Reptile & Amphibian Forums

It’s curious when people denounce crossing species in captivity, especially in the name of “conservation.” What is conservation in the minds of these people? Encouraging demand for pure species to be wild-caught for supposedly “conservation”-minded keepers? That's an ugly side of the notion.

Dare any purists venture what their species concept is? After all, its one's species concept that makes him/her push for maintaining "purity." What makes a species? Is it certain gene sequences? Or is it more lax, like where parent stock originated?

The real answer’s easy. Nature makes a species. Take the species out of nature and it doesn’t stay the same across generations whether hybridization is allowed or not. But, it doesn’t change the way the ones in nature change, either. Don’t believe me? Check the leopard gecko classifieds to see how “pure” that species is after a couple decades of captive breeding without hybridization. “Pure” species, or not? Granted, monitors don’t seem likely to show such accelerated results, but you get the idea of what happens even if you “conserve” the species.

Applying a sound species concept to captive animals doesn’t equal denouncing captive hybridization – it equals letting animals do what comes naturally. If natural behavior in captivity is for two species to cross, why not? Why does anyone need ONLY pure species for completely unnatural purposes (pets)?

Heres a somewhat scientific question. In other areas of herps, for instance turtles. The biologists and academics embrace crosses and hybrids. They do so in nature and captivity. They think its very educational, from a biological and taxonomic point of view.

Yet, with varanids, suedo-advanced keeper, biologist and academics, seem to not only hate this, but dismiss it, both in captivity and in nature.

With the turtles, there are some species that are now known to be natural occuring hybrids/crosses of two other species. This type of work is done with DNA.

With monitors, there are several captive crosses, that have been produced through many generations, and and and and, there appears to be many, at least several wild occuring crosses. For an example, I have crossed V.gilleni and V.caudolineatus. In nature, there are textbook V.gilleni and V.caudolineatus, and what appears to be intermediates between those two. All occuring over a fairly large area in Western Australia.

There are larger monitors that seem to do this as well. Also in that same area, there is V.gouldi and V.panoptes, and V.flavirufus. Then another type occurs that appears a perfect mix, V.panoptes rudibus. In the northern part of its range(Port Headland area) these rudibus have exactly the same body markings as Panoptes(markings forming bands) but lack markings to the tail tip. V.panoptes has markings to the tail tip. In the southern part of rudibus range, they do not have markings that align in rows. Much like V.flavirufus. Just a few K's north of the Grey river, you can see V.p.panoptes. Not much divides the two.

As we all know, there are tons of indo variations of many of the indicus group. Many of these appear inbetween many exsisting types.

So there should indeed be lots of interests scientifically speaking.

Also, in my little pea brain, it does not take a huge education to understand that, Kimberly rock monitors will breed kimberly rock monitors, that should not be a scientific surprise. But when a Kimberly rock monitor can successfully reproduce with a Pilbara rock monitor, that is truely a learning experience. And yes they can. Why does science dismiss this?

So yes, I do not understand the attitude of many. This includes biologists and academics, as well as many in the private sector. I guess its that old, "throw out, what you do not understand" thing. Cheers

Sometimes I find myself wondering whether there's correlation between people who choose not to try to understand oddities (like hybrids) and people who fail when trying to understand "real" species. But, I always go right back to wondering about the critters themselves.

What you you mean, wondering about the critters themselves?

I do really like this subject as there are so many aspects to it.

They are species, and and as importantly, individuals. Behaviors can be or may not be consistant between them.

This is a funny thought, do crosses, think they are crosses? Cheers

Yeah, hybrids are a really nifty subject - that's probably why I like it, too.

I can't venture whether hybrid monitors are like one or the other or both, since I haven't dealt with any.

I can tell you, with some hybrid turtles, they "think" they're one, or the other, OR both species. That individual factor.

I can also tell you (I know I don't need to) that as variable as my special group of monitors was (withIN the species) I don't know if there would be any unused behaviors left for hybrids to separate themselves.

