The Savannah Monitor Diet thread..

[infernalis]

I started this thread and moved the posts here so we can discuss and debate Savannah Monitor diet in Captivity and the wild.

[BarelyBreathing]

As Wayne said, no more ground beef. Savannah monitors are primarily insectivores. Set up a roach colony, add a bunch of night crawlers to his 2 ft of substrate, give him crickets, snails, slugs, crayfish, organic shrimp, freshwater crabs and millipedes.

Also, never ever ever force handle a monitor. If his enclosure is set up correctly, he will never have to be taken out to bathe. Bathing a monitor is pretty much pointless.

How is he set up?

[Gregg M]

You do not want to feed your savannah only inverts. It would not be a good diet for them especially when they reach adulthood. You NEED to add rodents to their diet. Half of their captive diet should consist of about 50% rodents 50% inverts.

Also, in general, most varanids will not eat millipedes. Many species can be dangerous to add as a food item When something tries to eat a millipede some species will release a poision in both gas and liquid form. That poison is cyanide. Some species may be fine to feed but how do you know what species it is? Better off not risking it.

[BarelyBreathing]

You do not want to feed your savannah only inverts. It would not be a good diet for them especially when they reach adulthood. You NEED to add rodents to their diet. Half of their captive diet should consist of about 50% rodents 50% inverts.

Also, in general, most varanids will not eat millipedes. Many species can be dangerous to add as a food item When something tries to eat a millipede some species will release a poision in both gas and liquid form. That poison is cyanide. Some species may be fine to feed but how do you know what species it is? Better off not risking it.


Yeah, because clearly no wild savannah monitors ever make it to adulthood. :rollseyes:

[Pirarucu]

Apparently, yes it does. Here's my take on it. Instead of each keeper posting their own philosophy, why don't we just say "In the wild they eat almost exclusively insects but some people say it's better to feed rodents too." and let the person make their own choice on which they believe is the healthier diet?

Here's my take on it: I would not feed them strictly bugs, but I would say it's perfectly possible to do so and keep up with their energy needs. They meet their energy needs in the wild living on a diet of bugs, and if I had to guess I'd say their energy needs are higher out there than they are in captivity... "They don't get as big in the wild eating bugs" is a bit of a silly argument to me. They don't get as big in the wild because it's harder to get food, not because of the type of food. Give them enough bugs and I'm positive they'll do fine.

Now, as I stated, I would not feed them only bugs, but I would not feed 50% rodents either. That seems excessive to me. Now if we were talking birds, I may well feed them more of them, since they are lower in fat. I very much like the idea of feeding quail or chicks..

[Pirarucu]

As far as not feeding millipedes, wasn't there a theory about them rolling millipedes on the ground using their bottom jaw to encourage the millipedes to release their toxins? I'm not saying feed millipedes if you're not sure they won't hurt them, but I'm curious if anyone else has heard about them doing that. I saw a video of a Sav doing it to I think a hornworm, perhaps under the impression it was a millipede?

[infernalis]

As far as not feeding millipedes, wasn't there a theory about them rolling millipedes on the ground using their bottom jaw to encourage the millipedes to release their toxins? I'm not saying feed millipedes if you're not sure they won't hurt them, but I'm curious if anyone else has heard about them doing that. I saw a video of a Sav doing it to I think a hornworm, perhaps under the impression it was a millipede?

Right, but it has been brought up that evolution has "shaped" Savannah Monitors to deal with African millipede toxins, however different species of millipede produce different toxin chemistry, and the Savannah Monitor is more than likely ill equipped to handle foreign toxins from species they normally do not consume.

With this question in mind, I will pass on offering millipedes.

[Pirarucu]

Right, but it has been brought up that evolution has "shaped" Savannah Monitors to deal with African millipede toxins, however different species of millipede produce different toxin chemistry, and the Savannah Monitor is more than likely ill equipped to handle foreign toxins from species they normally do not consume.

With this question in mind, I will pass on offering millipedes.Oh I agree, I would never offer millipedes that they may not be capable of dealing with, the only ones I would ever feed would be the ones they consume regularly in the wild. I was just curious if anyone else has observed or heard of that behavior.

[Gregg M]

Yeah, because clearly no wild savannah monitors ever make it to adulthood. :rollseyes:

We do not and can not offer the same diet they get in the wild. The insects are different. they eat land snails which we can not get. The amount the eat daily when time are good is more than we can offer. This is not the wilds of Africa, it is captivity. It is stupid to even bring up "the wild diet" when we are talking about a reptile that will be living in someones house. THEY NEED MICE IN THEIR DIET IN CAPTIVITY. Stop trying to get people over to your invert only crap. All you are doing is setting the new owner up for failure.

[Jay]

Facts from where bb, cite your sources please.

[varanus_mad]

We do not and can not offer the same diet they get in the wild. The insects are different. they eat land snails which we can not get. The amount the eat daily when time are good is more than we can offer. This is not the wilds of Africa, it is captivity. It is stupid to even bring up "the wild diet" when we are talking about a reptile that will be living in someones house. THEY NEED MICE IN THEIR DIET IN CAPTIVITY. Stop trying to get people over to your invert only crap. All you are doing is setting the new owner up for failure.

Agreed.

Wild inverts in africa far exceed what we have available in both size and quantity availability.

[BarelyBreathing]

So instead of trying to simulate it you go completely out in left field and offer food that is nothing like their natural diets?

[StudentoReptile]

To each his own. Stop bickering over it. Sheesh.

Take it to the monitor discussion thread if you want to debate it til kingdom come.

[Toronto1977]

Yeah, I think the ignore option is in order here lol.

[Gregg M]

So instead of trying to simulate it you go completely out in left field and offer food that is nothing like their natural diets?

What? you mean like shrimp and crabs? Seriously. those items do not simulate anything they eat in the wild.

Again this is not the wild. In the wild, conditions are harsh, food can be scarce at certain parts of the year. We do not want to simulate any of that. We want to improve on those conditions in captivity. This includes offering a healthy, nutritious diet that may consist of more rodents. I can tell you with 100% certainty that they do not eat shrimp or crabs in the wild. That is for sure.

The fact is, savannahs have been foud to consume rodents and other mammals in the wild as well as insects, arachnids, land snails, and numerous other inverts.

You can not deny that even in the wild, rodents do in fact make of some % of their diet. I also believe that in areas over their range and even over the season, their diet will vary depending on what in available and abundant. Again, shrimp and crabs will not be on the menu.

You are NOT going completely out into left field by offering rodents as part of their diet. You are simply offering them what is available, healthy, and full of what they need in order to thrive in captivity. This includes a varied diet of inverts and rodents. Not one or the other.

I have raise many monitors from hatchling to adulthood on rodents and inverts. I am sure my result speak much louder than your assuptions.

[Pirarucu]

See here is where I have an issue with this debate: People have started banging on about how rodents are now necessary, because they're "improving" natural conditions. Who's to say they are an improvement? They're easier for us, certainly, but what exactly makes them so much better? That's a question I have never heard an answer to.

