# Do most people want to breed their reptiles?



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

A discussion on another thread got me thinking......


----------



## Dragon Wolf (Oct 27, 2009)

I'm not bothered about breeding my lizards too much, though I have a few pairs living together [Tunisian Eyed Lizards, Desert Iguanas, Chinese Tree Dragons, etc]
If they breed I'll incubate the eggs, if not, no problems


----------



## Meko (Apr 29, 2007)

i've no interest in breeding and that'd only change if i could get something higher end. There seems to be a lot of people that think breeding is fun / going to make them rich, and they're just the ones who want to buy a friend for Spike.


----------



## Athravan (Dec 28, 2006)

A lot of my customers do want to breed their reptiles, I'd say well over half, possibly even three quarters of the people I sell to ask about getting the opposite sex to breed. A lot of them then choose not to breed when they find out about all the negative sides to breeding, as they may not realise the amount of time, space, money, food etc. that can go into breeding reptiles - butsome of my customers do seem to insist on getting one of the opposite sex and breeding their animals, and then often come back to me when they can't house or sell the offspring.

From the POV of a shopkeeper it certainly feels that a lot of people want to breed their reptiles from the amount of questions we get asked.


----------



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

Dragon Wolf said:


> I'm not bothered about breeding my lizards too much, though I have a few pairs living together [Tunisian Eyed Lizards, Desert Iguanas, Chinese Tree Dragons, etc]
> If they breed I'll incubate the eggs, if not, no problems


So what did you vote?


----------



## Kat91 (Sep 19, 2008)

The way I see it is that yes, most reptile keepers intend to breed them, I myself am not aiming for that, BUT I may breed in the future just for the experience. Or I might not breed at all.


----------



## Dragon Wolf (Oct 27, 2009)

Crownan said:


> So what did you vote?


Hi mate, I voted............
"Not interested in breeding, my reptiles are my pets"

I don't look at them as breeders, they're pets, simple as :2thumb:


----------



## Crownan (Jan 6, 2007)

Dragon Wolf said:


> Hi mate, I voted............
> "Not interested in breeding, my reptiles are my pets"
> 
> I don't look at them as breeders, they're pets, simple as :2thumb:


But you keep pairs together and would incubate the eggs if they had any..............surely if you werent interested then you'd be more responsible and keep same sex pairs (where possible) or you wouldnt incubate the eggs?


----------



## BoaQueen (May 3, 2009)

Definitely breeding this year. Didn't plan that years ago when I got my first corn snake!!!! But after getting my first boas it was always a future plan and hopefully now I have the snakes I want, my plan will come to fruition!!


----------



## snakeboy101 (Jul 3, 2006)

I have dreamt about making a living out of breeding since I was about 8 years old. I don't think I am as ambitious now as I was then but I really do want to start breeding some animals soon.

As a kid here are the animals I wanted to breed when I got older.

Emerald Tree Boa's
Royal Python's
Green Tree Python's

The list of animals I wanted to keep at that age is bigger as I got older the list for animals I wanted to keep got smaller and the list for animals I want to try breeding got bigger.
Here is a list of animals I want to breed or at least try my hand at breeding them a couple times.

Emerald Tree Boa's
Royal Python's
Green Tree Python's
Dumeril's Boa
Hogg Island Boa's
Dwarf Retics
Brazilian Rainbow Boa's


----------



## zoe6660 (Jun 3, 2007)

i did want to breed but no they are pets too me like my dogs, and guinea pigs, but i think soon reptiles will be free bearded dragonw ill be free 1st coz there soo many not eveyone goign to want them soon once they see something new.


----------



## LizardFTI (Dec 2, 2006)

when I get my emerald tree monitors (in about a year or so once I am settled in a proper long term home of my own) I intend to breed them. Fascinating animals and not nearly common enough in the pet trade.

I dont think I would ever breed one of my "pet" reptiles tho.


----------



## Fatherted (Feb 8, 2010)

Kat91 said:


> I myself am not aiming for that, BUT I may breed in the future just for the experience. Or I might not breed at all.


 if you do just for the experince....remember to use protection!!!:lol2:


----------



## Fatherted (Feb 8, 2010)

As already said...i think alot think it will make them loadsa money...unfortunatley thats further from the truth than they realise, i only try & breed stuff if i know i can move on any resulting offspring, after that its kept as a pet.


