• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Culling 'side product' hatchlings

Culling hatchlings:

  • is a responsible thing to do when they are deformed/weak and have no chance of a decent life

    Votes: 155 74.5%

  • 1 + when they are 'side products' and end up in pet shops, overflowing the market

    Votes: 5 2.4%

  • 1 + when hybrid hatchlings can be mistaken for pure, threatening the mass market with their genes

    Votes: 9 4.3%

  • 1 + 2 + 3

    Votes: 24 11.5%

  • is ok when..... (see my post)

    Votes: 2 1.0%

  • is never a good thing to do, even a deformed/week hatchling should only die by its defect

    Votes: 13 6.3%
  • Total voters
    208
carol said:
I'm still looking for an answer on this one Blutengel. :)

I have a colony of mice that my breeding goals are to create mice with gentic mutations that are pretty to look at and have temperments that are pleasant as well.

I also have colonies that my breeding goals are just to have females that produce as many healthy pinks as possible.

So is it wrong to to feed off some from one colony and not the other? Do I have to place all the mice from the first colony with pet homes if they don't meet my breeding goals? I am obligated to just breed those mice less instead of feeding them off? All because my goal for that colony was to make nice pet mice?
Click to expand...

One is obliged to try not to to produce too much hatchlings/mice/etc. then you need, for any purpose what so ever. Should you unexpectedly be overwhelmed and not be able to provide good lifes for all animals one way or another, one might have to kill them. But next time, recalculate what you thougt was the right amount to breed...

People make this into a duscussion wether it is right or not to kill animals with no chance of a good life, if an unexpected situation makes you do that....

For me the discussion is about CONSCIOUSLY producing animals which you will (almost certainly) have to kill (like Vin and the hybdrids)... somehow this aspects is overseen all the time.... I never said that I am against killing hatchlings if they have no chance of a decent life when a breeder is suddenly confronted with a dead loch of overproducing snakes...

Maybe I had better not put all options in the poll....
 
I have a few adults that are like that have not decied what to do with them that is why when I breed it will be young hatchilngs culled . The reason I like hybrids is I like to see what you get. The suprise when the clutch hatches. Some of thje jungle corns crossed to corn/tricolored king or a corn milk make out of this world looking snakes. Yes they can commanite but you have to educate people how to work with hybrids that they are breaking the laws of nature . Diffrent rules apply when working with hybrids.
 
Blutengel said:
One is obliged to try not to to produce too much hatchlings/mice/etc. then you need, for any purpose what so ever.
Click to expand...
But I NEED to feed my snakes more mice than I can ever produce on my own from either colony. My question to you is should the colony I keep for producing pets be exempt from being fed off while the colonies I keep for producing food get the axe?

This is what I'm taking away from your statements...
It's OK to breed animals for food. It's OK to breed animals for pets as long as you can place them in "good" homes. It's NOT OK to breed animals for food and pets in the same litters/clutches.

I wonder if mice could talk, how could you explain to a feeder mouse why his pet mice cousins get such exemption. Well you see, feeder mouse, I don't need any more breeders to produce food so you are food. On the other hand, for Mr. Pet Mouse... I don't need any more breeders to produce pets, but making you food is unthinkable so you get to be placed in a pet home even though I have a hundred hungry snakes that would benefit from your nutrition.

So if I breed a lot of Kingsnakes and the babies require being started on hatchling corns, do I have to set aside a select pair of cornsnakes for the purpose or creating feeders instead of just feeding of surplus from other projects? And why?
 
Blutengel said:
Would you kill adults you do not use?
Click to expand...

Have not decided what to do but for right now I bought them and will use them in my projects might have to put some animals down if I cant find the right homes for them anything can happen till that time. Some of the females might get egg bound and die , sickness, escape ( dought that ) I will have to cross the bridge when that times comes.

Do you hve any idea how many funa I killed in my life, Millions. herps ,birds , rodents, insectes, bugs, fish , ect. , so many living things. Death does not bother me accept when I loose something I like.
 
carol said:
But I NEED to feed my snakes more mice than I can ever produce on my own from either colony. My question to you is should the colony I keep for producing pets be exempt from being fed off while the colonies I keep for producing food get the axe?

This is what I'm taking away from your statements...
It's OK to breed animals for food. It's OK to breed animals for pets as long as you can place them in "good" homes. It's NOT OK to breed animals for food and pets in the same litters/clutches. QUOTE]

No, that is not what I mean at all... you can breed as many animals for the purpose of feeding and breeding as you like, in different mixed groups, if you think you can all provide them good care befiore dying or good pet life. I think it is not ethical to produce waste bin animals CONSCIOUSLY from which you know they will just hatch and die because you want to breed the perfect snake.

