So here they are: my ball python breeder best principles and practices:

Simple Recessive:  “Hoes Before Bros”

It is a simple and unalterable fact that female ball pythons take longer to reach sexual maturity than males.  Most females won’t breed until their third or fourth winter while males can potentially be ready inside of a year, 18 months almost without fail.  If, in the same buying season, you acquire both male and female hatchlings for a project your male will be ready to breed not less than a full year before the female.  The only guaranteed thing you can do during that time is watch the value of the morph continue to fall.  When examining the original price paid you will see that you acquired and paid for the male at least a full year in advance of when you should have.  You should have purchased only females in year one and waited at least a full year before buying the male.  Doing this makes it more likely that you will have both of them reaching sexual maturity at the same time.  This minimizes your losses from depreciation.  So the next time you are looking to start a simple recessive project, buy your females first; pick up the males a year later.

This best practice may not appear to make sense if you already have other females that will be ready when the male is a year old (give or take).  But that all-too-common scenario really just illustrates the point.  The females you already have that will be paired with the male were acquired (or born) long before the male, which is exactly what I am suggesting should be done with simple recessives.

Dominant/Co-Dominant:  “Bros Before Hoes”

If you are going to visually see the product of your breeding in the first generation of offspring (e.g. dominant/co-dominant genes) it is a better decision to invest in males first and turn your attention to the acquisition of females in the following year(s).  Dominant and Co-Dominant (incomplete dominant) prices fall fast.  In order to have a chance at seeing a return in a reasonable time period you have to work for very fast turnaround.  Many males can be ready to breed in less than a year and, assuming they perform, you will see the product of your efforts in the next breeding season.  This allows you to begin recouping your investment after only one season of depreciation.  If you are using females to get yourself into a particular co-dom project you will have to patiently suffer through 2-3 seasons of depreciation before seeing the first dollars in return.  This is too painful for most people to bear and is not an ideal use of investment capital.

A corollary to this principle is that the eventual investment in co-dom/dominant females is required.  It is only when both the male and female are genetically special that we see the really exceptional designer morph advancement.  It should be abundantly obvious that true genetic progress only comes when both male and female are contributing genetic awesomeness to the mix.  Four, fix & six gene snakes don’t typically get made because all of the genetic mutations come from one side of the family; both mom and dad have to be sufficiently morphed-up in order to make really morphed-up kids.  It’s all about genetic synergy.

Pair Genetically Greater Boys with Genetically Lower Girls …But Never the Other Way Around
(Put Another Way:  Never Breed a More Expensive Female to a Less Expensive Male)

It is reasonable to buy a male dominant/co-dom morph and use it to make more of the same (e.g. breed it to a normal female).  However, you should never do that with a female.  When you acquire female dominant/co-dominant morphs it should be with the full intent of breeding it to a male whose genetics are different (and typically of greater financial value than hers).  It is economically effective to acquire a male dominant/co-dominant animal and breed it to a genetically lower female.  The opposite is never true.  Do not acquire a dominant/co-dominant female and breed it to a genetically lower male.   Please note that ‘genetically lower’ refers to the financial value of the morph.  For example:

• It is sane to buy a pastel male and breed it to a normal female.  It is insane to by a normal male and breed it to a pastel female.
• It is sane to buy a champagne male and breed it to a pastel female.  It is insane to buy a champagne female and breed it to a pastel male.
• It is sane to buy a silver surfer male and breed it to a ghost female.  It is insane to buy a silver surfer female and breed it to a ghost male.
• It is sane to buy a male albino and breed it to a het albino female.  It is insane to buy an albino female and breed it to a het albino male.  Please note that your sanity is also in question if you breed an albino male to an albino female.  At the very least breed female albinos with a male who is albino plus something else (albino spider, albino pinstripe, albino black pastel, etc.).
• Do not buy a pastel female with plans of breeding her to a pastel male (even though you can make super pastels).  It is no longer true that breeders intentionally produce super pastel ball pythons; they are almost always the product of missed opportunity in a different pairing (e.g. lemon blast x pastel lesser can produce super pastels but it is not what the breeder was trying for).  A female pastel bred to any other co-dom morph will, in the best case, always produce babies that are worth more money than a super pastel.

I almost gave myself an aneurysm this breeding season when I pulled a clutch of eggs from a bumble bee female and realized I had bred her to a pinstripe male.  This is a classic example of wasted female potential.  My decision to breed that particular pair of animals was rooted in my lack of males to go with all of my females.  I have a lot of 3, 4 and 5-gene males …but I have a lot more females.  Rather than breed her to nothing or try to stretch a male too thinly I, at some point, decided that the long odds of making spinner blasts was better than nothing at all.  The problem is that the odds of making spiders and pinstripes is much greater and that negates the value of such a great female.  Don’t make mistakes like that.

Diversity is a Detriment

Quality never goes out of style.  This does not require much elaboration.  But quantity…

Quantity of production of a particular morph is a benefit.  This is obviously true from the simple “more is better” perspective.  But quantity of production is also important for a breeder because the acquisition of many of your morphs will come out of  your own production and it is only after the needs of your own collection are satisfied that you can begin to easily entertain the notion of selling the results of your production.  You will forever be your own best customer and that is not a financially good thing.  If, because of limited breeding stock, you only produce a tiny handful of the morph you are shooting for you will be hard-pressed to sell when you finally hit on the odds.  How many times have you heard yourself say, “Yeah, I’ve got to keep this.”?   This could mean that your ability to sell your productive efforts is pushed back by a full breeding season and that push has a tangible financial value.

If you only produce a single clutch of clowns how can you easily sell them when you don’t have all of the clowns you need for yourself?  If you sell them without first satisfying the needs of your own collection you are effectively decreasing the worth of your collection (while increasing the quality of your competitor’s collection).  Ball python breeding groups are always depreciating in value and, as such, must continuously be upgraded to keep them even with the market.  If the diversity of morphs in your collection is out of proportion to its size you will probably produce comparatively few of each kind of morph.  The desire to keep them will be powerful and each animal you keep is less money in your pocket this season.  If you focus less on diversity and more on quantity you will be more likely to produce an abundance of a particular morph.  The decision to sell becomes easier and all you need to do is decide which animal(s) to keep rather than if there is an animal to keep.

It is not as exciting to keep a larger number of the same morph but it is definitely more profitable.  On the other hand, a diverse collection is more fun to look at but, since you are more likely to keep the best of your production, you are more of a hobbyist than a businessperson (and I’m not really writing for the hobbyist at the moment).

This principle also has a few corollary’s:

1. When you produce a particular morph in quantity you have more to choose from when selecting quality.  You get to pick the very best of what you produce to keep for yourself rather than having to hold on to whatever you get.
2. There can be a lot of variation in feeding response with ball pythons.  If you have several of the same morph you can hold them for a few weeks/months to see which are the best feeders.  You should always keep the best-looking, best-feeding animals for yourself.  And no, this is not an ethical issue.  A negative-minded person will read this and say that I wrote, “keep the good stuff for yourself, sell the crappy stuff to your customers.”  I’m not suggesting that at all.  Bluntly:  I suggest that you keep the very best for yourself, sell the remaining excellent product to your customers and, if you have anything of “low” quality (unattractive, poor feeding response, etc.), sell it to the wholesalers.  And yes, that should serve as a warning to people who buy the cheapest snake they can find (which is usually from the wholesalers).  Trust me on this one; the great deal you just got on that snake may not be as great a deal as you think.  As is often the case in life, you get what you pay for.

Nobody is going to tend to your collection but you.  If you don’t take steps to make sure it is the best is can be …who will?  If you give your friend’s first pick they will take the very best of what you produce and expect the lowest price.  If you put the very best of what you produce up for the world to buy, it will sell and people will applaud you for your quality.  But at what cost?  If you build your own collection from the leftovers how long can your collection remain superior?  Hopefully that question is rhetorical.  Never feel bad about keeping the best for yourself.  It is your responsibility to do so.  Altruism has no place anywhere on this planet, including the ball python business.

Refinement is a Religion

As you read this article the financial value of your ball python collection is falling.  The only way to keep it even or, dare I say, growing in value is to constantly increase its genetic quality.  If you have single-gene males now you need to upgrade them to multi-gene males for next year.  If you have a large number of normal female breeders you need to upgrade them to pastels, black pastels and other single-gene co-dom girls.  If you already have a solid base of single-gene breeder females you need to upgrade them to multi-gene girls.  And as soon as that upgrade is complete you will need to begin to do it again.  You cannot maintain profitability in a market as volatile as the ball python trade without constantly upgrading.  It, like the different combinations of morphs that can be produced, is endless.

Be mindful of the size of your collection as you go through this process.  The desire to keep the old while adding the new can quickly lead to an excessively large collection.  Big collections come with big caging bills, even bigger rodent bills and endless maintenance requirements.  The key here is to constantly increase the quality of the collection, not its size.  As one girl comes of age she should be moving into, not next to, the slot of another girl.  Don’t get me wrong, though.  If you want to grow your collection, do so.  But know how it is growing.  Collections in growth-mode need to grow in size and quality simultaneously.  Don’t keep older, less valuable, animals into infinity.  A $100 female breeder eats just as much as a $1,000 female breeder, requires the same amount of time to care for and generally produces animals that are worth significantly less.  A person who is breeding ten $1,000 females is going to make as much or more money with less effort and less overhead than the person breeding fifty $100 normal females.

2.0 Males

Keep multiple males of the same morph.  2.0 Pastel Genetic Stripes, 2.0 Pieds, 2.0 Pastel Lessers and 2.0 Honey Bees.  Not all males are good breeders and not all females are receptive to any male.  If you want to maximize the percentage of females that lay viable eggs each season you need to make sure they have as many opportunities as possible to be with a male.  Rotating at least two males of the same morph with each female will do this.  Yes, it is more expensive and no, it is not as exciting as having a bunch male morph diversity.  But this isn’t about having the prettiest collection; it’s about having the most productive collection possible.  The addition of a second male should easily pay for itself in the form of a higher rate of oviposition.  If the addition of another male can increase the number of females who produce each season by 10% he will pay for himself (and then some) in one year.

How many people ever see your collection anyway?  I can still count on two hands the number of people who have actually been to my facility over the past few years.  Would you rather “ooh and aah” over  your snake rack or your bank account?  Pick one and then act accordingly.  Very few of us can do both.

The One Who Dies with the Largest Ball Python Collection Does Not Win

Quality versus quantity.  Consider a tale of two breeders; one hatches 2,000 ball pythons each season with prices ranging from $8 – $10,000.  The other breeder hatches 300 babies with most prices ranging in the $500-$5,000 and up range.  Both are making money, no doubt.  But the guy with 2,000 baby snakes is busting his butt every day, has a crew of people helping him and has massive overhead.  The guy producing a comparative handful of snakes is doing it on his own, mostly in the evenings.  He enjoys spending time with his animals and has paid his house off over the past five years.  Both paths are a way to make money but one is a harder life.  The decidedly American mentality that “more is better” is tough to shake; it’s everywhere around us every day.  A smaller, higher-end collection is worth a lot more in time spent and overall quality of life.  But that is just an opinion, not a fact.

