Reptile & Amphibian Forums

In the interest of getting to know you, I would like to know to what extent you've studied hognose in the wild? Things like number of years, months, weeks, hours, land areas that you've actually researched and observed. Meaning what regions/states have you actually spent significant time in the field. I'm not talking about a few day trip to a buddies hot spot back east in Timbuktu. I'm talking areas that you've spent real time in the field researching. How many square miles, things like that. Feel free to go for it buddy. This is your time to shine.

As I mentioned here many times, I only recently started in depth work with hognose, almost two years ago. In that time, I have seen 201 individual hogs, of which, 166 were seen alive by me. The others were either DOR's or discovered by others with me.

Over the years, I have found hognose in the field in, Texas, New Mexico, Az. Kansas(dor) and Mexico. Those are westerns and Kennerlyi. I have also seen Easterns and southerns in the field. In the distant past, I have captive bred, easterns, southerns, and westerns. When I did, I had no real interest in them and simply plugged them into normal colubrid breeding. Also in the past, finding them was a bi-product of looking for other species.
I almost began working with them in the early seventies. Which is a funny story. I was working with alterna, I think it was in 1973. I was hunting north of Comstock, on both 163 and pandale rds. I saw several hogs. I did not take any, as I had collected a pair of Blairs and a beautiful alterna. On my way to the Christmas mts, just west of Alpine, I found a huge beautiful female hog. I decided to take it and pair it up. Once in the Christmas mts, I was very lucky and found two alternas in ten minutes, so I drove the hog back to exactly where I found it and released it. From then to now, I wanted to work with hogs, but was always busy working with other species.
A couple of years ago, my wife decided she was tried of climbing mountains and wanted to see some other species. One was boas, so in the last two years, we have done that. She actually found and picked up a boa constrictor all by herself in mexico on a work related trip.(impressive indeed) And she loves hogging. Absolutely loves it. So there you go.
As I mentioned here, I am new to hogs, but as most already understand, I have been in depth in the field for over fifty years. pt1

During the last twenty months, I have seen 10 hog nests, and two females nesting. And all manner of behaviors. And of course seen 7 axanthics, and two what I call, black and whites and a few hypos. A few nearly patternless(possibly just really old) and all manner of "normal" color variations. 4 basic pattern type, and many color types. I am working two counties. And several habitat types. The closest to my house is aprox 40 miles.
In my field work, I would rather see quality observations, in the field and not numbers on the road. But I do both. Concentrating in the field. I have always been a fan of tracking, and have tracked snakes since the late sixties. Wait, I tracked a gophersnake down in 1958. which may be why I like doing that. hogs are a great subject to track. Hogs can move when they want. I took a friend and we found a photographed a neonate, released it, found it again two hours later and it traveled, 3/4's of a mile. That is the exception, most only travel on the surface, less then 50 ft. before returning to the ground. So whats your story?

So you've really only lightly touched on the southern most range of the westerns habitat?

You do realize that their natural habitat goes from Texas all the way up to Albert, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and every state in between there and Texas? And that the habitats change drastically as you get out of the desert states of Texas, New Mexico and Arizona?

That would explain why you keep pushing sand as a substrate because that's all you see down there.

So knowing these facts, do you think that they might use something other than sand to nest in once they don't have access to it in the central and northern states where sand is not as abundant or even nonexistent?

Isn't it just as likely that they are only using sand down there because that's all that is available and by nature they could really prefer a more northern style of soil?

Guezz give it up. In all papers, all books, and one talk that showed many wild females nesting(in minn.), All say, the same as I see here. preferred habitat is Sandy soils. Look it up please.
You do understand that reptiles are broken down to habitat type. Such terms as mesic and xeric. or Riparian or arid, etc. each habitat type has species evolved to those types. Some species are obligated to certain habitats very tightly, others cover a few types, Hogs seem to be specific and adapted to mesic habitats of sandy loaming areas. Look it up.
Also please understand, you can use what ever you want. For darn sakes, use what you want. But that will not stop me from recommending what I think is good. If you nest them well in a pea can of turnip greens, all the better. But that has nothing to do with me.

