Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Ok, I know I have read a few discussions on here regarding uvb and monitors. I think it is generally accepted and known that monitors do not need uvb.

My question is...who says any reptiles need this spectrum to be succesful? I have researched this a bit and it seems some studies were published back in '91 that suggested green iguanas experience less MBD and increased reproductive activity after uvb exposure. Other studies followed that supported these findings. I have not read the studies, but my impression is that they were not as conclusive as they people think. Or at least not as extensive. THere certainly werent any uvb crap for reptiles when I was a kid.

99.9% of the google hits on this are simply people stating over and over how needed it is, etc....no one seems to question it.
Consider uvb requirements for reptiles is big business. Pet stores make money, mfg make money, distributors make money...and that little beardie that cost $50 suddenly costs an additional $120. It also sounds scientific...well you see, between 280-315nm the light is considered uvb, or ultraviolet-B, one of three uv classifications, which reptiles use for...blah blah.

Consider my daughter's beardie...I have never put anything over it but a normal 60 watt bulb for heat, the same we use in our lamps. It has grown like a weed and seems very healthy. Of course it could be a ticking time bomb of D3 deficiency, ready at any moment to suddenly turn into rubbery boned goo. I dunno, but we'll see haha.

The original study uses green iguanas, and some have concluded iguanas have a higher requirement. BLAH BLAH BLAH.

So...I call bullsheeet on uvb. I think our little artificial uvb makers are worthless, they do not come close to the real sun even if they were needed. You might as well lay a $100 bill on top of their cage, it would provide as much benefit and cost less.

Where's the conclusive proof? So far I see an entire industry blindly following a few measely studies. The industry would be crazy to question it ($$$). The vast majority of reptile & reptile supply customers dont question it, they just want their 12 yr old son to have that damn beardie or whatever.

Anyone with experience over the long haul have an opinion based on application rather than theory? I mean real stuff...with results of the repeatable kind.

Thanks -

Tom

Yes its BS, end of story. I have and are raising all the types of reptiles that are suppose to REQUIRE UVa and UVb. I never offered it and my charges grew up in a superior fashion.

It appears that these bulbs are a bandaid approach in lew of a decent temp range. Particularly the higher end. Cheers

Hey Frank, have you raised other lizards without? It seems like I read that you had had Beardies and they were fine without it.
I have never bought the bulb bs because the output is so pathetic for reptile bulbs. At least coral and reef bulbs have better output. But none the less I see a lot of people that think the light is the end all and then the animal gets into trouble and they figure...gee, it must be genetic.
-----
Sonya

I'm not mean. You're just a sissy.
Happy Bunny

Hi Sonya, Over my pitiful life, I have successfully raised Iggies of several types, in numbers, heck, I even hatched them. Chams, same same, torts, turtles, geckos, beardeds of many types, many different lizards, skinks etc, colubrids, pythons and boas, and of course a bizillion varanids.

I think as an old fart, I had a real advantage. We had no commerial products, I was not bombarded by all manner of advertisements. We had to FIND the right way. We had to find what worked. Which included such things as grinding up bird calicum blocks, etc. Which is what minerall is. hahahahahahaha.

I was both lucky and unique. I am and was a field herper first. So I always had a successful model. I knew what healthy producing individuals looked like(wild ones). So I kept changing my captive conditions until my captives looked like wild individuals. And more importantly performed like them.

A funny story. When I was young, it was common to cover your cages and sneak a food items, in hopes that that finicky snake will feed. I thought this odd, because in the field, I had snakes chase lizards up my pants and once chased a rat up my jeans.(that was really fun and a story). The point is, the wild reptiles WERE NOT FINICKY, in the least. To me, that meant captive conditions were so poor, they could not be themselves. So I changed those conditions until the charges ate everything and anything, at nearly all times(except, winter, gravid, etc)

That lesson, has led me to where I am today.

Of interest, I commonly feed wild snakes and lizards on my property, they eat like pigs. I often show this on varanus.net, in fact, I did yesterday. Come and look, they are not finicky either. Cheers

Okay, now I am confused....do you have a lizard or a snake in your pants.
-----
Sonya

I'm not mean. You're just a sissy.
Happy Bunny

One has legs, the other one doesn't, is that right? hmmmmmmmm I will have to check. Cheers

No, no way, she didn't just say what I think she did, did she?

