Goanna Ranch

[SHvar]

Those who study, have studied, or do so that they do not multiclutch, its not normal and that in captivity if they are its because they are being turned into something they arent supposed to be.
Im not naming names, but it has been argued in those words by a few so many times, also that they are not supposed to multiclutch at all.
That is why I made the comment. On CD Im sure I have quotes from individuals saying this many times. Thats not the point though.
Im not worried about either side of the arguement, but I know what was said about multiclutching, and I know it happens, also I know that FR produces many many beautiful monitors and has done so beyond anyone else with the species he works with. There are many people breeding monitors now, but to say he doesnt know what hes talking about and that he lies and evades questions is wrong. He gives straight answers, all it takes is to ask him. I found myself over a few years that if you drop any attitude and not turn it into an insult exchange you can get a ton of great info on monitors from him. His delivery method isnt the smoothest when responding sometimes but then again everyone gets into misunderstood arguements. Ive decided since I have less time now to post on forums that Im staying away from "bated, or loaded" posts aimed to start arguements and posts from those blowing off steam about others because they felt as if they were insulted by a post or responce made by someone else. Yes, he produces alot of reptiles that are inbred or closely related but this does happen in nature, I know from herping here in Pennsylvania and other states on the east coast that almost all reptiles here live in areas that are isolated from each other (local populations), they are different by color or pattern and do not travel to mate with other populations unless there is a reason to leave their home area usually for good. This produces inbreds and does so probably in every area of the world. Some species may and do travel to den up but not as far as some people think, they just dont realize how many are actually in an area. This explains why WTs all over Africa are a complete different color or pattern from one area to the next only miles apart, they breed to familiar populations in many cases and it keeps these differences the way they are. Its not always what happens, but it obviously does alot.

[Jeff_Favelle]

How can you observe a monitor to multiclutch in the wild anyways? Won't the disturbance have negative effects that pre-determine the outcome of events? If you go diggin' up nests every three days, what effect is that having on the wild monitor, that, if left alone, might have produced several clutches in a season?

Likely, there is a lot less to be learned from cb specimens, and i'm guessing it would become progressively less through the generations.

Why is that? The DNA doesn't change.

[crocdoc]

Originally posted by SHvar
Those who study, have studied, or do so that they do not multiclutch, its not normal and that in captivity if they are its because they are being turned into something they arent supposed to be. Im not naming names, but it has been argued in those words by a few so many times, also that they are not supposed to multiclutch at all. That is why I made the comment. On CD Im sure I have quotes from individuals saying this many times. Thats not the point though. Im not worried about either side of the arguement, but I know what was said about multiclutching, and I know it happens,

SHvar, is this you or another SHvar:
http://forums.kingsnake.com/view.php?id=789340,789862

I'll quote: "And to think the experts say it doesnt happen, multiclutching..."

No mention of the wild there, no matter how many times you read it. You say you've got samples on CD of people saying multiclutching never happens, let's see them.

Remember, I'm one of the so-called 'MSs' (what the AS's like to call us). My monitors multiclutch in captivity, why on earth would I say they never multiclutch?

Originally posted by SHvar ...also I know that FR produces many many beautiful monitors and has done so beyond anyone else with the species he works with. There are many people breeding monitors now, but to say he doesnt know what hes talking about and that he lies and evades questions is wrong.

What has captive breeding to do with knowledge about wild monitors? Who would you believe knew wild chimpanzees better, a zookeeper or Jane Goodall, knowing that Jane Goodall has probably never bred a single chimpanzee? Why does everyone always bring up captive breeding in discussions on wild monitors? I've bred lace monitors, has it changed how I view the wild ones? no.

