Grow Faster, Breed Sooner? (NOT POWER FEEDING)

[Ball_Pythons4life]

Directly related to the topic.

Starts at 14:21

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_SHPzzHRDw&t=861s

Here is the feast and famine example I mentioned.

Though Vin says he'll feed them as much as they will eat, it isn't a daily occurrence. He also feeds larger prey, not smaller. My friend Bryan mentioned in another thread a while back that ADULT snakes experience some metabolic and growth changes when graduating to larger prey. Obviously within reasonable limits.

Vin's feeding regime equates to about 10 meals a year according to this broadcast. From this, you can surmise he is not feeding daily.


If you've read his books THE COMPLETE/MORE COMPLETE BOA CONSTRICTOR you will read that Vin and Eugene Bassett found boas to grow more when NOT being fed.

This topic relates to royals, but it stands that energy being used to digest cannot be split with energy being used to grow. My personal opinion is that daily feeding will put a constant stress on the system and eventually have negative results no matter how small the meal.

This is why seasonal changes are so important.

There should be some agreement as to how a royal can be fed based on the seasons.

Feeding more frequently at certain times of the year will mimic a more natural pattern.

Put the animal's wellbeing first.

Ok thanks for the link, and it makes sense how constant feeding would put a huge strain on their digestive system.

[nikkubus]

Directly related to the topic.

Starts at 14:21

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_SHPzzHRDw&t=861s

Here is the feast and famine example I mentioned.

Though Vin says he'll feed them as much as they will eat, it isn't a daily occurrence. He also feeds larger prey, not smaller. My friend Bryan mentioned in another thread a while back that ADULT snakes experience some metabolic and growth changes when graduating to larger prey. Obviously within reasonable limits.

Vin's feeding regime equates to about 10 meals a year according to this broadcast. From this, you can surmise he is not feeding daily.


If you've read his books THE COMPLETE/MORE COMPLETE BOA CONSTRICTOR you will read that Vin and Eugene Bassett found boas to grow more when NOT being fed.

This topic relates to royals, but it stands that energy being used to digest cannot be split with energy being used to grow. My personal opinion is that daily feeding will put a constant stress on the system and eventually have negative results no matter how small the meal.

This is why seasonal changes are so important.

There should be some agreement as to how a royal can be fed based on the seasons.

Feeding more frequently at certain times of the year will mimic a more natural pattern.

Put the animal's wellbeing first.

10 meals a year sounds really extreme to me. That doesn't even seem like enough to recover from the eggs alone, let alone the calories burnt the rest of the year, even if they are pretty large meals. How on Earth is 10 meals "as much as they will eat" in 5 months? I know he knows his stuff when it comes to boas, but I don't know anything about his experience with BPs and I'm pretty skeptical of the math here. If I feed a BP an adult rabbit, it's going to regurge. It's not like a boa or retic where they can eat proportionally massive meals.

[jmcrook]

It's not like a boa or retic where they can eat proportionally massive meals.

Boas should never be eating massive meals either. Something the diameter of the animal or 3/4 of that once adult and infrequently, 3-4 weeks. If feeding substantially larger meals then even less frequently, like once every 4-6 weeks. Sure, in the wild they might take down something huge, but they also may go another 3 months before they get that opportunity again.

Also bear in mind that putting the weight back on after breeding in a captive setting in regards to Royal Pythons is often with the goal of breeding the animal again the next season. Very unlikely that they, or any snake for that matter, breed once a year in the wild.

[Gio]

10 meals a year sounds really extreme to me. That doesn't even seem like enough to recover from the eggs alone, let alone the calories burnt the rest of the year, even if they are pretty large meals. How on Earth is 10 meals "as much as they will eat" in 5 months? I know he knows his stuff when it comes to boas, but I don't know anything about his experience with BPs and I'm pretty skeptical of the math here. If I feed a BP an adult rabbit, it's going to regurge. It's not like a boa or retic where they can eat proportionally massive meals.

