It may be time to rethink a little (Savannah Monitors)

[crocdoc]

Somebody who works there is a member of at least one forum (I actually think two, but am unsure) who has posted pictures.

Now we're getting somewhere! Link?

[BarelyBreathing]

He's on KS. I don't know what his name is, but I can ask him the next time I see him. His name is Kyle (and I promise you, it isn't Miller, lol). Kyle's actually his middle name. His first name is John.

[crocdoc]

hmmm.... Not much to go on. We're still left with a mysterious organisation that has bred savannah monitors to multiple generations without any proof that any of us can see. Now we have a name (John, Kyle or both John and Kyle), but as he posts under another name no one can actually follow up on it and we're back where we started.

Any chance of a link?

[millertime89]

I refuse to use the KS forum simply because of the worthless format.

[BarelyBreathing]

hmmm.... Not much to go on.

He has a sav and a mangrove monitor. The savannah's name is Lilly and the mangrove is Steve. Sorry, I don't have more information. Like I said, I'll ask.

I refuse to use the KS forum simply because of the worthless format.

That's why I don't use it.

[jarich]

Did anyone notice how much more pleasant it is lately with a certain individual missing though? It's could actually be useful again!

[crocdoc]

One thing I've noticed is that the threads which go from the top left hand side of the screen all of the way down to the bottom right have stopped with his last post there. You know the ones, with the silly back and forth banter.

I suspect a few of them got together and decided they'd show everyone how dead the forum would be without him. Perhaps now is the time to start putting informative posts up there? To be honest, though, I lost interest in that forum many years ago after a few years of that constant crap from you-know-who, so I'm not really sure I want to waste my time putting together posts when I know what will happen to the threads in the end. This lull isn't likely to last.

[Gregg M]

He has a sav and a mangrove monitor. The savannah's name is Lilly and the mangrove is Steve.

That helps. LOL.

How about the name of this reptile conservation facility? I do not understand why they would need to breed savannahs for 10 years in order to get data on egg developement. Why not use a smaller species with a shorter incubation period? Hell, if they used leopard geckos, they could have gotten the results in one season with a group of animals that are far easier to breed, woud take up 1/8 th the space, and "they" would have been able to get data from each day of incubation.

Besides all that, it is a study that has been done over and over. Why take ten years plus to do something that has been done already?

Why would a reptile conservation spend 10 years breeding a monitor species that does not need conserving?

This all reminds me of how people used to say that a rodent doet was bad for hognose snakes as it was not their natural diet. The same arguments came up on how mice were junk and all this and cause fatty liver disease. Now that we have husbandry down on the species, generation after generation are being frequently bred. Long lived animals that produce long lived offspring on an unnatural diet.

[KORBIN5895]

So what is a hoggies natural diet? Fish?

[jarich]

I may be wrong, but I believe a large part of their natural diet are frogs.

[Gregg M]

So what is a hoggies natural diet? Fish?

Amphibians. Frogs and toads make up huge part of their wild diet. They are also known to eat turtle eggs.

Most hatchling will not eat a rodent unless it is scented with frog or toad. Rodents are not thier natural prey.

[infernalis]

Amphibians. Frogs and toads make up huge part of their wild diet. They are also known to eat turtle eggs.

Most hatchling will not eat a rodent unless it is scented with frog or toad. Rodents are not thier natural prey.

Same thing for Thamnophis, and I have bred them, so has Scott Felzer, Jeff Benfer, Don Belnap, and several others for multiple generations on Mice.

Garter snakes eat worms, toads, frogs and fish.

Heck I even had a Dekayi snake that ate pinkies and lived past her expectancy by almost 2 years. and they feed exclusively on Mollusks & worms.

[Gregg M]

Same thing for Thamnophis, and I have bred them, so has Scott Felzer, Jeff Benfer, Don Belnap, and several others for multiple generations on Mice.

Garter snakes eat worms, toads, frogs and fish.

