Responsible breeders, culling, and overall health (long read and questions)

[Simple Man]

I've recently been searching for morphs and I finally settled on a breeder that's been in this awhile, has reasonable prices (not cheap but not top end), satisfied customers and overall good ethics in regards to breeding. Ball pythons are relatively new to me in the regards to ownership but not research and knowledge. I have a lot of experience with working dog breeds and I'm well aware of the way show breeding has ruined many working dog lines. I recently was presented with a situation in which the breeder made a very sound decision. I had settled on a certain bumblebee but was made aware that they didn't feel the python should be used in a breeding program. The snake had several issues that meant he was going to hold it back or sell it for a greatly reduced price as a pet only. This was the breeder admitting that the animal would not have met my standards. I was very impressed with the professionalism and decision the breeder made. This is a perfect example of a professional in my opinion. I've seen videos where you can barely tell an animal has an issue and I've seen animals with issues so apparent that in my opinion they shouldn't exist. I've read many posts on this forum where someone doesn't make that same logical decision. Responsible breeding means culling animals that should not pass on their genetic traits. We have a responsibility to keep the animals healthy for following generations. Culling does not necessarily mean killing. A cull could also be placed in a guaranteed pet home where the animal will never be bred. My animals health and the ones I produce should be top notch or else I'm not doing my job. I do things right or not at all. That's just the way I was raised. When I eventually sell pythons I will guarantee the genetic health of my animals the same way I would guarantee a working dog has the tools to work. My questions below are from a professional and curious standpoint presented for professional breeders, hobbyist breeders, and pet owner to reflect and answer. I am by no means calling anyone out or trying to start a heated debate so lets keep this clean and professional.

Would you buy or have you bought pythons with known issues?

Would you breed a snake with known issue(s) regardless of the potential negative outcome?

Do professional breeders cull their lines to make sure the best representations of not only looks, but also health and longevity are achieved?

Would you cull an animal from breeding due to known genetic health issue(s)?

Thanks for your time in advance! I'm really looking forward to hearing thoughts from professionals, hobbyists, and pet owners. It should be an interesting conversation if nothing else.

Regards,

B

[angllady2]

I am in complete agreement with you.

I do have one python which I adopted who was born without eyes. Her breeder "culled" her in a manner of speaking, and agreed to send her to me on the condition I never breed her. Now, in this instance she's only a normal and it's not tempting to breed her in the slightest. However, I do understand if she were a valuable morph, a Bee or a Pewter or something, the temptation to breed her would be great, BUT since she had clutchmates who were also born with deformities, to me that says it's highly likely to be genetic and I have no desire to produce more of any morph with deformities.

I myself would never breed a snake who had a known deformity, especially if I have reason to believe it is genetic. Even if the little eyeless girl was a quadruple co-dom, I still wouldn't run the risk of producing more babies with problems like those of her and her clutchmates.
Now, if the defect was believed to be cause by accident or improper incubation, I MIGHT under certain specific conditions, breed the snake one time to see if the defect is passed on. This is one reason why, despite the fact that spiders and their combo's are very beautiful to me, I have no desire to breed them. I simply cannot stomach the thought of being responsible for creating baby pythons who cannot live a normal life. Others may feel differently.

I can't speak for all breeders of course, but it seems to me if the breeder is responsible and wants to be respected, culling is necessary. Like you say, this does not have to mean death, but doing the utmost to ensure that the animal in question is never bred.

If I had a seemingly normal animal that produced flawed offspring in a clutch, I would in good conscience go through two clutches. If both clutches showed a tendency toward defects, I would not continue to breed that particular pair. I might under certain circumstances attempt to pinpoint the cause by breeding the two snakes to different mates to see if the source can be found, or I might just stop breeding both to be sure of no more difficulties.

Gale

[T&C Exotics]

Well this is a hard one to answer because there are a few different points of view. Personally I have bred animals with known issues such as the spider ball. Now with this mutation the spinning/wobble could be known at hatching but could take years to take full effect. I had a female that never did any form of the wobble until she produced her first clutch and none of the babies from that clutch had the wobble at birth but the 2 I held back ended up with the wobble after a year. I will continue to breed the spider female because she is a beautiful animal and produces exceptional babies and well it is the spider gene so you never really know what you are going to get when it comes to the wobble.

As to purchasing an animal with a known issue no I would not purchase one because I do breed them and if the animal does not fit in to a breeding program I will not purchase it.

When I hatch out a clutch if I see that there is a trend with certain breedings I wont do those breedings anymore. I would try different mates and see if it is one snake or the other or just the combination of the 2. I have had to cull numerous animals due to severe deformities and have also given away an animal that was deformed but would survive with a little special attention.

