Culling 'side product' hatchlings

[tyflier]

So if want to protect the pure market in all sincerity you should not breed any hybrids I think, that for me is called being consequent. But I do see culling your own pure looking ones, is a way of finding a balance in doing what you like and living up to your ethics (protecting the market). I would never bring live to the world and then kill it to execute that balance.

I was a bit fed up with the Q about F2 not being answered so I might have gone a bit too far in suggesting you could not, I apologize for that.

No...if I want to protect the market and the bloodlines, I can ONLY ensure that every snake I sell is visually identifiable as either pure corn, pure king, or obviously hybrid.

I have no control over F2. YOU have no control over F2. NOBODY has any control over the F2 breedings of snakes they sell to another person, period. By your reasoning, the ONLY way to "protect the bloodlines" is to never sell a snake or never breed captive offspring. Once you breed in captivity for sale, you are "potentially" polluting the bloodlines...by YOUR reasoning. I don't hold myself responsible for someone else's actions, so that doesn't apply by my reasoning.

I can sell a 100% pure cornsnake to someone that turns around and makes a hybrid and sells pure-looking offspring on the market as pures. Am I at fault? Absolutely not. And I would be no MORE at fault if I sell a hybrid that obviously LOOKS like a hybrid, and someone turned around and sold pure-looking offspring from it's clutch.

I cannot be held responsible nor accountable for the actions of another person. I can only do everything in MY POWER to ensure that every snake I SELL is of the highest quality, and not "visually confusing".

Nobody answered you F2 question because, quite frankly, it is not impactive to the discussion. F2 from ANY snake can be used in unscrupulous dealings, whether pure or not. So why only question it as regards the unpure?

 

[tyflier]

As a means of clarifying, I am, not using the term "F2" as I should be suing it. I am using the term "F2" to qualify any breedings that are from MY stock, but NOT bred by me.

In other words...If I sell a pure corn, and someone else breeds it, I consider that pairing F2, because it is second generation to MY breedings. But the pairing would be F1 to the breeder performing the cross.

Not really important, just wanted to clarify my use of the phrase...

 

[SnakeAround]

No...if I want to protect the market and the bloodlines, I can ONLY ensure that every snake I sell is visually identifiable as either pure corn, pure king, or obviously hybrid.

I have no control over F2. YOU have no control over F2. NOBODY has any control over the F2 breedings of snakes they sell to another person, period. By your reasoning, the ONLY way to "protect the bloodlines" is to never sell a snake or never breed captive offspring. Once you breed in captivity for sale, you are "potentially" polluting the bloodlines...by YOUR reasoning. I don't hold myself responsible for someone else's actions, so that doesn't apply by my reasoning.

I can sell a 100% pure cornsnake to someone that turns around and makes a hybrid and sells pure-looking offspring on the market as pures. Am I at fault? Absolutely not. And I would be no MORE at fault if I sell a hybrid that obviously LOOKS like a hybrid, and someone turned around and sold pure-looking offspring from it's clutch.

I cannot be held responsible nor accountable for the actions of another person. I can only do everything in MY POWER to ensure that every snake I SELL is of the highest quality, and not "visually confusing".

Nobody answered you F2 question because, quite frankly, it is not impactive to the discussion. F2 from ANY snake can be used in unscrupulous dealings, whether pure or not. So why only question it as regards the unpure?

That surely is an interesting new view But is also exactly why I would not draw a line what to sell and what to kill by blood lines. Any snake can be used for polluting the market, so that is why I treat any snake the same; pure, hybrid looking pure or odd looking hybrid. They are all sold with the right label, that is the only thing I can do indeed. But I do not have to kill life for it. If you look at this like a left to right line ranging from my opinion (do not kill hybrids because of what they look like) to the complete opposite of killing any hybrid ending up in your hands (which some people live up to), you are just a bit right of me.