Heck I even had a Dekayi snake that ate pinkies and lived past her expectancy by almost 2 years. and they feed exclusively on Mollusks & worms.

Exactly Wayne. It is all about proper husbandry and not so much about the rodent diet. When monitors fail to thrive in captivity it is always because of the conditions like heat, humidity, substrate, and nesting options or lack there of. It has very little to nothing to do with what you are feeding them.

A side note. If a keeper can not tell their varanid is getting a bit too fat by looking at it, there is a problem with the keeper.



Heck I even had a Dekayi snake that ate pinkies and lived past her expectancy by almost 2 years. and they feed exclusively on Mollusks & worms.

Dude, I caught one that regurged a grasshopper. Pretty cool.

[BarelyBreathing]

They also work with black tree monitors, several types of tropical geckos, anoles, and frogs. They apparently used to work with alligators and American crocodiles, but that was a while ago. They occasionally get baby komodos. It's called TCI.

[Gregg M]

They also work with black tree monitors, several types of tropical geckos, anoles, and frogs. They apparently used to work with alligators and American crocodiles, but that was a while ago. They occasionally get baby komodos. It's called TCI.

Any more information? Web site? write up? Any literature they have written?

Also, where do they get these baby Komodos from? And for what reason do they "occationally get them"?

[BarelyBreathing]

They got them from a zoo's breeding program to raise them for display at another zoo. I don't believe they have a website, and I'm not sure if they have any published information. I'm sorry. I'm really not as involved there as you seem to think I am.

[red ink]

Amphibians. Frogs and toads make up huge part of their wild diet. They are also known to eat turtle eggs.

Most hatchling will not eat a rodent unless it is scented with frog or toad. Rodents are not thier natural prey.

Aspidites are another example of this... won't find too many people (if any) feeding varanids to Black head pythons or womas.

[crocdoc]

yes, I've been with them for a little under two years
It's called TCI.I don't believe they have a website, and I'm not sure if they have any published information. I'm sorry. I'm really not as involved there as you seem to think I am.

So let me get this straight. You've been working there for close to two years, know for a fact they've been breeding savannah monitors to four generations but don't know from where they have baby Komodo dragons or whether or not they've published anything or whether or not they have a website or whether or not the acronym for the organisation (TCI) stands for anything...

Despite all of this, when I suggest that this organisation seems a bit 'secret', you take offence and respond as follows:

It isn't top secret. I don't have a security clearance or anything, lol. They're looking at egg development, not breeding, not nutrition. I can't give out any more information because I haven't been told much.

hmmm...okay.

Why would any zoo need someone else to raise Komodo dragons for them, anyway?

Look, I do apologise, but you have to admit that the facts all seem a bit... slippery.

[BarelyBreathing]

So let me get this straight. You've been working there for close to two years, know for a fact they've been breeding savannah monitors to four generations but don't know from where they have baby Komodo dragons or whether or not they've published anything or whether or not they have a website or whether or not the acronym for the organisation (TCI) stands for anything...

Despite all of this, when I suggest that this organisation seems a bit 'secret', you take offence and respond as follows:



hmmm...okay.

Why would any zoo need someone else to raise Komodo dragons for them, anyway?

Look, I do apologise, but you have to admit that the facts all seem a bit... slippery.


I don't take offense at all. I just think you're looking too far into what I do there. I don't work there, I just volunteer there. My time there, as mentioned, is mostly just checking enclosures. I clean poop, too, when I see it. The only people I really talk to are the vet (which is the same vet I use) and the other volunteers).

I do know where the most recent set of dragons came from, but I don't know where they went. They were just there until they were large enough to put on display at another zoo. One day I went in and they were just gone. I asked a few people where they went, and they just shrugged.

TCI stands for The ConservationHouse Inc. They just call it TCI.

I have a friend who volunteers at the zoo, and he doesn't know the details of where their animals come from, where they go if they're shipped off somewhere, or whether or not there have been studies published. He just goes in and cleans poop. That's pretty much the extent of my duties there, except I don't handle much feces.