I have heard the argument that it's impossible to support a Savannah Monitor on only inverts, and to that I'm afraid I will have to say BS. It clearly works for them in the wild, they will not "suffer" in captivity. It's not hard to supply the amount they need, am I the only one who has heard of a roach colony? Simply get a colony of hissers going and eventually they'll get to the point that a few thousand are born each day, and you end up having to split your colony so you aren't overrun. If you have a big colony, you can keep a Savannah Monitor supported with no problem.

I think that if anyone thinks that they know better than millions of years of evolution, they're kidding themselves. If you want to improve on nature, why not just replicate nature and cut out the negatives? No predators, no dry season, no shortage of parasite-free, gut loaded, healthy bugs as opposed to wild prey items, hotter temperatures made available, the list goes on and on. Those are ways to improve the natural environment, and it's ridiculous to think that magically you have thought of something nature has not.

Now, I am not against feeding rodents to Savannah Monitors, I believe they can be fed and may be beneficial, but I don't buy into them being necessary or needing to make up most of their diet.
I would think that they should be fed to the point where the monitor has a healthy reserve of fat in it's tail, and no more than that.

As for them eating them in the wild, I'm sure they would, if they stumbled upon one. But if they targeted rodents, their diet would be rodents. They would be perfectly capable of outcompeting other rodent-eating species. The simple fact is that they do not spend their time and energy actively searching for rodents in the wild, that much is clear.

[varanus_mad]

See here is where I have an issue with this debate: People have started banging on about how rodents are now necessary, because they're "improving" natural conditions. Who's to say they are an improvement? They're easier for us, certainly, but what exactly makes them so much better? That's a question I have never heard an answer to.

I have heard the argument that it's impossible to support a Savannah Monitor on only inverts, and to that I'm afraid I will have to say BS. It clearly works for them in the wild, they will not "suffer" in captivity. It's not hard to supply the amount they need, am I the only one who has heard of a roach colony? Simply get a colony of hissers going and eventually they'll get to the point that a few thousand are born each day, and you end up having to split your colony so you aren't overrun. If you have a big colony, you can keep a Savannah Monitor supported with no problem.

I think that if anyone thinks that they know better than millions of years of evolution, they're kidding themselves. If you want to improve on nature, why not just replicate nature and cut out the negatives? No predators, no dry season, no shortage of parasite-free, gut loaded, healthy bugs as opposed to wild prey items, hotter temperatures made available, the list goes on and on. Those are ways to improve the natural environment, and it's ridiculous to think that magically you have thought of something nature has not.

Now, I am not against feeding rodents to Savannah Monitors, I believe they can be fed and may be beneficial, but I don't buy into them being necessary or needing to make up most of their diet.
I would think that they should be fed to the point where the monitor has a healthy reserve of fat in it's tail, and no more than that.

As for them eating them in the wild, I'm sure they would, if they stumbled upon one. But if they targeted rodents, their diet would be rodents. They would be perfectly capable of outcompeting other rodent-eating species. The simple fact is that they do not spend their time and energy actively searching for rodents in the wild, that much is clear.

Go do it then...

Im yet to see anyone breed boscs using just inverts soley which is where my issue with not feeding rodents lies...

[infernalis]

On thing I do know, in the quest to avoid rodents, I have seen people suggest some pretty off the wall stuff..

and to what end?

I tried to avoid rodents with Chomper, and all I did was feed him a bunch of seafood items treated with phosphates.

at least, if nothing else.. rodents are a clean chemical free food source that no one (as of yet) can show one single necropsy report that proves without a doubt that rodents were the cause of the lizard's demise.

[varanus_mad]

On thing I do know, in the quest to avoid rodents, I have seen people suggest some pretty off the wall stuff..

and to what end?

I tried to avoid rodents with Chomper, and all I did was feed him a bunch of seafood items treated with phosphates.

at least, if nothing else.. rodents are a clean chemical free food source that no one (as of yet) can show one single necropsy report that proves without a doubt that rodents were the cause of the lizard's demise.


Since mostly what we see is bad husbandry, people blame the food not the husbandry.

Hence the mad quest for cutting verts out of captive bosc diets.

[infernalis]

Since mostly what we see is bad husbandry, people blame the food not the husbandry.

Hence the mad quest for cutting verts out of captive bosc diets.


Ah, but you and I both know, all the careful diet in the world is not going to correct poor caging.

[varanus_mad]

Ah, but you and I both know, all the careful diet in the world is not going to correct poor caging.

Which has escaped the notice of the invert only crowd.

[jarich]

We are battling over history in this community as well, and it seems like it has gone in the right direction. These debates mean that more research is done by the community members in general, in an effort to find the truth, and as a result a more informed consensus is reached. I know this is the case for me; this debate spawned a lot of research I might not otherwise have done (and still does). This is true for both caging and diet, and so I think it is a good thing.

In the past, the entire recommended diet of these guys was mice. As is often the case, it took a swing in the opposite direction to bring light on the subject. I think it could be argued that the 'invert only' diet was what challenged the idea of feeding mice only. Possibly as a result, it is generally accepted practice now to feed a mix of rodents and inverts. I think its a step in the right direction too.

As to whether it is essential to feed mice, lets be honest, no, it isn't. I know of monitor keepers who have bred solely on inverts. Its just that it takes a lot of certain kinds of inverts to equal one mouse with all its fat calories. And with monitors at healthy metabolic rates, caloric intake is pretty crucial. Feeding a single mouse is easier to get to those caloric levels than say 20-30 large roaches or a bajillion crickets. Especially when you are talking about a gravid female or growing juvenile. Is this to say that it is the only way to do it? Absolutely not. Is it an easier way to do it? For most people, yes it is.

[varanus_mad]

We are battling over history in this community as well, and it seems like it has gone in the right direction. These debates mean that more research is done by the community members in general, in an effort to find the truth, and as a result a more informed consensus is reached. I know this is the case for me; this debate spawned a lot of research I might not otherwise have done (and still does). This is true for both caging and diet, and so I think it is a good thing.

In the past, the entire recommended diet of these guys was mice. As is often the case, it took a swing in the opposite direction to bring light on the subject. I think it could be argued that the 'invert only' diet was what challenged the idea of feeding mice only. Possibly as a result, it is generally accepted practice now to feed a mix of rodents and inverts. I think its a step in the right direction too.

As to whether it is essential to feed mice, lets be honest, no, it isn't. I know of monitor keepers who have bred solely on inverts. Its just that it takes a lot of certain kinds of inverts to equal one mouse with all its fat calories. And with monitors at healthy metabolic rates, caloric intake is pretty crucial. Feeding a single mouse is easier to get to those caloric levels than say 20-30 large roaches or a bajillion crickets. Especially when you are talking about a gravid female or growing juvenile. Is this to say that it is the only way to do it? Absolutely not. Is it an easier way to do it? For most people, yes it is.

Ive seen plenty of people breed dwarfs, trees, with invert only diets in fact id go so far as to say it works better than mice for small varanids...
the big uns on the other hand...

then 20/30 eggs...

Im still yet to see a pair of boscs produce on inverts only until i do...

