Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Do all reptiles in general enjoy handling?

Do all reptiles in general enjoy handling?

No. Reptiles do not enjoy handling. The reason is simple. In order to enjoy handling, a reptile must

1. recognize that the handler means them no harm.
2. derive a feeling of pleasure from the experience.

I will conceed that reptiles can learn to tolerate handling by learning that it doesn't present a real threat, so number one is possible.
However, number two is not. A few species of mammals enjoy handling because they are social animals that derive some pleasure from the physical interaction of their handlers. This is an adaptation of being a social species where interacting with others is selectively advantageous.
For non-social species however, these sort of interactions don't benefit the species. In general, interactions between individuals of non-social species tend to be negative. They tend to avoid interaction and so interactions are not perceived as

Most reptiles are non-social and the species that are found in groups tend to not interact positively within the groups to any degree (several lizards come to mind). Therefore, reptiles will have no selective pressure to develop any sort of positive social response.

Add to that the fact that reptiles are not capable of recognizing humans as "beneficial", and you have a reptile that isn't likely to gain any positive experience from a social interaction with a species in another order of vertebrates.

Furthermore, the experience of emotion requires the presence of some sort of limbic system within the reptile brain. I would love to see any evidence that such a system exists.

I know we are going to hear from the "my kingsnake loves me and hates my roommate" people but those emotions lie solely in the brain of the keeper, not the reptile. If you want to believe that your snake loves you, you can certainly find ways to interpret their behavior to reinforce your perception. But if you choose to be more objective about interpreting the behavior, you find that they are just being snakes.

-----
Chris Harrison
Central Texas

>>Do all reptiles in general enjoy handling?
>>
>>No. Reptiles do not enjoy handling. The reason is simple. In order to enjoy handling, a reptile must
>>
>>1. recognize that the handler means them no harm.
>>2. derive a feeling of pleasure from the experience.
>>
>>I will conceed that reptiles can learn to tolerate handling by learning that it doesn't present a real threat, so number one is possible.
>>However, number two is not. A few species of mammals enjoy handling because they are social animals that derive some pleasure from the physical interaction of their handlers. This is an adaptation of being a social species where interacting with others is selectively advantageous.
>>For non-social species however, these sort of interactions don't benefit the species. In general, interactions between individuals of non-social species tend to be negative. They tend to avoid interaction and so interactions are not perceived as
>>
>>Most reptiles are non-social and the species that are found in groups tend to not interact positively within the groups to any degree (several lizards come to mind). Therefore, reptiles will have no selective pressure to develop any sort of positive social response.
>>
>>Add to that the fact that reptiles are not capable of recognizing humans as "beneficial", and you have a reptile that isn't likely to gain any positive experience from a social interaction with a species in another order of vertebrates.
>>
>>Furthermore, the experience of emotion requires the presence of some sort of limbic system within the reptile brain. I would love to see any evidence that such a system exists.
>>
>>I know we are going to hear from the "my kingsnake loves me and hates my roommate" people but those emotions lie solely in the brain of the keeper, not the reptile. If you want to believe that your snake loves you, you can certainly find ways to interpret their behavior to reinforce your perception. But if you choose to be more objective about interpreting the behavior, you find that they are just being snakes.
>>
>>
>>-----
>>Chris Harrison
>>Central Texas
-----
Chris Harrison
Central Texas

I agree that reptiles do not necessarily "love" someone and dislike someone else. To me as well, that is all in the mind of the keeper. However, reptiles CAN and there IS evidence that they learn to recognize individuals. My alligator will tolerate my entering his enclosure to do regular maintenance and will also tolerate my girlfriends presence without giving either one of us any grief. But I have had others in the same enclosure and they were quickly informed that they were not welcomed. I do not feel that this has anything to do with "love". I feel it is due to TRUST. They CAN learn to trust you in particular. If they are socialized well, they will learn to trust humans in particular.

Some people use reptiles in educational programs. These animals have been socialized well and have learned that humans are OK and there is no need to feel threatened. Therefore they will allow handling and so forth. This however, doesn't mean that they like it. If the snake or lizard had it there way, they would be left alone completely.

