Do you avoid morphs with known genetic flaws?

To answer the op's questions.... I have no interest in caramels, so I couldn't say about that. However, I love everything spider. I think spiders with high white sides are beautiful, I LOVE my bumblebee. And yes, I knew about it before we got her. I had watched several videos on you tube, with varying degrees of wobble. Yes, some of the extreme cases cam be sad too watch, but I don't think there are as many that are that extreme. Our bumblebee had a slight wobble when we first got her. You can't really even tell anymore. I think her nerves brought it out when she got here, new enclosure stressed her out. Her head would bobble a bit. The first two feedings she missed the rat on her first strike, due to head bobbing from excitement/stress, but nailed it on second strike. Since then, we never see her wobble, and she is a great eater. I think she may have it mild, where stress or feed response triggered it? Anywhoo, I would not avoid anything spider, I love them. Just maybe try to find a less extreme animal.

Look. You people that sit on your soap box talking about caramels and the fact you will produce nothin but tail kinkers let me ask you a direct question. How many caramels have you bred and what was the ratio of kinkers? If you say more then 10% having kink issues your lying. I have been breeding caramels for along time. I have had many clutches of them. I would say 1 out of 20 babies has a kink. Good odds?, good lines?, pure luck? Whatever it is i can give you the answer based in doing it. Not from searching the internet and speculating. Stop feeding people who are trying to learn useless information

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

Look. You people that sit on your soap box talking about caramels and the fact you will produce nothin but tail kinkers let me ask you a direct question. How many caramels have you bred and what was the ratio of kinkers? If you say more then 10% having kink issues your lying. I have been breeding caramels for along time. I have had many clutches of them. I would say 1 out of 20 babies has a kink. Good odds?, good lines?, pure luck? Whatever it is i can give you the answer based in doing it. Not from searching the internet and speculating. Stop feeding people who are trying to learn useless information

---

Actually, you must have missed the link I posted from these people with 20+ years of experience.
http://vmsherp.com/ViewPastProjects.htm

Whether they have a HUGE kink in their tail, or a very minor one only visible under an x-ray, they have one. Not just 10%. Also, that means that ALL of them have the possibility to produce extremely kinked animals.

I don't know why you would be proud of having any kinked animals, even just 10%, if you seem to have such 'high quality'. Oops, just don't look at that 10% with huge kinks, or any other problems. Color shouldn't make up for spinal problems, or any other genetic disorder.
It's also incorrect to attempt to learn only by doing something. I want a reticulated python. I'm not going to 'search the internet and speculate', I'm just going to buy one. How do you know they don't get 20+ feet long? I guess you can't take other people's warning...

To answer your question, I have not bred ANY caramels. I'm smart enough to believe it when other people say they have kinks, and not risk it with living animals.

Let me ask you a direct question. How many have YOU looked at under an x-ray?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Actually, you must have missed the link I posted from these people with 20+ years of experience.
http://vmsherp.com/ViewPastProjects.htm

Whether they have a HUGE kink in their tail, or a very minor one only visible under an x-ray, they have one. Not just 10%. Also, that means that ALL of them have the possibility to produce extremely kinked animals.

I don't know why you would be proud of having any kinked animals, even just 10%, if you seem to have such 'high quality'. Oops, just don't look at that 10% with huge kinks, or any other problems. Color shouldn't make up for spinal problems, or any other genetic disorder.
It's also incorrect to attempt to learn only by doing something. I want a reticulated python. I'm not going to 'search the internet and speculate', I'm just going to buy one. How do you know they don't get 20+ feet long? I guess you can't take other people's warning...

To answer your question, I have not bred ANY caramels. I'm smart enough to believe it when other people say they have kinks, and not risk it with living animals.

Let me ask you a direct question. How many have YOU looked at under an x-ray?

---

You dont get it do ya. Kinking is part of the risk with caramels so is the woble with spiders. If your gonna work with the gene its something to remember. I love the caramel combos and the fact i said 10% doesnt reflect squat about my quality. Its the gene. I selectively breed lines where its not as prevelant but it still exists. If you have a problem with possibillities of genetic issues you shouldnt be involved in ball pythons. Second you can copy and paste all ya want. Until you know from experience you shouldnt be making claims like you know. Just my oppinion

And yes i do look at imaging. I have a welld imaging system that i use quite often for my breeders and for any animal that may have issues. By your statements people shouldnt breed any spider combos, caramels, banannas, etc because of risk from something that may or may not come from their genetic makeup. So dog lovers shouldnt own or breed english bulldogs, pugs etc because of the inherant risk of nasal structure issues. Every animal has something that comes as a risk or a flaw in their genetic code. Now i wouldnt breed a kinked caramel obviouslly but for you to say we shouldnt breed them based on your google knowledge i think is flawed. Yes the internet is a good place to get knowledge. But you also cant believe everything you read on the internet. Now if you wanted to buy a car would you take the advice of the manufacturer or the mechanic? Think about it oh and the funniest part is your pro info at vms is coming from people selling spider combos and cinny stuff which both also have inherant genetic issues. Hmmmmm

One last thing. Vms herps own words were that every one they have seen in their collection had minor deformallities so they terminated the project. So that just means the line they were working with were kinkers. Doesnt mean all are. Seriouslly look at the validity of the statement that you are going to back as gospel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

You dont get it do ya. Kinking is part of the risk with caramels so is the woble with spiders. If your gonna work with the gene its something to remember. I love the caramel combos and the fact i said 10% doesnt reflect squat about my quality. Its the gene. I selectively breed lines where its not as prevelant but it still exists. If you have a problem with possibillities of genetic issues you shouldnt be involved in ball pythons. Second you can copy and paste all ya want. Until you know from experience you shouldnt be making claims like you know. Just my oppinion

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

And yes i do look at imaging. I have a welld imaging system that i use quite often for my breeders and for any animal that may have issues. By your statements people shouldnt breed any spider combos, caramels, banannas, etc because of risk from something that may or may not come from their genetic makeup. So dog lovers shouldnt own or breed english bulldogs, pugs etc because of the inherant risk of nasal structure issues. Every animal has something that comes as a risk or a flaw in their genetic code. Now i wouldnt breed a kinked caramel obviouslly but for you to say we shouldnt breed them based on your google knowledge i think is flawed. Yes the internet is a good place to get knowledge. But you also cant believe everything you read on the internet. Now if you wanted to buy a car would you take the advice of the manufacturer or the mechanic? Think about it oh and the funniest part is your pro info at vms is coming from people selling spider combos and cinny stuff which both also have inherant genetic issues. Hmmmmm

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

One last thing. Vms herps own words were that every one they have seen in their collection had minor deformallities so they terminated the project. So that just means the line they were working with were kinkers. Doesnt mean all are. Seriouslly look at the validity of the statement that you are going to back as gospel.

---

I guess you didn't see this:
Claims of 'perfect' animals are common, but all we've seen have shown the problem under x-ray.

