Quality of breeding stock

At first, I thought about reducing the price on lower quality morphs but that will not work because whoever buys them might end up breeding them. I will not have any control over that so... that means I should sell them for the same price, or maybe $50 bucks less than a higher quality morph. That doesn't stop the breeding of lower quality morphs though, but that's part of the competition?

M

That's an interesting point! People who have low standards (in any aspect of breeding), want to breed for $$. They don't care about health, they don't care about visual quality of the morph. When buying their stock, they are likely to go for cheapest snakes they can find. Perhaps pricing lower quality animals at lower price than high quality is what causes the average quality to go down? Perhaps low quality animals should be priced higher than high quality, so these "multipliers" or "hatchling-farmers" produce large quantities of good quality stock? :rolleye2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nykea

That's an interesting point! People who have low standards (in any aspect of breeding), want to breed for $$. They don't care about health, they don't care about visual quality of the morph. When buying their stock, they are likely to go for cheapest snakes they can find. Perhaps pricing lower quality animals at lower price than high quality is what causes the average quality to go down? Perhaps low quality animals should be priced higher than high quality, so these "multipliers" or "hatchling-farmers" produce large quantities of good quality stock? :rolleye2:

---

these mysterious breeders that care about nothing have now been mentioned time and time again in this thread. But i doubt that these even exist in any meaningful quantity. Maybe somewhere between 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000 breeders are like that. They either care about health, or about optics, or about both, with different priorities.

Also, people seem to be eager to attack these mystery rogue breeders as if there were some of them posting in this thread. But noone here is defending that position, its nowhere to be found in the thread. The position that is closest to the strawman that is being properly dismantled in this thread is simply: health first, and no inbreeding please.

What if a lot of those 'low quality' morphs were simply het for undisclosed wonderful things?
If there were no 'low quality' BPs, would there would be 'high quality' BPs?

You have some good arguments but unfortunately not everyone has the money for quality breed. In order for me to have any money at all for Vet / Feed costs, Cages, I need to stick to $200-300 pythons. not to say I won't look for quality in the pythons I buy. I want the best of the best, but it's not always a option for everybody. I just need to stay in my ball park while looking for quality breed.


What ever happen to start out small and work your way up?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newbie Ball

You have some good arguments but unfortunately not everyone has the money for quality breed. In order for me to have any money at all for Vet / Feed costs, Cages, I need to stick to $200-300 pythons. not to say I won't look for quality in the pythons I buy. I want the best of the best, but it's not always a option for everybody. I just need to stay in my ball park while looking for quality breed.


What ever happen to start out small and work your way up?

---

---

What they're saying is that there is no "there's not enough money". If you are trying to pay minimum everything just because you want to breed for whatever reasons, you shouldn't be breeding.
The point is if you're breeding, you NEED to give it your all in order to improve the genes out there.
Starting small and working up is good for your breeding plans, but not for the quality of your breeder morphs.

Just my 2 cents...but isnt low vs high quality quite a subjective issue rather than objective for the entire community....

I have read countless threads that have people saying they like dirty morphs over super clean ones (I can't remember the exact 2 or 3 morphs being discussed)

seems like its just a helluva lot of personal opinion as to what makes something high or less than high quality.....?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Newbie Ball

You have some good arguments but unfortunately not everyone has the money for quality breed. In order for me to have any money at all for Vet / Feed costs, Cages, I need to stick to $200-300 pythons. not to say I won't look for quality in the pythons I buy. I want the best of the best, but it's not always a option for everybody. I just need to stay in my ball park while looking for quality breed.


What ever happen to start out small and work your way up?

---

If you want to breed simple one or two gene morphs, there is no reason for you to go out and spend tens of thousands on the latest multi-gene morph. If you prefer single gene morphs, that's where you should spend your money. But that being said, you should be willing to pay whatever it takes to buy the highest quality of that morph you can find. Don't have the money now? Wait until you do. There's no need to sacrifice the vet fund, but there is a need to be patient.

I personally am starting "small" with a few single and double gene morphs. I'm new to all the different morphs (though not new to genetics by any means), and need some time to figure it all out. I'm also starting out with babies that won't even be old enough to breed for a couple years. That gives me time to really read up on everything I need to know before starting, and figure out if that's what I really want to do. HOWEVER, I also personally prefer the simple single and double gene morphs. I *personally* am not a huge fan of the "powerhouse" morphs that have multiple genes. That's personal preference and that's ok. So I will work on breeding the best quality of the simple morphs, if I decide to breed,and be successful at that. If a certain simple morph's market value is $150, I'm probably not going to have to worry about spending $600 on even the best one I could find.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dave partington

What if a lot of those 'low quality' morphs were simply het for undisclosed wonderful things?
If there were no 'low quality' BPs, would there would be 'high quality' BPs?

---

This is one thing I noticed while breeding rats... A "low quality" black rat (one who is faded or browned out, not good for show) had very strong potential of carrying hidden recessives, especially mink and beige. Also when the Burmese rat became popular a lot of breeders started advocating breeding low quality Siamese (one without good shading) into the Burmese to strengthen up the points of the Burmese. (I personally preferred to breed a high quality Siamese into my Burmese and get very good points and keep good quality Siamese instead of sacrificing one for the other, and personally never saw a problem with having shading on a Burmese, personally thought it made them look nicer actually!) If that can be transferred to snakes as well, it is possible there may be a place for "low quality" in improving or producing other morphs. Someone just needs to prove that now! ;)

quote sorraia This is one thing I noticed while breeding rats... A "low quality" black rat (one who is faded or browned out, not good for show) had very strong potential of carrying hidden recessives, especially mink and beige. Also when the Burmese rat became popular a lot of breeders started advocating breeding low quality Siamese (one without good shading) into the Burmese to strengthen up the points of the Burmese. (I personally preferred to breed a high quality Siamese into my Burmese and get very good points and keep good quality Siamese instead of sacrificing one for the other, and personally never saw a problem with having shading on a Burmese, personally thought it made them look nicer actually!) If that can be transferred to snakes as well, it is possible there may be a place for "low quality" in improving or producing other morphs. Someone just needs to prove that now! ;)[/QUOTE]

This is a very good post.
It's easier to grasp how (genes, traits, and line-bred) visual (homozygous) appearances, on a faster generational timeline which rodents provide us with, can be applied to other goals. Whether they prove out exchangeable with other goals, or not, is probably contained in many (perceived as 'low grade') visuals.

Is anyone here able to remember when all royal pythons were wild-type-&-"classic" color?

Hey, I have a real question.
Please tell me how much the first amel ball pythons sold for? And if a pic can go with that, was it a low grade amel?
thanks for sharing, dp

One of my bigger points that I think got lost in the "quality" debate is this: if the snake does not blow you away or "wow" you, why breed it? Whatever it is that you find pleasing aesthetically, you should find that in your breeding stock. I think despite what any of us feel about standards, we can all agree on that.

For the vast majority of my purchased animals, when I see them I say "I have to have that snake" before even looking at price. Now I have said that a lot on snakes I cannot afford, and therefore do not have them. But the ones I DO have, pass that test. If everyone shopped for their breeding stock in this manner, no matter what the trait is that floats your boat, I think we would be moving in the right direction. In other words, find and make the best darn brown Pastels you can make.

If you are just putting a couple of genes together because you think they might sell, put down your paintbrush and go home. Find something that you are actually passionate about and leave the snake breeding to the rest of us. (Not directed at any specific person, but the point is universal.)