Just my 2 cents.

Chris
-----
Chris Law
U.A.P.P.E.A.L. (Uniting a Proactive Primate and Exotic Animal League)
Herpetoculture Element Representative

Some reptiles, snakes in particular, will appear to enjoy handling because the body heat of the handler is more desirable to the animal than the ambient environmental temperature. This should be interpreted as an emotional or cognizant reaction. Snakes may recognize a particular individual through some consistency such as smell, a lab coat etc. and associate that person as a not threat where as a new individual may be perceived as a threat.

Bottom line: Snakes want to feel safe and will seek out certain environmental parameters. They may also learn to associate a keeper’s behavior with food. Outside of these basic needs snakes do not enjoy or want human interaction.
-----
Randy Hallman

This questions, and the answers are in my opinion as rediculous as asking how many angels can sit on the head of a pin. There are some things that you can answer with science and some things that you can not. One thing you can say scientifically is that most snakes are not social, but that doesn't mean they are completely antisocial or completely lack the potential for social responses. For example: many nonsocial snakes gather together for brumation, like garter snakes or ringneck snakes. you can argue that there motive is based on survival needs, but you can make that argument for any social interaction, including humans. The fact is that the gathering is social. Another example, Ball pythons, which are not at all social in the wild will prefer to be in physical contact with each other when caged together in captivity. So I think you can scientifically deterimine if snakes are capable of a social response, but to say that the motive for that response is or isn't equal to our own is not scientifically possible to determine, since the very concept of love is not scientifically provable even between people. Some things you just have to take on faith.

One thing you can say scientifically is that most snakes are not social, but that doesn't mean they are completely antisocial or completely lack the potential for social responses.

You can look at the brain structures of a snake and make inferences about their cognitive functions based on what we know about brains.

For example: many nonsocial snakes gather together for brumation, like garter snakes or ringneck snakes.

These snakes do gather in groups for brumation, but here it is largely coincidental. The snakes are not going to the place to be together, they are simply all going to the same place because that is a safe place to overwinter. They don't care if any other snakes are there or not. In fact, if you looked at their stress hormone levels, I suspect they would be lower if there were no other snakes there. That is aggregation, not a "social" gathering.

Prairie Ringnecks have been shown to do this during other times of the year as well. They will deliberately choose to be under the same rocks even when similar rocks are nearby. Are they seeking out each other's company out of desire to be near their own species? I doubt it, and I wouldn't jump to that conclusion.

you can argue that there motive is based on survival needs, but you can make that argument for any social interaction, including humans. The fact is that the gathering is social.

Human beings (and other social species) aggregate for the purpose of being with other humans, not just because they all happen to choose the same geographic location. It isn't a social gathering just because more than one individual happens to be in one spot.

Another example, Ball pythons, which are not at all social in the wild will prefer to be in physical contact with each other when caged together in captivity.

This is a desire on the part of the snakes to be in a confined space. If the only physical security they can find is by getting smashed into a group with other snakes they will do so. I am confident that the snakes don't "enjoy" being smashed up against the others, they are just meeting the most basic need to feel in a confined space. They would be equally likely to smash themselves into a hidbox that was stuffed with rocks - it isn't the other snakes they are seeking out.

So I think you can scientifically deterimine if snakes are capable of a social response, but to say that the motive for that response is or isn't equal to our own is not scientifically possible to determine

Exactly my point. It is not possible to determine the motives of the snake when they demonstrate behaviors. As many animal behaviorists have learned, one of the most foolish mistakes you can make in interpreting the behavior of other species is to anthropomorphize. Different species engage in outwardly similar behaviors for entirely different reasons.
We all know what happens to people who walk up on a strange dog that is baring his teeth and say, "Look, he must be friendly, he's smiling".

since the very concept of love is not scientifically provable even between people. Some things you just have to take on faith.

The concept of gravity isn't scientifically proveable, that isn't how science is done.
Taking things on faith is an OK approach. But in this case you are saying "I don't have any evidence that this is true, I just want it to be true". If you are OK with that, then I have no problem with your position.
-----
Chris Harrison
Central Texas

Yes, but that may only tells you that their brains work differently then ours, or that our brain has a more complex reaction to the emotion. For years we equated brain size with cognitive ability, and yet parrots like african greys have demonstrated that size doesn't necessarily equal function.