Re-read what I said about taking people's word for things. I don't buy animals with known problems, just to prove to myself that it has the problems. That would be stupid. Like I said, why would someone buy a reticulated python, not believing that they get 20' long, then find out for themselves?
VMS herp also said 'every animal they had seen', not only in their collection. They also don't test their own 'claims', meaning that by their statement, all lines of caramels have kinks.

Are you saying that some of your animals have NO kinks? I know people that would pay ALOT for kink-free caramels, and from what you said, it seems like you must have some.

People on here act like they were SO particular about buying an animal with the perfect color, pattern, fading,...
but then, they don't even care that the animals either show, or will have offspring that show neurological or physical problems or deformities.

I already wrote that not all morphs have associated problems. Breeding 1000 lemon blasts and hatching a huge amount of hatchlings might give you a deformed or kinked animal, but it's not known to be associated/connected to the morph. It's just a random thing.
Breeding 1000 caramels or spiders would give you an extremely high amount that show the associated problems in varying amounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

I guess you didn't see this:
Claims of 'perfect' animals are common, but all we've seen have shown the problem under x-ray.

Re-read what I said about taking people's word for things. I don't buy animals with known problems, just to prove to myself that it has the problems. That would be stupid. Like I said, why would someone buy a reticulated python, not believing that they get 20' long, then find out for themselves?
VMS herp also said 'every animal they had seen', not only in their collection. They also don't test their own 'claims', meaning that by their statement, all lines of caramels have kinks.

Are you saying that some of your animals have NO kinks? I know people that would pay ALOT for kink-free caramels, and from what you said, it seems like you must have some.

People on here act like they were SO particular about buying an animal with the perfect color, pattern, fading,...
but then, they don't even care that the animals either show, or will have offspring that show neurological or physical problems or deformities.

I already wrote that not all morphs have associated problems. Breeding 1000 lemon blasts and hatching a huge amount of hatchlings might give you a deformed or kinked animal, but it's not known to be associated/connected to the morph. It's just a random thing.
Breeding 1000 caramels or spiders would give you an extremely high amount that show the associated problems in varying amounts.

---

Yes u did see there claim. And i thought i made my point clear. But ill go slow incase ya missed it. They said in the ones they saw under xray. Ok again the line they were working with obviouslly had issues. Unless they are running xrays on everyones lines how can you equate that as meaning all caramels have kinks. And no none of my caramels have kinks. Have i produced some in the 15 years of breeding ball pythons alone? Yes. But not very many. So again your saying you wont buy or work with any animal with a chance of genetic flaw. So cinnies and all combos are out, spiders and all combos are out, caramels and all combos are out, deserts and all combos are out, banannas and all combos are out, do i need to go on? You might as well get a goldfish and be done. Oh wait now they are finding hole in the head with them so i guess your out of luck with the animal hobby. Im not claiming to have kink free caramels. It can happen. What im saying i work with lines that it is not as common therefore stacking the odds in my favor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

Yes u did see there claim. And i thought i made my point clear. But ill go slow incase ya missed it. They said in the ones they saw under xray. Ok again the line they were working with obviouslly had issues. Unless they are running xrays on everyones lines how can you equate that as meaning all caramels have kinks. And no none of my caramels have kinks. Have i produced some in the 15 years of breeding ball pythons alone? Yes. But not very many. So again your saying you wont buy or work with any animal with a chance of genetic flaw. So cinnies and all combos are out, spiders and all combos are out, caramels and all combos are out, deserts and all combos are out, banannas and all combos are out, do i need to go on? You might as well get a goldfish and be done. Oh wait now they are finding hole in the head with them so i guess your out of luck with the animal hobby. Im not claiming to have kink free caramels. It can happen. What im saying i work with lines that it is not as common therefore stacking the odds in my favor.

---

This is what I couldn't understand, in bold.

What line of caramel are you working with? Do you ever hatch any with the extreme kinks, or are they all very minor when they do hatch? If you have ones that never hatch major kinks, you could be marketing and selling them for alot more if it's proven.

Wow... Just wow... <_<

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

This is what I couldn't understand, in bold.

What line of caramel are you working with? Do you ever hatch any with the extreme kinks, or are they all very minor when they do hatch? If you have ones that never hatch major kinks, you could be marketing and selling them for alot more if it's proven.

---

Im saying none of my caramels have kinks. None of the ones i own are kinked. Have they produced kinked babies? Yes 3 years ago i had 2 babies out of 5 clutches of caramels that had slight kinks. I would say pretty good odds. You may disagree but nothing is perfect.
With you calling yourself genetics breeder you should know this. And with you way of thinking i wouldnt be making a website promoting ball breeding if your against working with morphs that have some genetic flaws cause that will cut you out of about 50% of the market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

Im saying none of my caramels have kinks. None of the ones i own are kinked. Have they produced kinked babies? Yes 3 years ago i had 2 babies out of 5 clutches of caramels that had slight kinks. I would say pretty good odds. You may disagree but nothing is perfect.
With you calling yourself genetics breeder you should know this. And with you way of thinking i wouldnt be making a website promoting ball breeding if your against working with morphs that have some genetic flaws cause that will cut you out of about 50% of the market.

---

Oh ok, that's what I was asking. Those are very good odds, for a caramel. What line do you have?

It wouldn't be close to 50% of the morphs that I cut out. I would cut out anything with neurological or mental disorders, and anything with problems that can at all affect the animal functioning, no matter how minor. If some have very minor bug eyes, but so minor that it was almost not there, that is, in my opinion, alot better that an animal with the possibility of corkscrewing/spinning. I still would be against anything more major than that.

Also, there are still many species with very few morphs, or only the wild phase, so breeding only non-problematic morphs is completely normal. There are even people that only breed normal ball pythons.
Stinkpot turtles, green anoles, rosy boas, and many species of tortoises don't even have morphs. People still breed those.
Then there are still other species that have only non-problematic morphs, probably because there are not many morphs. Brazilian rainbow boas only have 2 genetic morphs, anerythristic and hypomelanistic. Then there are a few line bred genes, but only those 2 genetic morphs, plus the ghost, an anerythristic hypomelanistic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

rosy boas, and many species of tortoises don't even have morphs

---

There are rosy boa morphs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobNJ

There are rosy boa morphs.

---

I remember now, the albinos and ghosts. Still, there are not many, and none that I know have problems. I was talking about the localities.

My point is that there are animals out there with only the wild type, still being bred.

My lines are a mixed bag but i have crider lines in my project which have been known to not produce kinks. As far as this post goes. I apoligize i was under the understanding that we were talking about ball pythons considering the poll. If we are talking about ball pythons then it would be nearly impossible not to flirt with genetic flaws. Also ball python breeding has come so far in a short period of time and more people are breeding them then any other snake. With that said it is not hard to believe that these genetic flaws can be manipulated and corrected over time and selective breeding. For example i got into a pissing match a few months ago about the spider wobble. I have been breeding spider combos off of my original male i bought for 15k back in 2002 from rob at then spiderballs.net. that male had no wobble at all. It was 8 clutches before i saw a wobble. Great odds. The spider that came out with the wobble was never bred. I sold it to a lady who still has it today as a pet. Now im not saying i have never produced any wobblers since but i do take breeding seriouslly and do select breeding to ensure the greatest odds. These other snakes you mention to be free from genetic flaws could be a real strong genetic animal or the face not as much work has been put in to them to discover any flaws. As we push to open genetic windows there will always be flaws that we uncover. The fact that mainstream breeding of snakes is still in its infancy im sure you will see these flaws in the future. We are manipulating natures way plain amd simple. We the breeders are the scientists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Oh ok, that's what I was asking. Those are very good odds, for a caramel. What line do you have?