As pointless as some people would have you believe hybrids are, I bet if a hybrid ran past them in the outback, they'd be quick to shout the name of a "real" species and never know better. It was running, it was in nature, that's what makes it real...

i must admit, i don't have much energy left to start this again. you should have jumped in at the beginning.

here's my general belief in a nut shell. if the captive population of the species in question is massive, cross breeding for the sake of curiosity, or even learning wouldn't bother me. but when that population is low, and the cross breed population out weighs the pure breed it really bothers me. i personally don't think there is much to learn from a hybrid. those interested in the natural history of these animals aren't interested in these animals unless it really happened in nature. then it is interesting. a synthetic hybrid is worthless. for some reason kids think they're cool and it created a demand for them. now people waste their time breeding them.

i guess it's just something that gets under my skin. i don't like it, and i voice my opinion about it.

cheers
shay

I don’t look to take any more energy than you look to share, but when you make blanket unjustified statements, that draws this otherwise musing reader outa the woodworks. I find monitors (most reptiles, eh?) more interesting than people, but sometimes I manage to find people (their concepts or lack of) interesting, so I ask them whether their statements are backed by anything real.

If people breeding hybrid monitors bothers you, breed an uncommon real species instead of Argus. Combat your plague, or don’t you believe your words enough to take action?

How do you know there’s not much to learn from a hybrid? Have you kept any? Or are you so turned off by them you’ve never kept one (to learn something or nothing from)? If a hybrid is worthless, what makes a captive real species of value?

You say, you like captive real species because they happen in nature? Captivity isn’t nature. When hybrids breed in captivity, it doesn’t make unnatural since captivity is already unnatural. Your glass-fronted, screen-topped box is what’s synthetic. Does it really matter what it confines?

quote - "If people breeding hybrid monitors bothers you, breed an uncommon real species instead of Argus. Combat your plague, or don’t you believe your words enough to take action?"

i plan on it my friend. but i'm committed to argus monitors right now. i really love this species and want to work with them. i don't live on a very big property at the moment so i'm doing what i can with the space i have.

quote - "If a hybrid is worthless, what makes a captive real species of value?"

if someone's interested in a pure natural species that's been around as a contributing member of the ecosystem, and want to learn about their behaior, biology, ecology, color variations, avg size/weight etc, you can learn a lot from a pure species in captivity. you won't learn everything. a lot of field work is necessary but a lot can be learned. Walter Auffenberg studied captive bengalensis and compared this data with data he collected from the field.
-what will you get from something that's only been around in captivity?

quote - "You say, you like captive real species because they happen in nature? Captivity isn’t nature."

thanks for the tip.

cheers
shay

What did auffenbergs captive bengals contribute? Please answer.

How would that be different then crosses? please answer.

Is it about nesting, about feeding, about mate selection? What? how would it differ?

What do crosses do in their base behavior thats different from the "pure"????????

Sir, you seem to be "thinking" about the fine edge of a well honed knife. The problem is you(and others) do not have the ability to even think about the butt end of the handle. That is, you do not have knowledge of the simplest part of varanid behavior, yet your worried about the keeness most adapted trait. How silly.

Again, I suggest, WALK before you RUN. WAIT, in your case, crawl before you walk, then walk before your run, then run short distances before you take on a marathon. Cheers

Ok I get it, your simply prejudiced without reason.

You said so many sad statements, and other things are pure fiction, made up in your mind.

First, do you have any idea how some of these crosses came about?? no I am sure you do not. You said curiousity. kinda wrong there sir.

Simply put, they came about out of ignorance. The people that bred them, including me, did not know what we had. We went by books and other peoples opinions, which turned out wrong. This was also done by some zoos as well.

In some cases, the animals were the same, defined by literature, then literature changed. So does that make them not crosses because books, AT ONE TIME, called them the same. Funny huh????? I would guess there is a different reason for each case. But then, I am sure you know better, you did them didn't you??? no you didn't, then how do you know?

Also when you said, people wasting thier time breeding crosses. That is horrible and reflects poorly on you.

In most cases, people are learning to breed monitors, YOU want them to practice on something RARE in nature or rare in captivity. Sir, your not being very intelligent.

Most people breeding monitors are "not" proficent at breeding them. In most cases, a clutch here and there, then they are done. Another perfect way to get rid of species that need to be bred(in your mind).

As I mentioned, I produced hundreds of Flavis, yet others failed to keep them going. Whos fault is that? surely not the crosses. Oh, its those keepers fault. So what difference would it have made if they had crosses. Both would end the same.

