# Morphs and the Hobby... a discussion



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

morphs, designer animals.

reptile keeping and pet keeping.

what are people's opinions on these so-called morphs and their impact on the hobby of keeping and studying reptiles and amphibians?

there was a time not all that long ago when there were no morphs. people kept herps and they were all naturally patterned and colored... herps keeping wasn't a mainstream, acceptable hobby in general. there were no books really to speak of and certainly no products made specifically for them. most of us went to the fish section of pet shops and made due with aquariums and what few useful things we could scrounge...

not many people profited from the hobby, that's for sure...

then things heated up. i remember well when products began coming out... magazines and books began to be written. pet shops began to ramp up on herps and marketing them with kits and such... breeders began to make wild caught animals a thing of the past... and of course, variations began to appear on the infant market... these morphs began springing up just as more people started to warm up to the idea of keeping herps... the products and equipment developed along with supplements and better husbandry information... the internet began and reptiles were no longer the red headed step child of the pet and hobbyist industry...

the whole thing became popular... people were spending good money and a market with strong demands came into being and breeders and pet product manufacturers were happy to provide ever more sophisticated and better animals and accessories for those demands...

the beginning of what we see today in herps and their captive care was born... and it's never looked back.

... what i have see over the years as the hobby evolved was the shifting to the designer animals... the morphs as they are commonly referred to.

they have had the arguably biggest impact and influence is the hobby and it's direction...

all this said, what i want to do is get people's views on the designer/morph aspect of reptile keeping.

what have been the good things and bad that these morphs have brought?

pro's and con's and where this thing is all going.

what is good about all these morphs and what is bad.

there seems to me at least to be two main camps in the hobby today... and they overlap in many areas... firstly there are the reptile keepers... those who have a passion for the animals and study them to different degrees and breed them as well... these are the guys who read the natural histories and taxonomy of the animals to better understand them and increase their own knowledge and expertise...

these are the guys who know the difference between a labial pit and a ventral scute...

then there are the pet keepers... the people who read a care sheet or a book and follow a recipe of sorts in order to keep a snake or lizard...

their animals are their 'pets' and they love them... but they aren't all into the biology or husbandry aspect of the animals... they want a cool pet or ten...

they are not sure what the real difference in the various families and genera of herps are... and likely don't care... they want their beloved pet to be happy and thrive under their care and aren't trying to be amateur herpetologists at all... they just want a cool kingsnake or bearded dragon... which is perfectly fine in my humble opinion.

but in my readings over the past couple of years i have noticed how morphs influence keepers of all types... as if they are taking over the entire hobby or at least providing most of the momentum and direction we see today in herp keeping.

as with most things in life, there are good aspects and bad.

i would like for our members here to weigh in as the see fit and give their perspective on these things i have laid on the table. what are the good, the bad... and the ugly in the herp hobby today?

what about these designer animals and their influence on breeding and the market? how are they influencing new keepers, whether serious minded ones or casual?

what about breeders cashing in on the latest 'thing'? and buyers wanting the latest thing?

... let's dissect the dynamics of the hobby and where it appears to be heading and where we as enthusiasts, wish it to go...

what are the ramifications of breeding, morphs, bloodlines, the pet industry and all the variables that swirl around to make what the hobby is today and will be tomorrow.

are these designer animals a good thing or bad?... what's the upside and the down?

are the purists like me living fossils anymore?

will snakes and lizards go the way of goldfish and guppies?

will snakes be like the generic hamsters and budgies that we see in shops all the time, an undecipherable blend of myriad mutations and bloodlines to the point where we no longer know what they are?... just different colors and lengths of fur and for lack of a better word, mutts?

will we see people when asked what kind of kingsnake or boa they have be unable to say much more than "it's a yellow one"?

... what when all these mutations in color and pattern and crosses all intermingle and become something almost generic as we see with all the mixed, fancy hamsters?

i'm just throwing this out there as i thought it a decent discussion and more filling than another "what should i name my lizard" thread.

say what you need to say here... all are welcome.

or i just might post pics... and we all know how tiresome that becomes.:lol2:


----------



## Chris Newman (Apr 23, 2007)

Interesting posting well written. I have for a long time been meaning to pen a piece “Captive Breeding and the Demise of Herpetology” – one day


----------



## blood and guts (May 30, 2007)

To many morphs and to few spieces in the hobby these days.


----------



## mattsdragons (Jul 6, 2009)

i like morphs because that way you can get different variations in the species yet i do feel than there show be some 100% normals in the hobby.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

Chris Newman said:


> Interesting posting well written. I have for a long time been meaning to pen a piece “Captive Breeding and the Demise of Herpetology” – one day


 
one thing that i do know for sure and that is, back in the day we all fancied ourselves budding herpetologists... after all, about all the information availible were ancient books about giant snakes that had zilch concerning actually keeping them... just observations and adventures...

and a few entries in encyclopedias... descriptive stuff.

we all cut our teeth on reptile classification which was all there realistically was to satisfy our hunger for learning... we experimented and read all we could on various habitats... like detectives... we looked for clues to solve the husbandry mysteries...


below is about all one had to go on if he wanted to have a green anaconda... you were on your own... but it made us good, innate observers of our charges... no caresheet/recipe... you had to develop a "feel" for what you were doing...

people are so fortunate today... if i had this internet back in the mid 70's, i'd be rich and famous now...:lol2:

*Green anaconda*

The green anaconda (Eunectes murinus) is the largest member of the boa family of snakes and the most heavy bodied member of the super-order Squamata.




