Monitor Care & Natural History; Zoo & Pet Experiences

[murrindindi]

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

Please see comment#29; I'll read some of the forwarded articles when possible; cannot comment on these studies without reading...given what I know of note-taking/daily log entries at the zoo, hard to imagine how studies can accurately examine deaths dating back 4 decades, but, again, I'll need to read the articles. It will take some time, no point in my commenting until then..

Hi, sorry I must have been typing my last response when you typed this.
Hopefully now you`ve clarified your intention to comment further in due course, we will all have the patience to wait. Thanks!

[dinosaurdammit]

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

Please do not comment on my perceived personality traits, pl see earlier response to this post also.

Just my two cents but it sounds like you just dont want to hear ANYTHING negative and anything negative is an attack and just plain wrong to you. This is not the case- people disagree and are allowed to do so ESPECIALLY when an animals wellbeing is on the line.

[infernalis]

I am only going to say this once...

If people cannot respond in a professional manner in this thread, please do not respond at all.

This thread has attracted attention from all over, and I will not allow it to become a circus of slander.

[bronxzoofrank]

Originally Posted by crocdoc

There is nothing personal in these comments. It's simply a matter of what we know about varanid husbandry having changed over the years and those low basking temperatures are known to result in issues. When new keepers see a blog by someone that says they have worked at major zoos, they may try to copy the techniques outlined in your care section and that will lead to trouble for their monitors. We have a responsibility to ensure people start out on the right foot.


The exceptions to the rule are the monitors that fare well at those low basking temperatures. You'd be surprised at the difference when monitors are kept at higher basking temperatures. They feed better, grow faster, live longer and will breed readily. There may be a number of ways to go about providing proper care, but if one has been proven time and time again to be better than another, it is best that one puts that technique into a care sheet.

Not referring to differing opinions, there was an insulting message that was removed by the moderator, 2 more have been posted recently, no time to debate opinions as to what is insulting, etc., will try to read forwarded articles, citations shortly.

[Akuma223]

My apologies on my earlier comment....

[crocdoc]

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

...no time to debate opinions as to what is insulting, etc.

Hopefully that's not all of the content you gleaned from my post. The first line was about insults, the rest was about monitor care. Online care sheets are only of value to keepers if they are going to benefit their charges. It is not just my opinion, but that of every successful modern monitor keeper, that low basking temperatures (such as those outlined in your care sheet) are damaging to monitors in the long term. Perhaps you should just take the care sheet offline until you have a chance to read the literature, so it doesn't do damage in the interim?

Just a suggestion.

[bronxzoofrank]

Originally Posted by crocdoc

Hopefully that's not all of the content you gleaned from my post. The first line was about insults, the rest was about monitor care. Online care sheets are only of value to keepers if they are going to benefit their charges. It is not just my opinion, but that of every successful modern monitor keeper, that low basking temperatures (such as those outlined in your care sheet) are damaging to monitors in the long term. Perhaps you should just take the care sheet offline until you have a chance to read the literature, so it doesn't do damage in the interim?

Just a suggestion.

Perhaps my earlier point has been lost in the shuffle...while basking, monitors and other lizards raise their body temperatures over that of the basking site; hopefully the articles I've been forwarded re deaths attributed to basking temperatures will have info as to basking site temps, body temps of monitors; re the study conducted at the Bronx Zoo, I do not imagine this will be the case, as I have a good handle on what type of info is routinely entered on animal record cards, as such was part of my job for many years; I'll check, perhaps other means were found to address the issue. As for the article, the site managers are free to do as they see fit, please address your suggestion to them.

[crocdoc]

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

while basking, monitors and other lizards raise their body temperatures over that of the basking site;

No point has been lost, anywhere (and, speaking of insults, I find it incredibly condescending when people assume that disagreement means the other side has missed their point).

Many studies have been done on the preferred body temperatures of monitors and their core body temperatures while out foraging. Let's take one of the local monitors, the lace monitor, Varanus varius. It's not only local to my area, but is my favourite monitor, is the one I keep at home and is one of the species that you've failed with at the Bronx Zoo.

