Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I've seen a lot of posts about location specific snakes - IE stocks of snakes that are from a certain location.

Is there any kind of registry for this? I don't mean certified, but registry of location designations?

I've got one pair of WC cal. kings - male from (east) Contra Costa County (Antioch, I've had him for 6 years now, he was a large adult when I collected him - for many years he was my only snake) and a female from Shasta County. Obviously if I breed them next year, the young are not "location" specific.

My other pair - both were collected in Shasta County, in Redding to be precise. I'm not going to breed them until '08. They would be location specific, they were collected about a mile apart from each other.

Would their CB offspring be "Shasta County" or "Redding" or "North Redding" - what would be best? Is there already designations that should be used?

Now for these guys, it probably doesn't really matter - there isn't a hell of a lot of local variation in wild Calif Kings in Northern California - at least not that I'm aware of. Everywhere I've seen them, the adults tend to be black head, brown irregular bands that meet somewhat checkerboard on the underside. I suppose there could be variations in typical number of bands. One specimen I caught (and released) on Mt. Tamalpais was banded (not striped) but the checkerboard was merged on his belly to make his belly all black. Had to release him, state park and all. Don't know how common that is in that area, he was the only King I found there.

But anyway - I'm kind of curious as how the location naming is done, is there any kind of consensus or is it up to whoever starts maintaining a CB representation of a local population?

Why I really like the idea - if something were to happen that created a need for restoration of a species in an area, I think it would be awesome if captive bred snakes that are true from the area could be used.

There is a registry that has recently been started for cornsnakes, don't remember the link but it should be easily found with a google search. It's a bit late...but better than never.

I think the locality rage began with alterna...usually with any other species the locality is used when an animal of exceptional appearance occurs (i.e. Stillwater Hypo Bullsnakes). This made differentiating those hypos from the original strain easier. I know that some people choose to use thier name (if they are the ones responsible for establishing the morph or appearance) like the Applegate Gophers/pyros...they could have just as easily been Airport Road Amels or something to that effect but the locality was not considered to be as good a name for the look. I know FR mentioned he caught the original pyro exhibiting the Applegate look....it could have been named after the mountain or town nearest to the capture site...it's all a personal thing. With Cal kings there are several locales which exhibit specific looks (Mendota, Carlsbad, and Sisscor's Crossing come to mind, Kerby, F. Retes, or B. Hubbs would be great sources of information on other locality Cal Kings)

The names are usually made up by an individual who is working with the snakes....sometimes it catches on and is used by seemingly everyone...sometimes not, and depending on the amount of variation found in that population, animals that are not from there...but look similar to that locale are often named to increase value and make them sound more desireable (Okeetee & Miami Corns for example)...this is also rampant in Chondropython circles (see G. Maxwell's book for further reading on true locality vs. type descriptions) You could be the originator of Shasta Kings but unless they are #1 different enough from the surrounding area's specimens & #2 Pleasing enough in appearance to make them a popular animal that a great deal of people want to obtain. Popularity seems to cement the names into the hobby.

While it's a great feel good idea, I don't think that it will ever be acceptable to release captive animals regardless of how pure they are kept geneticlly. It depends on the studies you read but the overwhelming evidence is that re-population does not appear to work...at least in the species with which it has been tried so far.

Great discussion material!

Horridus

While it's a great feel good idea, I don't think that it will ever be acceptable to release captive animals regardless of how pure they are kept geneticlly. It depends on the studies you read but the overwhelming evidence is that re-population does not appear to work...at least in the species with which it has been tried so far.

Well, I'm guessing the biggest problem with repopulation is probably the conditions that caused the demise of the population to begin with. Another concern of course is the introduction of foreign parasites (IE the fungus that probably came from South Africa that is quite possibly responsible for many new world frog extinctions)

I know locale is also popular amongst some mountain kingsnakes - with locale specific specimens fetching more than non locale specific specimens. Of course, with mountain kings there are visible location pattern variations, so it probably is appropriate there.