(07-26-2013, 02:19 AM)Death2Housework Wrote: No, Dave, you're right. Alice probably wouldn't eat the baby, but that doesn't stop constriction or trying. I don't post every detail to the story because there isn't usually enough room, but I'll add one so you'll understand. I know the kid, and I doubt that he's the best candidate to own a pet like that. He's just the kind of kid that given the chance to make a decision, he'll take the bad one almost every time. He's so likeable, though! I'm not saying I'd get rid of a snake because I had a child or baby in the home, but I'm not going to judge a new mother for that decision, either. Snakes don't bother me in the least, and Alice is pretty sweet, actually.
Actually, 99.9% of the time, that does stop constriction and trying. Boa constrictors could be viewed as animals that budget their energy. Constricting and killing any prey, especially large prey, requires quite a bit of energy. A large constrictor will not waste the energy to constrict something it cannot eat.
All this said, I am not condoning anyone leaving a baby, or any small child with a large constrictor. But I would say the same about a dog or cat honestly. If you have a larger animal, great care should be taken in housing and caring for it properly.
The only sidenote to all this, human bodies do seem to be confusing to large snakes. Overall length and girth, to a very large snake, we look edible. But most can't get over the shoulders. This is the case in the 12 or so human fatalities from large constrictors over the last 30 years. Most of the prey any of these animals would consume is more streamlined. So with the giants, this should always be kept in mind.
I should also say, that I am referring to the large constrictors here (reticulated pythons, Indian pythons (& ssp), both species of African rock pyrhons, and green anacondas). Not boa constrictors.