[jarich]

You sure youre not from Missouri?

Im only going on what I have been told by people, Ive never actually seen anyone breed anything with my own eyes. However, I know of two people that have bred boscs, and said they fed only inverts. I am taking their word for it, as there seems little reason to think they are lying. Again, youre talking about caloric intake. Like many things, that can be reached in a number of different ways.

[infernalis]

You sure youre not from Missouri?

Im only going on what I have been told by people, Ive never actually seen anyone breed anything with my own eyes. However, I know of two people that have bred boscs, and said they fed only inverts. I am taking their word for it, as there seems little reason to think they are lying. Again, youre talking about caloric intake. Like many things, that can be reached in a number of different ways.

Yes it can be achieved a number of ways.

However, I honestly think that steering people away from rodents is counterproductive too.

Not everyone has access to mountains of large crayfish, jumbo organic prawns, giant locusts, etc..

As the lizards get larger, the common feeder crickets become a lost cause, since it would take so many of them to even put a dent in the appetite of a bigger monitor. (we have to remember, African crickets are gigantic compared to N. American crickets.)

Roaches are awesome, but what if something happens (like mold in the roach colony) and suddenly you are roach-less, or your spouse / landlord / parents forbid the roach colony?

[jarich]

Ya, like I said, its easier for most people. I was just saying I dont think that its absolutely necessary either. WISH we could get locusts over here. You Brits have a great food source there we dont have access to.

[varanus_mad]

Ya, like I said, its easier for most people. I was just saying I dont think that its absolutely necessary either. WISH we could get locusts over here. You Brits have a great food source there we dont have access to.


Yup fantastic... one tiny problem with em though... Bleeding $32 per 100 for adults give or take...

and as you can imagine even a sml bosc eats a couple hundred adult locusts per sitting...

I prefer roaches personally more meat on em admittedly warmed up locusts are bloody good fun.

Dexy eats $60 dollars per sitting.

[infernalis]

I wish we could get the ones like I saw down in Florida, holy cow they were freakishly huge.

[varanus_mad]

I wish we could get the ones like I saw down in Florida, holy cow they were freakishly huge.


Im sure there highly toxic down there though at least the brightly coloured species are at any rate.

[infernalis]

We have thes bland brown ones out in my meadow, I have fed them without any problems.

Watching the lizards jump up after them is a riot.

I never checked to see if the monsters from Florida were toxic.

[jarich]

When I lived out in Colorado we used to have these huge ones a few inches long and fat. Would be great to have those around now.

[Gregg M]

As to whether it is essential to feed mice, lets be honest, no, it isn't. I know of monitor keepers who have bred solely on inverts.

Josh, you and I agree on a lot and I love you bro, but seriously, do you know anyone who successfully kept or bred large monitor species on a strict insect only diet? Not that you are BSing. I would say whoever told you they did was BSing. I only know of 2 people in the US who bred savannahs in captivity and they all used mice in the diet.

I can see this being possible with Aussie dwarf species but not with larger species of varanids like savannahs. From my personal experience, mice are needed. We even feed our dwarfs rodents a couple of times a week.

[mo9e64]

Their biology of requiring high basking temps to metabolize,is a way of expanding what you can feed them in captivity.When we provide our monitors with what they need their potential in many areas increases-diet ,healing, growth and reproduction are examples.

[BarelyBreathing]

Here's how I think about it. I'm going to use dogs as a baseline, because I've actually studied canine nutrition (as in I studied it in college, not as a hobby).

For a very long time, the standard in dog food used to be (and sometimes it is still used) high in grain, high in by-products with very little nutrition. Can dogs live on it? Absolutely! Can they breed several generations down on this type dog food? Absolutely! Is it healthy for them? Only a fool will say yes. Canine nutritionists, vets, pet owners, breeders, and scientists have extensively studied the difference between these still common, once accepted "healthy" foods and these new, natural grain free diets. It's not up for debate that dogs who are given grain free diets have less digestive problems, less skin irritation, live longer, have healthier joints, are more active, and even mentally more sound than those dogs given dog food that is high in grains.

So why should it be any different with other species of animals? Yes, I'm aware that I can't provide the exact diet of a wild savannah monitor based on where I'm located at. However, I can simulate it. I can provide foods for them that are nutritionally the same. I don't have to add foods that are too high in fat to fit in to their natural diet in order for my monitors to remain healthy.

[Jay]

Where do you get your info?

[Pirarucu]

Here's my take on feeding insects being "unsuccessful". People have started saying that the reason Savs fed a rodent diet die is their improper conditions, not their diet. Could it not be true for an all insect diet as well? Could it be that the reason no insect fed savs breed is their housing, not their diet?
I hear you people saying you don't know anyone who has successfully bred them on an insect diet, but do you know anyone who has tried and failed while keeping the monitors in proper conditions?

I also think that another reason an insect diet may fail is that people don't feed them enough. We regulate their intake as adults, which is certainly necessary when feeding rodents, but when feeding insects, could it be that it's best to feed them as many as they want, even as adults? Daniel Bennett observed that they completely filled their stomachs in the wild before returning to their burrows, might it be that they should be allowed to do the same in captivity?

I for one intend to actually try all this, feeding a diet 50% rodents, a diet with much fewer rodents, and a diet with no rodents, and finding out for myself which is the most successful.

[jarich]

Josh, you and I agree on a lot and I love you bro, but seriously, do you know anyone who successfully kept or bred large monitor species on a strict insect only diet? Not that you are BSing. I would say whoever told you they did was BSing. I only know of 2 people in the US who bred savannahs in captivity and they all used mice in the diet.

I can see this being possible with Aussie dwarf species but not with larger species of varanids like savannahs. From my personal experience, mice are needed. We even feed our dwarfs rodents a couple of times a week.

We do agree on a lot man, and its a shame when youre wrong. ;)

Youre right about that though, they could be giving me a line when they told me they fed inverts only. It seems unlikely, as they arent that invested in the argument that Im aware of, and dont ever participate in it on the forums I am part of. Plus, who the heck am I that people would bother to lie to me about it?!

I guess the question I have in response though, is how many people do you know who have actually tried it? I hear many times that it isnt possible, but I hear it from people who never tried, or whose version of trying was to throw in a bunch of crickets only or roaches only. If youre going to say that it definitively isnt possible, then that means you should have really tried breeding them on a healthy and varied invert diet and not been able to do so.

I dont know myself, I dont have the experience of breeding these animals yet. But if mice are required, what is it about them that is required? Ive studied their nutritional value, and cant see anything there that a careful invert diet cant provide. Like I said, I think mice are easy, so I understand adding them to the diet. I just dont understand saying that they are absolutely necessary however.

And once again, I feel like I should state that I am not advocating one way or the other really. I have ideas of course, but dont really care what other people feed theirs. I think its a very technical discussion which genetics might override in certain individual animals anyway. I hope there arent people feeding exclusively mice anymore, but to each their own.

[infernalis]

Here's how I think about it. I'm going to use dogs as a baseline, because I've actually studied canine nutrition (as in I studied it in college, not as a hobby).