Never Breed Recessives a Year After Dominant/Co-Dominants

If you breed a dominant/co-dominant male to a female in one breeding you should avoid breeding that female to a simple recessive carrying male in the following season.  If you do there is a chance, albeit a small one, that the babies might not be the hets you think them to be.  Ball pythons can and do retain sperm across breeding seasons.  No, it is not terribly common (I believe it to be very rare) but I know more than one breeder who has witnessed it.  I have produced many thousands of ball pythons and have not had it happen …that I know of.  But one thing I am powerfully motivated to never do is sell someone a het and have it not prove out.  For that reason I am careful in pairings not only within the same breeding season, but also from one breeding season to the next.  In order to to this you must keep excellent records.  Consider the following pairings:

Pairing #1:  Risky and too stressful for me

• Year 1:  Pastel female x Pinstripe male – Possible offspring includes pastels, pinstripes, lemon blasts and normals.  None are het for anything.
• Year 2:  Pastel female x Ghost Pinstripe male – Possible offspring includes pastels, pinstripes, lemon blasts and normals.  All should be 100% het ghost.  But what if the female had some retained sperm from the previous season?  You are certain the production is 100% het but it may not be …and there is no way to tell until years down the road when your customer experiences the fallout from the mistake.  There was no deception on your part but the mistake is still your responsibility and, with your reputation on the line,  your problem to correct.

Pairing #2:  A slightly safer bet

• Year 1:  Pastel female x Pinstripe male - Possible offspring includes pastels, pinstripes, lemon blasts and normals.  None are het for anything.
• Year 2:  Pastel female x Ghost Mojave male – This is a slightly more bearable situation.  The best things to produce from this pairing are mojaves and pastel mojaves, which have no choice but to be 100% het ghost.  The pastels and normals that result from the pairing are almost certainly 100% het ghost but you can only be 99.5% sure.  There is an outside chance that the pastels and normals are from the previous season’s pairing.  If I were to do a pairing like this I would sell the normals and the pastels as “normals”, not hets.  Yes, they are more than likely going to be actual hets but I would not want deal with the fallout several years down the line if they weren’t.

Pairing #3:  Warm and fuzzy feelings for everyone

• Year 1:  Pastel female x Ghost Pinstripe male - Possible offspring includes pastels, pinstripes, lemon blasts and normals.  All are 100% het for ghost.
• Year 2:  Pastel female x Black Pewter male – Possible offspring includes silver streaks, black pewters, super pastels, pastels, black pastels and normals.  None should be het for ghost but it is remotely possible that the pastels and the normals are actually hets.  It should go without saying that you cannot sell them as such.  They are sold as the normal, non-het, animals you suspect them to be.  The worst case scenarios is that they are actually carrying the ghost gene and someone gets a happy surprise several years down the road.

Second-Hand Hets are Not a Good Bet

Buying hets is risky business.  The simple fact of the matter is that you have to buy hets either from A) someone you know and trust or B) someone who has a verifiable and trustworthy reputation.  The operative word in both options is ‘trust’.  Over the years  I have had a few bad experiences and I know plenty of other people who have lived through the pain of an animal not proving out.  Because of the time involved it’s really depressing.  Buy a lottery ticket and you’ll know in short order if it’s a loser; buy a het and it can take years to realize that you won’t be getting a return on your investment.  Adding insult to injury is that the het is supposed to be a winner.  At least with a lottery ticket you know you’re taking a chance and could come up empty-handed.  I have written at length about the danger of buying hets.  Rather than beating that horse any further let me refer you to the article called Genetic Provenance, Insanity and Spoiled Milk (http://ballpythonbreeder.com/2010/11/genetic-provenance-insanity-and-spoiled-milk/) that I wrote on the topic.

The article referenced above deals mostly with buying hets directly from the person who has (supposedly) produced it.  But what about buying hets from the person who bought the hets?  I guarantee my hets and I am willing to guarantee hets that I have purchased from others that have proven for me.  But I won’t guarantee or knowingly buy a het that passed through more than one person’s collection.  The only hets I am ever willing to buy are one’s the come from the person who produced them.  At least that way there is a measure of accountability.  If you buy your hets from a wholesaler you need to be at peace with the fact that they are selling them to you under the assumption that the person from whom they bought them wasn’t ripping them off.  Graft in the het business rolls down hill and if it’s you putting male to female it’s you and only you who is going to come out the loser when the het doesn’t prove out.

Avoid Sweet Deals on Other People’s Problems

You simply must exercise Due Care and Due Diligence when buying adult ball pythons.  I have written on this before.  Please read my article titled Sweet Deals on Other People Problems (http://ballpythonbreeder.com/2009/12/sweet-deals-on-other-peoples-problems/) for a detailed discussion on this topic.

Cover Your Assets

Whenever I sell hets I include a Certificate of Genetics that includes a photograph of the animal and describes the genetics it carries.  I also include information on the pairing that was used to produce the animal.  I do this to give my customer a high degree of assurance that the animal is what I claim it to be.  I will not last long in this business if I sell fake hets (which I call “Fets”).  My willingness to sign a document that holds me personally accountable for an animals’ genetics goes a long way to helping people feel better about their purchase.  But I don’t do certificates just for my customer; I do them to protect myself as well.  If I sell a het and years later the person comes to me complaining that it didn’t prove out I have no real defense if there is no photographic record of the animal.  How do I know that the animal they are claiming didn’t prove out was really from me?  I don’t.  This would be a delicate situation and I would like to avoid it.  I do that by making sure that I also have a photographic record of the animal being sold.

Happy Breeding!

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

At the time of her email, Casymay’s included link to Petfinder.com, a national registry whose purpose is to re-home animals currently residing in shelters, contained a whopping 34 pythons, six of which were listed as being in Canada.  Both amused and annoyed by her email, and without knowing anything else about the sender,  I sent the following curt response:

Casey didn’t reply back.  Should human procreation be put on hold until all the world’s orphaned kids get homes?  Would Casey subscribe to that suggestion, too?  In order to see if I could learn a little more about the person who disproved of my actions I decided to do a quick Google search for Casie’s email address.  That search led me to another page where her profile suggests that she is 14 years old.  This realization changed the paradigm with which I had viewed her question.  Young people, many of whom have parents that have unknowingly let them watch too much thinly-veiled animal and environmental extremism in the form of Dora the Explorer and Go, Diego, Go, are filled with a legitimate yet often misguided desire to help animals.  I am confident that this young woman’s intentions are pure; why would someone buy an animal when perfectly good one’s are available for adoption and, better still, why would someone intentionally make more when the same conditions remain true?  Those seem like honest questions and legitimate concerns.  And with many more orders of magnitude these questions are also portable to dogs and cats.

Nobody can argue that there are animals in this world that are abused, abandoned and irresponsibly cast aside.  One good thing about them is that they get people’s attention.  But that’s also a bad thing for the majority of animals that are on the other side.  You know, the one’s that have caring and considerate owners who give their companions the very best in care.  They provide excellent nutrition, a warm and comfortable place to sleep, companionship and prompt and regular medical care.  But those animals are so incredibly uninteresting.  Video of my dog sleeping happily next to me on the sofa isn’t going to help the Humane Society of the United States get any donations.  It also makes for a very boring storyline for Diego and Dora.  The evening news reporting on the secure, healthy and otherwise happy black throat monitor living over on Scenic Avenue isn’t very interesting either.  You see, there’s no money and no story in the animals that are well cared for.  No sound bite, nothing to tweet about and nothing to go viral on YouTube.  Instead we dig for and find the 34 pythons that have lost their homes for who knows what reason and focus on them.  Their plight is evidence enough for young Casie that a breeder like me is in the wrong; that I am the one who is perpetuating the abandonment of more pythons later down the line.  Casie seems to be suggesting that the best solution is to bring captive breeding to a halt because a tiny minority have not received proper care.  I do not share her opinion.

To rescue from a shelter or to buy from a breeder, that seems to be a recurring topic of discussion in the pet world.  I have a friend whose opinions, perspectives and insights on this topic are often different than mine.  She sees the world through the eyes of someone who works in a shelter and has repeatedly seen the tragic end-result of animals, mostly dogs and cats, that are dumped by incapable or otherwise irresponsible owners.  She regularly sees, first-hand, how some people obtain and dispose of living things with callous whimsy.  The animals dumped on the doorstep of her shelter are victims and the perpetrators simply drive away, hands washed of an inconvenience that has a heartbeat.  Those experiences have steeled the resolve she has on her opinions and I know that there is nothing I can ever say that will change her mind.  In a recent exchange of emails she and I had another friendly debate/discussion on buying dogs versus rescuing dogs.  She was uninspired by my reasons for leaning toward a respectable dog breeder rather than a rescue for my next dog.  One of her arguments was that “puppies suck”.  She suggested that a one year old rescue would likely be house trained, past the chewing stage, able to be left alone, have its shots, etc.  And you know what?  She is 100% accurate in all of those things and when looked at from such a pragmatic point of view I might buy into her assertion.  But using the same empirical logic I know another thing that sucks when young:  human children.  They pee and poop on themselves for the first two years or so.  They vomit with some consistency and at incredibly inopportune times.  They can’t talk and, even after months of interaction, can’t communicate their wants with any consistency.  They make loud noises, don’t sleep through the night, cost a ton of money and disrupt virtually every other aspect of your existence.  As a parent, the logical approach is to say screw it and avoid taking the ‘puppy route’ when expanding the family; we should all rescue 18-year old college students who have full scholarships at Virginia Tech.  They won’t cost as much and, despite their tendency to abuse alcohol on the weekends, are almost certainly potty-trained.  Someone else has already taught them the basics and their vaccinations are sure to be up-to-date.

I hope that sounds as silly to you as it does to me.  Almost every parent on this planet knows that there is no way they would ever trade a day of their child’s youth.  Despite sometimes being dirty, stinky, and inconvenient, they are incredibly rewarding.  But it’s not the dirty diaper that makes it so wonderful; it’s the relationship that is formed in the process.  And it’s that relationship that makes everything else so worth it and so wonderful.  And for me, having the puppy equivalent of that relationship with the exact breed and provenance I want is my prerogative.  The rescue animal may work for many people but it does not work for all people.  I respect my neighbors decision to adopt a dog from the local shelter and do not cast derision upon him for doing so.  So why does it happen in reverse?  Why do animal rights advocates throw scornful glances my way for buying rather than adopting?  There are many reasons, I suppose.  But one of them is not as plain to see.  There is a pervasive idea growing in our society that suggests that the less fortunate and otherwise downtrodden are not just worthy of the capacity of the more fortunate; they deserve it.  Those who ‘have’ should be compelled to give what they have to those who do not.  If you have more money you should pay more taxes.  If you come in first place you should share your glory with those who came in 2nd, 3rd and, increasingly, even last.  Nobody should be allowed to be better than anybody else because that’s not fair.  You should work harder so you can give more to others.  You shouldn’t get the puppy (or snake) you want when there are other animals who need your capacity.  You should give up your desire to have your needs satisfied in order to satisfy the needs of someone (or something) less fortunate.  “I really want a Weimaraner puppy,” you say.  “But I can’t get what I want when there are mix-breed puppies at the shelter who need homes.  Their need for a home is greater than my need for the breed that makes me happy.”  Under this illusion, the so-called ‘greater good’ trumps any need of any individual.  This notion, which is both a centerpiece and a rallying cry of the liberal mentality, is so perverted and wrong to me that I struggle to think that another person could arrive at the conclusion.  But reason is not automatic and logic is not always appropriately applied.   I do not subscribe to the notion that the “greater good”  supersedes my needs as an individual.  I believe that I need to take care of and be responsible for myself and my family.  I do not live a life where the benefit of others comes before the benefit of my family.  I know there are many who will disagree with me but I’m impervious.  If you do disagree with me do you know what I am to you?  I’m one less person with their hand out, asking you to freely give me the product of your efforts.   And these ideas are far from new.  The first time I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand I was floored to see that she was writing about the same issues in the 1950′s.

