 | market - home |
|
| market - home |
|
 |
 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Chris H. on April 14, 2002 at 20:50:04:
In Reply to: above was response to Mr. Chris who missed your important point! n/p posted by matt m on April 12, 2002 at 19:21:20:
First of all, I am well aware of the fact that dogs are all the same species = Canis familiaris. In fact, the genetic data suggest that they probably should all be the same species with the Wolf C. lupus. I was not confused about this issue.
My point is that dog breeders have long ago let go of the concept of locality pure dogs (OK, there are a few fanatics). Instead dogs are judged on a series of artificially selected traits (shape of muzzle, hair length, etc).
The time will come, when our hobby evolves a little more, that people will choose pet snakes that are 10 or more generations removed from the wild by their appearance and pay little attention to their locality of origin (if it is known!). Corn Snakes are a great example. You can't get extra money for a locality corn (unless it is very different like a Kisatchie Corn). Otherwise, people choose corns by their appearance.
Locality is irrelevant unless it represents some identifiable and coveted morph. Otherwise, people won't care if their snake is from one mountain range or another 10 miles away.
I have watched with interest the rise of the "locality" Rosy Boa over the last 20 years. It used to be that Rosy's were sold as coastals, deserts, or Mexican. Only when widespread collecting (and poaching from Mexico) began, did people start selling them by locality. And that was largely financially motivated (a rare locality was "worth" more).