For a very long time, the standard in dog food used to be (and sometimes it is still used) high in grain, high in by-products with very little nutrition. Can dogs live on it? Absolutely! Can they breed several generations down on this type dog food? Absolutely! Is it healthy for them? Only a fool will say yes. Canine nutritionists, vets, pet owners, breeders, and scientists have extensively studied the difference between these still common, once accepted "healthy" foods and these new, natural grain free diets. It's not up for debate that dogs who are given grain free diets have less digestive problems, less skin irritation, live longer, have healthier joints, are more active, and even mentally more sound than those dogs given dog food that is high in grains.

So why should it be any different with other species of animals? Yes, I'm aware that I can't provide the exact diet of a wild savannah monitor based on where I'm located at. However, I can simulate it. I can provide foods for them that are nutritionally the same. I don't have to add foods that are too high in fat to fit in to their natural diet in order for my monitors to remain healthy.

Here is my take on that analogy, It is comparing grains VS meats.

To be more in perspective here, would it be fair to say that dogs who eat chicken are healthier than dogs who eat beef?

Would a dog be healthier eating pork than venison?

The one thing to remember, inverts are meat, rodents are meat...

[BarelyBreathing]

Here is my take on that analogy, It is comparing grains VS meats.

To be more in perspective here, would it be fair to say that dogs who eat chicken are healthier than dogs who eat beef?

Would a dog be healthier eating pork than venison?

The one thing to remember, inverts are meat, rodents are meat...


Actually, it's well researched that dogs who eat fish or poultry are healthier than those who eat beef, bison, or pork.

[Jay]

Actually, it's well researched that dogs who eat fish or poultry are healthier than those who eat beef, bison, or pork.

Can you provide any factual information on that?

[infernalis]

Actually, it's well researched that dogs who eat fish or poultry are healthier than those who eat beef, bison, or pork.

Fair enough, how many wolf packs go fishing in the wild?

[Jay]

Wayne, I know of one. I also have photographic evidence.

[BarelyBreathing]

Can you provide any factual information on that?


Yes I can. Fish and poultry, especially poultry, is much easier on the digestive system than red meats. This is why food with the main ingredient of fish is so often recommended for dogs who have digestive problems.

DogAware.com Health: Digestive Disorders in Dogs (http://dogaware.com/health/digestive.html)
Some studies have been done that indicate supplementing with omega-3 fatty acids can help with intestinal inflammation. Fish oil is the best source of these and has been found beneficial in human patients with IBD.

5 Steps to Upgrading Your Dog's Commercial Dog Food Diet - Whole Dog Journal Article (http://www.whole-dog-journal.com/issues/14_5/features/Improving-Your-Dogs-Diet_20260-1.html)
Fish supply omega-3 fatty acids EPA and DHA that are good for the skin and coat. In addition, they help regulate the immune system and reduce inflammation, and so can be helpful for dogs with allergies, arthritis, and autoimmune disease. DHA is also good for brain health, which can benefit both puppies and senior dogs.
Also on 10 Best Foods to Feed Your Senior Dog (http://www.dogchannel.com/dog-magazines/dogworld/dog-world-extras/10-best-foods-to-feed-your-senior-dog.aspx)

There are thousands of articles on this. If you're really interested, do some googling.

[Jay]

Here it is, I found it on the Internet, it must be true right??

http://i1129.photobucket.com/albums/m517/jay0133/f422808c.jpg

[BarelyBreathing]

Fair enough, how many wolf packs go fishing in the wild?


Fishing? Not often. However, wolf packs frequently eat fish washed up on shore, and also steal and bully other predators off their fish, such as birds, bears, and cats.

[varanus_mad]

Meat is better for dogs.

inverts better for savs...

Basing that on what they eat in the wild... well...


Based on that we should feed the animals that are locally available to every animal in captivity.

Madness i say.

[infernalis]

The Maned wolf eats mice... ;)

[BarelyBreathing]

I've never researched maned wolves.

[varanus_mad]

The Maned wolf eats mice... ;)

Never heard of em if its not got a forked tongue four legs and a non regen tail im not interested.

[infernalis]

I've never researched maned wolves.

They live in the Savannahs.

The only way to truly understand the lizards, one must comprehend the whole picture.

Each and every organism within an ecosystem has an effect on the others.

Like the only thing that keeps giraffes from defoliating entire trees, is the ants living in the tree.

Without Rhinos, the Impala will suffer, etc....

[varanus_mad]

They live in the Savannahs of Africa.

The only way to truly understand the lizards, one must comprehend the whole picture.

Each and every organism within an ecosystem has an effect on the others.

Like the only thing that keeps giraffes from defoliating entire trees, is the ants living in the tree.

Without Rhinos, the Impala will suffer, etc....

occasionally mate i meet someone even more obsessed with varanids than i am...

At this point i feel like im dipping me toes in the ocean of your obsession with em.

Kudos Matey.

[infernalis]

occasionally mate i meet someone even more obsessed with varanids than i am...

At this point i feel like im dipping me toes in the ocean of your obsession with em.

Kudos Matey.

Cheers..

Can't be helped.. So primeval, yet so brilliantly smart.

[BarelyBreathing]

They live in the Savannahs.

Except for the fact that they don't. Maned wolf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maned_wolf)

[infernalis]

Except for the fact that they don't. Maned wolf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maned_wolf)

Touché - the Savannahs of south America.

We do have to remember that there are Savannah plains all around the equator.

[BarelyBreathing]

Touché - the Savannahs of south America.

wrong continent. My bad.

I do have to remember that there are Savannah plains all around the equator.


No worries, the only reason I actually knew that is because I went to the zoo on Saturday.

[mo9e64]

Using dogs as a baseline in anyway is in my opinion the problem and a direction newbies are already predisposed to use.I know this is light hearted banter but it reinforces the harmful conception alot of newbies have 'i can make a monitor a scaled-dog,puppy tame lap doglizard.Monitors are not warmblooded and do not have the rules or lack of rules that warmblooded creatures have.They do not form bonds the same way as mammals,and do not metabolize based on an internal source of heat like mammals do,they are sometimes harder to read as to their state of health due to the many more external factors in their wellbeing-usually interpreted wrong by newbies.A dog due it to it's very biology if it's fewer needs are met are easy to read and can communicate on a more mammal level it's state of wellbeing.

[StudentoReptile]

This is my $.02 on it, strictly as an "outsider" if you will, since I don't keep monitors at all.

We will NEVER be able to replicate their natural diet. Never. Ever. So its a moot point trying to argue that we should. Even with all the advances in husbandry, and everything Wayne has on his website, etc, etc, the most dedicated varanid keeper would only provide a FRACTION of meeting that animal's needs in terms of habitat, diet, temperature, seasonal changes, weather, etc etc, things we have no way of providing in a captive, controlled environment..at least not for anyone on this forum. Doing so would take tons of money and space, before we could even come close. Someone alluded to it in the enclosure thread about having a "sustainable" colony of rodents in the habitat or whatever...so like I said, the whole "they eat mostly inverts in the wild so thats what we should feed them in captivity" argument should be dropped.