 

[SnakeAround]

That surely is an interesting new view But is also exactly why I would not draw a line what to sell and what to kill by blood lines. Any snake can be used for polluting the market, so that is why I treat any snake the same; pure, hybrid looking pure or odd looking hybrid. They are all sold with the right label, that is the only thing I can do indeed. But I do not have to kill life for it. If you look at this like a left to right line ranging from my opinion (do not kill ANY SNAKE because of what they look like) to the complete opposite of killing any hybrid ending up in your hands (which some people live up to), you are just a bit right of me.

 

[tyflier]

Well, I did point out a long time ago that the fact is...we are much closer in AGREEMENT that we are seperated by difference.

The MAIN difference I see in our opinions is that I simply do not care nor do I judge the actions of other breeders as regards culling, so long as the offspring NEVER SUFFER. You simply feel that there *should* be universal lines drawn, where I simply feel that each person MUST draw those lines for themselves...

 

[SnakeAround]

Of course people must draw lines for themselves, and no line is THE right line.... where did I say universal lines should be drawn or my line is the right line? I was only 'defending' where I drew it, and all others were they drew it, by using 'personal logic'. Now that is debating IMO. And since ethics is about what is 'wrong or right' in yout eyes, if someone does something that is on the other side of your personal line, it is in the category of 'bad things' to do. I feel sorry if people think that is attacking or getting personal, cause that has never been my intention.

And I do understand and know people get tired of me going on sometimes in discussions, but I so much like it to thoroughly split discussions into separate details to see with which people agree or disagree

 

[tyflier]

Well, FWIW...I never said you were "attacking" anyone. But, IMO, challenging one's ideals and debating one's opinions are 2 different things. I have no problem nor issue with the reasonable and respectful exchange of opinions, similar or different from my own. However, I do take issue when it becomes a matter of "explaining myself" instead of exchanging ideas. I feel that over the last 3-4 pages of this topic(or more), it had turned AWAY from reasonable debate, and became a challenge for one side to find fault with the other side. Once that happens, all reasonable debate becomes pointless, and respect gets thrown to the wind, whetehr intentionally or not.

The simple act of challenging the ideals or intentions behind a person's opinions shows a lack of respect for that person's opinions. It becomes a matter of "I don't agree with you, so you must PROVE that you are right. Until you do, I will consider you wrong and myself right." and that is not a good place for a debate on opnions to be, because there are no truly right or wrong answers.

There is a difference between trying to understand one's opinions, and trying to "disprove" one's opinions, and I think the topic became more a matter of proving one side wrong, instead of understanding...

just my $.02...

Either way, I still feel that MOST of the topic is going to be extremely useful for anyone thinking about getting into the breeding side of things. It has certainly exposed alot of potential problems and "what if" scenarios that I am POSITIVE a lot of "new breeders" have not even remotely considered...myself included.

 

[SnakeAround]

We disagree on what debate is, I'll stop with debating the definition of debating with you then (is that mega debating? LOL)

:wavey: (now for real) :cheers:

 

[kathylove]

Kudos to Tyflier and Blutengel for bringing the discussion back on track when it seemed to be going downhill. I pretty much gave up on participating, since there seemed to be no more to say. But I am still following it.

 

[SnakeAround]

I'm hoping for some new blood to appear

 

[tyflier]

I'm hoping for some new blood to appear

LOL...I wouldn't hold my breath for that to happen. I think anyone that hasn't already spoken, has made a decision to stay out of it and just watch ...

 

[Tula_Montage]

Want some new blood? Ok I'll add my 2 pennies.

First of all I voted for reason 1. Why? Because an unhealthy, deformed, kinked defect of a snake is unsightly. Yes It may live, it may eat, hell it may even survive to become an adult, but I honestly wouldn't give that sort of snake the time nor money. Sure there may be someone out there with so much love to give and raise this poor defect, but I wouldn't want to put an animal through that. Would it be ethical to let it live for life's sake?

Secondly I cannot believe people are questioning culling snakes without the "right look". Thats almost like saying all ugly children shot be shot at birth. There is NO STANDARD in snake morphs. Unlike dogs and cats there are standards set by Kennel clubs of how that breed SHOULD be. We all know a bloodred is diffused and the best adults are considered nearly patternless deep red. However what about all those bloods that are fully patterned and brown in colouration? Are they defects? NO, because no standard has been set.