A great study was done on thermoregulation in wild lace monitors by Brian Weaver, quite a number of years ago. His study site was a fair way south of here, near the border between NSW and Victoria. Far from the tropics, this area would be considered warm temperate, bordering on temperate. Despite this, the monitors maintained a body temperature of around 36C (96.8C). In order to gain that temperature quickly, they position themselves perpendicularly to the sun and flatten out their body. They'll often get their body temperature a bit above that core temperature, especially if they are ill or have an infection. Even on a normal day, their skin gets phenomenally hot after basking. I've measured the skin temperature of my pair immediately after basking and it can be up to 44C (which, if that were the core temperature, would be lethal). This does not bother them. The point is to bask as little as possible so they can spend more time active and foraging.

With a basking temperature of 95F, the monitor would pretty much never be able to attain that temperature and, if it did, it would take a day of basking to do so.

Here's the thing - if you take a non-contact temperature gun and check the temperature on any surface in lace monitor habitat (I've done this, trust me), it is way above the preferred body temperature of a monitor. Even on a moderate day (like today - I've just gone outside to do this) the surface temperature is 50C in the sun. On a hot day the surface temperature of a neutral coloured rock is around 65C.

What high basking temperatures mean for our captives is that they are able to metabolise their meals properly (especially calcium and D3, but also protein etc) and self-medicate by raising their temperature above preferred core temperatures when ill. Much like mammals get a fever to raise their body temperature. Your lace monitors have developed gout and lived short lives because they weren't able to metabolise their meals properly. Let's not forget your breeding records with that species, which I believe stands at 0, despite them being a very easy species to breed.

I honestly don't mind if you want to stubbornly hold on to superseded husbandry techniques, but to put them onto a website in care sheet format is misleading new keepers, in my opinion. You may mean well, but you will cause many animals to suffer, long term. I've worked in enough zoos to be aware that zoos aren't always 'best practice' when it comes to reptile care, but many new keepers reading your care sheet may not be aware of that and will take your word as gospel. To me that is irresponsible.

[crocdoc]

By the way, what goes for lace monitors goes doubly so for other species as most monitors are tropical and many live in incredibly hot habitats.

[bronxzoofrank]

I've just read the Zoo biology study; perhaps I missed something, but I did not see any data re basking temps provided or body temps reached (as mentioned, this is as I expected, given my familiarity with the study site's record keeping system); the gout found on autopsy is often associated with low body temps; a wide variety of other factors (husbandry, medical conditions that we do not yet understand, etc.) are also likely involved in some or all of the deaths. Some of these were well covered in the article, others not.

[crocdoc]

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

...the gout found on autopsy is often associated with low body temps;

...and you don't think the gout often associated with low body temperatures is relevant to what we are discussing?

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

a wide variety of other factors (husbandry, medical conditions that we do not yet understand, etc.) are also likely involved in some or all of the deaths.

Ah, but in this day and age we do understand many of them. That may not have been the case when you were a keeper. Many of them are associated with low body temperatures.

I do have a question to ask: Why do you have such a strong (dare I say emotional) investment in your recommended basking temperatures, given that any modern keeper, across the board, would advise you to raise them?

[crocdoc]

I have almost missed this:

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

I've just read the Zoo biology study; perhaps I missed something, but I did not see any data re basking temps provided or body temps reached (as mentioned, this is as I expected, given my familiarity with the study site's record keeping system);

So, if the Bronx Zoo is not in the habit of keeping data on basking temperatures, on what do you base your (clearly immovable) recommended basking temperatures?

[_Varanidae_]

Originally Posted by bronxzoofrank

Hi,

Thanks for your input; we've done very well with those temperatures for a wide variety of species at the Bronx Zoo;

I am curious what criteria this success is based on. Lifespan? Long-term health? Reproductive success?

The reason why I ask is because it appears, based on your comment about briefly working with Sam Lee, that you left the BZ in the mid to late 1990s. This was likely before, or possibly towards the beginning of some limited reproductive success at the zoo, as the BZ didn't experience its first successful hatching of a monitor lizard until 1997 (V. beccarii), and this was from a confiscated pair that laid eggs a few days after arriving at the zoo. The first true captive breeding was of V. mertensi in 1998, followed by V. ornatus in 1999 (all successful reproductive events at the BZ are documented in the second paper I linked to earlier). My point is that if you are basing your comment on reproductive success, there wasn't much success occurring during the time you were there, if any.

The fact the zoo bred several species of monitor lizard since the late 1990s does not necessarily equate to them doing particularly well in the collection either, as when you look closely at egg viabilities (also reported in the reproductive study)- they have been very low for all species except V. ornatus (which only produced 2 clutches at the zoo). Here is some egg viability data taken from the study:

V. melinus: "A total of seven V. melinus offspring were hatched from a clutch of 10 eggs in 2007. Eight additional clutches have been laid by two wild-caught females, but lacked viability."

