This one is for a friend of mine who asked me to touch on this last week.

Let us go over what Flippers, Wholesalers, and Breeders are.

Definitions are somewhat different, and sometimes overlap, but I will try and make it clear enough for you to determine on your own who you know and what to label them as.

Breeders.

You and I know what this means. These are the people who spend the time to raise their breeders, feed them, care for them, and breed them selectively (usually) to produce animals that they feel are good quality and healthy.

They tend to hold on to animals for future projects, and keep records as to who does what when, as well as what they intend to do with animals that they produced. It's a viscous beautiful cycle, and the breeder loves it. That's the passion and the drive that keeps them doing what they are doing.

Animals produced are produced for a reason, and the babies are what they know they are (usually, exceptions being dinkers).

These are the people making the snakes.


Wholesalers..

These guys are the ones that buy excess animals for whatever reason.

Breeders make 100 normals, and although it is awesome to see the babies pop out, they are not needed in future projects, so they are sold to wholesalers or pet stores to supply the pet trade.

Pet stores are somewhat of a wholesaler, but in a different category, in my opinion. They are the ones that are selling to Joe Shmoe, and can (if they have the resources) teach Mister Joe about the care and husbandry that they are familiar with.

Now wholesalers buy up whatever morphs or "leftovers" that a breeder or hobbyist wants to move and sells them for a profit. This is somewhat of a grey area, as this entails not knowing completely the history behind the snakes that they are selling. Some wholesalers care, some do not. The distinction is in the specific person wholesaling.

Do they back up the animal with a guarantee? Depends...
Pet Stores usually do, Wholesalers, it depends.

This is a not so clear area of sellers in the reptile trade. Some are good, some are not so good.
It is up to you to determine what you feel comfortable with.


Flippers...

This is a bad word in some circles of the reptile world. Why? Well, these guys are the people that take animals from breeders and flip them for profit. How quickly? It really depends on the person and the animal, but usually this is only a month or two, maybe even less.

If the animal is sick or not in optimal health, the flipper more than likely doesn't even notice. They are just out to move the animal quickly and for a profit. The longer they have the animal, the less profit they make. Flip it!

Now again, this is a grey area, depending on who you are talking about. Some people actually take the time to care about the animal and where it was produced, what the morph/locality is, etc... Most do not, which is why being a "flipper" is again, a bad word.


Now how do you tell who you are buying from and what you are getting?

Do your homework.

Do they have a good reputation? Have they been around long enough? Does the price seem too good to be true? Can they show you parental lineage? Can they vouch for the health of the animal and how long it has been in their care?

All things you as a consumer/customer have to determine in your own comfort zone where you want to be.

If you don't care that the person selling the animal can't tell you what the parents were, then by all means, buy from a wholesaler/flipper.

But remember this, these people are in it more for the profit than for the animal most of the time.
(I do not want to make generalizations because I know there are some people out there that are not.)

Money is always nice, but for peace of mind, would you rather save $100 and possibly lose the animal and your money, or buy from a breeder that can help you in the future if something goes wrong?

Again, things to think about.

This blog is not meant to sway you one way or the other, as I am trying to be as unbiased as I can under the circumstances.

Like I said before, I have sold to wholesalers, and I still would love to know that my animals, albeit not being sold by me, are getting good homes in the end.

So the final thing to take away from this is, do your homework, try not to just look at the dollar signs. If that is your only focus, you are in the wrong industry.


Have a fantastic day, my friends.

Given the current state of our economy, as well as the the Internets role in shopping for goods, it's no wonder that many first time, and even seasoned, reptile enthusiasts get caught up in worrying about getting "the best price" or "a good deal" on a new boa.

The problem with this approach to buying boas lies in genetic diversity as well as future marketability. Unlike many other markets where a certain commodity is identical from one store to the next yet a price disparity exists thus encouraging price comparisons, boas are increasingly seen as less homogeneous and differences in prices should be expected from one breeder to the next. In fact, buyers should expect price variation within the same litter of boas!