I doubt they eat 10 meals a year (nearly monthly) in the wild. I don't find Vin's methods extreme. A wild specimen burns far more calories just to survive in the wild and very likely eats less.

In captivity conditions are ideal, the need to move is negated by having everything to sustain a quality life right there in the enclosure. Captive prey is far more fatty than wild prey. Everything in the wild is leaner and meaner so to speak. A captive snake gets fed more frequently, moves less and eats higher calorie prey items.

My female (royal) that is 10 years old in July, maybe eats 5-7 times a year. That's her choice and not mine. My coastal carpet isn't far behind. She eats infrequently and is 8+ feet long.

Vin works with multiple species, and there is another good interview that I believe he and Nick Mutton discuss the over feeding topic. Check Morelia Radio for it. I was not able to find it offhand.

In any case, the subject of DAILY feeding seems extremely detrimental to the health of any royal python.

A look into the biology of boas and pythons tells a lot, specifically how they have evolved over millions of years to be able to survive and conserve energy without frequently eating. Eating 10 times or maybe less in 5-6 months seems logical if you consider seasons and migration patterns.

Captivity changes certain factors for the better and some for worse.

I like seeing what people with animals over 15 years old are doing. I've been told Gus Rentfro (Boa Expert) has had 20 year old female boas breed and deliver healthy specimens. Impressive!

There is certainly enough evidence to show over feeding results in health issues and early death.

If pounding food just for the sake of re-breeding at the earliest opportunity is the driving force the snake's health seems low on the list of priorities.


Finding the balance is the key.

[bns]

Now we can talk about the commodification of animals all we want, and I 100% agree with jmcrook, the animal comes first, our passion and enjoyment second, and the money that can be made way down at the bottom of the list, BUT we're talking about a very big, well known, and well respected breeder who's gotten countless people into the hobby by making these animals easier for them to get, at a price point that's low enough that your average person can afford them. ...

You can't agree 100% and then say it's ok because...

Respect is the same as trust for me...its earned not given.

In my opinion, when your breeding ball pythons, your either making a livelihood out of it or you're doing for enjoyment. If you are making a living out of breeding, I see no reason why its a problem to try and raise males faster. if you're breeding for fun, there's no reason to breed faster for more profit.

So it's ok if money is involved? How about with puppies?
___________________________________________
Ok, I'm not picking on you two...I just want you to think about what you said and the meanings that come with it...

We're heading deep into ethics here and we are just talking about a creature that gets killed on site because of what it is.

10 meals a year sounds really extreme to me. That doesn't even seem like enough to recover from the eggs alone, let alone the calories burnt the rest of the year, even if they are pretty large meals. How on Earth is 10 meals "as much as they will eat" in 5 months? I know he knows his stuff when it comes to boas, but I don't know anything about his experience with BPs and I'm pretty skeptical of the math here. If I feed a BP an adult rabbit, it's going to regurge. It's not like a boa or retic where they can eat proportionally massive meals.

This cuts to the heart of the matter in a way folks may have missed IMO. You're skeptical because you haven't observed it. I have and I apply it...if they told you how few meals it takes to keep an adult in proper form without breeding it would be even less.

These things can only be observed if the goal is about understanding the critter...as soon as money, a specific gene, a combination of genes, an appearance, recognition, a desire for being first, a desire to be among a group and so much more become the goal; understanding through observation with a desire for knowledge is lost.

I'm not trying to take some ethics high road or say I'm better than someone else because I don't breed for money...This started in the 70's for me...it was about fascination/understanding at first and it still is today.

[Ball_Pythons4life]

So it's ok if money is involved? How about with puppies?

I never said it was okay if money was involved, and i'm sorry if that comes across as my meaning, what I meant was that the Only reason to do it was if you ARE breeding for money. I still don't see any problem with this method. They are only eating when they want to, unlike power feeding, they are still being fed the same amount, and it is only for a few months. Now, whether this has any long term affects we have yet to see. I also see puppies the same way I see reptiles they both deserve the same amount of respect. its not like i'm practising this method myself.

