I doubt this was anything to do with the snake in question having the spider morph. I’ve had several snakes confuse me for food, including a cinnamon male I used to have that had gotten as far as wrapping my hand before realizing I was not food and letting go.
Snakes sometimes get too excited over the idea of being fed and just go for the biggest warmest target they see 
I had the normalest looking normal female that was so ready to eat that she launched out of her top slot tub before the rat was even close to her. She latched onto a towel I had on top of the rack that was overhanging just a bit. And then I had to just sit until she lost interest.
It didn’t take long because the cool towel didn’t fight back or move. But once she did properly key in on the rat a few moments later there were no problems.
Also see:
My butter female thinking I was food and managing to eat my finger… she got to the base of my finger before realizing I was not food and letting go
This was a few years ago but still funny
Nom nom nom! That’s hilarious!
Hilarious picture
My sand boa has latched onto my hand thinking it was a mouse before. I definitely think it’s just a general snake thing, not something limited or related to spider/wobble morph ball pythons. They get into excited feeding mode and strike first and ask questions later. 
My corn has the same motivation lol, on his birthday meal where he wore a party hat beforehand (always a great eater so I wasn’t too worried about stressing him out into not eating, also he’s never been bothered by head touches or putting hats on him so a quick happy birthday song and hat pics seemed fun) he got so excited waiting for his mouse as soon as I got near his hide with the tongs and mouse he skipped right past the mouse and ended up latching onto the side on my hand, absolutely would not let go, once he got a better smell of the mouse on the tongs though he let go and snarfed it per usual
Lol. For us it was the only one to do this and she was heavily corkscrewing right before whipping around and latching onto my wife’s forearm and wrapping.
That snake was my wife’s personal pet. Afterwards I was the only one to handle her until I rehomed her, because my wife no longer trusted her or any of the other snakes. And tbh not even my pet ball pythons were given a pass for a good year; and I let the in laws and children handle them.
I always have to wonder in these cases if it had been a dog or cat, would the reaction be the same?
For some, maybe.
I did one thing slightly different while giving medication to one cat and got a nasty bite (thankfully did not become infected) but I could never blame the others for that. Although in my case I may be desensitized because I’ve worked veterinary before as well?
I believe there were actually some tests run surrounding that at a local university or maybe a next state over one? I remember there were multiple surveys posted along the lines but I’d say a majority yes, from the amount of just general animal keeping I do and shelters I enter and exit and rescues I do people generally don’t even flinch when a sewer rat looking dog with some kind of disease bites them (I’m serious) or will pass it off as ok straight up to letting their dog pee on guests shoes (this happened to me rather than witnessing) or pass of a lot of possibly easily trained behavior or behavior that should be trained wether it’s easy or not (ex peeing on guests shoes, jumping on people and biting them, being harmful towards other animals of any sort unless hunting dogs and that’s for specific animals) while I’ve had somebody straight up slap a snake in front of me at an expo because “it moved to fast” the situation was a lady was holding a retic brought as a representative animal at a rather popular big snakes table and the retic simply swiveled its head to get a better look around. I’ve also had situations where people are fine with giving food to and getting dangerously close to wildlife (bison and elk primarily, honestly more dangerous than any snake I’ve met when it comes to unpredictability and the fact that it can be a bit harder to get away from a charging mammal at least 4x your size) but I also have a good snake wildlife story where my cousins buddy and him were out in a tent for whatever training they were doing and his friend ended up beating a non venomous (don’t remember the exact species) of snake to death with a broom handle. These are also far from the worst stories I have and also people seem to generally just not reach kids how to handle animals outside of cats and dogs, and sometimes even then don’t teach their kids how to handle them, no, kitty doesn’t want their ears pulled and puppy doesn’t want makeup put on them, and snake especially wants no ■■■■ having to do you you grabbing it’s head or pulling it’s tail (volunteering for a zoo is great, along with having a park right next to your house that you would let your snakes roam in since there’s no chemicals used and it’s always empty besides this one person who thinks it’s ok to get in my business with their kid even though you told them not to and ended up just being to tired of it to go back again)
Super duper long but here’s my evidence to support the theory that people give snakes a lot less leeway and kids just give animals like zero leeway and don’t care even at a reasonable age (I’m talking 8-9+, a little 5 year old I wouldn’t expect to understand yet how to behave around animals entirely or that animals generally don’t like being poked and prodded or pulled)
Something to keep in mind is that spider morphs are essentially snakes with a skull deformity that makes their behavior abnormal (star gazing, spiraling, etc) as opposed to normal ball python behavior. Keeping a spider morph is not similar to keeping the average dog or cat, but rather a dog or cat with a neurological disorder. Or even a reactive animal that you know the triggers for; because stressing out spider morphs tends to bring out that abnormal behavior.