One thing about snake morphs (and the thing I love the most) is the variety in each morph. Consider this, is a brightly coloured sunglow BETTER than a broken patterend, white speckly common amel (vomitmel)? To some people maybe... but its still an amel. I can understand keeping the best looking offspring to linebreed or improve a particular trait or look. But I cannot understand culling apparently ugly hatchlings. Off topic a little yes, but the same goes to hybrids. I wouldn't cull a hybrid for looking too similar to its kingsnake mother, or corn snake father. Just the same as people don't cull babies because its too similar to its African American mother and Caucasian father.

I honestly believe it is unethical to act like god in producing life so easily, and taking it away with no consequences. These "surplus" hatchling are here because of OUR selfishness... For brighter morphs, for supplying petstores, for our own greed. Whatever the reason for these hatchlings to be produce, we do it and we have the responsibility to deal with it.

I 100% agree that sending hatchlings to petstores can be like sending them to the slaughterhouse... but at least they are given a chance. Not every snake that is wholesaled will die, some even end up in the hands of good people like Mr Mike who has purchased many a petstore corn, and even myself. My first two cornsnakes were from a petshop. A bad one at that. But I rectified that and now have two beautiful adult males, just an anery and a normal at that.

I am going to open a can of worms and say that it is utter snobbery to cull corn snakes for not being sellable or highend. Give them away... donate the surplus to class rooms or family's who are interested in reptiles yet would not take the plunge otherwise. Use them to educate others and maybe the common miserable overpriced petstore snake will become a thing of the past.
It may be a loss of money, but life is priceless... IMO.

 

[westexherps]

Ok, here goes. I tried to stay out of this discussion, what it really comes down to is what the breeder feels is the right decision.

I began breeding corns first because I love the animal. Not to make money, not to create the perfect corn or the perfect representation of a specific morph. I can't even imagine culling a snake that does not fit someone's standard. If it is healthy it is a waste of life to kill it. There is always someone that will want that snake. We cull when the quality of life is at risk, if the animal can not survive on its own or is in pain. I understand the argument that space is an issue, but in that situation I would never kill babies, I'd lower the price and not breed as many the next year. Lack of space is not an excuse to end life. I also don't think lack of qualities is either.

By breeding two animals I feel I am making an agreement or signing a contract, one that intales I will take care of the babies produced until they are sold to a new home. I know what I'm getting into putting the two adults to together, I also have a pretty good idea of what the babies will be, therefore if I don't think they are worth selling then I don't breed the two adults to begin with. To wait and see what comes out then start culling if its not up to my standards is cruel.

I understand people being worried that the bloodlines will be crossed, but my opinion on that is not to breed animals with questionable heritage if it is that important. I will continue to put my faith in the ACR that eventually we will be able to keep track of any potential breeders heritage. But definitely not just cull anything that looks un-corn snake like or doesn't have a perfect pattern.

As I stated in the beginning it really comes down to personal choice, but I for one could not live with myself if I culled for some of the reasons that people have stated before me. It is hard enough for me to do it when the baby itself is suffering.

 

[Eremita]

Ahh, a new day.

Hmm... so by YOUR reasoning, I should also not bother to recycle, since regardless of what I do, the rising human population is going to kill the planet anyway? No, in this case, I feel that I DO have an ethical reason to maintain pure blood lines, regardless of what "everyone else" does. And I don't feel guilty about it... mainly because I am not even a breeder (yet). But when I am, you can be sure that if I have to cull a hatchling for any reason, I will do it. Will I feel bad about it? Yes. But being a responsible breeder means making decisions that are at times quite difficult. I am not sure guilt is the word for it though.

