Sometimes I think....

[artgecko]

I think it can be, but I think that to be a "good" breeder (not necessarily profitable or professional), you need to breed animals that improve on the previous generation in looks... For me, 2-3 gene animals seem to look the best, or really good examples of 1 gene animals. I have only 2 BPs at the moment, a 1 gene and a 2 gene female. Of the two, the single gene female is a better example of her morph, so it makes sense to me that she should produce better looking babies than the 2 gene animal, although I will get more combos with the 2-gene female.

I think you need to start with solid examples of the morphs (1,2, or 3 gene, etc.) then build your collection from there... Keep back the best examples (i.e. keep a 1 gene awesome pastel over a 2 gene mediocre bumblebee), then breed quality to quality striving for some aesthetic goal... i.e. reduced pattern, more contrast, etc. If you become known for quality, it makes sense that more owners will come to you for breeding stock / pets.

[lurch9]

Also not sure if some off this breeding is good for the animals I still don't know how I feel about scale less snakes seems like breeding to get a human with down syndrome to me as scale less is a genetic defect

[Ballpythoncrazy]

As for producing 3-4 gene animals, there are many I like but can't afford to purchase... but I can afford to purchase the "ingredients". So, I'll make my own, and enjoy the journey along the way.

Same with me. Although I haven't started breeding yet, it'll be mostly a hobby for me. I think of ball python breeding more as art than anything. Making beautiful snakes from other beautiful snakes. It's like drawing or painting a beautiful picture. Even if I do hit a jackpot combo, I'd probably end up keeping it due to its beauty.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Eric Alan]

Also not sure if some off this breeding is good for the animals I still don't know how I feel about scale less snakes seems like breeding to get a human with down syndrome to me as scale less is a genetic defect

Yes, DS is a genetic abnormality. Yes, scaleless ball pythons are a genetic abnormality. However, DS is associated with physical and intellectual disability. Scaleless ball pythons, despite their obvious physical differences, do not (in my understanding) behave differently than any other ball python morph. They eat well, shed well, poop well, and move well. To put it simply, they're thriving.

We, as responsible hobbyists and breeders, do not knowingly breed for snakes with known physical or intellectual disabilities that impact their quality of life.

[lurch9]

Yes I know that they thrive and are fine and down syndrome probably extreme comparison just showing an example. I think scale less is going to look amazing in other morphs just feels so unnatural to have a snake or reptile without scales

[CptJack]

I think sometimes, too, people lose sight of the pet market. Doesn't matter how many of the supers are being bred, the single, double, and even normals are always going to have some kind of market in people keeping the snakes for pets, and the benefits of breeding those fancy morphs is that people getting into reptiles or looking for just a pet have somewhere to go to look for decent quality 'low end' morphs that are really nice and responsibly bred.

Even if they are a byproduct.

[Mr. Misha]

We, as responsible hobbyists and breeders, do not knowingly breed for snakes with known physical or intellectual disabilities that impact their quality of life.

Playing devil's advocate here, but isn't breeding anything with the Spider gene is knowingly breeding a defect that might impact their quality of life?

Personally, I have a very sweet Bee boy who thankfully isn't too wobbly and it doesn't effect him too much but it's honestly a gamble since it effects each snake differently. Just a thought...



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using Tapatalk