I believe that our lack of evolution from out humble beginnings are responsible for a large part of the current state of the boa market. The practice of indiscriminate breeding or, breeding boas simply to produce more animals has long been a standard for this market. Change is overdue!

Indiscriminate breeding has been widely practiced for some time and is likely to be able to trace its roots back to the first people trying to breed boas. I believe that at that time, no forethought was given to the quality of the possible offspring with regards to genetic diversity and/or looks/marketability. However, I give these pioneers a "bye". For one thing, boas were relatively rare and inaccessible at that time. Second, so little was known about the reproductive capabilities or environmental requirements to induce breeding that most people who actually had a sexual pair of boas, simply placed them together and crossed their fingers.

Years later genetic mutations such as Anerythristic, Amelanistic, and Hypomelanistic hit the boa scene and the color variety available to those who loved boas expanded exponentially, along with demand. Laws of economics tell us that when demand increases and supply stays the same (it takes time to produce boas), the market will generally bare a higher price. In an effort to make money (we all love money, don't we?), those in possession of these genetic mutations focused on reproductive capacity, rather than reproductive quality. At this time, a presumably "of age" male would be placed with as many females as possible to coax the maximum number of offspring out of that seasons production capacity. It didn't matter if the male or female was the FUGLIEST boa in existence, the opportunity to produce more boas with the same genetic mutation would not be passed up, especially at the introductory prices of these mutations (well above $10,000 10-20 years ago).

The results of these litters were often not very good, aesthetically speaking. However, in order to "get the genetics" of the litter, consumers would buy them anyway - often times, buying a pair of fugly siblings with the intention of breeding them together. This was common practice because the fugly offspring were slightly or even substantially cheaper (just like today) and provided a less expensive entry point into the market. This allowed someone who would have otherwise been excluded from that segment of the market at the current time to be included and get a head start on his competition. Because back then, the buzz phrase was "just get the genetics".

The practice of buying the cheapest boas you can find simply to breed them has become a plague on our hobby. Indiscriminate breeding results in hundreds and thousands of visually substandard boas each year. To compound this conundrum, buyers often buy siblings with the intention of breeding them to each other. This is understandable early on in a genetic mutations lifespan before varied genetics are available. When working with "normal" boas or established genetic mutations, there is simply no excuse for a lack of genetic diversification. The combination of indiscriminate breeding and unnecessary inbreeding has led to a dramatic decline in prices and slower than normal overall improvement in quality in the boa market. Certainly a case could be made that the overall economy in the US is responsible for the downturn in the boa market. However, I offer this opposing point of view: If the supply in the boa market was cut in half overnight (the fugly boas were removed), would it not make sense that demand would still be the same (those who buy based on price would drop out, but those who look for quality would likely replace them as they would see a more viable market)? Therefore, we go back to the basic laws of economics, when supply is low and demand is high, price stays (or goes) up.

Here are some closing thoughts on the issue. If you're planning to breed your boas, ask yourself "why?" If your pairing will not produce offspring that are in the top 75%, visually, of the market - please pass. If genetically diverse pairings are available, yet your animals are related (immediately or closely) - please pass. If you decide to post your pairing on a couple of forums that you visit and you don't get people sending you messages asking to be on the waiting list - please consider passing. All of these pleas point to a lack of demand for your future product. Producing boas just for the sake of doing it will help no one. It will not improve the market and in fact will work to its detriment. It will likely result in a greater expenditure for you, and you'll likely have to wholesale the litter to a broker for next to nothing - simply to move the animals out of your collection.

However, if you’ve taken the time to acquire the best quality available of a particular type of boa, your boas are relatively unrelated, and demand exists for the offspring – go for it! Additionally, if you have something new, rare, or unusual – go for it!

Best of luck to you all!