Originally posted by SHvar
Yes, he produces alot of reptiles that are inbred or closely related but this does happen in nature, I know from herping here in Pennsylvania and other states on the east coast that almost all reptiles here live in areas that are isolated from each other (local populations), they are different by color or pattern and do not travel to mate with other populations unless there is a reason to leave their home area usually for good. This produces inbreds and does so probably in every area of the world. Some species may and do travel to den up but not as far as some people think, they just dont realize how many are actually in an area. This explains why WTs all over Africa are a complete different color or pattern from one area to the next only miles apart, they breed to familiar populations in many cases and it keeps these differences the way they are. Its not always what happens, but it obviously does alot.

I'm not entering into an argument about whether his monitors are suffering from being inbred or not (they all look fine to me), but to assume that they inbreed in the wild because animals have locale specific colour patterns isn't really looking at the situation in detail. The monitors around Sydney are very locale specific in their colour patterns, but does this mean they are inbred? No, there are countless thousands of them. Even animals which appear to live on habitat 'islands' surrounded by apparently usuitable habitat seem to avoid inbreeding. Someone I know has just finished a study spanning several years looking at reproduction in Cunningham's skinks which 1. live on habitat islands (rocky outcrops) within unsuitable habitat (forest) and 2. live in large groups (yes, they are social! See? But we always knew that about them and they are almost always found in groups). Sounds like a recipe for inbreeding, does it not?

Well, he took blood samples and compared DNA to find out who was fathering which offspring. The big surprise? They avoided inbreeding through dispersal and inbuilt behavioural mechanisms. Yet 'casual' observation would have led to the opposite conclusion. They all look similar, they're even related (the groups are usually family groups), but aside from the main pair they aren't breeding with each other and the main pair are an unrelated male and female.

[crocdoc]

Originally posted by Jeff_Favelle
How can you observe a monitor to multiclutch in the wild anyways? Won't the disturbance have negative effects that pre-determine the outcome of events? If you go diggin' up nests every three days, what effect is that having on the wild monitor, that, if left alone, might have produced several clutches in a season?

three things

1. did you read what I said about museum specimens and how the only ones found with eggs or ova are ones collected during a certain time of year? That would go for other monitor species as well. If they multiclutched, we'd expect to see gravid females or ones with developing ova over a widespread period. For species in which seeing hatchlings are reasonably common (V panoptes, apparently) one would expect to see hatchlings over a wide period rather than during a narrow one.

2. opening a termite mound does not affect a female if she's already laid eggs in there. If they multiclutch, there should be eggs in mounds before and after the expected season. There should also be hatchlings, or still developing eggs, in those mounds long after the expected hatching time. After the expected hatching window, though, termite mounds only contain empty egg shells or dead eggs.

3. Observations of behaviours of the females indicate that they mate during a certain time, but aren't seen mating after the short mating season. Would telemetry affect a female in such a way that they lay one clutch but not more? What if the male is the one being followed, would telemetry stop him from mating outside the known mating period? If they were multiclutching, one would expect the males to be seen mating with females several times spaced by a few weeks, to provide sperm for the multiple clutches

[kap10cavy]

I'm one of the so-called 'MSs' (what the AS's like to call us).

Since I am on niether side and am just trying to learn, can I me BS?

Scott

[SHvar]

I stated fact, and quoted unnamed people, thats why IM NOT MENTIONING NAMES. Over the last few years Ive saved comments by people that are useful info to this hobby and stored it under their names on CD.
Im not arguing with you. You try this frequently, then you turn it around on them and say otherwise. Anyways, on with this.
Its been said by the same people more times than I care to remember, thats why I made that comment.
The idea is not about CB or wild monitors, snakes, or whatever, the idea is that it has been said that they do not multiclutch by the same people, no names because this is not intended to start any bashing on anyone.
I responded because I was taken out of context, I decided to clarify things so as there is no doubt as to what was meant.
Next I responded because this also turned into a Frank Retes/Goannaranch bashfest because someone felt insulted by him and decided to slander him. Many people have inbred reptiles for many many years, yet this becomes about his animals and no one elses. I guess all of those Aussie monitors available over North America, and sent to Europe because of his efforts are wrong, without his efforts most of us today would only have WC monitors in our collections, prove that wrong. I guess everyone with an ackie, flavi-argus, mertens, lace, etc are wrong because they are inbred stock.
Id rather have CBB available to get than continued WC animals. This responce was to cover many posts on this thread not just one or 2 of them. Take it as you will, this needed to be said, cant we just be monitor hobbyists and not MS or AS? Personally I like Kaps idea, but I think its all BS.
Have a nice day everyone, and yes Frank produces absolutely beautiful animals at resonable prices. These are some in my collection, the red ackies are decended from his (of course all red and yellow ackies in North America are).

