Breeding Standards

[Eric Alan]

But how do you verify that they are quality animals? Who decides what that quality is? The same people who stand to make the most on selling a non quality animal at a higher price than a quality animal just because it looks different? The big name breeders because they have time and money in the animals? How does your average consumer know what is and what id's not a quality animal when there is nothing to say or prove what that quality is.

I'm not sure what's so complicated. It's almost as if you're offended by breeders (big OR small) taking pride in their animals and the work/time they've put in to producing them. To answer your questions, though, sellers only determine the price. It's up to the buyers determine quality and perceived value for themselves with their own eyes and wallets.

If anyone feels that an animal isn't worth what a seller has it priced at, then it really is as simple as not buying it. (mic drop) If that's the case, then there's very little a seller can do to to convince them otherwise. Ultimately, it just isn't worth a seller's time to try since that person isn't the right customer for that animal anyway. In this hobby, as I've said many times before, there really is something for everybody.

For me, a certified statement of quality isn't going to change my mind one single bit if I have no interest in the animal in the first place.

To be a lot cliché, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." It's up to the seller to market themselves and their animals to the best of their ability. It's up to the consumers to form their own perceptions of quality and value. When those two circles meet, everybody ends up happy. When they don't, there's no reason to be upset - no one is forcing us to either buy or sell snakes with cool paint jobs.

[StillBP]

I'm not sure what's so complicated. It's almost as if you're offended by breeders (big OR small) taking pride in their animals and the work/time they've put in to producing them. To answer your questions, though, sellers only determine the price. It's up to the buyers determine quality and perceived value for themselves with their own eyes and wallets.

If anyone feels that an animal isn't worth what a seller has it priced at, then it really is as simple as not buying it. (mic drop) If that's the case, then there's very little a seller can do to to convince them otherwise. Ultimately, it just isn't worth a seller's time to try since that person isn't the right customer for that animal anyway. In this hobby, as I've said many times before, there really is something for everybody.

For me, a certified statement of quality isn't going to change my mind one single bit if I have no interest in the animal in the first place.

To be a lot cliché, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder." It's up to the seller to market themselves and their animals to the best of their ability. It's up to the consumers to form their own perceptions of quality and value. When those two circles meet, everybody ends up happy. When they don't, there's no reason to be upset - no one is forcing us to either buy or sell snakes with cool paint jobs.

I have to agree here. See the spider Albino ( that started alot of this conversation) I have is in my eyes worth more than I was undercut at so instead of selling her for less than I feel she is worth I put her in my breeder rack. I suppose I could have waited and the right buyer might have come along. But I have no regrets keeping her. And she is going to make some killer babies next season ( she is sitting at 900 g). Personally i think that if you feel the animal is worth no less than X dollars do not sell it for less than X dollars.

[Unknown Subscriber]

I just hate seeing snakes for sell with poor patterning and bad markings at an upscaled price. Add some Fancy words like pixilating, swirled, or one of a kind and charge way to much for a snake that is clearly not a good example of the morph they claim it is. I agree that something should be done if for nothing else than to help the non educated consumers aquire nice healthy animals that are exactly what they are being sold as and not an undesirable defect that someone can decide to over price. A morph standard for each morph would help not only the breeders keep the genes stronger but also help new snake owners know and understand the morph they are purchasing. Right now I hear a lot of people talking about quality animals but no one has yet to say what makes them quality animals.

[Eric Alan]

I just hate seeing snakes for sell with poor patterning and bad markings at an upscaled price. Add some Fancy words like pixilating, swirled, or one of a kind and charge way to much for a snake that is clearly not a good example of the morph they claim it is. I agree that something should be done if for nothing else than to help the non educated consumers aquire nice healthy animals that are exactly what they are being sold as and not an undesirable defect that someone can decide to over price. A morph standard for each morph would help not only the breeders keep the genes stronger but also help new snake owners know and understand the morph they are purchasing. Right now I hear a lot of people talking about quality animals but no one has yet to say what makes them quality animals.

What do you think makes a quality animal? Why do you care so much about what the rest of us think are quality animals? Who are you to say that those animals you're talking so much smack about aren't someone else's dream animal? How much do you need to understand about a morph in order to see its beauty? What happens to those animals that don't meet the standard?

Here's my definition: A quality animal is one that makes you stop and smile every single time you see it - even when the rank poo-casso art it just smeared across its enclosure rivals the beauty of the living art smiling back at you.

Honestly, if someone doesn't inherently see the beauty of the animals in this hobby for themselves, I'd be questioning what they're doing in the hobby in the first place - it's not like ball pythons make great companions.

[embrit345]

What do you think makes a quality animal? Why do you care so much about what the rest of us think are quality animals? Who are you to say that those animals you're talking so much smack about aren't someone else's dream animal? How much do you need to understand about a morph in order to see its beauty? What happens to those animals that don't meet the standard?

Here's my definition: A quality animal is one that makes you stop and smile every single time you see it - even when the rank poo-casso art it just smeared across its enclosure rivals the beauty of the living art smiling back at you.

Honestly, if someone doesn't inherently see the beauty of the animals in this hobby for themselves, I'd be questioning what they're doing in the hobby in the first place - it's not like ball pythons make great companions.