It wouldn't be close to 50% of the morphs that I cut out. I would cut out anything with neurological or mental disorders, and anything with problems that can at all affect the animal functioning, no matter how minor. If some have very minor bug eyes, but so minor that it was almost not there, that is, in my opinion, alot better that an animal with the possibility of corkscrewing/spinning. I still would be against anything more major than that.

Also, there are still many species with very few morphs, or only the wild phase, so breeding only non-problematic morphs is completely normal. There are even people that only breed normal ball pythons.
Stinkpot turtles, green anoles, rosy boas, and many species of tortoises don't even have morphs. People still breed those.
Then there are still other species that have only non-problematic morphs, probably because there are not many morphs. Brazilian rainbow boas only have 2 genetic morphs, anerythristic and hypomelanistic. Then there are a few line bred genes, but only those 2 genetic morphs, plus the ghost, an anerythristic hypomelanistic.

---

I'm curious, I remember from past conversations that you are a young man (15 if I remember correctly). You present yourself very well for 15. Very opinionated for your young age, but very well. How many ball pythons are you currently working with yourself? How many different mutations?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rabernet

I'm curious, I remember from past conversations that you are a young man (15 if I remember correctly). You present yourself very well for 15. Very opinionated for your young age, but very well. How many ball pythons are you currently working with yourself? How many different mutations?

---

I have albino, pied, OG, pastel, citrus, line bred granite, ivory, combinations of those genes, and a few others. I don't know the exact amount. I have more of other species than ball pythons, and those have morphs also.

I also didn't say that I do have any of the morphs this poll was about. I have experience with other animals, like boas, colubrids, and geckos, and those have morphs. I think that with the spider wobble, people might be underestimating how powerful and sophisticated animals' brains are. People say that they want to keep the personality, but not the wobble or corkscrewing.
To me, that seems almost impossible. There is just too much variation. If people can barely line-breed for certain visual traits without altering others that they are not aware of, it would be all the more dangerous with neurological affects, especially since some become progressively worse/better with age, and people could easily alter other areas of the brain/neurological system without realizing it, just trying to breed them out of the problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

People say that they want to keep the personality, but not the wobble or corkscrewing.

---

Who says that? I think most people have resigned to the fact that if they choose to breed spiders and spider combos, then neurological issues are sure to come with that choice. They eat fine, drink fine, poop fine, and shed fine, so who's to say that a little wobble or corkscrew make them unsuitable for breeding. It's not as if we're breeding spiders to repopulate balls in the wild. If bred in captivity and kept in captivity, what is the issue?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobNJ

Who says that? I think most people have resigned to the fact that if they choose to breed spiders and spider combos, then neurological issues are sure to come with that choice. They eat fine, drink fine, poop fine, and shed fine, so who's to say that a little wobble or corkscrew make them unsuitable for breeding. It's not as if we're breeding spiders to repopulate balls in the wild. If bred in captivity and kept in captivity, what is the issue?

---

Of course not. It's the same as the goldfish that have HUGE eyes sticking out of their head.
http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/p...58&pcatid=2758
There are also 'bubble cheek' goldfish that have huge pouches under their eyes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/65304419@N00/3109378507

I shouldn't even have to describe it, but obviously, the huge eyes and cheek pouches can be damaged and even POP. Yes, they can break open, and the fish will be left swimming around, until it dies, with broken loose skin from the huge pouches. It can happen from sharp rocks in the tank, the filter intake, or other fish biting. Do YOU think that's good? They die if that happens to them. People are still breeding them, saying the same thing as you are about spiders.
That is the issue.
I know that goldfish are not ball pythons. People use the same excuses for breeding animals that are messed up.
Not a single person has been able to tell me why them seem to have to breed spiders. Whether you like what I say or not, if someone has the will power, they can easily avoid buying spiders, and like people always say about breeding ball pythons, if you aren't patient or don't have enough self control, you shouldn't be doing it.

Seeing something day after day makes it seem a lot better than it is. I brought it up in another thread. Reptile vets are normally surprised that people are still breeding spiders, even after they know that they have problems. The fact that people back each other up doesn't help. One post with someone saying 'spiders aren't bad. Just buy what you like' gets thanked 10 times.
The single comment made by another person, other than mine, saying 'why do people still breed them', doesn't get thanked, it just gets tons of negative replies talking about how colorful the combo morphs are with spider.:rolleyes:

How could we live without it?

I know!!!
Pretend it's not there. How hard is that for people?
I guess it's pretty hard, based on all of the impulsive-purchases and people regretting that they bought the baby retic at an expo, then releasing it.

People need self control. I know there are people that think before they buy a spider, but when they are hearing other people constantly talking about how good it is, the decision is biased.

There are dog breeds that can only give birth through c-section. Is it going to be that bad with ball pythons in years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobNJ

Who says that? I think most people have resigned to the fact that if they choose to breed spiders and spider combos, then neurological issues are sure to come with that choice. They eat fine, drink fine, poop fine, and shed fine, so who's to say that a little wobble or corkscrew make them unsuitable for breeding. It's not as if we're breeding spiders to repopulate balls in the wild. If bred in captivity and kept in captivity, what is the issue?

---

I forgot to actually mention what you asked me.
First of all, look on these forums before asking me who said something. I know you saw that other thread. People said that 'spiders are more curious and have more personality than other ball pythons'. They also said 'spider problems are being bred out of them'. Like I wrote above, people are underestimating the power of animals' brains.
They aren't just going to breed them away from the neurological disorder, while still keeping some aspect of it that seems to make them 'more curious' and with 'more personality'.
Actually, people still say that they are trying to breed them out of the problems. Just look it up.

You also say the thing about them 'eating, growing, and breeding fine'. Of course they will. What are most animals main purpose in the wild?
Eating, growing, then breeding to make more of the species.
It's the most basic instinct-repopulate to make more of the species.
That doesn't help your argument.
Also, you said that if they were kept and bred in captivity there should be no problems.
Whether it's obvious to you or not, people are already breeding past the point that is natural. I'm not talking about colors or patterns, those are exceptions.
It's one thing to change the color or pattern of an animal. Screwing with brain function is completely different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

Of course not. It's the same as the goldfish that have HUGE eyes sticking out of their head.
http://www.liveaquaria.com/product/p...58&pcatid=2758
There are also 'bubble cheek' goldfish that have huge pouches under their eyes.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/65304419@N00/3109378507

---

I had these goldfish when I was a kid and I loved them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

I shouldn't even have to describe it, but obviously, the huge eyes and cheek pouches can be damaged and even POP. Yes, they can break open, and the fish will be left swimming around, until it dies, with broken loose skin from the huge pouches. It can happen from sharp rocks in the tank, the filter intake, or other fish biting. Do YOU think that's good? They die if that happens to them. People are still breeding them, saying the same thing as you are about spiders.