Are crosses easier to breed, compared to crosses, NO. I should know, I do both(commonly) So what do you know, that can reflect something different?

Its common sense that Crosses would be perfect for this. You know, to practice on. In fact, the problem is, it turns out, people like them for more then just practice.

Now back to crosses. Do you know the ancestors of your Argus, were they wild caught. Did they come from the same area? if not, they are crosses. If you do not know where they came from, they must be considered crosses or not pure. As you surely cannot represent them in a collection. As there is no data. You understand what a collection is don't you? Its animals kept to represent them as they occurred in nature.

This thing of pure is kinda only in some folks mind. Once they leave nature, they are totally not pure. The reason is simple, nature selects for what is represented. It selects for what survives in changing conditions. Which means its a bit liquid, its ever changing.

On the otherhand, if you think your qualified to tell me the fine details of how an argus fits in nature, please tell me. I would be very interested. How about what kind of habitat do they utilize? Cheers

So, you think whats pure????? hahahahahahahahaha Cheer

this feels really silly, but here it goes... hahahahahahahaha.
i never said i want beginners to start with flavies something rare. you're putting words in my mouth. they should start with something that is common and more simple than others, such as a pair of ackies. that would be a good start.

you made a really good point though. natural selection will slowly alter all these animals to better suit them to an ever changing environment. what that means to me is after several generations of captive-bred monitors there may be micro differences. i know that every captive hatchling may not have what it takes to survive in the wild. and by natural selection those individual would not breed or survive. so that ultimately means that captive individuals in our care may not even be good representitives of the strong individuals that survive and breed. i can see where that leads.
that is a good point. however it doesn't change the value of a pure captive species in my opinion. (and i'm not talking about $ value)
i do believe that breeding crosses is a waste. this view doesn't reflect poorly on me. it reflects poorly to you... and a few others. i'm ok with that.
you are getting me to think. congrats
cheers
shay

Why I call you prejudice. One difinition of this word is, Judgement formed before the acquaintance with the facts.

You form judgements like this one about crosses, without knowledge of crosses. Which totally reflects on you.

Next, you wonder why I have little respect for you. I have good reason. You seem to WANT respect. In this area of varanids, your wanting respect for something you HOPE to do, not from what you HAVE done. While thats all fine and dandy, Please do not ask that from someone that has already DONE it. That is pretty simple and I hope you understand it.

I have to wonder what kind of respect is granted for someone who is hoping to reinvent the wheel. As what your hoping to do has been done so many years ago.

Your opinion on crosses is weak and heres why. The reality is, what we all keep, All of us, is not about conservation or what would exsist in nature, or what is pure. And surely not about a species whos names are constantly changing. What we keep is "purely" and directly about each of us as individuals. We keep what we as individuals want. I will keep what the heck I want. PERIOD. And others should be allowed to do the same. As I mentioned so long ago on this thread, your allowed to keep anything within the law you want, go for it. You often talk about ego, yet your the one telling others what to keep. I never tell others what to keep, other then whatever blows your skirt up.(whatever you like and keeps your interest)

What it boils down to is, your attempting to influence others with your personal prejudices, it doesn't matter if they are meaningful or not. Sir, I hope you are smart enough to understand, people with negative prejudices have made up their own reasons to act the way they do. As have you. A common trait of the prejudice is, to back their up their reasoning with false information. As you do. As I have said, you have no knowledge of crosses, you have no experience with them and you have no real reason to think like you do. YOUR simply prejudice. Which in my opinion lacks respect.

Please understand, you do not have to like them, keep them, or whatever. How about promoting what you like and working with what you like. That sounds good to me. And let others do the same. With any monitor they like. IF there is any sound arguement to be made here, its probably the subject of Captive hatched vs. wild caught and farm raised. Sir, thats a real conservation issue.

In context, what we(private keepers) do will not and does not directly effect nature. Particularly when we are talking about a captive produced enity. They will not be used in any re-introduction program. They will not be used for the betterment of nature.

What is of benefit is the same whether its a cross or natural species. That is the knowledge gained from working with all of these. This knowledge gained from success, applies to all and can be used for conservation. That is, if conservation is ever applied.

