Quote Originally Posted by WingedWolfPsion View Post
If it's 1/10,000, then the additional risk from having the spider mutation truly is negligible.
I agree with this (though I know that there are some who wouldn't even take that risk, which I think is also to be respected). I don't know what the actual number is, though -- and for me, it's important to find out.

There are some folks that are simply disturbed by the ataxia of spiders, as it reminds them of ataxia in humans, which is usually associated with something unpleasant.
On the other hand, waltzing mice have their fans. Some people would never dream of breeding waltzing mice, while others love them.

It all comes around to the definition of a 'defect'. Is a change in body shape desirable, or a 'defect'? Obviously, we don't demand conformity of shape in our other pets--check the difference in shape between a pug dog and a greyhound! So, is the duckbilling that occurs in cinnamons an actual issue, or just a neat alteration of form that is desirable? Do bug eyes in a super lesser actually cause any harm?

Is a spider's ataxia substantially worse than what's seen in fainting goats, or waltzing mice?

I think calling some of these traits 'genetic flaws' is loaded language--it's making an assumption from the outset, which not everyone will agree with. Not all of these things are necessarily flaws.

I will agree that it's loaded, but I can't think of another term for it. You're absolutely right, though -- some people might like bug-eyed snakes.

All animal breeding is a very loaded topic, with a lot of contentious issues. I think it all ultimately often comes down to what is considered acceptable within the community of people that work with that animal -- but I think sometimes it is important to consider it from an outside perspective.

For example, there are some breeders of English bulldogs who will just take it as a given that the animal will need multiple surgeries (airway surgery, eye surgery) at a relatively young age. It's just a part of owning a bulldog. To them, it's "normal," and it's acceptable. In my mind that doesn't make it acceptable. I go to a school where the word "breeder" (and "exotic pet," FWIW) are considered dirty words by an awful lot of people, and I see an awful lot of judging going on every day, so I try very hard not to be judgmental. However, I just don't believe that deliberately and consciously breeding for a dog that you know will eventually need a surgery to survive past a couple years of age can ever be considered acceptable.

I'm not about to compare spiders to English bulldogs -- not by a long shot. And indeed, in my mind I really don't see much that's ethically unacceptable about breeding, say, a duck-billed super cinny or a bug-eyed lesser, provided those things don't affect the animal's health (which they really don't seem to from what I can see). I had been under the impression that they were undesirable largely because they are "deviants" from the normal physical conformation of snake, which seems to be overall undesirable to this community. Maybe that's changing, though. (Who knows, maybe in the future we'll even start to see selection for morphologic characteristics other than color ...)

And as for the spiders -- yes, I agree 100% -- it is very much like the myotonic goats. (I don't know too much about waltzing mice, though I can guess about it ...) I don't know that I am totally comfortable with the idea of selecting for an animal that falls down when it gets too excited, either. To be honest, since I've never met a myotonic goat (to my knowledge), I can't really comment on it, but I will say that I don't take it as a given that the breeding of myotonic goats is ethically acceptable.

Clearly the propagation of spider ball pythons is, by and large, accepted within our immediate ball python community. I can tell you, though, that when I mention it to other veterinary professionals (or non-ball python herp people), the reaction I get most often is, "Oh, so people don't breed those now that they know about it, right?" Well ...

I am still running my male bumblebee through my females, FWIW ... Though I am debating making this my last year with the morph. I don't know.

Ironically, as far as the caramels -- I am still tentatively planning on going forward with them. For some reason, I have very little internal debate there -- even though my little poll is clearly indicating that on the whole, ball python people are much more concerned about the ethics of caramel breeding than spider balls (though I wonder -- how much is ethics and how much is economics? You can sell a spinny spider because it's commonly accepted, but you can't get rid of a kinked caramel ...) I think that for me, the path for that project is obvious -- one kinked baby and I nix the project. Over and done. For the spiders, my biggest worry is that I'll hold back a perfect, gorgeous three or four banger combo (or worse, sell one) that later in life turns into a spastic train wreck.

... That post was also stupid long, but more rambling than pedantic ...