Posted by:
dbherp
at Mon Mar 31 10:01:09 2008 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by dbherp ]
It's part evolution and part food availability (which over time is what causes their size evolution). When all the adult animals coming in from the wild are the same size this is their 'natural' size. If you take that animal and feed it ten or twenty times the amount it normally would in the wild then obviously it's not going to look 'natural' anymore. It's the same reason there are no burms or retics cruising around in the wild obscenely fat, we do that for them. They aren't supposed to look like blood pythons, they're slender bodied snakes naturally. 
On top of this there are a LOT of animals being sold as CBB Superdwarfs that are either outright mainland normals, some kind of cross or CH animals of unknown background. Add this to the large amount of people that spread stories based on hearsay rather than actual experience and there's a lot of misinformation out there.
I've got 1.1 2004 CB Superdwarfs and another 1.2 2005 CB group. My 2004 female laid her second clutch for me a month ago. None of these animals are over seven feet. I openly admit I feed them normal sized meals once every 7-10 days. I'm not power feeding them just to see how big they can get.
The point is that they do have the genetics to stay relatively small. It's possible for people that don't want a gigantic retic to keep them. I've attached a recent picture of my 2005 male for size reference.
-----
www.dbherp.com
[ Hide Replies ]
|
RE: Question?????? - dbherp, Mon Mar 31 10:01:09 2008 