I have to wonder why you worry about others and what they keep, particularly in the states, as no varanids occur here naturally. Even if a cross escaped, it can only do the same amount of harm as any natural species. Why don't you stop the talking and walk the walk. I would be far more impressed if you "walked the walk" even it is something that has been done over and over. Cheers

roger that Frank, thanks for your opinion. i can't comment any further for a few days. i'm going out to sea, and doubt i'll have i-net access. cheers

I forgot you do not actually have monitors at this time. This explains your theoretical approach.

Of course in theory you can come up with all sorts of supposed differences, as that is what we are taught.

In reality, these things we were taught seem to break down.

For instance, something so simple as, why do argus stand up? Why? Do flavis? do gouldi? do rudibus? do crosses?

The reason I stress experience is, its often different then what we read. Cheers

turns out i do have i-net. technology is amazing.

didn't i just tell you that i have 5 argus monitors right now? i havn't been without monitors for the last 9 years. maybe you'd like to see picturs of them, and maybe their cages to. i'd be happy to share if you're interested. i'm sure you can find plenty of things to criticize.

all monitors are capable of standing up. even komodos. but as far as i know, only v.p.panoptes, v.p.horni, and v.p.rubidus do this on a regular basis to check for predators, look over tall grasses, and i'm sure there's other reasons that i don't know about. however, after reading Auffenberg's The Bengal Monitor, he suggests that they do this for similar reasons as stated above. but i doubt it's nearly as common as with argus. i don't know if crosses tripod. common sense tells me that a percentage might. you tell me. do they?

i find no fault in reading books and field journals and learning from it. i will agree that it is no replacement for first hand experience, but i think it gives you a good base to start from. a lot of the information i learn from reading is something i will never experience first hand. i think a good philosophy is to learn from your own experience and other peoples experience at the same time. without being too presumptuous i don't think that's your philosophy. of course you've burned so many bridges you may not have a choice.

cheers
shay

I see you have a great attitide. burned bridges, what bridges. The only bridges I have burned were made of paper. And paper bridges are of no value. Those bridges were like a bridge to you. Of no value to me. And it appears no value to monitors.

Five argus, wow thats something. A huge comitment. So what is your value to monitors, what is there at the other end of those bridges thats of value to monitors?

You do understand, that most of the recent advancements in captive management and even what is considered normal these days are advancements I introduced. You know, ranges of temps, ranges of humidity, deep substrate, pairing, and more. What came from the other end of the bridge? I am interested.

You see, I did not lite the bridges on fire. Those that could not understand those advancements did. I only accidently ran them over with a bulldozer. My only problem is, I could not see over the blade to avoid those poor folks.

You see, I have supported(with the above advancements) generations upon generations upon generations with all sorts of species. That really bothers those folks on the otherside of the bridge. The real problem is context, they got mad at me, when its not about me. Its about the monitors, they should be mad at the monitors, as the monitors did it, I only supported the monitors, then reported it. You do understand what a report is, don't you?

So all in all, those folks burned the wrong bridge. They should be mad at themselves for being out of context, they are actually mad at themselves for not being able to keep up. I really had nothing to do with it. Sort of the messenger. They are the ones not keeping up. They are mad because they think of themselves as smart and think of me as lucky I guess, hahahahahahahaha.

The real truth is, why do you folks have such complicated theories of this and that, and have all these problems with keeping monitors. When I, who by your accounts is totally wrong, does not understand monitors, etc. Have no problem breeding monitors of many species, and doing it in a very simple way, without complications and have it occur for generations upon generations. No raincycle, no hibernation, no photoperiod, just feed them and dig up eggs and then the big part, I hatch the eggs without problem. Yes, I see, you want me to have bridges to the complicate and learn to actually become less successful and not hatch eggs. Ok, that sounds like a bridge that I need. hahahahahahahahahahaha humor

I wonder, relationships are give and take. Yet these bridge people all want to take. They never give. Hmmmmmm good reasons to burn the bridge. Then they fail to understand how to take, so they blame the other end of the bridge, hmmmmmmm is that a good reason.

About argus, they appear to stand to SEE, to see has been coined, TO MONITOR. Very accurate coinage. Argus must have evolved this trait during a time of grasslands or other low ground cover. To see over grass or low cover. All monitors do this to an extent. Even ackies and Savs climb things to see over ground cover during the wetter times of the year. All monitors, monitor(view their surroundings) and yes, crosses do as well.

