Reptile & Amphibian Forums

Please understand, anyone can say anything, its a free country(some will argue that)

But its simply apples to oranges, to donut holes, when you compare wild diets to captive diets. They do not relate, not with monitors. Monitors, simply put, can and will consume whatever gets them to tomorrow.

The apples to apples thing is important in captivity. That is, what diet allows for the best success in captivity(where the question is important). In the past, it really did not matter what you fed them, as their basic husbandry was so bad(off) that diet was a bandage or excuse for poor husbandry. The monitors failed from poor husbandry, but failed faster with a poor diet.

Whats absolutely needed is, a standard diet you as a keeper can rely on. That is, if you meet normal husbandry, and offer this diet, then your charges will achieve life events and longlife. For instance, with snakes, wild snakes do not consume only white mice or lab rats or fuzzy rabbits. Yet in captivity those do provide a base for success. But surely people should not be bound by habit and not offer anything else. They simply need to understand what will allow success.

This goes for monitors, There are two basic food items that have shown great success for achieving life events and longevity. That is mice and crickets, but there are more, like birds, rats, other rodents,eggs, roaches, hard shelled worms(superworms etc) The only thing that has shown to be criticial is, they like their snake cousins, need whole food items.

More to the point, for newbies or even longterm keepers that do not understand success, what is needed is a base to work from, not a smorgesboard of what you do not understand. For instance, not understanding what is needed, is approached by shotgunning, that is, give them all sorts of stuff and hope it works. The problem is, those who have done that, are not the ones who continually achieve success. They seem to continually achieve failure. They simply move from species to species, as they wear out their charges. Then claim to be experts. Please understand, those that offer you a varity is important, really should show their longterm success. If they cannot show it, then why would you want to believe it? After all, husbandry and diet is actually an applied discipline. In such, it achieves results. Have them show their results.

If I were new to monitors, I would want to know what diet is dependable and easily obtained for what I was working with. That would be important. Because I am not a robot(programed), I fully understand, I can offer other items or fun, but not for necessity.

The problem is monitors are reptiles, and most newbies are mainly concerned with getting their new pet, soon to be lap lizard to feed. What you fail to understand, their willingness to feed is based entirely on their conditions, they are indeed reptiles. A monitor kept in good or even normal husbandry will eat the chrome off a trailer hitch, that is, they will readily consume about anything. And further more, they appear to like to eat anything, the reason is, they like to eat.

The above paragraph is very important because so many newbies fall back on the old, my monitor really likes donuts, excuse. Whats important is, your monitor maintains health, whether it likes it or not. Once healthy, then even donuts are not a problem(in moderation)

But no matter what the theory boys have to say, and they do say(to bad they don't back it with doing). Its better to understand whats needed, a successful base diet, then guess(as they have been doing their whole failure prone lifes)

What it boils down to is not theory, There is now a history of longterm success. There is no need to guess, there are very successful diets and husbandry. Your task as a newbie is to find those exsisting programs and see what they are feeding, not what someone sitting in a room without monitors has to say.

There is a real need to theorize about why keepers do not want to use what has been proven to be successful. I would think that would be step one. Then once understood, you can take as many steps as you like. But wouldn't understanding step one be a good thing? My theory about this is, its far easier to except failure when following theory, then when following something proven. That way, you can always blame the theory, after all, its only theory.

The facts are, any species of monitor can and will achieve adulthood within a year, to a couple years, depending on size. Savs, have no problem reaching adulthood within a year, with proper husbandry(what allows use of a diet) and only consuming mice and crickets. But what is required is that the keeper have a brain and learns to use it. You do not have to feed only mice and crickets, they are an established base diet.

For those who promote theory, please understand, we can read and we too understand what monitors ate in nature, but we also understand, this is not nature. The focal point is very important, what works here is far more important than what worked in nature.

Thanks for reading and, after all is said and done, its the keepers choice and full responsibility, if your monitor fails, its only your fault, the information is out there, as well as all sorts of theory. Still, its only your fault for failure and your joy for success. Cheers FR

If I would of seen this sooner I wouldn't of put my post below. I could of just added it here.

Frank, you're a couple of years behind the the Tortoise people(who actually share many similarities with monitor people) but that's another rant.

We/they've (I don't like to think of myself as a tortoise person although that is my main interest) have found that if you research what they eat in the wild you will find that it is... almost everything. They do key onto certain plants but those plants and forms are not available all year around. I'll be willing to be that it is the same with all herps.

So... the key term among tortoise/turtle keepers for the last few years has been 'variety' because we really don't know their requirements totally. This is kind of a shotgun method in terms of that if you provide a large enough variety you are bound to hit the requirements of the animal.

I have to ask you what is your success rate with animals that you keep outside that come from a similar habitat to those from the opposite.

>>Please understand, anyone can say anything, its a free country(some will argue that)
>>
>> But its simply apples to oranges, to donut holes, when you compare wild diets to captive diets. They do not relate, not with monitors. Monitors, simply put, can and will consume whatever gets them to tomorrow.
>>
>> The apples to apples thing is important in captivity. That is, what diet allows for the best success in captivity(where the question is important). In the past, it really did not matter what you fed them, as their basic husbandry was so bad(off) that diet was a bandage or excuse for poor husbandry. The monitors failed from poor husbandry, but failed faster with a poor diet.
>>
>> Whats absolutely needed is, a standard diet you as a keeper can rely on. That is, if you meet normal husbandry, and offer this diet, then your charges will achieve life events and longlife. For instance, with snakes, wild snakes do not consume only white mice or lab rats or fuzzy rabbits. Yet in captivity those do provide a base for success. But surely people should not be bound by habit and not offer anything else. They simply need to understand what will allow success.
>>
>> This goes for monitors, There are two basic food items that have shown great success for achieving life events and longevity. That is mice and crickets, but there are more, like birds, rats, other rodents,eggs, roaches, hard shelled worms(superworms etc) The only thing that has shown to be criticial is, they like their snake cousins, need whole food items.
>>
>> More to the point, for newbies or even longterm keepers that do not understand success, what is needed is a base to work from, not a smorgesboard of what you do not understand. For instance, not understanding what is needed, is approached by shotgunning, that is, give them all sorts of stuff and hope it works. The problem is, those who have done that, are not the ones who continually achieve success. They seem to continually achieve failure. They simply move from species to species, as they wear out their charges. Then claim to be experts. Please understand, those that offer you a varity is important, really should show their longterm success. If they cannot show it, then why would you want to believe it? After all, husbandry and diet is actually an applied discipline. In such, it achieves results. Have them show their results.
>>
>> If I were new to monitors, I would want to know what diet is dependable and easily obtained for what I was working with. That would be important. Because I am not a robot(programed), I fully understand, I can offer other items or fun, but not for necessity.
>>
>> The problem is monitors are reptiles, and most newbies are mainly concerned with getting their new pet, soon to be lap lizard to feed. What you fail to understand, their willingness to feed is based entirely on their conditions, they are indeed reptiles. A monitor kept in good or even normal husbandry will eat the chrome off a trailer hitch, that is, they will readily consume about anything. And further more, they appear to like to eat anything, the reason is, they like to eat.
>>
>> The above paragraph is very important because so many newbies fall back on the old, my monitor really likes donuts, excuse. Whats important is, your monitor maintains health, whether it likes it or not. Once healthy, then even donuts are not a problem(in moderation)
>>
>> But no matter what the theory boys have to say, and they do say(to bad they don't back it with doing). Its better to understand whats needed, a successful base diet, then guess(as they have been doing their whole failure prone lifes)
>>
>> What it boils down to is not theory, There is now a history of longterm success. There is no need to guess, there are very successful diets and husbandry. Your task as a newbie is to find those exsisting programs and see what they are feeding, not what someone sitting in a room without monitors has to say.
>>
>> There is a real need to theorize about why keepers do not want to use what has been proven to be successful. I would think that would be step one. Then once understood, you can take as many steps as you like. But wouldn't understanding step one be a good thing? My theory about this is, its far easier to except failure when following theory, then when following something proven. That way, you can always blame the theory, after all, its only theory.
>>
>> The facts are, any species of monitor can and will achieve adulthood within a year, to a couple years, depending on size. Savs, have no problem reaching adulthood within a year, with proper husbandry(what allows use of a diet) and only consuming mice and crickets. But what is required is that the keeper have a brain and learns to use it. You do not have to feed only mice and crickets, they are an established base diet.
>>
>> For those who promote theory, please understand, we can read and we too understand what monitors ate in nature, but we also understand, this is not nature. The focal point is very important, what works here is far more important than what worked in nature.
>>
>> Thanks for reading and, after all is said and done, its the keepers choice and full responsibility, if your monitor fails, its only your fault, the information is out there, as well as all sorts of theory. Still, its only your fault for failure and your joy for success. Cheers FR
-----
Ed @ Tortoise Keepers
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

