Reptile & Amphibian Forums

I brought this up from below because I wasn't sure you'd see it.

I did not get to finish or write enough yesterday because I was working.

Here is a quote from you:
"There`s nothing wrong with including a moderate ammount of rodents, but insects should form the main part of the diet."

I think this is mis-leading to others.. as you suggested that Savannah's should only be fed a MODERATE amount of rodents.

What gives you the basis for saying this?

Also, we raise everything here on rodents and insects, with rodents being the MAJOR bulk of the diet... even to the extent of rodents being exclusive with our larger monitors (ex: croc monitors).

As for working with monitors- I have not worked at a zoo (as you have).. However, I probably have more hands on experience with monitors then the zoo experience offered to you.. This has more to do with the zoo itself and not you as a keeper.

I was striving to offer good advice to this keeper- as so many things were wrong. However, your post was off base- and this is a common topic- feeding and what to feed. If it wasn't so off-base- I likely would not have replied. This response- which was yours this time- has been rejected many times before.. in the past.. and has been discussed here for years and years and years-look-up the archives. The topic being- the suggestion that rodents should not be the bulk food offered and other such foods should take precedence.. Everything from insects- as you mentioned, and others- fish/shrimp, etc.

You have to consider- which I mentioned when I first replied- this is not the wild, it is captivity. So, ideally, what is most abundant in their wild environment is not necessarily what is best to feed. In captivity, in some ways, we are so confined and do not have as many options. But, in many others ways- we do. We can offer, for example, an unlimited supply of rodents if we so choose.

So, I question your thought. That is- that rodents should only be fed moderately to Savannah's.

Taking an observation from the wild-- it was stated by Daniel Bennet- that baby Savannah's will feed plentifully on crickets.. And adults- millipedes, etc. So, I get it- that is, where you get your information.

This is not false either- as baby Savs do very well fed crickets. We have raised fresh baby Savannahs off crickets (initially) and their growth was swift.

But, he also suggested that mice should be fed too. Not that using him as a reference point is necessary, but for you, this seems to be where abouts you get your info- journals, articles, etc.

You seem to think that because they have been observed eating insects- in the wild- that rodents should only be fed moderately. It is common to think this way. I suppose the same would apply to other animals, people too. That the food most plentiful or the food available is best. This is not true.
We, as people, tend to think this way and form our own thought or opinion because it is what we see or what we think.

You many even go so far to say that they are DESIGNED to handle insects more.. and rodents are too bulky- this again, is another common thought- and an already anticipated response. Perhaps I should refrain from saying it, because now, you won't.

With regard to Sarah- she was feeding, among the things she mentioned- scrambled eggs and canned tuna. This is horrible. So, suggesting she keep it simple, and stick to rodents- is spot on and necessary advise for both her and her monitor. Context. Suggesting crickets is important too.. this is not a feeding animal, and sometimes, the enticement of movement and the smaller prey will encourage feeding.

This all is of no significance, however, if the conditions are not improved.. and the lizard supported.

The argument isn't that crickets, or insects are no good- because they are- it is that your thought says rodents are not. You did not say this.. I know, you said they should be fed moderately. But, if only in "moderation" relative to insects- insects being the bulk portion- as you suggested- then you're suggesting there is something non-beneficial about rodents.

Hi again, thanks for your very thoughtful reply.
First of all, if you read my initial response, I said I agreed with much of what you said, the only criticism I had was when you stated the the poster should keep feeding pinky mice, and then stick to an all rodent diet. However, (adult) mice in particular, have a relatively high fat content, and pinky mice for an adult Savannah monitor, are almost useless!
I`ve personally seen the effects of feeding a large ammount of mice to the Bosc`s monitor, the outcome was death after less than one year on the diet, due at least in part to fat deposits around the vital organs, even though the animal/s were kept under "optimum conditions", so proper digestion wasn`t the problem.
Any thoughts?
My responses, like yours, were intended to help the keeper help the animal!
The important points I made were to get an accurate temp and humidity reading, then ask the enclosure size, it was obviously much too small, no way to maintain the temp range or humidity these animal require, as you will know, that will cause many serious problems.
Can you show me a few pics of 10 year old (or older), V. exanthematicus, that have been fed a diet consisting exclusively of rodents throughout their life? In fact, a ten year old Bosc fed on ANY whole prey diet would be quite rare, I think!? (Sadly)
Thanks...

You answered your own question.

