Snake Positive Reinforcement?

[imported_Varanus]

it would pass its waste, without any sense of guilt at having to do it in its cage.

Jamie

I think you've hit the nail on the head there, Jamie. We should ALL be concentrating our training efforts on making our snakes feel guilty as sin! Guilt's the way to go, it certainly works on me!!

[cement]

Try this link
Wahyu Hijau | Facebook

Hopefully that one will work
Although that display is closed we still have most of the snakes

From behind kissing a cobra isnt too hard even if it gets the heart racing a bit
Aga kisses Kings from the front every day and has never been bitten
Her and her hubbys show is in Penang Malaysia and is the best Ive ever seen
Will find links if I can because its well worth a visit

Yeah mate I would like to see it. Even kissing them on the front of the head doesn't (to me) come across as learned snake behaviour though. Its just working with the animal around its nature. Horses can't kick sideways so if i approach a wild horse from the side I can't get kicked. Do you see what I mean?

[SamNabz]

All I can say after reading this thread, is wow..

[longqi]

Yeah mate I would like to see it. Even kissing them on the front of the head doesn't (to me) come across as learned snake behaviour though. Its just working with the animal around its nature. Horses can't kick sideways so if i approach a wild horse from the side I can't get kicked. Do you see what I mean?

I can partly understand
If a wild snake is approached head on and touched it will defend itself
That is a natural defence which would be called a major part of their nature
While a horse finds it physically impossible to kick sideways any snake can bite forwards
Kissing a cobra from behind is definitely 'working the snake around its nature' as they cannot strike effectively from that position
But
For those cobras to allow themselves to be touched by a mammal in a position where they can strike, but choose not to, may not be exactly learned behaviour, but what other category would you put it in??

[Focus]

I'm sorry if this is a little off topic, but there's a lot of talk about reptilian brains not being equivalent to mammalian brains hence why reptiles can't be trained. While I agree that pythons are not trainable, I was always under the impression that this was related to the size of the brain (small vs big), not the type of brain (reptiles vs mammals). I was under the impression that the larger monitors for example are quite trainable, at least in comparison to pythons, is this a misconception?

Bump, sorry, would anyone be able to elaborate on this?

[cement]

I can partly understand
If a wild snake is approached head on and touched it will defend itself
That is a natural defence which would be called a major part of their nature
While a horse finds it physically impossible to kick sideways any snake can bite forwards
Kissing a cobra from behind is definitely 'working the snake around its nature' as they cannot strike effectively from that position
But
For those cobras to allow themselves to be touched by a mammal in a position where they can strike, but choose not to, may not be exactly learned behaviour, but what other category would you put it in??

Yes, sure enough. Category wise,... hmm. maybe "distraction" ?
And my reasoning is that if you watch the handlers closely, they distract the snake before they touch its head. This is always done and definitely a part of the act. It quite obviously distracts the snakes focus, (to the point of the handler being able to see where the snake is looking). They approach from an angle which is out of sight to the snake.

A brave act to be sure, but as is the case with most extreme sports or stunts, there is method to the madness.
This is, I believe, working within the parameters of the snakes known natural abilities.

[Nathan_T]

'Im sorry if this is a little off topic, but there's a lot of talk about reptilian brains not being equivalent to mammalian brains hence why reptiles can't be trained. While I agree that pythons are not trainable, I was always under the impression that this was related to the size of the brain (small vs big), not the type of brain (reptiles vs mammals). I was under the impression that the larger monitors for example are quite trainable, at least in comparison to pythons, is this a misconception?

Bump, sorry, would anyone be able to elaborate on this?

It's not quite so simple. There are several issues with reptillian brains that render them quite poor at learning. First off, you are correct in that it does depend highly on the species. That said, reptiles do share similar problems with their brain structures that would strongly inhibit learning:

- Raw size does matter, but a better measure is what is called Encephalization quotient: The ratio between the mass of the brain and what would be expected in an animal of that size. Reptiles, particularly snakes have extremely poor ratios- that is the mass of the brain is miniscule compared to other animals of similar size. This is not a particularly good measure of intelligence, but it is a rough correlation.
- Second is the lack of folds on the frontal cortex. It's extremely hard to find a good picture of a snake brain, but picture a human brain. See those wrinkles all over it? Snake brains are actually quite smooth. Those folds are actually extremely important in higher level functioning- basically it increases the surface area of the brain, which multiplies the processing power for any given amount of mass by a drastic amount.
- Animals have very similar brain structures in nature. The forebrain refers to the sections of the brain that deals with learning, consciousness, all that good stuff. In humans, this is massive in comparison to the rest of the brain, in cats and dogs the ratio is about 50/50, in snakes the ratio is opposite, the forebrain is dominated by the hindbrain, which regulates breathing, heartbeat and so on.

Edit- actually found a picture that works:
http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homep...nEvolution.jpg

The bit you're concerned about is labelled Cerebrum. I'm not entirely sure what mammal that is, but it would be very low order- in comparison to that picture a sheep's brain is highly advanced.

[Focus]

Thanks Nathan_T, that's really interesting.

[cement]

Something else that I think might be worth mentioning here, is the handling of snakes as pets.
Empathy for others is an important life skill. This also goes with animals.
For new snake owners, it will take quite a while to "get" what your snake is doing and why. For long term keepers this is easy, as snakes are such basic creatures, when you learn to understand them you wonder why you found it so hard at first!
If you constantly treat an animal or person in a way that they are not biologically evolved, then that person or animal will suffer.
For example, if you had a bird, and bathed it twice a day, fed it chocolate and kept in on a harness and taught it to run fast... you as a keeper might think that that because you like this stuff that the bird would too. But in reality you are killing it with kindness.

This is why long term keepers don't tend to get there snakes out for a play, they prefer to leave them alone so they can live their life as a snake prefers. In sleepy peaceful solitude. Just because a certain snake has a placid nature, doesn't mean it is trained.

[Pythoninfinite]

I wish I could "Like" the above post 1000 times ! Perfect cement!

Jamie

[mrblack66]

lizards are nearly as smart as dogs .... esp skinks and monitors

lizards are nearly as smart as dogs .... esp skinks and monitors

- - - Updated - - -

u can train monitors! =]

i reckon lizards are nearly as smart as dogs and can be trained and behave in many ways similar to dogs. especially skinks and monitors. snakes are more simple brained, but I bet there is more to them than we currently know...