Hm, I do recycle (voted against our lousy mayor because he stopped all recycling for a couple years), so either I am being inconsistent or the analogy is weak. Let's see. I think, generally in line with Kantian ethics, that I should behave the way I want others to behave. So, I recycle. I would not kill a creature that appeared to be in good shape. In regards to the business, I would not actually assume that the corn gene pool is going to become impossible to sort out due to Disreputable Breeders, I would not kill hybrid hatchlings for their looks, and I would advertise any for sale as such. This assumption of the horrors brought by D.B.s is a core point of the pro-kill group, but does not figure in my reasoning. I made use of that assumption because it is the one used by them/you in the kill-justification process. So, I go with Weak Analogy.

(...)
As for a historical precedent, yes, there used to be one, even in dog breeding. Dog breeders would not allow dogs to be bred that carried undesirable traits. For instance, a gun dog who was blind or deaf was of no use to people in the field, as it could not hear commands called to it, nor naviagate its way through unfamiliar territory. Such dogs would have been "culled" or euthanized as soon as the defect was discovered. The reason why this system WORKED in historical times is because much more depended on having good working bloodlines, and animals free of defect- whether your family ate this week would depend on your working dog. Whether your sheep made it to market would depend on your working dog. When your life depends on an animal, you want to be certain that that animal is "the best," and as perfect as possible.

In modern times, we have become "softer." We try to avoid bloodshed when possible, and when we cannot, we feel bad about it. I don't mean to say this as a bad thing, but we also tend to distance ourselves from the idea that eliminating animals of poor breeding from the gene pool is an inherent task in breeding- if you CHOOSE to breed, then you must accept the fact that along with wonderful new traits, you will also find bad traits, and it is your responsibility as an ethical breeder to ensure that those traits are not propagated, regardless of what traits they are. It is wonderful that we can now remove traits from the gene pool of dogs, cats and other larger animals without loss of life, but the reality of breeding smaller creatures- be they snakes or fish- is that the only way to ensure that those traits are not passed on is to euthanize the animal.

All right, well, I will accept that for the purposes of the argument. Let us contemplate, then, the ideal world of old where people weren't such softies and the dogs were dogs and the women...oh, nevermind.

But something happened, something horrible that has brought us to where we are today. The traits we thought we had properly culled weren't actually gone at all. They were there, waiting to pop up as soon as we stopped killing the pups. All my efforts as an Ethical Dog Breeder to produce only Dogs that are each and every one the Adonis of Dogdom have proved to be in vain. It turns out, then, that there was never anything I could do to actually ensure that there would only be ideal, healthy dogs in the future, no matter how many pups I killed.

It seems then that the only way to keep the specimens looking fine - barring involuntary and unsafe surgery on tiny little snakes - is to just kill, kill, kill. From that viewpoint, my perspective is a threat to you. My own intention not to kill a normal, healthy non-jungle-looking hybrid, no matter how I market it, is destroying all your hard killing efforts, and I am myself a Disreputable Breeder exactly because I do not kill them on sight.

(...)
But rest assured... as a responsible breeder, I will strive to produce only the highest quality hatchlings for my customers, and to me, that means animals of good health and ravenous appetite. If they fail to meet either of those two prerequisities, then I would most definitely not feel comfortable passing them on the my customers (who are most likely going to be local beginners). It's just good business... selling most people a struggling hatchling does not a repeat customer make. :shrugs:
By the way, did any of you catch the thread on that corn hybrid who was sold to the buyer as a pure corn snake, an amber? I've linked it below. The animal has already been bred several times, and the resulting offspring will now be hybrids. This is an animal that has been passed along probably several times, and who knows if the original owner intended that... but this case illustrates exactly why I would chose not to dabble in hybrids, and certainly if I did, I would make sure than any "normal looking" types did not leave my care, or were culled.

What is this [snake]?

Hm, speaking of threads, did you see this one? Perhaps after Reputable Breeder, there is something more you can aspire to, where even your poor non-feeders help improve your reputation. Some kind of Super Reputable Breeder. Interesting to consider from a business perspective. (Note that I am not recommending that breeders in general sell known non-feeders, but I did think it worthwhile to show that broad, pat decisions are not always the best ones.)

:cheers:
-Sean

 

[Ssthisto]

Ok, now for my opinion.

I voted for option D - 1 + 2 + 3.

I'm going to explain this by telling you a little story.

