what do you consider when considering quality

[WildLore]

we always say quality over quantity in every species with reputable breeders in dogs disreputable breeding of quantity and for the "its better because of this rare____" is an issue. or the "because its better" that creates animals that often only meet the baseline of their standard or look nothing like their standard (there is in fact room to move some times, too much) the dogs these people breed are typically not structurally built to last, have internal issues that are missed, never looked for or are simply never taken to the vet. that slight variation in the movement in the rear angulation of your dog may seem normal to you but a walking disaster waiting to happen for those more familiar with structure and it's necessity to work. i am including breeding for extremes in this statement of bad breeding practices as i know many outside, inside, work and show people and there is one in every group that breeds for it and many that do not

so lets PLEASE not get into that . I am using it only as an example.

so i must ask what do you see as a lack of quality in:
ball python structure
morphs
ethics

[JodanOrNoDan]

This is my opinion and only my opinion. To the best of my knowledge, with the exception of scaleless, there is no one intentionally trying to breed physically deformed ball pythons. There are a few morphs that have the potential for physical deformity and most of those combinations are avoided. It could be argued that anything with the "wobble" should not be bred. I do not subscribe to that line of thinking. Even my animals with severe wobbles are doing fine. Ball pythons are bred primarily for their paint jobs. For the most part there is no physical or behavioral difference between a normal and the latest 5 gene combo from NERD. Ball python pricing is based primarily on the desirability and rarity of the paint job. The quality of the paint job is subjective.

[Lizardlicks]

With ball pythons, other than genetic defects linked with certain genes (super cinny kink or spider wobble for example) there really isn't a whole lot of structural variance so there really isn't breeding for some rare, amazing feature that ends up leaving the animal crippled. With mammals, a lot of it is about exaggeration of traits through inbreeding and "the purity of the line". Snake keepers doooon't really track that stuff a lot to my experience. It's not important. A ball python is a ball python. A snake is a meat tube with a mouth on one end and a butt at the other.

When we look for quality in our animals it usually comes down to two things: the health of the animal, which is generally more related to it's keeper's husbandry than the snake's breeding (is it well hydrated, eating, free of mites, RI, stuck shed, damaged scales or other injury, etc.), and the clarity of the color/pattern associated with that morph. Is the pastel obviously a pastel at first glance, or do you have to tilt your head and debate on whether it's really just a blushed out normal? This snake is advertised as a two or three gene animal, but can you only clearly see one? Things like that. Each morph has it's own definition of quality, and then there are morphs for which personal preference plays a big role. I like my pied to have a nice white balance, but some people like them high white and others like low white. I like reduced patterns on snakes, even in normals. To me it just looks nicer and more clean. If I want a snake to breed, I like to look at the snakes parents if I can. An axanthic who's got really brown parents might look nice as a hatchling, but he'll be mud before his first birthday. I also like gauging the personality of my snakes. Each animal is an individual, but they're pets, and I like animals that are naturally more easy going and chill with handling and changes. Less likely to stress and become sick or stop eating as opposed to an animal that is never out of a ball or snapping at me constantly. Of course this can be changed overtime with consistent gentle handling, but starting with a docile little sweet heart goes a long way. With my future snakes' babies I would like to see if they can pass on their temperaments with selective breeding. I don't think that's something a lot of big names focus on much if at all.

[WildLore]

With ball pythons, other than genetic defects linked with certain genes (super cinny kink or spider wobble for example) there really isn't a whole lot of structural variance so there really isn't breeding for some rare, amazing feature that ends up leaving the animal crippled. With mammals, a lot of it is about exaggeration of traits through inbreeding and "the purity of the line". Snake keepers doooon't really track that stuff a lot to my experience. It's not important. A ball python is a ball python. A snake is a meat tube with a mouth on one end and a butt at the other.

When we look for quality in our animals it usually comes down to two things: the health of the animal, which is generally more related to it's keeper's husbandry than the snake's breeding (is it well hydrated, eating, free of mites, RI, stuck shed, damaged scales or other injury, etc.), and the clarity of the color/pattern associated with that morph. Is the pastel obviously a pastel at first glance, or do you have to tilt your head and debate on whether it's really just a blushed out normal? This snake is advertised as a two or three gene animal, but can you only clearly see one? Things like that. Each morph has it's own definition of quality, and then there are morphs for which personal preference plays a big role. I like my pied to have a nice white balance, but some people like them high white and others like low white. I like reduced patterns on snakes, even in normals. To me it just looks nicer and more clean. If I want a snake to breed, I like to look at the snakes parents if I can. An axanthic who's got really brown parents might look nice as a hatchling, but he'll be mud before his first birthday. I also like gauging the personality of my snakes. Each animal is an individual, but they're pets, and I like animals that are naturally more easy going and chill with handling and changes. Less likely to stress and become sick or stop eating as opposed to an animal that is never out of a ball or snapping at me constantly. Of course this can be changed overtime with consistent gentle handling, but starting with a docile little sweet heart goes a long way. With my future snakes' babies I would like to see if they can pass on their temperaments with selective breeding. I don't think that's something a lot of big names focus on much if at all.

agree will add however its not purity of the line in mammals...so much as "hehe i can say this is a rare breed and sell it for money they won't care as long as its a breed" or the one even the designer dog breed creator and the JVMA all agree is BS "hybrid vigor" test was run 2014 in april or july documenting a higher risk of health concerns with "hybrids" people try and market that for more than its worth that said a badly bred purebred is just as bad as a badly bred mutt. True genetic hybrids do not in fact follow the biologics of being better 9/10 times because a vast majority are unable to reproduce. good show and work breeders test to prevent genetic disorders a vast majority of mutts have not had that effort put in nor have the owners of BYB purebred dogs

But i am ranting sorry it's a sore subject for me lol no tone implied.

as for structure in snakes i was talking about things such as duckbill, short neck , eye deformities < i realize some of these pose no risks other than to the eye of the beholder but would you consider that a lesser quality animal?

