The Domestication of Reptiles and it's Effect on the Reptile Hobby?

[Carinata]

In the last few years, I have noticed a surprising trend in the reptile hobby. When I started keeping snakes 7 years ago I wanted to have a pet that was different and at the same time something I had a passion for. I have noticed people trying to “domesticate” the reptile hobby, and I feel like this is not good for the hobby at all. People are selectively breeding and culling animals for temperament, or mental traits that are not visual, but emotional. Is this a good thing for the hobby? Do we want to be like the dog or cat hobby? Or the small animal hobby? Do we want our Reticulated Pythons or our Green Tree Pythons to be puppy dog tame? We already play with the physical traits of the animals and we seem to be having a great amount of success with that but once we toy with the emotional and mental setting of the animal I think we cross the line. These animals have specific needs, and if we are making the animals more tame which makes them more desirable but at the same time this allows for people to get potentially dangerous animals thinking they are safe and they overlook the requirements of the animals because it’s nice. If I was to breed King Ratsnakes to behave like Cornsnakes, people would buy them because they are nice, and unique, but at the same time they have very specific needs that may be overlooked. Reptiles have very specific needs and if they are domesticated to be like cat or a dog the other basic needs will be overlooked and they will be treated as so. They may seem more desirable but are they really? Will it benefit the reptile hobby ? What do you think?

 

[RobbiesCornField]

AYS? How is the potential domestication something that's going to make people overlook their basic needs? Domestication has the potential to greatly benefit the hobby. Already, when people see "tame" snakes, some of their fears are alleviated, and they're more open to listening to people talk about them, rather than saying "ew, slimy and bitey!". I, for one, would love to have a puppy dog tame GTP or retic. I also don't really believe we're "toying" with the mental state of the animal. We're selecting desirable traits to pass on to future generations.

 

[Carinata]

Sure a lot of people will benefit, but when that kid or adult walks into a petstore and handles that "tame" GTP, takes it home because it seems so nice and puts it on aspen, with an unregulated undertank heater, and no branches. They animal suffers. Every show I work and we are selling GTPs people say "I like them but I hear they are mean so I don't want one but cornsnakes are nice". Most of them are first time keepers.

 

[RobbiesCornField]

Honestly, how many pet stores sell GTPs? I can only think of one in my area, and they won't sell to anyone without going over the proper needs for the animal.

 

[Carinata]

Honestly, how many pet stores sell GTPs? I can only think of one in my area, and they won't sell to anyone without going over the proper needs for the animal.

You would be surprised. I know quite a few petshops that come to shows and buy GTPs from us!

 

[Tavia]

For my .02, there is a bit of necessary handling to be done with any captive snake, to care for it's needs. I'd think that breeding for ones that don't freak and go into defensive or attack mode every time they need their cage cleaned, fed, or help with a stuck shed, can only be better for that snake's mental and physical health. Stress on these animals isn't good and the less this would stress them, has got to be better for them.

 

[Carinata]

For my .02, there is a bit of necessary handling to be done with any captive snake, to care for it's needs. I'd think that breeding for ones that don't freak and go into defensive or attack mode every time they need their cage cleaned, fed, or help with a stuck shed, can only be better for that snake's mental and physical health. Stress on these animals isn't good and the less this would stress them, has got to be better for them.

Sure, its great for snakes to to react in a natural way! Some snakes BY NATURE are aggressive. We are playing god already with color and pattern morphs but once we delve into the mental status of the animal we have gone too far. If we are playing with how the animal acts and how they naturally behave we are going to far. Handling a snake to get it used to humans is great and I think that assimilation is great but breeding snakes solely because they are nice I don't think is very good for the species.

 

[Tavia]

Sure, its great for snakes to to react in a natural way! Some snakes BY NATURE are aggressive. We are playing god already with color and pattern morphs but once we delve into the mental status of the animal we have gone too far. If we are playing with how the animal acts and how they naturally behave we are going to far. Handling a snake to get it used to humans is great and I think that assimilation is great but breeding snakes solely because they are nice I don't think is very good for the species.