Whether it’s dogs or snakes I support the rights of the breeder to create a ‘product’ that is demanded by the buyer.  So long as there is a market for snakes I will produce and sell them.  Moreso, I support the decision of each buyer (or adopter, as the case may be).  If you want to buy an animal because it is the exact animal you want, do it and feel good about it.  If adopting/rescuing makes you happy, rock on!  But do not think negatively of someone who chooses differently than you.

So here is why I breed (and why I do not):

• I breed snakes because I find them beautiful and enigmatic.
• I breed snakes to financially benefit me and my family.  I do not breed snakes in order to benefit others.
• I breed snakes because I believe in an individual’s ability to choose the animal, regardless of what it is or where it came from, that makes them happy.
• I breed because there is a demand for the animals I have the capacity to produce.
• I breed the animals I choose because they satisfy a need I have.  People who see value in the animals I produce and who have a need, will buy one.  Nobody is compelled to buy from me just as nobody is (and never should be) compelled to pick an animal from a shelter.
• I do not abstain from breeding because someone out there has abandoned their snake.
• I do not abstain from breeding because some people do not practice good husbandry.  I breed because most people do.  I do not tailor my actions to address the shortcomings of the lowest common denominator.

I do not encourage people to adopt simply because an animal has a need.  I encourage people to buy or adopt in direct accordance with their own needs.  If purchasing an animal meets your specific need, open your wallet (or purse).  If adopting does the same, drive to the shelter.  But do not give up on your needs simply because someone else appears to be more needy than you.  And while it may make you feel good inside there is no absolution in sacrificing yourself to the want and needs of others.

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

I’m pretty much over it now, of course, but I was feeling pretty picked-on that day.  Missing so badly on the odds was one thing but I rubbed salt in my own wounds when I thought about the time, money and effort I had put into the parents; both of which I had raised from hatchlings.  All I could think about was how financially invested I was and how the production yielded nothing better than I could have made with a much less genetically impressive pairing.  For this clutch I was producing at a level that was genetically many seasons earlier than where I should have been.  With money on the line, that’s a tough pill to swallow.

Misses like this one are a seasonal reminder that ball python breeding is packed full of randomness and chance.  When you swing for the fences you run the risk of striking out.  And I’m doing it again this season.  I have pairings that have the potential to make some truly amazing things …if I can hit on the odds.  But when I hit on something big I’m notorious for holding it back; very little of my highest-end production makes its way into the collections of others.  Yes, sir!  I’m a morph hoarder.  And every year I rely on a lot of  luck to take me to the next level.  Luck, unfortunately, is a fickle friend.

Producing something next-level is a relative thing.  The animals that I am lamenting missing on today will be commonplace in the near future.  Perspective is important.  But lately I have been contemplating the intelligence of trying to hit on long odds.  The wisdom behind the answer to my contemplations can only be had after-the-fact, when I am  looking at the results of my production.  My decision will be interpreted as shrewd if I meet or beat what the Punnett Square suggests.  When I miss on the odds I can’t do anything other than think that I chose poorly.  But why did I try for such long odds in the first place?  Three reasons:

1. To make money
2. To take my collection to the next level.
3. I can’t afford to buy the super-crazy, cutting edge, designer morphs.

If I produce something amazing there is a pretty good chance that it will become a permanent resident in my collection, something I plan to use in the future to take me to even higher levels.  I’m using genetic luck to kite myself to ever higher heights.  The fact that I keep the coolest stuff I produce means that I am letting the betterment of my collection trump my desire to make money.

I’m starting to think that I shouldn’t be doing it this way.  As time goes by I am beginning to realize that it’s not smart business to try a hit tiny sweet spots and incredibly long odds.  This is especially true considering my admission that I’m just going to keep the best of the best that I produce.  The more intelligent bet is to re-align my pairing strategy to maximize the production of genetically less impressive (and statistically easier to produce) animals.  I wouldn’t produce much in the way of super-amazing combinations but I would produce a lot of moderately-priced, easy-to-sell, animals.  And if you don’t already know, it is fairly easy to sell lots of animals that are $1,000 and under before you sell a single $3,000+ animal.  The pool of buyers increases many-fold when the price falls to a certain point (usually under $1K).  This means that if I stop trying to go next level on every pairing and start trying to maximize lower-end morph production I will have many more babies to sell …and then I can buy the super-crazy morph from someone else who did take the chance.  Let someone else swing for the fence …and miss.  But I’ll be there, with cash in-hand, when they hit.  Let them be the one’s who count on long odds while I  produce lower-end animals in greater quantity, sell them easily and quickly find myself with all the cash I need to buy the morphs I covet.  I can sidestep the brutality of the odds, letting somebody else take all of the risk; I lose nothing when they miss and stand to gain when they hit.  There are plenty of people out there who are trying to hit on long odds.  Most of them will miss.  But some will hit on something silly-cool.  They took the risk, not me.  And by not even trying to do it I am guaranteeing that I won’t be one of the disappointed many that misses on them.  But, because I have so much desirable and affordable production to sell, I can safely conjure the cash (or trade) to make their animal my reality.  And the best part is that it’s still a win/win; everybody makes money.  I’m just doing more to guarantee mine.

This all makes a lot of financial sense.  But in the end I’m not sure I can do it.  The desire to make something cool, despite how painful it is when I miss, is a really tantalizing lure.  It frequently overrides my desire to make money.  I guess that means that this is more than just a business to me.

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

Not really a tough question, I suspect. Money in-hand is tangible and usable; it represents capability. In order for me to convince you to wait for money in the future it has to be more than what you can have today. But how much more? If the offer was $5,000 today or $5,200 in four years I feel pretty confident that you would still reject the deal and opt for today as the payday. The capacity for progress created by having money in hand will trump the promise of a meager future return.  What the exact future return needs to be in order to entice someone to take the deal is going to vary from person to person. But barring extreme and pressing financial need most people will eventually agree to wait for a future payday. Assuming you are looking to make some type of investment you need to decide what that number is and then make educated and rational decisions on how to achieve it. Enter the ball python; far from a pet the ball python has long since become one of the world’s many mechanisms of speculative investment.

I have an increasingly long history of trying to analyze the economics of the ball python industry (http://ballpythonbreeder.com/2010/04/on-the-economic-viability-of-ball-python-breeding/).  There are times when my contemplations on the topic consume me and I have lamented the pricing of ball pythons on several occasions (here and here).  Is it really an arena in which financial prosperity can be obtained? Or is it a money pit, a hobby that pays only part of its way with financial returns, leaving a hefty portion of the ‘profit’ to be paid in less tangible forms such as personal satisfaction and enjoyment? As a person who treats ball pythons as an investment in my financial future I really need to know. If the answer is ‘no’ I need to make some dramatic changes to my approach.

The number one place most people think to invest money is the stock market. It may not always be the best or most lucrative but it is fairly easy to do. How easy?  Simply open an investment account, fund it, and  then sit back and watch. Investing in mutual funds is almost completely hands-off. You need to keep track of the funds you have selected and adjust course from time-to-time but the day-to-day buy/sell decisions are off-loaded to professionals who do it on your behalf (for a fee).  It’s a pretty easy way to invest money.   Like many of you I invest in a retirement plan through my employer.  I also have a brokerage account, IRA’s and a few mutual fund accounts. Each month money from my bank account simply vanishes into them. Aside from the required attention I must pay to their performance I don’t do anything other than earn the paycheck that feeds them.  Pretty simple. How much of a return will these investments earn? I have absolutely no idea. But when I play around with the numbers I always assume that over a long period of time my investments will earn an average of 10% (compounding). Having spent some time around the investment world I have consistently seen 10% used as the variable when speculating future results (please note the emphasis on the word ‘speculating’).  And for the purposes of this ball python investment exploration I would like to use that as the baseline against which we measure everything else.

Let’s suppose you have $5,000 and want to invest it in something.  Should you invest in ball pythons, gold, diamonds, orange juice or mutual funds?  If (and this is a very big ‘if’) we assume that the stock market will provide you with a 10% return during the next four years we can figure out how much your $5K investment today will be worth some 1,500 days from now.  Here is the equation:

FV = P • (1+%interest)ⁿ

• FV – Future value of your money (how much money will you have at the end of the investment period)
• P – Initial Investment ($5,000 in this example)
• %interest – The return you expect (10% in this example)
• n – the number of years you will leave the entire investment (P) untouched.

So:

• FV = $5000 • (1.1)⁴
• FV = $7,320.50

This means that at 10% compounding over four years (e.g. you don’t touch the money at all during the investment period) your $5K investment will earn you $2,320.50 before taxes.  If you take those profits at the end of the four year investment period we will assume that you will pay a 35% tax on the profits (total tax = $812.18).  That will leave you with a net profit of $1,508.33.  Now let’s take a moment to ask the initial question again:  Would you rather have $5,000 today or a net of $6,508.33 four year from now?  Before you answer let me remind you that you won’t have to do any tangible work to make that money.  The only thing you will have to do is go without the $5K for four years.  Is that $1,508.33 going to be enough of a return?

Please also keep in mind that this calculation assumes that you actually have $5,000 in your hand today.  If you borrow the money with interest (credit card) you will have to deduct (from your net profit) the money you pay in interest to the credit card company.  I won’t try and present those numbers here but it should go without saying that borrowing $5K at 12% interest so you can invest in something that might pay 10% interest is not going to be very lucrative.

But wait, there is more to consider!  At this point we are supposing that we can turn $5,000 into $7,320 in four years.  But it is important to remember that $7,320 in four years will not be worth as much as it is today.  It is a mistake for you to think about future money using today’s perspectives.  The buying power of money is going down.  It always has and always will.   So what is today’s value of your future earnings?  I’m going to make an unscientific guess that across the board we are experiencing about 2% inflation.  Please note that I know that the real rate of inflation is a highly political issue.  The Consumer Price Index (CPI) suggests that the current rate is just over 1% but other people have compelling arguments that suggest it is practically closer to 8 or 13%.  I’m not educated enough on the nuances of the topic to argue it so I’m just going to make up a number that seems plausible but not excessive.  If you’re an economist please don’t bother trying to bust my chops on this point.  The make-believe I am playing doesn’t determine policy nor is it used to pass laws.