The primary overall color of Eunectes murinus is an olive green, with black blotches that run the length of the body. Their head is narrow compared to the rest of the body, with most exhibiting distinctive orange-yellow striping on either side. Their eyes are set high on their head so as to allow the snake to be able to see out of the water without exposing the rest of its body; likewise the nostrils are set high so the animals can breathe while largely submerged.
Green anacondas are found mainly in northern South America (Amazon and Orinoco basins), in Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil, northern Bolivia, northeast Peru, Guyana, and the island of Trinidad.
The green anaconda is among the largest snakes in the world, with recorded (but unverified) measurements of 9.45 meters (29.7 feet) and 11 meters (33.5 feet). It rivals the reticulated python for length, but is typically considerably heavier. Females are significantly larger than males, having the largest sexual dimorphism of all the snakes.
Green anacondas, like all anacondas, are primarily aquatic. They eat a wide variety of prey, almost anything they can manage to overpower, including: fish, birds, a variety of mammals, and other reptiles. Particularly large anacondas may even consume large prey such as tapir, deer, capybara, caiman, and sometimes crocodiles and jaguars, but such large meals are not regularly consumed. They employ constriction to subdue their prey. Cannibalism among green anacondas is also known, most recorded cases involving a larger female consuming a smaller male. Scientists cite several possible reasons for this, including the dramatic sexual dimorphism in the species and the possibility that female anacondas require additional food intake after breeding to sustain their long gestation period and the male simply being an opportunistic prey item; however, the exact reason is not understood (Rivas and Owens 2000).
Anacondas are ovoviviparous. Copulation takes place during the rainy season, typically in the water. The spurs of the males are used to stimulate the females. Gestation is approximately six months. Litter size averages 20-40 young, but as many as 100 are possible. Sexual maturity is reached between two and three years of age.

as a matter of fact, i remember my first green anaconda... 1976 i think...

ordered it from an outfit in florida... an animal wholeseller...

$5 a foot!

... so i ordered one... a 4 footer i believe... and it arrived just fine at the airport... when i opened the crate i realized they had slipped a couple feet in on me!:lol2:

built a cage out of an old kitchen cabinet... thing was mean as the dickens and had ticks ... who knows what else...

it was very nice though... took quite a while to get it feeding...

tinker... trial and error... a lot of head scratching... mistakes too.


----------



## captaincaveman (Nov 6, 2006)

I think morphs have their place within reason,, hell theyve been around long enough with many species, but totally agree with above, theres not enough species kept these days, theres a massive proportion of the hobby that only keeps within 5 maybe 6 species and there is way too many "investment" breeder for my liking, i think the hobbys worse for that side, but who am i to question it


----------



## toyah (Aug 24, 2006)

I keep and breed a couple of pet species of snakes, and I no more consider myself a herpetologist than I would consider myself a mammalogist for keeping and breeding a few different mammals. I also don't think that hamster keeping, rat keeping, or cat keeping suffered any for additional colour and pattern mutations becoming available.

Saying that - some of the snakes I choose to keep as pets don't come in different colour or pattern mutations. That doesn't change my keeping of them any, but I am unlikely to keep as many (for example...) pygmy pythons as I do cornsnakes, simply because the additional colour and pattern morphs in cornsnakes make for more variety in a snake I enjoy keeping.



> will snakes be like the generic hamsters and budgies that we see in shops all the time, an undecipherable blend of myriad mutations and bloodlines to the point where we no longer know what they are?... just different colors and lengths of fur and for lack of a better word, mutts?


I don't know about budgies, but I do about hamsters - and you don't get "mutts". Mongrel dogs occur when several breeds are crossed. Hamster varieties ("morphs") are all based on individual mutations, and they either display or do not display those particular mutations - so they are, or are not, one variety or another. An experienced hamster breeder/judge will be able to tell you which variety any particular hamster is - though yes, if there is more than one variety that is very similar genetically, some careful test breeding may be needed. But that confusion isn't to do with the myriad of mutations, all you need for confusion is two genes that produce quite similar effects.



> will we see people when asked what kind of kingsnake or boa they have be unable to say much more than "it's a yellow one"?


Well, you could have that now with someone who is uneducated about the morphs they are looking at


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

captaincaveman said:


> I think morphs have their place within reason,, hell theyve been around long enough with many species, but totally agree with above, theres not enough species kept these days, theres a massive proportion of the hobby that only keeps within 5 maybe 6 species and there is way too many "investment" breeder for my liking, i think the hobbys worse for that side, but who am i to question it


 
yes but does the huge morph bandwagon unduly influence new keepers or attract people with the mentality of collecting things for the sake of aesthetics and prestige over the down to earth enjoyment and fascination of the species? ... like so many brightly colored or scarce marbles?

does the constant development of new variations of a theme and availability unduly corrupt a new keeper into the collecting aspect of designer reptiles over all else... ala' pokemon cards?

if say there were no morphs... would a good number of current enthusiasts find it dull and boring and walk away because their need for something different or unique would go unfulfilled?

would all the multitudes of royal python keepers, especially the younger ones be satisfied if all they could get was a standard issue, naturally patterned and colored python?

... i remember when you know, albino burms were hot and new to the general public... then greens and so on...

now albinos are nearly as common place as normals and nearly as cheap...

are these morphs guilty of attracting people that have a need to move on to the next best thing because they get bored?

long lived things we know do best with keepers that are in it for the long haul and will buy a retic and actually keep it for the duration of it's natural life...and not have one for a time and trade it or sell it in order to buy another animal that will temporarily catch their fleeting interest?

tens of thousands of burms and the like around and young ones typically at that at any given moment... will these youngsters mean that in a few years there will be tens of thousands of adult burms and retics around?

... or will an unacceptable percentage of these immature animals end up traded and sold to several new owners by the time they reach maturity and adult size?

all that i know is that here in yankee-doodle land, with all the breeding that takes place every year, and the bazillions of neonates produced...

america should be up to our necks in adult big boids by now...

it smells bad here to me sometimes. i get a whiff of a bad market where demand for small, baby snakes is strong but the more mature market is all but non-existent...

where do all the adults go i sometimes wonder?

do they mostly die or get let loose... and more than likely perish?

what i'm awkwardly driving at is... does this morph thing feed bad behaviors in some cases... attracting people who have only a passing fancy for something new and/or something small and will in all likelihood get rid of the animal after a time, after they get bored or it gets too big... or is just too much of a hassle when the thrill is gone?


does this inundation of new and cleverly named morphs we all see these days undermine our desire for people to be good and responsible keepers because there are just so many flavors of ice cream now that they want to 'try' them all... without ever finishing the flavor they have?


