I thought that the health of a bloodline went without saying...but I guess it's good that someone said it anyhow. <lol>
And actually, I have every intention of selecting for animals that lay large clutches, because that matters to me. I also think it will matter to other breeders--all else being equal. After all, why not? My 5+ foot 10 lb girl who laid the 13 egg clutch is vibrantly healthy, and handled it without problems. I'd love to have more females like HER--and I will breed for them. I don't even want to bother with a female who will lay 4 egg clutches her whole life. To me, that's inferior stock. Assuming that clutch size can be tied to genetics (and there's no reason to think it's completely divorced from them), there are a lot of reasons to breed for larger clutch sizes in pet ball pythons.
Likewise, there is every reason to breed for a good temperment--and for good feeding habits. I would never hold back an inconsistant feeder, or a very picky mouse-eater, no matter how pretty they were.
There's a lot more to a strong bloodline than simple physical health and appearance--it's a pretty complex package.
It seems odd to me that someone would consider breeding dark pastels to other dark morphs to be 'an excuse to breed substandard pastels'. That implies some sort of benefit to be gained from breeding pastels people consider less attractive...I mean, some benefit other than producing an impressive combination. I'm failing to follow this train of thought. I mean, the reason I'm not breeding my current male again is that I don't want to produce more dark pastels--they aren't worth as much money, and I have enough of them for any future projects I might want to run with them. Why would I want an 'excuse' to breed animals that don't sell as well? Why would anyone? Any female I put them with could be put with my lesser, instead--or any one of my other morphs, they would all produce offspring worth more than a dark pastel. Well, perhaps not my albino, but at the rate pastels in general are falling, even albino hets will probably be worth that much next year.
Honestly, what possible motivation would there be for it? If someone who's just starting out and can only afford a $70 pastel wants to breed it, so what? There is a market out there for it--other people who want to do the same thing. You're calling the animal 'substandard' because you don't like its looks...but obviously other people do, or they wouldn't be buying it, and it wouldn't be worth more money than a normal. I think people are losing sight of the fact that the PRIMARY concern with breeding ball pythons should be their suitability as pets. These animals aren't going back to Africa, they will spend their entire lives as pets, and so will all of their offspring--and so on, and so on. They are PETS. First and foremost, they should be healthy and happy, and make their OWNERS happy as well. Being a shining example of an appearance type that hasn't even been defined yet is only a small part of that. Right now, pet owners love normal ball pythons just as much as most morphs.
Appearance is something for us to play with to keep us interested and happy--and it's a money-maker. Nothing beyond that. No one's set any 'morph standards', and I don't see it happening anytime soon, because people are still developing their own 'brands' of various morphs.
Then there is the idea that 'it's already been done (breeding darker pastels to other dark morphs)'...by whom? Give some names, I'd love to see photos of the animals that resulted from those projects. Show me a burgundyXdark pastel. I want to see a dark pastel pewter and compare it with a light pastel pewter. I want to see chocolate X dark pastel. What happens if you pair it with a calico?
Maybe a lot of those projects will turn out animals that don't look great--but if even one such pairing creates a neat look that is both beautiful and different from the same done with a light pastel, then it will all have been worth the trying.
You would think I'd spoken blasphemy when I mentioned breeding pastels specifically to be darker. I'm thinking of an animal as dark as it can be made with very high yellow washing on the sides--as high as I can breed for, and mad blushing. I think it would be quite an interesting look in its own right. If you don't like it...you don't have to get one. (I think clowns are ugly, and I'm not getting one of those). lol
Where's the fun in always doing what everyone else is doing? The snake doesn't care if it's yellow or black. Pastel is a gene. We haven't even scratched the surface of the possibilities it holds for changing the appearance of ball pythons. Don't get me wrong, I love high-yellow pastels, I think they're gorgeous. I love colorful snakes. But the extreme contrast that could be created by breeding for super dark pastels with high yellow on the sides could be pretty darned striking too.
There are already two lines of pastels that are pretty different in appearance--why not another that goes in the extreme opposite direction from the others? I'm not talking about 'plain brown pastels', after all--nothing that you're going to find floating around on the market already. But that's what you have to start with, of course. I find it enormously appealing to consider taking an animal rejected by others as 'substandard' and using it as a base to create something brand new, and beautiful in a completely different way.
. I think some yellows were proven to have a "surprise" gene..have you followed up on this?).
Her name is Bindi because of her head dots. I'm a reduced pattern nut, but the head dots put her over the edge for me!