ROFLMAO
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,
this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:
Appalachian American

> > > "The point is, the wild reptiles WERE NOT FINICKY, in the least. To me, that meant captive conditions were so poor, they could not be themselves."

Weird timing. I've been wanting to ask you a few non-monitor Qs the last few days and here you go opening the door for me.

In another section here at KS there seems to be a wide consensus that rattlesnakes (all, in general) are so high strung that their odds of survival from being relocated are slim. I don't buy into it, what do you think?

So I don't hijack this thread and get it too far off course I'll ask my other Qs some other time.

Thanks!
HH
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,
this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:
Appalachian American

I do not have to think, if you move them, they are dead, Period.

The reason I do not have to think is this subject has been tested many times over. Also, my field partner and best friend is a masters in herp and a captian at our local firehouse. They remove something like 3500 snakes a year(his firehouse) and there are a bunch of firehouses in the immediate area. And they kept tract of that. Their findings are like all others that kept tract, the snakes died.

The first event that brought this to sciences attention(a reason to study) is the California Desert tortoise. When they protected them, they did not grandfather them. So they confiscated all captive torts, many many hundreds. They took them to a nice location in the desert and released them. They marked them and followed them. They were mostly dead within a year. These were known animals. Then there are many parks that practiced capture and relocation of pest snakes(ones in camping areas) These were marked and sometimes radio tagged. These too died quickly. So, they started lowering the distance the snakes were moved and until the survival rate increased. That distance turned out to be less then a 1/2 mile.

Sadly, even releasing them in that short of distance does not eliminate them from perishing, it merely lowered the rate of death.

Let me add. I have been on a capture and pit tag study for 16 years or so, I am losing track. We started this study to see what effect this has on the snake colonies envolved. We already knew what the snakes did normally. So seeing what they did with us mucking with them would be new.

Our study is a little different, as we do NOT remove the snakes from the area. We find them(my job) we process them(gather information) we tag them and release in the exact same spot we found them. This took 15 minutes, in the early years, but as the years went by, we were required to take more information and this increased the time to about 30 minutes.

The results ARE. 65% of the individuals disappear. 35% are found over and over, for many years and many contacts. To clarify that, 50% disappear(die/perish/fail to exsist) immediately. 15% require several contacts to drive them away (kill them of).

Again this needs some clarification. Of the 35% that stay survive. None have traveled more then a couple hundred yards. They ALL have stayed in the EXACT same area. That is, none have moved to another drainage or canyon. We study three small canyons and monitor two more. We also check close by areas from time to time. NO individual as ever been found in another area. They either are recaptured or disappear.

Now consider, we find(collect data on) on average, 8 individuals per day. Normally just under half are tagged. The rest are naive(new, untagged) The short term rate(day to day) happens to be a little higher then the longterm rate.

Now consider, before we started this tagging them. We watched this area for about a decade. Which means we have something to compare too.

The changes, the numbers are the same. No change. But, the groupings have changed. In the first few years, the snakes were commonly in groups, pairs, trios, more. As the years moved on, this became rare. Now, if we find more then pairs we are lucky. Even numbers of pairs have dropped a lot.

Again, we can just move to a naive area and still find them commonly in groups.

Heres the deal. I also have several areas that I do not contact the animals. I photograph or simply remember them. I have watched these areas for a very long time. With the torts and gilas, next year will be 29 years. These animals are still commonly in groups and are much easier to find. Which means they do not move and find new homes(or die). ONLY the individuals that are contacted do. In fact, even the remaining ones on our site, move each and everytime they are contacted. The individuals that are not, do not. They stay and are found in the EXACT same place, year after year.

This brings up many points. Interference does not kill off the colony, but it does impact many individuals. From this comparison studies. I have a strong idea of where the problem exsist.

First, these animals do not know us from a coyote or bobcat or bear. We are a deadly predator. So, if you do not break their defenses, they stay, they are under their biological design control. Their behaviors worked.

But if you break their defenses, touch them, grab them, take them out of their control, they MUST flee the area. THAT is behavior. To flee means to start over in another area. You have broken their survival behaviors. Because its behavior, its not an exact number or an exact responce. Behavior being soft(not so hard wired) is what allows adaption. In otherwords, if we impacted this colony for 100 years or less, it would become mostly snakes that stay, instead of snakes that flee. This behavioral adaption may lead to others as well. It would soon lead to rattlesnakes that did not rattle at people(stupid herp researchers) But would still rattle are other predators(if any still exsist)

Now consider, 99% of the individuals perish trying to locate conditions that support their survival. In otherwords, whats the chances of surviving something with a 99% fatality rate, SEVERAL times, hahahahahaha I can answer, not good! Ok, what if at times its not 99%, but only 90% or 80% or 70% etc. The reality is, its not a fixed number. But at all but a few rare times, a high number. There are such things as behavior breakers, like Katrina. Huge floods and fires, that break all these behaviors and they start over. Unfortunately, these also kill of most individuals too.