Too much difference here sir, torts, which we breed some of, are not the same. Althought I agree monitor husbandry trails husbandry of all other major reptile types.

Monitors are basically snakes with legs. But not nearly so refined. That is, they are very much generalist, except for size. Almost all are Obligate carnivores, with the possible exception of one or two species(out of 65 or so) For the sake of this discussion, those two can be omitted as there are not in private hands in the states(maybe two if still alive)

Also, I cannot keep monitors outside on a permanent basis, I can allow them out only in the summer, after that, they are inside. With that said, if we keep control, they produce very well. Thanks FR

Considering how quickly you replyed... you have waaaaaaay too much free time... but that is good.

If you are keeping chelonians, I'm surprised that you say monitors are snakes with legs. I see them as a median but not... more advanced in some aspects... but not. They are very similar but different. No, I'm not trying to be coy or difficult but think about what I'm saying. I believe the point you were trying to make was that variety in the diet is the key.

>>Too much difference here sir, torts, which we breed some of, are not the same. Althought I agree monitor husbandry trails husbandry of all other major reptile types.
>>
>> Monitors are basically snakes with legs. But not nearly so refined. That is, they are very much generalist, except for size. Almost all are Obligate carnivores, with the possible exception of one or two species(out of 65 or so) For the sake of this discussion, those two can be omitted as there are not in private hands in the states(maybe two if still alive)
>>
>> Also, I cannot keep monitors outside on a permanent basis, I can allow them out only in the summer, after that, they are inside. With that said, if we keep control, they produce very well. Thanks FR
-----
Ed @ Tortoise Keepers
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

First its more or less meaningless what you think monitors are more like torts or snakes. Same for me.

I am saying that monitor keepers first have to understand, there is a basic simple diet that has shown generations upon generations of success. And unfortunately, its not a varied diet.

For instance, take many species of monitor to multi generations, without incident, on a basic diet. Our monitors grow and mature quickly(faster then most) They produce more(most peoples don't produce) As an example, I have a female cross that we hatched here and she is gravid on her 60 clutch. I believe that is a record for one female. Her diet is mice, period. Shes going on 9 years old, and is healthy as can be(or there wouldn't be 50 clutches already)

The point is, get successful, then experiment, not experiment to get successful. Example, why not ask the new owner of Rare Earth(he posts here on occasion) what Rare Earth fed in the past, ask how varied their diet was, they produced many many generations.

Simply put, there is no rule that says captivity should mimic nature. Only that we strive for healthy monitors, if that takes copying nature then fine, but if its not necessary then why make it harder then it already is?????

Please understand, if you have already achieved success and want to add more to the diet, please feel free to do so. But most here are not successful and have little experience, I recomend something proven. I feel its not the monitors thats bored, its the people.

Oh by the way, this is not free time, this is my job. I breed mice, crickets, monitors, snakes, torts, turtles for a living. FR

Meat diet to leafy veggie diet that is. That would be comparing apples to oranges. I think what was said is to compare apples to apples.

Veggie diets need alot more variety to make up for what the other is lacking. So it doesn't suprise me if only feeding them one or two type os vegetation didnt work as well as feeding them more variety.

Monitors however are meat eaters as was stated with exception of two not well known species. I believe even they have shown to have meat in the diet. So comparing monitor diets to a snakes diet would be apples to apples.

Try to find some studies on the natual diets of some monitors. I'm guessing some exists. I'm sure you will find the diet is vaired... I think that is the point. They might be meat eaters but the nutrients required are the same.

>>Meat diet to leafy veggie diet that is. That would be comparing apples to oranges. I think what was said is to compare apples to apples.
>>
>>Veggie diets need alot more variety to make up for what the other is lacking. So it doesn't suprise me if only feeding them one or two type os vegetation didnt work as well as feeding them more variety.
>>
>>Monitors however are meat eaters as was stated with exception of two not well known species. I believe even they have shown to have meat in the diet. So comparing monitor diets to a snakes diet would be apples to apples.
-----
Ed @ Tortoise Keepers
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

Daniel Bennett has data on wild savs--their diet is surprisingly varied. But, FR is saying he's not convinced we should strive to mimic a wild diet, or at least, it shouldn't be a focal point until we're already successful breeders. It all goes back to learning the fundamentals (which I am still doing) before moving on to advanced issues.

However, I am still quite curious to hear the average fat content of wild monitor diets.
-----
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

- Jack Handey

Its not about breeding, its about health. Healthy monitors breed like flys. You cannot stop them. This is true.

Understand, you do not need to hibernate, photoperiod, or anything with monitors, just get them healthy, and off to the races they go.

Those of us who breed them, do not understand how not to. Do you get that. How we control reproduction is to stop digging up eggs. I know that sounds funny, but its true.

Now consider, with that in mind, I absolutely cannot figure out, how someone can keep monitors without getting eggs, ok, female monitors. All you need to do is not make mistakes, like really large ones.

About fat content, its neither here nor there. In fact, they most likely require X-amount of fat to forum enlarged ovum. Also, fat is stored when the metabolism is low. Engine running to slow. When they have the temps and conditions to use those temps, they increase their metabolism to a point that getting fat is not a problem.

I would think the biggist problem with monitors getting fat is lack of parasites. Captives do not have to pay that tax. So they store it. Think about that. You all seem to want to discuss what wild is, then you eliminate what wild is(parasites)

The central point is, allowing a captive, to achieve life events. That is, hatch, grow, become reproductive, do so for a period of time, then die. That is whats important, of course those catagories all have parts and behaviors in them. Which are all important. So yes, breeding is only a part, its the culmination of many smaller parts, but just a part. Thanks FR

FR or do you mind if I call you Frank?