Conant says about eastern hognose "Sandy areas are a favorite habitat" In regards to southern hognose "Habitats include sandy woods..."

Tenant, in Field Guide to Snakes of Florida says "Eastern hognoses live in a variety of sandy-substrate habitats...."

Reichling, in Reptiles and Amphibians of the Southern Pine Woods says "the Eastern Hognose Snake is one of numerous species that finds suitable habitat in the pine woods by virtue of its sandy, friable substrate."

I do not think it is even up for debate that hognose are strongly associated with sandy soils, whatever the species of hognose.

All the sources you quoted referred to the other types, specifically, so your conclusion was surprising.

Knopf, for example, clearly differentiates between the Westerns and the others regarding soil types.

I'm not taking a side - I just think you shouldn't assume that Westerns are like the others.
They might be quite different, either as a result of inherent nature or because of what's available to them.

When I would search for agamas, I was blown away by the extremely different lifestyles of the 2 subspecies I observed(and they would freely hybridize). Their geographical ranges were side by side and one preferred to live on rocks and walls, mostly arboreal; (stellio stellio) while the other, (stellio brachydactyla) would hang out around objects on the sandy floor, living a much more terrestrial way of life.

Your right Caracal. The point is, with MY hogs, sandy substrate is much better then anything else.
Nesting, as I said, I found Ten nests and all were SANDY. and only sandy/ with fines.
This year I will attempt to nest one female in sand/coco mix, a fairly standard mix. But next year, I will nest half in that mix and half in the exact sand I found nests in. And see if there is a difference. You see, I try all manner of stuff
Heres a good point, You sir(Caracal) were kind enough to show your nesting and I thank you. You sir, are one of the very few who had the stones to do so.
The OP has not shown anything. Of importance, when I came here, I asked ALL for that data, and none but you posted anything.
Lastly, whats important is what is important to me and my goals. What any of you do, is up to you. Unless any of you show me something better, I have no reason to think or believe anything other then what I do now.
So show me! I am all eyes and ears.

I asked you a question below, but in case you didn't notice it:

Have you tried keeping Drymobius margaritiferus?

just saw your response

On that, I'm in complete agreement with you.

Try the alternatives and see what happens.

Which is all I have ever said here. I asked that folks try stuff. Not even exactly what I do, just try. With nesting, depth is important. Many have now tried it and its worked for them. I do not care if they do it their way. That's all good.
Materials, like type of sand, is next on the list. When you work with many species like you do, you will see that what they do is similar, yet slightly different. To me, and I think you, that is the fun part.
When you see hogs TAKE to sand, its fun. They are doing what their design is. I have a poor video of a longnose snake being a longnose snake. Its using its nose in an odd way. I will see if I can find it.

There is one question which really intrigues me. It relates to what we've debated over and over.
I've heard your hypothesis about how snakes have evolved to a tremendous level of efficiency in order to survive and, therefore, most of the problems we see in captivity relate to how we don't provide what is adequate for them etc. - excuse me if I haven't phrased your point the way you might have, but I think that's the gist.

Now this is my question and maybe you've discussed it elsewhere and I missed it:
In your field studies, have you attempted to palpate females which appear to have just laid eggs to see if they have retained any eggs.
I think this would be a very important and useful point of comparison when we are trying to determine how we are faring with our captive breeding.
If you haven't done so yet with a decent sample size and if it's a realistic thing for you to do, then I think it could possibly be an extremely informative study and I, for one, would love to hear the results.