I disagree, in many instances we gather becuase of resources, a mall for instance is a huge gathering place, so is a metro station. Yet we would all prefer it, if we were the only ones there. Any human interaction can be broken down to survival issues. We marry to share resources, we have freinds, likewise to share resources. How is it any different for a snake to like you because your hands are warm then it is for say a girl to like you because of preceived gain in social status. Both are interested in fulfilling there own needs, its just that one behavor is more complex then the other.

Thats easy to test just place a hiding box big enough for three snakes to fit into and one that can only hold one and place them in a cage with three ball pythons and see how often you find the single hidding spot empty, the results will suprize you.

The stress levels would be higher for people too, Iam not sure that supports your hypothesis. You could test your hypothesis by having two equally good brumation spots, accept that one is emptied every time a snake settles in, and then count which site attracked the most snakes, otherwise you are making an assumption. Although, a valid hypothesis worth testing. I too made an assumption, but as I said you can test and prove if this is social or not, if it is, you still can't relate it to our own social experience.

We agree here accept that I would add that because its not possible to tell the motives, doesn't mean that they aren't the same as ours. Scientist do the same thing with god, God can't be proven therefore he doesn't exist.

Our understanding of gravity is based on theory. A scientific theory is above a hypothesis, in the sense that it can be tested. Love, is intangible, it can't be tested or proven, I doubt you could even get a consensus on it's definition. Like an angel on the head of a pin, you can't even begin to use science to prove or disprove it. My point is that we have no choice but to say "I don't have evidence that this is true or not true, I therefore must take it on faith, from my own intuitive beliefs."
To say that it is not true because there is no evidence to prove it, is as much a leap of faith as it is to say that is true.

I think we are deviating from the original quesition - whether reptiles enjoy handling. I don't believe they do and I see no evidence to the contrary that isn't interpreted in a fashion that I regard as biased.

Thats easy to test just place a hiding box big enough for three snakes to fit into and one that can only hold one and place them in a cage with three ball pythons and see how often you find the single hidding spot empty, the results will suprize you.

Again, you are interpreting the behavior of them getting under the same hidebox as their desire to be together, rather than their desire to be in a cramped space.

Try putting two snakes in a situation where they had to choose between a large roomy hidebox where they won't be in contact with each other or two small, heavy hideboxes where one one snake can barely fit in each. I suspect you would find the snakes choose the security of the small box over the ability to "socialize".

You could test your hypothesis by having two equally good brumation spots, accept that one is emptied every time a snake settles in, and then count which site attracked the most snakes

This might work, except I don't know how to create two equally good hibernacula based on what the snake would regard as good. Furthermore, following another snake's trail to a hibernaculum doesn't necessarily imply a desire to "be together".

We agree here accept that I would add that because its not possible to tell the motives, doesn't mean that they aren't the same as ours.

True, but it is much more logical (and more likely to be correct) that the motivation is different than ours rather than the same. And when you include your personal biases (we want the animals to like us) that makes it even more likely you will jump to the wrong conclusion. The best approach is to assume nothing and test different interpretations.

Scientist do the same thing with god, God can't be proven therefore he doesn't exist.

Which scientists are you talking about? Some scientists are deeply religious, others aren't.

That generalization is no more correct than saying that religious people are delusional because they believe in something they can't see or hear. Neither generalization is true.

As I stated before, scientists (I am one, BTW) don't try (or feel the need) to prove anything. That isn't the purpose of science. Science is about proposing and testing falsifiable hypotheses that are created to explain observed phenomena.

Love, is intangible, it can't be tested or proven, I doubt you could even get a consensus on it's definition.

So in this case, love is a metaphysical emotional reaction that people feel in response to people they are attracted to. Yet, there is a scientific understanding of how this emotion develops and works. Scientists have shown
- if you place two people of similar age in a situation where they are required to spend a significant amount of time talking to each other about their personal feelings about life, etc., they are more likely to report feelings of love for the other person. (These subjects were much more likely to begin dating after experiment as well).
If you put the same people in that situation but have them talk about other topics, they don't feel that way. So love can be triggered by certain predictable situations.

