"I think that there is no doubt but that corns in the wild will eat all sorts of things. I have posted about this before, but I do know of one instance where a person who had a wc corn was feeding it for more than a year on nothing more than the earthworms he dug out of his garden, because he didn't know that corns wouldn't do that! What's more the snake was thriving!
I have no doubt that corns can and do eat insects from time to time in the wild. I also have no doubt that corns can eat crickets in captivity.
However, I ALSO have no doubt that to offer them crickets (especially as hatchlings) is very dangerous. No, not for the "you can't do that...it's against the rules" mentality. No one likes to go against the grain more than I do ("episkiastism," anyone?). The problem I have with feeding crickets to hatchlings is due to the exoskeleton of crickets.
Corns are hearty little creatures, but they are unbelievably delicate in some ways. For a neonate corn, the lining of the stomach is only a few cells thick at best, and the sharp edges of cricket legs and shells are easily capable of rupturing the digestive tract. I have even seen where a corn was killed because it was fed live prey, and the claws of the food item shreded the esophagus of the young corn, because it was not fully constricted prior to consumption.
So, I think to ask and consider the question of "will they eat insects" is fine...interesting even. But I cannot stress loudly and long enough, especially to newer keepers, that crickets just should not be included in the diets of their corns. Yes, wild corns probably do eat them, but then again, most wild corns probably don't make it through their first year either."
-----
Darin Chappell
Hillbilly Herps
PO Box 254
Rogersville, MO 65742
Ken,
Why doesn't the aforementioned post by Darin make sense to you? Why is it wrong? Are you a vet? Do you have some kind of proof or research 411 showing that a neonate's stomach lining could not be torn by a cricket? Please tell us or share it with us.
Because although I do not really know either way which is correct, this seems to make some sense to me. And if your testimony of this knowledge is solid, then tell us why it is.
I had a well-known herp vet and king/milk guy, Dave Doherty, tell me that my baby suboc most likely had a tear inside do to a food item that occured before I bought the snake. He said it is a more-or-less common occurence among captive baby snakes. The snake died, being (practically speaking) too small to operate on.
If a pinky or fuzzy could sometimes do it, then why not a cricket?
If you know of some credible source that tells us either way, please share it. I don't give advice or post comments unless I have some inkling that I may be right, due to what I have studied. But this makes some sense to me, without having any real CREDIBLE source to look up.
Dusty