Now the problem, in a high percentage of cases, the grasslands or whatever caused this behavior to develop to this extent are much reduced. Argus now live in areas this behavior is no longer needed. Curious thing about behaviors and related adaptions, they are ever changing and in fact, often lag behind need.

As I stated many times, there are many areas that three similar types of this complex live in the exact same places, and over much of their range, two occur together. How can this happen. Cheers

my commitment to argus monitors isn't about how many i have. what i mean is i'm going to stick with them until i perfect my husbandry to the point where the animals reproduce for me like clock-work year after year. -that's the commitment. i'm not going quit on them before i reash my goals to work with something else. as i've said before, i only have so much room right now. so i'm doing the best i can with what i have.

quote " When I, who by your accounts is totally wrong, does not understand monitors, etc."
" Yes, I see, you want me to have bridges to the complicate and learn to actually become less successful and not hatch eggs."

ehh? i don't think that. i respect and appreciate what you've done for the world of varanid husbandry. i use your techniques for crying out loud. not sure what else to say about that.

cheers
shay

In one paragraph you say " I am going to perfect my husbandry until they do this and that" going to indicates something thats not done.

This paragraph indicates your going to do something. Like your going to learn something. Which indicates your not there at this time. Sir, that is exactly what my comment indicates. You(AT THIS TIME) do not have an understanding of what you hope to learn. By your own admission.

When your talking to me. Consider, I have a proven long term pattern of having this understanding. That puts me in the horrible position of making that statement to you.

You see, this is what bothers me(the bridge you burn) You come off as you already have this understanding, you want me to respect you, as if you have that understanding, AND YOU DON"T. YET.

This is why I ask you to walk the walk FIRST. before you talk the talk. You see, you make comments about husbandry, not from your experience, but from what you and others talk about(in fact, theory). You make prejudiced comments telling others what to keep and what not to keep. Sir, you have not walked the walk.

Once you brought up the fact that you are serving your country in the military. With this in mind, I get the feeling the first thing your taught is to WALK THE WALK. They teach you to gain respect through "the doing", NOT THE TALKING. I respect what you have done, NOT what you HOPE to do. I will respect that after you do it.

So it comes to this, as you are taught, wait until you walk the walk, before you give advice subjects that requires walking the walk. That is all I ask.

When we respond to posts here, we do so, on an idividual basis. You offer your experience. If your offering someone elses experience, then please clarify that. If your offering theory, then please clarify that. You talk, without experience, that is not something to gain respect with. Unfortunately, that is very common here. That is also why so many people fail. There is too many people giving bad advice. Your just one more of them.

If you have walked the walk and we still have differences(which would actually become a great thing) I would still respect you. The reason is, you have walked the walk.

But your sitting here going on and on, and mostly about how bad a fella I am. When you have not walked the walk. SIR, THAT IS ALL I ASK. WALK THE DANG WALK, then lets talk.

Heres a very important FACT. your monitors will not listen to TALK. They only respond support you actually give. To give, is to actually something, not to talk. In all reality, "I am going to do something is only talk" until its done.

My monitors respond very well to me. They "know" something you and your bridge friends do not. Cheers

ok Frank, thanks for your opinion.

You keep bringing up your available space as being limited. If you're limited in space, why 5 Argus? That scenario, you might not Perrect anything, heck, you might not Learn anything other than monitor gangs can crash and burn when cramped. Did you keep 1 Argus before getting 5? Have you seen how active? If you like "real" species because you like their behaviors, why wouldn't you respect those behaviors.

Word through the grapevine is that hybrids could stay smaller. But, you wouldn't need that, eh?

i have enough room for what i have. what i don't have is room to manage other species at the same time




i have 5 argus monitors and 5 cages at my disposal. 8x4x6 being the smallest, 12x10x8 being the biggest. i'm able to mange this group with what i have.

where's the criticism?

Ok, two things, one, the large outdoor cages are art deco cages. That is, they fit your expectations what not argus monitors.

While there is nothing wrong with them, they lack half the usage the argus need. They lack underground, which by the way is mostly what argus are about. They have wasted air space in place of underground. You see, where argus live, the center of attention is a series of burrows. Amoung those, some are used as and considered HOME burrows. Thats funny huh? home burrows, I wonder what that means?