... do the morph enthusiast too often place looks and prestige over the the animals themselves? i mean a ball python is a ball python in spite of it's color, name or scarcity... right?...

... i'm just saying.

seems to me that especially new keepers too frequently know more about the various morphs and their brand names over their skills and knowledge of snake husbandry and species appreciation...

snakes are specimens to some, pets to others and i submit, '"collectibles" to a few others...

i'm not making accusations here... just laying out some reasonable possibilities as to what motivates some keepers and some of the potential fallout that may result.

also, and i'll shut up after this... but do the breeders both large and small sometimes in promoting their products add to the morph craze??

is this altogether a good thing in certain circumstances, with certain people?

how many of these young keepers we see today at maybe sixteen years of age, will be still in the hobby in ten years?... or five for that matter?


alright then, i am finished... i hope there is a sliver of merit in my post.

just some thoughts and observations on my part...: victory:


P.S.- these musings of mine aren't aimed at anyone in particular at all...


----------



## cordylidae (Nov 2, 2008)

personally i dont agree with how some people breed or buy just because it a certain morph etc especially how people breed albino etc because theyre worth more and it is actually a 'bad' trait that in no way benefits the animal


IMO i would like to learn quite alot about lizards rather than just know what i need to.I would like to do the biology side of stuff.I dont know that much atm and am still learning but i am happy to do so and would rather learn thing properly than rush it.I think all keepers should have a decent knownledge of the biology or atleast try


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

toyah said:


> I keep and breed a couple of pet species of snakes, and I no more consider myself a herpetologist than I would consider myself a mammalogist for keeping and breeding a few different mammals. I also don't think that hamster keeping, rat keeping, or cat keeping suffered any for additional colour and pattern mutations becoming available.
> 
> Saying that - some of the snakes I choose to keep as pets don't come in different colour or pattern mutations. That doesn't change my keeping of them any, but I am unlikely to keep as many (for example...) pygmy pythons as I do cornsnakes, simply because the additional colour and pattern morphs in cornsnakes make for more variety in a snake I enjoy keeping.
> 
> ...


 
my bad... here in the states we say mutt as any mixed breed animal...

mongrel is more rarely used...


you brits are certainly sticklers for semantics... we also say poisionous in place of venomous!!!:gasp:


May 2002 - Ohio Reptiles - Poisonous Snakes

Kentucky Snakes - Thumbnails

Illinois Poisonous Snakes


and a biscuit is a cookie here i believe...: victory::lol2:


----------



## captaincaveman (Nov 6, 2006)

HABU said:


> yes but does the huge morph bandwagon unduly influence new keepers or attract people with the mentality of collecting things for the sake of aesthetics and prestige over the down to earth enjoyment and fascination of the species? ... like so many brightly colored or scarce marbles?
> 
> does the constant development of new variations of a theme and availability unduly corrupt a new keeper into the collecting aspect of designer reptiles over all else... ala' pokemon cards?
> 
> ...


what i mean is things like say albino or hypo or melanistic species of say taiwanese beauties for instance isn't a bad thing but the royal market is just a headache waiting to happen(imho)

Royals are a good example, ive kept them for probably 15 years give or take, but suddenly theyve gone from the odd snake in many peoples collections to the next must have, its a good indicator of how morphs affect an individual species

I personally dislike the whole situation but people will continue to follow the trends, shame that people dont brave it alone and try different species but then people are people:lol2:


----------



## .D.o.m.i.n.o. (Aug 19, 2007)

Sorry if im saying something wrong here,but i think its not a hobby its just another quick way for money,for some anyways,fair play tho there are some lush colours of morphs out there but i wouldnt be spending over £100 for a snake or lizard,well i am intrested in the red eyed crocodile skinks but ill be looking for a better offer than £80,not haggling just looking for the cheapest seller.


----------



## toyah (Aug 24, 2006)

HABU said:


> my bad... here in the states we say mutt as any mixed breed animal...
> 
> mongrel is more rarely used...
> 
> ...


No, sorry, that wasn't my point - I mean in species where there are no purebred breeds, only colour/pattern varieties, you can't get mongrels. For example, in dogs if I breed a Yorkshire terrier with a shih tzu, the babies are all cross-breeds, and if I breed the babies from that with each other, the offspring are then all mongrels. But if I breed a topaz rat to a blue rat, I could get Siamese and agouti offspring, and then if I breed those together I could get champagne and opal rats. They're not mongrels, not like the dogs would be - they are still the recognised varieties.

In snakes if I breed two different colours of cornsnake together, the babies are still all cornsnakes of whatever colour, even if there's ten different morphs. They're not mongrels and the colours are no less distinct and don't get "muddied" together.


It does concern me that the number of fully adult snakes doesn't seem to match up with the number of babies produced, I totally agree - but I don't think morphs are to blame for that.


----------



## gaz (Oct 5, 2005)

without the large market out there as a result of morph breeding ,much of the groovy equipment we take for granted wouldnt have been developed! where there's money theres lots of ancilliary stuff to go with it,certainly without morphs of boas i wouldnt be able to make a living from snake breeding....................keep the morphs or gaz might starve!!:2thumb: 
regards gaz


----------



## hiero (Feb 7, 2009)

Gaz beat me to my thought - really fascinating to read about the beginnings of the hobby Habu, but one of the things that struck me as 'good' from your timeline was the development of more specialist equipment that can more easily help us to provide a healthy environment for our animals. 

