Numerous states/counties/etc have rules regulating what species and/or size of animals can be kept and how they must be kept. I admit I am not in tune with the decision making process for these levels of government when enacting these regulations, but based off the regulations I’ve seen, it doesn’t appear that whether an animal is considered social is the motivator behind the government regulating a species at the pet/hobby level. Take garter snakes for example. It has been widely accepted for years that garters are social, but I am not aware of any legislation banning/regulating the keeping of garter snakes at the pet/hobby level based simply on the fact of them being considered social. Due to this, I am still not convinced that fear of rising costs is the reason many aren’t on board with the claim that balls are social.
This topic will never end. It has been around for a long time and will always be around.
Short answer, if you are careful and have a large enough enclosure, and it works for you, then keep them together. It does not matter what others think. As the only way they will know is if you tell them.
Longer answer, it is hard to know when it was suggested to keep them separated. As for why, well, any number of reasons. Just someones personal thought, from only seeing one at a time in the wild, to hearing about other types being cannibalistic and not wanting to take a chance, rumors, from people who are afraid to them, or even someone wanting to make more money on the hardware for housing them, to just about any reason.
Until someone does a large and lengthy test with detailed information (and even then some people won’t agree with it) we will never know. If people are willing to test this, then more power to them. It has to start somewhere by someone. Posting the data will get negative and positive feedback. But it will also inform others who are willing to listen and are curious about it.
For those who are against it, well, you have that right. The same for those who are for it.
If I choose to put several in one enclosure and it is done correctly, then it is my business. If I choose to house each in their own enclosure, then again, it is my business. As long as husbandry, size and health come first, then it doesn’t matter.
I have not tested this but have had some escape into another space and had no problems. This topic does make me wonder what will happen long term. But I am in no position or wanting to test it on my own currently. Maybe in the future I might do my own test or not. If I do and I post it, I know I will get slammed by many that I am a horrible person to put a living thing through that kind of stress. Even if it turns out to be a good outcome and not bad.
People are people. You will never get everyone to agree or even like your choices.
Im glad you brought this up. I am in several Burmese python groups on face book. In the last few months there have been at least 2 posts about young Burmese pythons who have died. According to the OP both had been microchipped in the past two months. One I specifically remember was from Georgia. Now im not saying it was because of the micro chipping that caused the deaths. It could have been anything from poor husbandry to disease to keeper error. But i am curious about how much experience vets have microchipping snakes. you had mentioned that you Were in favor for f these types of regulations but i fail to see how microchipping snakes would have prevented the current problem in Florida anyway? Its not a gps tracker.
Welcome to the forum @alexio and great post/question! I’m wondering the same thing actually so we will see what we can learn from this! So glad you are here! I like the “gps” comment! Lol! 
I lurk on this post and cringe at some times because I like things to be puppy dogs (reptiles?) and rainbows all the time. It is a very interesting topic for sure though. Your microchipping question makes me feel like I’m missing something, not understanding the conversation, and I apologize if this is silly or like “duh Gina tell me something we didn’t already know!”
If the microchipping had been a requirement as they are pushing now they wouldn’t be such a huge problem because maybe the owners would think twice about releasing them into the wild given the fact that if their snake is caught and scanned then there would be consequences for that person since the chip is linked to their personal information.
That makes sense, but is also assuming that the current problem in Florida is a result of people releasing their pets into the wild. no one can be sure 100% . Im sure a few people did release Burmese pythons into the wild. However i have read multiple theories that the current problems were caused during a hurricane ( possibly andrew) where a breeding facility in Florida was damaged and their snakes got loose. This actually makes a lot more sense to me . Although giant snakes had been allegedly seen in Florida for 40 years it does seem that post 1992 is when the reports started to get extreme. Realistically though the type of person who releases a snake into the wild is also the type of person who probably wouldn’t have followed the rules and got it mico chipped in the first place .
Maybe I’m being really dense here, which of course is possible. But I in absolutely no way see a correlation between laws and regulations for microchipping snakes, having anything to do with them being social animals…… to me that makes absolutely no sense. Mind enlightening me on how this is even relevant to the conversation at hand?