Here is the equation to calculate today’s value of a future return:

CV = FV • (1+%interest)^-n

• CV = The current value of a future return
• FV – Future return (e.g. how much will you actually be paid at some point in the future)
• %interest – The amount you will pay in interest (inflation in this case).
• -n – The number of years until you will receive the payment.

So what is that actual $5,000 in your hand today going to be worth in four years?

• CV = $5,000 • (1.02)^-4
• CV = $4,619.23

And what is today’s value of the $7,320.50 you might have in four years?

• CV = $7,320.50 • (1.02)^-4
• CV = $6,763.01

In four years your original $5,000 is only worth the equivalent of $4,619.23 in today’s money.  The $2,320.50 you made in pre-tax profit is only worth the equivalent of $2,143.78 today.  So just what does this all mean?  It means that without accounting for the ever-decreasing value of money you can’t make a direct apples-to-apples comparison of money that you have in your hand today with money you might have in your hand at some point in the future.  Stick with me because this is important.  You have to understand the future value of money in a way that is meaningful to you today.  This is called “net present value”.  Getting $1,500 today is not the same as getting $1,500 in the future.  In order to understand the future value of money you have to be able to look at it from today’s perspective.  The after-tax value of your future profit (four years from now) is worth only $1,393.46 in today’s dollars.

And now I can ask the question one final time, in a slightly different, yet much more meaningful, way.  Would you rather have $5,000 today or today’s equivalent of $6,393.46 in four years?  Now we have a meaningful comparison of money across time.  If the stock market can actually produce a 10% return over a four year period your $5,000 investment will yield an effective profit of $1,393.46 (taking taxes and inflation into account).  At this point you are either seeing the light or bleeding from the ears.

Ok.  The baseline is set:  $5K invested.  Fours years of waiting.  Net profit of about $1,400 (in today’s money).  What about taking that $5K and investing it in ball pythons instead?  Can that investment provide a better potential return?

The calculations for a snake breeding project are not quite as simple as putting money into a mutual fund.  There are a lot of moving parts that need to be considered.  Investing in the stock market comes with many unknowns.  Investing in ball pythons has just as many, if not more.  On the Scale of Risk an investment in ball pythons is arguably more risky than the stock market but not quite as wasteful as buying lottery tickets.  The benefit to this is that increased risk should bring greater potential for reward.  The risk versus reward theme is a constant.  The bigger the bet, the bigger the gain.  Or, if things don’t go well, the bigger the loss.  I have said it many times:  breeding ball pythons for profit is a game of calculated chance.  No matter how well you control the variables the end game is usually nothing less than a toss of the dice.   How many females lay how many eggs?  How well did you do on the odds and are the babies the “right” gender?  None of these things are under your control.  And that’s not too unlike the stock market; technology stocks can tank, there could be another accounting scandal or that pharmaceutical company you invested in could have its most profitable product recalled because it kills more people than it cures.  Not matter the mechanism, investment is full of risks you can’t completely control.  So is the profit potential when breeding ball pythons worth the risk?  That’s the question.

What are the moving parts that need to be considered in an evaluation of a ball python investment?  They include (but are not limited to):

1. Will there be any startup costs?  This includes caging, water bowls, hides, room preparation, etc.  Many of these costs are, for the most part, one-time costs.  If you buy quality cages today they should still be serving you well in 10 years.
2. The initial (and continued) investment in animals.
3. The costs associated with raising animals to an appropriate breeding size.  This mainly includes food and environmental necessities (heat, cleaning supplies, etc.) and, rarely, vet bills.
4. Your time.  How many hours per week will you spend taking care of your investment?  How much do you get paid to do it?  For most of us, for-profit breeders included, that answer is close to zero; we don’t pay ourselves to take care of our snake collection.  We rationalize this decision by telling ourselves that our payday will come in the future, when babies are hatched and sold.  One way or another you are expecting to get paid for the time you spend.  But by excluding the value of your time you are artificially skewing the numbers to a more positive outcome.  At the very least this is a healthy dose of denial.  Companies can’t calculate their profits without accounting for the cost of labor. Would you go to work every day at your “real job” for no paycheck?  If this reptile thing you are doing is a business why do the hours spent working on it count differently?  It’s OK for you to defer your pay.  I did it for a few years when I started my IT business.  All I’m saying is that you need to account for it as you do.  It’s part of the real cost of being in business.
5. Market value depreciation.  Ball python prices are both fickle and arbitrary.  They frequently fall very fast.  It can be depressing.  Do not look at the animal’s value today and use that as a measure of your profits tomorrow.  You will be very disappointed if you do.  For the purposes of our discussion we will assume that co-dominant morphs lose 45% of their value each year.  And we will assume that simple recessive animals lose 30% of theirs.    This can be quite variable from one morph to the next but the numbers I have seen over the years (despite making me sick to my stomach) suggest this is not unrealistic.

It is impossible to account for every eventuality when considering ball pythons as an investment.  This fact alone may make it unsavory for some people.  I am reasonably confident that most people who take time to read this really want ball pythons to be an excellent investment.  I know I do.  But I endeavor to be pragmatic on the topic so I can make the most responsible investments.  I am, after all, no longer in this because it is a hobby.  These snakes need to pay for a good portion of my future.  Can they do that?  If not, I need to direct my investment dollars in another direction and let this whole snake breeding thing fall back into the category of ‘leisurely hobby’.

The first thing we need to do is invest our $5,000 in some snakes.  To keep things focused on the animals we will assume that the appropriate environment has already been established.  Cages, water bowls, etc. have already been acquired and we don’t need to dip into our investment capital for these things.

Here is what we buy:

• 0.3 Normal Adult Females @ $125 each
• 2.0 Visual Males (Single Gene, Simple Recessive) @ $850 each
• 0.3 100% Het Females @ $500 each
• 0.2 Visual Females (Single Gene, Simple Recessive) @ $1,100 each

Total value of investment:  $5,700.  Whoops!  We already blew the budget.  But we’ll assume we got a discount on the whole package and our total price was $5,000.  Sweet.

With the exception of the adult normal females all of these are current year (hatchling) snakes.  Here are some general assumptions we will make about this group of animals:

• The 2.0 males will be big enough to breed the following breeding season.  This is why we invested in the normal females.  They are an affordable way to get some production early in the investment period and the sale of that production will help offset the cost of raising the others.
• We also assume that two of the heterozygous females and one of the visual females will be ready to breed in 18-20 months.  The remaining het and visual female will require an additional year before achieving a good breeding size.  This is a relatively safe thing to assume.  Not all females get up to size in 18 months but some do.  It is not unusual for females to take upwards of 36 months to get up to size.
• Every female of breeding size will not lay eggs every year.  Most breeders will agree that in any given breeding season you should expect only 50-70% of your females to lay eggs.

The Timeline

The animals are purchased in May of Year One.  Beginning in November of Year One the males are bred to the 0.3 normal females.  Breeding continues through late February.

In June of Year Two (13 months after the initial investment) two of the three females lay a total of 12 eggs.  In late August 5.6 hets hatch.

For completely arbitrary reasons the price of simple recessive animals drops by approximately 1/3 each year.  Using the value of the animals in the previous year as a reference we can speculate that the value of the heterozygous animals one year later will be:

• Male Hets:  $70, down from $100 the previous season.
• Female Hets: $350, down from $500 the previous season.
• Male Visuals: $600, down from $850 the previous season.
• Female Visuals: $775, down from $1,100 the previous season.

The total value of our production in Year Two (all of which we will sell) is:

• 5.0 Male Hets @ $70 each = $350
• 0.6 Female Hets @$350 each = $2,100

Because we acquired our initial stock at a 10% discount we will assume that we also sold your production at a reasonable 10% discount.   The value of our Year Two production is ($350+$2,100) – 10% = $2,205.  The hatchlings were in our possession for a total of ten weeks before being sold.  They were fed twice weekly during that time.  Subtract the first 10-14 days for their first shed and subtract two additional weeks when they were again in shed and we were feeding them for a total of six weeks.  That works out to ($.90 x 2) x 11 animals for six weeks.  By the time they are sold we will have spent approximately $120 feeding them.  Subtract this from your total and your net for Year Two production is $2,085.  As a reminder, that $2,085 is not the same as $2,085 today.  The net present value of that $2,085 you will earn in one year is $2,024.

Now let’s jump forward to the tail end of Year Three.  This season you got eggs from one normal female (7 eggs), one of your young het females (6 eggs) and one of the visual females (5 eggs).

• From the normal female you hatch 3.3 hets (one egg went bad during incubation)
• From the het female you hatch 2.1 visuals and 1.2 100% hets
• From the visual female you hatch 2.3 visuals.
• Total production:  4.5 hets, 4.4 visuals

Prices at the end of Year Three are as follows:

• Male Hets:  $50, down from $70 the previous season.
• Female Hets: $250, down from $350 the previous season.
• Male Visuals: $425, down from $600 the previous season.
• Female Visuals: $550, down from $775 the previous season.

The value of your Year Three production:

• 4.0 hets: 4 * $50 = $200
• 0.5 hets: 5 *$350 = $1,750
• 4.0 visuals: 4 * $600 = $2,400
• 0.4 visuals: 4 * 775 = $3,100
• Total production value:  $7,450

In Year Three we will again assume that you sell your production at a reasonable 10% discount.  This drops your gross to $6,705.  Using the same sales time line as the previous season (with a slight increase in rodent prices), hatchling feeding costs for Year Three are: ($.95 x 2) x 17 =  $193.80.  Subtracting this from your Year Three production gross leaves $6,511.  The net present value of that $6,511 is $6,137.

Finally let’s jump to the end of Year 4.

This season you got eggs from two normal females (11 eggs), two of your het females (12 eggs) and both of the visual females (11 eggs).

• From the normal females you hatch 7.4 hets
• From the het females you hatch 1.3 visuals and 3.5 100% hets
• From the visual females you hatch 7.4 visuals.
• Total production:  10.9 hets, 8.7 visuals

Prices at the end of Year Four are as follows:

• Male Hets:  $35, down from $50 the previous season.
• Female Hets: $175, down from $250 the previous season.
• Male Visuals: $300, down from $425 the previous season.
• Female Visuals: $375, down from $550 the previous season.

The value of your Year Four production:

• 10.0 hets: 10 * $35 = $350
• 0.9 hets: 9 * $175 = $1,575
• 8.0 visuals: 8 * $300 = $2,400
• 0.7 visuals: 7 * $375 = $2,625
• Total Year Four production value:  $6,950

In Year Four we will again assume that you sell your production at a reasonable 10% discount.  This drops your gross to $6,255.  Using the same sales time line as the previous season, hatchling feeding costs for Year Four are: ($.95 x 2) x 34 =  $408.00.  Subtracting this from your Year Three production gross leaves $5,847.  The net present value of that $5,847 is $5,402.