[crocdoc]

It doesn't bother you that you've spent two years volunteering your time at a facility about which you know nothing? You've never asked "say, what do you guys do here, anyway?"

[BarelyBreathing]

I've asked the vet, and I've been given answers to my satisfaction. They breed a few animals to be displayed at zoos around the US. They study behaviors, and they study mating patterns and egg development. I've never asked for any research papers (besides the savannah monitor ones) mostly because I'm just not interested. Honestly, I could care less about anoles.

[crocdoc]

But we're talking about their monitor projects, not their anole projects. If it were me, I'd be asking a lot of questions because I'm curious. If I weren't that interested I wouldn't be volunteering there in the first place (or even doing paid work, for that matter). I also find it strange that an incorporated company which sells animals to zoos has no web presence whatsoever, not even a space-holding website with contact details.

On top of this, as Gregg asked, why do an egg development study on savannah monitors? There are monitors with shorter generation times which are also easier to house and breed from a logistics point of view (for example, ackies). Also, if the study were on egg development, they'd only need one pair doing clutch after clutch, rather than generation after generation. On top of this, given that the study is on egg development rather than diet, surely giving them mice would be far more convenient and logistically feasible than producing enough insects to keep a large number of large monitors going.

Komodo dragons are one of those display animals that attract a lot of attention. I'm perplexed as to why they'd do a stopover between zoos at an unknown facility with apparently zero web presence or history, just to be 'raised up'. Every zoo I've worked at has had holding facilities for raising animals on or off display if need be. However, for something like Komodo dragons there's no way the marketing and PR departments wouldn't want to take advantage of having cute little dragons around, so the public can be encouraged to come in to see them while they are still small and watch them grow up over time. That sort of PR is gold for a zoo.

Given their conservation status, their movements from facility to facility are closely monitored (excuse the pun), so for the people that work there to just shrug when asked where they came from and where they went to is just... bizarre.

[BarelyBreathing]

On top of this, as Gregg asked, why do an egg development study on savannah monitors? There are monitors with shorter generation times which are also easier to house and breed from a logistics point of view (for example, ackies).


I have NO idea. Even the vet doesn't know. The vet told me that bearded dragons were suggested.

The people I asked didn't work there, either. Just more volunteers.

[infernalis]

I see my thread got sent down a far different path than intended....

[bushsnake]

lol Wayne...yes it did...road to nowhere

[Gregg M]

Komodo dragons are one of those display animals that attract a lot of attention. I'm perplexed as to why they'd do a stopover between zoos at an unknown facility with apparently zero web presence or history, just to be 'raised up'. Every zoo I've worked at has had holding facilities for raising animals on or off display if need be. However, for something like Komodo dragons there's no way the marketing and PR departments wouldn't want to take advantage of having cute little dragons around, so the public can be encouraged to come in to see them while they are still small and watch them grow up over time. That sort of PR is gold for a zoo.

Given their conservation status, their movements from facility to facility are closely monitored (excuse the pun), so for the people that work there to just shrug when asked where they came from and where they went to is just... bizarre.

This raised my eyebrow as well. Why would a zoo give a species like a Komodo to a non AZA accredited faciity to raise baby dragons. when they can do it themselves? It does not add up for me. Also anyone housing Komodos needs to be a member of the International Komodo conservation effort. In the US and I believe world wide. You also need permission from the Indonesian government in order to house them as they are still property of Indonesia no matter where they were captive bred. You basically need to be AZA accredited to have this permission granted.

BarelyBreathing, please do not take this questioning personally. I know you are not running the place. I just dont think you are being told the truth.

[crocdoc]

I see my thread got sent down a far different path than intended....

Not really. The discussion is about savannah monitor diets and we're just badgering one of the witnesses about her source ;)

[BarelyBreathing]

I'm not taking anything personally. I admit I was getting quite angered about a week ago, but I was having issues in other aspects of my life that didn't include you guys, so my fuse was much shorter than it is now. Badger away. Lol.

