Breeding Ethics

Quote:

---

What makes you so much better than me that your "theory" has to be fact and I am BS?

---

Nothing, that's what bothers me so much about you. I suspect you know better numbers than I what is going on yet you make posts that imply the opposite. For example, I suspect you knew that my guess that albinos are regularly imported was true but you implied that it wasn't. In this case I believe the evidence is very strong that there is a genetic component to kinking in caramels and spinning in spiders, I believe you are very capable of understanding that evidence, yet you feel at liberty to make posts implying that you don't think it's genetic even if you will not come out and say as much. Sure you can hide behind the confusion of why it sometimes skips generation and that there quite possibly is an environmental component also but there is certainly also a genetic component that I believe you understand and still will not admit.

Quote:

---

Do you even know how many different caramel lines there are Randy? Do you know if all or only some of the lines kink? What data do you have on the number of caramels produced to date vs. the number with kinks? Have you ever spoken to ANYONE that has had success producing large numbers of caramels without kinks by using a dryer than normal incubation medium?

---

The 50% of imported caramels being kinked was something I saw Ralph Davis post when I first learned of the caramel kinking problem on his forum after years of the morph being around but still curiously underrepresented. Why don't you fill in the answers to your other questions as I don't know them, I suspect you do, and everyone should? Has the Maslin line shown kinking? I know there was speculation it might not but when it was never mentioned again after the eggs hatched I thought it probably did. Has the dryer incubation been able to help? Your question seems to me to imply that it does and I suspect you know the answer but are you going to share the facts or just imply something that you might even know not to be true? Are there any lines that haven’t produced kinks or is that data you would rather not share while leaving us with the impression that there are? The sample size of people I know who have produced caramels is very very small but over half kinked. What % of kinks are you aware of?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington
Even if the animals picked for display at Daytona where a representative sample and 3% of them spin that is way higher than spinning in non spiders (I think I've actually heard of one).

---

Quote:

---

So because Randy Remmington that sits behind his computer in the middle of CO reading posts on internet message boards has only heard of one instance of a non spider spinning you are declaring yourself in the know enough to make the judgment that the percentage of spiders that spin is caused by a genetic flaw. Can you honestly call that a proper scientific method and keep a straight face?

---

I've only heard of one non spider demonstrating spinning similar to the spiders. I may not have seen many spiders but I’ve seen enough non spiders to know that spinning isn’t common. I'm pointing out that even if only 3% of spiders spin it's many many times more common in spiders than in non spiders and hence I believe almost certainly has a genetic component. Unless spider and caramel breeders somehow treat there eggs and hatchlings differently than other ball pythons then the variable is almost certainly genetics.

Yes, I've only hatched about 100 ball pythons but none of the surviving ones have been kinked. I believe the kinking I've seen in babies that didn't survive was due to incubation environmental factors. I've never even seen a living kinked normal ball python in hundreds of ch or other breeder's cb. Maybe they throw them away in Africa but I still don't believe the occur anywhere nearly as often as in caramel lines.

You have first hand experience with spiders and talk to even bigger spider breeders. Let us know what percentage of spiders you believe will start spinning at some point in their lives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

Nothing, that's what bothers me so much about you. I suspect you know better numbers than I what is going on yet you make posts that imply the opposite.

---

So because I know better numbers and I post the opposite of what you do, I am "BS" as you called it in your other post? That makes a ton of sense Randy. Why am I not entitled to an opinion that is different than yours? You're saying that because my views aren't the same as yours, I'm lying and you're righteous? Give me a break.

As far as the numbers of imported albinos go … LOL … I know what you’re talking about, and it goes directly to my point … Why do you give so much credibility to half cocked jobbers that will post ANYTHING to inflate their egos and impress the yougins. Do you really believe that some redneck (no offense to my good friends from the south :D ) that’s flipping 100 CH imports a year out of a closet in a spare bedroom knows anything about anything? Why are you so quick to take any post that agrees with any one of your points as fact and any post to the contrary of your views as BS?

Have you ever considered the fact that the "numbers" that you've read about in posts on the internet were exaggerated figures posted by breeders to cast a negative light on projects that they are not working with and attracting potential customers to projects that they are? What if that were true and now you're running around promoting those numbers as fact all over the internet ... it really makes you look like a pawn. And let me tell you, those breeders chuckle every time they see your posts, all the way to the bank.

I know you like to see breeders disclose information over the internet for all to see, but what I don't think you've considered is that many times the information that is "disclosed" isn't really true. It's skewed to promote an agenda. You have no idea how political the market really is.

More CB and CH normals spin, are kinked, and have a ton of other problems and get thrown in the freezer than most people can imagine. Of course high dollar morphs are not going to be frozen off if people spent 2 or 3 or 4 years working on a project. Basing theories on "100's" of baby ball pythons is nothing until you've seen thousands and tens of thousands and what is simply "tossed" because it has problems.

