natural Selection takes time. And yes these deleterious genes exist in both captive and wild populations. But you seem to forget that inbreeding and artificial selection can magnify the expression of these deleterious genes in a relatively short amount of time... less than 50 generations. You say runts find food in nature and may survive. I agree, but they are less likely to survive and breed when compared to a more robust animal.

"It may not be asinine to not have the same opinion as what I just wrote. Not at all. But I think its asinine to suggest buying wild caught Ball Pythons over captive-bred animals because you think that the wild ones will have better genes!!"

Response: Still insulting, but at least you spelled asinine correctly this time. I never said wild caught now did I? I said I prefer CH over CB.

"Ha ha. Do you know how wild BP's are collected? They collect gravid females, hatch the eggs and ALL the babies are sold. Is this your "natural" selection that you speak of? I'm interested as to how you think that this process acts in an evolutionary sense to weed out the runts and produce stronger blood? REAL interested."

Response: This is how... only the fittest animals will survive and be healthy enough to reproduce. Unlike CB animals they have to overcome many challenges to reach that point. The weak would likely have been weeded out. So stronger parents are most likely to yield stronger babies. Yes there will be runts, but the probability of stronger blood is HIGH! That is BASIC GENETICS.

"So it boils down to either buying animals that were born in captivity by animals already in captivity as oppsed to animals that were born in captivity from animals that were caught in the wild (and then skinned) and then shipped 1/2 way across the globe in conditions that would make your skin crawl. If it makes you happy to think you have a "stronger" snake that ha the fortunate happenstance to by ON TOP of the pile of snakes in the shipment box from Africa, then buy all means, support the farmed BP trade."

Response: I have personally helped the importer I buy from unpack animals from Africa. There were about 5-8 animals per burlap bag packed in wooden crates that were stuffed with newspaper. They were well packed and healthy animals. I guess the guys he uses in Africa are different than you describe. Hope this helps you to sleep better tonight. Though I would not be surprised to learn some animals are imported in that fashion.

Let me close by saying you failed to change my mind. Your argument is weak and based on nothing substantial. I am actually disappointed as I was hoping to learn something. Instead you just confirmed what I already suspected, your just another pompous ass that likes to frequent the forums picking fights.

See Ya,
Oz
-----

Ok, for some reason you have brought this to a personal level and I can't figure out why. I never called you asinine or anything. I only said that your comments weren't terribly bright. If that makes me pompous, well then so be it. I don't mind. Not in the least.

But bear in mind:

1) You say that I "failed to change your mind". Wow. Who cares? I wasn't posting to change your mind. I'm flattered that you think I was. I don't care where you get your BP's from. I only responded to the thread because you posted in a PUBLIC forum reasons for buying WILD CAUGHT over captive bred. The fact that you think I’m worried about you and your collection makes you pompous.

2) The Ball Python game is decades old, yet I've never heard anyone marketing CH BP's as "stronger blood" or the like. Why is that Oz? You think your smart enough to discover something that EVERY SINGLE BP DEALER has overlooked in the last 30 YEARS? Wow. All hail the great and powerful ......er.....that's a movie, isn't it?

Point is, if CH Balls are indeed stronger in blood than CB, why has NO ONE EVER MARKETED them like that? It strikes me as odd that you would just come up with this, all the while importers never say a peep about it.

3) Why do some people pass off CH as CB in the classifieds? That doesn't make sense! CH has way stronger blood? They are sitting on a gold mine and selling it as bronze. (tongue firmly in cheek).

Lastly (for this post), I disagreed with your post on how CH is better. That is considered pompous? But you disagreed with my post on how CB is better, and you're complaining about how you should be able to speak your mind blah blah blah? Do you not see the inherent hypocrisy?? Crazy. THAT’S what I call ASS – I – 9 (how’s THAT for spelling??).

Ok, now to dissect the other post.
-----

1) So you don't think its a crime to import BP's because they are abundant and cheap and easy to catch? Ok fine. But I'm just wondering where you find the time to do population studies on wild populations of Balls in Africa? Just curious. Because I KNOW you would never just assume something, right?

You also ask what I would say to people who say that "keeping a snake in wooden box is wrong"? What does that have to do with this discussion!!?? Ha ha, you completely lost me there man. If there's a point to make, please make it, because that little tangent just confused me. People say lots of things. Keep it relevant to the discussion.

2) You say that the CH BP's you've bought have never had mites or ticks. Great. Does that automatically mean that no CH BP has mites or ticks? No. Now even if you were right, and they didn't, why would every single book and caresheet and breeder tell you that they might/probably would? Again, maybe you're light years ahead of the game man and know something we all don't?

3) All my CB BP's grow fast and breed and eat well. Not sure where you're heading with that one...

4) Inbreeding and artificial selection contribute to lethal and deleterious alleles getting together. Ummm...ok. If that's the case, then the increased homozygosity of such alleles would further refine the captive population and, thus, make it stronger. I think you misunderstand where runts come from and why they occur. Its usually not the fault of DNA. Rather, its usually environmental. These things have evolved for hundreds of thousnds of years and you seem to think that a few captive breedings that produce runtish animals is that fault of DNA not being acted upon by nature? Excuse me while I burst a lung!!! Don't be so egotistical man. BP DNA is pretty much set. We're not going to mess it up. Runts occur from OUR mistakes, not nature's. Don't be so pompous.

5) Get over the typo thing man. I just type away and press "submit". I don't read and re-read. This isn't a formal report for a job or dissertation.

6) QUOTE: “ Unlike CB animals they have to overcome many challenges to reach that point. The weak would likely have been weeded out. So stronger parents are most likely to yield stronger babies. Yes there will be runts, but the probability of stronger blood is HIGH! That is BASIC GENETICS."

Again, runts are not usually the result of faulty DNA. And what works for the savannas of Africa, might not work for your cage. So if for some magical reason you are correct (which you’re not) and wild BP’s have better blood, well that better blood is for the plains of Africa, not for your cage in your reptile room. Its beyond me why that is so hard for you to understand.

7) So you've helped an importer unpack from Africa? Great. Now do you honestly think that what you are unpacking is what was initially caught? NO. BP's can trade hands 2-7 times before they reach N. America man. If you are trying to tell me and the rest of the BP community that its moral and ethically right and that CH are better than CB, you are fighting a losing battle man.

As for picking fights, why is it ok for you to disagree, yet when someone disagrees with you, its labelled "picking a fight"? Doesn't make sense. Especially when you were the first to bring it to a personal level.

Thank you for confusing me utterly and for making me practice my typing.
-----

How you like dem apples! Beeotch!