Thank you Bob, that was one of the most well-written posts I've seen in a long time.



And thank you also for seeing that a lot of what I've been doing has been tongue-in-cheek and I do have an ususual sense of humor.



I agree with you also about Colin. In no way was what I posted originally any slam against him, but rather just to shed light on the fact that doubt can be shed on everyone and it is about personal resposibility in the end. I trust Colin implicitly with regards to his animals. I also trust many other people whom I might disagree with philosophically, Eric and Joe among them. If I purchased animals from them I would have no doubt that they were honestly represented, as I would also probably everyone else on the list whether I know them or not. I would also completely trust MANY others who are not on the breeders list (you among them) because I think it is important to remember who you are dealing with and what their reputation is over ALL other factors.



One of the Big problems that I see is one that has come about as a result of our innate desires to produce animals that are more and more 'aesthetically' pleasing to us. In a matter of two or three generations I've been able to produce localty animals (even through line breeding from a gravid wild-collected mother and her offspring) which have NO resemblance to any other pictures of animals that I've seen from that locality. This has happened with my offspring SEVERAL times as I'm sure it has with MANY other breeders. It happens because we generally keep back unusual or aberrant animals because we consider them just that - unusual. It is unlikely that we would keep back the ugliest animals nor the animals that most resemble their parents - that is just a facet of captive breeding. The problem I would see is that there would be someone who would cast aspersions on these offspring as not being locality simply because that person has never personally seen an individual like that as a 'wild' snake from that locality and then throwing out your babies as generic. I think it is clear that this continually happens with Black Gap animals in particular as people have produced pattenless or speckled animals that some don't feel represent the location and doubt their purity. From talking with you, I know that you believe that that area in particular might be the 'gene pool sink' for the entire population of alterna and could therefore produce any number of aberrant individuals - with the eastern edge of that sink being Sanderson. I hate that breeders are not able to exploit the edges of the gene pools of localities because they are doubted when they produce highly unusual locality animals.



"In my opinion, we don't need a self-proclaimed "Ayatollah of Alterna" to dictate standards according to their particular interpretation of veracity, nor do we need "Purity Police" to enforce those standards on this forum or elsewhere."



Amen. I don't need to add anything to that at all.



"For all concerned with this topic, if you are not convinced of a locality representation according to your own standards of acceptability for any reason, then don't engage in an action that is contrary to them. Seek out alterna enthusiasts that share the same passion for true locality representation of gray-banded kingsnakes, inquire, gather information that is personally satifactory, and make your own decisions from that point. Otherwise, go find your own snakes and dispense with the pedigree issues. No individual should dictate who is acceptable or not by imposing their standards on others. "



Bob I am very appreciative that you have decided to weigh in with this opinion because it is exactly the opinion that I hold and I believe a lot of other people hold as well.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]