Great question, I mean a great question, Many years ago, late seventies, I worked on a research grant. I did a literature search infertility in wild snake clutches(in nature) and found there was some infertility. I have pics if me checking croc nests. I found full term dead babies, in eggs and infertile eggs in each nest.
In all the years in the field, I have indeed seen maybe five females with held eggs. One was a greenrat. One a banded rock rattlesnake on our study site. A cal king. That's all I can remember.
And yes, I palpate all snakes on the road, and some in the field. I try to not touch field snakes, but there are exceptions. So far, no held eggs with hogs.
The point is, nature covers all possibilities, from mass die offs, to super successful. Our task in captivity is to support success not support failure. I do not believe in any way, failure is only in captivity. Nature wacks them dead in more ways then you can imagine. Its the other end that interests me. Simply put, in nature, if a snake makes a poor decision, its quickly erased. Nest in the wrong place, gone. Nest in the right place where neonates survive, they continue until that no longer works.

Didn't I recently post a pic of a hatched nest with an infertile egg in it? If not I could post it.

I agree that our task in captivity is to support success not support failure - I just don't know whether that means realistically expecting a 95%, 98% or 100% success rate.
Like you said, you've observed a certain amount of infertility, dead babies etc.
If you had to ball park, how many female hogs, that had obviously just laid, have you palpated?

Its not a good question, first because theres not enough data, and more importantly, Nesting is hardwired. That is, its needed for survival of the species, not just an individual. A healthy population, is healthy, first because of good recruitment. Which means, eggs hatch. Failure for eggs to hatch occurs when something drastic occurs, floods, drought, fire, drastic change in conditions. Egg binding or held eggs would also have those types of causes. Failure to deposit eggs, is totally abnormal to recruitment. Remember, they have had millions of years to perfect nesting, egg deposition, and the ability to deliver eggs. If an individual becomes egg bound, its erased, end of that genetic line. Or end of that behavioral line. So in lew of lack of data, its simply not logical or realistic that egg binding is a "normal" occurrence. does it occur, sure. How often, pretty dang rarely. it is far far far more likely to happen In captivity because we simply do not have a handle on how they nest in nature, which is what their design is for. With the subject of nesting material as misunderstood as it is. I will add to this later

You did a full 180 between your two posts:
"Great question, I mean a great question....wild snake clutches(in nature) and found there was some infertility. I have pics if me checking croc nests. I found full term dead babies, in eggs and infertile eggs in each nest...
In all the years in the field, I have indeed seen maybe five females with held eggs...And yes, I palpate all snakes on the road, and some in the field...So far, no held eggs with hogs.
The point is, nature covers all possibilities, from mass die offs, to super successful. I do not believe in any way, failure is only in captivity. Nature wacks them dead in more ways then you can imagine..."
"Its not a good question, first because theres not enough data, and more importantly, Nesting is hardwired... A healthy population, is healthy, first because of good recruitment. Which means, eggs hatch. Failure for eggs to hatch occurs when something drastic occurs, floods, drought, fire, drastic change in conditions. Egg binding or held eggs would also have those types of causes. Failure to deposit eggs, is totally abnormal to recruitment. Remember, they have had millions of years to perfect nesting, egg deposition, and the ability to deliver eggs. If an individual becomes egg bound, its erased, end of that genetic line. Or end of that behavioral line. So in [lieu] of lack of data, its simply not logical or realistic that egg binding is a "normal" occurrence. does it occur, sure. How often, pretty dang rarely. it is far more likely to happen In captivity because we simply do not have a handle on how they nest in nature, which is what their design is for. With the subject of nesting material as misunderstood as it is."
My question was how many hogs in the field, that have obviously just laid, have you palpated?
It doesn't make much sense to say that is not a good question, because of lack of data and then, instead, write a lengthy discourse explaining why obviously the answer would be zero.

Its not a good question because it cannot be directly answered. Tell me how to tell if one just laid, one day later, two days later, three days later.
If you asked if I palpated females after the nesting season I could give you a direct answer, yes, lots of them and never felt a hard egg or ovum(retained). EVER in hog, and as I explained. Its an odd question. As its a medical problem and not normal. So if it occurred, it had to have some traumatic reason.
I would like to ask, why do you ask that. Are you attempting to justify egg bound as normal to hognose. Its not and not to any egg laying reptile. Its a medical condition. In nature and in captivity.