I would like to ask your permission to use your post in the Horned lizard forum. We are discussing captive versus wild diets and your post explains to a tee what I was discussing in that forum.

Thanks,

Nate

The thing about those studies is they do not tell me that such and such bug was in season at that time, or the fish were spawning, or the mice had just moved in and infested the area. they also do not say it was dry this year or wet this year when the studies were done etc.. They simply show when they caught this animal it had this in its stomach contents. Then when this animal was caught it showed this in its stomach.

I think we all know they eat what is available.
Which in turn means there is probly not a supply large enough of one thing to sustain them everday on the hour for year after year.

However when I am looking at captive animals I tend to look at other captives. Ones that are successful after all keeping them in captivity is my goal. I am sure everyone with snakes could feed a varied diet of many things. However they stick with rodents. Why? they are readily available and work.

Everyone who is successful with monitors has one thing in common the base of the diet is whole foods. Once they learn how to sustain them with that then they may add a few things to it. But a complete varied diet has not been known to be successful.

i have a lot of tespect for what frank says. i have changed a lot of my practices based on what he has learned from keeping reptiles. i personally find that monitor lizards are not only a lot different from snakes, but are a lot different from each other as well. researchers first thought that monitors were sort of a link between snakes and lizards. the way i understand it; these assertions were proved for the most part to be false. monitors are way different from the rest of the lizards and snakes as well. i really think each of these 60 or so species are very different from each other as well. this is one of the reasons that keeping monitors is such a challenge. we try to generalize for all of them, and we can't. people are having a lot of success with green iguans, tegus, beardies. why? because keepers are learning just what these animals need to stay healthy and survive. i think torts are different from monitors because i think the needs of torts are more general, and there is more transferance of what has been learned from one tort to another tort. most success that has been had by keepers has been by those who have specialized in one monitor. if you are trying to keep a monitor, i would try to listen to those who have experience with that particular monitor rather than what someone has tried with his sav or ackie.

Pertaining to your posts:

Yes, agreed, monitors are creatures of opportunity, as are many predators. Wild diets do not always equate to what they should be given in captivity. Some things in nature should not be mimicked, such as V. salvator consumes carrion in the wild as part of its diet, which for many reasons I would never feed them in captivity: smell, bacteria, pathogens, and later the possibility of receiving a highly infectious bite (people die here from wild V. salvator bites). That being said, I would not deny my V. dumerilii crabs, when their jaws and teeth have evolved for that purpose. Nor would I deny others whole food items which are a significant and important part of their diet in the wild, i.e. fish to V. indicus complex or insects to V. bengalensis.

Also agreed is that the diet in captivity is all important. For the new keeper, a simple standard whole animal diet is a good idea and safe until they gain more knowledge of their particular species. I know that many new keepers buy their monitor knowing little or not knowing anything about it, which is terrible. Bird-rodent-cricket diets are easily obtainable in the US. I am also terribly opposed to feeding of just meat, liver and heart- it goes back to the nutrient issue.

Mostly you confirmed what I had written and I thank you for that. You named a number of other good food sources. Varied diet does not necessarily mean a smorgasbord of items fed in a haphazard manner; that would be problematic. In the context that I used it, I meant amphibians, mammals, insects, fish, crustaceans and reptiles (and you mentioned birds, which I failed to mention) all have important and different nutrients for monitors, not that all monitors would eat all of these food items or that vertebrates should not make up the staple part of the diet. You must admit, that even a good insect/larvae only diet should be supplemented with vitamins and minerals. Even bird only diets, with their weak and porous skeletal structure, fail to provide enough calcium for most young growing reptiles.

I am not just an academic or one that throws around theories. I was also around during the days when little to nothing was known about husbandry, when many of us were learning the hard way of what works and does not work. Over the years, I have worked with many types of reptiles, monitors being a favorite. As you may have noticed, I am rather new to this forum or any forum for that matter, but not at all new in the study of herpetology or the “art” of herpetoculture.

What I have noticed from these forums are some have an unshakable and uncompromising system of beliefs and are either unwilling or unable to make a paradigm shift or only their way is the correct way. Aren’t these forums supposed to be for the exchange of ideas? I have learned some interesting points of view that have changed the way I look at things from the available forums. Where would the world be without the consideration of different ideas? We probably would be rubbing two sticks together trying to make fire in order to cook a monitor lizard rather than be discussing how to care for them.

Success should not just be measured solely in accordance with fastest maturation and growth. Understandably, you measure success in that manner, since that is what you strive for. It is your business to breed captive reptiles, so faster growth and maturation is to your benefit and financial gain; however, it does not lead necessarily lead to greater longevity in Varanus species. To the contrary, accelerated growth rates and maturation have been shown to shorten the longevity of many types of reptiles, most notably Boids. If your experience shows differently, please publish your results! It would be a first in reptile husbandry.

Your other measure of success, a healthy monitor, is a measure that I can agree with 100%. According to your posts, you have been very successful breeding monitors and I applaud you for that; the more monitors being bred in the US (the largest consumer of monitors), the fewer that are being taken from the wild and that means less pressure being exerted on those species targeted for the pet trade. Keep up the good work.

Cheers,

Michael

I fully agree Mike....good post.
markb

"To the contrary, accelerated growth rates and maturation have been shown to shorten the longevity of many types of reptiles, most notably Boids. If your experience shows differently, please publish your results! It would be a first in reptile husbandry."

* Do you have published results regarding the shortened lifespan of reptiles who experienced accelerated growth/maturation? I would be interested to read it/them.

* What monitors have you bred?

* Thanks for mentioning that birds have porous bones--I had completely forgotten that fact. Do you happen to recall if chicks (chickens) have porous bones as well? Since they don't fly, I thought perhaps they are solid.

Sam
-----
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

- Jack Handey

Hi Sam, you saidTo the contrary, accelerated growth rates and maturation have been shown to shorten the longevity of many types of reptiles, most notably Boids. If your experience shows differently, please publish your results! It would be a first in reptile husbandry."

Please entertain these thoughts, as in consider them. I did what I am doing with monitors to colubrids, Oh so many years ago, that is, have a history of fast growth, heavy reproduction, etc. Then I moved on to pythons, I did the same. Of course there were many who agreed and many who did not. Sorta like here.

What I found was, it was not the fast growth or the size that was the problem. It was us the keepers forgetting what we did.

I use the term support, that term is the hunbandry required to achieve all or individual tasks the animal in question does. Where we fail is normally in our support. Where we fail on a larger scale, is in support of a larger individual. A larger individual takes more support then a smaller individual of the same species. Are you following?

Take a keeper with good husbandry that is applied evenly, what energy support does it take a 16 inch,80 gram female ackie(or any species) to achieve normal reproduction? Lets for the sake of discussion say it takes a 100. The 100 represents a level of support. Now, what does it take to allow the same of success with a female thats 32 inches longs and 350 grams. As a math question, this is fairly simple, the larger one is twice as long so it needs twice as much, right? Ok, thats not really accurate because the larger monitor is 4 and 3/5's times heavier. So, then, 460 or so, is needed to attain the same level of success, yes?? could be, i guess. The reality is, it does take far more, but we have no handle on how much. It could be far more.

So understanding that larger individuals need far more support is the cure, right? nope, not at all, the cure is applying what we understand. The problem is them old paradigms, we keepers fall into habits, we tend to feed on a certain schedule and with certain amounts.