Let me make this clear for you Randy ... beyond the rumor, innuendo, and political agendas, with all of the collections that I am lucky enough to visit containing thousands of ball pythons with hundreds of morphs and all of the breeders that I talk to each week producing these animals in numbers, I have yet to see any hard evidence that there is a genetic problem with either spiders or caramels. I am open minded enough to understand that it is surely possible, but until I see better evidence one way or the other, my beliefs are my beliefs no matter what you want to think.

If you want to uncover the great ball python conspiracies out there, you are really barking up the wrong tree ... LOL. This is just the stuff that they want you to know .... the "secrets" in the business would blow your mind.

-adam

Thanks Adam. I was just wondering about that bit. Very interesting thread to read btw.


~~Jo~~

Hmmm I just thought I'd stick my two cents in here allowing for my total newbieness.


Just seems common sense tho if you breed any creature from the most evolved down to the most basic, at some point given enough pairings and their offspring you are going to get some offspring that aren't "perfect". It happens. Does this automatically mean that the parents or their resultant offspring are genetically defective? It could, but it could just as easily be many other factors at work, nothing can be assumed.

Without the benefit of intensive genetic study by an independent source, as far as I'm concerned it's just not something anyone can definitively say one way or the other.


~~Jo~~

Quote:

---

Why are you so quick to take any post that agrees with any one of your points as fact and any post to the contrary of your views as BS?

---

Based on the track record of the person posting it and the amount of corroborating evidence. I didn't have any reason not to believe the poster about there being at least 5 albinos imported to the US this year. It agreed with information I had seen in the past and the only voice against it was yours, which I have come to suspect as skewed to promote an agenda.

Of course I know I've been wrong in the past and don't automatically feel that any opinion other than mine is BS. For example, my theory that pastel and cinnamon might have been alleles. I thought the evidence supported there being a fair chance they would be but I knew there was also a considerable chance I was wrong and you where right. I didn’t call BS on your belief that they would be separate genes and time showed you to be right on that one.

I just believe that in this case there is strong evidence that spinning in spiders and kinking in caramels isn't random. I believe your posts are crafted to give the impression that these problems show up just as often in normals (looks like that's what frankykeno got out of it). If you are willing to come out and say that there is no evidence of genetics in the spider line causing them to tend to spin or in the caramel line causing them to tend to kink in spite of your direct contact with large projects for both mutations then I guess time will tell who is being disingenuous to promote an agenda.

Adam is very upfront about the kinking and spinning being a possiblility. I have gone to his shop to look at caramels (as they are my favorites) and he explained the possiblity of kinking in caramels and several possible reasons for it. (Since there is no absolute proof of any one factor being the cause) I very much appreciated his candidness, and am still going to pursue my love of caramels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

It agreed with information I had seen in the past and the only voice against it was yours, which I have come to suspect as skewed to promote an agenda.

---

I'm promoting an agenda now?

Randy, you are the one starting posts on every internet forum that will have you (except NERDS interestingly enough) that there are genetic problems with ball pythons but you give ZERO direct evidence to back your claims. The best you can do is reference posts from people that you've never even spoken to and that are in many instances obviously promoting an agenda of their own. You repeat your speculative theories as if they are factual over and over with such voracity that you've really become a little anti-morph propaganda machine.

All I am doing is challenging the basis of your views. I think that you have been manipulated by some very angry people that have agendas against some of the bigger breeders. I believe that there is as much evidence to suggest that some of these problems could be environmental or developmental as there is to suggest that they may be genetic. I've never once stated that any of these problems were not genetic, only that I can point to just as much evidence to show that they may not be that I have reasonable doubt. You seem so hell bent on these things being genetic problems that I really have to question your intentions.

You are right, time will tell ... I think you have a lot of nerve to call me disingenuous sir. You don't know me and have no idea what I am about. I LOVE ball pythons, they are my life 24 hours a day. As someone that loves these animals I promote and evangelize the joy of keeping them, raising them, and breeding them. I don't think you can muster the imagination necessary to understand how passionate I am about royals and this hobby in general. When I see something stated about this hobby that I don't agree with or that I feel is incorrect, I'm going to challenge it, simple as that.

I think that people are entitled to and should hear both sides of any discussion. That’s as close as I get to any “agenda” Randy.

-adam

Quote:

---

I'm promoting an agenda now?

---

Yes. As best I can tell your agenda is that us peons shouldn't ask any public questions and should be happy with whatever information the big breeders decide we need to know. Just shut up and buy!

Quote:

---

Randy, you are the one starting posts on every internet forum that will have you (except NERDS interestingly enough) that there are genetic problems with ball pythons but you give ZERO direct evidence to back your claims.

