The "Hoser review" of the genus Thamnophis...

[ConcinusMan]

I don't think it's cruel necessarily. If the snake is fed already dead food and likes it, the venom isn't needed. But I don't think it's right either to permanently alter them.

[snake man]

I believe that if the snake can kill you that easily then you should not be keeping it, and if you are keeping it then you take that risk and responsibility of the snake and its venom. Bottom line in my opion is that if you want a "hot" snake then yo can have it but don't take away it's venom.

[d_virginiana]

I see no reason that anyone would need a 'safe' cobra and another ACTUALLY safe species wouldn't cut it. Makes me think of the people who refuse to own a snake smaller than they are because they want to look cool.

[Greg'sGarters]

I don't think it's cruel necessarily. If the snake is fed already dead food and likes it, the venom isn't needed. But I don't think it's right either to permanently alter them.

But the venom isn't only used for killing the animal, a lot of times, it will also help break down skin and muscle tissue making the animal easier to digest - give it a head start in a way.

[thamneil]

Venomoid snakes have been kept for many, many years on a diet of pre killed prey alone. There have been no digestive differences between the venomoids and their fully functional equivalents. The theory of digestive issues is moot. It was simply an idea that someone came up with to boycott venomoids.

[chris-uk]

I spotted this on RFUK, and at the risk of dragging Hoser back to our peaceful forum I thought it was significant enough that quite a few of you would be interested to know that a group of respected herpetologists have responded to the Hoser debacle.

The block below is from Mark O'Shea's Facebook page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A very important herpetological paper has just been published - read about it here first.

We have published a Point of View in Herpetological Review 44(1):8-23 in March 2013. It provides a reference which can be cited by persons who wish to avoid using names coined by Raymond Hoser or Richard Wells from Jan 1st 2000 to the present.

You can download a copy of the pdf from my website but pasting this link into your browser.

http://www.markoshea.info/downloads/...eer-Review.pdf

These Hoser and Wells names are considered invalid by the vast majority of herpetological taxonomists and paleontologists, a large number of whom have expressed their support for the Point of View (see Acknowledgements).

A number of the world's largest and most influential herpetological societies and the World Congress of Herpetology have also indicated their opposition to the taxonomic vandalism wrought by these two gentlemen by passing motions in support of this Point of View (see Censure of Taxonomic Vandals p.20).

The PoV also has the backing of the International Commission for Zoological Nomenclature. Authors of herpetological papers wishing to avoid the use of names by Hoser and Wells can cite this Point of View. A Table of preferred names for each of the several hundred Hoser and Wells coined names is also provided for clarity.

The Point of View is an open-access paper so please feel free to circulate this pdf on websites, forums and social network sites where other herpetologists may access and benefit from it.

[Steveo]

Sad that it even had to come to this.

[Stefan-A]

And that's why I don't design buildings. Someone competent would have to sort it out.