Nature is not civil. Lets look at your survival. What if, there were no laws. And in fact, the laws were opposite of what they are now. Lets say, it was normal for anyone who did not know you(you grew up around) to run you off or kill you(kinda instintual human behavior). We are talking about humans. Now what if, the vast majority of predators where the size of buildings? Also, there are no doctors or cops. Would you travel much? would you go to town? What are the chances of your survival is you were kicked out of your area? or run off by a monster? I can answer that too.

So in the end, the first rule of biology was taught to us a long time ago. Animals practice a behavior called, fight or flight. That means, if they can beat you(fight) its ok, they stay. If not, they take flight. The problem is, to take flight normally causes their death. And the reason is simple. When they take flight, they run the gauntlet of predators without the knowledge of where to hide.

I know a bit long, but its a great subject. Of course, many reseachers think you can catch them, take them home, slice them open, install radios, sew them up, release them, follow them with a TV antennae sticking out of your head, and all data will be normal. WHAT FRACKEN IDIOTS, hahahahahahahaha This is reason I treat academics like I do. They treat animals like windup toys. What fracken idiots, animals have behavior. How simple is that, FRACK. hahahahahahaha Cheers

Long? Heck, I didn't think it was long enough. You answered one question but stirred up 100's more. LOL! Man, oh man, could I ever dig into that post, inquiring about several related things.

One more question that a simple yes or no will do, that way you won't have to take up much more of your time.

I see you mentioned torts and gilas, does that mean that the relocation problems are not limited to rattlers but can/do also include other species (colubrids, etc...)?

If you're game I'd love to carry this further so I can learn more. I'm intrigued. We could either see if it'll fly here as an "off topic" thread or take it over to your place, don't matter none to me. You tell me.

Appreciate it!
HH
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,
this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:
Appalachian American

Of course its the same with many/most/all to some degree or another reptiles, BUT, the percentage of success and failure can and does differ between species. It also differs as to the quality and type of habitat.

For instance, take the rattlesnakes, if you release them where other rattlesnakes of the same species, already occupy the nitches needed. Then the failure rate is high. If you release them into a habitat that has little to no competition, then the success rate is high, If you release them into a habitat that has no competition and plenty of resources, then the percentage of success becomes great. So, its not a yes or no answer.

Take evasive species, they are evasive because they are introduced into a habitat that supports them, without competition. They don't outcompete other species. They don't have competition, or they would not bloom like they do. Another way to think about this is, there are no species that compete in their area of specialization. So they bloom and prosper.

Unfortunately, most think you should release them in undisturbed(natural) habitat. And again, this is the area of high competition and the nitches that allow success are already occupied. If you want a high survival rate, release them in artificial habitats, like barns and old feral fields, or the areas between crops, or PARKS, golf courses will do, etc.

Also, something totally forgotten is, The exsisting members of a colony has stiff competition from members of their own colony. Other individuals are waiting for the successful individuals to make one mistake, get old, etc, then they will take over their position. There should be a line of individuals waiting. This is included in a healthy enviornment. With humans, waiting for your boss to screw up is commonplace. You can get a better job, more pay, more perks, etc. IF it was legal, many of you would blow the fool away.

With animals, its about being able to live, to exsist. If the cannot take over a decent place in the enviornment, they are dead. Its life dependant.

So when you take them out of a exsisting structure, they are immediately replaced, IN A HEALTHY POPULATION.

It boils down to this, the more specific a species is, the higher the rate of failure, when introduced into a new area. The more generalized it is, the better the percentage gets. Its really common sense. Its really stuff we already know and were taught. Its simply our emotions that mask this knowledge. We want it to not be a problem. So we can feel better screwing up populations, killing off individuals and otherwise damaging animals like we do. Doing field studies is nothing more then animal harassment.

