is this a real colombian

[mathias]

can anybody say me if this is a real boa constrictor and not a mix.

thanks
http://reptilenet.dk/boa/boa4.jpg
http://reptilenet.dk/boa/boa3.jpg
http://reptilenet.dk/boa/boa.jpg

[goofykid87]

it has the saddles of a guyana or a suri, but i dunno. do a scale count. nice tail

[Toymaker]

BCI's have more saddles than BCC's . . . scale count will be more accurate.
Question is-if it is a mixed BCI/BCC which of the two passed on the scale count dominance?

[The_Boaphile]

Yes, Colombian.

[diablo]

Very nice im not sure, dosnt really look like a mix though, Looks like you have some awsome caging systems??

[BCIboy]

I vote Colombian. The back saddles have a little bit of peaking, but that happens on some of them. My colombian BCI has one like that too.

[Jon-e-Boy]

That is perhaps the best representation of the columbian boa.

[obz]

That is perhaps the best representation of the columbian boa.

where IS columbia? i cant seem to find it on a map... ;D

jk jon.

as stated above about the saddles... just because some of them are slightly peaked doesnt cue me to think suri or guyana. ive got some with no peaks at all...that is most likely a nice colombian BCI :'(

[Jon-e-Boy]

where IS columbia? i cant seem to find it on a map... ;D

jk jon.



What's the matter, you've never been to Columbia? lol. Whoops! Let's get this straight, as an engineer we don't use the letter "O" as a variable, so I sometimes seem to omit it from memory. No big deal, I've got 25 other letters to work with! lol.

[honkyfb35]

Agreed! Looks to be a normal bci to me.

[new-boi]

nice looks exactly like mine same size and all ::)

[goofykid87]

If it were a cross, how would you be able to tell?

[Randy_T.]

I think it looks colombian as well..

And as far as if it is a cross, usually the only way to know for sure is if the person who crossed them told the buyer...Other then that it usually boils down to just speculation...

Later

[kingcobra]

hi mathias, i have just bought one EXACTLY like yours in u.k. it was sold as a columbian red-tail boa, the supplier was an american x-pat by the name of rick love,formerly of california,then arizona. i bought her about 2 months ago and she is fantastic! she was however u.k bred so i guess somebody over in u.s.a ust have another litter (or more). the feedback i got upon enquiring about the species was that the columbian red-tail is a taxonomic inaccuracy,there is no such species!! so what do i have in my hand then? (no RUDE ANSWERS FOLKS ,PLEASE) .LOL! . bottom line is i dont really care about taxonomic identification as i used to keep tarntulas previously and have "fond?" memories of the constant changes to the latin names as the "taxonomic itelligensia" constantly bickered with each other about what was the accurate description :D ??? ??? :o

[obz]

im not being rude, lemmie break down the feedback you got.

the feedback i got upon enquiring about the species was that the columbian red-tail is a taxonomic inaccuracy,there is no such species!!

this is partly false. there deffinatley are colombian red tails.

the misnomer of whats most commonly sold and reffered to as colombian redtails are the BCI from colombia, west of the andes. they are sold as redtails, well the fact of the matter is the tail is not red. its brick\orange\brown in the best examples out there.
The 'true' redtails from colombia are a seperate species, BCC, EAST of the andes. these animals are where the term 'redtail' came from. their tails are actually red. amazingly so in the best examples. BCC from colombia are quite rare in captive collections.

so MOST 'colombian redtails' are mislabeled. most likely your boa, and the boa in the first pic in this thread, is a colombian BCI. wich, by litteral deffinition, is NOT a redtail. there does however exsist, a very beautiful and rare, actual colombian redtail.

hope this helps.

sean

[bcijoe]

I say you that is a real boa, not fake! lol .. just having fun... :P I don't see any visible signs of an integrade here.. looks pretty simple to judge as a pure, normal colombian. real colombian - not real redtail. :'(

take care

[kingcobra]

obz, sounds like what you are saying is that is columbian boa, but NOT red-tail . i presume the species you are referring to in you reply as b.c.i. are boa constrictor imperator, and b.c.c. are boa constrictor constrictor,which over here is recognised as the common boa,the imperator being described as a smaller darker colored species from more northerly locations, i would NOT be surprised that red-tails ARE in columbia if you consider the vast range of the species as a whole. as i said or rather i presumed i suggested was that this was the information i was given about the "columbian red-tail" and no doubt the taxonomists will argue about it for years to come. me i got better things to occcupy my time! no offence man, but after the headaches of "taxonomic accuracy" with mygalomorphs i have had enough of it !! ::) lol!

[obz]

thats exactly what im saying, its most likley originates west of the andes in colombia. and until the pet trade boomed in the states BCC (constrictor constrictor) was known as the common redtail and the constrictor imperitor was known as the emperor boa. in efforts to sell more of the more easily maintained, obtained, and bred imperitors; petstores named them 'redtail boas' wich isnt what they are. however its a catchier name. so redtails of BCC hand up the anty and are now called over here 'true redtails'. there is most deffinatley a colombian population of them. they resemble closely the peruvian and ecuadorian variety. back to BCI, it is now called the common boa here,... due to the obvious readily available supply, as they are 'common' in most pet stores with a reptile department, where as BCC must be sought primarily through private and commercial breeders, or importers.

theres really no arguement for taxonimists... simply a couple of misnomers and names changing over time. there are 2 sub-species of boa from colombia, both are called redtails, both have been called common, but the scientific taxon was never in question. only one is really a redtail , and only one is 'common'.

[kingcobra]

well we can agree on something and that is the fact that the term "columbian red-tail" is in fact a mis-used term in the description of imperator species and is usually used by either ignorant or unscrupulous dealers (in the case of the latter)to try to increase the value of their stock, i will accept that red-tails have a range which extends into columbia, as well as surinam,guyana, peru and reportedly bolivia,and perhaps areas in south america we are not aware of (it is a vast area :D) as for taxonomists NOT arguing !! you have GOTTA be having a laugh. granted i aint had much to do with herpetological taxonomists, but after the constant changeovers from one species to another then back again, then back to original the one "expert" denounces the findings of the first only to have the first tear his views to bits again, you would see why i feel like this, it is NOT HELPFUL to the enthusiasts who seek guidance ,(does this have a familiar ring to it?), i dont know if you are familiar with mygalomorphs but look how many times the mexican red-knee has been re-classified !! i had a gutful of it ! sorry mate, but some of these guys need their heads knocking together. but i guess we( or rather i) have strayed from mathias's original query (no kidding!!lol!) i repeat what i told him it is exactly the same snake as i was sold in high wycombe, bucks, u.k. and it was sold as a columbian red-tail, tho rick at no time tried to claim otherwise, and in fact pointed out that it WAS NOT what is accepted as a TRUE red-tail. true red-tail or not they are great snakes , mine is pretty calm and feeds like no tomorrow. p.s hope its warmer in california than it is here obz! its cold and damn wet again 8)