Exactly this!

I like my spiders with high white sides, I like my pied with medium ish white, I like my albino with minimal white.

If this "standard" says that a spider should only have a small portion of white sling it's lateral line, pied should only be 50% white and albino should be defined well between the yellow and white then does that make my snakes less valuable than yours?

See to me, my snakes are the ones that I have looked at and said wow I adore this part of her pattern or I adore the lack of white on my albino. My snakes are irreplaceable and priceless and, in my eyes, the best examples of what I find beautiful.

It's not someone else's place or right to tell me that what I find beautiful if above or below par compared to anyone else's snakes xx


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AntTheDestroyer]

I have a few issues with setting standards. First is that just because dogs have standards doesn't mean this hobby should. In my opinion dog hobby comparisons rarely work. In this case it falls apart when you consider that differences in dogs have mostly to do with genetice elasticity and not genetic mutations. This means that most dog genes can be changed by line breeding to attain a certain look. While in ball pythons this is not always the case, for example high white and low white single gene pieds, which is entirely random. Also there is a level of pretentiousness that exists in dog breeding that I would rather never see in this hobby.

This brings us to the point that people have different tastes in animals and standards do nothing but crap on different views of certain morphs. For example I tend to like cg/bananas with more freckles, but I realize that some people like more clean animals. It would a shame to see breedings forced to one style over the other by a standard, if that is even possible. Even though mid and high white pied are more desirable and fetch a higher price, does not mean the individuals preference for low white pied should be viewed as lesser quality.

Also certain traits that are obvious as adults are nearly impossible to predict as babies. Two examples that come to mind are freckling in cg/bananas and browning in pastels. It does not seem pertinent to set standards that can not be predicted from birth as then breeders are forced to keep more hold backs than they would normally. I will concede that these issues may be solved by line breeding, but I am not entirely sure on the matter.

It seems to me, even when asking someone with experience about what a quality animal looks like, for many morphs except the obvious things like a browned out pastel, they have a hard time explaining it. This is of course just my experience and there is a possibility they just don't want to share their information.

I agree that undercutting prices is not good for the hobby, but I feel that has to do with personal integrity and ones commitment to the hobby. We would do better to weed out these types by using the community than to set limiting standards. I recently had to make some space for a banana het pied by rehoming a year old single gene banana. From the beginning I had people telling me my price was too high, but I thought he was a quality animal so I stuck to my price. I was eventually able to sell him, and I honestly think he ended up in a better home because I refused to be pressured into slashing my prices.

[Craiga 01453]

This is a fascinating thread. I can see pros and cons on both sides and am really watching closely to see how it plays out. As somebody who just got back into the hobby after years away, a LOT has changed. I last kept snakes in the late 90's and I rehoused them in 2000 or 2001 (it was best for the animals at the time) and just got back into the hobby less than a year ago.
I would quote all that I agree with and touch on it, but it would be a colossal waste of most people's time. I'm just a passionate keeper and have no interest in getting into my own breeding, so I'll leave that up to those who are breeders. I would however love to work FOR a breeder. That would be an awesome job I think.

[Unknown Subscriber]

Would a quality standard not raise the price of all morphs across the board? I mean still sell the not perfect representations of a morph because they are pretty and they are desirable. But if there was a quality standard then new comers to the hobby have a solid point of reference when purchasing animals. They can know what a certain morph is supposed to have and supposed look like. For breeders this raises the price of animals with stronger genes. I Just don't understand why there is a market that profits more off defects that are not what the breeder was even attempting to do just had a fluke and got a weird pattern and now wants to charge extra.

[AntTheDestroyer]

Would a quality standard not raise the price of all morphs across the board? I mean still sell the not perfect representations of a morph because they are pretty and they are desirable. But if there was a quality standard then new comers to the hobby have a solid point of reference when purchasing animals. They can know what a certain morph is supposed to have and supposed look like. For breeders this raises the price of animals with stronger genes. I Just don't understand why there is a market that profits more off defects that are not what the breeder was even attempting to do just had a fluke and got a weird pattern and now wants to charge extra.

Maybe it raises the prices that fit that certain standard but lowers the prices on the rest of the market. Standards only apply to personal preferences of the cosmetics of a snake. No one with integrity needs a standard to tell them they should not buy a kinked animal for breeding.

[JodanOrNoDan]

I love the discussion on this and it is influencing my "proposal". I do agree with Eric or Deborah at least at this point but I respect their opinions. They retail, I do not. I make two kinds of animal right now. I make the ones I like, and I make the ones that my buyers says sell well. Ironically my personal quest in quality has nothing to do with paint jobs. I like to produce animals that are easy keepers and have the genes to get large for ball pythons. The paint jobs for me are just a way to attract someone to the animal in the first place. My personal favorite snake in my collection is a big, ugly normal female. She doesn't win people over with her looks, she is all personality. I paid less for her than any other animal in my collection but she holds the highest personal value to me. She is worth more to me than all my gravel stuff put together. All that said she is still at best a $35 normal that I would probably rate as a 2 on a pretty scale.

In the end I think what I am going to put forward will make sense. Even those opposing it may not like it but will have to admit it could work.