A funny example is, one field study done on V.p.panoptes, included duct taping radios to their tails then following them around. I have to think, the researchers KNEW better. But they were not smart enough to think of a better way, so instead, they tell themselves, this will work. I can tape a radio to their tail and follow them. Of course that will work, but what does it tell you. IT will tell you, that monitors do not like radios taped to their tail and do not like being followed around. You see, the reason radios were needed is, V.p.panoptes does not allow people to follow them around(except in parks and cities) In fact, they do not allow humans to even see them. For everyone you see, you missed many many many. hahahahahahahahaha

I tested this with lacies, you can go to parks(THE PARK LACIES) go into a picnic area and sit down, at first you do not see any lacies, maybe one. But just sit there, then soon, you will be surrounded in them.(where did they all come from). Much like squirrels in parks here.

Then I moved out away from the picnic areas, to areas where there were no people. There was the same amount of tracks, the same amount of claw marks(from climbing trees) But to actually see a REAL WILD lacie was a horse of a different color. I could track them, hear them, find them in shelters, but to see one out, was not easy. I had to sneak up and become stealt to see them. I could bait them too. But to walk around and view them, hahahahahahaha as they say in New York, FORGET ABOUT IT.

I often suggested to these field guys, why not study the park monitors. They somehow think those are different. Yet, they do not have problems studying KD's and they ARE PARK monitors. Heck, park monitors would be easy to study, you would not need radios or pit tags. But I wander(on walkabout) Cheers

p.s. How could opening up a lizard, installing a radio and leaving the antenne sticking out of the lizards body cavity BE NORMAL. If that is not normal and it sure as heck is not. Then how can it act/behave in a normal way. After all, its their normal behavior that we are interested in. Isn't it?????

come over to varanus.net, for a moment, I have been posting a series on a rattlesnake on my property. Cheers

This is a great discussion. Good on HH for keeping it going. Out of the loop for a few weeks(on road working) but this is reason to come here. Makes one think of the animals we effect in the wild when we are not even field collecting. Here is another thought...awhile back I was working for a company in Cambodia. When we would get something illegal(caught in National Park) we would within 24 hours rerelease the animal near(usually) the interception point. Problem was the animals were often from areas far away...days by boat. Anyway we re-release the animals, take GPS, and digital photos then feel like something really got accomplished(at the expense of locals????) by this I mean well intentioned people see these photos and send more dollares...except at the end many(the animals) were screwed the second a person caught them. Rambling but to keep it on monitors one day a Bengal (land monitor) was caught with a bunch of retics...long story short this monitor never made it back to suitable habitat. FR, would have liked to read your thread before leaving Campuchea...there is a herper type still quite involved(French Legionaire by trade...not academic) now joking but if Jobi could translate(this fella does not speak any english) I plan to get it to him. Through translators we had very intersesting discussions about our "conservation" efforts within the organization. Now I see those discussions were on target. Lastly, Hows it going Hillbilly?...good talking to you awhile back...lookin forward, cheers,bigears.

Hey there!
Are you having fun, yet? Hot enough out there for ya?

Don't be such a stranger 'round here.

Catch ya later!
HH
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,
this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:
Appalachian American

Those reptile bulbs didnt exist until the pet industry decided that they needed to market something to us as reptile keepers, something that according to them needs replaced every 3-6 months, and according to them your reptile will suffer s short horrible death without.
Now, think about this, before the early 1990s, how did all of those keepers, and breeders keep and produce the results that they do, and did, without them?
I have a friend who does reptile rescue, and has done this for years. Not, just someone who calls themselves a rescue, but the kind that takes sick, dieing, and almost dead reptiles, and turns them in no time at all into an animal that the owners would never recognize.
In fact Ive seen and know of hundreds of examples I helped them with, which came in horrible shape, from owners that actually had them under UV bulbs that were replaced every 3-6 months, and had all of the other "so called important points" the pet industry sell you on (proper man made foods, etc).
In a few weeks in proper caging, and with normal household bulbs, and a good diet 99% of these creatures looked almost like a different species.
Also I used to help a few good friends in the pet industry, I used to contact company reps, and order supplies for them, as well take care of animals. The bulbs (straight from the horses mouths), are a scam, they are purely for making a consistant profit and getting return customer business. Those bulbs sell for a few dollars to the stores, and to customers for $20-$100 each, does that not tell you the real story?