Also, are those cages in use now? are they old? as in are you still using them? do you the monitors in them now? Or are they in the tiny box cage you showed partly built?

I was not going to say nothing, but you demanded. Cheers

hey, i don't mind constuctive criticism. i like to hear ways i can make my cages better.

the outdoor cages are not in use at this moment. but will be in a few months. i need to build a quality heated hide box before i let them out there for the winters. those pictures were from this last Aug. i'm not sure what you mean by the lack of under ground. there's 2 to 3 feet of dirt through-out most of the cage. the female did build a series of burrows, the male however didn't. he digs quite a bit but prefers the box i gave him to sleep and hide.

so for the winter they stay in those tiny boxes that is pictured. that pic was from the tail end of construction. i have a few of those. they work really well for the juvies, but small for large males. they hold heat and humidity exceptionally well. with 2 feet of dirt, they've built an impressive series of burrows. cheers

You might lash big barky limbs along the upper reaches of those outside cages - right now they look like they should hold toucans or something. The upper half is wasted, and a couple boards six feet up in the corners won't change that. Put hollowed limbs or really snug (flat, flat, flat) hide boxes up there.

If there's as much useable dirt in those outside cages as you say (and the animals approve of it), other differences I have with them are in taste (trivial), like get the damned Christmas lights up on them, already.

One thing I'm uncertain about is the reaction you'll get shifting the animals back and forth, between the big cages and small cages. Never did that myself.

i think i will put more usable space towards the top of those outdoor cages for this next summer.

you do make a good point as far as moving the animals back and forth. the only thing i would be concerned about is moving the females. males have no problem moving around. they don't suffer from stress like females do. when i determine which of my juvies are female, i'll dicide whether or not to take them out in the sun or not.

not sure what you're talking about with regards to Christmas lights. explain

cheers

Christmas lights are as mandatory for success with Argus as a widely varied diet. Get it?...

Well Shay, the reason I mentioned the lack of dirt is simple(to me) Whenever I had argus around dirt, they made huge tunnels, which means, they made huge dirt mounds(escavated dirt) In fact, they had dirt throw over hill and dale.

Your cage appeared to me like a cage that was empty(lacking argus) and allowed to grow. Once argus are placed in such a cage, the plants all get murdered, dug up and destroyed. That is, the smaller plants. Larger plants like small trees get killed when the monitor lay their eggs in the roots( a favorite of theres) So in order to dig up eggs, you have to kill the plants.

Also from you wide view pic, it appeared your bird(type) cages were on the ground, not in the ground.

So it appeared to me, your argus was roaming around in the cage, not actually living in it. But hey, its only a pic and its only from my experience of actually keeping that species in that manner. Cheers

you know i may make changes to the soil this coming season. or at least add lots of better dirt to what i have. the female i had in the cage did build several burrows. i found eggs in one of them. the male diggs around a bit, however he doesn't seem interested in digging a "home" burrow. maybe he's telling me something. the heated box i gave him seems to be his best option.

an observation i made when i started keeping the monitors in a much larger outdoor cage is they're not quite as destructive. when they're in the smaller indoor cage i see them not having anywhere to go with a bank load of energy. =mass destruction. outdoors i see lots of foraging, basking, hiding and digging, but they havn't destroyed any of the large plants. not sure if i've been lucky, or if they find this area unusable.

this cage is set into the ground some. the shallowest point is right there in the front at about 8 inches deep. however in the back the dirt is between 2 and 3 feet. it's hard to see that in the picture.

let me ask you.. if you started with this aviary from scratch, how would you set it up for panoptes? i may be willing to redo it if i can make something much more usable for the monitors. i will admit that i like attractive cages like the one i built. but i won't compromise it's usefullness to the animal. atleast not on purpose. i'll change it if it needs change
cheers

The problem, with the tools monitors use, and dirt is a major one, is, They need to be more then a label. That is, dirt must be exceptable in order to be of use. Dirt must be the right type, the right consistancy and the right temps and humdity(and more). Even direction is important. If they do not use it, there is reason.

Please don't feel bad, in nature argus only create burrows in certain areas, not anywhere or everywhere, in very particular areas.

That is very hard for most to understand. Cheers