In reality, larger individuals get shortchanged because of our tendencies, not because they are larger. Understand, its rare for someone to support the needs of monitors on a longterm basis, sir that is history, just look at the current level of achievements of most. Muchless increase that support for larger monitors.

In my experience, larger individuals do not have problems, as long as we support them as such, larger individuals and increase everything they need exponently, housing, food, temps, security, etc. Thanks for considering this, FR

I really like your post, but do have a couple concerns.

I also do not care for the divide and conquer approach to posting. That is seperate each paragragh and approach it without concern how it fits in the entire post, but sadly your post is well written and I only have concern with a couple paragraphs.

You said, I am not just an academic or one that throws around theories. I was also around during the days when little to nothing was known about husbandry, when many of us were learning the hard way of what works and does not work. Over the years, I have worked with many types of reptiles, monitors being a favorite. As you may have noticed, I am rather new to this forum or any forum for that matter, but not at all new in the study of herpetology or the “art” of herpetoculture.

You said your not just an academic, then what are you?? I do not know who you are, yet you seem to think you know who I am(or what I do).
Also you say you worked with reptiles, monitors, etc. Yet many many, in fact almost all here work with them. That really does not define your understanding of them. I know you may not like this, you did not state if you have expressed generations or any success other then allowing them to live. You see, once the basic experience of allowing them to live is achieved, you soon learn that life is more then a heart beat. I use the term "life events" to discribe success. What that tells me is, a monitor is more then teeth for eating crabs(your example) Of course specialize teeth are very obvious and upfront(and important). hahahahahahaha, but they are only teeth. Life events, expresses the true monitor, its behaviors, how it mates, how it chooses a mate, how it lives in its habitat, how it chooses and constructs a nest, how it nests, and how it reacts to others after nesting. These and more are as telling about a monitor species as teeth. Yet you and others, seem to want to teach me that teeth are more important without including these. I fail to understand that, specially from someone with education. I understood the importand of teeth(development of teeth to meet prey types) I understood that many decades ago, but do you understand the importance of the behaviors I mentioned, of course those are only a few examples of what I experience on a daily basis.

Then you said,Success should not just be measured solely in accordance with fastest maturation and growth. Understandably, you measure success in that manner, since that is what you strive for. It is your business to breed captive reptiles, so faster growth and maturation is to your benefit and financial gain; however, it does not lead necessarily lead to greater longevity in Varanus species. To the contrary, accelerated growth rates and maturation have been shown to shorten the longevity of many types of reptiles, most notably Boids. If your experience shows differently, please publish your results! It would be a first in reptile husbandry.

This paragraph contains a false train of thought. Its seems that you are totally refusing that paradigm shift you mentioned.
I use the term and its wide meanings, "Life events" to discribe success, I have used this term for a decade now. You see, life events(hatching, growth, reproduction, old age, death) includes what all wild monitors strive for. It also includes what it takes for monitors to exsist, both in nature and in captivity.

You also state, I do this to sell monitors for a living, this too is total error and misconception on your part. Sir, you are talking without investigating, and that makes you a poor academic, or biologist, or keeper, whatever you are. It matters little to the outcome of some offspring, what matters is the life events their parents expressed. By the way, what would you have me do with all the offspring, give them away, hahahahahaha.

What is surprising is, I am a varanid newbie, yet with my heavy production, fast growth, etc(your paradigm) I have already approached and exceeded many longevity records with my captives, how odd is that. What does that say about your thoughts?

About longevity, I find this term is very naive. It merely means the lenght of time an individual is alive. To me thats sad. If you researched the animals that set longevity records, you may find that the vast majority of them, did not achieve life events, most are males, most are kept without choice of metabolism. That is, they lived a very long half alive exsistance. Also, longevity records are the exception not the normal. Why not concern ourselves with the normal? Also, why aren't any longevity records set by female varanids?

What would be more important is, if the term longevity had one adjective, that is, "functional". A functional lifespan", would be very important to me. I think now that we can allow life events, the term longevity should no longer be important, and be replaced with functional lifespan. Why isn't this included in any books, any what so ever?

I have a few questions for you, with the above in mind, how long is a functional lifespan? for any species, wild ones? captive ones? individuals? species?. Wow, it seems this important area has been totally overlooked, why?

Here is some food for thought, this is above and beyond the old, I have bred this and that to this many generations.

I have a 14 year old ackie. I hatched it.(shes a great great grandmother)
I have a 14 year old flavi, was brought here as an adult(hes a great great grandfather)
I have a lacie that I tracked back 21 years, hes healthy as can be,(hes a great great grandfather).
I have a argus/flavi cross, thats 10 years old and is gravid on her 60th clutch, name any reptile that has done that? (she is also a great great grandmother)
I have a riverbanks zoo, retired female gouldi, that laid 20 clutches in her first two years for me. that was 6 years ago, she is gravid now and still alive(she is a great great grandmother)

It seems your in error on what you think rapid growth and reproduction does to a individual. See what happens when reseachers fail to research.

Have I lost monitors, yes sir. What I learned(aren't we suppose to learn) is keepers errors kill monitors, not their life events. This is something you should learn, thank you, FR

P.S. If you read my post, I recomend a basic diet to newbies, so they can rely on it, that way, they can be concerned with the real problems of keeping monitors, all the rest.

P.P.S. If you really did have experience, you would understand, varanids contain two main problems to overcome in captivity, one is socialization, and the other is nesting. Once real conditions are met, diet is not a problem. They can survive for a very long time, even on a very poor diet, they are indeed survivors.

To respond to both posts (excuse any incoherency as it is after midnight here in the Kingdom):

Concerning my writing style, it is only the use of proper English; the separation of ideas demands the use of a new paragraph, as it does in most other languages, at least the six that I have learned. Rules of writing on a topic or writing a paper also dictate that you must bind your ideas together or it is ineffective. It may also have to do with the fact that I teach English and German part time.

As to the statement “I am not just an academic,” “just” is meant as “not only.”

No, I do not know who you are; I took what you wrote in posts and assumed that you were telling the truth. Sometimes I am gullible in that respect.

I never tried or desired to breed monitors or any other species of reptiles. My interest has been solely the individual species and its observation. That being said, I do desire in the future, now that I no longer have to constantly deploy around the world, to breed my pair of V. bengalensis nebulosus, which are disappearing from this part of the world much too quickly. By the way, I do like your term “life events” and agree that observation of all “life events” is important to the overall understanding of species. I just never looked at it that way before.

I believe Samsun asked about the references concerning accelerated growth and maturation. The one that first came to mind concerning Boids were Richard A. Ross M.D., M.P.H. and Gerald Marzec’s writings from the Institute for Herpetological Research. There are also many others concerning problems that tortoises suffer when artificially accelerated growth rates are introduced; those are far too numerous and much too easy to track down. If you want more examples of other reptiles, I am sure that I can find them for you. Those were the only ones that popped inside of my head right away.

Back to “life events,” yes, I took that part out of context, if that is what you were referring to, as well as that is what you do for your living; however, in another recent post (investigation), you did say it was your business. (Business is commercial activity engaged in as a means of livelihood) Business was your word, not mine. As far as what to do with the offspring, giving away is exactly what I intend to do with any V. bengalensis nebulosus offspring that mine produce. It will be part of a re-introduction of species program that I am hoping to establish here in coordination with the Thai Zoological Organization.