ALso, please do not get upset if you ask a bad question. Unless your doing it on purpose.
As mentioned, in nature, they are AT their chosen nesting site, weeks months, ahead of laying. Normally

First you said it's a "great question", then you said it's "not a good question".
I didn't attack you - I just pointed out how you shifted positions so extremely.
I also pointed out that if somebody asks you for data, then it's very peculiar to respond by saying that: "Its not a good question.... because there's not enough data".
Your original response showed open-mindedness, even enthusiasm, that your ideas could be validated by research in the field, but when I asked you exactly the same question again, you opted to say that it couldn't be validated with data and was just "simply" the truth.
With regards to your point that one can't tell if a hog's just laid eggs - I don't agree.
Admittedly, one can't be sure, but if one restricted one's sample to 'skinny as a rake' females in the appropriate season, then it could be quite informative - especially if you are right, because you would get zero, or close to it.
Conversely, if you discovered that some did retain an egg, then it would be more difficult to ascertain the meaning of the result, unless it was a decent number, which would be telling.

I think at this point in the discussion you've illustrated a clear lack of objectivity, so I can't say I'd treat your "research in the field" too seriously

You respond without allowing anyone to finish. Do I care what you think, No. Why should I. Do I like you, yes, your fun. Whether or not you agree with me, no worries, I could careless, with the exception if you offered HELP to me or others. Do that, and I will care.
Caracal, if you were doing similar field observations and had other interpitations, I would be very interested.
The important part of all this is, CONTEXT. Sir, you drift in and out of context and all based on your theories(non proven and not tested) In context, I would take one real field observation over any ten of your theories. No offense please, I would take that over anyones theories. I do consider your theories.
Sir. you would make a horrible field researcher. why, you think to much. All we do is record data. Not tell data what it is. As mentioned in this context, all the field data, in situ nests do is, offer probable cause to test. no more, no less. All your theorizing is for your head. and that's great, for you.
in context, most of what you theorize is not in context to the animals. its more about you. which again is fine. The context of field work is ONLY ABOUT THE ANIMALS. If they use large areas that do not fit in your box, its all about you. If sand is too heavy and sphagnum is liter, its about you. So what ever I see in nature, surely is out of context to you. in reality, you should not understand it, your not there.

We're supposed to wait till you're done with your part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4?
That's funny !!

Its funny because it makes you look foolish when you react harshly and its explained in pt 2. I did not limit the amount of words per post. If some is of value, it usually takes for then a couple words.
How about this, I will give you a one word answer to all this. NO.

"Sir. you would make a horrible field researcher. why, you think to much."

Absolutely the dumbest statement I ever read.

Sorry, to me, those were two different questions. One was exploratory the other was attempting to gain something direct.
So, if they were the same, why ask it twice?
Also, theres this cute advertisement of TV. A old lady with pictures on her wall. One of her old lady friends asks her something, and the old lady with the picture wall said, I am unfriending you. The other said replied, that's not how this works, its not how any of this is done.
That is the problem, your line of questioning is, NOT HOW THIS WORKS. What your doing is attempting to make theory(Theory is a contemplative and rational type of abstract) or to hypothesis(A Hypothesis (plural hypotheses) is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it) This is not what we are doing here. What we are doing is to establish probable cause. That is, create enough pertinent data that we test it. In short, how its done is, TEST IT. A simple box of sand, sitting right next to your box of sphagnum, and observe the difference. Or place both in a big cage and offer a choice.
Your confusion lays in this area, THIS IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC board. So your use of many terms is basically out of place.
For instance, from my field observations, I formed the hypothesis that hogs prefer sandy nesting area. So, I am going to test it. What ever hypothesis you make, is yours to make a test. What you do is based on your probable cause. In short, test it or not. Its about that easy. pt1

I asked again (yes, more directly), because you showed a positive response the first time and I was hoping for a clearer response based on your experience in the field.
Instead, you've reverted to FR incoherence.