If you are able to calculate how much pet mice you can breed, in combination with feeding mice to serve both your fancy mouse and fancy snake breeding purposes, I am fine with that. But should you buy kings only for the purpose of eating the mice you cannot use for fancy breeding so you can run more breeding projects, that is not ethical IMO. Of course just killing them would even be less ethical...
Click to expand...
 
Blutengel said:
What do you do with adults you do not want to breed with anymore? you do sell hatchlings that do not look pure, right? Why does it not get through your barricaded that these also threaten the market? Tell me why they would not....
Click to expand...
I'll answer this one...

Because a true hybrid should resemble NEITHER parent. A jungle corn does not look like a cornsnake NOR a cali kingsnake. However, since breeding hybrids has the potential to produce offspring that are 75% one parent and 25% the other, the possibility of pure looking offspring is there...that's possibility, not probability.

The chances of a breeder mistaking a jungle corn for a pure corn are slim and none. The only way for it happen is if a "pure-looking" hybrid ends up being sold. With Vinman's scenario, culling anything that LOOKS pure reduces the potential for hyybrids being sold or bred as pures...in EITHER line.

Producing hybrids for sale is a lucrative market. The ability to "create" an entirely different product from anything else readily and commercially available is what science has been about for hundreds of years. I see no reason why the science of snake breeding should not follow suit. I also see the decision that Vinman has made regarding what to do with offspring that *could* potentially infiltrate the pure bloodlines as one of the responsible solutions to the question of dealing with hybrids. It may not be the ONLY solution, but I see it as no better nor worse than any other responsible solution to the question...
 
I did the same as carol , when I breed mice I would start to breed the mutations to the high producing lines. To produce high production a large size and freaky hair genes with color genes and the silky genes. I breed B. dubbia which I got from lindesy marie. They are so damm varribal , from body size and type to solid black to solid orange and everything inbettween. Guess who gets fed off , yes I select breed my roaches for size color and body type. I also have a conoly of blabrus roaches which are all hybrids I put in 5 diffrent kinds and let them intrebreed , now I'm putting female dubia to see if they will breed with a total diffrent species other than blabrus. I breed fish for their quilty , color, pattren, fin quilty. I breed Mystery snails for color mutations and shell quility. I do this with everythingI breed
 
Blutengel said:
But should you buy kings only for the purpose of eating the mice you cannot use for fancy breeding so you can run more breeding projects, that is not ethical IMO. Of course just killing them would even be less ethical...
Click to expand...
Not if you ask the kingsnake. :laugh:

I just think it is wasteful HAVE to have two separate colonies. I like corns, I like mice. Why can't I have one colony of mice and choose some for pets and some for feeding? I did not buy the mice to feed the snakes, I did not buy the snakes to eat the mice. But if an abundance can fill a need, why is that wrong?

What if I only had pet mice colonies and the over abundance from my pet mouse project filled my need for feeders perfectly? Would I still have to reduce my pet mouse breedings and then turn around and pay for feeder mice? I would have to sell a mouse to be a pet then turn around and buy a mouse for food?
 
Blutengel said:
Why does it matter? Does it make you feel good/proud? Is your opinion worth more because of it?
Click to expand...

no just letting you know that I'm quite numb to death I have greved over some of my favorit animals more than some old friends. Sometimes because of what they were worth either monitary or just because it was a screamer . Nothing to brag about just letting you into my world . Where my head is at It helps a person under stand you on the net
 
I think a HUGE barrier that is difficult to cross in discussions of this nature is human emotional connection.

We love snakes, therefore it is nearly impossible to view them in a light that holds no bias towards them and our desires for them to be healthy and beautiful creatures that are well loved and appreciated.

I wonder how many breeders have shed tears over a little cutie that just wasn't going to make it, and needed to be put down? I also wonder how many poeple get into breeding without ever considering the probability that they will, eventually, need to euthanize some of their offspring? How many people get into breeding thinking, "Oh...this is amazing, i get to raise these beautiful little creatures, get them started, and healthy, and pass them along to a loving home where they will be loved and respected.", only to find out that some of the offspring won't survive, and a good number of those that DO survive, may end up dying horrible deaths because of lack of appropriate knowledge and care on the part of the pet purchaser?

I think if you can seperate the love and emotional attachment we feel with the little hatchlings as they pip and take their first breaths of unencumbered air, it is far easier to understand the rational thought processes that many people put into making the decisions of which animals will thrive and be sold and which will be euthanized...for WHATEVER reasons...
 