- jb

Among the serious efforts in which I believe every member of the responsible reptile and exotics keeping community need to be actively partaking in and rank with high importance, is the initiation of, and subsequently, the continual education of the general public (especially our elected officials at the local, state, and federal levels) as it relates to our hobby/industry and what it actually is that we do, and what it is that it is not. This is yet another topic in which I feel needs to be addressed by the herp and exotics community, for over many years now, I have noticed many (if not, an increase in) the number of uninformed members of the public posting largely uninformed, oftentimes outright incorrect comments/information on some Internet news article's comments sections, public forum or discussion board, or elsewhere. These individuals are likely those who might not fully understand our hobby, our animals, or the nature of their comments they are posting/stating.

In current times, and seemingly all too often, many members of the public seem to be taking very little to no time at all to research or verify the bits of information that they are exposed to before making a decision (or reaching a particular conclusion), which is, and should be, an important step in gaining the most informed opinion possible on any given subject matter. The reasons, or causes I believe for this have been discussed in further detail in a previous post of mine. Therefore, they will not be discussed in nearly as great of detail in this post. Nevertheless, due to the continued efforts of much of the sensationalistic and irresponsible news and "entertainment" media (Animal Rights Planet, anyone?), the extremist animal rights groups such as P.E.T.A and the Humane Society of the United States (H.S.U.S), or through simple ignorance, much of the public is largely being (mis)-educated, through the use and perpetuating of common misconceptions, or misnomers about the herpetoculture hobby. I am sure that most of us have heard the notion that if a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes truth.

Exotic Equates to Dangerous?

Using Princeton's definition of the word "exotic", the most applicable of their definitions states: "being or from or characteristic of another place or part of the world". Using that particular definition, and that definition only, any animal then that is found outside of your particular locality is "exotic". However, the use and nature of the word quite often has many negative connotations associated with it often due to various individuals or groups following underlying political agendas or ideologies. As a result, much of the public has been incorrectly led into believing that an "exotic" animal equates to being a "dangerous" animal from a foreign country recklessly imported into the United States that are all equally as dangerous and difficult to manage, often failing to realize that their own pet dog, cat, bird, hamster, gerbil, goldfish, or gecko can also be construed to be considered an "exotic" animal.

One case in point is the HSUS's "Exotic pets" campaign. Spending some time on HSUS's PR materials on "exotic pets", one sees quite a bit of mention of animals the public widely fears and misunderstands (and have been involved in rare yet extremely high profile cases) such as big cats, bears, venomous reptiles, and "large constricting snakes". And in a similar fashion to HSUS's TV ads showing abused puppies and kittens in animal shelters and implying that the majority of their donations are spent towards shelter animals depicted in their commercials, the implication here, whether explicitly or implicitly, is that these animals are therefore represent the most prevalent and widely held "exotic pets" in the United States. HSUS then regularly presents this list of animals to the public and to legislators as a "modest", and "reasonable" list of animals to outlaw, a technique which in of itself is among HSUS's well oiled, deceptive, and well funded PR measures, but one which still ignores the published facts and statistics demonstrating that the keeping of those animals presents NO significant threat to the public at large. Lest we not forget HSUS's stated agenda of "putting an end to the entire reptile trade" and to "ban the sale of reptiles as pets to the general public" in their 2001 publication, as Seen Here.

Deadly Invasive Reptiles, Coming to a Northern Town Near You?

As most members of the reptile community and industry have long been aware of, there has also been an unprecedented amount of news and television media hysteria initiated and perpetuated over the last several years (especially in 2008-present) surrounding the Burmese pythons in the Florida Everglades as a result of Hurricane Andrew in the early 1990's. Adding even more kerosene to the already raging media bonfire was the tragic and unfortunate death of 2 year old Shauna Hare by an emaciated and improperly kept albino Burmese python in Florida 18 months ago. Even some so-called 'scientists" have participated in this media frenzy by publishing flawed climate maps in conjunction with the USGS projecting that Burmese pythons could inhabit the southern third of the United States in association with climate change. However, these reports have been widely criticized by the scientific community as "unsuitable for the basis of legislative or regulatory policy", and with no less than three independent and peer reviewed scientific papers disproving the USGS maps and report.