[crocdoc]

You shouldn't take it personally, either. I'm just a habitual fact-ferret. Lol.

[BarelyBreathing]

You shouldn't take it personally, either. I'm just a habitual fact-ferret. Lol.

I'm just going to answer all the questions I don't know the answer to with "unicorns". Fair enough? It was the unicorns.

[youngster]

Those damn unicorns again?!

That's the 6th time this month. :(

[Gungirl]

The amount of unknown information does leave one to wonder what is going on "behind closed doors" Is there any chance BB you could talk to one of the people that does work there and get some more information that you can share with us? I have been reading this thread from the start with high interest. I am not that knowledgeable about monitors but I love all that I am learning. I would really love to read up on the place you volunteer at if you could get us a link.

[mo9e64]

I was thinking what if the greatest longevity for monitors isn't achieved by optimal husbandry but a balance between good husbandry and short bouts of survival mode.Their adaptation to harsh environments prolonging their lives,and the periods of good husbandry allow them to recover from the effects.Just a thought.Giving them optimal conditions in a way burning them out quicker as they grow quicker can breed and recover in shorter periods of time.

[crocdoc]

I've always had a gut feeling about that, Moe. All of the longevity records I know of for local reptiles have been animals brumated every winter. Not just lace monitors, but water dragons, bluetongues, Cunningham's skinks and snake-necked turtles. The other thing all of these animals have in common has been a spartan diet. There's that old adage about having a lean horse for a long race.

[Gregg M]

I was thinking what if the greatest longevity for monitors isn't achieved by optimal husbandry but a balance between good husbandry and short bouts of survival mode.Their adaptation to harsh environments prolonging their lives,and the periods of good husbandry allow them to recover from the effects.Just a thought.Giving them optimal conditions in a way burning them out quicker as they grow quicker can breed and recover in shorter periods of time.

I've always had a gut feeling about that, Moe. All of the longevity records I know of for local reptiles have been animals brumated every winter. Not just lace monitors, but water dragons, bluetongues, Cunningham's skinks and snake-necked turtles. The other thing all of these animals have in common has been a spartan diet. There's that old adage about having a lean horse for a long race.

You guys bring up a great point and I did actually read a study. The people doing the study equated it to automobiles. Whos car will last longer. The guy who used his to go to work everyday, go to the store, around the block a few times, or the guy who leaves his in the garage 4 or 5 months out of the year? If I can find the study, I will post it up.

Maybe by keeping them active all year every year we are actually cutting their "life expectancy" in captivity.

Brumation is also important for proper fat burning. All this talk about natural diets and natural substrates. How many folks just skip right over a very important yet very basic and natural function like brumation or aestivation? My guess is, everybody.

[BarelyBreathing]

The people doing the study equated it to automobiles.

And I get critisized for comparing monitors to children. Hey, at least both of THOSE are alive. :p :wacky::D

[Gregg M]

And I get critisized for comparing monitors to children. Hey, at least both of THOSE are alive. :p :wacky::D

LOL. Ok, you got me on that.

[BarelyBreathing]

I win, you lose, you owe me a smoothie. :p

[Gregg M]

I win, you lose, you owe me a smoothie. :p

Deal. I pick the flavor though. How does rodent sound? LOL

[BarelyBreathing]

Deal. I pick the flavor though. How does rodent sound? LOL

Disgusting! Lol.

On a semi-related note, I heard a rumor that humans can get very sick if they injest rodent blood. True or false?

[millertime89]

I wonder the TCI is a privately owned offshoot of the Denver Zoo which allows them to somehow get around the legal problems of Dragon ownership.

[infernalis]

I wonder the TCI is a privately owned offshoot of the Denver Zoo which allows them to somehow get around the legal problems of Dragon ownership.

there is no way around that one...

