Posted by:
kirby
at Sun Apr 9 15:22:14 2006 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by kirby ]
What I had were hypos het for anery and het for albino. They would only be triple hets for avalanche if I produced the first hypo snow and named it avalanche. The other people may have called their animals triple het for snowglow but until the definitive animal is produced and named they were nothing more than hypos het for anery and albino. You don't have naming right's to a morph just because you produce hets. A line or a morph isn't named based on the hets.
For example, what if the first produer of the hypo snow decided to name this boa a Blizzard which is totally within their rights. Is he/she not allowed to use this name because dhets for another project are called dhets for Blizzard even though a Blizzard has not yet been produced? Obviously they could name it a Blizzard. The animals for the other project would still be what they always were doublehets for type2anery and albino.
I think this does raise a good overall point and that is in the naming of hets. I would propose that hets for combination morphs be named exactly what they are and leave the naming of the actual morph to the first producer of the animal. For example dhets hets for the albino blood boa would be called exaclty that and whoever produces the first albino blood can call it whatever he or she wants. I think this would make things easier and avoid some of the current problems.
Bill Kirby
[ Hide Replies ]
|
I totally disagree.... - kirby, Sun Apr 9 15:22:14 2006