Like I said when I started this is a really hard question to answer because as with my example the spider gene there are animals that show no signs until late in life and others that I have seen that as they age the wobble gets less and less. There are other genes such as woma that I will not breed to produce a super form, the pearl, because it is a fatal gene. I also will not work with carmels because of the kinking in them.

Well that is my point of view.

[cinderbird]

My point of view:

I love spider ball pythons. I have owned three over my time of owning snakes (I still currently own one).

However, I will no longer own enigma leopard geckos.

The difference between these two animals (other than species) is that the spiders, except for those that are absolute trainwrecks, THRIVE. they are some of my best eaters, my most calm animals, docile personalities, great growers, and I would assume produce well (I have never bred any of my BPs so I can't comment on this).

The enigma leopard geckos though.. At some point when I own them (I have had two) have completely failed to thrive. To the point where they are losing weight, not eating well or on their own, seizures (in one case, but this may have been unrelated to the enigma gene), etc. I've already had to euthanize one and am contemplating euthanizing the other because this animal is beyond saving. (I'm sure she will tell me when its time if she doesn't turn around).

I believe in culling deformed offspring. Something kinked, missing an eye, short jaw, etc. I would rather work on breeding and selling animals that don't have physical defects (be them genetic or just a factor of incubation). I also won't ever be adding caramel albinos to my collection. These animals can live for 30+ years. You can't guarantee that your friend won't "give another friend" a kinked 4 gene female that wont breed her 10 years down the road. I also find it would be easier to put down a small young animal than one you've grown attached to for x years.

In anther turn of this topic, I would also put down animals that failed to thrive. I would accept some force or assist feeding (I've done this before and have had animals completely take off and turn into monster feeders after a few force fed or assist fed meals). If it went on for whatever I considered to be "too long" I would probably cull it. I would not pawn off an unfeeding animal onto another keeper.

I think it comes down to an ethical and moral and personal decision on euthanizing. Its something I've thought about a lot, even before I paired up my first animals, because things don't always go right. :/

[Serpent_Nirvana]

This is also tough because, as others have said, there are different viewpoints as to what constitutes a defect severe enough to justify culling.

You mention that the animal in question was a bumblebee (spider gene-carrier). Though I don't know the specifics, that brings to mind the idea that perhaps the animal was a "train-wreck" neurological case. I applaud the breeder for believing that such an animal should not be bred.

I am of a mind that "train-wreck" spiders should NOT be bred, just in case there does exist the slightest amount of genetic variability to how bad the neuro issues will be. This is a hotly debated issue, and at this point, many people believe that the severity of the neuro issues is completely random -- as it well may be, and as it "appears" to be in many cases. Therefore, some would suggest that "train-wreck" animals CAN be bred, because they are no more or less likely to produce more train-wrecks than a spider exhibiting almost no apparent issues.

I don't agree with this viewpoint -- while I don't know whether the severity of the issues are "random" or not, in my mind, there's enough of a possibility that there is some genetic component to the severity that I would not want to encourage breeding of a train-wreck animal. However, that doesn't mean, in my mind, that those with the opposite viewpoint are unethical. It just means that they disagree with my views on the genetic aspects of it, and that's okay.

Really, I think the bigger debate is whether we, as breeders, should be continuing to perpetuate spiders at all ... They don't seem to be going anywhere any time soon, though, so I think that debate is going to rage for a looooong time. (I'm really conflicted on this one myself. I have spider-gene animals. I'm breeding one of them, and he's one of my favorite snakes. All the ones I've had have, as Cinderbird put it, absolutely THRIVED in captivity, even relative to other BPs -- they love to eat, breed like rabbits, are tame, etc.. But, all but one has some bit of neuro issue that I have noticed, even though it may be quite subtle. So ...)

As far as caramels -- I am planning on working with them, as I do believe that caramels have the possibility to be bred away from kinking regularly. However, I don't believe I will be releasing any kinked ones (certainly not sexually-intact kinked ones) to the general public even as "pets," because I agree completely with Cinderbird that you just can't guarantee that, six owners down the road, the animal won't be bred. I am also trying to pick individuals from lines with low kinking rates. So, we'll see how that goes ... I think if I hatched several high-kink clutches, I would probably drop the gene entirely, though I really hope it doesn't come to that.

As far as other "general health" issues -- I DO try and select animals for breeding that are especially strong feeders, and weak feeders often get sold as such. (Thankfully, I haven't had to do as much of that as I thought I might when moving into BPs -- I think breeders HAVE improved that particular trait over the past couple of decades!)