Why not? I'd agree, if you were planning on releasing them back into the wild, it would be bad to mess with their instincts and thereby reduce their chances of living even further. But since you aren't breeding most snakes with the intention to release them, and instead plan on keeping these lines in captivity indefinitely, keeping the individual snakes that are maladjusted to captivity, and deliberately perpetuating the things that make them maladjusted to captivity by breeding, is, IMHO, cruel.

 

[Carinata]

Basically, we have taken these animals from the wild bred them, then taken the rejects from the wild (Albinos, anerys etc) and bred them. Now we have captive mutated animals, but if we continue to breed for mental status or behavior, we are playing god. I breed for morphs, you bet I do, but the demeanor of the animal doesn't have anything to do with it. If we breed for these behavioral traits how do we know the animal is not miserable? How do we know that the animal is not miserable the way it feels? Sure one could argue the same with morphs, but mental status takes individuality away from the snakes. I love my nasty, pissy, ass of a VBB. He is designed to be high strung and nasty, so I accommodate and give him the space he needs and only handle him when he approaches the front of his bin himself. Why breed animals to be nice when the animal is naturally mean. Why should we further these animals for our own personal needs and completely throw their well-being to the back burner? We already changed their skin color and pattern, why do we have to keep pushing the limits? Until we break them?

 

[Irish Eyes (Mrs.Z)]

I can only see domestication as a good thing, in this case. Nice, tame animals relieve the pressure on wild populations because owning an animal that has been somewhat domesticated is less of a challenge than catching and attempting to care for a wild animal who would be terribly stressed in captivity, and probably die. If we're going to keep these animals as pets, why not make the lives of captive snakes as stress-free as possible through domestication? Since people WILL make pets of other animals, I think it's a good thing to make that experience as pleasant as possible for both humans and their pets.

 

[lilwing89]

I wanted to have a pet that was different and at the same time something I had a passion for. I have noticed people trying to “domesticate” the reptile hobby, and I feel like this is not good for the hobby at all.

So, basically, you think that having domesticated pets isn't 'cool' because cats and dogs are popular and you are a nonconformist? What am I missing here?

People are selectively breeding and culling animals for temperament, or mental traits that are not visual, but emotional.

What is the basis of your argument? You're making a claim without proof. I personally do not think that you can breed 'domestication' traits. BTW, domestication is what happens any time you take something from the wild and hold it captive. The fact of the matter is that most herps (particularly 'mutated' kinds) would not survive in the wild if they were ever released... therefore, they have become domesticated; dependent on the owner for survival.

On the other hand, of course people are going to choose snakes with reasonable temperaments. The only people who enjoy getting bitten are masochists! Now, some people will go beyond the boundary when they feel that having a particular snake is worth the difficult temperament.

 

[Carinata]

The basis for my argument is the fact that domestication to the point where an animal is no longer a representation of the species behaviorally is wrong. Domestication to a certain extent is great but once we are trying to alter the way an animal behaves is not moral. I own Asian Ratsnakes, some of the nastiest snakes out there. I don’t enjoy getting bit, but I accept it because it is the species. My argument is that people will take advantage of the fact that the animal is nice and more people will impulse buy and more people will buy the cute little animal and not pay any attention to the animals needs. It happens all the time, why do you think there are so many ball pythons and cornsnakes in shelters? I am a non-conformist but I don’t keep reptiles because of that reason. I keep reptiles because I love reptiles and I enjoy keeping and breeding them. Aggression is a personal trait, as is nervousness, excitement, shyness, and any other way a certain species of snake acts. Why try to change that and customize it? Why should we have a say in how the animals behave and function? We already change physical characteristics but now we are delving into the behavioral sanctum and we are changing the animals all together and not making them a species but a designer animal that celebrities can wear on their wrists. I simply think we are trying to play go d too much and not enjoying the species for the species.