There is a real benefit of UVB light, but ofcourse real sunlight is better. That's why you want to put it as close as possible to the animal, but not mercury vapor bulb which gives off UVB stronger than sun. Most iguana rescuers will tell you that iguanas need UVB light because they cannot absorbed the oral intake of vitamin D3 for the reason that they don't get vitamin D3 from the food they eat in the wild since plants don't have them, and they seem to develop metabolic bone disease without it. That's why many iguanas rescuers often have basking cage outside during the warmer months. So there are proves from those reptile rescuers who specialized in green iguanas and the vets seem to recommend the use of UVB light, also. But for a lot of reptiles like bearded dragons and monitors and nocturnal reptiles they can absorbed it from the food they eat. Monitors eat whole prey so they don't need to be supplemented, but inverterbrate eaters probably need to be supplemented a little. That's why I gutload the my insect feeders with food that is high in vitamin D3 and calcium like crushed dog food, chick mash, and tropical fish flakes. But for reptiles that don't really need the UVB they can still benefit from UVB exposure because synthesizing their own vitamin D3 from the exposure is not toxic like the oral supplement. Rat poison is an overdose of vitamin D3. But these UVB tube tend to not last very long and you need to set it up really close to your animals to get the full benefits. You can ask your vet to explain to you the real benefits of UVB light. I'm sure he or she will be happy to explain it to you.

Not 100% true. I had uvb on my iguana when young with a normal iguana diet. It developed a bone def and I took it to the vet. As it turned out to be , its more of a diet consideration because most of that store bought crap is much more different than what that iguana eats in the wild. Its more of a heat digestion factor than anything and the animal needs a wide variety in its diet and ocasionally protien like trout chow. I have always used 50 watt halogen spot lights and they work perfect! I have had and do have many healthy reptiles that show no sighns of defeciencies of any kind.

Ok, this is where I need the proof Paradon. I dont need anyone to explain the concept to me, I understand it. I just dont buy it, and repeating what every other reptile 101 website says doesnt provide any proof.

Tom

I have some proof of it, but not with monitors...
I have bred and raised between 1000-1200 bearded dragons with good success. In the beginning I raised some nests without UVB, mainly because I had to seperate the young sometimes and I din't have enough UV bulbs. With many clutches raised without uvb I saw a calcium def problem, starting with twiching toes and a cramping lizard when I held it in my hands. As soon as I gave them some uvb lighting the twitching stopped within 2 days and never came back. And I only gave them 12 hours of uvb (tl) every 4-5 days. I have never had any problems with animals raised with uvb, even if used only every 4 days.
I did have a good hotspot in every cage, 130-140F.
I used different mineral/vitamin powders over the years, and had the same results with the uvb bulbs. Last year I "made" my own mix and with that mix I could raise a clutch without uvb.

SO:

I am not saying you can't raise beardeds without uvb, but it does do something, it's no bs. I think it really helps the lizard in digesting calcium. If you are a very good reptile breeder (FR) you probably don't need uvb, but the problem is that 90% of all reptile owners don't know what the H they're doing with their lizard...
I have seen metabolic problems many times in my vet practice and in almost all cases the owners are absolutely clueless...They really don't know the difference between the different powders and just do something (or nothing), often with dramatic results. Adding to that is that the different brands of supplements are very different from eachother, in effectiveness and composition
I think uvb bulbs take away some of the problems, it makes the supplementing easier. I do think there is a big difference between reptiles and their need of UVB, Basking herbivores will probably rely on it much more than burrowing carnivores.

Jasper

All that told you was, you needed to raise the hot end of your heat range.

No offense, but most of the bearded keepers in the states have no concept of what these animals life in. They are normally exposed to air temps over 90F in the winter, and over 105F to 130F plus, in the summer.

Now what seperates them from the varanids in the same areas, varanids burrow down and have access to cooler temps. Beardies rarely do so(only extreme heat) they normally sit on dead branches. Which means, there is no leaf shade or moisture let off. They sit of these dead branches to temps in the 115'sF to the 120's F. Those are air temps, and not surface temps.

Any surface in the desert(where they come from) is above air temps, even in the shade. An example is, with an air temp of 110F(here yesterday) The lowest surface temps(where the lizards sit) is above 118F(actual check yesterday)

Again, beardeds come from places hotter and more barren then here. This goes for most of the different different species(excluding the most southern types) I have field experience with V.barbadous(sp)vitticepts, mitchelli, rankeni, microlepidota and more.

In captivity, I too have hatched and housed and raised many many hundred of beardies and I never had a need for UV bulbs. So, point counter point.