The Tally

At the end of three full breeding seasons (which will put you into year four on the calendar) you will have earned (expressed using Net Present Value):

• Year Two:  $2,024
• Year Three: $6,137
• Year Four: $5,402
• Total:  $13,563

After subtracting your initial $5,000 investment you have a profit (still expressed in Net Present Value) of $8,563.  Well that looks pretty nice but don’t start grinning just yet.  You need to subtract your expenses, the biggest of which is your rodent bill for your adult breeders.  If you buy rats at an average of $1.30/rat I estimate the bill to feed ten ball pythons for three years is about $1,600.  Subtract that from your profits and you have now netted $6,963.

A few more estimated expenses that were incurred during the multi-year process:

• Mulch/Bedding: $487
• Electricity: $720
• PayPal/Credit Card fees:  $406 (assumes 1/2 of the $13,563 was payments via credit card or PayPal at 3%)
• Misc supplies:  $300

After factoring those into the equation our profit is down to $5,050.  That’s not bad, really.  We are still $3,657 ahead of the comparatively meager $1,393 we earned in our mutual fund.  But don’t forget what is missing:

• Taxes: At 35% your $13,563 would be chopped by $4,747, leaving you with a total initial profit of $8,816.  Important Note:  There would be plenty of deductions that would push that number back up, of course.
• Caging: We didn’t budget the cost of caging into these calculations; we assumed it was already there.  If that isn’t true you could quickly see your profitability drop below zero.
• Your Time: Invest in a mutual fund and make $1,393 while doing almost nothing for four years.  Or bust your butt in the reptile business and make $5,050.  You worked a lot harder for the return.  The time you spent has financial value, doesn’t it?  Had you been paying someone to do this all along how much would you have spent in payroll?  Even if you spent a lowly 8 hours per week taking care of your animals (a low number, I think) and paid $10/hr you would have spent $4,160/year in payroll.  Actual payroll over the total investment period would approach $15,000 …more than the total amount earned.  Every business owner knows that payroll is the single biggest bill that has to be paid.  This also helps us understand why we don’t pay ourselves for the time we spend tending to our animals.
• Selling Difficulty: I generously assumed that you would quickly sell your production.  If your babies spend more time on the rack you could easily add a few hundred more dollars to your rodent bill.
• Marketing Costs: This includes fees to sell using on-line classified sites, web site hosting, trade show table fees, display cases, etc.  All of these costs could add up to a lot over a four-year period.
• Catastrophe: The production numbers each season were pretty darn fair.  Subtle swings in the odds could radically change the numbers.  What would have happened if an animal got sick and needed vet care?  You could easily lose them for an entire breeding season (or worse).

One criticism of this particular analysis is that the collection of animals remains stagnant over the investment period.  I admit that this is not the normal way ball python breeders do things.  Most of us continue to upgrade the quality of our collections.  At the end of the first breeding season we could have acquired other multi-gene animals to increasingly work toward making something other than the same stuff year after year.  While this may be the more common approach it was not my intention to muddy the waters with additional investment capital being poured into the mix.  What I want to know is if an investment in a project can be profitable by itself; no continuous cash infusions needed.  Trying to determine profitability when buying new collection members is a topic for another day.

The end analysis in all of this is that ball pythons have the potential to provide a better return that what it typically expected from the stock market.  But it’s not a sure thing; nothing is even remotely close to guaranteed. There is a lot of risk and expenses are significant.  I remain confident that there is money to be made for some people in this business …but not all of us.  Most people simply don’t make plans to be profitable and, as a result, they won’t.  I once had a teacher tell me that “failing to plan is planning to fail”.  How true…

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

The pace of production for different morph combinations is always accelerating.  As breeders get their hands on more and more multi-gene males and females the combinations are beginning to leap forward almost exponentially.  In 2011 it won’t surprise me to see an abundance of new six, seven and possibly even eight-gene combinations.  It’s not as if they will be available in quantity, though.  Even with three or four genes on each side you still require a massive amount of luck on the odds.  Because they are so hard to make it will still be several years before they are available in any measurable quantity (and there is still plenty of time to be the first). For the next several years getting your hands on a four, five or six-gene animal is going to require you to produce your own or be prepared to drop significant cash (or comparable trade).

So if you really want to be the first the make something amazing what do you have to do?  The answer is quite obvious, I suppose.  But if you’re lagging behind the bigger names in the business you may be looking for a way to gain some momentum.  There isn’t much opportunity for the short road but here are a few quotes that nicely illustrate my perspective:

“Those who live within their means suffer from a lack of imagination.” – Oscar Wilde

• I hate to be the bearer of bad news but you are far less likely to be in a position to name a morph if you are not financially aggressive.  Who am I kidding?  Let’s call a duck a duck:  you will likely need to lean more toward financially reckless.  This immediately narrows the field of contenders.  Most of us don’t have the stomach to spend multiple thousands of dollars on a single animal.  Even if the money was available we wouldn’t do it.  And in reality, you need more than one.  These days you will need several heavy genetic hitters because big genetic combinations require you to come to the table with powerful potential in the sire and the dam (and that requires money).  Having a high-end male paired with lower-end females is a great way to make some money but don’t expect to be wondering what you are going to call the babies when they pip; it’s almost guaranteed that somebody else beat you to it.  I admit that it is silly to spend big cash for the sole objective of being able to name a ball python morph.  It’s really more of a fringe benefit.  It remains, however, largely true.  Can you spend five, ten or fifteen grand on a single snake?  Most people wouldn’t even consider it.  I hem and haw over how much to spend on a new dishwasher but I barely flinch when spending multiple thousands on a snake.  I’m one a relative few that has that special kind of addiction.   From Mr. Wilde’s perspective, I, and others like me, have ample imagination.

“Luck favors the prepared.” -Louis Pasteur

• Louis Pasteur is frequently referred to as the king of accidental discovery so I take him at his word on this point.  The more opportunity to which you expose yourself the more likely it is that you will come across something amazing.  Put another way, serendipitous moments are less likely to occur when the “data set” is small.  What exactly does this mean for ball python breeders?  A few things:
  1. Don’t count on the odds to be kind. Punnet squares are not guarantees.  More often than not I consider them to be taunts.  Consider yourself fortunate if your production matches what the square suggests; your eggs have been sprinkled with magic fairy dust if you beat the odds.  Be sure to thank the Higher Power you deem worthy when it happens.  Sometimes it takes a whole lot of tryin’ just to get lucky once and painfully large amounts of time may pass in the process.  Ball python breeding is not a field of endeavor packed with an excess of guarantees.  Even though you may have the ingredients necessary to make magic you are going to find that you often have to try more than once to hit the sweet spot.  And if you’re trying to be the first to make something you need it to happen sooner rather than later; this particular facet of ball python husbandry is competitive.  To beat everyone else to the prize you need to get as many at-bats as possible.  Put simply, get as many high-end animals as you can to improve your odds.  Easier said than done, I know.  Please refer back to Oscar Wilde’s quote if you need to get the full spectrum of my point.
  2. If you’re gonna’ go, go big. We all have limits on money, space and time.  This makes ‘big’ a relative term.  To make magic you don’t have to keep thousands of animals but you do have to keep as many as your time, space and money allow.  Scratch that, you have to work within your time and space constraints; you need to stress the limits of what you define as affordable.  Yes, I know it is horribly bad advice to tell people to spend more than they can afford. In this instance, however, I am addressing the desire to be the first to make, and subsequently name, a particular morph.  If pushing the edges of what has been done is part of your game plan then you don’t get to be conservative.  You can expect conservative results if all you make are conservative investments.  Risk versus reward is always in effect.  If you only buy snakes that are $1,000 and less you are not likely to make the first of anything.  You have to have the largest, nicest collection that you can still provide with excellent care.
  3. Husbandry matters. Getting animals up to breeding size is a game of vigilance, chance and speed.  I have one word for all the people who breed for profit and say they “don’t push their animals” to get big.  That word:  bullshit!  When price is factored into the mix time is your biggest enemy.  Casually getting animals up to size is contra to the stated objective of making a profit and I don’t buy it when people tell me they aren’t in a hurry to get their girls on eggs.  On the breeder’s carousel the gold ring is only available once per year and missing it requires you to wait at least another twelve months before you get another shot.  That time is valued in cash.  Almost all of us are in a hurry to push that male past 500 grams and we hope and pray that our females blow right through the thousand-gram wall.  Most breeders will start breeding their girls at 1,200 grams, give or take, but the odds of a first-time girl going at that size are somewhat low.  The odds of the clutch being large are even smaller.  There is no substitute for bigger, older girls.  This, of course, takes time.  But if you want to have the greatest chance for success you need to make sure that the time is well spent.  You have to aggressively feed your females in the off season and you can’t waver in the slightest.  It’s not an exact science but bigger girls tend to produce bigger clutches.  One girl who gives you ten eggs is worth a lot more than those smaller girls who only offer four, five and six eggs each year.  Every extra egg that makes it through incubation increases the odds that this time around will yield the gold ring.  Set yourself up for success by adhering to a simple philosophy:  ABF – Always Be Feeding.  Feeding snakes should be your favorite pastime.  And before you heat up your keyboard flaming me for encouraging reptile obesity let me remind you that we are talking about ball pythons here; their appetites are sufficiently fickle that overfeeding is an infrequent problem.  Other species of snakes?  Sure, there are many python species that will get too fat.  But consider yourself lucky if you have a ball python that will eat often enough to look like most Americans.

“Collect opportunities.” -Nicholas Taleb

• Collecting opportunities means a few things to me.  In some ways it ties in with points I have already made about the size and quality of your collection but it also emphasizes the opportunity you have to leap forward by taking chances with the unknown.
  1. You can’t breed it when it’s not in the rack. When you come across an animal that fits beautifully into your collection, do everything you can to make it yours.  It is more than just a little cavalier to suggest causing yourself financial stress and/or harm over ball pythons.  Admittedly, it is not right for most people.  But people who are always going to be financially conservative probably stopped reading a while ago, anyway.  Much to the chagrin of my wife and business partners I have an incredibly optimistic attitude about my ability to make money.  It’s this mindset that allows me to actually pull the trigger and spend it.  I believe the pain to be temporary and I have faith that the investment will earn the money back multiple times over …most of the time.  Despite the tone you may interpret here, my risk-taking is quite calculated.  It’s aggressive but not to the point that I can’t pay my mortgage or feed my family.  Being happily married with healthy kids and a nice, safe place to live is always going to be cooler than naming a ball python morph.
  2. Dinker. A few of the bigger names in this business got there by being lucky.  Most got there through money, investment and time but there are a small few that saw something others did not.  They took a chance and bought an unusual (or not so unusual) looking animal and found that it was genetic gold.  The Orange Dream, Special, het Puma, Specter, and Yellow Belly are a few easy examples.  Most of these animals are not immediately impressive but when paired with the right mates something amazing happens.  Some breeders have an eye for unusual markings and have developed a knack for teasing new morphs from the DNA; others have just had blind luck.  In the end it doesn’t matter, though.  It all starts with the dinker.  The flow of unusual ball pythons from the wild has slowed in recent years but they are still arriving.  If you see something odd and unusual, pick it up.  Dinker projects are like lottery tickets; most are going to be losers but every now and then somebody wins big.  If you don’t dinker you can rest assured that it won’t be you.  Don’t bet on dinker projects to put you on the map.  Consider them a fun little side project that might, just might, bump you ahead in the game.