 

[Karoni]

These animals have specific needs, and if we are making the animals more tame which makes them more desirable but at the same time this allows for people to get potentially dangerous animals thinking they are safe and they overlook the requirements of the animals because it’s nice. If I was to breed King Ratsnakes to behave like Cornsnakes, people would buy them because they are nice, and unique, but at the same time they have very specific needs that may be overlooked. Reptiles have very specific needs and if they are domesticated to be like cat or a dog the other basic needs will be overlooked and they will be treated as so.

My argument is that people will take advantage of the fact that the animal is nice and more people will impulse buy and more people will buy the cute little animal and not pay any attention to the animals needs. It happens all the time, why do you think there are so many ball pythons and cornsnakes in shelters?

Carinata, if I understand one of your arguments correctly, you are saying that people are more likely to neglect "nice" animals than they are "mean" ones. I don't see any evidence for this argument. People who are very devoted pet owners very typically own dogs that are very "nice" to them. Most people do not want an animal who hates being around them. It seems to me that people are more likely to be drawn to and feel affection for "nice" animals than "mean" ones. I know I do. I would be much more likely to buy a leopard gecko than a monitor. I would be much more likely to feel affection for my "sweet" little leopard gecko than that nasty monitor. I would be happy to take care of her and less likely to continue to feel motivated to take care of him. See my point?

Also, it doesn't make sense to me that because an animal is nasty I'm going to remember it has specific needs.

 

[Tavia]

Carinata, if I understand one of your arguments correctly, you are saying that people are more likely to neglect "nice" animals than they are "mean" ones. I don't see any evidence for this argument. People who are very devoted pet owners very typically own dogs that are very "nice" to them. Most people do not want an animal who hates being around them. It seems to me that people are more likely to be drawn to and feel affection for "nice" animals than "mean" ones. I know I do. I would be much more likely to buy a leopard gecko than a monitor. I would be much more likely to feel affection for my "sweet" little leopard gecko than that nasty monitor. I would be happy to take care of her and less likely to continue to feel motivated to take care of him. See my point?

Also, it doesn't make sense to me that because an animal is nasty I'm going to remember it has specific needs.

I have to agree with this, I have a male Puget Sound garter that has a nasty attitude, that is mostly because he is afraid of people. But because he is such a PITA, I often have to make myself feed him and clean his cage. This is partly selfish, I will admit, but in part I also feel bad for the stress I cause him. While some people are more willing and able to put up with a snake that is difficult, the majority aren't and would actually be more likely to get rid of a pet like that. In fact, my garter will be getting a new home on Sat.

 

[Carinata]

My point is that when people see animals like a GTP they associate the aggression with the animal. Most nervous snakes have difficult requirements. Asian Rats, GTPs, Drymarchon, and an arway of other snakes. Unfortunatly many people overlook the care of the animal and focus on the temperment. Why do you think those cute baby burms sell so well and end up in so many shelters? But Af. Rocks are less kept? When we play god we end up making it more difficult on our selves in the long run. I want to sef the hobby grow but we can't keep playing god.

 

[Karoni]

Okay. I think I get what you are saying. See if I'm right. You're saying that the very fact that some snakes are nervous means they have special needs. And that if they were nice instead of nervous, people would be more likely to get them in spite of their special needs. But if they stay nervous, most casual pet owners wouldn't be interested and only the serious hobbyists would get them as pets.

What I think is that it's really all about the pet owner and not the pet. I'm sure there are plenty of people that handle their spotted salamanders on a regular basis and don't know or care about their skin. Maybe they handle their day geckos and the skin sloughs off. It seems to me that people who care about their pets, nice or nasty, would do the required research before obtaining a pet so that they can make sure they take care of it properly. Other people are going to get whatever takes their fancy without giving much thought. Certainly, there are types of people who are drawn to "nasty" animals just because they like seeing aggressive animals. I don't know that they necessarily take better care of them because they are flighty.