And
What about a snake being social is considered when determining if it can be an invasive species?
Also, another reason this is a hot topic, and very debated, is you have so many groups out there, and every day so many new keepers. These new keepers find groups, and don’t dig into how to do something like this safely, they just see “oh, I can keep more than 1 together, sweet. And then they throw them together without providing adequate care for the animals. It’s much easier to keep new keepers on track if they get used to caring for one snake properly in its own enclosure. Just because something CAN be done, definitely doesn’t mean it should.
You know how many stories I saw on some of the Facebook bp groups that claimed their live mouse was friends with their snake and they figured they’d let them live together? Too many to count.
As @ballornothing said
You simply don’t have the ability to provide the evidence currently. Saying “yep, they lay on top of each other and stay together” honestly unfortunately proves nothing. Truly.
There’s a lot of replies that I can’t grasp and wrap my head around the thought process some are having, so I’ll just respectfully disagree overall that they should be cohabbed. Some other species can, sure. But to me in this scenario we’re just looking at the need/desire for people to keep more snakes, in less enclosures. In the end it sounds greedy to me.
You bring up some great points Nathan and I agree with everything you have stated. It occurred to me that the people who argue to the nth degree for BP cohabitation are looking for reassurance that what they are doing is morally and ethically correct because I believe these people are not even sure themselves……
A ball python breeder recently talked about having a social time for the BPs they own during cleaning sessions and such. Not cohabitation, but still socializing is a bit close.
They mentioned the younger bps tending to group together more than the adults which would rather go their own ways or hide. But they weren’t sure why.
I think what might be getting missed with arguments for keeping them together is defense mechanisms.
Like entire groups of sea turtles running for the sea, it’s safer for a younger python to hang out with others. They’ll even appear bigger than they actually are since the patterns will blend together and such in the wild.
So when younger BPs clumping up willingly instead of separating as a defense mechanism is misjudged, it can look like they are more social animals.
Just some musings after seeing that on YouTube.
Thank you @armiyana! That’s another interesting observation and it certainly makes sense!
I do think this is so important for new keepers(of any species! Need to learn and understand your animals before even trying advanced things, not just something unproven like co habitation but also such as bio actives, even extra large enclosures, or zoo type displays! Such a great point! @nswilkerson1 I see way too many people try more advanced methods with there first reptile! New keepers definitely need experience with basic tried and true methods before they try any other type!(proven or unproven)
It’s probably been mentioned before, but there is an in-between option for allowing animals to socialize without keeping them together long-term. It isn’t unreasonable to believe that some species of snakes could be more social than we believe them to be, but it’s also proven truth that cohabitated animals often display more stress behaviors, cannibalism, etc… In the wild, yes, some ball pythons may choose to remain in the same area - nesting areas, areas rich with prey, etc., but it is also true that in the wild, those same snakes can go as far away as miles to get away from other snakes. When you’re keeping snakes in four foot enclosures, there’s nowhere to go to truly get away from each other, and therefore likely significantly more stress even if it’s not being visibly shown through behavior every day.
I like allowing my animals to socialize. I think it’s good enrichment for them. So I have a canvas doggy playpen that I will set up in my front yard with some branches, hides, climbing opportunities, etc. and I will put 2-4 snakes in the pen at a time. However, they’re always supervised, and they’re never in there for more than an hour or two at a time. If someone is really dead set on cohabitating, shorter periods of time together is something you really need to observe so that you can become accustomed to the individual behaviors of the animals you’re looking at cohabitating. However, this kind of thing also allows you to socialize animals without putting them in a stressful permanent housing situation.
That’s a super great idea @inspirationexotics!
However where I live we have cold icy winters so a set up like that could be used indoors I suppose but not on a carpet floor! Lol!
Blockquote Garter snakes breed in groups ball pythons do not. That kinda tells you which one is a social animal. Garter snakes are observerd in large groups breeding in the wild. Ball pythons are not observed in the wild breeding in large groups. In captivity the ball pythons are laying on each other resource guarding.
