Quote:
If they were non-feeders in the wild, they would just die.
|
If they were non-feeders in the wild, they'd be food for something else. Having non-feeding Corns isn't the wasteful exercise in the wild that we find it in captivity. Out in the wider world, non-feeders actually contribute to the survival of other species.
I read (years ago - can't quote a source, sorry) that in the wild, only 1% of Corn eggs hatch then go on to survive to adulthood - imagine how over-run Florida would be if every clutch of 20 eggs resulted in 20 adults!
In captivity, we manage to hatch 90+% of eggs because we can precisely control incubation conditions. It's statistically likely that we're hatching eggs that wouldn't even survive to produce hatchlings in the wild. It's possible that given captive incubation conditions, embryos survive to hatch and be non-feeders which wouldn't get that far in the wild.
Basically, evolution has built in a lot of "natural wastage" with Corns, so that the weaker or sickly ones help form the bottom of the food chain. Non-eaters are a natural extension of how Corns fit into their natural environment and they contribute to the overall health of the wildlife population. It's nothing to do with captivity in my view.