Althoughhhh..... with big manufacturers out to reel us in, do we now all accept an orthodoxy on how to keep our snakes? Is it REALLY best to house/heat/feed/mist/whatever our snakes in the most widely accepted way, or could there be some better experiment that we're all missing out on whilst racking up our loyaly points with exoterra? I just wonder because sometimes someone will come on the forum and say they keep their snakes on this or that different substrate, or feed this or that random way, and we've all got a tendency to say YOUR SNAKE WILL DIEEEEEEEEEE, assuming that they're stupid when in fact they might be an experienced person who is onto something. I'm not on about anything specifically (if I had an idea maybe I would have tried it!), just a hypothetical thought that arose from reading Habu's experiences. 

I'm a pet keeper bit by the info bug, to the point of collecting all the random natural history books I can find, and thinking about studying some zoology... but I've got some morphs first. Hopefully a lot of people might be spurred into an interest after their initial attraction, that would be an optimistic hope.


----------



## oakelm (Jan 14, 2009)

Herp keeping has really exploded over the years, I have been in it 13 years now, not as long as some but long enough to see the changes and how the market has grown and grown. I think morphs are both good and bad because on the one hand you have people buying for nothing but investment thinking they can make money from it, no real love for the hobby thankfully those dont seem to stick around for long. But on the flip side you have the people who have never considered a snake but see the fantastic colours and consider it, then look into the hobby and another herp keeper is born.

I do find it strange that over the years the switch has very much gone from keeping to breeding. Near enough everyone who has a herp is intent on breeding it, most times not thinking of the long term of what to do when things dont sell, like the current market. Yet you see people buy dogs some pedigree and worth over £1000 but ask them if they would breed it and its unlikely.

It will be interesting to see the hobby in another 10 years time.

Edited to add: Another thing I have noticed lately is because reps are more readily available I think more people are buying without considering the actual needs of them as this year and last year I personally noticed a massive increase in the amount of poorly kept snakes in particular normal male royals as these tend to be the cheap option for those wanting a royal. To give you an idea this year alone I have helped out, taken in, had put to sleep, etc, 18 royals and im not a rescue centre just a person out to help where I can, most where short term feeding/shedding issues but some have been so severe that pts was the only option. Unfortunately that is a down side to such specialist creatures going main stream.


----------



## captaincaveman (Nov 6, 2006)

oakelm said:


> Herp keeping has really exploded over the years, I have been in it 13 years now, not as long as some but long enough to see the changes and how the market has grown and grown. I think morphs are both good and bad because on the one hand you have people buying for nothing but investment thinking they can make money from it, no real love for the hobby thankfully those dont seem to stick around for long. But on the flip side you have the people who have never considered a snake but see the fantastic colours and consider it, then look into the hobby and another herp keeper is born.
> 
> I do find it strange that over the years the switch has very much gone from keeping to breeding. Near enough everyone who has a herp is intent on breeding it, most times not thinking of the long term of what to do when things dont sell, like the current market. Yet you see people buy dogs some pedigree and worth over £1000 but ask them if they would breed it and its unlikely.
> 
> ...



:no1:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

toyah said:


> No, sorry, that wasn't my point - I mean in species where there are no purebred breeds, only colour/pattern varieties, you can't get mongrels. For example, in dogs if I breed a Yorkshire terrier with a shih tzu, the babies are all cross-breeds, and if I breed the babies from that with each other, the offspring are then all mongrels. But if I breed a topaz rat to a blue rat, I could get Siamese and agouti offspring, and then if I breed those together I could get champagne and opal rats. They're not mongrels, not like the dogs would be - they are still the recognised varieties.
> 
> In snakes if I breed two different colours of cornsnake together, the babies are still all cornsnakes of whatever colour, even if there's ten different morphs. They're not mongrels and the colours are no less distinct and don't get "muddied" together.
> 
> ...


morphs are the precursors to true breeds within each species... we're already there it can be said even:

*Breed* 
1. A race or variety of men or other animals (or of plants), perpetuating its special or distinctive characteristics by inheritance. _Twice fifteen thousand hearts of England's *breed*._ (Shak) _Greyhounds of the best *breed*._ (Carpenter) 


mutts are when distinct breeds are mingled... after a while you can't tell what breed something is... it all becomes muddled... we see that already..

species, sub-species, localities, races, strains, breeds... the species stays the same but they are different...

some folks get these terms confused... and use breeds interchangeably with species or sub species...

there's only one dog and only one corn snake in real terms... what we see with snakes and dogs are morphs that we have selectively bred until we got an animal that will faithfully reproduce it's unique qualities faithfully...

breed 20 generations of dobermans and you'll never get a poodle in a litter...

these strains of morphs will do the same very often... producing 100% exact phenotypes of themselves...

mutts have multiple bloodlines from different breeds/morphs... what looks to be mostly doberman can indeed produce a poodle if the genes line up a certain way and they are expressed physically...

so here we are, going from a wild animal in it's natural form... to multiple domesticated breeds/morphs/races of animals that are entirely different from the ancestral, wild stock... as in wolf and pug... as in wild corn and blizzard or whatever designer corn strain you choose.

is it entirely a proper thing to do this to wild animals?... take a reticulated python and create things such as shar-peis?... but in a retic way?


a python equivalent of a pekingese?

it seems to be the way of the future...

i got into this stuff for the wildness of the animals... i wanted raptors/falcons... now the hobby is gravitating towards chickens/geese.


we are domesticating these wild things... and creating breeds... just as we did in the wolf/dog model... that is a very profound thing to me...


maybe i'm not expressing this well...: victory: anyone get my drift?

*** need more coffee...


----------



## toyah (Aug 24, 2006)

HABU said:


> morphs are the precursors to true breeds within each species... we're already there it can be said even:
> 
> mutts are when distinct breeds are mingled... after a while you can't tell what breed something is... it all becomes muddled... we see that already..
> 
> ...



No, you're incorrect - sorry. As an example, look at your doberman - doberman bred to doberman will produce all dobe puppies. A black Dobe to a fawn Dobe might well give red and blue puppies - but they're all still dobes. The colour is the "morph", the breed is much more than that, it's to do with physical changes too.