---

I can't remember the last time I started a thread, I'm just willing to participate in discussions you would much rather not have in public. This thread was started to ask about ethical issues in breeding. I believe that the possibility of a sporadic morph marker and it's implication for selling possible hets and also the possibility of genetic problems associated with morphs are the biggest ethical issues in breeding ball pythons.

Should I go find the NERD forum and ask for a password? I'll keep asking the same questions and participating in the same discussions. Personally I don't think they are anti NERD issues but they are certainly touchy subjects and based on your reaction I suspect they _might_ be offensive to NERD. Out of courtesy I don't think I should participate on a site they are paying for.

Quote:

---

All I am doing is challenging the basis of your views.

---

No, you are succeeding in convincing people that kinking in caramel and spinning in spiders has a good chance of not being genetic.

Sure you have a right to not like that I haven't spent the money years ago to have worked with these morphs long enough to have my own data. You also suggest that I should call up the big breeders and ask them personally for the data that they have refused to post so far. My opinion is if they wanted to tell us what percentage of their caramels are kinked or what percentage of spiders eventually spin they would have posted it already.

I have talked to the one Colorado breeder that I'm aware of producing caramels and his small first year production was at least half kinked. I'll see him again in a couple weeks and ask for an update. I don't see the need to waste Ralph Davis' or Camlon’s time calling them to confirm the posts they have already made of similar results. I feel confident that there is reliable public evidence of a significant tendency for caramels to kink. How can this not be genetic? Even if dry incubation can compensate for it why do caramels need drier incubation than other lines?

Quote:

---

When I see something stated about this hobby that I don't agree with or that I feel is incorrect, I'm going to challenge it, simple as that.

---

Me too. That's why I called you out on this one. The disingenuous part is that I still don’t believe that you believe that either problem isn’t genetic. I just think your agenda is to cast doubt and get the public to believe it isn’t genetic.

Quote:

---

I think that people are entitled to and should hear both sides of any discussion. That’s as close as I get to any “agenda” Randy.

---

Great, so you won’t be suggesting I stop posting my side anymore?
I'm not at all anti morph. I'm not even anti caramel or spider. I just think this discussion should have happened years ago and by now there should be little question left regarding the nature of kinking in caramels or spinning in spiders. I still intend to work with both but I want to go forward knowing as much as I can about the issues and I think all the forum readers deserve that. I still don’t know if spinning spiders tend to outgrow it or not as I’ve heard conflicting info on that subject. Maybe in a decade or two I’ll have the data that the big breeders are already sitting on regarding percentages with the problem and if there is a homozygous spider and what it’s like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandyRemington

Yes. As best I can tell your agenda is that us peons shouldn't ask any public questions and should be happy with whatever information the big breeders decide we need to know. Just shut up and buy!

---

Not once was I ever pressured into stop asking questions and just buy a snake or get out. Adam took time (on a weekend no less) to allow me to come into his shop and ask him anything I wanted. He even brought up topics that I was unaware about and gave me a lot of information to consider. He truely cares about his animals and wants to help in anyway he can.

Sorry, that came across wrong. From all reports I've read Adam has excellent snakes and is great to do business with and I'm not at all surprised that he told you about the kinking and if he even told you about other issues that aren't yet public that would also not surprise me.

I was referring to Internet discussions. Adam and I have a long ongoing debate as to if sensitive issues like this should be discussed in public. It looks to me like he prefers leaving the dissemination of such information to one on one private discussions between breeders and potential customers. My problem with this is that I've seen evidence that this information doesn't always get passed on. Maybe the first breeder waited until they where darn sure about the problem to start discussing it (I think the evidence should have been discussed along the way). I've seen posts that indicate that some breeders don't fully understand the problems even if they wanted to inform their customers. Public debate allows us as a hobby to arrive at the best answers as quickly as possible. Even once one on one information starts to flow there is no guarantee the secondary breeders will pass it on. Jeremy Stone's initial post on the subject leads me to believe he didn't know about the spinning in spiders until he saw it in his first production (also documenting the generation skip that is possible). Even now that these problems are occasionally discussed publicly there was a recent post by someone who hadn't heard of it until their new spider arrived spinning. If people keep starting threads asking about this sort of thing and we still don't agree on the answers I don't think it's a resolved or over exposed subject where I should stop contributing.

It's not that I don't think Adam loves ball pythons or is enthusiastic about their care. If anything he takes it too seriously and seems to me to be willing to compromise what I believe is a clear right to the public discussion of any potentially negative information to try to protect they hobby. If the hobby where more open to start with it wouldn't have secrets that need protecting. Perhaps a few morphs would have started out a little lower had we known then what we are starting to know now but it would have been a more fair market between then and their current prices now that the basic news is finally out.