Posted by:
JPsShadow
at Tue Sep 20 13:00:26 2005 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by JPsShadow ]
You mentioned it was done with Salvator. This is a very large species and known to get heavy in captivity. This however has more to do with the enviroment limiting factors and less to do with food items.
It is simple in how flawed it is. A wild monitor is in the wild. A captive one is in captivity.
A captive monitor can eat when it wants, can have more or less heat, is confined to an area limiting activity. All of this is especially evident or important with the larger species.
Wild monitors can only eat when food is available, have a vast endless area to move about in. They also are exposed to the elements which may or may not favor it.
In order to test these theories they have to have some common ground, you won't find alot of common ground when comparing a captive salvator to a wild one.
In the begining these studies may have been very useful. You had to start from someplace to figure out how to keep these animals. Now they have been kept and many have been successful with them in captivity. I myself would rather look into the ones kept in captivity to compare to then the wild ones. After all keeping them in captivity is what I am doing and is my goal.
[ Hide Replies ]
|
RE: One problem I see with this - JPsShadow, Tue Sep 20 13:00:26 2005