Breeding dobes to poodles will produce "mutts" that are neither-nor, but breeding different coloured dobes to each other will only ever produce one of the existing colours. Same with cornsnakes - breeding any colour of cornsnake to a ratsnake will produce hybrids (not mutts, since they're different species being crossed), but breeding different corns together of different morphs will only ever produce one of the genetically possible morphs from the parents.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

hiero said:


> Gaz beat me to my thought - really fascinating to read about the beginnings of the hobby Habu, but one of the things that struck me as 'good' from your timeline was the development of more specialist equipment that can more easily help us to provide a healthy environment for our animals.
> 
> Althoughhhh..... with big manufacturers out to reel us in, do we now all accept an orthodoxy on how to keep our snakes? Is it REALLY best to house/heat/feed/mist/whatever our snakes in the most widely accepted way, or could there be some better experiment that we're all missing out on whilst racking up our loyaly points with exoterra? I just wonder because sometimes someone will come on the forum and say they keep their snakes on this or that different substrate, or feed this or that random way, and we've all got a tendency to say YOUR SNAKE WILL DIEEEEEEEEEE, assuming that they're stupid when in fact they might be an experienced person who is onto something. I'm not on about anything specifically (if I had an idea maybe I would have tried it!), just a hypothetical thought that arose from reading Habu's experiences.
> 
> I'm a pet keeper bit by the info bug, to the point of collecting all the random natural history books I can find, and thinking about studying some zoology... but I've got some morphs first. Hopefully a lot of people might be spurred into an interest after their initial attraction, that would be an optimistic hope.


 
old habits are hard to break... to this day when i want to take care of something and set up the right housing, i go directly to the habitat which it evolved from... mimic the habitat emphasising the beneficial aspects and you'll have a thriving animal... habitat in captivity is no less than a slice of the wild place your animal came from and putting it into your house in a sensible and practical way...

some snakes are more forgiving than others... and if you can do the fussy ones and make them comfortable then the less demanding ones are a cake walk...

i've made it a point to have visited most habitats generically... i've lived in the desert, rainforest and temperate zones from grassland to deciduous forest and everything in between... it helps give you a more realistic feel for what is right... than just reading and imagining these places...

back in the day going after the wild habitat first and trying to recreate it was all we had...

we didn't have much else to go on... desert animal?... read all about the desert and it's conditions and variables... also understanding micro-climates is hugely important... there are many micro-climates in any given ecosystem and area... often within feet of one another...: victory:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

toyah said:


> No, you're incorrect - sorry. As an example, look at your doberman - doberman bred to doberman will produce all dobe puppies. A black Dobe to a fawn Dobe might well give red and blue puppies - but they're all still dobes. The colour is the "morph", the breed is much more than that, it's to do with physical changes too.
> 
> Breeding dobes to poodles will produce "mutts" that are neither-nor, but breeding different coloured dobes to each other will only ever produce one of the existing colours. Same with cornsnakes - breeding any colour of cornsnake to a ratsnake will produce hybrids (not mutts, since they're different species being crossed), but breeding different corns together of different morphs will only ever produce one of the genetically possible morphs from the parents.


 
varieties within a breed, not a species...

a doberman is a breed of canis familiaris... the very same species as a husky or great dane...

breeding different corns?

corns is corns...

dogs is dogs...

all you have are species
 breeds
varieties

and the sub groups of each...

there are no different corns... different natural locales yes... but all corns are the same taxonomically speaking... we can take most any animal with it's natural genetic variability and produce breeds over time and those breeds can be further refined into physically distinct varieties of that breed but they are all the same species...

mutts are the corruption of a man-made breed...breeds which are a corruption of the species and it's natural phenotype...

we start with a wild animal and everything we engineer after that makes no matter... they are what man has created using the pallet of natural genes contained in the ancestral, wild animal...

semantics once again...

but my biology is very rusty anymore as am i... i take correction fairly well...

my point is... that we have these wild animals... and are creating things by selective breeding to make them commercially viable and appealing to collectors who aren't so much interested in the species as they are in colors and other physical traits...

is studying dogs the very same thing as studying wolves i ask?


we started out with wolves and as time goes by we see dogs displacing the wolves in the hobby... wolves being the wild snake... and dogs being these new creatures that we see with ever increasing changes as we narrow down the genetics of them and select for the ones that express the traits we believe will sell and make us rich...


ah, never mind... i do understand your point... we're just tripping over the terms and how they're : victory:used....


----------



## gtm (Jan 23, 2008)

I've never really 'got' the point of Leopard Gecko & Ball Python morphs. In fact the whole Enigma saga have moved my view from being ambivalent to highly sceptical.

interesting thread.


----------



## gregmonsta (Dec 3, 2007)

Personally I have no interest what-so-ever in the morph market. When I first started keeping snakes it was thanks to a pre-university study and my own motivation to get to know these creatures more intimately. My priorities changed and I never made it to Uni .... but my hobby continued with the study's snakes becoming my pets.
Natural colour forms/species/subspecies have always been more attractive to me. I can't get my head around how some people can spend over £100 on an essentially ugly snake (especially albinos). This comes down to personal preference, of course (although ... I still refuse to pay more than £100 for a snake).
Generating some of these 'morphs' can be a questionable activity for some. It comes down to breeders who actually pay attention to bloodlines/inbreeding doing a good job. We've already seen some of this through seeing reduced clutch sizes/higher mortality rate in hatchlings/genetic defects becoming more prevalent (ie head-wobble/stargazing)/etc. The problem is that captive breeding can compound and encourage genetic problems, encouraging the development of snakes that would have less chance of survival in the wild.
Fashion is what it is ... I don't understand it for clothes ... nevermind snakes. It's like supply and demand (which again seems like nonesense). But eventually there will be too many people doing the same thing and prices will crash. 