 

[Hypancistrus]

Do we want our Reticulated Pythons or our Green Tree Pythons to be puppy dog tame?

I do want my burmese python to be puppy dog tame. I don't want him to grow up to be a danger to myself or my family. If he is super aggressive and I consider him to be a danger to myself or my family, I will euthanize him. I cannot afford to pass him along to others, on the off chance that he might hurt them or their family. I won't pass my problem on to others.

I think it can't hurt to breed for tameness and docility in ANY animal-- but when you're talking a large, potentially dangerous animal-- then yes, it's definitely a good thing and will better the hobby.

 

[Tavia]

My point is that when people see animals like a GTP they associate the aggression with the animal. Most nervous snakes have difficult requirements. Asian Rats, GTPs, Drymarchon, and an arway of other snakes. Unfortunatly many people overlook the care of the animal and focus on the temperment. Why do you think those cute baby burms sell so well and end up in so many shelters? But Af. Rocks are less kept? When we play god we end up making it more difficult on our selves in the long run. I want to sef the hobby grow but we can't keep playing god.

I guess I can sorta see part of the point you are making. However, there is no single gene or anything that has been found yet, anyway, to control how an animal behaves. Without that, there is no way for someone to start churning out puppy dog tame snakes of those species right away anyway.
By breeding the calmer, gentler ones together, they will probably level out in time and the longer those lines of those particular snakes have been in captivity, the more their behavior will change, that is what happens to a species when the instincts it has developed for one environment are no longer applicable to it's new environment, it will change. And changes to behavior will happen in captive snakes, no matter the way they are bred. This is talking about 500, 1,000 or more years of captivity, of course. But once you take an animal out of it's natural habitat and breed it in captivity for a few generations, it is no longer a representation of the wild species behaviorally anyway.

 

[sciencechick]

Sure a lot of people will benefit, but when that kid or adult walks into a petstore and handles that "tame" GTP, takes it home because it seems so nice and puts it on aspen, with an unregulated undertank heater, and no branches. They animal suffers.

The problem then would be that they didn't research. They can take on an animal they can't care for just as easily if they think the animal looks nice, and I don't think anyone would advocate breeding for ugliness to prevent people from wanting them.

I can get the draw of working with a challenging animal, but I just can't wrap my head around the idea that it is bad to breed for temperament. Its fine if you want to deal with some more challenging species, but why is it wrong for the hobby as a whole? Do you not want it expanding because people are better able and more willing to care for snakes that behave better?

 

[bitsy]

The basis for my argument is the fact that domestication to the point where an animal is no longer a representation of the species behaviorally is wrong. Domestication to a certain extent is great but once we are trying to alter the way an animal behaves is not moral.

Having studied the domestication of animals for farming, by your logic, farming animals is morally wrong. For example, cattle are actually evolved for low scrub grazing on woody shrubs. We force them to eat grass and hay because that promotes faster growth and greater yields of meat and milk. That's why they emit so much gas. We've altered their fundamental behaviour.

Unless you're a vegetarian with a serious thing for animal rights, your logic is flawed - you can't apply it just to snakes. You have to apply it to all other animals that humans have already domesticated and altered away from their wild origins and I don't think you can. You can't really campaign against selective breeding in snakes unless you take a stance against thousands of years of genetic engineering. Well, of course you can, but that wouldn't be logical.

but when that kid or adult walks into a petstore and handles that "tame" GTP, takes it home because it seems so nice and puts it on aspen, with an unregulated undertank heater, and no branches. They animal suffers.

Yes, you get irresponsible snake owners in the same way that you get irresponsible cat, dog, tortoise, parakeet, cow and elephant owners. This in no way supports your argument, it's just a random unrelated observation that has nothing to do with your selective breeding theory.