Evidence leads to hogs being sand nesters, but that does not mean they are obligate sand nesters. In fact, in captivity, they will lay eggs on the ground in their cages, under the water bowl, in tissue paper, in sphagnum moss. Or where ever they can. This exercise is not about possibilities. This is to see if there may be a material known to hognose females, that tells them, this is a nesting site.
In nature, hogs or other snakes do not lay eggs willy nilly, They are very specific as to where they lay them, and in what material they lay them in. Also, very specific about conditions they lay their eggs in.
What we are questioning here is, is there a material that will help, work better, benefit the female and us. That is the question. Not proving some scientific fact. The fact here is, the results of testing.
As I have said(1mt's=one million times) when investigated hogs in captivity, egg binding was commonplace and often resulted in death. With other species, this was eliminated by supporting the species with nestings choices that suited their species. I will start with materials like sphagnum. pt2

Sphagnum moss is a standard material for nesting many species. Lets take a look at this material, what is it?Sphagnum is a genus of approximately 120 species[1] of mosses. Sphagnum accumulations can store water, since both living and dead plants can hold large quantities of water inside their cells; plants may hold from 16–26 times as much water as their dry weight depending on the species.[2] The empty cells help retain water in drier conditions. Hence, as sphagnum moss grows, it can slowly spread into drier conditions, forming larger peatlands, both raised bogs and blanket bogs.[3] These peat accumulations then provide habitat for a wide array of peatland plants, including sedges and ericaceous shrubs, as well as orchids and carnivorous plants.[4] Sphagnum and the peat formed from it do not decay readily because of the phenolic compounds embedded in the moss's cell walls. In addition, bogs, like all wetlands, develop anaerobic soil conditions, which produces slower anaerobic decay rather than aerobic microbial action. Peat moss can also acidify its surroundings by taking up cations, such as calcium and magnesium, and releasing hydrogen ions. Under the right conditions, peat can accumulate to a depth of many meters. Different species of Sphagnum have different tolerance limits for flooding and pH, so any one peatland may have a number of different Sphagnum species.
Hognose are a xeric species, that occurs in sandy areas, Which is foreign to peat bogs. In my experience, texas, new mexico and az. they are alkaline in nature. often occurring in alkaline flats and surrounding areas. Sphagnum moss is highly acidic, very much the opposite of their natural habitat. If hogs were prejudiced about where they put eggs, It would be easy to rationalize they sphagnum would not be a first choice. As it does not occur in their natural habitat. So if problems occurred, this would be logical place to start.

Keep repeating your theory.

Alkaline habitats and acidic habitats are known to divide species, plants, insects, and animals. So why do we use sphagnum moss. That's easy to answer, cause you can buy it, with your money, from your pocket. All it does is, hold moisture. No more, no less. In that, its good.
So why do hogs seem to have egg binding problems. I don't know, you tell me? But if you want to call egg binding normal. You need to be wacked on top your head. In the end, this is not about biology or science, its more about common sense, your snakes having a problem, FIX IT. they are not having a problem, no worries.
Caracal, if yours are fine, good, its not about you. But if this helps one other person and their snakes, then its all good. And there are lots of folks with problems. This is why I continue to have this conversation. It may indeed help others. Its also why I guide it back to something USABLE, and not theoretical. So please do not feel bad that I do not follow your train of thought. You love theory and making all manner of hypothesis, and your welcome to do so. Me, its all about, the animals IN MY CAGES, then others cages, If there is a problem that we can help fix. Caracal, lets do it, lets try. Our conversation really should lead to something of use. or at least test. All those things like facts, an theory an proof etc. are all at the end of the rainbow. did it work?
The OTHER problem is, most here that argue, do not have a point, other then to discredit someone else. So debate turns ugly. This is called trolling by TROLLS. If you have a better way, shout it out.
Caracal, to me, your a bit too academic(ideas not pertaining to a hypothesis, testable) Me, I see a hog nesting in sand, I get shovel dig up sand and test it. I do not need to theorize, hypothesis, or anything else. just test it. Why, cause its fun to learn. If don't work, adjust try again.