"I`ve personally seen the effects of feeding a large ammount of mice to the Bosc`s monitor, the outcome was death after less than one year on the diet"

The answer, in part, being: "large amount of mice". To much was offered relative to the calories being expended. This is just simple nutrition. The same will happen with any animal. What is meant by "large amount of mice" too I don't know. Either- you meant fed a large quantity daily. Or fed a diet consisting mainly of mice. Maybe both. But, it's simple.. Too much food relative to the care provided (yes, heat and metabolism) and too much relative to calorie expenditure. Fat content or not, the metabolism and calories used are what is important.

And you say optimum conditions.. how can you be so sure? Was this animal in your care. I don't mean to be upsetting, so hopefully this question doesn't come out that way.

But, to narrow down that a mice diet was the exclusive cause of death is a very narrow way to view things.

And yes, seeing pictures of thriving monitors.. more often.. would be great.

Yes, I did answer my own question!
I believe it WAS too much too often (in that case, upwards of 30 pinky/fuzzie mice per week), that ultimately caused the death of that monitor... Unfortunately, many people feed varanids that way; as if they were mammals (3 large meals a day, every day), no thought as to how much energy their monitor is using in it`s tiny box, so even under optimum temps, good whole prey diets etc, etc, they become obese in a relatively short time, and as with any animal, obesity can lead to very serious health problems.
I do agree with you all that the studies that have been done are far from the "complete picture", but they are still a guide.

Not sure were this thread started, but i thought the whole point of these forums was to improve the quality of life in respect to captive monitors.

We all no that the vast majority of savs are bought by first time keepers, not experienced keepers generally speaking.

We all know that most will die in their first year.

We all know the easiest diet for novices to stick to is crickets/locuts/roaches etc dusted.

We all know that savs growth is unlikely to be sustained on insects alone & novice keepers may under supply vitamins/calcium, so we added in egg/mice etc as weekly treats to balance the books.

There's alot of people out there that would love to see monitors stay in the wild, surley as keepers if we can reduce the yearly deaths of first time owners pet savs, this would benefit our hobby overall!!

I have another comment in response to your reply: It`s known that rodents (inc. mice), are plentiful in the areas V. exanthematicus inhabit, but still they choose mainly insects?
It IS relevant to discuss what these animals do in the wild, how on earth would we know anything, if we don`t know how they behave/feed etc, etc, naturally, even though we cannot hope to provide all the conditions here in our little tiny boxes (prisons), of dirt.

Three of the problems with studies on Monitors diets in the wild are that there just are not that many and the ones that are out there only cover monitors for a limited time period and only cover a few populations of species that often have large ranges. I can think of four off the top of my head and two of those were done by Daniel Bennett. With his studies on V. olivaceous being a bit more extensive than his studies on V. exanthematicus. Another was in a book on 3 large species of reptiles in W. Kalimantan (author and title escape me right now.) a fourth one I am aware of is from a researcher here in Fl. (Whose name also escapes me right now.) on the non-native population of V. niloticus. I am certain there are more I am not aware of but the four I mention are some of the most extensive studies I have seen regarding diet of wild caught monitors. The problem is these studies represent a small window into the actual diet that these animals eat and there are also field observations that show a good majority of monitors are opportunistic predators. while rodents may be readily available with in the range of V. exanthematicus they may not be able to capture rodents as often as they would like to except possibly during the nesting season of rodents (which may not be when the study was done. ) there is also alot of talk of how the skull structure of monitors in the polydaedalus sub-genus are designed for the consumption of mollusks something not indicated in the studies of the stomach contents of either monitor in this subgenus I have seen studies on but something I have personally observes with V. niloticus. Bennetts book is an excellent study on these lizards and a good guide for starting with these lizards but it is far from the last word on them and is only the observations of 2 people.

Great post Cal! And exactly the problem with basing the captive diet of Bosc's on those studies. The studies aren't wrong, they are just extremely incomplete.

Hi Calparsoni,

Great post.. I share some of those same views.

Funny, as I was thinking some of those same things myself and you posted.

So much is left out (of the studies). As you mentioned- these studies are very limited- both by the number of people conducting them and by the space criteria- as well as time frame.

There is so much room for improvement. So much left to be seen. What is funny is that there is a trickle effect. Some data is put out there- and it then shows up in print material, "care-sheets" all the way down to the actual individual keeper. So much husbandry is based on so little info.

Tomorrow, some person, scientist, researcher or otherwise, could go out there in the bush (Africa) and find a new niche, new locality and discover greater rat densities there, etc. There just is a lot of variation. Possible scenarios could be discussed for quite some time.