We’re all in this business for different reasons.  Some people could care less about the money, making something first or any of the other limited forms of fame and glory the business has to offer.  Others feel just the opposite.  They want desperately to be the first to make something new.  And there there are a huge number of us who could care less if we are the first so long as we can make some nice money from our efforts.  I find that I am most closely aligned with the latter.  More than once I have said it:  nobody keeps as many snakes as I do solely out of love for reptiles.  Money is the motivator.  Seeing something for the first time, something no other person has ever seen …that’s just a super-cool bonus!

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

Like gamblers in Vegas, ball python breeders sit at the table each and every year and play the odds.  And each year we bet on increasingly long one’s.  We have to.  Competition is increasing, prices are fickle and our desire to make something magical is insatiable.  In many ways the designer morph business is a competitive sport and the release of the second edition of John Berry’s book has put all of us on notice.  The first time I sat down and flipped through its pages all I could think was, “I’m gonna’ need a bigger boat.” More so than ever I see the heights to which I need to elevate my game.  All that and there are several existing combos that didn’t make it into the book and photographic contributions from a few of the bigger names in the business were missing.  We can only imagine the things they produce and don’t share with the world.  Playing catch-up with the morph-producing leaders of this business is forever difficult.  The dollars required remain ridiculous and their production helps them stay in front.  I’m feel like I’m sitting in the fourth or fifth row, doing my best to leverage a modest but potential-rich collection of animals.

Breeder? You Need to Own this Book!

My opportunity to jump forward in the pack hinges largely on one thing:  hitting the odds.  It has to be.  I don’t have the kind of money necessary to buy my way to the front.  Each year I spend just enough on new morphs to make my finances constantly uncomfortable and each year I hold back a large number of animals that I should be turning into cash.  People who have painful addictions often behave in such irrational ways.  Doing the best I can with money I try to fill in the gaps by breeding my way forward in the pack.  It’s a slow, uncertain and sometimes painfully frustrating process.  The breeders I am trailing have either been around a lot longer than me or they have the finances available to buy themselves the pole position.

Because we are almost always trying to increase the genetic diversity of the animals we produce we seldom do pairings that provide a 100% guarantee on the odds.  Every clutch has a desired sweet spot, a moving variable that we are shooting for.  Not many people breed super pastel to super pastel or albino to albino even though doing so provides genetically guaranteed results.  There wouldn’t be any measurable excitement when the eggs pipped because the results are already known.  Genetically speaking, there also would be no forward progress.  For many years people have been breeding albino males to het albino females.  Meanwhile, albino females are busy being bred to albino spiders or albino black pastels or something else that still leaves some piece of the genetics to chance (while you may be hitting 100% on the albino you’re betting on 50/50 or longer odds for some other morph being added to the equation).  Those of us who have eyes set on distant future prizes are breeding albinos to other simple-recessive animals, producing double or triple hets that are not visually exciting.  While they are rich in potential they are quite normal in appearance.  The payday comes a few years from now …maybe …when you hit on the 1:16 or 1:32 odds.

When you breed single-gene albino to single-gene albino you aren’t doing anything to advance the quality of your collection.  More to the point, it’s a waste of a female albino.  When combined with another morph the hets you could produce from an albino female are worth more (financially and genetically) than the albinos you can guarantee in a homozygous pairing.  Because at least one of the genes is left to chance the results are almost always incomplete and intermediate.  Lesser het albino, spinner het albino, albino black pastel, the list goes on.  It seems we are always producing things that are visually one thing and het for something else.  Once mature these animals are likely to be paired with mates that also do not give us a guaranteed returns on the odds.  The lesser het albino might be bred to an albino pinstripe, the spinner het albino could be bred to an albino female and the albino black pastel will be bred to another albino black pastel.  All of these pairings offer opportunity but they do not offer certainty.  You could miss on the odds, leaving that pairing’s pinnacle of genetic achievement frustratingly unrealized.  The odds are long to hit on the albino kingpin, the albino spinner and the albino super black pastel.  Hitting on the odds is a magical moment but missing on the odds means your production is not much better than that of a person who is much less invested and breeding albino male to het albino female.  Such is the nature of betting on long odds; win big …or lose big.

Pretty much every person who breeds ball pythons has lamented their mistreatment at the hands of The Odds.  Friends and colleagues console them by offering assurances that the odds will come back around for them next time.  But is it true?  Does missing the odds on one clutch earn you the right to have the odds work in your favor on the next one?  Is getting brutalized on the odds a way of earning some reptile breeder’s form of karma credit?

In short, no.

When you flip a coin there is a 50/50 chance it will land on heads.  The odds are equal for tails.  If the first coin flip lands on heads what influence does that exert over the second flip?  Do the 50/50 odds shift to favor tails?  Of course not.  Each flip of the coin is independent of and unrelated to the preceding flip(s).  The same is true with ball python genetics.  To the best of our knowledge all of the morphs available in the market place are determined at the moment of fertilization and do not change.  Whatever genetic code is carried in the haploid cells prior to their union is what determines what type of morph you are producing.

Every year I know, hear or read about a breeder getting miraculous results on the odds.  You know who I’m talking about.  The guy who breeds het albino to het albino and hatches nothing but albinos.  The guy who breeds double het axanthic pied to double het axanthic pied and gets two male axanthic pieds from 7 eggs.  The guy who breeds pastel het ghost to spider het ghost and produces 4 ghost bumble bees (humble bee’s).  We can go on forever.  I console myself by remembering that they are not telling me about all the clutches they had with results that were on par (or under).  How the odds work is not foreign to me and while Mr. Punnet’s square tells me how things statistically should go I know from countless times at bat that they frequently don’t.  The ratios illustrated by the Punnet square show us the likelihood that certain genes will come together but in no way does it guarantee that the genes will cooperate.  So how much stock can you put in the square?  A lot if you are producing a lot.  Not much if you are only producing a little.  Let’s explore some numbers to see what I’m saying.

The table below (which does not display correctly if you are reading this from Facebook) shows the results of pairing a pinstripe to a normal ball python.  The Pinstripe gene is a dominant trait and, according to the Punnet Square, there is a 50/50 chance that the babies will be Pinstripes.  In the first analysis I assumed that ten females all laid ten eggs each.  I then flipped a coin ten times to represent the 50/50 odds of pinstripe:normal.  The results are in the right-hand column.  Only two of the ten pairings produced results that match what the Punnet Square says they should be.  Female #1 and #7 had odds very much in favor of Pinstripes but Female #6 only had one Pinstripe in the 10-egg clutch.  As you look over the results you can see that they are quite varied.  Such is the nature of the odds when viewed on a small scall.  Now notice that the total ratio of Pinstripes to Normals is 47:53.  That’s pretty darn close to the 50/50 odds the Punnet square promised:  47% of the babies are Pinstripes and 53% of the babies are Normals.  What can we learn from this?  As the data set increases (e.g. you hatch more eggs with the potential to produce a certain morph) you are more likely to produce at a level consistent with the Punnet square.  If you only produce one or two clutches you are more likely to be the recipient of wild swings in the odds.  For example, look at the results of just producing with two females (Females #1 & #2); you would have produced 13 pinstripes and 7 normals.  Nice!  But now look at Females #9 & #10.  If theses were your two girls you would have had the exact opposite results; only seven Pinstripes and 13 normals.  If Pinstripes are worth $200 each that is a swing of $1,200; one breeder walks away with $2,600 and the other earns only $1,400.  This is part of what makes it so difficult to make a living as a reptile breeder.  No matter how hard you work you are always at the mercy of a coin toss.  There is neither financial nor mental stability in that.

The table above is interesting but what happens when you adjust the number of eggs to more realistic values (after all, every girl doesn’t lay ten eggs)?  In the table below I counted the number of eggs laid by ten of my females and flipped a coin again.  The results are shown in the table below.  Similar to the previous table there are few pairings that did exactly what the Punnet Square said would happen.  Female #4 was the only girl who produced 50/50 odds.  And just like before we can see that there are some wild swings in the odds from one clutch to the next.  Female #1 produced 5 Pinstripes and 1 Normal.  Female #3 did even better with 6 Pinstripes and 1 Normal.  But Female #6 and Female #7 did more poorly with a combined ratio of 3 Pinstripes and 7 Normals.  When you look at the average from the ten pairings you see that the final ratio was 32:28 which is pretty close to the 50/50 odds we were expecting.  53% of the babies are Pinstripes and 47% are normals.  What am I learning from this?  I can only put faith in the Punnet Square and The Odds when I am working with larger and larger data sets.  If you want to increase the ability to predict that rate at which you will produce a certain morph you have to attempt to produce an increasingly large number of them.  If you rely on small groups of animals to produce statistical results you can expect results across the board.  If you are trying to make a living out of doing this you are setting yourself up for failure.  When I was in college I worked as a waiter.  Anybody who has ever waited tables knows a few truths:  1) Virtually all of your income comes from tips and 2) while the standard gratuity is 15% you can count on a lot of variation.  When I went to work to wait tables on a Friday night I knew I was going to make some money but it was never consistent.  Some nights I would leave with $80 and others I would leave with over $200.  It’s tough to control your finances when your income is so variable.  Such is the nature of breeding a particular morph on a small scale.

As a final bit of proof for the predictability associated with ever-larger numbers I did ten trials of 1,000 eggs that had 50/50 odds of producing Pinstripes.  After 10,000 coin flips (er, eggs hatching) we can see that 49.33% of them were Pinstripes and 50.67% of them were normals.

Part of the reason I sat down to write this is that I, like many other ball python breeders, am a perpetual Punnet Square optimist.  With every clutch laid I convince myself that the odds are going to be in my favor.  And it simply isn’t true.  I produce a few hundred baby ball pythons each season.  And that production represent all of my projects and the overwhelming majority of my production is geared toward hitting on longer than 50/50 odds.  It’s no wonder that I get depressed when eggs start to hatch.  As the incubator fills I begin to mentally count morphs that haven’t even pipped yet.  And it hurts when the odds don’t pan out the way I planned.  This morning, as a 10-egg clutch of pastel x black pastel spider hatched and I saw that not one baby carried the pastel gene I was reminded yet again that missing on the odds is a constant companion.  It will deflate you and kill your motivation more than anything else.  In the business world you will often hear people say, “Under promise, over deliver.”  The idea is to set expectations lower and then wow people with the service or product your provide.  Ball python breeders like me would do well to take a page from this script.  Unless you are producing large numbers you need to underestimate what the Punnet Square says is possible.  This way you stand a better chance of being happy when little heads start poking out of eggs.