Shawn

[treevaranus]

SHVar, what are you talking about??? Where in anyone's post did they say anything criticizing the animals produced by FR, or captive populations of monitors anywhere?? Where did anyone say anything about people in North America being wrong for inbreeding monitors??

The previous posts are about monitors IN THE WILD, and how FR, although he is good at breeding CAPTIVE monitors, is way out of his league when telling others what they do in the WILD.

Nowhere did we discuss his business ethics or practices... We are arguing the fact that one cannot assume that what occurs in nature on the basis of what is seen in captivity. But you brought up captivity and breeding... and what the heck is the plug in there for? "and yes Frank produces absolutely beautiful animals at resonable prices"?- now tell me what was the significance of that???

[crocdoc]

Originally posted by SHvar
I stated fact, and quoted unnamed people, thats why IM NOT MENTIONING NAMES. Over the last few years Ive saved comments by people that are useful info to this hobby and stored it under their names on CD. Im not arguing with you. You try this frequently, then you turn it around on them and say otherwise. Anyways, on with this. Its been said by the same people more times than I care to remember, thats why I made that comment.
The idea is not about CB or wild monitors, snakes, or whatever, the idea is that it has been said that they do not multiclutch by the same people, no names because this is not intended to start any bashing on anyone. responded because I was taken out of context, I decided to clarify things so as there is no doubt as to what was meant.

Sorry, mate, you can't get away that easily. Nothing was quoted out of context on my part, for I even gave the link to where the quote came from. Was that not you that said that in that post? Here's the thing: You can't accuse a group of people (and we all know exactly who you meant when you said 'experts') of stating that multiclutching never happens, that it is a fact that they have stated this and that you actually have these quotes on CD, then accuse me of starting an argument when I ask to see this so called 'evidence'.

I'll put it into terms you may better comprehend. If I said 'SHvar said monitors are frogs, that's an exact quote and I have the post stored on my computer' and you insisted on seeing evidence of this so called quote, wouldn't you find it a bit odd if I then said 'don't argue with me, SHvar, and try to turn this into something it isn't. It's a fact that you said that'?

Has anyone actually said 'multiclutching never happens in monitors' or not? This statement keeps reappearing on various forums, yet I haven't seen anyone actually say that. Certainly not in recent years. I think you are creating imaginary straw men to knock down, much like when the AS's claim that scientists think monitor behaviour is random (yeah, right), or have a social heirarchy like wolves (again, when? where?) etc etc. It's easy to make others look like fools when you misquote them, then ‘prove’ them wrong.

So, do we get to see the quote or not? Quickly now, as I'm not going to be able to access my computer for a couple of weeks as of tomorrow.

Originally posted by SHvar
Next I responded because this also turned into a Frank Retes/Goannaranch bashfest because someone felt insulted by him and decided to slander him. Many people have inbred reptiles for many many years, yet this becomes about his animals and no one elses.

If you actually followed this thread and read it thoroughly, SHvar, you'd see that you've missed the point entirely. When Spike said 'Unfortunately I can't buy monitors from goanna ranch' I responded that he needn't be disappointed as mertens are readily available here and are less inbred, so why would he read as being upset that he couldn't get one from over there.

You can't deny that the stock over there is going to be much more inbred than here, but later, in another post in this same thread, I said that I wasn't going to enter into the debate as to whether this has a negative effect on the monitors as the ones from goannaranch look okay by me. No bashing there.

