To me, Hemet, Temecula, Winchester.. close enough to be called locality for a morph. Just an opinion. I haven't a clue where they came from. But I have more opinions. Don't we all?

The albino gene is out there somewhere in Temecula, Hemet or thereabouts. But nature, at this point anyway, has not allowed for that gene to be common. Most animals found are not amels. Fact. Same goes with anery. Most animals found in those areas aren't. With anery, I can see how the snake can still blend in with its environs, so maybe there will be more of those? I digress.

Point is, when folks start breeding amels and anerys in captivity, and then make snows, etc, it is not likely what natural selection would do. So locality becomes more of a label for the origins of the animals, but the new snows and whatnot will not be characteristic of what Temecula, Hemet, etc has in the wild, at least not what is the common snake one would find.

I just don't see how locality matters for morphs other than for people to know where the animals came from. Those animals in captivity though aren't what's in the wild as nature selected to be the dominate color of the natural populations, so they are simply captive representations of what we wish we could find out there, or maybe even representations of a fluke of nature.

They are coastal rosies. Big. Different from those found in deserts. They live in sweater boxes or glass tanks. And they eat white mice originating from Sweden or somewhere other than Temecula. The parentage stock originated from the rosy-friendly habitat in the vicinity of Vail Lake, CA and somewhere else near there.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]