I own quite a few reptiles and quite a few species. I think it was 45 animals, ranging from corns and house snakes to royals, rainbow boas, geckos, legless lizards and the apple of my partner's eye, an Argentine Tegu.

I breed the leopard geckos. Every adult has a name, every one of them is a beloved pet, and I can sit there and tell you that Lesuth is a lardbucket who likes to cop an attitude but she's not so bad; that Kurhah is mad as a pair of trousers, but oh he has a gorgeous feminine head... I can tell you a little "oh, so and so did such and such" story for each and every one of them. I LOVE them - they're my "kids" and I feel towards them the same warm fuzzies I feel towards my cats and indeed the people I care about. Two of the girls I bred this year, Keid and Chara, are babies that hatched here in this house. I've known them since I carefully scooped their eggs up out of the laying boxes. They're no special morph - just a couple of hypo girls. Keid is the first baby we ever hatched out, and oh, she could scream her head off and HATED me to start with.

Just over a week ago - on the Thursday night before Good Friday - I noticed Keid seemed to be having trouble with the clutch of eggs in her. She'd laid two... but there was a third big one in there. I gave her extra calcium, I put her in an isolation tub, and planned to call the vet in the morning. Next morning, gave her more calcium, and thought she seemed to be doing much better - the egg had shifted a bit in her belly, and she was strong enough to spit half the mouthful of calcium slurry all over me (so she got more). I made a judgement call - that I'd go out and pick up some more liquid calcium and some slurry-able kitten chow - that sort of stuff - and then phone the vet just to have her checked on.

When I got home, Keid - my first hatched baby and an animal I loved - had died. I'm kicking myself for breeding her even though she appeared healthy at the beginning of the year. It made me cry when I discovered that her last two eggs had moulded, because they represented a piece of her. I have one egg in the incubator from her, and I just hope it hatches out as a female so I can keep it.

And thinking about it last night... if there had been some magical way to 'trade' the death - for one of my other animals (completely healthy and fit, NAMED pets who I know better than I know my neighbours) to die in order for THAT gecko to live... I can point my finger at a dozen that I wouldn't have any hesitation to have traded for her life. I can choose another ten that I'd have to think about for a while, based on them being either investment animals or slightly more emotionally valuable to me.

Out of forty-five reptiles I own, I think there's only ten or twelve that I would not have sacrificed to save her, and that's because I love those animals as much as I loved her.

Conversely... if I plan to produce, say, forty leopard gecko hatchlings this year, and breed my girls accordingly - and then I wind up with eighty because everyone decides to give me eight clutches instead of four... yes, I DO have a "triage" value system. In this example, I have resources to produce, feed and keep forty hatchlings. I do not have resources enough to produce, feed and keep eighty hatchlings healthy. I would rather remove the surplus hatchlings before they drain my resources than risk the lives of all the hatchlings.

This year, we have made arrangements with a shop that will buy any "normal" morph leopard geckos from us straight out of the egg, no guarantee of feeding or health - for a pittance, in store credit, but at least they're not being culled and fed to the tegu.

This frees up my resources to go towards the babies who are going to 'pay their own way' in my collection - the ones I can sell to individuals and at least pay for the food they consume while they're with me, and hopefully for the food their parents consumed to make them. The BABIES are livestock, not pets. If I overproduce and don't have an outlet, then I do not have an intrinsic problem with taking the less profitable offspring and humanely euthanising them - it's better than the entire year's set of babies failing to thrive because I tried to stretch myself too far - and I'm sure I can find something that will eat baby geckos so that the nutrition they represent is not wasted.

Only the adults are pets, not livestock.

Sometimes babies unintentionally make the transition between livestock and pet. We have two little girls - last year's babies - who were not originally going to stay. Wednesday had a home planned, but it fell through. I sorted out another home for her. That one fell through too. Now, because I suspect she's a Keid baby (at least, it's as likely as not and at least I can pretend she is) ... she has a home here for life. Never mind I'd gotten attached to her anyhow. The other little girl, Maybe, she stayed because I spent so much time and energy trying to get her to thrive - so much so that she, along with the other eleven or so babies that didn't make it, have shaped my non-feeder policy (which is, in short, if it won't feed within a reasonable time frame, it will go. I will NOT let another hatchling suffer by my waiting too long to euthanise). She never stopped trying to bite me, so we thought "maybe she'll live." She has.