----------



## yonark (May 23, 2007)

i will be breeding in the future but not a money making plan, i am starting a herpetology course so its only out of interest, and i would also like to mention that all my reptiles are my pets, they are very much loved, and though i say so myself spoilt. 
my schnau_zers and german shepherd dogs are my babies and i have bred them, its a great experience and by the time i pay all fees, medical test, vaccinations and microchips i don't make a huge profit from them neither.
_


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

According to the Animal Welfare Act (2006), as owners we should provide our animals the following;
 
(a) a suitable environment.
(b) a suitable diet.
(c) the opportunity to exhibit normal behaviour patterns.
(d) adequate housing (which could mean being housed with, or apart from, other animals depending upon the species in question).​(e) its need to be protected from pain, suffering, injury and disease.

Now, since breeding is certainly a "normal behaviour pattern" in animals, you could probably make a pretty convincing agument that we are morally and legally obliged to (at least attempt to) breed our animals in line with their natural breeding cycles etc. 

Just to be clear, I'm not necessarily saying that that's an argument I'd want to make myself, but it's one that could be made pretty well.

Any thoughts?


----------



## becky89 (Nov 24, 2009)

essexchondro said:


> According to the Animal Welfare Act (2006), as owners we should provide our animals the following;
> 
> (a) a suitable environment.
> (b) a suitable diet.
> ...


Maybe it would depend on if the animal actually suffers due to not being able to breed? Personally I would think (from the female reptile's point of view) that it would actually be more stressful for them to be bred.

I _may_ try breeding in the future, just for the experience, but wouldn't do that for any other reason.


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> Maybe it would depend on if the animal actually suffers due to not being able to breed? Personally I would think (from the female reptile's point of view) that it would actually be more stressful for them to be bred.
> 
> I _may_ try breeding in the future, just for the experience, but wouldn't do that for any other reason.


Stressful for the female it might be, but that stress is all part of nature...so by not allowing it to breed you're not allowing it to behave naturally. Now, even if that isn't suffering in itself (and you could argue that it is!) it's still technically going against the terms of the Act. 

The suffering factor isn't the issue here because any suffering that results from breeding is only _indirect_ and not a direct result of the act itself. Its not in the same category as burns from an unguarded heater, for example (which would be covered by point (e) I would assume).


----------



## becky89 (Nov 24, 2009)

essexchondro said:


> Stressful for the female it might be, but that stress is all part of nature...so by not allowing it to breed you're not allowing it to behave naturally. Now, even if that isn't suffering in itself (and you could argue that it is!) it's still technically going against the terms of the Act.
> 
> The suffering factor isn't the issue here because any suffering that results from breeding is only _indirect_ and not a direct result of the act itself. Its not in the same category as burns from an unguarded heater, for example (which would be covered by point (e) I would assume).


That's very true. But by keeping them in captivity in the first place they're never going to really be able to behave naturally, as much as we try


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> That's very true. But by keeping them in captivity in the first place they're never going to really be able to behave naturally, as much as we try


I appreciate that, but that still doesn't get around the fact that the Animal Welfre Act _does_ concern itself with captive animals and it _does_ set out certain requirements about what those captive animals are entitled to...one of which is that they should be able to exhibit (as much as is possible in a captive environmnet) "normal behaviour patterns". 

Clearly it's impossible to provide a truely natural environment _in every respect_ for a captive animal...but giving them the opportunity to breed in line with their natural breeding cycles is definitely one of those behavior patterns that we _can_ cater for. That being the case, surely the notion of deliberately preventing an animal from breeding - because it suits _the keeper_ to do so - is a delibrate act of "abuse" in the context of the criteria of AWA?

Like I say, I'm not necessarily advocating this point of view, but it does make for an interesting debate...and the whole idea that we might be abusing an animal by not allowing it to breed certainly adds a new perspective to things.