I did not question your success, only the one aspect, which you pointed out I took out of context anyway. I believe that I even applauded you on your reproductive efforts and if you are breaking longevity records, publish them, like I said, they would be a first. By the way, good point about the female Varanids. Longevity records generally state species type, but not always sex and also true that many were kept solitary.

As far as the “life events” are concerned, I never really looked at it in the way that you made your argument and you now have sold me on that aspect. Could that be a paradigm shift? I am definitely capable of changing my belief when presented with a logical argument. I would not look for your term “life events” in any publications in relation to a functional lifespan, not because it is not catchy, but deals with intangibles. Science is often cold in that respect.

Again, I applaud your success and wish you much success in the future. You also said that this success was arrived at with a staple diet, not a rodent only, bird only or insect only diet. Limited variety it is, but still variety. I agreed earlier that that is good advice to the new keeper until he learns more about his species. I offer a greater variety, which does offer more nutrients. Isn't that what this entire thread started with? As for Samsun’s comment on birds, I think that you can figure that one on your own; unfortunately there are people out there that I am sure you have met that never considered that. I am constantly talking to people here that have young Python molurus bivittatus and only feed them chicks.

Thank you again for posting.

Again with the divide and conquer(us yanks)

You said, Again, I applaud your success and wish you much success in the future. You also said that this success was arrived at with a staple diet, not a rodent only, bird only or insect only diet. Limited variety it is, but still variety. I agreed earlier that that is good advice to the new keeper until he learns more about his species. I offer a greater variety, which does offer more nutrients. Isn't that what this entire thread started with? As for Samsun’s comment on birds, I think that you can figure that one on your own; unfortunately there are people out there that I am sure you have met that never considered that. I am constantly talking to people here that have young Python molurus bivittatus and only feed them chicks.

I have experimented with diet, which a good researcher should do. As an example, the female thats 10 years old(I hatched her) and gravid on her 60th clutch, has been fed mice only her entire life. So with that in mind, what could be added by varing the diet that would help her increase her success? Consider, she is record setting.

I understand the use of a varied diet, its to cover the needs when any or all of the elements of the diet are not complete. Now consider, rodents, lab rats and mice, have been shown as a complete diet for hundreds and thousands of generations of captive snakes. It has also been shown to be complete with our monitors. To vary a complete diet with incomplete items, actually serves no purpose nutritionaly.

If you offer mental stimulation as an arguement, than you would have my agreement. It is here, I recomend giving monitors, "something new do investigate" But alas, the discussion was nutritional. And mice do the trick.

Thank you again, FR

Sorry about the delay. I had to make a trip to the National Zoo today, having promised to help acquire reptile care products for them. Here there is a severe shortage of UVB lighting, reptile vitamins and other reptile care products, i.e. medications specifically for reptiles and topical solutions.

Keeping in mind your success with Varanids, I will equate it with the multi-million dollar (probably billions of dollars over the years?) business of alligator and crocodile farming. They have 50 years of success worldwide with untold numbers of generations and offspring. Most (not all) farms around the world do this with chicken, only chicken and not even always whole chicken. I am sure that you would not recommend this diet with its calcium deficiency in comparison to mammals or turtles. They do not feed whole chickens in many programs. Success in this case is not only well documented, but out performs all other captive reptile breeding programs combined. Good diet? You can definitely make a case there for variety, but they are in it for business, not the welfare of the animals. Crocodiles are not Varanids, but they are both predators that feed on basically anything that they come across, including rotten carrion, but they both have nutritional needs.

Captive snakes: I have a Cylindrophis ruffus that should eat rodents (mice), but for some unknown reason will not eat any of its known prey items and is prey specific, eating only a single species of eel, Monopterus albus. I will agree that rodents are the diet of choice for most Boids; however, monitors are not Boids. Although snakes and monitors have similar digestive systems, to a certain degree, and both seem to have the ability to extract more out of their prey in the digestive process than most other reptiles, no snake has the ability to take on the variety of food that most monitors can handle (try feeding a snake canned food or rotten carrion). The only snakes that I have seen eating bits and pieces of different animals (chicken bones for example) and even trash (items that I feel would not be appropriate for this forum) was Boiga irregularis while I was in Guam and that was purely out of the need of survival, having eradicated all other prey species.

I like your idea of mental stimulation! Why did I not think of that? I also agree to that aspect. Monitors being the highly intelligent creatures they are, by reptile standards, can only benefit from mental stimulation, as long as that stimulation is not stress related.

Knowing that I can not convince you, no matter what, I have at least been mentally stimulated by our exchange and even we Homo sapiens need mental stimulation from time to time.

Thank you for the mental stimulation as well as exercising my mind by pulling out information that had been long forming cobwebs- the curse of storing information in the mind that is too often superfluous.

Cheers,

Michael

Hi Mikeal, In the begining of our nice thread, I mentioned theory vs. reality. You then mentioned that you are not one to wildly throw around theory. Yet, you are only basing your comments on theory. You are comparing crocs(in croc farms) to monitors, snakes to monitors, etc etc. When its already been clearly stated, that we(and others) have achieved superior success with a diet of mice(for larger varanid species). With that is mind, you seem to be searching and grabbing at straws to support your old fashioned paradigm, that you refuse to shift. Possibly and more accurately, you could and should compare a successful program that uses a varied diet to one with a base diet, that would be interesting and real.

Now heres the point, I never said, mice alone are perfect or best, or never did I recomend them to others as a sole diet. If you and others would bother to read my post, I said I recoment whole prey items. I then mention examples of superior success with a sole diet of mice. I can also mentions superior results with a sole diet of crickets with several species of odatria. With odatria, I rasied a single male ackie(Mt. Isa, morph) to 27 inches TL, in one year. In all aspects this monitor was perfect. Of course thats one example, I have applied this hundreds of times.

About applied knowledge, you must understand, that what I am saying is about results. In our case, hundreds and thousands of results. Even thought I am not a scientist(some academics say) I thought and was taught that science was based on two important things(as it pretains to this subject), being pramatic(to question) and testing and achieving repeatable results. This we have done over and over and over. Therefore, our comments are results of tests and applied husbandry. That is in fact, reality. They are not from investigation of croc farms(which I did) and find it nice that you did investigate them too. I found that the preferred rasie up diet in croc farms was chicken necks and heads, it worked, was cheap, and in the country of investigation, a byproduct that was not in high demand. But I did not use that information in our programs. The reason is clear, I was not interested in the cheapest diet, just a realible diet. As I mentioned, lab mice are easily obtained, easily stored, not exactly cheap, but work solidly with a wide range of normal conditions. Sir, this is not theory, or comparsion its results.

Now back to applied knowledge, as you understand, the level of understanding and methods is a constantly changing thing. It should constantly become better and better as we learn. The problem with varanid husbandry is, its been stuck in the dark ages without progress for decades, thanks to many former and current academics and varaphiles. They constantly publish theory and fodder, that has no bearing to reality. That is, they have no results for actual applied husbandry. They simply live by old wifes tails and old paradigms, and I assume will do so until they die of old age. Of course as a human, you do understand that is relatively normal. Its also normal that the squeaky wheel makes lots and lots of noise and draws attention.

