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



I'm intrigued by this statement, and it's something I've heard anti-locality guys say over and over. Not everyone breeds the best of the best to the best of the best, hopeing to get super snakes. Some of us keep plenty of less attractive animals around to ensure a healthy and diverse gene pool with our captive snakes. There are, believe it or not, those of us who maintain not just a pair or two of each given locality, but actual colonies (not housed together, of course).



To me, all these things are interlaced. Would I let a pretty female go without love in the springtime because her date wasnt from X locale? NOPE. At what point would I not? Well I think ssp. designations are too much to begin with, if a naturally occuring intergrade exists why should WE choose against them?



Hmmm... You do understand that the term "intergrade" is a direct refernece to the biological phonemon of primary intergradation, correct? An example of a primary intergrade would be the zone of non-differentiation between L. t. triangulum and syspila in IL. That is a much different concept than breeding a L. t. triangulum from Maine with a L. t. syspila from eastern Kansas.



Honest representation is everything, be it locality or hybrids. But I always try and think of where the offspring will go before I breed, I think this is the most responsible way to breed. On this I think we can all agree!



Totally. I tried to make that apparent in my original post by strongly suggesting that keeping records of which animal was bred to which other animal, and where they both came from, is all part of the honesty of disclosure.



-Cole

[ Show Entire Thread ]