- people with damage to certain regions of the limbic system can't feel emotions like love, so clearly it is localized to one area of the brain.

My point is that we have no choice but to say "I don't have evidence that this is true or not true, I therefore must take it on faith, from my own intuitive beliefs." To say that it is not true because there is no evidence to prove it, is as much a leap of faith as it is to say that is true.

Absolutely, but that isn't science. We do the same thing when we decide whether to believe in ghosts or not. Just because something isn't science doesn't make it invalid. It just means it isn't science.

Therefore, if you are going to try and figure out whether reptiles enjoy being handled, there are two approaches - the scientific or the metaphysical. I prefer the former as it gives me testable hypotheses.
The metaphysical isn't wrong, it just doesn't answer the question satisfactorily for me.

You could take the metaphysical approach that says "I like my snake and it must like me back because I don't like things that don't like me". I have no fundamental problem with this approach.
However, Many people take an intermediate approach. They have the metaphysical outlook ("my snake likes me" ) but they take a pseudo-scientific approach to try to support it ("see, he comes out of his hidebox when I enter the room" ). You can't support a non-scientific hypothesis with scientific evidence.
-----
Chris Harrison
Central Texas

I have been keeping herps for a long time and have had some that became "pets" like most of us. So as has been said, I don't want to come off as the person who falsely attributes emotions/behaviours to their new Cal. King "Bandy"

I some times think there is more going on behind the eyes than we give credit for though. Other times a LOT less.

I wonder sometimes if CB snakes aren't like horses. The hack horses that are ridden by riders that don't really know how to ride suffer from sore mouths from inexperienced riders, get dull from being kicked by knukleheads that don't know the proper way to get them to move. They sort of turn "off" and follow the butt of the horse in front of them, sort of becoming a soft machine without personality or life. Sort of like a lot of snakes you see at herp shows that are handled like living sausages by hordes of people.

On the other hand I've read accounts(Goodman and Goodman?) About Pyros puposely moving around in the open to get nesting parent birds in the area to go after them to protect their young only to have the Pyros watch the parents return to the nests so they could locate the nestlings and eat them.I know that handling is stressful to varying degress as discussed but I sometimes notice a few of my Gaigeae who are out for cleaning wandering over to me puposely, not a feeding interest and just watching me and sometimes seemingly purposely laying on me when they could go look for cover or move away. Just makes me wonder sometimes even though I "know" better.

Bob.

Do reptiles respond like dogs and cats.....depends. many owners of Box Turtles can attest that their animals like to be rubbed. Will even "ask" for it. Each individual is also different, some like their shells rubbed, some legs, and some their heads. One poster on the Box Turtle forum has even had her Boxie come and sit in her lap while she was working in the yard! So to sum it up, in general I think reptiles do not "seek" interaction with humans except for food. However, as with Boxies, you will find a few that are the exception.
-----
Jenea

1:3 Eastern Hognose
0:0:1 Florida Redbelly Snake
0:1 Gulf Coast Box Turtle
1:1 Red-eared Slider
2:0 Cats
1:1 Kids
1:0 Spouse

Well, I think it depends on the reptile. You would have an easier time showing that turtles and crocodilians can be social then lizards and snakes, snakes being the hardest.

My Ideas about snakes being solitary animals without social abilities has been challenged lately after reading FRs posts about feild obsevations over many years in the Kingsnake Forum.

Some times all the turtles on the log means they may all want the same warm environment and this is the best place for it not that they like all the other turtles.

On the other hand.....

FR has said that he observes snakes living in colonies many times, like kings and milks that I would have suppossed preyed on each other. FR seems to observe and believe that they all seem to know where each other are at all times, pick specific repetitive mates instead of it being whoever runs into whoever in the spring, males hanging out with other adult males under AC without challenging each other or trying to eat each other. I have to say my ideas about their social lives has taken a beating but I am glad that Frank posts so much cool stuff to clue us in.

Bob.