OK, I think I have a little better grasp on what you are saying Blutengel... lets see, from my example of breeding mice for pets/breeders/and snake food... I have already stated that I do not breed enough mice to feed my own snakes (I have to purchase frozen feeders to supplement my supply.) I COULD breed more mice, and I have extra racks that are going unused, but I choose to breed only what I can raise with a high level of care. This is OK because I am not over-producing mice. But if someone were breeding all of their mice all of the time without consideration for their need/demand of these animals, that is where the line is drawn? The same for snakes... if you know that you have a demand/need for 200 snakes but you breed many more clutches HOPING to sell all of the babies produced yet planning to cull any that do not sell quickly, then that is NOT OK... But if you have hungry kingsnakes that NEED to eat baby snakes (some kings really do demand something other than mice for their first meal(s) and a variety of diet is highly beneficial as well) then that is OK too? Do I have that right? If that is what you are saying then I do agree. From my point of view, I see no point in wasting time and money producing babies (of any species) knowing that you have no plans for all of the babies and no need for them and it does seem a bit unfair to cull a bunch of hatchlings that you never needed to breed in the first place. I sure hope I have it right this time, I do want to "get" what you are saying.

So, just to be totally clear... say that you breed cornsnakes and you have kingsnakes as pets. Your kingsnakes need to eat, you want them to benefit from a varied diet and some of your kings are picky eaters and prefer to eat other snakes on occasion. You don't want to breed clutches of corns JUST to feed your kingsnakes because that is not your goal in breeding and not something that you look forward to doing, but you can humanely euthanize a few hatchlings and yearlings to have on hand for when your picky eater king decides it needs a snake-meal. Even though the hatchlings were healthy and intended as pets, they were needed (in a limited supply) to supplement the diet of your kings. Is this a scenario that falls into the"OK" category? :shrugs:

have a good nights sleep!
 
carol said:
Not if you ask the kingsnake. :laugh:

I just think it is wasteful HAVE to have two separate colonies. I like corns, I like mice. Why can't I have one colony of mice and choose some for pets and some for feeding? I did not buy the mice to feed the snakes, I did not buy the snakes to eat the mice. But if an abundance can fill a need, why is that wrong?

What if I only had pet mice colonies and the over abundance from my pet mouse project filled my need for feeders perfectly? Would I still have to reduce my pet mouse breedings and then turn around and pay for feeder mice? I would have to sell a mouse to be a pet then turn around and buy a mouse for food?
Click to expand...

No, you do not seem to see what I say... if you can breed a pet colony of mice in a way that the side products keep your snakes alive and no redundant mice need to be killed , that is perfectly fine with me. I literally said that....
 
chausies said:
OK, I think I have a little better grasp on what you are saying Blutengel... lets see, from my example of breeding mice for pets/breeders/and snake food... I have already stated that I do not breed enough mice to feed my own snakes (I have to purchase frozen feeders to supplement my supply.) I COULD breed more mice, and I have extra racks that are going unused, but I choose to breed only what I can raise with a high level of care. This is OK because I am not over-producing mice. But if someone were breeding all of their mice all of the time without consideration for their need/demand of these animals, that is where the line is drawn? The same for snakes... if you know that you have a demand/need for 200 snakes but you breed many more clutches HOPING to sell all of the babies produced yet planning to cull any that do not sell quickly, then that is NOT OK... But if you have hungry kingsnakes that NEED to eat baby snakes (some kings really do demand something other than mice for their first meal(s) and a variety of diet is highly beneficial as well) then that is OK too? Do I have that right? If that is what you are saying then I do agree. From my point of view, I see no point in wasting time and money producing babies (of any species) knowing that you have no plans for all of the babies and no need for them and it does seem a bit unfair to cull a bunch of hatchlings that you never needed to breed in the first place. I sure hope I have it right this time, I do want to "get" what you are saying.

So, just to be totally clear... say that you breed cornsnakes and you have kingsnakes as pets. Your kingsnakes need to eat, you want them to benefit from a varied diet and some of your kings are picky eaters and prefer to eat other snakes on occasion. You don't want to breed clutches of corns JUST to feed your kingsnakes because that is not your goal in breeding and not something that you look forward to doing, but you can humanely euthanize a few hatchlings and yearlings to have on hand for when your picky eater king decides it needs a snake-meal. Even though the hatchlings were healthy and intended as pets, they were needed (in a limited supply) to supplement the diet of your kings. Is this a scenario that falls into the"OK" category? :shrugs:

have a good nights sleep!
Click to expand...

YEAY you got it!!! I hope some other people might get it now too... :crazy02:
 
tyflier said:
I think a HUGE barrier that is difficult to cross in discussions of this nature is human emotional connection.

We love snakes, therefore it is nearly impossible to view them in a light that holds no bias towards them and our desires for them to be healthy and beautiful creatures that are well loved and appreciated.

I wonder how many breeders have shed tears over a little cutie that just wasn't going to make it, and needed to be put down? I also wonder how many poeple get into breeding without ever considering the probability that they will, eventually, need to euthanize some of their offspring? How many people get into breeding thinking, "Oh...this is amazing, i get to raise these beautiful little creatures, get them started, and healthy, and pass them along to a loving home where they will be loved and respected.", only to find out that some of the offspring won't survive, and a good number of those that DO survive, may end up dying horrible deaths because of lack of appropriate knowledge and care on the part of the pet purchaser?