V. prasinus: "Since 2003, a total of 18 V. prasinus have been produced by two females, .... An additional 21 clutches have been produced by a total of four females since 2002; however, most of these eggs were nonviable, and on a few occasions contained fully developed embryos which died in their eggs prior to hatching."

V. beccarii: "...Thirteen additional clutches have been produced by one captive-bred and three wild-caught females; most were nonviable, but some eggs from one clutch incubated the entire term and died with fully-developed embryos."

V. mertensi: "An additional 25 clutches were laid by five females since 1995; however, eggs from these clutches were nonviable, died full-term, or were intentionally culled" (only 2 clutches were actually culled).

V. kordensis, V. olivaceus, V. salvator, V. storri, V. panoptes horni,
V. bengalensis nebulosus, and V. indicus: "All clutches received from these species lacked viability."

"A total of 20 clutches were produced by three V. kordensis..."

"Three clutches were produced by two female V. olivaceus ..."

"Six clutches were produced by five female V. salvator ..."

These statistics suggest a history of inadequate reproductive husbandry, as you will see has also been the case for most other zoos if you review the literature.

What about health as a criterion? If you look at the retrospective study I linked to, you will see that many of the diseases and disorders experienced by monitors at the BZ such as gout and reproductive complications are easily preventable with simple "modern" changes to husbandry.

You are correct in that the data from this study did not pinpoint specific problems at the BZ, as it would be near-impossible to effectively correlate specific individuals and their disease to specific husbandry given to that particular animal throughout its life. However, what the study does identify and illustrate, which I think is even more important, is that many of the confirmed causes of death are consistent with common health issues linked to problematic areas of captive husbandry which have already been identified and discussed elsewhere for varanid lizards.

The main purpose of the study, beyond presenting important mortality data, was to introduce zoos and their staff to these known husbandry and reproductive management issues, because many, like I've said are not well informed or familiar with the existing literature and current keeping methodologies, and keep making the same mistakes over and over again. Many today still practice antiquated husbandry, and are relying on 15+ year old husbandry guidelines as a reference.

Having also worked within the zoo industry for many years, including at well-funded, major zoos, tradition (the "this is what we've always done and things have worked out fine" attitude) tends to have a much stronger influence on husbandry practices than modern day advancements or published literature suggesting the contrary. I think I have presented considerable evidence of this here in this thread, and your persistent push-back from these modern keeping methodologies despite being unfamiliar with the literature, and even in the light of evidence demonstrating that these outdated practices have not been effective (i.e., limited reproductive success, mortality at the BZ) is further evidence of this.

I want to see zoos, as well as private keepers succeed and attempt to provide what's best for their captives. After all, that's their number one job. Having seen and experienced this obstructive mentality firsthand in the zoo field has given me the opportunity and inspiration to help improve the current situation, with the hopes of improving welfare, lifespan, and reproductive success in zoos. This is why I've invested more than four years reviewing existing literature, compiling data, running statistical analyses, and preparing the manuscripts for these studies.

This is also why we founded and continue to produce the varanid research journal Biawak (International Varanid Interest Group -). Varanid keeping should be about progress and advancement, not maintaining the status quo...

[bronxzoofrank]

While I applaud everyone's enthusiasm, I simply do not have the time to contact colleagues and do the follow-up research that would be required to properly respond to some of the comments, nor to wade through the barbs, veiled insults and "pet trade vs zoo" comparisons that are becoming increasingly frequent. I'm going to ask the moderators to remove the article/thread. Good luck to all, Frank

[bronxzoofrank]

Originally Posted by crocdoc

...and you don't think the gout often associated with low body temperatures is relevant to what we are discussing?



Ah, but in this day and age we do understand many of them. That may not have been the case when you were a keeper. Many of them are associated with low body temperatures.

I do have a question to ask: Why do you have such a strong (dare I say emotional) investment in your recommended basking temperatures, given that any modern keeper, across the board, would advise you to raise them?

Mentioned gout to show I was aware of the possibility, and that other factors may be involved as well; not daring to use names here, given the tone of this thread, but personal and professional contact with the leading vets in this area convinces me that there is a great deal that we do not know.