This is a decent comparison because a lot of people will rehome or do behavioral euthanasia for dogs and cats that have issues…and just due to inconveniences or vet bills, which you well know as part of the vet field.
Have you ever heard of Springer Syndrome in Springer Spaniels?
Or have you ever seen what an English bulldog’s skull looks like… Or how a munchkin cat is almost physically incapable of walking when they’re older? How about the munchkin cats with ribcages that push inwards? How many doxies need wheelchairs… Degenerative backs in German shepherd lines? Rhodesian ridgebacks born leaking spinal fluid from their backs?
American Bulldog Chance in homeward bound… I worked with someone where every one of his grandchildren from one litter had to be put down for hip dysplasia.
There are multiple issues with the way dogs and cats are bred as well. It’s not an isolated incident to spider morph. Also there are multiple genes in that complex that cause wobble… And multiple genes that cause other deformities as well.
The care that you need to take while breeding is important and you need to be knowledge in it regardless of the type of animal it is.
You can’t just point at a spider ball python and say “that’s unethical” without considering any other type of selective breeding done with animals for looks as also possibly being the same.
Any animal that you take home as a pet should also have these considerations. Because any animal can have an abnormal behavior that others consider normal. You need to do research.
This one is the worst as a german shepherd lover. I hate seeing these pictures of beautiful german shepherds but with the shortest back legs and a terrible back. It’s just awful.
I love how certain spider morphs and combinations look but imo it’s just not worth putting they animals through all the neurological issues just because they look pretty.
Only jumping in here real quick just to to correct what I think is a pretty common misconception about folks who are against spider breeding (as a person who is against breeding neuro morphs, believes it is inherently unethical and advocates against it)
I think a lot of folks somehow get the impression that folks who are against breeding spiders just ignore other aesthetically-bred species, and this is mostly incorrect. I very vocally believe that intentionally breeding neuro morph animals (or any BPs with genes that have an increased risk of negative QOL) and one of the arguments I get thrown all the time is “well, look at pugs! Look at munchkin cats! Look at x/y/z!” And this is always confusing to me because of course I am also against those things. I don’t think people should continue breeding pugs, bulldogs, frenchies, etc. that have inherent issues that come with the breed, and I consider anyone breeding who is NOT doing full breed genetic testing, hip/eye/elbow/etc. evaluations even for species where they’re less common is incredibly irresponsible. Yes, I also believe we shouldn’t continue breeding munchkin cats. Yes, I also advocate against breeding German shepherds with lower backs. So it is something that applies across the board.
The other reaction I always get when folks talk about spider specifically is “well there are other neuro morph complex genes/there are other genetic defect morphs, I suppose you don’t have any of those in your collection?” No, I don’t. One of the first things I did when I started breeding was learn to identify all of the defect morphs to make sure I never bought one on accident. I don’t and never will have spider, champagne, woma, hgw, or Spotnose. I do have chocolate and blackhead because neither have ever been reported with wobble syndrome in the single gene form, so I will never produce supers and if new evidence comes to light that they can suffer wobble syndrome as single gene, I will remove them from my collection. I work with black pastel/cinnamon but again, only in the single gene form, I will never ever do a pairing that could produce a super. I don’t work with scaleless or scaleless head. I don’t work with any of the genes with fertility issues or higher risk of egg binding.
