OK, this was weak > What was weak?



"Not the degree of intricate speckling and the high number of serrated bands present in that Blair “Juno?” > Basically, I was paraphrasing Damon’s post, and recalling the attributes of the contestants that led them to select River Road, Lajitas and Davis mountains, or these mixes. Here’s Damon’s post: “I've seen "speckly-necked" animals from Juno (mainly F1 offspring) but the type and nature of the speckling on those animals were of a totally different nature than the more delicate speckling and rough-edged primary banding of the snake Robert posted. The nuchal pattern, where the pointilist outline of a blotch runs onto the head and forms an arrow, is something I've only seen from the western parts of the range... especially the river.”



So what WOULD be acceptable and who set that standard? > Don’t know. The only standard I know is the standard for the Recommended Breeder’s list.



"In addition, I produce somewhere between 70-80 locality offspring per year with my wc East Sanderson and Dryden groups."



Come on now, this is still and EXTREMELY small sampling taking into consideration the number of animals in the field in that region, thus the potential for variations we haven't seen, yet. > DUH, lol, but it looks like you’ve taken this sentence out of context and you forgot to put in the sentences that precede and follow it, so here is the entire relevant passage, “That Juno Road pair produced about seven clutches for me. In addition, I produce somewhere between 70-80 locality offspring per year with my wc East Sanderson and Dryden groups. So, I’m a little familiar with the variability of alterna clutches.” That passage meant to convey to Mike that I’m a LITTLE familiar with the variability of alterna clutches, nothing more…nothing less.



At least with the Limpia debacle we got the breeder to fess up to a possible error on his part. > LOL, that’s only if the breeder knows he’s made a mistake. Check out Aaron’s post below.



Robert

[ Show Entire Thread ]