|
|
|
| |
| facebook - twitter |
kingsnake racing -
field outfitter shop -
reptile laws -
kingsnake shirts -
club.kingsnake -
advertising rates -
site news -
help -
contact
|
|
Reptile & Amphibian Chat Sunday 9-11 PM Eastern - Click here! |
Posted by Dave Beamer on November 12, 1998 at 13:25:04:
In Reply to: Re: Very Serious Flaws With Proposed Guidelines posted by John Kellar on November 12, 1998 at 03:05:30:
John
Thanks for addressing the issue. I agree that in unresolved complexes such as Ensatina it is best to leave subspecies until it is robust taxonomic allocations can be made. In IN we don't have much in the way of unresolved complexes and therefore our list was prepared at the species level. There was an outcry by hobbyiest that the state needed to recognize subspecies. In a few instances for snakes commonly CB they did make some "subspecies" exceptions. I do not wish to see states that are using a robust taxonomy be dragged down because hobbyiest like to focus on clinal variation. I would encourage states to discard subspecies from their list unless there is an unresolved complex. In these instance I have no problem with listing a subspecies.
DAve Beamer