----------



## samurai (Sep 9, 2009)

i'm no good at rehoming animals i have bred and always end up keeping the babies, thats why i had 7 chinchillas (6 now ). did think about breeding african pygmy hedgehogs but know i would end up over run lol


----------



## tayside_el_boa (Apr 13, 2010)

am thinking of breeding in a gd few years want too learn as much as i can before i do and have the snakes i want for breeding


----------



## MrPhillips (Oct 18, 2009)

i voted _May dabble at breeding in the future but not 100% set on it_


----------



## Fatherted (Feb 8, 2010)

essexchondro said:


> According to the Animal Welfare Act (2006), as owners we should provide our animals the following;
> 
> (a) a suitable environment.
> (b) a suitable diet.
> ...


:gasp:OMFG......they might be watching this thread right now.......seein if anyone says they dont !!mg:


----------



## maddragon29 (Oct 16, 2008)

I'd like to breed one or two of my animals in the future, my cham for one, maybe the cresties.
However MOST of my animals are pets and i'd never breed them, and a few of them are rescues that i couldn't breed.
So my choice of what to say was hard lol but i chose that i'd like to in the future... simply cause theres two or three i would.


----------



## pam b (Mar 3, 2005)

I currently dont breed, all the snakes are pets, but i'll never say never and who knows if i may change my mind.
But its not 100% or carved in stone.


----------



## incrisis (Jun 15, 2008)

I have bred, but purely just to see how it turned out.

I am not naive enough to think I will make any money out of it, it is just an extension of my hobby.


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> OMFG......they might be watching this thread right now.......seein if anyone says they dont !!


My point wasn't so much that people are breaking the law and they might get caught (I don't think anyone would, _in reality_, be successfully prosecuted for not breeding their animals). My point was more about the associated moral implications of it all if you accept the importance of providing for "normal behaviour patterns". 

If providing the opportunity to exhibit "normal behaviour patterns" is so important for an animals welfare that it actually gets explicitely stated in the relevant legislation, then surely not allowing an animal to exhibit a fundamental aspect of normal behaviour (i.e reproduction and breeding activity) is not only _technically_ against the law, but also morally and ethically wrong? 

That's the real point I'm making. Everyone that has said they keep "pets" and are therefore not interested in breeding doesn't seem to have considered this moral/ethical aspect of not allowing their animals to exhibit normal behaviour patterns in this respect. Rather, their decision not to breed is based purely on _their own needs_ and they see breeding as an "optional extra" to keeping animals. Perhaps it's not really an "optional extra", though. Perhaps it is (morally as well as legally) a fundamental requirement of keeping animals?


----------



## pam b (Mar 3, 2005)

essexchondro said:


> My point wasn't so much that people are breaking the law and they might get caught (I don't think anyone would, _in reality_, be successfully prosecuted for not breeding their animals). My point was more about the associated moral implications of it all if you accept the importance of providing for "normal behaviour patterns".
> 
> If providing the opportunity to exhibit "normal behaviour patterns" is so important for an animals welfare that it actually gets explicitely stated in the relevant legislation, then surely not allowing an animal to exhibit a fundamental aspect of normal behaviour (i.e reproduction and breeding activity) is not only _technically_ against the law, but also morally and ethically wrong?
> 
> That's the real point I'm making. Everyone that has said they keep "pets" and are therefore not interested in breeding doesn't seem to have considered this moral/ethical aspect of not allowing their animals to exhibit normal behaviour patterns in this respect. Rather, their decision not to breed is based purely on _their own needs_ and they see breeding as an "optional extra" to keeping animals. Perhaps it's not really an "optional extra", though. Perhaps it is (morally as well as legally) a fundamental requirement of keeping animals?


Mmmmm, wonders how that would effect keepers of Praying Mantis:lol2:


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> Mmmmm, wonders how that would effect keepers of Praying Mantis


That's an interesting question. But the Animal Welfare Act only really applies to vertebrates so wouldn't really cover them.


----------



## pam b (Mar 3, 2005)

essexchondro said:


> That's an interesting question. But the Animal Welfare Act only really applies to vertebrates so wouldn't really cover them.