Unfortunately, though, widespread and reckless repetition and sensationalizing of this issue by the media has led many ill informed members of the public to believe that a similar "python problem" could occur in their area, since after all, it has occurred in south Florida, and irresponsible keepers could be dumping their pythons anywhere in the US, right?. The obvious flaw with that line of reasoning, however, is that it is largely ignorant of the natural history, biology, and temperature requirements of Burmese pythons, and pythons/boas in general. It is just one fundamental aspect of reptile biology and ecology, that we as responsible reptile keepers clearly need to more frequently explain/educate to the general public, for it otherwise appears to be lacking.

Are We All Now Animal "Hoarders"?

In recent years, the usage of the words "animal hoarding" has gained increasing popularity and exploitation among sensationalistic ratings driven television programming and news media. To quickly recap, the true definition who and what a "hoarder" should constitute as, is someone who habitually acquires and keeps any number of animals WHILE subjecting both themselves and their animals to unsanitary living environments, neglect, and/or lack of appropriate veterinary/medical care and attention. Every reader of this posting should keep that word, "while" in mind. Numbers alone are not, and should not, be a sole indicator of a hording or neglect situation.

However, the term "animal hoarder" has largely become simply another inane media buzzword, exploited recklessly (and without accountability) by media and some television networks to simply generate ratings at the expense of truth, facts, and ethics. As an end result, dedicated and passionate reptile keepers, hobbyists, and breeders collectively have all been perceived, and inaccurately characterized as "mentally deficient animal hoarders" by some segments of the public, while the very responsibility and dedication many of us hold towards caring for our animals, collections, and to the hobby/industry itself is suddenly plagued with the negative stigma or connotation of "animal hoarding" as a result. Many likely do not realize or understand the true meaning of the word and/or how to properly distinguish a true "hoarder" from someone who is a responsible pet owner, hobbyist, or breeder. Nevertheless, if herp keeping and propagation now constitutes as "animal hoarding" of the 21st century, that may well then classify tens of thousands of individuals worldwide as such, therefore rendering researcher's estimates of the scope of this so called "epidemic" to be grossly underestimated!

Most Reptiles still wild caught?

A third and final mis-notion I believe much of the public our hobby and the animals we keep and offer for sale is that we are still harvesting, acquiring and importing most, if not all, of our them from the wild in some "cruel and abusive fashion resulting in widespread animal neglect and suffering as well as depletion of all of our natural resources" (as would the HSUS would have the public believe). Now, wild collection and importation does still occur, and cases of animal abuse or neglect can and do accompany it on occasion. However, I believe that responsible importation practices are still necessary to some degree in order to help continually maintain genetic and bloodline diversity in the animals we maintain in our collections provided all collection and importation regulations are abided by. However, more importantly and to the point at hand, in my opinion, we must also educate and stress to the public about the tremendous advancements we have made thus far (and the importance of) in providing healthy, well acclimated captive bred and born animals for numerous domestic industries and that the vast majority of animals we now offer are (or have been) domestically produced.

Walking the aisles at Tinley Park in IL at the NARBC/Summit show back in 2009 (which was the last time I was in attendance for the show), I was astonished to see how many color morphs of different species of snakes and other reptiles have now been produced, which species were now available as captive bred and born specimens, and the many different products and services now available for keeping reptiles and amphibians. Even at the smaller local shows we have here in Madison WI and Sturtevant WI, I have noticed many of these developments unfolding. Ten years ago, I would only have imagined more than half of the developments I noticed at these shows coming to reality.

Despite this, and in closing, I believe that much of the general public is still largely in the dark when it comes to most of these developments we have experienced and made within our hobby and industry thus far as well as our current scope; the increased prevalence and diversity of captive bred and born animals and color/pattern morphs, the large and small, national and local captive born only shows alike, and yes, Waterland Turtle Tubs (when aquariums or outdoor ponds have long been the only options for keeping aquatic turtles, for example).

Other Thoughts?