But that's just my $0.02


----------



## ginnerone (Aug 2, 2009)

gtm said:


> I've never really 'got' the point of Leopard Gecko & Ball Python morphs. In fact the whole Enigma saga have moved my view from being ambivalent to highly sceptical.
> 
> interesting thread.


 i don't think you could breed a leopard and a ball python:lol2:


----------



## gtm (Jan 23, 2008)

ginnerone said:


> i don't think you could breed a leopard and a ball python:lol2:


 Not yet but I wouldn't be suprised if some bright spark is working on it.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

why have something that doesn't look like the real thing?

why have a snake that 'almost' looks like the genuine article?










why does everyone want to "pimp-my-snake?"


----------



## gtm (Jan 23, 2008)

I'd like some one to explain the attraction. Why are people willing to pay £1000's for a morph ball python?


----------



## captaincaveman (Nov 6, 2006)

gtm said:


> I'd like some one to explain the attraction. Why are people willing to pay £1000's for a morph ball python?



investments or ego:whistling2:


I'll start running now:lol2:


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

gtm said:


> I'd like some one to explain the attraction. Why are people willing to pay £1000's for a morph ball python?


 
short answer?













same thing... same lunacy...


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

i'm trying to figure out how i can come up with a punk-*ss $250 bucks to buy either this male or the female next month... isn't looking good right now...


















and then i see folks buying morphs for what i could live on for a few years or allow me to buy a few basins...

i'll never afford basins... the lottery never pans out for me either...

no rich uncles to leave me any inheritance...

robbing a liquor store is off the table...

i'll be growing some smoke this year ... a few small plots, maybe that'll be a cash generator for me?
:lol2:


$500 bucks and i'd get the pair...

having money has it's upside... what someone could buy for some of these ball python prices...


----------



## gtm (Jan 23, 2008)

HABU said:


> short answer?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Anyone who spends $20,000 on a snake need their head examined. What if you trad on it?


----------



## toyah (Aug 24, 2006)

Habu, I don't really understand your point there, I'm sorry - suffice to say, your original question - "... an undecipherable blend of myriad mutations and bloodlines to the point where we no longer know what they are?... just different colors and lengths of fur and for lack of a better word, mutts?" - the answer is NO, because that simply is not possible for snakes, unless you count hybrids as "mutt snakes". Since we have no breeds, we have no mutts.



HABU said:


> my point is... that we have these wild animals... and are creating things by selective breeding to make them commercially viable and appealing to collectors who aren't so much interested in the species as they are in colors and other physical traits...


I love my cornsnakes. Why does the fact that I particularly admire and choose to concentrate my time on one or two particular morphs that I feel are attractive make me a collector who isn't interested in the species? My ghost bloodred cornsnakes are just as "real" as my wild-type pure locality corns, I just happen to find both morphs to be attractive and enjoy owning them.


Here is a non-snake story. I have three cats, all the same wild-type cat colour. Next year, I'll be getting a new cat - the same breed, but I will be seeking out a rarer, more unusual (and inevitably more expensive) colour. Why? Not because I particularly want a rare colour, not for ego, not for breeding investment (I actually prefer the wild type colour). Simply so I have a bit of contrast, so it's easier for other people like pet sitters or family to tell them apart.

Will my new differently-coloured cat not be the genuine article, or not look like a real cat? Why would it be any different for a snake?


----------



## Robbie (Dec 4, 2006)

toyah said:


> I love my cornsnakes.


Pervert!!


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

toyah said:


> Habu, I don't really understand your point there, I'm sorry - suffice to say, your original question - "... an undecipherable blend of myriad mutations and bloodlines to the point where we no longer know what they are?... just different colors and lengths of fur and for lack of a better word, mutts?" - the answer is NO, because that simply is not possible for snakes, unless you count hybrids as "mutt snakes". Since we have no breeds, we have no mutts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

what's the range of ghost- blood red corns?...

i'd like to go and find me a few...:lol2:

haha! no seriously, i'm not against people liking whatever they enjoy...

cats are domestic animals... snakes are wild animals...

re-engineering an animal through artificial selection is the path to domestication...

it's all good and i will be the first to state that many, many of these animals are very attractive...

we select breeders on the basis of many things... firstly, a potential breeder animal must do well in captivity... and must be tolerant...

over generations with this intense selection the animals will change... and one day they will be so unlike the wild varieties that they will be considered domesticated...

give it a hundred years... we may have basin emerald tree boas that are as user friendly and un problematic as the typical corn snake we see in captivity today... many generations from the wild...

things will become hardier, not particular in what it eats... in every color imaginable,.... much larger than it's wild counterparts... and also we'll likely have dwarf varieties... hybrids... maybe artificial species...

cloning...

the gates have been opened and anything is possible...

no big deal really...

let's talk turkey...


an anology...


The domestic turkey lost its ability to fly through selective breeding that created heavier, broad-breasted birds, a feature much desired by chefs and commercial turkey producers. The shorter legs of the domestic turkey also mean it can’t run as well as its wild cousin. In contrast to the heavier domestic bird, the wild turkey is slim, tall and long-legged. Factor in its keen eyesight and native cunning, and the wild turkey makes a difficult target for human and animal hunters alike.

Spanish explorers took Mexican wild turkeys domesticated by the Aztecs home to Europe in about 1519. The turkey then spread rapidly through Europe and was introduced in England between 1524 and 1541, where they were highly sought after for gourmet dinners.

After the domestic turkey spread across Europe in the 1500s, the colonists who settled the New World brought these tasty birds with them across the Atlantic to the land of their origin. Imagine the pilgrims’ surprise to find the turkey already one of the most plentiful foods of the American Indians.


While the attributes of wild turkeys have been important in enhancing domestic breeds, the flow of genetic material in the other direction is not encouraged. State law prohibits the release of pen-raised turkeys due to the possibility of introducing disease into the wild flocks and because of the danger of contaminating the wild turkey gene pool.

But because domestic turkeys lack the "wood smarts" of their wild cousins, they generally fall prey to a host of hungry predators such as bobcats, foxes or coyotes before getting a chance to breed with native birds. 