What we do have, however, is some basic info- what they -will- eat in the wild, what they were observed or -seen- consuming.. and this is not to say it is the best/optimal food, the only food, the bulk of their diet, etc. All of this is good stuff. Like gray areas of info (in the wild) become a little more clear. And we should be appreciative for what has been shared (information)... Remembering too to try to keep it within context- as you did.

I fed some aquarium snails to my monitor the other day. He did eat them but it took him a few minutes to figure out they were food. When I put mice in front of them I can't even count to 2 before they are swallowed down. They defineatly like the rodents above all else here.

Rodents has been proven to be the staple diet in all varanids as long as their being kept at optimal temps and health.

Even a pinky. I hear alot about how they are just all fat. I read somewhere and someplace by someone who knows a heck of alot more than me and it made snese. Look at a pink its belly is full of white stuff. Is it Milk? Did they nurse? Is that calcium? hmmm.

Its been proven so not sure what has been seen by others but the question of proper husbandry may be a factor

Thanks

Scott
-----
Scott
"The most powerful person never has to use it"

Nobody can accept they did anything wrong.This thing about Sav's requiring a special diet is ridiculous,any monitors wild stomach contents studies-would make make someone believe most monitors have a specialized diet. Correct me if i am wrong but Prasinus probably don't eat many rodents in the wild,but they tend to die of husbandry issues or internal damage during export.Yet the successful people who i've read keeping them successful are feeding them lots of rodents.Moe

Hello, I agree with you, the thought or false belief about rodents and savs is actually worse then most think.

As far as I can tell, its a concept based on failure. That is, rodents are not good because Savs that consumed them died. Which sounds good, only the reality is, all the Savs died, even the insect feeders, or the turkey feeders, it didn't matter what they ate, what mattered was they died. It wasn't diet.

They died because the rest of the husbandry was completely substandard.

In this type of case it was about the monitors not being allowed to operate at a normal rate of metabolism.

With a low metabolism Savs were unable to utilize the energy that rodents supplied, So it was quickly turned to fat and as too much fat entered the bloodstream, was deposited not only in the massive fat storage areas, but in organs such as the liver.

Of course this would end up being fatal. And as STUPID humans do, They blamed the most obvious condition, fatty liver.

So instead of allowing the monitor, The SAV, to utilize a normal high metabolism, like they do in nature, the keepers simply take away the culprit, the rodents. This is a common human trick, fix the symtom and not attempt a cure.

As mentioned above, unfortunately rodents were not the problem and the Savs died anyway. To this day, of the hundreds of thousands of beautiful baby savs that enter the country each and every spring, very few is any are still alive the next year, that is fact, that is history. And it has nothing to do with rodents being a poor choice for captive husbandry.

Just use the head thats sitting on all our shoulders, if half the savs that are imported each year survive, this country would be overrun with them, within a year. Much less the decades that they have been mass imported.

How much success do you see here or on any forum? You see a whole lot of starters, and then you see more people starting, we rarely see finishers that is, seeing these animals reach normal natural life events.

This is fact and it has nothing to do with rodents.

As someone who has recieved lots of success with varanids of many species, having raised literally hundreds upon hundreds, Mice is the very best diet to raise any varanid on. With the exception of the very smallest species. And they are a bit inconvient for the largest species, but other rodents are not.

Rodents result in rapid growth and high level reproduction, without the need of suppliments. Period

But, if your going to feed rodents, you must allow the monitors to reach normal operating temperatures. So they much include the upper ranges of temps they normally pick.

What is actually really really important is not about rodents, but the understanding that reptiles utilize a range of temps, and the highest temps they choose, are of the most importance. This is what is important.

On the otherhand insects have shown to be imcomplete and must be dusted with both calicum and vitamins to be sufficent. Good luck on your endover to convince the blind to see.

About Daniel Bennetts cricket feeder wild Savs, Hmmmmmmmm again READ what he wrote, He stated that the Savs on that site were very very little, the adults were tiny, he showed a pic of an adult and he was holding it by the tail with two fingers, hahahahahahaha

Then he stated that Savs do not attain lenghts of three feet(one meter) in nature and there is something wrong with captive Savs because if fed grow to lenghts over 3 feet, including lenghts of 4 feet are often seen.

Again if someone, anyone were to use the brains we humans are suppose to have, you should easily realize that the population, the over collected population that daniel was looking at was dwarfed. That is, over collecting causes higher numbers of smaller animals.

Its again common sense that monitors do feed on a range of prey items, not all are equal. These items can be broken down into two areas.

one that allows for growth and reproduction, at high levels.