[KORBIN5895]

Disgusting! Lol.

On a semi-related note, I heard a rumor that humans can get very sick if they injest rodent blood. True or false?

Well blood really isn't good for you to eat no matter what source. As for eating rodents they are a staple in meat In se Asia.and I guess they are commonly eaten in Africa too.

[BarelyBreathing]

Yes, but they are COOKED when consumed. I wasn't asking about the meat. I was asking about the blood.

[bodiddleyitis]

This issue came up with a reviewer when I submitted a paper to herp review with a well known monitor breeder. The reviewer wanted it rejected on the grounds that animals kept with unlimited access to heat would have shorter life expectancy because their metabolisms were so high. No denying that, of course candles that burn twice as bright last half as long. But the aim of husbandry (pet animals aside) is to produce offspring and success therefore has to be measured by reproductive output rather than in years of survival

[infernalis]

This issue came up with a reviewer when I submitted a paper to herp review with a well known monitor breeder. The reviewer wanted it rejected on the grounds that animals kept with unlimited access to heat would have shorter life expectancy because their metabolisms were so high. No denying that, of course candles that burn twice as bright last half as long. But the aim of husbandry (pet animals aside) is to produce offspring and success therefore has to be measured by reproductive output rather than in years of survival

Any pointers for those of us who wish to see our Monitors grow old?

[BarelyBreathing]

This issue came up with a reviewer when I submitted a paper to herp review with a well known monitor breeder. The reviewer wanted it rejected on the grounds that animals kept with unlimited access to heat would have shorter life expectancy because their metabolisms were so high. No denying that, of course candles that burn twice as bright last half as long. But the aim of husbandry (pet animals aside) is to produce offspring and success therefore has to be measured by reproductive output rather than in years of survival


Well if that certainly is the case, I guess that means FR is a god, after all.

(Obviously, this is a joke.)

[red ink]

Yes, but they are COOKED when consumed. I wasn't asking about the meat. I was asking about the blood.

Being an individual originating from SE Asia... I have consumed and continue to do so, cooked pig blood in a traditional dish. :)

[crocdoc]

But the aim of husbandry (pet animals aside) is to produce offspring and success therefore has to be measured by reproductive output rather than in years of survival
There was a long exchange on BS.com about this, recently. Turns out that, with some species at least, the short survival time experienced by that very same breeder limited the reproductive output such that longer lived animals elsewhere ended up producing a lot more offspring.

[KORBIN5895]

Being an individual originating from SE Asia... I have consumed and continue to do so, cooked pig blood in a traditional dish. :)

That sounds like something I would love to try!

[mo9e64]

So will the method of getting extended longevities necessarily give the monitor a better quality of life as opposed to living at a higher rate of metabolism?Right now getting a monitor to live to the mid to late teens should be an admiral feat-these exceptions might be based on individual genetics.

[crocdoc]

So will the method of getting extended longevities necessarily give the monitor a better quality of life as opposed to living at a higher rate of metabolism? Right now getting a monitor to live to the mid to late teens should be an admiral feat-these exceptions might be based on individual genetics.

How does one define 'quality of life' with a monitor?

Going back to the burning candle analogy, even if one were to remove the relatively inactive months of brumation from the totals of their lifespans, my pair of lace monitors have outlived most captive lace monitors in overseas collections, yet to me they're still young.

I don't think examples of long-lived reptiles all comes down to genetics, unless there is some strange coincidence whereby the genetically long-lived ones always land in the hands of keepers that practice certain styles of husbandry. One particular keeper I know here in Sydney has had reptiles of several unrelated species live incredibly long lives under his care.

