Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I've been trying to understand what exactly it means to differentiate between a Pulcallpa and Iquitos Peruvian? I've seen examples of both, and I really can't point out any differences? Am I missing something? I'll be the first to admit when two localities look different, but I'm having trouble with this one. I have two Peruvians I have on the website, without a locality tag. Why is this micro locality thing the first question that everyone that has inquired asked? Why is the general public so enthralled with the Pulcallpa and Iquitos tag? Personally, I'd be leary on lableing any Peruvian that I couldn't trace back to the original imports from the 80's. Thoughts? Opinions?
-----
South Central Herpetological

Hey Eric, we have spoken before on this topic before only that time was with a N. Brazilian B.c.c. you had. I feel that we have an obsession to lable these animals to make them more unique and possibly more marketable. I agree with you on not lableing unless you are SURE of the orgin, however there are people to trust and others to not. The bottom line is they are both Peruvian and share a lot of the same traits. Some of the "Pucallpa" I have seen have pattern anomalies That the "Iquitos" dont, my opinion is that it is because few people are very consistant in reproducing the Peruvians anyway so the gene pool of those snakes being bred and offered for sale are not as diverse as say a Surinam/Guyana. I have some "pucallpa" Peruvians that have the typical "Iquitos" look, so like I said before it helps market them but the best marketing is to have gorgeous healthy animals, nothing wrong with just having pretty Peruvians. Just my opinion.
Joel Thomas

good point joel, by the way that's a nice Iquitos you got there, just kidding with ya, nice pucallpa, nice pic.
greg c

Anyway it is still a nice Peruvian!!!!!
Joel

i agree, that one is a beauty and should look even better as an adult.
greg c

agreed