Ok, I'm not picking on you two...I just want you to think about what you said and the meanings that come with it...

its okay, I have thick skin

[Hugsplox]

You can't agree 100% and then say it's ok because...

Respect is the same as trust for me...its earned not given.



This cuts to the heart of the matter in a way folks may have missed IMO. You're skeptical because you haven't observed it. I have and I apply it...if they told you how few meals it takes to keep an adult in proper form without breeding it would be even less.

These things can only be observed if the goal is about understanding the critter...as soon as money, a specific gene, a combination of genes, an appearance, recognition, a desire for being first, a desire to be among a group and so much more become the goal; understanding through observation with a desire for knowledge is lost.

I'm not trying to take some ethics high road or say I'm better than someone else because I don't breed for money...This started in the 70's for me...it was about fascination/understanding at first and it still is today.

I disagree, I think we can be understanding of an issue from multiple viewpoints. I'm trying to look at this from a hobbyist and a business standpoint. I agree that the animal comes first, BUT Wilbanks is running a business and has found a way, that he claims, works for him to get his males up to breeding size faster than normal. Now, that is the one and only benefit of the method he described. There's no claim by him or anyone else that this is beneficial to the animal in any way whatsoever, this method is only beneficial to him as a business owner. That being said, is if he's found a way to safety (with supporting data to show it's safe) grow his snakes faster, is there anything inherently wrong with it. It may not be beneficial to the snake, but if it doesn't hurt the snake is there an issue.

Couple of things to remember here. First, we're not talking him giving a snake who would typically eat say, a 30g rat every week, a 30g rat every day. He's giving them 30 grams of rat in a week. Meaning I'm feeding multiple smaller rats. So we're not power feeding in a traditional sense, we're turning one big meal into a bunch of small meals. Second, this was coupled with a university study, it wasn't a breeder just doing something with absolutely no data to go off of. The argument here is not overfeeding, in my opinion, because calorie intake is the same just spread out over a week vs all in one feeding, the argument is, is it safe to keep a snake's digestive process turned on and running at this pace non-stop for the first few months of it's life?

My answer to that question is I don't know. Again we have to look at it from both points of view. To you and I, it's not worth it, we're not interested in getting a snake breeding faster, it doesn't benefit the snake, so to us there's no point. To a big breeder who makes a living off snakes though, if he isn't seeing any negative effects, and he can boost productivity, I get why he would be willing to try it especially if based on his experience there's no negative impact.

All of that being said, all of you guys have a metric ton more experience than I do keeping, breeding, discussing, anything to do with reptiles I'm sure of this. I take no offense to any of you telling me I'm wrong about something, and I may be wrong here and Mike may be setting his snakes up for failure. In this scenario though, I think we have to be able to look at this from both directions and not just disagree because we think Wilbanks is breeding for a different reason than we would.

[Bogertophis]

I agree with Hugsplox about seeing both sides of this issue, & while it's obviously for the benefit of someone breeding snakes for sale (which is not my personal interest at all), I don't believe it sounds harmful as far as experimental issues go- I can think of many things that are far worse.

I don't know Wilbanks one way or another, so I certainly don't know what's in his mind, but I can't imagine he's not interested in protecting his investment- for this reason I'm not willing to throw stones at him for trying something different, even though it's not something I'd care to repeat- & like I said before, the fact that he was willing to share the information took guts, opening himself up to criticism just to share some experimental knowledge.

Humans being what they are, I don't think we'll ever be able to separate the breeding of exotic animals from some taking personal satisfaction in doing so & pride in being a "first" at something- I think we all share different proportions of the same reasons for keeping & breeding snakes, & that will probably never change.

I love that our discussion here is seeing different ethical sides of this issue & making us all think more about it with such thoughtful replies, especially what's best for the animals & why.