[distaff]

"...as for structure in snakes i was talking about things such as duckbill, short neck , eye deformities < i realize some of these pose no risks other than to the eye of the beholder but would you consider that a lesser quality animal?"

In my opinion it detracts from the quality. They are bred for beauty, and I've never come across anyone saying they prefer a differently shaped head, or different sized eye. Bug eyes are considered a fault in rat snakes, although I suppose some might see the trait as cute.

For all the BP colour and pattern variation, I'm not sure why we don't more variation in shape and size - even in what is admittedly a limited structure to work with. Dogs, pigeons, chickens, and goldfish all show enormous structural variation - but other animals don't, and I've always found that puzzling.

[Lizardlicks]

I think part of it does come back to the meat tube thing... not a lot to work with. The most drastic legit physical change you see in snakes is scaless, or breeding up or down for size. They don't have limbs or fur or feathers or anything to mess with, so you're left with the face and the body, both of which are vitally necessary to be at least somewhat similar in the original design in order to eat.

[wolfy-hound]

I've rarely ever seen a BP with "short neck"? There's very rarely eye issues, and when they have popped up, it's not attributed to a particular morph and most all breeders would not use it as a breeder if it hatches with a missing eye.

Also, there's less correlation with some "deformities" in snakes, because of the incubation issues. Instead of it being a genetic issue, able to be passed on... it could be a drop(or spike) in temps during incubation.

I mean, I get that you're really into the whole dog breeding analogy. But mostly, that doesn't really apply to BPs. When people want "quality" in a morph, it's usually things like a pastel that is brighter and holds it's color into adulthood. An anxachic(sorry, I can NEVER spell it!) that stays more greyscale and doesn't gain gold coloration in adulthood.

It's not the same as a dog with bad hips. Also, it's not the same to say cross breeds are healthier, because ball pythons really don't have distinct breeds, just different morphs, but underneath the skin, they are exactly the same animal. So "mutts" don't apply to ball pythons like the term does to dogs with their varied breeds.

It's just hard to apply dog breeding stuff to ball python breeding. If you're fishing to have someone say "Oh I'd breed an eyeless bp because it's rare and totally worth a ton of money", you're probably not going to get that kind of response from most breeders, because no one wants to pay a high price for a deformed snake with no eyes. Or with kinks. Or whatever deformity you pick. Other than scaleless and wobble, there's not a lot of traits that are acceptable or desirable that could also be considered a deformity. And Wobble is not desirable or sought after as a trait, so it doesn't apply either. In fact, people often tout their animals as having "no" or at least very little wobble to help sell them. So pretty much, you're stuck with scaleless, and that's a divided issue. Some people say it is desirable and doesn't hurt the snake... some say it's a deformity and undesirable.

[WildLore]

"
If you're fishing to have someone say "Oh I'd breed an eyeless bp because it's rare and totally worth a ton of money", you're probably not going to get that kind of response from most breeders, because no one wants to pay a high price for a deformed snake with no eyes. Or with kinks. Or whatever deformity you pick. Other than scaleless and wobble, there's not a lot of traits that are acceptable or desirable that could also be considered a deformity. And Wobble is not desirable or sought after as a trait, so it doesn't apply either. In fact, people often tout their animals as having "no" or at least very little wobble to help sell them. So pretty much, you're stuck with scaleless, and that's a divided issue. Some people say it is desirable and doesn't hurt the snake... some say it's a deformity and undesirable"


no i'm not fishing at all...sorry if you believe that and no i was honestly just curious what was considered quality for ball python owners. because i DO hear it a lot and i don't believe it means the same thing as it would in say dogs. dogs i use because i have the most experience in that area..


such as another thread on the genetics section where many said don't just throw random multi gene animals together think of quality rather than the money side of things
i asked about mutations because while i don't think many are used for obvious ethical reasons i think we have noted that certain mutations do have higher risks so do we consider that breeding to be less worthy of an option even if the snakes come out being non culls.
i see from the answers that typically no such things as duck billing and small or bulging eyes are non issues but something along the lines of no eyes or kinks would be a no go for many.


so what determines quality other than individual desire for a specific paint job?

[WildLore]

I mean, I get that you're really into the whole dog breeding analogy. But mostly, that doesn't really apply to BPs. When people want "quality" in a morph, it's usually things like a pastel that is brighter and holds it's color into adulthood. An anxachic(sorry, I can NEVER spell it!) that stays more greyscale and doesn't gain gold coloration in adulthood.

It's not the same as a dog with bad hips. Also, it's not the same to say cross breeds are healthier, because ball pythons really don't have distinct breeds, just different morphs, but underneath the skin, they are exactly the same animal. So "mutts" don't apply to ball pythons like the term does to dogs with their varied breeds.

.

sorry as i said that was my rant mode i wasn't trying to say that there were "breeds" so much as that was a problem in dogs more than the "purity" i was not commenting on snakes being mutts lol...

[stickyalvinroll]

When you first see the ball Python, a good quality one will give you a moment of wonder and will bring you into a trance, that's when you know you're holding a high quality ball Python