Same goes for my mice. I have a couple of adult females I love to bits - they're friendly, they're nice, and they produce nice, friendly females. Those two females are pets. However... their babies are there to be fed to snakes. That's exactly what I produce them for. The babies are livestock.

My corns? The ones I've got now are pets. The ones I breed will be livestock unless they're my own personal keepers (at which point they become pets). Babies that don't thrive won't be forced to suffer and starve. And if I plan for forty-five hatchlings and wind up with ninety... the babies that can't pay for the cost of feeding them will not stay either. Either they'll be sold straight out of the egg to a shop willing to take them on or they'll be euthanised and used to pay for the cost of feeding someone else.

For me... death is not evil, it is not a punishment to be feared. Euthanising one animal so that another animal can live - regardless of WHY you chose that one animal to die (because it's the wrong colour, because it's unhealthy, because it looks too much like this or that) - is not intrinsically wrong as far as I am concerned.

The only wrong, to me, is when a death is unnecessarily painful or stressful to the animal - or the death is wasted.

 

[SnakeAround]

Ssthisto, good story! I do see your way of thinking, and agree that if resources are not available or there is a change other animals will have a lesser life when keeping 'overproduced' animals, it is ok to euthanize them as a last resort. At least your intention when breeding your animals was not to overproduce and kill them...

 

[JoannaD]

Ethically speaking it is not the intent which is important but the outcome. In many of the posts above you are discussing culling healthy hatchlings. It makes no difference why they were culled or were they "put to use". They end up dead.

To give you a human example; from an ethics point of view there is no difference if a person dies because a ventilator was turned off or if the person was never put on the ventilator but allowed to die. In both cases the person is ill and dies. People have much more difficulty stopping something because they think they are actively killing someone. Somehow if we do not start something it makes people feel less guilty. The end result is the same and from an ethics standpoint there is no difference.

Therefore if you think it is ok to cull animals because resources are slim then it is ok to cull them if they do not look right or don't fit into your plans. The end result is the same. Healthy hatchlings have been culled.

Joanna

 

[diamondlil]

Ethically speaking it is not the intent which is important but the outcome. In many of the posts above you are discussing culling healthy hatchlings. It makes no difference why they were culled or were they "put to use". They end up dead.

To give you a human example; from an ethics point of view there is no difference if a person dies because a ventilator was turned off or if the person was never put on the ventilator but allowed to die. In both cases the person is ill and dies. People have much more difficulty stopping something because they think they are actively killing someone. Somehow if we do not start something it makes people feel less guilty. The end result is the same and from an ethics standpoint there is no difference.

Therefore if you think it is ok to cull animals because resources are slim then it is ok to cull them if they do not look right or don't fit into your plans. The end result is the same. Healthy hatchlings have been culled.

Joanna

I have to agree totally with this post. Culling hatchlings that are deformed or not thriving despite good husbandry is not the same as culling healthy hatchlings because they are surplus.
Having said that, I still don't think it's right to try to make other keepers feel bad about their decisions.

 

[SnakeAround]

Ethics is about what you think is right or wrong, and I think one can say an intention is wrong or right....

In your case any reason to kill a person is the same ethically seen?

 

[diamondlil]

Ethics is about what you think is right or wrong, and I think one can say an intention is wrong or right....

In your case any reason to kill a person is the same ethically seen?

In my case, I'm involved in life and death decisions at work, where it may be seen as more compassionate to let someone die than to actively prolong their life or put them through CPR if their heart stops. So effectively it is deciding to kill them if treatment or life support is withdrawn.
The only justification is that to do otherwise would be unacceptably cruel. A whole convoluted legal process means that each case is dealt with individually. It's never taken lightly, and is one of the hardest parts of my job