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

Why do you do this?  By ‘this’ I mean breed reptiles, of course.   Is it a hobby?  Do you do it for a living?  Somewhere in-between?  If you aren’t doing so already, do you aspire to one day breed snakes for a living?

Regardless of where you are in the reptile husbandry game, do you have a plan?  Does it look a little like this?:

1. Buy snakes
2. Breed snakes
3. Sell snakes
4. Count crazy amounts of cash
5. Repeat

What is the last snake you bought?  Why did you buy it?  Was it a smart buy or did you buy it on impulse?  Did it fit into any current breeding project?  How about the snake before that one?  Did you buy it because of its price or because of what it was?  How many times have you let your reptile purchases guide the direction of your reptile collection?  Shouldn’t it be the other way around?  Shouldn’t your collection guide your purchases?  Shouldn’t you have a plan; an honest-to-goodness business plan?

I’m not good at rationalizing things.  I am flat-out awesome at it!  In the game of rationalization, I’m a rockstar!  When I set my mind to it I have yet to come across something I couldn’t talk myself into.  My decisions are good.  The are solid and they are just.  I have rationalized my way into many, many snake purchases, each of them a brilliant, strategic and soon-to-be-profitable decision.  With a punnet square, an Excel spreadsheet and available credit I can design a plan for world domination and financial nirvana within a matter of minutes.  On paper I am well on my way to living the dream.

The reality?  I have lived in the same house and driven the same truck for the past eleven years.  Neither are impressive (but I’m not complaining).  Year after year I’m a year away from making good money.  More than once I have run up to the precipice of profitability, stared longingly and lovingly at it, and then turned and walked back down the trail.  By my definitions I am not yet successful.  Some people who know me would argue otherwise.  If three years ago I had the reptile collection I have today I would have said that I am very successful.  But today I want the collection I will have three years from now.  I just can’t seem to get my reptile collection and my timeline to sync up.  I wonder if it’s because I don’t really have a plan any better than the one above.  Who am I kidding?  Step #4 doesn’t exist for me.   After step #3 I jump straight back to #1.  That’s me:  buy, breed, sell.  Repeat.  Snake rich, cash poor.

Because ball pythons are so diverse there is an underlying and [perhaps] unconscious drive to have all of them.  Your collection must have pastels, spiders, pinstripes, black pastels, albinos, mojaves, clowns, piebalds, ghosts, lessers, butters, yellow bellys, fires, axanthics and cinnamons.  Right?  But that’s just to start.  With all the ingedients you can make all of the magic!  But is that really the most profitable way to go about it?  Maybe for some.  I’m not sure it’s right for all of us, though.  I think you need to explore your motivations before you buy any more critters.

Why do you breed ball pythons?  You probably fall into one or more of these categories:

• For the love. Making money isn’t that important to you.  You just like to breed snakes.  You love the whole process and derive joy from successful husbandry.
  • If this is you, congratulations!  Your desires are pure.  Please collect your group of normal ball pythons and make your way to the back of the room.  From there you can listen at a distance, safe from getting any of my capitalism on you.
• To be the first to produce a new morph, to be a recognizable name.  A pioneer in the ever-emerging ball python genetics/morph game.
  • Bring your wallet.  You will need it.  If your wallet is mighty and equipped with sufficient stamina, we will all one day know your name.
  • Fame in the ball python world is real but small.  While I know the names of the big breeders, my parents do not.  Nor do my friends and neighbors.  Being a big name breeder makes you look cool in only the smallest of circles.  Keep your ego in check when you get there.
• To produce a diverse and eclectic array of ball python morphs while making a profit.
  • While the profit part may be elusive these days I suspect that many of us fall into this category.  As your collection expands it becomes more diverse.
• To produce the animals that will make you the most profit, regardless of how you feel about them.
  • You are a pure capitalist.  Whatever sells is what you are selling.  Some may call you a heartless, money-hungry bastard.  Me?  I admire your motivations and envy your lack of  personal attachment.
• Some other motivation. There may be some other category into which you fall so put yourself here if that’s true.

So who among this list is in the worst position?  It’s the people who want to ‘produce a diverse and eclectic array of ball python morphs while making a profit’.  Why?  Your motivations are at odds with each other.  A diverse ball python collection of 100 animals (or 50, or 25, whatever) will allow you to produce a good number of morphs.  It’s exciting and cool when you open the cages and see all the colors and patterns.  But stop for a moment and really think about what’s happening with your collection.  For ease of discussion I will talk about Clown Ball Pythons.  Clowns are not cheap but they are within reach of many breeders.  The most common gateway into breeding clowns is to buy a male clown and some female het clowns.  So let’s say you buy 1.2 (one male, two females).  Chances are good that you buy them as babies.  In about 2-3 years you will have raised your females and are now producing clown babies for the first time.  What are you going to do when they come out of the egg?  Sell them?  Really?  Don’t you remember what you just went through to produce these?  You just spent almost 3 years of your life raising these things up and now, there they are:  baby clown ball pythons produced by YOU!!!  If you sell them you still only have your breeders.  How are you going to grow AND refine your ball python collection if you sell them?  You gotta’ keep some.  And as soon as you decide to do that, you’re screwed.  The cycle has you.  But if you do sell them you’ll still only be producing a few clowns the following year (you are breeding het females after all).  You will never get any bigger and your collection will never get any better than it is today.  That’s the rub.  Keep your production and you’re screwed.  Sell your production and you’re screwed.  Neither is the end of the world but neither is getting you to the world you worked up on your Excel spreadsheet a few years earlier, either.  What to do?

I know it’s easy to write this and not have to talk about the money behind it but  if you are going to breed clowns, BREED CLOWNS.  Don’t buy 1.2 clowns and 1.2 albinos and 1.2 ghosts and 1.2 mojaves and 1.2 spiders.  Buy 2.8 clowns instead.  No, it’s not as exciting but when you do produce clowns you are more likely to produce a bunch of them.  When you have 25 clown babies to sell it is A LOT easier to sell them without emotion AND keep a few back to raise up.  When you are only producing a few clowns you often can’t bear to part with them.  Because they are few they are precious to you; a cherished commodity.  And they are the source of your problems.

So into your business plan you need to integrate VOLUME when it comes to a particular morph.  Resist the desire to expand both size and diversity.  If you are expanding the size of your collection do it with a morph you already have.  Don’t add new morphs to the collection until you have a sufficiently large production capacity with one of your other morphs.

This philosophy holds true when you start producing multiple-gene animals.  How are you ever going to bring yourself to sell that silver streak when you only produced one of them?  If you want to produce silver streaks, go all in.  Produce them by the dozens.  Two black pewter males and a slew of pastel females is a very affordable project (relatively speaking, of course).  Don’t even get me started on white snakes.  I’m sick of hearing people refer to them as being “just another white snake”.  You know the one thing that is always 100% true of white snakes?  They sell like you wouldn’t believe.

If you continue to insist on building a diverse collection of animals without focusing on building a larger production capacity for specific morphs then you are acknowledging that making money is secondary to your love of ball python diversity.  And that’s a tough thing to realize about yourself; what is more important?

In summary, if making money in this business is important to you:  Have a plan.  Produce any particluar morph in sufficient quantity that you can sell them and keep some without being conflicted.  Focus less on diversity, more on quantity.

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

In the mid-90′s I bred Burmese pythons.  They were some of the most gentle and tolerant snakes I have ever kept and working with them was one of the most rewarding experiences I have had as a reptile breeder.  Some life changes necessitated that I stop breeding them and space issues keep me from beginning again.  But I miss them.  I want to put another big group of Burmese pythons together and start breeding them again.  Four things give me pause:

1. Food: Finding a consistent local supply of affordable food has been problematic in the past.  This is the least of my concerns and can be overcome, I’m sure.
2. Space & Caging: Do I need to elaborate on the logistics of housing 30-50 large constrictors?  While do-able, it’s not trivial.
3. City ordinance: The city I live in requires all reptiles over 8 feet to have a permit.  I don’t mind paying the permit fee but I do mind being on the radar of local officials.  I feel like it makes me a target.  “Hey, this guy has 40 Burmese pythons.  He needs a visit.”
   I should avoid complaining on this point, though.  At least the city I live in hasn’t banned them completely.
4. The current national political climate hell-bent on banning large constrictors: If I put together a large breeding group now will I find them banned and worthless some time in the next few years?

At the risk of becoming a pariah I suggest that the writing is on the wall for the so-called Big 5 Constrictors.  I fear they will be banned some time in the next few years.  I also fear it will be our (e.g. the reptile community) own fault when it happens.  As a quick review for those who don’t already know, the Big Five include:

1. Reticulated Pythons
2. Anacondas
3. Burmese Pythons
4. African Rock Pythons
5. Australian Scrub Pythons

We have a chance to stop the ban but the reptile community is currently broken into two distinct groups.  While both groups have the same general objective of allowing for continued ownership of large constrictors (and other reptiles) they differ quite on a bit on their approach.  I suggest you can call the two groups Team USARK and Team PIJAC.  I know I am going to be accused of perpetuating the divide by laying it out this way but this is how I see it.  It is my perception (and you now what they say about the link between perception and reality).

Everything I have seen, read and heard seems to indicate that PIJAC supports the responsible implementation of regulatory controls that will allow continued ownership of large constrictors while USARK does not support any controls, in any form.  As individuals we align with the side that best fits our own personal desires.  That division has and will drive the efforts of both groups in two different directions that ultimately do not complement each other.  That separation may lead to neither group achieving its objective and the third, less desirable result, a complete ban, may prevail in their stead.

The non-big-5-owning portion of the reptile community (ball python breeders, in particular) is often accused of being willing to throw the 5 under the bus to quiet the voices of people wishing to ban snake ownership.  And large constrictors are such an easy target, are they not?  Burmese pythons garner most of the public spotlight because of the Florida Everglades situation and I can’t conjure a story of someone being seriously injured or killed by a ball python or any of the other smaller python species.  It’s always one the five (usually a burm or a retic)  that makes the news.  And they are the one’s profiled on the Discovery Channel, History Channel and other so-called ‘knowledge’ channels.  As a ball python breeder (and former Burmese python breeder) let me be extremely clear on this point:  a federal ban on the Big 5 will not stop the people who want to put your right to own snakes and other reptiles to an end.  Sure, a ban on the Five may quiet them down for a bit but I promise you they will be back, emboldened by their success, to finish the job and ban the rest of the python species.  Their goal is not to ban large constrictors; they want to ban all reptiles.  So if you are a ball python, carpet python or any other kind of python breeder, stop thinking that a ban on the Five will end the political opposition to reptile ownership. It won’t.  It will strengthen it!  All you need to do is look at Senate bill S.373 for evidence of this.  Regardless of size of python being bred, we need to be united and consistent in our opposition to legislation.  This includes a united approach for the future of reptile ownership.