I think if you can seperate the love and emotional attachment we feel with the little hatchlings as they pip and take their first breaths of unencumbered air, it is far easier to understand the rational thought processes that many people put into making the decisions of which animals will thrive and be sold and which will be euthanized...for WHATEVER reasons...
Click to expand...

I do see nothing wrong in feeling emotions about nature and life... that is human and does keep us humane too. Without feeling these emotions towards animals, we might abuse them. Being rational does not necessary result in being humane or respectfull. Rationalizing that killing deformed hatchling is actually the same as killing the ones you do not need/like is not a good sort of being rational IMO.
 
There are quite a few posts in this thread that I haven't read yet, so if this is a bit out of context, I apologize. I just need to comment on one of Blutengel's statements.

Do we have the right to play God with animals, deciding who is to be born as well as who and when some are to die? According to the Bible, then yes we do. God gave man dominion over all the creatures on Earth. The Bible says that all creatures other than man do not have a soul so we do not have the same ethical standards that we must use when dealing with other men...ie "Thou shalt not kill, etc.

Do I think that man does not have to consider the "rights" of animals? No...but the religious base is there as a potential defense for culling.

Man has been playing God with animals since he was created. It was man that developed all the different breeds of dogs, cats, cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, etc...not God. Do you honestly think that no culling ever took place during the development of those breeds? And it is still going on today. Breeders of racing greyhounds not only cull at birth, but also later on after each puppy is "tested" for how well it races. The greyhound rescues can't adopt out all the puppies produced that don't run, so all the puppies that didn't make the cut are euthanized. And the next time you go to the store, look to see just how many of those chickens and turkeys are labeled as roosters or gobblers instead of hens. I doubt you'll find any. Chicken ranchers sex each chick and keep only the females to raise to either become layers or food.

You have every right to believe that culling is wrong, but we also have the right to believe that it is not. Culling is different than killing for no reason.
 
Susan said:
There are quite a few posts in this thread that I haven't read yet, so if this is a bit out of context, I apologize. I just need to comment on one of Blutengel's statements.

Do we have the right to play God with animals, deciding who is to be born as well as who and when some are to die? According to the Bible, then yes we do. God gave man dominion over all the creatures on Earth. The Bible says that all creatures other than man do not have a soul so we do not have the same ethical standards that we must use when dealing with other men...ie "Thou shalt not kill, etc.

Do I think that man does not have to consider the "rights" of animals? No...but the religious base is there as a potential defense for culling.

Man has been playing God with animals since he was created. It was man that developed all the different breeds of dogs, cats, cattle, horses, sheep, pigs, etc...not God. Do you honestly think that no culling ever took place during the development of those breeds? And it is still going on today. Breeders of racing greyhounds not only cull at birth, but also later on after each puppy is "tested" for how well it races. The greyhound rescues can't adopt out all the puppies produced that don't run, so all the puppies that didn't make the cut are euthanized. And the next time you go to the store, look to see just how many of those chickens and turkeys are labeled as roosters or gobblers instead of hens. I doubt you'll find any. Chicken ranchers sex each chick and keep only the females to raise to either become layers or food.

You have every right to believe that culling is wrong, but we also have the right to believe that it is not. Culling is different than killing for no reason.
Click to expand...

I never said you do not have the right to have your opinion, I think you feel you are attacked personally too much.

I have no clue about what the Bible says about it, but for me the Bible is not a source of how to behave and ethics in any way. If we start using religious grounds to state that we have the right to do as we like with animals, what is next? I know very nasty people using religious grounds to cull people... :sidestep: And do not say that is different, I hate the Bible being abused as a source to turn right what is wrong.

I could say that Karma will turn bad on you when you kill animals for no use, but I won't because that is a believe, not a fact.
 
Ah, I just ripped through this whole thing when I should have been working, oh well...

Anyway, I've got lots of thoughts, but I hate being verbose (if you want to peg me I appreciate what Barbara is saying entirely), so I'll say what's relevant to the tail-end of the thread at this point:

Man does play God. But God, as we generally model him, cannot be played. It is the most serious job there ever was, and it entails doing what is right, ethically, above all other considerations. Unfortunately, ethics is a hairy topic, and we poor slobs, despite our fretting and strutting, are not close to our God-image as yet, and we bung things up mightily.

I personally am far more concerned about hearing what people do and how they feel when performing their tasks than in what they believe is justifiable, because their actions say something important about themselves as people, especially as people in the business of raising creatures. So I think these sorts of threads are great. Carry on!

-Sean
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top