Before I move on, here's an example on redfoot tortoises: redfoots are opportunistic foragers in their natural environment, very similar to our North American box turtles. They eat vegetation, all sorts of fruit, invertebrates, carrion, etc. Now, it is often argued that in captivity, we should offer them a fair amount of protein, since they're omnivores, right? Its what they eat in the wild, right? Well, one thing to keep in mind is that redfoots include a lot of "animal" protein in their natural diet because most of the ground-level plant life in their habitat is very low in nutrients. A lot of do with the rainforest environment, I suppose. But in captivity, this is NOT the case. The plants we typically offer our tortoises are very high in nutrients, stuff like collard greens, bok choy, mustard greens, chard, etc, as well as all the fruits and other vegetables we offer. Another thing is that they do get some protein from certain vegetables as well. Not all protein comes from animals and bugs.

So again, my point is that we simply do not have the same types of food to offer these animals in captivity as they are getting in their native habitats. SO it makes sense to offer a wide variety, in moderation and balance, of course, to ensure they are getting everything (or most) everything they need.

There could be something extra that these monitors are getting from their native inverts that they cannot obtain from the crickets, locusts, roaches, and earthworms we feed them in captivity. Maybe they get it from the occasional rodent, maybe they don't, I have no idea. But I'm with Wayne on this one...there's no conclusive evidence that feeding savs rodents causes any harm.

[BarelyBreathing]

Using dogs as a baseline in anyway is in my opinion the problem and a direction newbies are already predisposed to use.I know this is light hearted banter but it reinforces the harmful conception alot of newbies have 'i can make a monitor a scaled-dog,puppy tame lap doglizard.Monitors are not warmblooded and do not have the rules or lack of rules that warmblooded creatures have.They do not form bonds the same way as mammals,and do not metabolize based on an internal source of heat like mammals do,they are sometimes harder to read as to their state of health due to the many more external factors in their wellbeing-usually interpreted wrong by newbies.A dog due it to it's very biology if it's fewer needs are met are easy to read and can communicate on a more mammal level it's state of wellbeing.


We aren't talking about the psyche of each species. We are talking about how food affects the body. It doesn't matter what species you bring into this discussion. A poor diet will affect the body of a dog the same way as a poor diet will affect the body of a human the same way as a poor diet will affect the body of a starfish the same way as a poor diet will affect the body of a monitor.

[StudentoReptile]

So genetics and habitat have nothing to do with it?

[BarelyBreathing]

This is my $.02 on it, strictly as an "outsider" if you will, since I don't keep monitors at all.

We will NEVER be able to replicate their natural diet. Never. Ever. So its a moot point trying to argue that we should. Even with all the advances in husbandry, and everything Wayne has on his website, etc, etc, the most dedicated varanid keeper would only provide a FRACTION of meeting that animal's needs in terms of habitat, diet, temperature, seasonal changes, weather, etc etc, things we have no way of providing in a captive, controlled environment..at least not for anyone on this forum. Doing so would take tons of money and space, before we could even come close. Someone alluded to it in the enclosure thread about having a "sustainable" colony of rodents in the habitat or whatever...so like I said, the whole "they eat mostly inverts in the wild so thats what we should feed them in captivity" argument should be dropped.

Before I move on, here's an example on redfoot tortoises: redfoots are opportunistic foragers in their natural environment, very similar to our North American box turtles. They eat vegetation, all sorts of fruit, invertebrates, carrion, etc. Now, it is often argued that in captivity, we should offer them a fair amount of protein, since they're omnivores, right? Its what they eat in the wild, right? Well, one thing to keep in mind is that redfoots include a lot of "animal" protein in their natural diet because most of the ground-level plant life in their habitat is very low in nutrients. A lot of do with the rainforest environment, I suppose. But in captivity, this is NOT the case. The plants we typically offer our tortoises are very high in nutrients, stuff like collard greens, bok choy, mustard greens, chard, etc, as well as all the fruits and other vegetables we offer. Another thing is that they do get some protein from certain vegetables as well. Not all protein comes from animals and bugs.

So again, my point is that we simply do not have the same types of food to offer these animals in captivity as they are getting in their native habitats. SO it makes sense to offer a wide variety, in moderation and balance, of course, to ensure they are getting everything (or most) everything they need.

There could be something extra that these monitors are getting from their native inverts that they cannot obtain from the crickets, locusts, roaches, and earthworms we feed them in captivity. Maybe they get it from the occasional rodent, maybe they don't, I have no idea. But I'm with Wayne on this one...there's no conclusive evidence that feeding savs rodents causes any harm.


Exactly, it's impossible to recreate the wild, so why even try, right? By that logic we step back about ten years and keep them in rabbit cages and 20 gallon fish tanks.

[StudentoReptile]

Exactly, it's impossible to recreate the wild, so why even try, right? By that logic we step back about ten years and keep them in rabbit cages and 20 gallon fish tanks.

My point was only that just because something in the husbandry IS unnatural, does not necessarily make it incorrect. We just have to use trial-and-error and fine-tune our care methods to get things right.

As mentioned by many, feeding rodents to a savannah monitor isn't necessarily incorrect. As you implied, poor housing is.

Diet is not what is killing savs in captivity. A sav fed an invert-only diet will die just as quickly in a improper habitat as it would if it had the occasional rodent thrown into the menu. Dead is dead.

[BarelyBreathing]

My point was only that just because something in the husbandry IS unnatural, does not necessarily make it incorrect. We just have to use trial-and-error and fine-tune our care methods to get things right.

As mentioned by many, feeding rodents to a savannah monitor isn't necessarily incorrect. As you implied, poor housing is.

Diet is not what is killing savs in captivity. A sav fed an invert-only diet will die just as quickly in a improper habitat as it would if it had the occasional rodent thrown into the menu. Dead is dead.


You are absolutely correct, and nobody's arguing that point. The reason that type of husbandry works so well, though, is because we are doing our best to provide a bit of their natural environment.

[StudentoReptile]

You are absolutely correct, and nobody's arguing that point. The reason that type of husbandry works so well, though, is because we are doing our best to provide a bit of their natural environment.

Indeed. For decades (and of course, it still goes on), the collective herp community has been debating monitor diet "natural vs unnatural" but not taking into account other aspects of husbandry: proper temps, humidity, substrate, terrain/layout/decorations. "We" have been so focused on trying to offer the right/natural diet, but until recently, we haven't bothered worrying about getting the environment correct, so no one has had any real success either way, which is why the debate continues.

Obviously, this is old hat to most of us, and a lot of this is preaching to the choir.

The key that while we can never replicate their diet, we can do decent bit in replicating their natural habitat and bringing out their natural foraging/hunting behaviors. When we've gotten the habitat nailed down, and the foundation for a healthy monitor, the diet is IMHO a little flexible.