Which brings up a real concern. Why not ask for and look at results, why listen to squeaky wheels, when there are successful longterm results. These results are to be had from various people, in various countries. To be sure, these different programs have slight differences and lots of common ground. Its the researchers task to sort out, which is which.

What seems to be very very important here, is exactly why I recomend a simple straitforward diet. You said, you want to breed clouded monitors, you want to do a release program to re-establish them in certain parts of their range. If this is true, and I will believe this is your intend. You are in the same position as the other newbies. You are in absolute need of gaining as many solid reliable parts of husbandry as you can. So you can work or the real problems. Diet is not a messy problem. its basic and understood, like your croc farms. It does matter if the diet is romantic it merely has to function until you release the offspring. If your really going to do this, you are in absolutely need of a diet thats reliable and not tricky, even if both function the same. In this way, a release program and a commerical program are exactly the same.

You do understand, it always boils down to the humans, us humans will have a far better chance of success if its simple, then if its complicated. So if all things are even close to equal. In a large program its even more important that parts of husbandry are simple. Please keep in mind, the diet of mice as shown to be superior, and not equal. But that is not important. Whats important is longterm application.

I hope you can follow my screwball brain, because if you did, you would see, its leading you to this, results are not theory, they may not be exactly about the animal in question, results are simply about application. If you do not do something, it will not reveal results, its not about knowledge or theory. ITs about the actual doing or applying of the something. This is were the academics and others who offer old paradigm theories fail. They do not apply it, therefore have no results, therefore have to stay in a world of theory.

Now if you would indulge me. In the past we had huge discussions like this. With bigtime academics such as Sam Sweet, a well known varanid researcher. The reason I bring this up is simple, his papers are theory, the reason they are theory is, they are never tested or applied. Of course when I mentioned this to him, he would argue that, of course they were tested, we checked and double checked the math. Do you see the problem? Monitors are not math(yet) to test them you need to apply the princples of your paper and see if it actually works. Of course this is not done. They go to an area, take data, arrange it in a pre-determined fashion, and leave never to come back. I also asked do other colonies, other areas, other habitats preform in the same manner, reflect this same structure. Of course, this was never answered as it would reflect poorly on the author.

How this relates to you, the study was about social structure and population dynamics. The problem with monitors is, they have many different of the above, they change as they age, the young do one thing, then grow into doing something else, then as they grow old, get very solitary and non reproductive. Does this sound strange to you, its about what all animals do. So did he investigate different age groups, different colonies, different locals, no. How this relates to you is, you are going to be faced with these problems, period. There will be no escaping these problems. You will have to learn to master and control your monitors in groups, pairs, breeders, youth, etc. What you do, may or may not reflect what happens in nature, the reason is so simple, its not going to be in nature, at least not at first. If you do not master the captivity part, there will be no second, in nature part. This is the reality and not theory. You have to do step one, to get to step two. If you do not achieve suitable results, there will be no step two, or three or in the end, releasing and establishing of clouded monitors.

With the above said, diet is not a stumbling block is simple and easy to overcome, where the problems will be is in behavior. This will be very difficult. The reasons are clear, in order to reproduce, they have to behave. You cannot breed them alone, they have to become social or socialized, or accustomed, to be with and positively react to eachother. Dead monitors do not reproduce.

Now back to the thread, for newbies to get past being newbies, they need reliable information to start with. Its very hard to be a newbie on quicksand, with nothing solid or reliable. Don't you think. Cheers mate, FR

This is a great thread, as many of paralleled nature before it have been. It seems likely that many will miss (and are missing) the greater implications of it on behalf of the same misconceptions that have plagued the givers of captive diet adaptations for many years.

Nutritional needs are complicated, but break down most simply into mandatory amounts of glycogen and glucose (sugars) used for metabolism and other activities plus minerals and vitamins that support other systemic functions. The most interesting thing about this in relation to animal behavior is how they go about achieving the precursors (food) for those molecules.

Most on this forum seem to be in agreement that monitors are opportunists when it comes to diet. The genesis of this thread is with regards to that, but, downplaying any absolute necessity for varied diet. Monitors across the genus (or genera) seem universal in eating almost any animal they come across that might fit down the hatch. The group has adapted in accordance with being able to swing this. The first monitors were dietary opportunists, or they were not. Then as years progressed, they stayed dietary opportunists or they changed to become dietary opportunists. Either way, their systems are presently honed to achieve their nutritional requirements from many different organisms. Although there are many different monitor ecomorphs, they all still eat whatever is available to them (at least insofar as captives show). Remember, dietary opportunists are just dietary generalists that are very good at what they do whether they’re specialized in other ways or not.

The confusion for most seems to be coming from the angle, this variety is where the required nutrition comes from. Variety does not equal the nutrition monitors or most other successful dietary opportunists need, it only equals the various channels through which those nutritional needs can be met, i.e., whole prey (or mostly-whole prey). To feed many different kinds of (correct) channels will do nothing more for the animal’s metabolism than to feed one successful channel, because the molecular building blocks for energy units and fat reserves “taste” the same whether they come from this prey or that. As it also seems accepted that most similar, properly-nourished whole prey items can secure necessary vitamin/mineral complexes for most large carnivorous lizards (as they do for snakes), there should be little concern for variety on behalf of this.

Where the inclining for all of these other captive diet analogies originate, I scratch my head. Most tortoise species are not dietary opportunists. Most are specialized feeders on a relatively few certain plant species within their respective native ranges that most closely fit the bill for proper water/mineral balance, although the species of plants can change accordingly throughout the various seasons (at least in the well-studied arid-environ Gopherus, Psammobates, and Geochelone(Chelonoidea) chilensis complex). More than one plant species have to be utilized because, unlike with whole-animal foods, a single whole-plant food doesn’t normally contain all vitamins and minerals (or appropriate amounts) necessary for proper metabolism. Captive specimens of all tortoise species are supported on pseudo-diets such as kale, mustard greens, red-leaf lettuce and/or Mazuri chow. That is nothing other than a simple lab mouse diet analogy. Similar nutritional pathways are being met by “whole,” yet rather unnatural, fodder. The crocodile analogy was a direct point as to sturdy, dietarily opportunistic reptiles needing only baseline nutrition sources to forward great success. This example does not exactly encourage one to believe cosmopolitan diets are needed by opportunists for proper nutrition.

It seems that some of us don’t want to consider that these animals are successful because of the resourcefulness a cosmopolitan diet allows for, rather than the cosmopolitan diet being what gives the animals nutritional (and thus overall) success. Failure to understand this is likely stemmed from a poor ability to use common sense when it comes to weighing for application the usefulness of natural history data. Hopefully, this reasoning might make the thread more accessible to some. Thanks.

np

Thats the very points some of us are trying to get across.

The problem I have is not that end of the equation(front end), its the other end. While we can dwell forth and back, with all those fancy words that most do not understand. Its only half the equation. In math, thats half of the equation, which equals whats on the other side of the equal sign, the results.

Whats missing in all this theory is the results, no matter what the monitor is or was or why it is or was, superior success has been achieved with a solely mouse or solely cricket diet. If this was unknown then the forumla would be important, but now that there are repeatable results, it makes the forumla not so important.

Your discription was good and needed, but, all that should be required is solid results, which has been shown for years now.