Having said that I fear that rigid and uncompromising opposition to any legislation will result in long-term failure and the Five will be banned at a federal level.  Not long after the Big 5 get banned, many if not all, of the other python species will follow.  Supporters of these bills are sneaky and vigilant.  They use misinformation and fear to further their objectives and given enough time they are likely to be successful in convincing others who don’t care to take the time to find the truth.  Please understand that people do not intentionally form opinions they know to be wrong.  Many rely on seemingly valid sources of information, like the USGS and the University of Florida, to help them form their opinions.  Each person believes what they do for a reason and they often define themselves by what they believe.  In order to maintain their opinions they have to find evidence that supports them.  This fact lets us understand that people who want to prove their opinion will conjur results necessary to validate their perspective.  Consider this publication on the invasion of Burmese Pythons from the Univerity of Florida.  When quoted by the media, academic publications are often presented as lore to the general public.  If you read the article referenced above you will find that it is not short on bias against the large constrictors (and pet owners).  Rather than being an objective academic analysis of the status of the Burmese Python in the Florida Everglades it is a position piece cleverly set up to be ammunition for future citations and political rhetoric.  It is designed to support an opinion and it is seeded with some facts to bolster its credibility.  Who is going to argue with Congressman so-and-so when he is quoting ‘facts’ published as part of a study conducted by the University of Florida?  I hope you see the power in this type of misinformation.  The public will never question these sources, much less read them.

Rigid resistance to any and all legislation may result in complete legislation.  Our best chance for success is to find middle ground.  We need to quell the voices of opposition while maintaining our rights to own and breed snakes of our choosing.  To do this I suggest that the Big Five owners and breeders should not be thrown under the bus …but they may have to get their toes run over by it.  I’m not saying this because they deserve it.  It’s a simple truth that these constrictors get the lions share of attention from people on the outside looking in.  Starting anywhere other than with the Five will likely be viewed as a token offering.

But what do I mean by ‘getting their toes run over’?  Simple, really.  Owners and breeders of large constrictors will have to forego some of the freedoms enjoyed by breeders of smaller snakes.  To avoid sugar-coating it, breeding and ownership of large constrictors will be regulated.  The question is not ‘if they will be regulated’, it is ‘to what extend will they be regulated’.  There are two central issues that legislation will attempt to address:  invasive species and public health and safety.  The ability for large constrictors to invade other regions of the country is hotly debated.

Invasive Species

Nobody seems to dispute the presence of Burmese pythons in the Florida Everglades.  A few sensational (and very over-used) pictures (1) (2) have been released and more than one article/TV show has tried to portray an epic battle taking place for top-of-the-food-chain status between the American alligator and the Burmese python.  It makes for great TV but that’s about it.  The Burmese pythons, along with many, many other plants and animals have made their way into the Florida Everglades and found conditions conducive to their survival.  Over the past decade about 1,000 pythons have been captured in the southern-most portions of the Everglades.  Despite wild reports suggesting otherwise, there is no evidence to prove that they are moving north.  Burmese pythons do not have the ability to survive long-term in the colder parts of the United States, including northern Florida.

Education is our best defense against people who use fear of python invasion as justification for a ban.  We need to educate the people about the reality of python survivability in temperate regions.  Once people who vote on our behalf understand that invasion beyond the Florida Everglades is all but impossible we will have done serious damage to this argument.

Public Health & Safety

The spread of non-native ticks (addressed by the National Reptile Improvement Plan, NRIP) and the ability for large constrictors to severely injure or even kill humans are points of concern (the former is a concern for all imported reptiles).  Death of humans because of large constrictors is incredibly rare.  My research indicates that 11 people have been killed by large constrictors in the past 29 years.  But when it happens it is sensational.  The news and other media outlets seize upon it and milk the stories for all they are worth.  The damage to the image of herpetoculturists is disproportionate and long-lasting.  I’m willing to bet that more than 11 people have died from choking on pen tops in the past 29 years but pen tops, which exist in every home, do not have a lobby against them because of their danger to public safety.  To say that large constrictors pose an imminent risk to humans is just plain silly but when you watch TV they make it seem like there is a python in your back yard, stalking you.  The truth does not stir people, nor does it sell ad space.  The media lies to make the facts more interesting.

Sizable portions of our population are afraid of all snakes (I know a woman who paid $350 to have a 6″ ringneck snake removed from her back yard).  That fear is amplified when the snakes are large.  That fears transcends into hysteria when the snake is one of the Big 5.  Hysteria and fear are not mindsets that allow for rational discussion.  As irrational as the fear is to members of the reptile community, it is real to the people who experience it and they are not likely to be swayed by us telling them everything is all right.

So how do you fight against a largely baseless agrument that is supported by fear, sensational media coverage, irresponsible academics and abusive extrapolations by supposedly legitimate scientific organizations?  Education is the most important tool but it is a long term approach.  Let’s compare the fear of snakes to something like racism.  Racism, like fear of snakes, is a learned behavior.  It takes time to eliminate it and education is one of the key tools.  Eliminating fear of reptiles has to start early in life.  My two year old daughter is not afraid of snakes.  How could she be?  But the other day she told me she was scared the snake was going to bite her.  I later learned she got the idea from another child at school whose parents are deathly afraid of snakes.  How to address it?  Well, I started with my daughter.  Being afraid of snakes in this family isn’t going to work out so she and I spent some time with the snakes so she knows they won’t hurt her.  Next in line is my daughter’s school.  My wife is in the process of arranging a ‘show and tell’ day where I will take some snakes (and other reptiles) in and teach the kids that, while worthy of respect, they are not dangerous.  Every person in the reptile community needs to be a reptile evangelist, working to dispel fear and misunderstanding whenever and wherever we can.  But grassroots efforts (which have been going on for years) will not suffice.  There needs to be a national campaign, supported by entire reptile community, to begin to eradicate fear of snakes.

Education is a strategic aim.  We need a more tactical approach to deal with our immediate problem; a proposed ban on pythons.  Education won’t do us much good if we lose our right to own reptiles in the next few years.  It is likely that legislation in some form is a foregone conclusion.  We will do ourselves a favor to come to the table with something other than blanket opposition.  Here is what I propose:

• Implement a national permit system for large constrictor ownership.  Permits will be per individual/business, not per animal.  There will be an annual fee.  These fees must be realistic and not serve to exclude the average person from ownership (because of high prices).  For example, 200,000 large constrictor owners paying $15/year will generate $3 million in annual revenue.
• Require owners of large constrictors to attend an 8-hour certification class that teaches basic husbandry techniques, safe handling, escape-resistant caging, basic medical response (e.g. what to do if you get bit), etc.  Successful completion of the course is required for permit approval.  Enrollment in the course will be fee-based with a portion of the fees used to provide reptile education around the country.
  • This course could be offered as a single Saturday event (9-5) or two hours/night for four weeks.
  • Large constrictor owners could also be required to renew their certification every 5 years by attending a 1/2 day refresher course.  This will provide an opportunity to make sure all owners of large constrictors are up-to-date on any new developments in husbandry as well as the status of any regulations.  This also provides another revenue stream, complementing the annual permit fee.
• Reptile owners, not reptile sellers /breeders, are responsible for obtaining a permit and certification prior to the animal reaching 8 feet in length.  The breeder/seller of the reptile is required to notify the buyer of the requirement for a permit and certifiation but is not required to maintain records on who the animals were sold to and and what their permit status is.  This requirement falls to the reptile owner and the national reptile permit system administrators.
  • This may be a sticking point.  I think it’s important to avoid burdening reptile breeders/resellers with extra tracking and paperwork.  But large constrictors disappearing into the community with no trail to show where they have gone is likely going to cause a lot of buyers to simply not get a permit or attend the course.  The recourse to this is that there has to be a stiff penalty for failure to register and take the required certification class.  This may take the form of a fine, seizure of the animal(s) and a suspension period, during which time the offender is prohibited from owning a large constrictor.
  • I am not an advocate of microchipping.  Pet owners being labeled as the cause of the problem in the Florida Everglades is an unfounded accusation.  Natural disasters such as Hurrican Andrew are more likely suspects for the unintentional release of reptiles into the wild.  Escaped constrictors are not a problem outside the Florida Everlgades so the only thing mandatory microchipping will do is increase the total cost of ownership (TCO) and the money spent on building, administering and maintaining a tracking database will outweigh any potential benefits.  Microchipping also inhibits the free trade of reptiles.  Ownership of many animals changes frequently and quickly.  I can cite many instances where an animal changed ownership four (4) times in a single day.  Keeping up with microchip registrations will be burdensome without benefit.
• Stiff penalties must be put in place for anyone caught intentionally releasing a non-native species into the wild.  Most states already have something like this but the consequences need to be undesireable enough to cause people to want to find a different solution for getting rid of their animals.

I want a world where reptile ownership is unrestricted and unregulated.  I don’t want any national permit system nor do I want to have to pay an annual fee or take a course for the right to own a reptile of my choosing.  But that is increasingly not the reality.  I would much rather endure a little bit of paperwork, pay a small fee and attend a class every few years than have my rights taken away completely.  I fear that an unwillingness to budge by the reptile community will cause the total loss of our rights.  It’s not fair and the fears of others are not based on reality but they don’t have to be in order for a law to get passed.  It’s time we took the initiative and put processes into place that ensure our right to own large constrictors.  And as soon as we do that I will start building my group of Burmese again, safe that I can breed them and be able to legally sell the animals.

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

I think he meant to write, “Ivory and Pastel Ivory, locked together in perfect harmony”.

Or something like that.  Anyway, I can’t see much bad happening from crossing an Ivory with a Pastel Ivory.  Seems all good to me.  Sorry for the bum picture.  I didn’t want to mess with my boy’s mojo so I snapped it in a hurry with my iPhone.

Cheers,

Colin Weaver

The Silver Streak Ball Python.  Less often known by its real name; the Super Pastel Black Pastel Ball Python.

Like many breeders I have male Silver Streaks in my collection.  These days you almost have to.  It’s getting harder and harder to keep up with the big breeders so having males with some genetic firepower is a non-negotiable essential.

But for the past few years I have also been working to add female Silver Streaks to my collection.  I’ve manage to add several to my breeding arsenal but this girl

Is the biggest one I’ve got.  She’s a hefty 2700 grams at last weigh in and this is her second year in breeding rotation.  I’ve been breeding her with a Pastel Lesser Ball Python so I’m hoping to get some really cool stuff from her eggs.

• Pastels (Please, Lord. Please!  No.  Could I be soooooo unlucky?)
• Super Pastels
• Pastel Lessers
• Super Pastel Lessers
• Black Pewters (Meh.  Don’t get me wrong.  I’m glad to produce em’, just not excited about getting them from this particular pairing)
• Black Pewter Lessers
• Silver Streaks
• Silver Streak Lessers (Booyah!!!  Since I don’t have any of these I’ll be hard-pressed to actually let it go if I should be blessed enough to have one poke its head out of the egg.  If I produce a male, it isn’t even a discussion.  I’ll keep it.  I’ll actually keep the first 2-3 males I produce.  Females will be a different story.)

If she would hurry up and ovulate I’d be a much happier guy.