[infernalis]

Indeed. For decades (and of course, it still goes on), the collective herp community has been debating monitor diet "natural vs unnatural" but not taking into account other aspects of husbandry: proper temps, humidity, substrate, terrain/layout/decorations. "We" have been so focused on trying to offer the right/natural diet, but until recently, we haven't bothered worrying about getting the environment correct, so no one has had any real success either way, which is why the debate continues.

Obviously, this is old hat to most of us, and a lot of this is preaching to the choir.

The key that while we can never replicate their diet, we can do decent bit in replicating their natural habitat and bringing out their natural foraging/hunting behaviors. When we've gotten the habitat nailed down, and the foundation for a healthy monitor, the diet is IMHO a little flexible.


As much as I hate to compare Varanids with snakes, I have to say this..

In the wild the genus Thamnophis (Garter snakes) do not eat mice, by nature they eat mostly toads, frogs, newts, earthworms, fish and tadpoles.

This is not impossible, or really even all that difficult to replicate in captivity.. However since most amphibians are loaded with parasites, as they are the intermediate host to several species of multi cell parasites (worms) it is unwise to offer this "natural" diet.

So myself and virtually all of the dedicated Thamnophis keepers & breeders have turned to mice as the prey of choice to feed their garter snakes.

We have all had great success breeding for generations and have had nice long lifespans with our captive animals on a rodent diet.

I do not own one obese garter snake in my entire collection, and the only unnatural deaths I can attest to (aside from mistakes) occurred when I tried to offer fish that I bought from the store that was treated with phosphates or fish species that contained thiaminase.

The point behind what I just said is this.. we often do more harm than good trying to deviate from methods that work, in other words if everyone else is producing robust healthy animals on mice, and I killed snakes offering fish, then what is the logical course of action???

Feed them mice and be happy that may animals are healthy.

[KORBIN5895]

I personally will be feeding my sav hot dogs as they have everything in them; meat , gristle, organs, cartilage, bone, worms and rodents. What more could you ask for?

[BarelyBreathing]

I personally will be feeding my sav hot dogs as they have everything in them; meat , gristle, organs, cartilage, bone, worms and rodents. What more could you ask for?



Uhhhhh.................. :shocked::hmm::laugh:

[Toronto1977]

I personally will be feeding my sav hot dogs as they have everything in them; meat , gristle, organs, cartilage, bone, worms and rodents. What more could you ask for?

That seriously made me laugh out loud LOL.

[CDN_Blood]

Ha! Laugh all you want but one of my Savannah's absolute favourite foods was chicken wieners and I bought them just for him. I believe in as much variety as possible in an adult's diet, but man-o-man he sure loved those chicken wieners and he could smell them comin' :)

Of course, I had a Gold Tegu who's favourite food was cheese. I discovered that one fine day while *trying* to prepare myself a grilled cheese while he was perched on my shoulder. He was on that stuff like stink on an Adam Sandler movie. He just went gaga for it, but it's not something you can give them often at all, for obvious reasons.

Did I have weird lizards? Perhaps :)

[BarelyBreathing]

Dairy is very very very very very bad for reptiles.....

[CDN_Blood]

Dairy is very very very very very bad for reptiles.....

You stick *your* hand in front of a big Gold Tegu and try to pry it out of his mouth :)

[BarelyBreathing]

Oh, I have done worse.

[mo9e64]

humans are the best example of going against nature,being self contained with the ability to have a diet which isn't natural in all areas of the world but has the ability to give us longer lives.We can go back to having just nature provide for us but wasn't our lifespans considerably shorter then.Duplicating nature isn't a good argument,duplicating the good things in nature is.And since nature can't provide the best conditions all the time everywhere,is it possible that giving rodents to an animal that doesn't normally eat them,just creating an environment nature could create if condition were optimal?

[jarich]

Ok I think we can now safely say that the analogy part of this thread is breaking down. (Good grief Moe, you dont think our present diet is what makes us live longer, do you? Maybe Im reading that wrong) Also, I think we need to be careful of any individual experiences being 'proof', especially without understanding the parameters of the example. For instance, the fact that one person fed a foolish food to a monitor and it didnt die (surprisingly) isnt proof of anything except getting lucky and dodging a bullet.

I also think we should stop pointing to the extremes of the other sides of the argument. No one is suggesting in this thread feeding all mice (I hope) and no one is suggesting in this thread just feeding one single species of invert (again, I hope not). What we are discussing is the relatively small difference between feeding a varied invert diet and feeding a mix of inverts and mice. So lets get back to the science of nutrition.

I think it can pretty conclusively be shown that the vitamin and mineral differences between a varied invert diet and a mix of inverts and rodents is inconsequential. Both also provide plenty of water content and more than enough protein content. Which essentially leaves us with a difference in lipids, both in quantity and quality. Mice are mostly saturated fats and inverts are mostly unsaturated and polyunsaturated fats.

What we know is that fat is an easy and plentiful source of energy for monitors and a highly prized food source for that reason. Not surprising given the competition for food in the wild, and how much energy has to be expended to get it normally. This is something that obviously is a positive increase in caloric availability to captive monitors with either diet (they expend no energy getting it), but most especially with mice that are high in fat. I would argue that this isnt required necessarily, but I cant see it being problematic at a young age either. The only incident where this could become problematic, in my opinion, is when discussing the long term effects to older monitors of a diet high in saturated fats. Again, I dont think that feeding a mouse a week means you are feeding a diet high in saturated fats, and so far no one has studied what levels of saturated fats may or may not be problematic to monitors. There does seem to be increasing conjectural evidence though that a high saturated fat diet is a problem when their metabolism drops (ie poor husbandry and old age).

What I think this means is simple. Whenever possible, breed your own feed. Breed your roaches, crickets, worms, crayfish, etc with the right nutritious food for each and they become much more nutritious food sources for your monitors. The same is true for mice. Feed them lower fat rodent diets (not dog food) and they will be a lower fat, healthier food source. Food doesnt need to be available for mice 24/7 either, like other mammals they can be fed once a day. Heck, give them one of those stupid little wheel things in their cage for exercise; it cant hurt. My hope is that this continual discussion will increase our awareness of the feeders themselves (and what we feed them), and thus increase nutritional content no matter the diet chosen.

[mo9e64]

Jarich, i have gotten good results from feeding my baby monitors crickets fed crushed dog food and dusting them,they developed properly with no problems.I respect your opinion but personally believe husbandry first then diet.Diet to me means feeding the appropriate type of whole prey at proper quantities dependent of conditions.Vertebrates to larger monitors with a bit of inverts,and for smaller monitors mostly invert with the occasional vertebrate.Dust inverts for margin for error.Too me this is as complicated as it needs to be for newbies till they get their conditions right and an understanding of their monitors.

[jarich]

I, and I hope everybody else, understands that obviously habitat conditions come first. This is a thread about diet however, so lets stick to the diet and stop using the husbandry cop out. Im confused as to why we are so willing to be so specific with people about their husbandry and then just go with whats simplest for food. Its not hard to feed the feeders properly, and its obvious that makes for a healthier feeder. Why go through all the effort of setting them up properly in their habitat but then not bother with the minimal extra effort to give them the best food source, Moe? These animals can survive on garbage, but that doesnt mean we should feed it to them. Instead, we want to provide whats best for them nutritionally. Its not difficult to feed your crickets the fresh vegetable scraps from your kitchen, or even buy them some green beans, squash, kale, etc. Nor is it hard to grow crickets and roaches and worms instead of just crickets. So if you are such a proponent of meeting their best habitat needs (and we should be) then why not be a proponent of meeting their best nutritional needs too?