Call me "whacked in the head", but, yes, I suspect it might be normal that a certain percent of females, even in ideal nesting conditions, may retain the last egg and many of those times expel it at a later date.
Or certainly, that there may be many reasons, aside from nesting, that hogs retain eggs.

I see you didn't suggest I was whacked in the head.
You suggested I needed to be.
I guess that's one way to convince your opponent

Your not an opponent nor do you need convincing. which is why thing things go wrong. Sir, we are teammates. doing the same thing, not an opponent. Convincing is childish. Its your task to absorb it or not.
For instance, You live in a wonderful world of theories. What are you home bound and can not get out? Whoops, sorry for that.
Is that true, you dwell on theories?
I am different then you, I dwell on proving theories or hypothesis out. Sir, we are not here to make theories, we are here to proof out methods to improve husbandry.
If your are happy with snakes normally become egg bound, then be happy. I am not happy with that. And many others are not either.
here comes that wack to the head. Caracal, if your happy with your theories, by all means be happy. Why do you constantly think its all about you? To improve nesting is for those that WANT to improve nesting. If you don't, THEN DON'T.
Theories are like opinions, everybody has one, or in your case a million. Consider, I bet I can come up with more theories then you. At worse we would tie. Truth is, theories are worthless, at least the bunghole has value. YOu know, opinions are like bungholes, everyones got one.
Whats of value is the results, to prove a theory out. So stop with the theory BS and help come up with results, or not. Test it or not. All this theory stuff is compelling me to watch star trek.

Whats ideal? you and I have no concept what ideal is. What we are talking about is what is instinctual to hognose.
So ideal, what on earth is that? by definition, Ideal would be conditions that did not cause egg binding or held eggs. perfect, no problems, etc. So again, you confuse yourself.
Your theory is not even a theory, its a rationalization to explain something you do not understand. Does egg binding occur in snakes, YES, that is not the problem. what is the problem is frequency. Exceedingly rare in nature, and common in captivity. THAT IS THE PROBLEM. The TASK, how do we reduce the frequency in captivity. Troubleshooting, focus on the problem, not on clutter.
over the years on the internet, its common to hear the words, ideal, and optimal etc. The problem is, what's normal to the animal, is IDEAL to us. Ideal is an illusion. These animals are selected for performing well in normal conditions, In ideal conditions, they preform exceedingly well, like heavy multiclutching or superior growth etc. Our problem is, lets first get to what is normal for the animal. Ideal can come later.

"So stop with the theory BS and help come up with results"
That was funny
Let us know when you have some results !!

You complain that we attack you, but your posts are full of verbal abuse.
It really doesn't bother me - I could care less !!
I know it bothers many other people.
I'm being emailed constantly by others who are sick of your aggressive approach.

First, I intend to have results and I hope to share them. The reality, this problem is not new to me, and have solved it before, many times. So I have reason to take this approach.
Also, its normal human behavior, to want to be equal, and at the same time to be different. I do not pretent to be good for all people, I hope to help some people. Those people that worry about how something is said or whatever, are rudely put, a waste of my time. Those that are interested in the animals, I have interest in and respect, and its not about right or wrong.
In a nutshell, if you take numbers of people, You have a super high percentage of normal nice folks that are followers, governments live on this group. They do what their told, etc follow recipes etc. Then a small percentage that are explorers or inventors. And a small percentage that help those that explore. There is also a percentage that are ambivalent. Those that don't care one way or another. All that is normal. put them together and they fight. its normal.
Its not that anyone is bad or horrible, they are just different people. I have a history of invention and discoveries. In other areas too. Which means, my mindset is to the keep looking and question. Those that are not like that, sometimes have problems.
working on zoo exhibits, we were exposed to thousands of people daily, 80% said the exact same thing, 15% said something different, only the same a the others in that group, 4 perfect were different, and 1% were completely wacked.
go to any forum on other subjects, other species on KS, you have the same dynamics. Before I was here, there were others that were attacked. Its normal. As one who seeks what I don't know, I simply cannot pay attention to clutter.
whats bad is, you make it ahout right or wrong or this or that. Heres the deal, there is opportunity to help and add to the keeping of hognose, so either help or get out of the way. I believe you can help. others will only hold you back.pt1