You know the old saying, if it ain't A and it ain't B, then its mostly likely not A or B. That goes for this problem, its not a UV problem, but a conditional problem and UV bulbs may aid with POOR conditions, but is much more benefitual to fix the problem, that helps with more then just calicum. Cheers

I know, you and I are polar opposites. But hear me out.

You read, you listen to folks, but you forgot to check up on what you read or heard. Research is important, reading is not research, its simply reading, checking up on what you read is MORE IMPORTANT RESEARCH.

What this research is for, is to verify that this information will actually improve the keeping of real live reptiles. As I have said so many times, real live reptiles, have life stages, real life events and real life accomplishments. To measure the quality of husbandry is not to measure what you apply, but instead, those real life events, the real life accomplishments, the life stages and the quality of life your husbandry supports. This is measured from the reptile in question. Period. Not what you read and surely not the products you use.

You, like so many others who first start out, want to not make mistakes, so you read, the problem is, you read the wrong things. You must include reading your animals as the final say.

What is a problem is you trying to rationalize all you read, without real life experience. Wait until you have experience, then you can verify and not rationalize.

Sadly researchers, vets and herp students appear to be mostly inept at keeping of living animals. Inept, means, lacks suffecient abilities. They ARE trained in the ability of their specialty. Like to make graphs and apply formulas, for researchers and to cure maladies for Vets. But, there are very very very few of these fine folks that show expertise in the keeping of living animals. ITs actually not their job, or expertise. So don't expect that of them.

Please go visit your vets office, a bunch of vet offices. They do not have sufficient caging for any reptile, muchless monitors. They normally hold them in cold tanks with screen tops. And mostly no added heat. But no worries, they fill them with antibiotics and such. The point is, 99% of both researchers and vets show no ability or history of keeping reptiles in a progressive manner. Yes, there are a few. And yes, there are a couple of good ones. Scott Stahl and Richard Funk, come to mind. I totally enjoy my conversations with them.

But even they do not have deticated caging for specific reptile species. They too simply hold them, treat them, and get them out the door. That is THEIR JOB.

What this is getting to is always the same. You must produce results before you produce recomendations and confirmations.

For instance gut loading. That tells me, your a novice. It does so because if you were not a novice, you would understand that a normal diet for crickets is one that allows them to grow quickly and produce well. This is the goal of all cricket supply companies. The better they feed them, the faster they grow, the more they produce, the more money the company makes. This goes for rodent producers as well. They CANNOT feed poor diets or their production DROPS and that costs them money.

That you think your going to do better then these professional breeders is very naive of you. After all, they have a proven history and you have no history, what so ever.

Which is the point, you do not have any history to have an opinion on what is good and what is not. So you pick something to believe. In this case, the squeakist wheel(the one making the most noise) are the advertising companies selling UV litebulbs(high profit products)and The advertising companies promoting gut loading to sell product again another high profit product.

The reality is, very few iggie keepers and even fewer varanid keepers are successful in achiving life events for their captives. And this is including the use of those commerical products. The average keeper follows MAGAZINE advertising and petshop recomendations. And the average keeper fails in a huge way. Try and explain this.

Of the tens of thousands of iggies sold each and every year, fewer then 1% make it to adulthood, muchless accomplish lifes minimum goal of recruitment. IF these commonly promoted products were so good, why is that so? I want you to answer that Please.

Here at goanna ranch, we see much the opposite. 99% of our offspring(that I keep) grow up and become successful in these lifes minimum goals and more. We do not gut load or use UV bulbs. Again, you must explain that to me, PLEASE.

Remember this(our) success, is a result, not a hope or dream. Here it's repeated(thousands of times) results. Over hundreds of species of many types, over decades. Yet you think your opinion is better??? I have to question that.

Yet, your stating what you hope will work, because you read it. Hmmmmmmmmmm Don't you think your thinking a whole lot of yourself? You are new, you just started, you have nothing to show for it and yet, your giving advice and recomendations. You must question why you do that.

I think this is wrong, not just of you, but of all the newbies. And yes, its very common for newbies to give advice. What I think you and other newbies should do is SHARE your experience. You know, take pics of your animal/s your cages, your methods and show what they are doing. Daily reports, weekly reports, etc. Keep the forum informed. Then we can see whats working and whats not working. Why don't you do that?????

Cheers and share you experience.

Oh and if I may, I will borrow Sonyas tagline. I am not mean, your just a sissy(hehehehehehehehehe)

Not make recomedations and suggests and lead other newbies down a questionable path.