Again, I have no problem with your mix of inverts and mice, the issue I see here is the use of only one type of invert and an improper food source given to those inverts.

[infernalis]

Moe, diet is a part of husbandry. It's surprising how many people fail to realize this.

I agree to a certain extent.

My obsession with Varanids should be very obvious by now, I gobble up every single documentary, book, research paper and forum post I can, it infects my mind.

Once upon a time, I thought FR was crazy for making this statement "You can feed them nails if the cage supports the animal"

However, the more I learn, the more I do realize what he was trying to say in that statement.

Varanids in general (including Savs) are natures garbage cans, they are opossums with scales, In Asia it is common for water monitors to come right up and raid trash cans in parks, they will eat a human corpse floating in the water, etc, etc.

I would wager that if something happened that wiped out all the millipedes, snails and giant crickets in Africa, that Savs would adapt and do just fine.

I honestly believe that we are placing way too much emphasis on this fat thing, really I do.

Give the monitor, any monitor the correct conditions, allow it to exercise and burn that fuel, and it could eat virtually anything (organic, chemical free of course) that has flesh.

I demonstrated this theory on RFnet when I showed the video of Butaan eating mice. Now we all know that Butaan eat fruit with a supplement of snails in the wild, so how is it that the ones in that video are robust adults on mice?? because they are getting what they need, and the cages are set up more than adequately.

I hate to say this, but losing Chomper was an eye opening experience, it showed just how ill informed I really was, I avoided rodents, I thought I was doing right by him, but in the end.. I had a very dead monitor.

It can't be blamed on rodents, Mice would not have saved him either.

However, during this last year I have actively sought out anyone who would take the time to talk to me who keeps or has kept Savannah monitors, bred them, studied them, dissected them, etc...

and unless I want to start calling people liars, all of the animals that are alive past 5 years have done so on a diet that included rodent, and a few of them including Ravi Thakoordyal used mice as the staple food in their diets.

the wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round........

[varanus_mad]

Interesting to hear about thew frugivores being happy n healthy of mice...

but i cant say im suprised... i never thought for a second theyd be solely fruit eaters aside from one enlarged sack which the name of escapes me at the minute i believe there digestive system is the same as every other monitors....

[MonitorMad]

Correct high basking temps will let any monitor use any food source to it's full advantage , yes boscs eat a hell of a lot of different inverts and mollusc's in the wild but also they will consume other lizards , amphibs , ground nesting birds , scorpions and even small snake species if encountered plus any rodents they come across , so all in all a correct captive environment is the most important , correct humidity , correct basking spot temps and correct ambient temps plus being able to thermo regulate correctly within that environment. MM

Edit ........ whole food items that is

[BeardedDee]

A question I would ask is, would a female Sav on an insect only diet be able gain enough calcium to shell potentially 50-60 eggs?

[bodiddleyitis]

Varanids in general (including Savs) are natures garbage cans, they are opossums with scales, In Asia it is common for water monitors to come right up and raid trash cans in parks, they will eat a human corpse floating in the water, etc, etc.

I would wager that if something happened that wiped out all the millipedes, snails and giant crickets in Africa, that Savs would adapt and do just fine.

I demonstrated this theory on RFnet when I showed the video of Butaan eating mice. Now we all know that Butaan eat fruit with a supplement of snails in the wild, so how is it that the ones in that video are robust adults on mice?? because they are getting what they need, and the cages are set up more than adequately.

Interesting stuff. I very much doubt that, in the event of mass millipede and cricket extinction, that savannah monitors could compete with the animals (primarily snakes) that are already eating rodents in West Africa. Its diet is so specialised everywhere people have looked that the idea that it could suddenly switch to a generalised diet seems rather far fetched. How the theory that they are "getting what they need" is demonstrated by a "robust" butaan eating mice on a video isn't very clear. If they are not churning out eggs at regular intervals, they aren't getting what they need. Butaan don't churn out eggs in captivity, and despite all the claims that their diet in nature is irrelevant when kept in a box, nobody has managed to breed these lizards in captivity, despite considerable efforts. Butaans' ability to kill and eat rodents is perhaps why Robert Sprackland listed them as among the easiest varanids to keep in his remarkable "Giant Lizards" book. It's true that a small percentage of them can survive for decades on a diet of rodents and fruits that are edible to humans, but the percentage is extremely small and they do not reproduce.

I don't know how many times I've said this on this thread, but in order to demonstrate that a diet is suitable for monitor lizards, you need to be able to show that the lizards can survive on it from generation to generation, not just that they are "robust" and can kill and swallow things.

[jarich]

A question I would ask is, would a female Sav on an insect only diet be able gain enough calcium to shell potentially 50-60 eggs?

I dont think anyone is saying anything about an insect only diet. And in answer to your question, yes, the monitor could get enough calcium on an invert only diet. (Though if we are talking boscs, then the clutches are more like 15-25.)

Ill agree with you Wayne that indeed these animals can sustain themselves on just about anything, as long as it has enough calories. But like Daniel said, sustain themselves and thrive are different things.

I bring up the saturated fat thing only because I feel like we are at a level of discussion whereby we can get into finer detail. I dont look to feed any of my reptiles just what they can get by on, I try to feed them the best, most nutritious diet I can feed them. Like I said, I cant imagine higher levels of saturated fat having much effect at all on younger animals in a proper habitat. I just think that it seems likely that this could effect longevity. Is there proof? No, but I think that it makes sense from a nutritional point of view and from the conjectural evidence to keep those fats to a lower level. Nutritionally speaking, animals not adapted to a high saturated fat diet develop health problems when they are fed this diet and their metabolism slows down. We also see that even properly supported boscs do not live longer than around 12 years usually, yet we suspect that they live much longer in the wild. Larger monitors used to eating more red meat do seem to live longer in captivity however. So it might make sense that this maybe having an effect on longevity. Again, no scientific proof on this, as no studies have been done either way.

Now if you think the only measure of monitor health is whether they breed or not, well then this argument means little. Im not a breeder, so to me longevity and the ability to breed seem like better indicators. Thats just my perspective though.

[infernalis]

I dont think anyone is saying anything about an insect only diet. And in answer to your question, yes, the monitor could get enough calcium on an invert only diet. (Though if we are talking boscs, then the clutches are more like 15-25.)

Ill agree with you Wayne that indeed these animals can sustain themselves on just about anything, as long as it has enough calories. But like Daniel said, sustain themselves and thrive are different things.