Domestic turkeys can’t fly, whereas wild turkeys are very much built for speed. Wild turkeys are very sleek and alert, making it very difficult to hunt or watch them. _The constant state of caution that wild turkeys are in makes them one of the most challenging game animals in the world._ Domestic turkeys will gobble when just about anything else makes a noise, while wild turkeys will minimally vocalize to prevent attracting predators. All in all, domestic turkeys have been bred for a large amount of meat and a mild temperament, where wild turkeys have been subject to natural selection—evolving traits for speed, survival, sharper senses, and heightened awareness of their surroundings. 


The physical traits of domestic turkeys make them an obvious stand out from the wild turkey. Incapable of flying or even running very fast, they would make easy pickings for any predator in nature. Domestics' neck skin, or wattles, are heavier, snoods, the finger-like appendage that hangs over the bill, are longer and breasts much larger and broader. The domestic also possesses a temperament suited to confinement. All of these features point to the selective breeding and sedentary lifestyle that are true to the domestic breed. 
A truly wild turkey is a sleek, alert animal, built for speed and survival. Its senses are sharpened through generations of living in a harsh, unforgiving environment. .This constant state of caution has made the wild turkey one of the toughest game animals in the world to hunt or even photograph. Lacking its cousin's natural caution (and intelligence) is one reason that has kept pen-raised or domestic turkeys from being of any benefit to turkey restoration efforts. Many people still don't understand that the pen-raised turkey contributed little, if any, to the expansion of the wild turkey in recent years. Even turkeys with a wild genetic background, but raised in a pen, will cease to exist in nature. The few that initially survive will generally do nothing to expand their range and eventually will perish. 










 

the turkey got all morphed up!!:lol2:​


----------



## Rum_Kitty (Jun 14, 2009)

We're not all in the morph thing for money or prestige. I recently shelled out for a beautiful royal who I love to pieces. When I seen him I didn't think "wow, he'll boost my self esteem and reputation" or even "god his babies would be worth a fortune". I thought what an incredibly stunning, beautiful animal and I was not disappointed seeing him in the flesh. I can in no way afford what he cost (not meaning I cant afford to care for him just the initial purchase price was a lot for me) and I would have lived off beans and toast for months if I'd had to to bring him home. I love him to pieces, he's worth many times what I paid for him to me. I didn't even intend on breeding him when I bought him, although I will now...not because I think I'll get rich but because I would love to breed a couple of different colour morphs for him purely as pets for myself, and yes it would be nice to make a profit but also wonderful to see beautiful snakes hatch from eggs and raise them up into big chunky things. I am probably a pet owner, I couldn't tell you much more than the latin name, locale and basic stuff about wild royals.

I do get upset when I read about the way some people view their snakes as merely possessions, but to be honest I reckon this happens as much among people you might term as "herpetologists" as people who are in it for the fashion or the money...collecting rare and unusual snakes for the sake of them being rare and unusual.


----------



## Robbie (Dec 4, 2006)

The purest view (which I'm getting from this wee debatey) can't be used to pick at colour mutations within a pure species. As far as I'm aware the only real hybrid of a corn snake is the Caramel. No one can say they are any less of a corn snake than ones round running the farms of Northern America with the exception of the Caramel.

All white Alsations are not favourable in the KC. They're still all Alsation with note that they've been bred to pronounce a white coat.


----------



## boipevassu (Aug 6, 2007)

No judgements or loaded comment - just some thoughts to add to the mix

Some pros

1. Biologically speaking variation/mutation isn't a bad thing - it's a necessity.

2. Regardless of views on 'wild caught animals' the variety of herps available is shrinking, so the variety might come from within species more often now.

3. We can learn a lot about genetics from morphs - this might lead to a better understanding of colour and pattern distribution mechanisms, for example.

Some cons

1. Genes linked to colour and pattern may produce other 'unwanted' outcomes.

2. Potential inbreeding issues.

3. Welfare issues when animals are bred too young or too often.

Some questions

1. Are all the pythons swimming around the everglades 'wild types'?

2. Which morphs were not found in the wild first?

3. Will genetically engineered herps or clones be popular in the future, or is the fun in the breeding and 'the odds'?


----------



## cordylidae (Nov 2, 2008)

boipevassu said:


> No judgements or loaded comment - just some thoughts to add to the mix
> 
> Some pros
> 
> 1. Biologically speaking variation/mutation isn't a bad thing - it's a necessity.


Biologically speaking variety isnt needed many animals surivive without it e.g mourning geckos(which are asexual therefore meaning that all ofspring are genetically identical to the parent) it is better to have variety in a species as it makes them more likely to survive in the WILD but the fact is they arent in the wild and a provided with suitable conditions for how they currently are.Also breeding 'morphs' doesnt nessicararily cause the same amount of variety as random breeding does as breeders choose each animal for certain charecteristics and then will(usually) breed it with another animal with similiar charecteristics so it makes more defined morphs that each generation is very similiar and has very little variation


----------



## boipevassu (Aug 6, 2007)

Mourning geckos are not genetically identical. Have a read - it's why I included the term 'mutation' - thinking of MRSA etc.

'We present 16 variable dinucleotide microsatellite markers to quantify genetic variation in the parthenogenetic gecko, Lepidodactylus lugubris. Genetic diversity at these loci was *unusually high* for an asexual species.'

'This parthenogen may provide a rare opportunity to explore the relative advantages of sexual and asexual reproduction without *the confounding affects of reduced genetic variation typically encountered in asexual lineages.*'

http://www.biology.uc.edu/faculty/petren/LAB/publications/2003WilmhoffPetrenMEN.pdf

It is true that my comment relates to our captive or 'domesticated' animals. 

Some animals occur only in captivity. We can also consider projects such as 'amphibian ark' or captive breeding progs etc which might need to be managed well to avoid gene pool issues. The same could be said for morph breeding projects I agree, although in the wild inbreeding is not excluded and in particular in geographically limited ranges it occurs relatively often.

So here are two more (one borrowed) hypotheticals:

Has the occurrence of hybridization between domestic dogs and wild canids after the speciation event, contributed to the vast phenotypic variation evident in the domestic dog?