---

There is nothing in my spider's enclosure that it can hurt itself on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

Not a single person has been able to tell me why them seem to have to breed spiders.

---

Because we like them, and like what breeding them does in combination with other genes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

Whether you like what I say or not, if someone has the will power, they can easily avoid buying spiders, and like people always say about breeding ball pythons, if you aren't patient or don't have enough self control, you shouldn't be doing it.

---

While patience and self control are important in this hobby, i don't see what that has to do with will power and not buying spiders. Some people don't like spiders, many people do. The people who do like them buy them and breed them for that reason, not because we have this insatiable urge to own/breed defective animals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

Reptile vets are normally surprised that people are still breeding spiders, even after they know that they have problems.

---

My vet likes spiders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

The fact that people back each other up doesn't help. One post with someone saying 'spiders aren't bad. Just buy what you like' gets thanked 10 times.
The single comment made by another person, other than mine, saying 'why do people still breed them', doesn't get thanked, it just gets tons of negative replies talking about how colorful the combo morphs are with spider.:rolleyes:

---

If someone can come to the table with good reasons and facts as to why spiders should not be bred and present themselves in such a manner that doesn't come off as condemnation, I would happily "Thank" their post. Doesn't mean I'll stop keeping/breeding spiders, but I could appreciate it nonetheless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

How could we live without it?

I know!!!
Pretend it's not there.

---

It's a little too late for that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

I guess it's pretty hard, based on all of the impulsive-purchases and people regretting that they bought the baby retic at an expo, then releasing it.

---

Irrelevant to the matter at hand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

People need self control. I know there are people that think before they buy a spider, but when they are hearing other people constantly talking about how good it is, the decision is biased.

---

I've not made one purchase based on opinions of the masses, including my spider. I'm sure many others can say the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geneics Breedetr

There are dog breeds that can only give birth through c-section. Is it going to be that bad with ball pythons in years?

---

If that's what it takes to get eggs out of a Desert!



Ok, so now on a more serious note...Robin said you where what, 15? My hats off to you that at that age you seem so passionate about something and are able to organize and present your thoughts. That being said, I can see why people may be fairly dismissive of your posts based on how you present them...it almost comes with an air of elitism. Discussions without lecturing will always get you feedback...now whether it's feedback you agree with or not is beyond me, but you'll get better results. You can't expect to come on here being so highly opinionated about what is a sensitive subject to many one way or the other and expect to change peoples' minds.

Other than that, all I can say is to go out and get yourself a spider...:gj:.

Also, just to contradict what is written above, here are the links to back what I wrote.
post 21, by interloc-
Are you saying stop breeding spiders all together. That would be a huge mistake IMO. A bad wobbler can produce a very very mild wobble and vice versa. So it's not like w could jus brew it out of em. Spider combos are amazing IMO. I would be way sadder to never be able to see a spider ever again. Also the wobble increases their personality. My spider is the best snake to handle our of my collection. He acts more like a boa. Very inquisitive and loves exploring. Everyone needs a spider in their collection. If not for breeding with, for enjoyment as part of the family.
This proves what I said about people using the 'more personality' excuse.

post 25, by DrDooLittle-
Like others have said, don't let that stop you from getting something with the spider gene.
This proves what I said about people backing each other up, like peer pressure, against the people saying that spiders should not be bred.

Of course, posts number 4,7,12, and 13 were not thanked, just negatively replied to. The rest were thanked multiple times, showing how people back each other up, making it not seem as bad.

Here is a link to the thread.
http://ball-pythons.net/forums/showt...8-wobble/page3

I'm not trying to turn this into another argument page. If you are able to try to contradict any of the things I wrote, try to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobNJ

I had these goldfish when I was a kid and I loved them.

Did you read the part about the things that can happen to them? I know people that had lots of pets as kids. The point is that people use the same excuses for breeding them. They say that they eat, grow, and breed, meaning that they must be completely normal.

There is nothing in my spider's enclosure that it can hurt itself on.

Not even close to what I meant. It was an example for the excuse of breeding them being the same.


Because we like them, and like what breeding them does in combination with other genes.

So you HAVE to have them? I like anacondas, but I wouldn't buy one, knowing that it will get huge.

While patience and self control are important in this hobby, i don't see what that has to do with will power and not buying spiders. Some people don't like spiders, many people do. The people who do like them buy them and breed them for that reason, not because we have this insatiable urge to own/breed defective animals.

That's not what I meant. People all agree that they are trying to breed them out of the problems. You must not have seen all of the posts with people saying that they were 'nervous' about getting spiders, but got one anyways.

My vet likes spiders.

Most people that are not hearing it day after day wouldn't think that they should be bred. That includes most vets that are not involved in the ball python morphs.

If someone can come to the table with good reasons and facts as to why spiders should not be bred and present themselves in such a manner that doesn't come off as condemnation, I would happily "Thank" their post. Doesn't mean I'll stop keeping/breeding spiders, but I could appreciate it nonetheless.

And I didn't? If my posts seemed rude after a while, it is because I keep repeating information, and people keep ignoring it, making other excuses.

It's a little too late for that

So you're saying that you are not able to ignore something that is there already? That just goes back to what I said about people HAVING to get what they want, if they have the money for it.

Irrelevant to the matter at hand.

Actually not irrelevant. People urge people to buy a spider and not be 'nervous' about it. It's basically impulsive and an extremely biased choice.

I've not made one purchase based on opinions of the masses, including my spider. I'm sure many others can say the same.

I'm saying that based on seeing people say something like "I'm scared to buy a spider because of the head wobble", and people responding something like "Don't be nervous about buying one, just find a good breeder and buy what you like".

If that's what it takes to get eggs out of a Desert!

I wasn't saying that in a positive way. Not to be rude, but are you saying that there is no way around getting eggs out of a desert than C-section? I know one way. Only breed the males. The females are perfectly fine in every other way. Just breed only the males.

Ok, so now on a more serious note...Robin said you where what, 15? My hats off to you that at that age you seem so passionate about something and are able to organize and present your thoughts. That being said, I can see why people may be fairly dismissive of your posts based on how you present them...it almost comes with an air of elitism. Discussions without lecturing will always get you feedback...now whether it's feedback you agree with or not is beyond me, but you'll get better results. You can't expect to come on here being so highly opinionated about what is a sensitive subject to many one way or the other and expect to change peoples' minds.

I'm not really hoping to change peoples' minds about breeding spiders. There will probably be people that will for a long time. I'm just contradicting attempts to cover up for breeding them. What some people said on that other thread was almost interesting...

Other than that, all I can say is to go out and get yourself a spider...:gj:.

I'm not sure what you mean by this.