[Adam Chandler]

I think this strongly depends on what you consider a "issue"

This is my own personal opinion:
"Beauty" issues
I only add Ball Pythons to my breeding program that I believe a good visual examples of their genetics. If I do not think the animal is a good visual example of its morph do I think it should never be bred by anyone? No, just not by me. Some other BP breeder may like the look of it and decided to add it to their program.

Health issues
I believe Ball Pythons who are born too deformed to live a comfortable life should be humanly euthanized. By this I mean deformities that prevent the animal from properly eating, may be causing the animal pain or prevent the animal from properly moving (i.e. Spinal deformities). I DO NOT believe the Spider wobble is ever cause to euthanize an animal unless it is so sever that the animal cannot feed (which I've never heard of a case that severe) Any Ball Python with a Spider gene that has a wobble should be given a chance to grow out of the wobble (as most I've seen do) if the animal does not grow out of it, it should be kept as only a pet.

[Matt K]

I won't touch the more discussed issues here, but will add that although I don't think that poor morph examples should be removed from breeding pools, I do think they should be discounted price-wise from breeders. That way they'd be setting a clear precedent as to the quality of animals they feel would make the best breeders. The not-so-hot snakes could still be sold as breeders, but the individuals buying them would most likely be hobbyists who are more interested in the actual breeding than they are with producing mind blowing animals. This would make certain morphs and combinations more obtainable to those who can't afford huge price tags, and might at least make reflecting quality in price more of a standard in the industry. Inevitably this would create two different niches in the industry, but would alienate less people in my opinion; there's nothing wrong with breeding just for the fun of it! This is probably unrealistic however, haha, as people seem partial to their own animals, and sometimes have trouble keeping a clear head about the quality of animals they're producing. Not all snakes are created equal, and price should really reflect that more than it does currently.

Cheers,
-Matt

[Simple Man]

I was away from home last night and almost dreading reading this thread. I must say there have been some superb replies. I can agree to pretty much every point made here because it was well thought out and expressed. I thanked you all for sharing but I still want to say thank you in post. Knowledge is power and every one of you just provided some based on your own experiences and opinions. These kind of threads will hopefully pop up in searches for potential new owners/breeders/pros to read and contemplate. If even one person read this and considered the questions posed then we were all successful. Thanks again and I will post some more specific replies later. I'm finishing up school projects and finals for the rest of the week. Rest assured the topic will be revisited!

Best Regards,

B

[SlitherinSisters]

It depends on what is wrong with the animal. If it's poor quality, has one small kink, etc then culling is probably not the answer. Last year my entire clutch was a train wreck. Missing eyes, kinks out the ying yang, and split bellies. After speaking with a lot of breeders, I decided to cull. One breeder made a great point, "you do not want these things getting bred and the only way to guarantee that is if you keep them all." It was a really hard thing for me to do, but culling was the best choice IMO.

[Serpent_Nirvana]

I won't touch the more discussed issues here, but will add that although I don't think that poor morph examples should be removed from breeding pools, I do think they should be discounted price-wise from breeders. That way they'd be setting a clear precedent as to the quality of animals they feel would make the best breeders. The not-so-hot snakes could still be sold as breeders, but the individuals buying them would most likely be hobbyists who are more interested in the actual breeding than they are with producing mind blowing animals. This would make certain morphs and combinations more obtainable to those who can't afford huge price tags, and might at least make reflecting quality in price more of a standard in the industry. Inevitably this would create two different niches in the industry, but would alienate less people in my opinion; there's nothing wrong with breeding just for the fun of it! This is probably unrealistic however, haha, as people seem partial to their own animals, and sometimes have trouble keeping a clear head about the quality of animals they're producing. Not all snakes are created equal, and price should really reflect that more than it does currently.

Cheers,
-Matt

I do think we're starting to see this more and more. I've noticed that many (if not most) big breeders, even many small-time breeders, absolutely DO price different individuals of the same morph differently based on quality. I think that pastels and bees get priced this way the most often, but I've seen it for other morphs as well.

I think it's only natural, if only from a supply-and-demand perspective!

IMO, I think we as BP breeders don't use the word "pet" often enough! I don't think there's anything at all wrong with marketing those animals that are lower-quality in terms their appearance more towards the pet market than the breeder market. (Though of course, in our industry those lines are perhaps MUCH more blurred than for other species ...)

For this species, I think there's still a large enough pet demand (which is currently being filled largely by CH/import animals) that I would agree that low-quality (appearance) animals don't "need" to be removed from the gene pool. However, for those whose goal is to improve the overall quality of the gene pool of that morph, it does make sense to suggest these animals more strongly as pets than as breeders ... At least, it does to me. That said, I certainly won't fault anyone who is breeding BPs just for the fun of it, as long as they're healthy, well-adjusted specimens!