I bring up the saturated fat thing only because I feel like we are at a level of discussion whereby we can get into finer detail. I dont look to feed any of my reptiles just what they can get by on, I try to feed them the best, most nutritious diet I can feed them. Like I said, I cant imagine higher levels of saturated fat having much effect at all on younger animals in a proper habitat. I just think that it seems likely that this could effect longevity. Is there proof? No, but I think that it makes sense from a nutritional point of view and from the conjectural evidence to keep those fats to a lower level. Nutritionally speaking, animals not adapted to a high saturated fat diet develop health problems when they are fed this diet and their metabolism slows down. We also see that even properly supported boscs do not live longer than around 12 years usually, yet we suspect that they live much longer in the wild. Larger monitors used to eating more red meat do seem to live longer in captivity however. So it might make sense that this maybe having an effect on longevity. Again, no scientific proof on this, as no studies have been done either way.

Now if you think the only measure of monitor health is whether they breed or not, well then this argument means little. Im not a breeder, so to me longevity and the ability to breed seem like better indicators. Thats just my perspective though.

That age would be under ideal conditions. Daniel had stated (somewhere) that all of the adult animals he found were young adults with high parasite loads and massive ticks, sometimes attached in ears and nostrils, as well as the Cloacal Vent.

These animals were in rough shape. However he did clarify that the sample range was small. So would this be indicative of all animals in the wild?

[jarich]

Im not sure I understand what that has to do with the discussion of possible life expectancy. Daniel has no idea how old those animals were, whatever their condition.

[infernalis]

Im not sure I understand what that has to do with the discussion of possible life expectancy. Daniel has no idea how old those animals were, whatever their condition.

True, I just remember him going off on someone for claiming they live so long in the wild.

we all know that with correct husbandry (once we truly find out what that is) any animal should live double, triple or more than it's wild counterparts do.

You and I would never tolerate ticks or parasites on our Savs, and we certainly are not going to allow any Baboons from ripping them apart either.

[bodiddleyitis]

Yes, some butaan keepers have been experienced varanid breeders. In practical terms, monitor nutrition is all about fat. Mineral deficiencies are not an issue when you always coat your food in soil. You might assume that if an animals has had a specific diet for millions of years that selection might favour the individuals best able to utilise specific types of fat. Most species of monitor lizard that we know about have a generalist diet in the wild, but a few do not.

I think that anybody who spent a day with savannah monitors in the wild would be convinced that the animals had a very specialised natural history. But an analogy might be the European badger; if you only know about badgers in boxes, you could easily be mistaken into thinking that this was a ferocious carnivore which could easily kill a dog and would eat just about anything it could find. You might also suspect that badgers would hunt other large mammals in packs. If you then went to watch wild badgers you might interpret their search for earthworms as a hunt for baby rabbits, but by the end of the night you'd be thinking that these particular badgers must just find it easiest to look for worms, and that the fierce packing hunting badgers were elsewhere.

I think that one of the saddest thing about this is that the pet trade has made this quite extraordinary monitor lizard into a generic product for "monitor lovers". It ticks all the boxes with regard to price, ability to withstand dessication and looking cute and prehistoric. But it doesn't have a macho diet like the Komodo dragon, and it's very much in the interests of marketing the animals to dismiss its ecological specialisations as the result of not enough data. All monitors are the same, right?

[infernalis]

I don't know how many times I've said this on this thread, but in order to demonstrate that a diet is suitable for monitor lizards, you need to be able to show that the lizards can survive on it from generation to generation, not just that they are "robust" and can kill and swallow things.

Sadly Daniel, That "sample group" is the smallest yet.

[infernalis]

Interesting stuff. I very much doubt that, in the event of mass millipede and cricket extinction, that savannah monitors could compete with the animals (primarily snakes) that are already eating rodents in West Africa. Its diet is so specialised everywhere people have looked that the idea that it could suddenly switch to a generalised diet seems rather far fetched..

You are the man to ask.. My thoughts could very well be off base here, but over history (and pre-history) some species will adapt to ever changing conditions, and other species vanish when conditions change.

One would think that since Varanids are one of the oldest currently existing genus around that they have repeadedly adapted to changes already, and would be suited to additional changes.

Sure there will be mass die offs, but the animals that chose to begin consuming alternative foods would continue on, would they not?



I think that one of the saddest thing about this is that the pet trade has made this quite extraordinary monitor lizard into a generic product for "monitor lovers". It ticks all the boxes with regard to price, ability to withstand dessication and looking cute and prehistoric. But it doesn't have a macho diet like the Komodo dragon, and it's very much in the interests of marketing the animals to dismiss its ecological specialisations as the result of not enough data. All monitors are the same, right?

Could not agree more. It's sad that people don't realize just how cool they really are.

It's also sad that the masses seem to prefer those lethargic lumps we see on youtube most of the time.

Someone commented to me just this week after seeing one of my videos that "I never knew Savs were so quick" he had a picture formed in his mind that they were all waddling blobs that sat around all day.

[StudentoReptile]

Someone commented to me just this week after seeing one of my videos that "I never knew Savs were so quick"

I would have fired right back: "Healthy ones are." :cool:

[infernalis]

I would have fired right back: "Healthy ones are." :cool:

I did, am I that predictable?:cool:

[StudentoReptile]

You're gettin' there! lol

[varanus_mad]

Yes, some butaan keepers have been experienced varanid breeders. In practical terms, monitor nutrition is all about fat. Mineral deficiencies are not an issue when you always coat your food in soil. You might assume that if an animals has had a specific diet for millions of years that selection might favour the individuals best able to utilise specific types of fat. Most species of monitor lizard that we know about have a generalist diet in the wild, but a few do not.

I think that anybody who spent a day with savannah monitors in the wild would be convinced that the animals had a very specialised natural history. But an analogy might be the European badger; if you only know about badgers in boxes, you could easily be mistaken into thinking that this was a ferocious carnivore which could easily kill a dog and would eat just about anything it could find. You might also suspect that badgers would hunt other large mammals in packs. If you then went to watch wild badgers you might interpret their search for earthworms as a hunt for baby rabbits, but by the end of the night you'd be thinking that these particular badgers must just find it easiest to look for worms, and that the fierce packing hunting badgers were elsewhere.

I think that one of the saddest thing about this is that the pet trade has made this quite extraordinary monitor lizard into a generic product for "monitor lovers". It ticks all the boxes with regard to price, ability to withstand dessication and looking cute and prehistoric. But it doesn't have a macho diet like the Komodo dragon, and it's very much in the interests of marketing the animals to dismiss its ecological specialisations as the result of not enough data. All monitors are the same, right?


Which numptie's think badgers eat baby rabbits?

Weasels, ferrets, stoats, polecats... They eat rabbits and are far better at it than badgers...

Out of interest Daniel... is there any research into the way mice/rats affect bosc's systems?

[bodiddleyitis]

Which numptie's think badgers eat baby rabbits?

Weasels, ferrets, stoats, polecats... They eat rabbits and are far better at it than badgers...

Out of interest Daniel... is there any research into the way mice/rats affect bosc's systems?

That is the point. If you only knew about badgers from animals that were kept as pets you would get a completely warped view of its ecology and lifestyle.

There isn't any work on how Varanids metabolise fat that I am aware of.