All of this to say, I just wanted to gently correct what I feel is a pretty common misinterpretation about those of us who do openly advocate against breeding spider (and other defect genes that have the potential to affect QOL). Ultimately I just don’t feel it’s ethical to intentionally bring animals into the world knowing they’re likely to experience suffering or discomfort and I believe animal health and well-being should always come before human aesthetic preferences. And that goes for any species that humans domestically or captively breed - snakes, livestock, domestic pets, etc.
That is all! 
It makes me wonder how these morphs ever evolved at all. How was it they were found or were they bred to become these morphs? My understanding is that all ball pythons originated from wild caught animals. Why didn’t nature cull the morphs with QOL problems? You would think with such issues that they would have never evolved for thousands of years in the wilds of Africa.
Should we as hobbyists cull those animals that show any QOL issues?
Forgive my ignorance but breeding any morph that has a severe wobble is irresponsible. Selective breeding of a Spotnose , spider , woman, hgw or champagne that show no sign of any QOL issues is just that , selective. You take the best of the best and try to produce an animal that has those same inherited traits.
Oh totally understand. But I have seen far too many people though that target only spiders. I had to actually tell someone at a reptile show yesterday that there were multiple genes that caused wobble and they had no idea. The misinformation kills me.
I was also a bit aggressive and bounced a bit too off topic with my post. I think because I had a busy weekend and was probably not a good idea to look at forum posts. -_-
I’m very much with inspirationexotics on this one, and think she worded it perfectly. Most people I know who are agains the breeding of spider ball pythons are also against other morphs that have QOL issues including scaleless and super cinnamon/black pastel breeding, and are against the selective breeding of dogs/cats with health issues as well as backyard breeding of dogs. They are usually very consistent.
I personally do not work with spider, champagne, HGW, Woma, etc as well as scaleless because I do believe they have a diminished quality of life, and don’t want to be a participant in their breeding. It wouldn’t stop me from rescuing one if it needed a home or veterinary care, but I won’t breed them. I do have spotnose, which is fine in the heterozygous form, and I will not be making supers. I also don’t support the breeding of breeds of dogs or cats with severe issues or backyard breeding of dogs (doodles, those mutant meatball pit things). My Great Dane is adopted, and I will likely continue adopting Danes, but should I ever go to a breeder, you can guarantee I will only be supporting those that do the highest standard of health testing (OFA hips and elbows, thyroid, echocardiograms, DNA panel, no spot-to-spot breeding) and breed for longevity. I’d like to think I’m at least somewhat consistent with my standards, and ackowledge that they are MY personal standards and I can’t force them on others.
These loaded questions, and I think it’s important to consider that there’s a solid difference between not bringing them into the word vs culling. If I thought an animal was seriously suffering, I would absolutely persue humane euthanasia.
As for the child question, that is an incredibly subjective and personal topic. As someone in genetics, I definitely do have some opinions on it, but am not sure this is really the right venue for them
I will counter your gentle correction with another. Arguing that keeping those genes in your collection and will just not make supers is absolutely hypercritical because you are, knowingly and with complete knowledge, perpetuating problematic genes in the gene pool. This is no different than a person with German shepherd that they know carries the degenerative back gene that only breeds it to animals that do not carry the gene. You are still spreading the gene through the population. You sell those animals to other people and they may decide to use them to make supers. So you are just as guilty.
All of this is why I still stand by my post over here:
Tl;DR:
.
.
.