One of the bits of information that I, as well as many other seasoned herp keepers and breeders often hear, read, or are 'told" is the notion that snakes (as well as other reptiles) must be fed inside of a separate container or enclosure from their permanent caging. The underlying notion behind this theory is to prevent "cage aggression" or from having the snake associate the keeper opening and/or entering the cage with feeding. However, this is a largely unnecessary and impractical practice, and one I would like to address since we all have likely heard this theory many times. Let's examine why I believe this to be so.

How Much of a Difference Does Feeding Outside the Cage Make?

The first thought that comes to my mind on this topic is "does it truly make a difference whether a snake is fed inside or outside its enclosure? Many snakes I have, and have had, are/were quite well acclimated to their permanent housing, and thus possess (or possessed) strong, healthy, and reliable feeding responses. This in of itself can oftentimes be mistaken for actual defensiveness, particularly by novices to the hobby, who might therefore believe that feeding outside the cage is the remedy to this perceived issue. Regardless, many of these particular animals I mentioned previously will possess the same feeding response whether fed inside or outside their cages. Some snakes I have had were on the opposite side of the spectrum as well, of which were relatively shy, wary, or nervous animals that would probably not place themselves in a vulnerable position (such as feeding) to predators or other perceived threats when they are already stressed by the process of having been removed from the cage and placed into another cage or container. Therefore, feeding those particular animals outside of the cage would be far more of a detriment than anything else.

In my opinion, even those animals that do display strong feeding responses (including the large constrictors) can be dealt with rather quickly and easily through the use of simple "hook training" which simply involves cancelling out any feeding response the animal might have when opening the cage by lightly touching the animal's head or fore body a few times until the animal withdraws its head. Similarly, I have also had success with this technique on over eager ball pythons and other smaller snakes with the use of a pair of tongs or hemostats. Once this initial feeding response has been cancelled out, it is easy to then reach in and pick your animal up with little to no fear of a subsequent feeding response bite. In essence, I believe that knowing the general disposition and habits of the individual animal in question, and subsequently knowing what works best for you in successfully keeping and handling that animal largely renders this topic a non issue.

Making Feeding More Complicated Than it Needs to Be

The second thought that comes to my mind is obviously having a sufficient number of spare cages and/or containers to feed your snakes in, should you choose to adopt this method of feeding, and therefore having to clean and disinfect each of those cages or containers after each time they are used to prevent contamination. Simply put, while this may not be a significant issue if you are maintaining only one to a few snakes, imagine having sufficient amounts of time, energy, space, and one or more spare sets of caging/housing for each snake when you are maintaining a large collection of dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of animals. Imagine having to transfer each snake back and forth between its primary and 'feeding" enclosure on a weekly basis, or whatever your particular feeding regime may happen to be. Obviously, these matters are even further complicated when having to do this if you maintain any number of the larger adult constrictors (Anacondas, Burms, Retics, or Afrocks). As one would quickly imagine, this method of feeding becomes a largely inefficient, impractical, and sometimes difficult practice for most, if not all of these keepers with mid sized to large collections of animals.

Another solution, in many cases, to solving this "cage aggression" issue, whether it is actual or perceived, is a simple one. It simply involves opening and reaching into the cage for reasons other than feeding on a regular basis, including for water changing, misting, spot cleaning, and/or handling of the animal. Nevertheless, these are all basic chores and responsibilities that any responsible pet owner or herpetoculturist should be assuming anyway. With this information said, and in consideration, it can not be possible for a snake to come to associate the cage opening with any one specific event (such as feeding).

To conclude, as with many other matters relating to the herpetoculture hobby, there is often a multitude of different methods and approaches to many different aspects in the herpetocultural hobby and industry utilized by many different participants in the said industry/hobby. The methods someone else employs in maintaining their animals may not necessarily be how I do so with mine, and vice versa. This is therefore not to say that feeding outside the cage is necessarily the incorrect or wrong way of feeding your animals, but is rather a largely unnecessary practice that need not be presented as the "sacred method of feeding snakes".

With that said, have a happy, safe, and enjoyable 2011 everyone!