Are reptile color mutations detrimental to the hobby?

[Dessicaria]

Interesting question ... and assuming there aren't genetically-linked health issues, I would say that color and pattern morphs come down to individual preference. After the initial reaction of "Oooh, neat!" wore off, I found that I almost always prefer the wild-type colors because they're usually more intense (I've never understood the appeal of "hypo," for instance, which just looks washed-out to me) - but there are some albinos that I really REALLY like. Tricolor milks, Burms, and retics (especially the purples), just to name a few off the top of my head. On the other hand, I remember years ago hearing about an albino green anaconda (these being my very favorite nonvenomous snake), and I remember thinking how cool that must be - but when I finally saw the picture, I was disappointed. The wild-type is much more attractive.

But I think anything that brings people to the hobby is a good thing, overall. It brings in people who might otherwise not have considered a pet reptile. My experience with albino Burms has been that people react to them much more favorably than they do to the wild-type color, because they just don't look "real," they don't look quite like something a reptile-phobe might expect to see - and so they give a second look, and they come closer, and they ask if they can touch, etc. And that makes for a positive experience with a reptile which has ripple effects for everyone involved.

Now if there are known health-issues linked to certain colors and patterns, responsible breeders should be working to eliminate those, or just not breed that morph, no matter how cool it is. Sadly there will always be those to whom a quick buck means more than the animal's wellfare, and that's true among the breeders of every species - but I like to think that *most* reptile people are into it because of a passion for the animals. It's worth trying to weed out the bad breeders as well as the bad genes, by sharing information and supporting those who are doing a good job.

 

[xchondrox]

I bet that you could buy two normal appearing cornsnakes one from one person and one from another, raise them, breed them, and end up with a cornsnake morph, lol. Will be that way with ball pythons at some point in time. I think its good for the hobby, its not likely that we are going to repopulate FL or Africa with these CB oddities.

 

[dtknow]

I used to be of the "purist" mindset, and for some species I still am. The main argument against this is we have only a small glimpse into the natural variation of our animals. Take jungle carpet pythons (Morelia spilota cheynei) for example. In captivity, our "pure" jungle carpets don't look much like what you see in the field. They are more colorful, bigger, and most likely originate from only a small sample of the wild population. Also, snakes like that which have been in the hobby for years with very little influx of wild genes (Australia has been closed off for decades now) may not have had the stringent collectors being sure that the subspecies remained separate. In this case the hobby JCP doesn't match the wild JCP. So is line breeding remaining pure? I think our various breeds of domestic dogs answer that one for us.

Another example is the acanthurus monitors. There are still some out there that will stand behind the thoughts that there are 2 species in the hobby. The red ackie (Varanus acanthurus acanthurus) and the yellow ackie (Varanus acanthurus brachyurus). Though if you try to key them out, they won't fit the descriptions in the literature. What's worse is that most that research monitors will agree that Varanus acanthurus actually represents a species complex made up of multiple similar looking species. So a "pure" red ackie most likely represents a line bred lizard that we have selected for various traits.

My point is that our concept of "pure" in the hobby doesn't always fit what we see in the wild. We have a small subset and early breeding attempts may have made it so that the lines are not as specific as we would like to think.

I don't think morphs are bad for the hobby in all cases. Take reticulated pythons for example. Most people 20 years ago had burms if they had a giant snake. Retics were known for being "nasty" so most shied away from them. Once more people started keeping them, it was learned that they are not bad snakes. The catalyst for people keeping them was the morph craze. Once the morphs started popping up more people gained interest and it is now a common snake for those that like the giants (for good or bad depending on your position on giant snakes). The morphs have also spurred the selection for a smaller size with the dwarf variants. The goal is all the fun of a retic in a smaller size. The morphs have helped this snake in my opinion.

For my collection it comes down to the species in question. Some species we keep in order to preserve "pure" bloodlines for a locality or subspecies. Others we have morphs in order to select for a better pet. I don't mind morphs provided the natural bloodlines are still being preserved by a number of breeders, or if the natural population is in good standing. If an animal is rare I think it is better to focus on preserving the natural diversity instead of popping out mutants.

Good points above. Some people do put a lot of work into maintaining pure bloodlines(a few Australian bluetongue skink breeders, for example) looking somewhat close to wildtype. But a lot of the difference is due to selective breeding. A dull small, JCP is simply not going to sell so their is selection for more colorful individuals even if they don't resemble those in the wild. In truth, our animals are really not going to be used for reintroduction efforts so this does not bother me too much. My main iff is that the morphmarket gets people looking at the animals like commodities or trinkets, kind of like a cell phone with the gimmicks, a funky goldfish, or an exotic car. The respect and mental relation to the wild animal is lost.

I am kind of worried about the retics honestly. Who knows how many throwaway snakes we are going to end up with. Already, morphs of them are quite cheap and who knows how many snakes had to get culled/found homes for to produce the cutting edge morphs we see. Along with the cheap WC coming in I see a lot of giant snakes being passed back and forth trying to find a permanent home in the near future. If i were to ever get into retics, btw, I'd want a pure dwarf or superdwarf locale.(nastiness is ok, huge is not)

 

[Dessicaria]

I'm worried about the glut of large constrictors myself. In particular I love Burmese pythons and green anacondas (have not yet worked with retics) ... the former being much more likely to end up as unwanted cast-offs because they breed so readily and are so cute as babies that they're often purchased without a full understanding of what the adult animal will be like.

What's really needed is a shelter/rescue where these animals can go, and be re-homed if possible, or cared for and kept for the rest of their lives, if necessary. As I keep moving toward my ultimate goals, I'll be looking to start something like that once I have the space and resources. There are some wonderful sanctuaries for mammals (Best Friends comes to mind, as well as some great farm sanctuaries), and I'd like to see something along the same lines for reptiles.

 

[GiantVinegaroon]

to everyone who's says they're not big into color morphs.have you ever seen a raptor leopard gecko with solid red eyes,completely patternless orange body,and a carrot tail atleast 80%?frieken amazing if you ask me!

too. Many. Leopard morphs.

 

[Shrike]

I'm not a fan of color morphs myself. However, it seems like they're a pretty fundamental aspect of the hobby at this point. From corns to ball pythons to beardies, it seems like breeders are always looking for the next big thing. I'm always amazed at the amount of money a new morph can demand.