I guess the reality of this is, most do not care if it actually works, they care more about the theory and thinking, Hey? Thanks and cheers, FR

Valid points! Many keepers have little knowledge of physiology, biology and chemistry (most just like monitors because they are interesting/fascinating). What many who do not understand and should understand is that the amounts of glycogen, glucose, and to a greater degree vitamins and minerals that can be extracted differ with prey items. A couple of examples of this are the much higher Vitamin D3 levels in fish/ diurnal basking lizards and higher calcium levels in crustaceans. Yes, you are correct that monitors have a great ability to extract what they need out of the items that they come across, similar to snakes and crocodilians in that respect, but we need to try to do better for those monitors kept in captivity than provide the minimum.

This thread started well enough, but seems to be turning in circles. Thank you for the scratching your head comment; it made me think about it again and see we that it has been going back and forth for no reason because there is agreement: whole prey items not from a single item is best. The crocodile analogy did not support either point of view at all; it was just to show that a terrible diet can also achieve results and in that example, outstanding results, but one could argue that properly fed crocodilians would produce better results; however that is not cost effective. The crocodile analogy did well to advance your argument.

Off the topic of monitors, I agree on the comments about the tortoises. Many things are to be considered, researched and analyzed when formulating a diet for such specialized feeders (what they get from their specialized diet vs. content of the replacement diet), especially when most of the tried and true plant matter is not available (in tropical climates) for a pseudo-diet . Admittedly, because of those reasons you stated, a good tortoise diet is far more complicated than a Varanus diet. I had a most difficult time finding out what the local plants here contained nutritionally for my different Geochelone sp.

To Frank: Snakes to monitors was a retort to your comparisons, I just took it further with the comparison of crocodilians and monitors, which did nothing to advance either of our points, only to show a terrible diet showing results and “life events.” I am happy to report that the crocodiles here are fed better than just chicken necks and heads. I spent much time at an alligator farm near where I grew up and investigation of the local crocodile farming on my part was not in relation to monitors, but the plight of Crocodylus siamensis, which is close to extinction in favor of its hybrid C. siamensis X porosus. There will be a most difficult time trying to convince the government of a reintroduction program in their favor, even though there had never been a documented attack when they were in the wild!

I have mentioned many times that you should have your results published. Bear in mind that without this you are doing yourself a disservice (credibility) and a disservice to those that are keeping monitors as well as the monitors being kept in captivity. It would serve as an important document for people to consider when they raise the subject of breeding themselves. Remember that publication means editorial review. There will be those that agree and those that disagree. Anyone can post what success they have on the internet and I am not questioning your success, but without publication, it is as though it never happened or existed. Publications avail the information for everyone forever, unlike the internet, where the threads of this forum will disappear in a couple of months time.

Concerning publications, yes, the level of understanding and methods are constantly changing. Please consider this in your personal editorial review of publications. With this in mind, a publication’s validity does not always stand the test of time because of this change, whether they are taxonomic in nature or revelations of new practices or methods. To do this would be to discredit the greats that laid the foundation for our understanding of monitors. It is because of this foundation we have come this far in the knowledge of Varanus, not in spite of it.

As for Sam Sweet, he has published his findings. They are well supported and his research has a solid foundation. As you said, monitors are not numbers and anyone who has kept monitors knows every monitor is an individual: with different behavior, likes, dislikes, compatibility and non-compatibility issues. I could hardly call the analyzing and computation of hard data (real events) as theory, if you are referring to theory as speculation.

To my future breeding of Clouded Monitors, I will let you and others know the results. No foreseeable problems, they have the “home field advantage” here. All of their environmental factors are naturally provided for, no compatibility issues and a sound diet.

Your comment: “Now heres the point, I never said, mice alone are perfect or best, or never did I recomend them to others as a sole diet. If you and others would bother to read my post, I said I recoment whole prey items.” – 100% agreement and have agreed through the entire thread!

I am not quite as stubborn as this thread and the other thread might suggest. I received an outstanding tip for my V. dumerilii that I have implemented in the short time that I have been looking at forums and have also received great information that I used for the care of my Geochelone sp. I am sure we will find more agreement in the future.

I think that we can ALL concur that the most important factor is the use of fresh whole prey diets for our monitors that does not come from a single source (my apologies to the canned monitor food industry). Can we end this thread on that note?

Cheers,

Michael

that's not really the note upon which to end, since it's ignoring what I was trying to get across. Although we don't know the molecular nutritional requirements well enough for most captive reptile species, we can see results (what started this thread) in monitors, crocs, dozens of snake species, not yet as many turtles since the darn generation turnover rate is rather slow. Nutrition-based results are positive or negative. Animals reproduce and carry on, if the positive is achieved.

If you want to claim that by feeding monitors rabbits or snakes on occasion to stimulate a more vicious feeding response, fine. But, that's not nutritional. That's behavioral (this was already discussed in your post above). That is eliciting a different (not better, simply different) natural behavior than with, say, a mouse, which the monitor has learned is quite easy to dispatch, thus, less effort is invested. Reptiles are the kings of conservatism, recall.

One more thought, to quote an idea you shared with hopes of possibly inflicting a different take on your part...

"The crocodile analogy did not support either point of view at all; it was just to show that a terrible diet can also achieve results and in that example, outstanding results, but one could argue that properly fed crocodilians would produce better results; however that is not cost effective."

You're refusing to budge here. The crocs that breed in captive environs everywhere are detracting from your theory that variety is such a big plus for captive reptiles. Not only that, but, captivity. Captivity. Captivity, begets a necessity for practicality. Finances are a huge component of projecting practicality, whether it's farming, breeding for hobbyist consumers, or repatriation/release program breeding. Do most reptile restocking programs feed their inkeeps various wildcaught prey or purchased items? (Hint, it's the latter almost always). So, even if a varied diet (i.e., buying less food products from more food sources) did provide better numerical results with regards to offspring (not proven in crocs nor monitors), that would not prove, in your words, cost effective. That means, poorer results. Don't you agree? If something (single whole-prey diet) has worked for many terms (generations), why question the maintenance regime? Thanks.

If there is any useful in formation here (and I know there is), I sure do not understand it but then I guess I misunderstood Franks original post also...

so, back to the shadows for me.