[mo9e64]

Is it possible that due to monitors possible higher metabolism they might not have the possible longevities of other reptiles.Sorry i meant individual genetics being just one factor.Quality of life is tough because we can only communicate through observing how they reacte to captivity,and we can still be wrong.I think by not having preconceived ideas why monitors do what they do-like my point about water basins(another thread)-under certain conditions they are using them because they are telling us they are dehydrated and under other conditions they are saying i enjoy soaking in water.A lot of behaviours that we witness don't always indicate a quality of life.I notice that people right off the bat look to make a monitor calm and tame-when i think you need conditions which make a monitor a monitor and we kinda find a way to interact on their terms.

[infernalis]

Is it possible that due to monitors possible higher metabolism they might not have the possible longevities of other reptiles.

Sorry i meant individual genetics being just one factor. Quality of life is tough because we can only communicate through observing how they react to captivity,and we can still be wrong. I think by not having preconceived ideas why monitors do what they do-like my point about water basins(another thread)-under certain conditions they are using them because they are telling us they are dehydrated and under other conditions they are saying i enjoy soaking in water.A lot of behaviours that we witness don't always indicate a quality of life.

I notice that people right off the bat look to make a monitor calm and tame-when i think you need conditions which make a monitor a monitor and we kinda find a way to interact on their terms.

I really like that post Moe, and we have made comparisons before, so I will again.

Thamnophis (Garter Snakes) have hyper metabolism compared to say a big boa or even a Royal python, the average life expectancy of one in the most Utopian captive conditions is about 13 years.

So yes, I do feel that metabolism plays a big role in longevity, that's a biological known fact with most any living creature.

In regards to "calm/Tame" I myself find problems with the people like we see on youtube every day with fat Savs that sit on their laps all day.

However, a nice tractable animal that can be trusted to let out and do some roaming (I know not everyone has a 40 acre yard) is a good thing as it gives the animal something to do with it's time.

Someone who has been posting on this thread whom I have the utmost respect for once told me that I should not be ashamed of Chomper's life, as he had it better than most any other Bok, Captive or wild and although I fell short of him living a long life by our expectations, the life he did have was a great one.

So I plan on giving these two babies an even better life than he had, even if they don't live to be geriatric.

If you really think about it, how many of the thousands from 2012 that came into the USA have it as good as those two do already? I would have to guess not many.

[crocdoc]

There's no doubt that Chomper had it better than most.

Moe, there does seem to be evidence of high metabolism animals living shorter lives, but that also gets compounded with the size factor - as larger animals tend to live longer than smaller animals and there's usually a correlation between size and metabolism. I'm pretty sure species in the tropics live shorter lives than those in temperate areas. There are exceptions, of course.

Having said all of that, we know that large monitors of at least some species can live a long time. I know of Komodo dragons exceeding 35-40 years and captive lace monitors in the same age range (plus the wild ones I've observed which have barely changed in 12 years, suggesting they've been like that for a long while). I also know of brevicauda, the smallest monitor, living 12-14 years. I'd be surprised if a good sized monitor like exanthematicus had a maximum lifespan under 20 years.

[jarich]

This issue came up with a reviewer when I submitted a paper to herp review with a well known monitor breeder. The reviewer wanted it rejected on the grounds that animals kept with unlimited access to heat would have shorter life expectancy because their metabolisms were so high. No denying that, of course candles that burn twice as bright last half as long. But the aim of husbandry (pet animals aside) is to produce offspring and success therefore has to be measured by reproductive output rather than in years of survival

Ive thought about this debate for awhile, and I wonder why breeding is the measure we use for monitor husbandry. I know that is the goal with farm animals that are used for food, milk, etc, but reproductive success doesnt seem to figure anywhere else in captive animals. Why is it that we would use that over longevity for monitors? To me its kind of like saying puppy mill dogs are healthier than your house dog.

The instinct to breed is stronger, in many cases, than even the instinct for survival. One possible example of this is female monitors that die because of retained eggs due to no suitable nesting area. In which case, it seems like breeding is the minimum level of measure in showing good husbandry, not the ultimate measure. After reading accounts of how these animals were cared for in zoos through the 70s and 80s, and that they bred in those conditions, I find the idea of offspring as the measure to be questionable. Although, maybe Im oversimplifying here and the measure is breeding to multiple generations or something like that.