You actually believe what the pet industry sells you in those adds?
Those studies showing benefits, etc to those pet industry bulbs are from those done by the pet industry, why, to sell bulbs every 3-6 months to you.
In real life, those bulbs do nothing any other bulb does if used in a helpful way.

Hello All,
In 1998 I kept a baby green iguana that was given to me in with a group of 1.2 crocodile monitors (out of space necessity at the time). The lizard was never harmed by the monitors but did benefit from their 250 watt brooder light basking spot(I also had a 2.3 group of dwarf tegus(maculatus) living subterranean in the cage). Of course, thanks to FR, I know that high wattage is not needed to achieve proper temps but the point is that the iguana grew without any metabolic problems- and grew fast... I have kept basilisk, iguanas(greens, cyclura, spiny's), water dragons(chinese & aussie), frilled, beardeds and rankins, etc.- and bred and hatched many of these. I watched Tom Crutchfield keep and produce Cyclura lewisi over a five year period without UVB lights. Crutchfield and FR(and FR has covered this UVB topic many times here-nothing has chaged) have achieved far more than this with reptiles... Full spectrum lights are GREAT FOR PLANTS- not needed for reptiles. If you NEED them- then your husbandry is lacking in other areas. Focus on providing your monitors and other herps with their needs- not expensive gimmicks- Whether it is the sun or a bulb give them the HEAT that they require. Best to you all- Mike

When I first got into bearded dragons I read everything I could get my hands one about them & their supposedly need for UVB.

I never completely bought into the UVB thing and didn't know a whole lot about it because my many years of reptile experience was limited to snakes. But I wanted to KNOW, without a shadow of doubt, what beardies needed, didn't need. I wanted to make sure I provided the best care that my common sense would allow.

I remember when this new scientific breakthrough was launched, how there were several snakes on the list of animals that required it, needed it. I've seen that whole list dwindle down over the years. My gut feeling never allowed me to really believe in it but yet I kept an open mind in case I was faced with a "need to know" situation to where I would finally need to look into it.

I had a good debate on another forum not too awful long ago with a scientific minded beardie keeper that I felt was pretty knowledgeable on UVB.

I told them to convince me, hit me with their best shot. I wanted to be convinced. I kept an open mind. Every argument they presented was riddled with holes, holes that could be explained by a few other things.

Every beardie/uvb research findings they presented as "concrete evidence" was anything but concrete. In fact, I even complimented the researchers for their honesty. Every study I've seen has ended with something like; "Our research seemed to indicate the bearded dragon's need for uvb," OR "Because of (this 'n that) we assume their need for uvb."

I have a healthy 11-month old male beardie that hasn't seen the first manmade UVB ray. In fact, I've only had it outside a couple of times for real UVB.

UVB: A wide-spread misconception kept alive merely for a substitue of knowledge, thereby making it easier, more convenient, for the average, inexperienced, person to keep reptiles.

Like FR says, it's merely a bandaid.

Take care!
HH
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,
this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:
Appalachian American

And the female took a break twice for 1.5 months each time shows it. This was in a plastic cage in our old basement, with room temps at 53f in winter or lower. I set the cage up with some styrofoam insulation around it for winter, and 2 bulbs at 45 watts halogen for basking lights, nothing else. I used dirt, and plywood (pine) basking spots. I fed crickets, lobster roaches, and superworms, with collard greens, I only supplemented some feedings with Miner-all Indoor. The beardie female (this example) started laying masses of good eggs at 10 months old (23 or more at a time), she was just finally introduced to a male 2 weeks before this started.
I have tried UV bulbs over the years with certain reptiles, with no positive effect, in fact some grew much faster and were more colorful fast without them. Ive tried blacklights, and regular flourescent bulbs in place of them, no difference whatsoever.

Those bulbs are purely for profit only, you can try to defend them, but those of us with experience know better. What do you think was used by those people who bred all of these reptiles long before these bulbs ever existed? Actually I think many want to defend their choice to have spent the money on those bulbs more than anything.

Wow! You were lucky! Just imagine what she could've done if she had UVB. (Ever heard that before? Ha! Ha!) Of course I'm just kidding about being lucky.

Nice, impressive, stats, SHvar. How old is she now, or, how old did she live to be?

Even after all these years we non-conformers are still a minority. Go figure.

Catch ya later!
HH
-----
Due to political correctness run amuck,
this ol' hillbilly is now referred to as an:
Appalachian American