Interesting post Cole, and well thought out. I think you have defined what & why it means to keep locality snakes.

I also liked the last paragraph statements about generic stock quite well too.

Generic animals are fine even great but if the generic animals had locality information it would make them even more important to me.



Jeff I don't fully agree w/ your F3 statement:

"See, I think locality is LOST beyond F3 because a decade of selective breeding WILL change any snake."



With this above statement you just devalued why we keep locality stock.

I do agree that a breeder holding back the best stock and breeding that stock to each other can and does change the look of a wild type animal, but not all selective breeding has this affect. I have some F3 and F4 animals that still have every bit the phenotype look that its original wild caught founding stock did.



And I hope this doesn't sound like I'm attacking you but this statement really stunned me."

"Would I let a pretty female go without love in the springtime because her date wasnt from X locale? NOPE."



So I've gotta ask. Are you saying that you'd breed your Monster Island milks to t. triangulum not from your Monster Island line?



I do agree honest representation is everything. Keep it honest.



KevinM wrote:

"I feel it is the isolation factor that influences population differences and expressions in phenotypes that spurs most herpers concept of locality, not the arbitrary lines on a map."



I agree w/ you Kevin, but the counties and lines on a map, make it easier to tell others where the said animals came from.



-Dell

[ Show Entire Thread ]