Morphs do not “evolve”. They are mistakes that happen because of the imperfect nature of DNA replication. That same process can sometimes give rise to “helpful” mistakes as well, and under selective pressure those mistakes can perpetuate and act as drivers for speciation/evolution
In the wild, most of these morphs would not be perpetuated because there is a selective pressure against them. However, our racks and tubs are not the wild and there is a very clear and profound fitness to morph animals that leads to their continued perpetuation. I would posit that 85% of this hobby is driven by the “designer snake” pyramid scheme, and unless that changes then we will continue to see people breed for morphs
.
.
.
To quote Jeff Goldblum - “Life… Uhhhh… Finds a way…”
Sometimes, mutations are not so traumatic that the animal carrying it is immediately picked off. This is why we see things like Scaleless and Albino pop up as adults in the wild. Most of them do get nabbed up, but every now and then one makes it long enough and breeds and passes the gene back into the gene pool.
That said, the other side of the matter is that the majority of our morphs were popped out in farms and not “in the wild”. Trappers go out and hunt down gravid females and wait for them to drop their eggs and then they incubate the eggs and pull aside anything that is different. This has been standard for probably thirty or so years. So the morphs that permeate the hobby never had to “fight for their lives” in the cruel cold jungle
Never meant to cause problems.
I will say first that there is a point of clarification here - there’s a big difference between intentionally producing animals with negative effect to their QOL, and producing animals that carry a defective gene that is completely harmless outside of a very specific set of circumstances. I would put forward that this is not hypocritical at all, because the former cannot be done responsibly, while the latter can, and in this scenario you’re assuming that like the German shepherd backyard breeder, I do nothing to manage that defect. I am not a breeder who sells animals to anyone who wants to buy them. I frequently turn down sales for many reasons, and one of those is breeding plans. If I’m selling an animal with any gene that potentially carries a defect and a person contacts me wanting to add that gene to their collection, I ask lots of questions and if the person is interested in combining that gene with other harmful ones, I will simply turn down the sale. With pet keepers, I do a lot of education and make sure they fully understand what other morphs that gene should never be combined with if they were to ever decide to breed. This still falls firmly within my ethical standards. Golden retrievers are prone to hip dysplasia and one could argue that by breeding goldens, you are perpetuating that bad defect gene. But in practice, good breeders test their dogs, don’t sell dogs that carry the defect to breeder homes, and require contracts to carefully control the perpetuation of the gene pool and education around responsible breeding. This is the exact same thing that I do. So yes, in some ways you could argue that this is just as bad breeding the supers themselves, but in practice that’s a slippery slope fallacy that isn’t actually based in fact. That’s like saying that nicking a candy bar from a Walmart is just as bad as robbing a bank at gunpoint. I think we can all acknowledge there’s a distinct difference in severity here. At the end of the day, I don’t believe it’s ethical to produce animals with reduced QOL. I abide by this completely, and for those genes that could still have issues, I am as responsible a breeder as I can possibly be.
I always tend to get in these discussions/arguments because I am vocal about being against the production of neuro morphs especially, and lots of people will never agree with me, and that’s fine. I just wanted to correct the perspective that folks such as myself cherry pick which genes we’re for or against, when in reality we are generally remarkably consistent across the board. That’s all!
I don’t shame breeders who breed neuro morphs or refuse to work with them. I’m never rude to them. I just am vocal about providing a different perspective on the ethics behind it and advocate for education and consideration around it. The hobby will never change without that kind of gentle advocacy, and it may never change anyway, but if I help change even one person’s mind about producing them, then I’ve helped the hobby.
Hilary made a really good point about this. There’s a huge difference between culling every animal with and issue and not producing them in the first place. I’ve never met anyone who believed that all spiders alive today should be culled. Those of us vocally against it just advocate against the continued breeding to bring more into the world.
Unfortunately in the case of neuro genes there is still a misconception that selective breeding is possible. Folks have been trying to breed the wobble out for decades and no progress has been made whatsoever because we’ve figured out that the phenotype/genotype itself is directly paired with the neuro issues and can’t be bred out.