Where the bashing came in was 1. whether you'd get a straightforward answer from FR if you asked him a question about monitor husbandry (without a science bash thrown in). The standard response to this is that he doesn’t have to answer anything, which is very true, but that doesn’t stop him from jumping in on every single thread in certain forums and turning each and every one of them into a personal attack of some sort.

2.in whether you'd learn much about wild monitors from a guy that lives in Arizona and takes the odd holiday trip here. Again, ask for details of his so called ‘research’ on wild monitors, or try to discuss anything about wild monitors in general, and all you get is personal attacks rather than logical responses. You going to deny that? Need me to go get some quotes for you? I don’t have to store them on CD, new ones keep appearing on certain forums on a daily basis.

Originally posted by SHvar
Take it as you will, this needed to be said, cant we just be monitor hobbyists and not MS or AS?

That’s a very lovely, kind hearted thought, SHvar and would probably seem genuine if you didn’t obviously lean so heavily to one side by saying things like ‘and the experts say they never multiclutch’ in your posts. .

[Jeff_Favelle]

When Spike said 'Unfortunately I can't buy monitors from goanna ranch' I responded that he needn't be disappointed as mertens are readily available here and are less inbred,

I said that I wasn't going to enter into the debate as to whether this has a negative effect on the monitors as the ones from goannaranch look okay by me. No bashing there.

If there was no bashing, the first statement wouldn't have even been said in the first place. If he can't get US monitors, why even state that US monitors are inbred in the 1st place? And if inbreeding hasn't been proven to be bad, then why say the ones in Aussie are better (implied, why else would it be stated) because they are "less inbred". Doesn't make any sense at all.

But on the multi-clutching thing, one thing I don't understand is that monitor eggs have long incubation times (like 3 months). So if they multiclutch in the wild, why haven't they found like 4 or 5 clutches incubating at the same time? It would stand to reason that if the monitors multiclutch, they would lay the subsequent clutch before the previous has hatched. Weird.

[crocdoc]

Originally posted by Jeff_Favelle
If there was no bashing, the first statement wouldn't have even been said in the first place. If he can't get US monitors, why even state that US monitors are inbred in the 1st place? And if inbreeding hasn't been proven to be bad, then why say the ones in Aussie are better (implied, why else would it be stated) because they are "less inbred". Doesn't make any sense at all.

You don't need me to tell you that animals with a more diverse genetic history are always preferable over inbred animals. That doesn't mean that inbred animals are going to die tomorrow, or have huge deformities etc. It's just that, given a choice, I'd always go for the non-inbred animals first. As I said, Frank's animals look okay to me. If I lived over there and had no choice, I'd probably end up buying inbred bloodlines if the alternative was nothing at all. However, I don't live over there and neither does Spike, so we do have that choice.

You can read a 'bash' into that, if you choose, but I don't. Frank himself would (and has) said that it's preferable not to inbreed but that the choice isn't there. Despite that lack of choice, the animals are turning out okay.

Originally posted by Jeff_Favelle
But on the multi-clutching thing, one thing I don't understand is that monitor eggs have long incubation times (like 3 months). So if they multiclutch in the wild, why haven't they found like 4 or 5 clutches incubating at the same time? It would stand to reason that if the monitors multiclutch, they would lay the subsequent clutch before the previous has hatched. Weird.

Huh, and all of this time I thought you believed that they did multiclutch in the wild, but you've just presented a perfect example of how there hasn't been evidence of it so far.

Lace monitors have a longer incubation than 3 months. It's closer to ten months in the wild, yet if you open termite mounds the eggs in there are at a developmental stage one would expect if they'd been laid within the narrow band of known breeding season. In other words, if eggs are usually laid in December/January and you expect them to hatch in September/October, opening nests in November will reveal empty eggshells from hatched eggs. If they multiclutched and females laid again in February, you'd expect some nests to have eggs still developing or about to hatch (if females chose a different mound for each clutch) or a combination of developing eggs and freshly hatched shells (if females laid subsequent clutches in the same mound).

So far, this hasn't been the case.