And one that allows for the individual to attain enough energy to make it to the next day.

insects are only good to get the monitors to the next day.

Lastly as a captive breeder of varanids, you soon learn how much calories it takes to allow reproduction. Its takes a whole lot and they are simply not going to get that insects.

A midsized to larger monitor IS NOT GOING TO GET IT ON INSECTS. The thought that they can is extremely naive or worse unintelligent.

Lastly, Savs are not a small varanid, females easily reach three feet and males four. And they are massive. Their mass is equal to a five to six foot normally built varanid.

And someone recomends feeding insects, thats funny.

IMO most of the Savs die because of bad husbandry...and yes, wrong temperature is one of the problems. We see a lot of football players that are big, but not necessarily sick. They can exert themselves, doing vigorous exercise, better than you and I could. Police dogs that are retired, are fed more than when they were in service and gain back a lot of weight. Being chubby doesn't necessarily mean unhealthy, or sick, and eating a lot doesn't mean unhealthy either if the person and animal are healthy. A lot of the time these animals are kept in too small cages, too, and become obese. Obese and fat (or chubby) doesn't mean the same thing. Obese is very unhealthy, but being chubby or robust, a person and animals can live to a ripe old age. My grandma lived to be 85 and she was quite big for Asians. Most of the time genetics play a part in bringing on the diseases.

Americans are so unhealthy because we eat the same thing over and over again...fast food...not many choices. Eating the same thing over and over again doesn't necessarily mean bad either, if the food is nutritionally balanced, like, whole rodents.

Your posts have nothing at all to do with the subject. Everything you said was offbase assumptions with no real base or reason to compare to monitors. Sorry

I am gathering from FR's post it is necessary for all the carnivorous species of monitors to eat vertebrates in order to get enough calories to reproduce and lay eggs. Of course that was a long post but thats what I gathered from it.

It is hard to know what monitors eat in the wild. Some of smaller species like ackies are probably mainly bug eaters but I have not been "Down Under" so don't know. I would guess even the smaller species are eating frogs lizards small snakes small rodents. During certain times of the year along with any bugs they can catch.

In order to feed larger monitors insects to keep up with their biological needs you would have to have an endless supply of insects to funnel into their enclosure constantly.It's easier to feed rodents,there is more in each package.In the wild these monitors are endlessly feeding -they don't have to wait for you to get home from work LOL Their are two results; if you don't feed them huge amounts of insects,and they seem fine OR you feed them rodents and they get fat and lethargic.To me it say you just have husbandry that puts the monitors into drought conditions-that's not proper husbandry.Too dry to cold,no choices.
When monitors hit that gear of being able to use all their caloric intake into energy they are lively and fast-not "tame" and lethargic like 99% of people who claim proper husbandry

Good post Moe.

Check out this healthy guy: https://picasaweb.google.com/susansmith201/MammalsOthersKenyaTanzania2009#5410124404848704978

Taken by a person vacationing in Africa. The pic is labeled incorrectly. Not a Savannah. Rather, Varanus albigularis.

There's some video footage too:
https://picasaweb.google.com/susansmith201/VideosKenyTanz#5410147745500368578

Is how so many people on here want to take one of the easiest things about keeping monitors (their diet.) and try and make it ridiculously complex. Then to top it of they will ignore other aspects of their husbandry that do need more attention than diet.
You are not keeping your monitors in the wild you are keeping them in captivity. Furthermore there are problems with what they eat in the wild that you don't see such as live prey wounding or killing their potential predator or diseases caused by eating prey that is readily available but not necessarily healthy for the animal eating it.
Furthermore you are not going to have access (or limited access.) to the exact prey items they eat in nature. How cheap are those african millipedes savannahs eat? I don't even think they are legal to get here in fl. I'm sure it is the same in other states as well. I've seen mangrove snakes listed in the stomach contents of water monitors, perhaps I should get my hot permit and go deeper into debt to feed my waters their "natural prey". Oh wait thats right they do fine on rats and mice, and yes they will eat bugs but I think it would at that point be cheaper to go with mangrove snakes given the price of crickets these days.
It has been proven time and again that most species of monitors do fine on regularly available commercial insects and rodents. It is the other issues that cause problems in monitor husbandry. Perhaps it would be better to focus on those issues instead of their diet.

You don't think it's relavant, Frank?