>>This is a great thread, as many of paralleled nature before it have been. It seems likely that many will miss (and are missing) the greater implications of it on behalf of the same misconceptions that have plagued the givers of captive diet adaptations for many years.
>>
>>Nutritional needs are complicated, but break down most simply into mandatory amounts of glycogen and glucose (sugars) used for metabolism and other activities plus minerals and vitamins that support other systemic functions. The most interesting thing about this in relation to animal behavior is how they go about achieving the precursors (food) for those molecules.
>>
>>Most on this forum seem to be in agreement that monitors are opportunists when it comes to diet. The genesis of this thread is with regards to that, but, downplaying any absolute necessity for varied diet. Monitors across the genus (or genera) seem universal in eating almost any animal they come across that might fit down the hatch. The group has adapted in accordance with being able to swing this. The first monitors were dietary opportunists, or they were not. Then as years progressed, they stayed dietary opportunists or they changed to become dietary opportunists. Either way, their systems are presently honed to achieve their nutritional requirements from many different organisms. Although there are many different monitor ecomorphs, they all still eat whatever is available to them (at least insofar as captives show). Remember, dietary opportunists are just dietary generalists that are very good at what they do whether they’re specialized in other ways or not.
>>
>>The confusion for most seems to be coming from the angle, this variety is where the required nutrition comes from. Variety does not equal the nutrition monitors or most other successful dietary opportunists need, it only equals the various channels through which those nutritional needs can be met, i.e., whole prey (or mostly-whole prey). To feed many different kinds of (correct) channels will do nothing more for the animal’s metabolism than to feed one successful channel, because the molecular building blocks for energy units and fat reserves “taste” the same whether they come from this prey or that. As it also seems accepted that most similar, properly-nourished whole prey items can secure necessary vitamin/mineral complexes for most large carnivorous lizards (as they do for snakes), there should be little concern for variety on behalf of this.
>>
>>Where the inclining for all of these other captive diet analogies originate, I scratch my head. Most tortoise species are not dietary opportunists. Most are specialized feeders on a relatively few certain plant species within their respective native ranges that most closely fit the bill for proper water/mineral balance, although the species of plants can change accordingly throughout the various seasons (at least in the well-studied arid-environ Gopherus, Psammobates, and Geochelone(Chelonoidea) chilensis complex). More than one plant species have to be utilized because, unlike with whole-animal foods, a single whole-plant food doesn’t normally contain all vitamins and minerals (or appropriate amounts) necessary for proper metabolism. Captive specimens of all tortoise species are supported on pseudo-diets such as kale, mustard greens, red-leaf lettuce and/or Mazuri chow. That is nothing other than a simple lab mouse diet analogy. Similar nutritional pathways are being met by “whole,” yet rather unnatural, fodder. The crocodile analogy was a direct point as to sturdy, dietarily opportunistic reptiles needing only baseline nutrition sources to forward great success. This example does not exactly encourage one to believe cosmopolitan diets are needed by opportunists for proper nutrition.
>>
>>It seems that some of us don’t want to consider that these animals are successful because of the resourcefulness a cosmopolitan diet allows for, rather than the cosmopolitan diet being what gives the animals nutritional (and thus overall) success. Failure to understand this is likely stemmed from a poor ability to use common sense when it comes to weighing for application the usefulness of natural history data. Hopefully, this reasoning might make the thread more accessible to some. Thanks.
-----
Ed @ Tortoise Keepers
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

It has been said that true intelligence is the ability to make the complex appear simple, and not vice-versa. Too many posters here make a concerted effort to sound "scientific," which fosters confusion.

It's grandiloquence at its finest.

Just read between the lines.
-----
I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

- Jack Handey

Heh heh, for those who practice shotgun diets for failure to construct effective adaptations (yes, tortoises here), it means a lack of understanding on some level is present, be it about the types of plants the animals eat in the wild or the species' base nutritional requirements. This is a prevalent case. None of us knows exactly what the animals need, nutritionally, monitors, tortoises, crocs, any of them. We can, however, see which diets provide positive outcomes, and that is what this thread is about.

Much as with monitors, a captive-adapted improv-diet has proven successful with many tortoises (although, again, because of general differences between a veggie diet and whole-animal diet, you can't give it all to torts in a single package). I don't know if you've bred your animals, past the first generation, second, etc. Many people have. Not as many as with monitors, since monitors have more rapid generation turnovers than do tortoises. Just the same, captive improv-diets have proven successful for many species in captivity. Those are the species in which we were able to approximate the diet closely enough to meet the needs (complete nutrition and the right taste, texture, etc. with which to get the first need into the animal), much like mice for monitors that eat some rodents in the wild, or crickets for monitors that eat insects in the wild. The others, such as all of those South African itty-bitty species (tortoises again) are gone from the trade (virtually) because we couldn't approximate the diet (among other variables) in time.

The explanation I gave was not scientific and was not meant to sound as such. Contrarily, it was supposed to serve as a simplification. It was, as already stated in one response, the other half of the equation. It was the hard half. The original post was stressing the easy half (the results), as that poster has many times before. Why?, everyone asks. Everyone wanted calculations as to why a certain diet (mice or crickets) should work effectively. I thought that by summarizing the reason for such reasoning, some might see the light. By recessing into the shadows, how will you see the light? You have to want to get something out of the exchange. That's why anyone ever clicked on the forum icon here in the first place, right? All the best.

(Somehow I get the feeling he's calling me stupid)

Are you trying to tell me I don't understand the animals I keep and that I'm suggesting a varied diet to compensate for that short coming?

I think I'm going to quit while I'm ahead. I'm definately out of my element here.

btw... i'm looking for usable information and the exchange of such.

Yes, you do provide that but it requires too much thought for my taste.

>>Heh heh, for those who practice shotgun diets for failure to construct effective adaptations (yes, tortoises here), it means a lack of understanding on some level is present, be it about the types of plants the animals eat in the wild or the species' base nutritional requirements. This is a prevalent case. None of us knows exactly what the animals need, nutritionally, monitors, tortoises, crocs, any of them. We can, however, see which diets provide positive outcomes, and that is what this thread is about.
>>
>>Much as with monitors, a captive-adapted improv-diet has proven successful with many tortoises (although, again, because of general differences between a veggie diet and whole-animal diet, you can't give it all to torts in a single package). I don't know if you've bred your animals, past the first generation, second, etc. Many people have. Not as many as with monitors, since monitors have more rapid generation turnovers than do tortoises. Just the same, captive improv-diets have proven successful for many species in captivity. Those are the species in which we were able to approximate the diet closely enough to meet the needs (complete nutrition and the right taste, texture, etc. with which to get the first need into the animal), much like mice for monitors that eat some rodents in the wild, or crickets for monitors that eat insects in the wild. The others, such as all of those South African itty-bitty species (tortoises again) are gone from the trade (virtually) because we couldn't approximate the diet (among other variables) in time.
>>
>>The explanation I gave was not scientific and was not meant to sound as such. Contrarily, it was supposed to serve as a simplification. It was, as already stated in one response, the other half of the equation. It was the hard half. The original post was stressing the easy half (the results), as that poster has many times before. Why?, everyone asks. Everyone wanted calculations as to why a certain diet (mice or crickets) should work effectively. I thought that by summarizing the reason for such reasoning, some might see the light. By recessing into the shadows, how will you see the light? You have to want to get something out of the exchange. That's why anyone ever clicked on the forum icon here in the first place, right? All the best.
-----
Ed @ Tortoise Keepers
Trying to keep the fun in Chelonian care

I'm not trying to call you anything. Just because someone attempts to hold a conversation (including giving explanations to assist what he/she says) does not mean the person is attempting to imply something about the other individual's persona or knowledge.

I didn't say you don't understand your animals. I was commenting based upon what you had already claimed above, which was

"So... the key term among tortoise/turtle keepers for the last few years has been 'variety' because we really don't know their requirements totally."

That doesn't seem to imply the utmost of understanding, but, sorry if I mistook what you were getting at.

You can't expect everyone's writing style to meet your desires for optimal intake. I certainly don't expect everyone to like the way I write (wordy) but I would appreciate the reader attempting to understand (to agree or disagree) since I do take the time to write it at all. If not, fine, as stated in the first line of this thread, it's a free country. But, you'll always have handicapped understandings if you preemptively determine how much thought you intend to invest into any factor for understanding. I hope that didn't require too much thought of you (grin). Good terms with you intended, till next time.