---

I was kidding about the Deserts...

Anyhow, if your point is to contradict people, you are not successfully making that point. You're pressing the same buttons over and over, but not getting anywhere with it. Making generalized statements and presenting them as fact isn't going to work. As far as people liking spider personalities and so on, that is irrelevant to me because the spiders I've owned have been the same as any other ball I've owned. What is relevant to me is that I like spiders, have bred spiders, and will continue to breed spiders because I like them. That's something you can't contradict.

Also, going out and making an impulse purchase on a retic can't in anyway be compared to buying a spider ball python other than the fact that cash changes hands. Keeping things relevant to the topic at hand and not grasping at straws would also go a long way in presenting your case.

Hey gb. I think your overthinking things

This debate is not at all new, or unique. I reckon nearly every species and breed has their own "spider wobble" that its breeders are arguing about right now, and very few of these debates are black and white. I could name a half dozen off the top of my head in the horse industry alone, and many of those diseases are a lot more harmful to the animal than the spider "wobble" is.

I will also say that I don't think that the way to change things is to come down on those who breed spiders. You're not going to do much more than rub people the wrong way, and people who feel that they're being "pushed" in any way are going to push back. Conversely, people do seem to jump onto the defensive very quickly -- sometimes a little too quickly -- when this topic is brought up.

Quote:

---

If someone can come to the table with good reasons and facts as to why spiders should not be bred and present themselves in such a manner that doesn't come off as condemnation, I would happily "Thank" their post. Doesn't mean I'll stop keeping/breeding spiders, but I could appreciate it nonetheless.

---

In my mind there are two main reasons to consider ceasing propagation of the spider morph (eg., stop breeding spiders). Reason one is pretty obvious, IMO, and that is if the defect causes suffering to the animal. In the vast majority of cases, I honestly do not believe that it does. I believe that it may do so in extreme cases (though of course we can't be sure, as that sure is a can of worms debate that borders on the philosophical -- can snakes feel "suffering," not just pain?). I repeat my earlier point that I would really like to have real numbers as to how many spiders are "train wreck" cases. That's the "facts" you mentioned, and I don't have them. I wish I did.

Reason two is much more philosophical IMO. That is the desire to avoid producing and propagating anything that has a "defect" beyond just skin-deep. That's where I think that we as snake breeders are, in some ways, more cautious than breeders of other animals -- we tend to avoid any mutations that aren't color morphs, even if they may not harm the animal. I really don't *think* that the bug-eyes of the super lesser ball pythons cause them any harm, but I still won't breed lesser x lesser because I still don't want to risk producing any. Why? I dunno; I guess I just don't like the way it looks -- it seems "unnatural," somehow. On the other hand, if I produced a baby chinchilla that expressed a mutation that caused it to have tiny cute little ears, I'd probably try to breed for it (assuming the rest of the animal seemed healthy). The "unnatural looking" chinchilla wouldn't bother me; the "unnatural looking" ball python would. It's pretty much purely aesthetic.

For me, personally, spiders with a slight intention tremor (wobble) or head tilt don't bother me much. I really don't believe that those animals suffer, and honestly I have individuals of other morphs that are just as quirky. The ones that do bother me are those spiders that corkscrew or appear severely deranged in their movements. Even if they are the happiest and most contented animals in the world, I wouldn't want to propagate their genes as those actions bother me, personally. So my internal debate as to whether or not to work with the spider gene hinges mainly on what percentage of spiders are corkscrewing "train wrecks." If the number is negligible, then I don't see the gene as really that much more risky than any other breeding. If the number is significant, then I wouldn't feel comfortable working with the gene.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RobNJ

I was kidding about the Deserts...

Anyhow, if your point is to contradict people, you are not successfully making that point. You're pressing the same buttons over and over, but not getting anywhere with it. Making generalized statements and presenting them as fact isn't going to work. As far as people liking spider personalities and so on, that is irrelevant to me because the spiders I've owned have been the same as any other ball I've owned. What is relevant to me is that I like spiders, have bred spiders, and will continue to breed spiders because I like them. That's something you can't contradict.

Also, going out and making an impulse purchase on a retic can't in anyway be compared to buying a spider ball python other than the fact that cash changes hands. Keeping things relevant to the topic at hand and not grasping at straws would also go a long way in presenting your case.

---

I guess I'm correcting what I think is wrong, not contradicting. You saying that spiders act the same also proves what I mean about the people trying to find a way to cover up for them.
Why do you like spiders? Is it just the pattern?
I compared the impulse buying of a snake that will get huge to buying based on other peoples' thoughts. Re-read the post from the other thread. People telling other people to 'just go buy a spider and not be nervous about the wobble' makes the purchasing descision biased at the vary least.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Serpent_Nirvana

This debate is not at all new, or unique. I reckon nearly every species and breed has their own "spider wobble" that its breeders are arguing about right now, and very few of these debates are black and white. I could name a half dozen off the top of my head in the horse industry alone, and many of those diseases are a lot more harmful to the animal than the spider "wobble" is.

I will also say that I don't think that the way to change things is to come down on those who breed spiders. You're not going to do much more than rub people the wrong way, and people who feel that they're being "pushed" in any way are going to push back. Conversely, people do seem to jump onto the defensive very quickly -- sometimes a little too quickly -- when this topic is brought up.



In my mind there are two main reasons to consider ceasing propagation of the spider morph (eg., stop breeding spiders). Reason one is pretty obvious, IMO, and that is if the defect causes suffering to the animal. In the vast majority of cases, I honestly do not believe that it does. I believe that it may do so in extreme cases (though of course we can't be sure, as that sure is a can of worms debate that borders on the philosophical -- can snakes feel "suffering," not just pain?). I repeat my earlier point that I would really like to have real numbers as to how many spiders are "train wreck" cases. That's the "facts" you mentioned, and I don't have them. I wish I did.

Reason two is much more philosophical IMO. That is the desire to avoid producing and propagating anything that has a "defect" beyond just skin-deep. That's where I think that we as snake breeders are, in some ways, more cautious than breeders of other animals -- we tend to avoid any mutations that aren't color morphs, even if they may not harm the animal. I really don't *think* that the bug-eyes of the super lesser ball pythons cause them any harm, but I still won't breed lesser x lesser because I still don't want to risk producing any. Why? I dunno; I guess I just don't like the way it looks -- it seems "unnatural," somehow. On the other hand, if I produced a baby chinchilla that expressed a mutation that caused it to have tiny cute little ears, I'd probably try to breed for it (assuming the rest of the animal seemed healthy). The "unnatural looking" chinchilla wouldn't bother me; the "unnatural looking" ball python would. It's pretty much purely aesthetic.

For me, personally, spiders with a slight intention tremor (wobble) or head tilt don't bother me much. I really don't believe that those animals suffer, and honestly I have individuals of other morphs that are just as quirky. The ones that do bother me are those spiders that corkscrew or appear severely deranged in their movements. Even if they are the happiest and most contented animals in the world, I wouldn't want to propagate their genes as those actions bother me, personally. So my internal debate as to whether or not to work with the spider gene hinges mainly on what percentage of spiders are corkscrewing "train wrecks." If the number is negligible, then I don't see the gene as really that much more risky than any other breeding. If the number is significant, then I wouldn't feel comfortable working with the gene.