I guess what my point was really was that if we consider the fact of simulating/replicating all naturalistic behaviour should this include danger and or death? All a part of the natural life cycle but considered morally wrong for captive animals.
An extreme example maybe, but food for thought on how naturalistic things should be. 
Even zoo's have breeding programes, and employ common sense within that programe.
Whilst i would totally defend anyones right to breed, i would also totally defend their right not to.
Also the health of the snake should be considered, take an elderly snake, or indeed a youngster, they very well may be able to breed, and may very well want to, but could die in the process that follows.
In theory you'd be damned if you did, and damned if you didnt.:lol2:


----------



## purpleskyes (Oct 15, 2007)

Following discussions regarding this matter in lectures we came to the conclusion that reproduction is more a biological trait than a behavioural trait. 

Futhermore putting a female in a box with a male were she cant escape isnt natural and some of the "tricks" people will use to get their reptiles to breed such as rubbing another males sperm on a snake, rubbing shed from another male/female on the snake, switching females at the last min in the case of hybirds. Putting males together in a box to to encourage one to breed or taking a male out as soon as its finished locking and putting another male straight in to encourage breeding with the same female who has just been locked for 24hours + none of that is natural.


----------



## mask-of-sanity (Dec 27, 2006)

i have bred in the past but although i do have pairs of different snakes i have no intention of breeding them, they are all just pets now


----------



## Danbellini (Sep 29, 2008)

I think its a part of liking reptiles
most people find it fascinating all their behaviours especially in mating seasons etc
But EVERYONE breeding can be a bad thing. Market saturation, species overbred to the point of common physical mutation bla bla bla
But yer
I want to breed my CWD and my Emperor Scorps. Reason being, scorps cannot be imported anymore so CB emperors is the way forward and my CWD is such a legend I feel that he deserves to fulfill his one and only purpose


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> I guess what my point was really was that if we consider the fact of simulating/replicating all naturalistic behaviour should this include danger and or death? All a part of the natural life cycle but considered morally wrong for captive animals.
> An extreme example maybe, but food for thought on how naturalistic things should be.


I'm not sure I really agree with that comparison. Dangers from predators and parasites etc (which often lead to death) aren't "naturalistic behaviours" of _our_ animals, rather they're what result from the naturalistic behaviours of the predator and prasite species that would prey on our animals! 



> Even zoo's have breeding programes, and employ common sense within that programe.
> Whilst i would totally defend anyones right to breed, i would also totally defend their right not to.


As would I in practice, I just think that it makes fo an interesting debate given the stipulations of the AWA.



> Also the health of the snake should be considered, take an elderly snake, or indeed a youngster, they very well may be able to breed, and may very well want to, but could die in the process that follows.
> In theory you'd be damned if you did, and damned if you didnt.


Yep, there's no easy answers to this one.


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> Following discussions regarding this matter in lectures we came to the conclusion that reproduction is more a biological trait than a behavioural trait.


But how can you really distinguish between the two in reptiles? All their behaviour is driven by biological needs; breeding, hunting/ feeding, thermoregulating...it's all driven by biology. What behaviours do they exhibit that are clearly distinct from evolved traits based upon biological needs? 



> Futhermore putting a female in a box with a male were she cant escape isnt natural and some of the "tricks" people will use to get their reptiles to breed such as rubbing another males sperm on a snake, rubbing shed from another male/female on the snake, switching females at the last min in the case of hybirds. Putting males together in a box to to encourage one to breed or taking a male out as soon as its finished locking and putting another male straight in to encourage breeding with the same female who has just been locked for 24hours + none of that is natural.


I agree that none of that is natural...but I'm not really big fan of that line of argument because keeping them as captives in the first place isn't natural...so that argument kind of "shoots itself in the foot" in my opinion. All it really demonstrates is how we as keepers can be very selective about when we decide to put on our "it's not natural so I won't do it" hats.


----------



## Molly75 (Jul 10, 2006)

This year was a no no as I don;t see any need to breed as the markets are swamped annoying a lot of my females which bred last year have also laid fertile this year and a fair few virgin females are also laying.

I think I'm upto 8 clutches so far and one very very gravid 8 foot BCC
Paula


----------



## purpleskyes (Oct 15, 2007)

essexchondro said:


> But how can you really distinguish between the two in reptiles? All their behaviour is driven by biological needs; breeding, hunting/ feeding, thermoregulating...it's all driven by biology. *What behaviours do they exhibit that are clearly distinct from evolved traits based upon biological needs? *


Some examples off the top of my head providing branches for snakes such as boas or GTP that naturally perch on branches, providing deep substrate for uromastyx that naturally burrow etc

I am also fairly sure that the 5 freedoms arent actually law and are just guidelines.