[Gio]

Here is another great interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YrAoIatca6M

Time and time again you will hear experts, that not only breed, but go into the field and study various species reiterate the fact that over feeding leads to the early demise of captive snakes.

Nick drives the point home here. Listen to how long his snakes live. Listen to how he keeps his animals. He breeds a multitude of species, including royals. You will not hear him mention rapidly increasing an animals size for the snake of breeding it.

There is no mention of daily feeding here.

The emphasis, whether you hear it here or not, is on seasonality and lessons learned from field studies. Understanding your animal on a biological level is very important.

Size does not equate to maturity, and "big" should not "green light" breeding. At least not healthy breeding over the long haul.

I've spoken to Nick several times, sometimes for hours over the phone. He calls himself a nerd because he knows so much about reptiles.

He is the real deal. He goes into the field he studies the various species, he reads studies already conducted and he puts his findings into practice.

Vin Russo is like minded and a friend of Nick's.

People can choose to do what they want, but with all of the evidence proving longevity in snakes is related to proper feeding in captivity and other obvious factors, I tend to see daily feeding as a disaster in the making over time.

[bns]

I disagree, I think we can be understanding of an issue from multiple viewpoints. I'm trying to look at this from a hobbyist and a business standpoint. I agree that the animal comes first, BUT Wilbanks is running a business and has found a way, that he claims, works for him to get his males up to breeding size faster than normal. Now, that is the one and only benefit of the method he described. There's no claim by him or anyone else that this is beneficial to the animal in any way whatsoever, this method is only beneficial to him as a business owner. That being said, is if he's found a way to safety (with supporting data to show it's safe) grow his snakes faster, is there anything inherently wrong with it. It may not be beneficial to the snake, but if it doesn't hurt the snake is there an issue.

Couple of things to remember here. First, we're not talking him giving a snake who would typically eat say, a 30g rat every week, a 30g rat every day. He's giving them 30 grams of rat in a week. Meaning I'm feeding multiple smaller rats. So we're not power feeding in a traditional sense, we're turning one big meal into a bunch of small meals. Second, this was coupled with a university study, it wasn't a breeder just doing something with absolutely no data to go off of. The argument here is not overfeeding, in my opinion, because calorie intake is the same just spread out over a week vs all in one feeding, the argument is, is it safe to keep a snake's digestive process turned on and running at this pace non-stop for the first few months of it's life?

I'm unsure what you disagree with...I completely understand what different reasons are involved and I know what the motivating factors are. I know exactly what money does... Money blurs the truth, the goals, the results, the give a damns and all the 'ifs'.

My answer to that question is I don't know. Again we have to look at it from both points of view. To you and I, it's not worth it, we're not interested in getting a snake breeding faster, it doesn't benefit the snake, so to us there's no point. To a big breeder who makes a living off snakes though, if he isn't seeing any negative effects, and he can boost productivity, I get why he would be willing to try it especially if based on his experience there's no negative impact.

He can't see any negative effects of what will happen in the future...Since we don't know the future long term results, there is no answer to the ifs.

All of that being said, all of you guys have a metric ton more experience than I do keeping, breeding, discussing, anything to do with reptiles I'm sure of this. I take no offense to any of you telling me I'm wrong about something, and I may be wrong here and Mike may be setting his snakes up for failure. In this scenario though, I think we have to be able to look at this from both directions and not just disagree because we think Wilbanks is breeding for a different reason than we would.

This experiment does not have anything to do with giving a damn about the long term affects on the snakes. The goal was to find a way to make money faster and even if it kills the snakes after year 5 there is no downside as the breeder will have a viable male almost immediately... The motivation is known, the goal has been met and the long term results (ifs) will only carry as much weight as the ethics of the human involved. -And nothing against the breeder (I've never heard of him before this) but when money, ethics and humans are combined... I know how I'd place my bet.