---

A third reason is that people let things slip too often. I brought up the subject before, and someone blamed human nature for it.
If people let the spider wobble slip, the caramels kinking, and any other thin

g that could be wrong with a ball python, soon enough, it will get worse.

It's practically asking for it to happen. Right now, people are comparing the spider problems to a normal. After the next worst morph, they will be comparing it to the spider, debating whether they should breed the even worse morph. Spider would be the new 'normal'.

Thats what I'm really not wanting to happen. People have told me that the animal isn't in pain, it's only the minority, and a few other reasons that I should get one. I was considering getting a spider, until I re-thought what I just wrote above. Then, I decided to NEVER get anything that alters more than color and pattern.

That's not my guess, it's not a philosophy, it's something happening right now. People letting one thing slip is setting off a chain of events and negative choices in the future.

People will think that this is not true, and they would have control, not buying anything with major problems, but when that next morph appears, even better looking than spider (the new normal), people will want to buy it, with a whole new set of excuses for breeding it. It's even more difficult for people to refuse something with the breeder shoving it in their face, and other people encouraging them to buy it.

I know that the spider problems are not extremely major. Once people get more used to it, it will be nothing.
Just wait for the next worst morph. The problems are escalating. People have the easy choice to stop it now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

Hey gb. I think your overthinking things

---

Thanks, I do too. It's alot better than underthinking. You're not the first to tell me I think too hard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

You saying that spiders act the same also proves what I mean about the people trying to find a way to cover up for them.
Why do you like spiders? Is it just the pattern?

---

How does what I say prove anything? I'm not trying to cover up anything...this isn't some grand conspiracy, lol. In MY experience with spiders, I have not seen anything that would remotely turn me off of them. The spiders that I have owned have been like the other balls I own. I have seen them with severe wobbles, but believe that they are the exception, rather than the rule you're trying to make them out to be. The vast majority I have seen have had slight to barely noticeable wobbles. And I keep spiders because I like how they look, no other reason. I do not take a ball python's temperament/predisposition into account when I buy one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Just wait for the next worst morph. The problems are escalating. People have the easy choice to stop it now.

---

The problems are not escalating. They pop up randomly within a gene or combination of genes(ex., spider x sable) and stay within those genes. They do not spread like a disease.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Also, just to contradict what is written above, here are the links to back what I wrote.
post 21, by interloc-
Are you saying stop breeding spiders all together. That would be a huge mistake IMO. A bad wobbler can produce a very very mild wobble and vice versa. So it's not like w could jus brew it out of em. Spider combos are amazing IMO. I would be way sadder to never be able to see a spider ever again. Also the wobble increases their personality. My spider is the best snake to handle our of my collection. He acts more like a boa. Very inquisitive and loves exploring. Everyone needs a spider in their collection. If not for breeding with, for enjoyment as part of the family.
This proves what I said about people using the 'more personality' excuse.

post 25, by DrDooLittle-
Like others have said, don't let that stop you from getting something with the spider gene.
This proves what I said about people backing each other up, like peer pressure, against the people saying that spiders should not be bred.

I love my bee, thank you. She the sweetest snake in my collection. And hasn't had a noticeable wobble since about 2 weeks after we got her. There is nothing wrong with her. She is friendly, and eats like a champ. Never missed a meal.


Of course, posts number 4,7,12, and 13 were not thanked, just negatively replied to. The rest were thanked multiple times, showing how people back each other up, making it not seem as bad.

Here is a link to the thread.
http://ball-pythons.net/forums/showt...8-wobble/page3

I'm not trying to turn this into another argument page. If you are able to try to contradict any of the things I wrote, try to.

---

Dang, sometimes posting on a phone is pita..lol. To genetics breeder.... I love my bee, thank you. She is my favorite snake in my collection. She is very friendly and sweet. She hasn't had a noticeable wobble since 2 weeks after we got her, and she eats like a champ. Never missed a meal. There is nothing wrong with her.

Hey gb just out of curiosity. What animals are you working with? Cause i really am intrested to know what species of animals are free and clear of any genetic flaw issues.

i avoid them because of price tags

This is one of those threads. If price tags are your issues or genetic flaws are your issues then this industry may not be for you. My statement is not directed at anyone specific just a broad statement for those with these issues

Animals 'worse than spiders' have already been produced...and whatever makes them worse, also causes other problems for them than ataxia. They rarely eat well, and fail to thrive. Some champagne combos have turned out this way, as has the super hidden gene woma (the Pearl).

Spiders, by their behavior, don't appear to be in any distress. Distressed ball pythons tend to not eat...that seems to be the standard ball python response to 'something is wrong'. Most spiders are good feeders--the morph has a reputation for producing a good feeding response.

I realize it makes some folks think uncomfortably of horrible human diseases like Parkinson's, but it doesn't seem to do the animal any real harm, so there's no reason to fuss over it--or to be upset with folks who aren't bothered by seeing it, and like spiders and womas.

As for train wrecks? Must be a very small percentage--I've never seen one, and I breed both spiders and womas. It's even possible that it's the result of something ELSE gone wrong, such as a developmental problem, which can also cause ataxia. Train wreck spiders may be the product of an incubation issue combined with the spider gene, rather than being an extreme expression of spider ataxia.

DrDooLittle, even if your bee doesn't have problems, they have the potential to, and also the potential to have offspring that do.

Eclipse Exotics, I was talking about worse problems that could potentially come up in the future. Not lethal, but worse than spider.

Snake Lab, I have only (from what I know) species without even potential problems or defects. Ball pythons, a few colubrids, leopard gecko morphs, African fat tails, crested geckos, bearded dragons, and a few species of boas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Stinkpot turtles, green anoles, rosy boas, and many species of tortoises don't even have morphs. People still breed those.

---

Albino musk turtle: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4VXrkZe4Wm...usk+turtle.jpg

Blue phase (axanthic) green anole: http://i.pbase.com/g4/29/489029/2/63066576.YOGSEgI5.jpg

Albino rosy boa (there are TONS of rosy boa morphs): http://www.priceanimal.com/rosy11.jpg

Albino Hermann's Tortoise: http://albinosunlimited.com/sites/de...n/DSC_4750.JPG

Of COURSE there are morphs of these species...and if there are any tortoise species in which morphs have not yet been discovered, the moment random mutation blesses someone, it WILL be propagated. Species with no morphs still being bred? Of course...because there are no morphs. The moment one shows up, people will breed it.
Even if there are no morphs, people aren't going to leave things be...they will selectively breed for the traits they want, instead, changing the animal's appearance more slowly, over time.

As for worse problems than spiders...such as what?
Increasing the ataxia beyond what you see in spiders produces a non-viable animal that can't feed well, and doesn't thrive. So there is nothing worse...worse doesn't work.