----------



## pam b (Mar 3, 2005)

essexchondro said:


> I'm not sure I really agree with that comparison. Dangers from predators and parasites etc (which often lead to death) aren't "naturalistic behaviours" of _our_ animals, rather they're what result from the naturalistic behaviours of the predator and prasite species that would prey on our animals!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


In order.

Ah, but doesnt the fight or flight instinct determine behavior, its debated wether it does in humans as to the degree of chemicals released.

Interesting debate? Mmmm i actually find it a frightening subject, dont ask why, as i honestly couldnt verbalise it if i tryed.

Nope, but i guess it could be debated its just the circle of life.


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> Some examples off the top of my head providing branches for snakes such as boas or GTP that naturally perch on branches, providing deep substrate for uromastyx that naturally burrow etc


How are they examples of behavioural traits that are distinct from biology? Those traits in GTP's and Uromastyx's have evolved via natural selection as strategies to provide for their biological needs.



> I am also fairly sure that the 5 freedoms arent actually law and are just guidelines.


Taken from the Animal Welfre Act (my highlights in red);



> _*9 Duty of person responsible for animal to ensure welfare*_​
> 
> 
> _(1) A person commits an offence if he does not take such steps as are reasonable in all the circumstances to ensure that the needs of an animal for which he is responsible are met to the extent required by good practice._​
> ...


----------



## essexchondro (Apr 9, 2007)

> In order.
> 
> Ah, but doesnt the fight or flight instinct determine behavior, its debated wether it does in humans as to the degree of chemicals released.


Yes definitely, a lot of natural behaviours will have evolved as a "fight or flight" behavioural response to other animals. The crucial difference in the context of this debate, though, is that introducing predators to cater for these behavioural traits would go against point (e) of the Animal Welfare Act. Introducing a mate for the purposes of breeding (to cater for point (c) of the Act) would not _directly_ go against any of the other points in the Act.



> Interesting debate? Mmmm i actually find it a frightening subject, dont ask why, as i honestly couldnt verbalise it if i tryed.


I agree, it is frightening. If the argument I'm puting across is a sound one then millions of "pets" are being mis-treated without anyone really even being aware of it...not even the owners! Admittedly, it might be mis-treatment _on a technicality,_ but you get the point I'm making.


----------



## Repta (Jul 29, 2008)

I voted with may dabble. Not to make a profit. I think, much like Incy, it'd just be an extension of the hobby.


----------



## pam b (Mar 3, 2005)

essexchondro said:


> Yes definitely, a lot of natural behaviours will have evolved as a "fight or flight" behavioural response to other animals. The crucial difference in the context of this debate, though, is that introducing predators to cater for these behavioural traits would go against point (e) of the Animal Welfare Act. Introducing a mate for the purposes of breeding (to cater for point (c) of the Act) would not _directly_ go against any of the other points in the Act.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, it is frightening. If the argument I'm puting across is a sound one then millions of "pets" are being mis-treated without anyone really even being aware of it...not even the owners! Admittedly, it might be mis-treatment _on a technicality,_ but you get the point I'm making.


Oh i totally get the point your making and a good point it is too.
Definate food for thought and my brain in now a bit fatigued with all its excersise.:lol2:
I'll stick with my never say never,as for now i think thats the best option for my particular pets, but thanks for the brain training.:lol2:


----------



## CoinOperatedGirl (May 7, 2009)

I voted 'may dabble' to. I'd never be dumb enough to think I'd profit from it, or even break even - it's something interesting to do once you've had some experience in caring for whatever animal you want to breed. 

Personally, I'd like to one day breed my White's Tree Frog Oscar, for no other reason than to hopefully be able to still have a part of him living once he himself is long gone.


----------



## Ally (Mar 8, 2006)

For me it's a part of the hobby, I enjoy the challenge!


----------



## croc&chewy (Sep 21, 2009)

I voted the 'might do' one. I definatly will not breed my Beardies.. too many of them about. 

However, if I got my hands on something uncommon and people were interested in buying babies I would have a go. It's nothing more than experience as I know most breeding that goes on never makes a profit.


----------

