As you know, I have a precieved dislike of science, but that is in error. I love science and use it and read it all the time. I do have a dislike for suedo-science. That is why I call some suedo-scientists. That is, when a biologist or like, Mask their arguements with their knowledge of words and writing. Instead of using successful experience.

I understand when they do that, its not about science, its about debate and the precieved notion that they can win an arguement. The problem is, its not about the arguement, its about the reality of keeping monitors and the success experienced. So yes, I have done very well using books and literature with keeping monitors. To clear it up, using literature that is pertinent. Apples to apples, not apples to polar bears.

I have also done very well using bits and pieces from nature to solve captive problems.

Like you, I found monitors to be no different then other captive produced reptiles, and heck, even mice and crickets(which I also produce) You give them the necessities and they react positively. The necessities are very simple.

The hard part is maintenance. You must keep it up on a day to day basis. With our mice, I touch each cage less then two minutes a week. That is by design(the mice are about making money). With monitors, that would indeed be impossible. You must apply husbandry of a consistant basis. This is where I believe the theory boys fall out. There minds do not allow such boring tasks, day after day. They must have something to theorize about, something magical, or they become bored. So they solve problems on a theoretical basis only and move on to the next problem.

Which takes us back to the start. Start with simplicity, then move to complicated, not the other way around. What do you think? FR

[ Show Entire Thread ]