That would be nice ifr the academics did indeed agree with that. But so far they haven't agreed to anything. They say, these things do not occur period, end of story, no ifs, ands, or buts.

I would not be so persistant if they even left a tiny window open to say, under certain circumstances, monitors could multiclutch in nature. Or maybe they do group up, but they haven't seen it. But sadly they say none of this stuff we(many keepers) see on a daily and commonplace occurance. No offense, my whole stinking family has seen groups of monitors in nature. So I do not understand where these fellas are coming from.

For instance, Wills post about his Kimberlys, they all pile on. They say they do this because they are forced to(no options) But they do have options. When we get monitors that do not get along, they without question avoid eachother. To a point of some burrowing down until they waste away. So when they are anti social, it is very apparent.

Its this anti social behavior that really defines the possible social behavior that Will posted. They use the same basking area because they want to, not because they are forced to. He did provide at least two different areas that appear to be alike. Of course I agree, if he had a wider basking area, they would not be directly on top eachother, they would simply be next to eachother but always touching. They really like to stay in contact with other monitors they like. They seem to have to touch them. Normally they are next to eachother with an arm around the other or one foot touching the other.

But surely most can understand, they would not tolerate another individual climbing on top of them if they are indeed anti social. They would kill it first. Monitors are very capable of killing eachother and doing so swiftly. Cheers

[ Show Entire Thread ]