Hmmm.... Your post is kindda long and tedious! [laugh] But i kindda did add something to which you said.... So, I guess...extra? [chuckle]

You should have seen what they say on the other forum about leachies.... And they wonder their leachies never grown large...because they don't feed them enough vertebrate preys. Those suckers won't touch bugs when they get older and only eat a little bit of the CGD and so never grown. They never thought of feeding them rodents. [chuckle]

Hey Frank,

Yes, that is exactly my point: that you cannot narrowly attribute a death due to a diet of mice or rats, whichever. There are so many different aspects and so many husbandry-related issues that are likely the cause. But, this is the faulted thinking we have.. not just with monitors, but with nearly everything. Even scientific studies non-monitor subject matter. These common behaviors do relate to monitors because they are found here too.

What I see is that you will find parallels to this (Monitor husbandry, its keepers, etc.) and to that of life abroad.

The hardest part of this is to get someone to look beyond what is comfortable to them. Often we will see them tuck back to what they know, although much of what they don't know makes sense. I know this is a lot of talk about life and people- but this is so fitting with regard to monitors and their care by us.

And as you say, yeah, society looks for ways to cover up symptoms rather than find the cause of them. We can purport that it is a way of thinking- which it is, a mis-understanding of the body- which it is, but also a money venue- which it is. It is really hard to get out of that mind-set. See, with so many things, it starts up top and then trickles down. Just like with the monitors- starting up top (some small study) and then down, individual keeper.

I must say, it is pretty awesome to be able to acquire knowledge from you. What people forget here is that you failed.. many times. You have made this clear. You started out, really, on an unknown pathway- you didn't have a whole lot.. and look at what you discovered, through trial and error. You share it with us, with everyone.. Most don't do that. I think we take for granted what information is available to us. We used to not provide near the amount of heat required to monitors. Now, keepers are informed to provide proper temps. But, this advice was unknown until it was discovered. Yet, people poop on it. Sorry to say it like that.. but they do. They take it, and either, make changes or don't. But, we have to remember this advice was given after years and years of trial. It's your hard work.

It is sad- about the thousands or better coming in.. with no return. They are so so awesome too! Quite simply, they really are one of the best monitors (opinion) and at such a low, not respectable cost.

Have you seen this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToML9p1iE1Q.

And well.., just, wow.. about the suggestion there must be something wrong with captives reaching that size. Again, this is another example of mainstream thought.. or at least, how thought can be non-constructive.

I said I wouldn't post here anymore, but it would be remiss of me not to comment on lies. Franks says:

"About Daniel Bennetts cricket feeder wild Savs, Hmmmmmmmm again READ what he wrote, He stated that the Savs on that site were very very little, the adults were tiny, he showed a pic of an adult and he was holding it by the tail with two fingers, hahahahahahaha Then he stated that Savs do not attain lengths of three feet(one meter) in nature and there is something wrong with captive Savs because if fed grow to lenghts over 3 feet, including lenghts of 4 feet are often seen. "

Frank has made this up. If he hasn't he can provide 1) the picture he talks about and 2) links or references to these statements he claims I have made. He won't be able to because he has just made it up, or imagined it.

So for the record; Adult exanthematicus eat mainly millipedes and snails in the wild, not insects. They don't often reach very large sizes in the wild, because of things they don't experience in captivity, like eagles and cobras and baboons, and months without water. The lizards at that site were very little because they were hatchlings. In my opinion the only thing "wrong" with captive exanthematicus is that they are in a box, completely isolated from their natural environment. Finally I don't hold adult monitors lizards by the tail with two fingers.

I don't know why he makes this stuff up, it isn't as if he doesn't have plenty of relevant stuff to say. I find his fabricated and personal attacks on my work deeply insulting. In future please back it up with hard evidence, or pick on somebody else.
-----
Mampam Conservation

I'm not exactly sure, but I think that's just the way he is..... I've come to accept it. I just figure it out.

Maybe he just like a good laugh! You're a British, aren't you? [chuckle] Although, IMO that might ticked-off Asian people, especially Thai! [laugh]

But he is a good breeder and keeper...better than a lot of people, even the so called academic experts who can't even keep feed their leachies properly.

Daniel, I think people take your research and give their own meaning to it.So you get the negative aspect of popularity, hostility by association.I enjoy any information on monitors-but people pick and choose what they want to believe,instead of going through all the information,and finding things that are relevant to monitor husbandry and things that actually work.Till monitors are banned from export,the best thing we can do,and still preach your philosophy ,is make sure people care properly for the monitors in captivity.What would help is telling people that the wild diet isn't the only diet-and improper husbandry is the root of failure of monitors in captivity.I thought monitors were the focus, not us. Moe