I do not intend to rock your worlds, or change anything. I can say, nesting can be improved. Every thing else you guys do, is up to you.
But if and only if, I end up with better results that a lot of you, its not about me. its all about you and what you don't do.
Another problem I thought odd was gravid females. Most gravid female colubrids cycle and form palpable ovum early on. Many hognose keepers state, I did not know it was gravid. I questioned that. Well, guess what, hogs are a bit different and may not form ovum until they shed. How cool is that. Now I understand how that could happen.
No offense, but in the entire time we have conversed, you have offered about three small posts of something real. The rest of the time its all about theory, hypothesis, and other folks feelimgs(social drama) In the time I have posted here, I have posted all manner of real hog stuff. What you folks do with it, is up to you. I am not your teacher, your dad, mother or anyone else that cares what you do. This is like college, you want to learn, then learn. If not, drop out. Here, you question me, Consider, its not my task to teach you to ask better questions, That is your task. In all reality, science is not about answers, its about asking better questions. All answers are temporary. So, ask better questions, and include asking the hognose. TEST IT!

"Those people that worry about how something is said or whatever, are rudely put, a waste of my time."

I guess that just about sums it up.

It does,
you want to make it all about friends and such, I don't. My friends are strong enough to understand why something is said. We are talking about the health and welfare of captive snakes. We are suppose to be thoughtful enough to understand what's important.
What bothers me is learning I was doing something poorly. Not what any yahoo on the internet thinks or says. You, are suppose to consider the message, not who is saying it, or if it hurts your feelings.
Heres something to think about, when I was younger, at that time, I had famous herpetologist criticize this or that. Sometimes they were wrong and sometimes they were right. What did I do? I considered what was said, and kept it in my mind. I did not argue like children.
WE do not have to like learning and it can be painful. But its not about us, its about helpless reptiles, confined in a box. If you think about it, there are about a million ways to make it better for them. I ask you to pick one and run with it.
You seem to make it about one of us, or one of them. you know, your opponent. Happily, I am not one of you. And I did not want to be. I just like hognose.

Why don't you try both:

1. Exchanging ideas about snake husbandry to improve the lives of snakes in captivity.
2. Interacting decently with your fellowman.

First of all, it might make people more receptive to your ideas and if you truly care about the snakes, that would further your goal.
Secondly, I would like to imagine that keeping snakes isn't your only value in life. Maybe I'm wrong !

You can keep calling us children.
But actually it's quite the opposite:

Grown-ups talk civilly to each other, listen to each other's ideas and do act friendly, not because they need friends, but because that's what mature people do.

Children pout, insist they're right, talk rudely and act defiantly, saying they don't need friends.

Quit the BS !!

There were a few posts where you were responding very pleasantly and I don't mean just because you agreed with some of what I said.
Your manner was completely different. You were being so polite and I was surprised at how much I was enjoying the dialogue.

It couldn't have been that painful

You found them nesting in sand because that's pretty much all that there is in region.

In Illinois, my home state, we have both western and eastern hognose snakes. In the Amphibians and Reptiles of Illinois, it states that western hog habitat is "Sand prairies, Savannah's, and adjacent wood lots in well-drained soil."
I have seen both hognose species in Illinois, a northern state, but always associated with sandy soils. Really never anywhere else.

I posted my thoughts before I saw your second post

Yeah, I realized that my references all dealt with playrhinos and simus, not nasicus, and added Illinois. Back when I lived there, that is how we found both species (eastern and western), by looking for sandy habitat. It would have been a waste of our time to look at non-sandy habitat.

If you see any more "black and whites" can you post some pics, and would you even consider catching and shipping? Sounds interesting.