Something everyone needs to understand and consider is that in the grand scheme of things the ball python breeding industry is still in its infancy. There are going to be genetic issues with what we do. To say we shouldnt work with certain morohs because of risks is stupid. Instead of taking that stance how bout working with them to try and eliminate such issues or get a better understanding of the issues. Alot of things genetically can be washed out over time with selective breeding. This has been done in dog breeding and in other animal breeding. Genetic flaws are in all living creatures. Its not species specific to ball pythons. Look at the amount of morphs that are solid without issues. The percentages are good. And back to the price tag thing. You can be as politically correct as you want but if there was no market then there would be no industry. This industry was not built on the hobbyist. It was built on buisness. Without it there would have never been all these morphs to work with. Without a market their would never have been a nerd, ralph davis, tsk, bhb, kahl, sharp, outback, etc etc etc. It costs money to do what has been done therefore there is the market to support it. We also have to look at the evolution of these morphs we see today. If we didnt have morphs on this poll we would not have the combos we have today. If you want to work with the most complete gene in ball pythons youd be breeding normals.

By the way, I encourage people who are impassioned over this to do exactly that--breed normals selectively, to produce better color and pattern, great temperaments, and excellent, non-picky feeding.

It's a project I have planned for the future, when I have the space and money for it. It will benefit everyone in the long run, if folks begin to do this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WingedWolfPsion

Albino musk turtle: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_4VXrkZe4Wm...usk+turtle.jpg

Blue phase (axanthic) green anole: http://i.pbase.com/g4/29/489029/2/63066576.YOGSEgI5.jpg

Albino rosy boa (there are TONS of rosy boa morphs): http://www.priceanimal.com/rosy11.jpg

Albino Hermann's Tortoise: http://albinosunlimited.com/sites/de...n/DSC_4750.JPG

Of COURSE there are morphs of these species...and if there are any tortoise species in which morphs have not yet been discovered, the moment random mutation blesses someone, it WILL be propagated. Species with no morphs still being bred? Of course...because there are no morphs. The moment one shows up, people will breed it.
Even if there are no morphs, people aren't going to leave things be...they will selectively breed for the traits they want, instead, changing the animal's appearance more slowly, over time.

As for worse problems than spiders...such as what?
Increasing the ataxia beyond what you see in spiders produces a non-viable animal that can't feed well, and doesn't thrive. So there is nothing worse...worse doesn't work.

---

I forgot about the ones in rosy boas. I never knew about the axanthic green anole, and it's not common. That's a razorback musk, not a stinkpot.

I wasn't talking about the wobble getting worse. I was thinking of the other problems above. I KNOW these are different examples. Compare a koi (fish) to the bubble-cheek and goldfish with huge eyes sticking out of their head.
There are 'balloon' mollies, and now a similar thing with bettas.
Obviously, these wouldn't happen with ball pythons. I'm saying that people still peoduce those, so why do you think they wouldn't make more of a genetic deformity, even if it survives?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by snake lab

Something everyone needs to understand and consider is that in the grand scheme of things the ball python breeding industry is still in its infancy. There are going to be genetic issues with what we do. To say we shouldnt work with certain morohs because of risks is stupid. Instead of taking that stance how bout working with them to try and eliminate such issues or get a better understanding of the issues. Alot of things genetically can be washed out over time with selective breeding. This has been done in dog breeding and in other animal breeding. Genetic flaws are in all living creatures. Its not species specific to ball pythons. Look at the amount of morphs that are solid without issues. The percentages are good. And back to the price tag thing. You can be as politically correct as you want but if there was no market then there would be no industry. This industry was not built on the hobbyist. It was built on buisness. Without it there would have never been all these morphs to work with. Without a market their would never have been a nerd, ralph davis, tsk, bhb, kahl, sharp, outback, etc etc etc. It costs money to do what has been done therefore there is the market to support it. We also have to look at the evolution of these morphs we see today. If we didnt have morphs on this poll we would not have the combos we have today. If you want to work with the most complete gene in ball pythons youd be breeding normals.

---

People definitely don't have to breed the morphs with problems for business. The spider gene is one of the cheapest right now, since so many people started breeding them.
There are still hundreds of combos that don't have problems. Someone correct this if it's incorrect, but none of these morphs have problems, or their combinations:
piebald, albino, OG, any line of pastel, pin, het. blue eye leucistic complex, black eye leucistic complex, 8 ball complex, any axanthic line, ivory, superstripe, puma, highway, calico/sugar......

The list is ectremely long, without the added problematic morphs. Try combining 3 of those, much less 4+ genes. The problem-free combinations are practically endless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WingedWolfPsion

By the way, I encourage people who are impassioned over this to do exactly that--breed normals selectively, to produce better color and pattern, great temperaments, and excellent, non-picky feeding.

It's a project I have planned for the future, when I have the space and money for it. It will benefit everyone in the long run, if folks begin to do this.

---

That is a good idea. It's pretty much what I'm trying to do with my morphs, so the normals coming from my projects will be to that description.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

DrDooLittle, even if your bee doesn't have problems, they have the potential to, and also the potential to have offspring that do.

Eclipse Exotics, I was talking about worse problems that could potentially come up in the future. Not lethal, but worse than spider.

Snake Lab, I have only (from what I know) species without even potential problems or defects. Ball pythons, a few colubrids, leopard gecko morphs, African fat tails, crested geckos, bearded dragons, and a few species of boas.

---

Meanwhile, she is living proof that wobble can be bred down, and that they can live happy healthy lifes....

Your bringing up examples in everything from gold fish to torts in a ball python discussion. I dont know man i cant argue with that knowledge. Look my point about money is simple. If you didnt have a market you would not have most of the morphs you call problem free. The pastel was the first codom morph that blew up the industry then came the spider. If you think for a second that the industry wasnt boosted forward by the spider then your crazy. Noone would have come out with or worked with the animals or imported the animals we have today if it wasnt about money. Thats my point. Do i think its good to breed and sell an animal that is unhealthy? No absolutely not. But these genetic flaws and general health are 2 different things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrDooLittle

Meanwhile, she is living proof that wobble can be bred down, and that they can live happy healthy lifes....

---

Actually, you have NO proof. From what I've heard, it's mor of a luck of the draw. It can get better or worse with age. You even said that yours had it after you got it, proving this.

You are also EXTREMELY underestimating the power and potential of animals' brains. There are multiple factors being affected in the brain to cause the spider problems. You can't just 'breed down' an animal with neurological affects, without expecting it to also affect something you didn't think could happen.
You can't breed animals into specific brain functions. It's not that simple. You can't breed a ball python to learn how to go through a maze. Brain function is too delicate and intricate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Thats what I'm really not wanting to happen. People have told me that the animal isn't in pain, it's only the minority, and a few other reasons that I should get one. I was considering getting a spider, until I re-thought what I just wrote above. Then, I decided to NEVER get anything that alters more than color and pattern.

That's not my guess, it's not a philosophy, it's something happening right now. People letting one thing slip is setting off a chain of events and negative choices in the future.

