If Red down is a dominant trait, why are nearby not more red haired family?

I read somewhere that having red down was a dominant trait, so why is the population of red haired culture at least equal to those of blonde quill? First, alot of blondes are bottled. There are alot of people out near that do have some red contained by there fleece, but most colour it or it is in here as some hilites. Everybody had some amount of red, just a different mixture of it. Everyone have brown hair believe it or not. On the colour rudder, red, blue and yellow produce up brown, so you will see some people enjoy more of 1 colour than most.Hope that helps you some.
Dominance have nothing to do beside prevalence. There are lots of dominant genetic diseases, for instance, that are very awfully rare.
Look at it this channel - if there are simply a few people near a dominant trait, they're only going to enjoy a few kids to whom they can pass that trait. Then those few kids are individual going to have a few kids.
Unless there's screening, meaning that population with the trait are more probable to survive and have children, the percentage of relatives with the trait is going to remain like from generation to social group.
Google "Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium" for mathematical proof.
People color their mane. But sometimes even if it isn't completely red people may own red undertones. Like I do. My mane is naturally blonde and I color it to trade name it lighter and have other had red undertone. When I was a little one my hair be black and at a year old it turned red consequently to blonde. It really varies on the soul.