I know I’m new here and this is an old post of an old thread, but this could not possibly be more wrong or more anthropomorphized. Garter snake breeding balls are literal resource guarding. This behavior does not mimic some human-type orgy where you have a bunch of snakes all giving pleasure to each other (also, why are you assuming sex is pleasurable to a snake and not simply a biological imperative? Only humans and bonobos are observed to use sex as social bonding, for most species it’s better described as hormonally induced temporary insanity) - this is every male trying to push away every other male to be THE one to breed while the female tries not to be smothered. Literally every male in the ball is trying to be the only one to utilize the “resource” while also actively preventing the other males from doing so.
How do you interpret 2 ball pythons laying together resource guarding? What resource is contested, and in what way is one snake trying to keep the other from it? How does a snake resting their head on top of another snake prevent the bottom snake from finding or utilizing a resource, or, how does that position give the top snake better access to it? If this is what is going on, what is your explanation as to why the bottom snake allows it instead of actively trying to escape this pressure? Without being able to answer these questions, the interpretation that the one snake is resource guarding is meritless.
What about dolphins? Also how is this relevant? Nobody ever said snake using breeding as social bonding. Garter snakes have be proven to do better in groups thus meaning they are social. Ball pythons have not been proven. I am not taking sides but I think this is an interesting subject that I plan to explore further myself in a very large enclosure eventually .
What about dolphins? Dolphins are not known to use sex as a form of social bonding.
If you read the post I quoted, yes, that person WAS using breeding behavior as proof that garters are a social species and balls are not. Here, I’ll quote it again;
Garter snakes breed in groups ball pythons do not. That kinda tells you which one is a social animal.
I stated that that tells you nothing of the sort because it is anthropomorphization to assume that sex is a social or bonding activity in other species. Humans (mostly) have sex with people they feel close to or have feelings for - we are the outlier species in that. It’s weird of us, and weirder to assume that to other creatures sex has any meaning.
. Nearly all animals have sex because they are biologically driven, and when certain conditions are met (ie; your housecat goes into heat, or a rainfall floods a betta’s rice paddy with some cooler water … or garter snakes start giving off some pheromones) the urge to perform this behavior becomes uncontrollable, sometimes to the point of overriding other survival responses (how many folks here have males go off food during breeding season?)
It was posted several times in this thread that since we don’t see social behavior when we (to the snake) randomly toss in a stranger and the snakes fulfill a biological imperative, that that means they aren’t social, which is a very human assumption (cannot underestimate how important sex is to humans) but a very flawed one regarding other species.
This along with many other sources says otherwise.
You are making it sound like he was saying that breeding balls occur because garters want to “have some fun” while to me I seems more like they do it to make themselves less vulnerable to predators as snakes are much more vulnerable than they usually are.
You are hyper focusing on a tiny thing while all I am saying is garters are proven to be social and ball pythons don’t have enough evidence to say they are
I could be wrong, but I don’t think that was meant as an orgy type comment but simply that garter snakes are a more social species of snakes. Mature ball python males will fight each other off, they don’t tolerate being in a group situation for housing or especially during breeding.
Garter snakes will tolerate other males being in the same vicinity before and during breeding. Yes, the ball behavior is competing to mate, but they aren’t actively attacking one another before getting to that point
This is a much better way of saying what I was trying to get at. Thank you 
So I am probably going to catch A LOT of backlash over this, however at the current moment i have 7 bp’s house in one enclosure. However this enclosure is 6ft long x 3 ft tall and 3 ft wide. It has a very large amount of space with several hides, all kinds of coverage and plenty of places to hide. We also add stuff about weekly. I have 4 that are about 7 months old, 1 thats about 5 months old and the last 2 are about 3 months old. We do not feed in the enclosure and we introduce new snakes to old snakes. We are very well informed on what may happen with them cohabitating and are also in the process of building another enclosure of the same size (this has always been the plan). Ours are fed on the same day and time every week. We have a schedule and we stick to it. So far we have had no isses. 2 hides are located in the same place, are the same hide/temperature etc and we still we find several of them curled up together under one. So i think depending on enclosure size and different variables bp’s can very well be housed together. Now once the new enclosure is built the smaller 3 will be moved into it. We also have plans on what we want to do when breeding times come around. So i think this is more of a “To each their own” situation. What works for one person may not work for another.