Again, multiclutching is not impossible, just improbable and (as far as I know) thus far never been documented.

The funny thing is, I've usually avoided this discussion when it's been on other forums. The one I've always got stuck into was the old 'social monitors' one. It's easier to see the evidence for that one, as I personally don't go around opening mounds looking at eggs.

[crocdoc]

Originally posted by crocdoc
The funny thing is, I've usually avoided this discussion when it's been on other forums. The one I've always got stuck into was the old 'social monitors' one. It's easier to see the evidence for that one, as I personally don't go around opening mounds looking at eggs.

Figured I'd better explain this before everyone jumps in and says 'so how do you know, then'

There have been studies done on lace monitor reproduction and I've also known of a number of instances where zoos have had permits to collect eggs from nests and even cases of nests being exposed when farmers have knocked over a mound while clearing bushland around their house.

[SHvar]

This is why I said, NO NAMES, of course anyone reading over the forum arckieves in KS, or other forums will find many examples of this.
Of course, common sense they dont multiclutch or rarely in the wild, the conditions dont favor that to happen.
I just believe that we can all get along and discuss reptiles, monitors etc without taking sides, and trying to start arguements.
We all have something in common, we all keep monitors or are interested in them one way or another. Life is too short enjoy it and this wonderful hobby.

[crocdoc]

Originally posted by SHvar
I just believe that we can all get along and discuss reptiles, monitors etc without taking sides, and trying to start arguements.
We all have something in common, we all keep monitors or are interested in them one way or another. Life is too short enjoy it and this wonderful hobby.

I agree with you on that. I've always been amazed that it seems impossible to hold a calm. rational discussion about monitors without people getting worked up and resorting to personal attacks. In fact, I once started a thread on KS asking why it is that people get so emotional about others disagreeing with their view on wild monitors, but that thread also degraded to personal attacks and got deleted. Big surprise.

Unfortunately, SHvar, as much as you like to think you're an unbiased bystander, you're still making inflammatory remarks such as 'and the experts say monitors never multiclutch'. However, as soon as you get called up on it, you accuse me of harrassing you. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Make statements like that and expect to get called up on it.

Originally posted by SHvar
This is why I said, NO NAMES, of course anyone reading over the forum arckieves in KS, or other forums will find many examples of this.

Why would I do a search in the KS archives when, as I've already stated, I don't think I have seen anyone say that monitors never multiclutch. I have seen people say that there has never been evidence of this occurring in the wild. Also, why would I waste my time doing a search on that notoriously poor search engine when you have the very quotes you are referring to on CD?

Originally posted by SHvar
Of course, common sense they dont multiclutch or rarely in the wild, the conditions dont favor that to happen.

Okay, we agree on that. We also know that they do multiclutch in captivity. This is why I can imagine people saying they don't multiclutch in the wild, but why would they say they never multiclutch at all?


In the end, I'm not here to harrass you or anyone else. I think we should all be able to discuss all sorts of monitor related things calmly and rationally. When people such as yourself stop making inflammatory remarks (with particular people in mind, as we all know), then it'll be possible. There has been a rash of science bashing on other forums, which is why I've started the whole 'AS's' thing here. Keep in mind that I haven't posted anything inflammatory about anyone else except in retaliation to inflammatory comments, or misquotes, by someone else.

So, what's it going to be? Get along, or continue with this anti-science nonsense?

[Jeff_Favelle]

Huh, and all of this time I thought you believed that they did multiclutch in the wild, but you've just presented a perfect example of how there hasn't been evidence of it so far.

Because I'm not stubborn, I like to learn, and I try to stay objective. Just because I lean one way (ha ha nice), doesn't mean I can't provide proof for another side.

[Jeff_Favelle]

Could it be that perhaps years ago (like 10,000) there was a completely different set of seasons and food abundance that allowed for multiclutching to thrive and be of ecological importance? That is, its a mechanism that hasn't been selected to disappear because it has no negative effects, but its there because it was once beneficial.