SnakeAround
Formerly Blutengel
We have/had a small population of Schrenki ratsnakes living over here in The Netherlands in a recreational area! They were scaring people so that's why they came in the news, not sure what happened to them further.
-
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.
Would it be possible...
- Thread starter Tula_Montage
- Start date
desertanimal
2003 UB313
Well, a single clutch wouldn't really have any impact on the wild population. That doesn't mean I think it should be done, though. Taking a single snake out of the wild won't either, but if everyone takes one, or even 5K people do, then it becomes a whole different story.
However, your experiment would tell you nothing about wild clutches, because your clutch wasn't wild. It would tell you something about a CB clutch bred from your particular CB animals incubated in a particular space at a particular time. Nothing more.
You cannot control for unknown effects of your clutch being CB because they are unknown. Now, you can ascertain what those effects might be if you do many experiments comparing CB clutches hatched in the wild to wild clutches hatched in the wild. Once you did, you might be able to glean understanding about wild hatching by using your CB clutches as a model. But even if you did all of these comparative experiments, you couldn't glean any information about hatching from your single proposed experiment, because it's only one clutch. You can't know that your results, whatever they were, weren't unique to that clutch, or to that particular spot, or to that particular year. In order to actually glean any useful information, you would need to repeat your experiment with many clutches from many different CB lines (otherwise your results might applicable only to the genetics of your own collection), in many different places. And now, you are back to the problems of introducing CB animals into the wild.
However, your experiment would tell you nothing about wild clutches, because your clutch wasn't wild. It would tell you something about a CB clutch bred from your particular CB animals incubated in a particular space at a particular time. Nothing more.
You cannot control for unknown effects of your clutch being CB because they are unknown. Now, you can ascertain what those effects might be if you do many experiments comparing CB clutches hatched in the wild to wild clutches hatched in the wild. Once you did, you might be able to glean understanding about wild hatching by using your CB clutches as a model. But even if you did all of these comparative experiments, you couldn't glean any information about hatching from your single proposed experiment, because it's only one clutch. You can't know that your results, whatever they were, weren't unique to that clutch, or to that particular spot, or to that particular year. In order to actually glean any useful information, you would need to repeat your experiment with many clutches from many different CB lines (otherwise your results might applicable only to the genetics of your own collection), in many different places. And now, you are back to the problems of introducing CB animals into the wild.
Drizzt80
Dakota Corns
From: http://nationalzoo.si.edu/ConservationAndScience/EndangeredSpecies/CapBreedPops/default.cfmrekn said:
Here's a quick google search, honestly I am short on time and was only able to peruse some of the links . . .
http://www.google.com/search?q=capt...s=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
All I am commenting on is that captive breeding programs are already introducing animals to wild populations . . . just because corn snakes aren't extinct or endangered shouldn't make a difference. A precedent has been set with the action of captive breeding and wild release.
D80
desertanimal
2003 UB313
Sure, Brent. People have been making changes to wild populations of animals for as long as people have been people. We compete with them for resources, we hunt them, we domesticate them, and now, sometimes, we breed them in captivity hoping for later re-introduction because we've done the first two in this list to such an extreme. But CB/re-intro programs are run by population biologists who are aware of potential problems and who have the resources to try to deal with those problems (like genotyping cheetahs to pair individuals so as to maximize genetic diversity of offspring). Those CB animals are bred specifically to
before they are released. OUR CB populations are produced by hobbyists, most of whom are completely unaware of the potential repercussions of introducing CB animals into wild populations (you and I both know that people who can't wrap their minds around Mendelian genetics probably don't have a good grasp of population genetics), and OUR CB populations are SPECIFICALLY bred to REDUCE genetic diversity, thereby increasing the frequency of rare alleles to get particular color morphs, more perfect versions of those color morphs, etc. This is why people occassionally outcross using wild snakes, because we all know that our breeding reduces genetic diversity. Though releasing CB animals, regardless, affect wild populations, the breeding processes and goals underlying the production of the two types of captive bred populations are exactly opposite, thereby producing two fundamentally different types of captive populations. One--a maximally genetically diverse population in an attempt to restore a decimated one to sustainable levels--is reasonable to release into the wild knowing full-well that you hope to effect a positive change (conservation-based captive breeding). One is not reasonable to release into the wild (becuase it may effect negative change as a result of its reduced genetic diversity), and is CERTAINLY not reasonable to release into the wild while simultaneously asserting that by doing so one will NOT effect a change in the wild population, which is patently untrue (and actually, impossible), but usually exactly what people who want to release CB cornsnakes assert.
Saying that conservationists do it so it's no big deal if we do is a little like saying that in Britain they drive on the left side of the road, so the precedent has already been established and therefore we can, too. In Britain, the larger context dictates that driving on the left is almost always the best thing to do, but here the larger context dictates that is rarely the best thing to do.
before they are released. OUR CB populations are produced by hobbyists, most of whom are completely unaware of the potential repercussions of introducing CB animals into wild populations (you and I both know that people who can't wrap their minds around Mendelian genetics probably don't have a good grasp of population genetics), and OUR CB populations are SPECIFICALLY bred to REDUCE genetic diversity, thereby increasing the frequency of rare alleles to get particular color morphs, more perfect versions of those color morphs, etc. This is why people occassionally outcross using wild snakes, because we all know that our breeding reduces genetic diversity. Though releasing CB animals, regardless, affect wild populations, the breeding processes and goals underlying the production of the two types of captive bred populations are exactly opposite, thereby producing two fundamentally different types of captive populations. One--a maximally genetically diverse population in an attempt to restore a decimated one to sustainable levels--is reasonable to release into the wild knowing full-well that you hope to effect a positive change (conservation-based captive breeding). One is not reasonable to release into the wild (becuase it may effect negative change as a result of its reduced genetic diversity), and is CERTAINLY not reasonable to release into the wild while simultaneously asserting that by doing so one will NOT effect a change in the wild population, which is patently untrue (and actually, impossible), but usually exactly what people who want to release CB cornsnakes assert.
Saying that conservationists do it so it's no big deal if we do is a little like saying that in Britain they drive on the left side of the road, so the precedent has already been established and therefore we can, too. In Britain, the larger context dictates that driving on the left is almost always the best thing to do, but here the larger context dictates that is rarely the best thing to do.