The Flood, fossils, & the geologic evidence

In many posts throughout this forum it has been suggested that if the Noachian flood was worldwide we should see genetic bottlenecks in all the species worldwide. It has also been suggested that the flood presented in Genesis represents a local flood, so therefore the lack of a bottleneck present in all species does not falsify the idea of a local flood. My question is would a local flood also leave a genetic marker of a bottleneck for the species within the locally defined area? If so, is this what we actually see when we compare the genetic signatures of animals indigenous to the area? Obviously I think we would have to consider just how local of a flood we are talking about. What is our minimum threshold where we should see some sort of marker contained within various species genetics?

Makes sense, after all as soon as one rabbit gets eaten then it is goodbye for all the rabbits in that area. The same would be true for any prey species. Once all the prey is gone then it is goodbye for the predators as well. Is there any way to analyze if this is in fact the case from a genetic stand point? Is there any animal species that are exclusive to the area where a local flood could have occurred? If so, then is there any way to tell if they were there pre-flood? Or if they were transplants from post flood populations? Simply moving in to populate an uninhabited area.Edited by rueh, : spelling

What? Why in the world would they need to conduct any experiments? They already know what the answer is gonna be.

Maybe not but I have always thought that a story grows in the telling. It would be neat to see if a regional flood for the appropriate time could be confirmed though. Something like the black sea deluge.