Which dogs would survive global warming - which would not?

I understand that dog breeds represent greater variation than that currently seen, say, in royal pythons. However dog 'breeds' must have started with one or a number of events. Which draws selective breeding and hybridisation into the discussion. 

The reason variation/mutation *is a necessity* is that it is essentially behind the mechanism for evolution. Often not a necessity for short-term survival, until sudden diseases or calamities or the arrival of new predators or competitors or antibiotics etc threaten.


----------



## sharpstrain (May 24, 2008)

as primates we suffer from a fundimental flaw - we believe that if we can do something, we should.

It is at the base of all our bad decisions as a species, basically we feel the need to show how clever/able/evolved we are and continue blindly doing things that are a mitake - neuclear weapons, biological warfare, simon cowell etc. we will never learn, we will never stop


----------



## bothrops (Jan 7, 2007)

HABU said:


> why have something that doesn't look like the real thing?
> 
> why have a snake that 'almost' looks like the genuine article?
> http://img197.imageshack.us/img197/9118/dawgc.jpg
> why does everyone want to "pimp-my-snake?"


why do 'old school' herpers think that 'the hobby' shouldn't change, grow, spread and expand? Isn't there room for everyone? Just because it what different 'back in the day' and most captive reptiles perished at the hands of keepers that didn't have a clue.....

I think you have a very different view of herping and herp keeping than anyone this side of the pond. You can walk into your back yard and capture ten species in an afternoon....over here I would bet that most of the snake owners have never even SEEN a wild native snake let alone caught one and tried to keep it alive.
There will be people who have, and many that have failed (you only have to check out the 'can I keep and adder' or 'I found a grass snake, what shall I do' threads on here and you'll find that 99% of the modern day UK herpers on these forums scream 'put it back in the wild...if you want a pet snake buy a corn snake.......

just another side.......doing a HABU.......slightly tipsy on Chrismas night, everyone's gone to bed...thought I'd brain-spew onto the forum.....




gtm said:


> I'd like some one to explain the attraction. Why are people willing to pay £1000's for a morph ball python?


Because they are likely to be able to sell the offspring for £100's....spread that over the lifetime of the snake = free pets! (plus a little extra to cover heating and rodent bills if you are lucky..simples....)





HABU said:


> short answer?
> 
> same thing... same lunacy...


See above....you seem to regularly quote 'fashion'....now although some folk do buy snakes for prestige (and so what if they do..I'm damn sure that a few 'wild snake only, die hard old school herpers don't keep king cobra for many other reasons' be it be personal keeping or wrangling prestige or to get other herpers to look at you in awe.....I fail to see a difference between the wild type old schoolers or the morphers.....both will have those that keep for a plethora of reasons.........

the handbag is a poor analogy because no Loius Vitton handbag has ever sat in a closet with another Loius Vitton handbag and produced little Loius Vitton purses that cover the cost of the original bag when sold on.....




gtm said:


> Anyone who spends $20,000 on a snake need their head examined. What if you trad on it?


I'm assuming you mean 'trod' on it?.....and anyone who EVER gets in a position that they might TREAD ON THEIR SNAKE needs *their* head examined ......:whip:
...and you might want to tell that to Jeremy Stone who paid more than that for a trio of odd coloured boas from the UK (I won't name names)...Jeremy now is a millioniare and drives a Dodge Viper...head examined? I think not.....





sharpstrain said:


> as primates we suffer from a fundimental flaw - we believe that if we can do something, we should.
> 
> It is at the base of all our bad decisions as a species, basically we feel the need to show how clever/able/evolved we are and continue blindly doing things that are a mitake - neuclear weapons, biological warfare, simon cowell etc. we will never learn, we will never stop


 
...like keeping other animals in boxes? I'm sorry but none of the arguements against 'morph breeding' and for 'old school keeping' actually stand up as both are extensions of each other....you can't argue for one and against the other....their are muppets that keep snakes and their are hugely knowledgable experts that keep snakes (and that don't), some only keep wild type snakes, some only keep wild caught, some only have one species and a hundred morphs of it...some have 100 different species...in ALL cases, some do it for the love of the animal, some do it for the money/status/prestige, some do it through a fascination for genetics, some are collectors..etc etc.......


Why is it that many of the 'purists' seem to have this 'Holier than thou' attitude to other snake keepers as though all people that own a morph have 'sold out' and are no longer worthy of being hailed as a 'true expert' or 'true herper' and are in fact money hungry collectors in it for a manhood extension only.........not so long ago that arguement was used for all 'big snake keepers' or 'hot keepers'........




..I guess I just think that the 'hobby' is very different to how it used to be...surely there is room in it for all without one 'group' feeling better, more superior or more worthy than another?

It happens all the time....

big snake keepers slating those that keep 'worms'
WC locale only keepers slating the 'pet owner'
Wild typers vs morphers
the 'I've got a 123 snakes' vs the 'one pet carolina named Charlie'
old school (no TV, no internet, no electricity, no wheel) vs techy know-nothings with too much money and a colour fetish...
*can't we all just love the snakes for our own reasons and share our passions with others without the fear of being belittled, ashamed or less of keeper because we have fewer, or cheaper, or smaller or browner, or newer or rarer or less aggressive animals?*


----------



## boipevassu (Aug 6, 2007)

sharpstrain said:


> as primates we suffer from a fundimental flaw - we believe that if we can do something, we should.
> 
> It is at the base of all our bad decisions as a species, basically we feel the need to show how clever/able/evolved we are and continue blindly doing things that are a mitake - neuclear weapons, biological warfare, simon cowell etc. we will never learn, we will never stop


Perhaps the planet will stop us. The reaction of the planet's systems to our abuses may well be the end of them and us! We will become extinct at some point.

I reckon you are being a bit harsh on nuclear weapons and biological warfare - classing them with SC.


----------



## HABU (Mar 21, 2007)

my job is to be provocative...:lol2:


----------