---

I'm fairly sure I understand what you're saying, but I don't agree that that's what's going to happen.

If I understand your train of thought correctly, then you're worried that, while the spider itself may not be the biggest ethical concern in the world, allowing ourselves to accept the spider morph's neurologic "quirks" as acceptable creates a slippery slope towards accepting everything that survives and can breed, no matter how egregious the defect. The widespread acceptance of a morph that is commonly associated with a minor intention tremor and/or head-tilt may make us complacent and willing to accept much more severe impairments, such as severe and consistent ataxia. You think that we may eventually justify everything under the banner of "it eats and breeds; it must be okay," even if it spends its whole life upside-down.

I guess I just don't see that happening. While I can appreciate the desire to avoid any and all potential for non-pigment-related defects if only for the sole, philosophical desire to avoid them, I don't believe that the spider is paving the way for a hobby full of twisted, defective snakes. I believe that the majority of people have a pretty strong negative reaction to the "train-wreck" spiders when they see them (a fact that makes me hopeful that they are, indeed, quite rare). I feel as though if a morph came along that was pretty consistently a "train wreck," people would avoid it like the plague, no matter how pretty it was and how readily it ate. We all do this for purely aesthetic purposes; a snake with profoundly messed-up movements just isn't aesthetically pleasing.

I can see what you're saying, and I agree completely that we have to be vigilant ... However, I don't believe that means that we have to immediately and completely discard a gene because of any associated genetic problem. I can appreciate the desire to think in absolutes, but I don't think that it is that black and white. Honestly, were we to do that, I do believe we'd run out of morphs rather quickly. Off the top of my head, I can think of only a handful that I can't link with some suspected defect of some kind or another. (Not everything made the poll by a long shot ...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

There are still hundreds of combos that don't have problems. Someone correct this if it's incorrect, but none of these morphs have problems, or their combinations:

---

Piebald -- Historically poor eaters (AFAIK, this has largely been eliminated through careful and selective outcrossing); possible immunosuppression (I don't know that I believe it, but it's been suggested in some case reports)

Albino -- I have read a few accounts suggesting that albino x albino pairings may result in genetic defects (anophthalmia, jaw deformities). I don't know quite why, from a genetic standpoint, that this should be the case, but I've read enough to suggest that it may be more than just hearsay.

Het. blue eye leucistic complex -- Nothing with the hets, but since homozygotes may have ophthalmic issues, from a purest standpoint, propagation of these should likely be avoided.

8 ball complex -- Homozygotes have a propensity towards kinking and mild jaw deformities ("duckbill")

Quote:

---

The list is ectremely long, without the added problematic morphs. Try combining 3 of those, much less 4+ genes. The problem-free combinations are practically endless.

---

The other problem is that some problems pop up in combinations of morphs that are unseen in the single-gene heterozygotes. The champagne, for example, seems to do fine on its own (AFAIK), but fails to thrive when combined with certain genes such as sable and spider. Does this mean that we should cease production of a morph as soon as any defect is discovered, even if it's only in a combination or heterozygous form?

That is why, much as it's tempting to, I don't believe that I can think of this issue in such a black and white fashion.

This statement:

Quote:

---

You can't breed animals into specific brain functions. It's not that simple. You can't breed a ball python to learn how to go through a maze. Brain function is too delicate and intricate.

---

Doesn't make any sense. (No offense.) Of course you can breed for specific "brain functions" (eg, behaviors). Look at dogs: some are bred for herding, some for guarding, some for retrieving, etc., etc.. You are even contradicting yourself, as you are proposing to select for behavioral traits in your ball pythons such as good appetite and lack of stress in captivity.

Quote:

---

You can't just 'breed down' an animal with neurological affects, without expecting it to also affect something you didn't think could happen.

---

If you're arguing that all selective breeding carries with it inherent risks, then you're right ... But then you would be arguing against all selective breeding, for any purpose, and that's just a shame IMO. (A very popular argument with certain groups for whom I hold no affinity, but not a belief that I subscribe to.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Genetics Breeder

Actually, you have NO proof. From what I've heard, it's mor of a luck of the draw. It can get better or worse with age. You even said that yours had it after you got it, proving this.

You are also EXTREMELY underestimating the power and potential of animals' brains. There are multiple factors being affected in the brain to cause the spider problems. You can't just 'breed down' an animal with neurological affects, without expecting it to also affect something you didn't think could happen.
You can't breed animals into specific brain functions. It's not that simple. You can't breed a ball python to learn how to go through a maze. Brain function is too delicate and intricate.

---

My point is that she is alive and well, that is proof enough for me, to not avoid them. No wobble in over a year, very minimal when she first transitioned to our home. So does she have it, yes. But so minimal that it hasn't again been seen. It also doesn't affect her life AT ALL. So why would you avoid that? I have seen only a handful of "trainwreck" spiders and that has been on you tube. How many thousands of them have been hatched that are just fine? There are dog breeds with problems that are more prone to certain breeds, yet they still breed and are happy healthy animals.

I don't understand the logic behind demanding that people give up morphs that have secondary physical characteristics that are unusual or make people uneasy, due to the CHANCE that in the future, some OTHER morph might be bred that has serious problems.

Can you explain...well...why we should? Would I really need to avoid breeding dogs with shorter muzzles, like St Bernards, just because someone, one day, might breed an English Bulldog? It doesn't make sense to me.

Just like calling the super-cinnamon duckbilling a 'jaw deformity'....it is an alteration in their appearance, but it's no more a deformity than the extra vertebrae in a greyhound, or semi-floppy ears on a terrier. It doesn't interfere with their ability to function normally, at all.

I consider spiders and womas to be the 'fainting goats' of the ball python world. They have a neurological abnormality, but it's not detrimental to them in a captive situation, because the mutation that creates it makes them desirable to us, so we propagate them. That makes it a positive mutation for them. Evolution cares only about whose genes are passed on. Spider ball pythons are successful in evolutionary terms, because WE like them, and care for them.

If there is no real evidence that the animal's quality of life is impeded, then it's fine. That's my stance.

I wasn't saying only neurological disorders, that is why I used the goldfish as an example. Someone looking at a koi 2 hundred years ago would be shocked (and probably disgusted) to see the pop-eye or pop-cheek goldfish.
Like people on here are saying, they don't think that ball pythons would be propagated if they had problems more extreme than that. I think it will happen, sometime, even if it's many decades from now.
That's why I was using fish as an example. They have been around hundreds of years. It's almost like seeing what the future will be for ball pythons, since both are very popular pets.
There ARE people out there, whether people on this forum would or wouldn't, that WOULD create extreme mutant animals.
There are scaleless snakes, furless rodents, rodents with abnormally large ears, so why don't you think it will happen to ball pythons?
I know that I wouldn't want to see ball pythons being bred for weird body shapes. It might be that they are not as prolific breeders that they don't already have weird shapes being bred.

Tattooing, injecting, or dying animals with colored dyes don't affect how they function, either. Like someone above said, what I'm saying is that just because it eats, grows, and breeds, doesn't mean it should be bred.