As with most good debates, it seems to likely to be a mix of the two. I think we wont be able to say we figured it out until we have lots of old monitors that have bred a high number of offspring.

[jarich]

The aestivation idea is really interesting to me, especially as it relates to diet. I was reading a couple articles on the mobilization of fatty acids before, during and after aestivation. It ties in a little to the diet debate, though only if someone were feeding an all rodent diet.

[crocdoc]

...I wonder why breeding is the measure we use for monitor husbandry.
That's a fairly simple one. The only way someone could keep pairs of monitors long term without ever having them mate and lay eggs would be by withholding some crucial aspect of their husbandry, such as basking heat or the right foods. The instinct to reproduce is strong. In fact, if you are a believer of the 'selfish gene' concept a monitor, like all other living things, is a life support system for its gonads and genes. That's why, for some people, success is only measured by an animal producing the maximum number of offspring it can in as short a time as possible, even if it means early death of the adult monitor. That certainly is considered success for a salmon. That might even be considered success for a hypothetical wild monitor, if one were somehow able to produce more young in a few short years than its con-specifics could in an entire lifetime, but that's not likely to happen. There is some argument in favour of that being a success if you were a commercial breeder of captive monitors and thinking of the overall numbers, rather than individual animals. It may not be my idea of success, but my monitors are 'pets' first and breeders second, so I can't really be the judge (and before anyone pipes in and mentions the debate I had with you-know-who, keep in mind that one of my arguments was that my two 'pets' beat all of his commercial breeders at his very own measure of 'success', anyway, which was total number of offspring).

It is possible to keep non-reproductive monitors alive for a very long time under substandard conditions. Not enough basking heat, for example. They'll linger rather than thrive, but they can linger for a surprisingly long time. If anything, providing some of the 'right' things (such as a hot basking spot, therefore increasing the metabolic rate) will accelerate the animal's decline unless it is accompanied by the other 'right' things (such as an appropriate diet or ample humidity), so if longevity were one's only goal it may be best to withhold a lot of things. There is a guy on youtube that had a savannah monitor called 'Martha' that was a classic example of that. Unfortunately, most of the incriminating videos have been removed, but it was kept under incredibly substandard conditions. It had free roam in the guy's bedroom without access to basking heat, humid hide spots or anything, and was confined at night to a bare (ie not even newspaper lining it) glass aquarium shorter than the monitor's total length. When comments were made about the proper care of savannah monitors, he justified his poor 'care' for it by saying that it 'lived' for 8 years, which is longer than many captive savannah monitors.

Of course, it's not possible for monitors to breed successfully under substandard conditions like that and I'd be hesitant to call longevity under those circumstances 'success'. Which gets us to the zoos:

After reading accounts of how these animals were cared for in zoos through the 70s and 80s, and that they bred in those conditions, I find the idea of offspring as the measure to be questionable. Although, maybe Im oversimplifying here and the measure is breeding to multiple generations or something like that.
When I first started keeping and breeding monitors I read through a lot of the literature on monitor breeding in captivity. Most of the literature is about captive breeding in zoos rather than in private collections, simply because most private collectors don't publish their results. What became apparent immediately is that most zoos had marginal 'success' at best. They'd breed a species once, maybe twice, and struggled to repeat it. More often than not, the female died of reproductive failure after a few clutches and the clutches they did get had marginal hatching rates. Even though the event was published as a success, because they did get some babies from the species, I wouldn't have viewed it that way in retrospect because of what ultimately happened to the female and most of the eggs. With the benefit of hindsight, it was fairly clear what went wrong and why.

On occasion I've been asked to give keepers in public zoos a hand with their monitor setups. One of the most basic issues that a zoo has (based on my experiences working in animal institutions and visiting others) is the constraints of display. The exhibits the animals are kept in are for public viewing first, breeding of the animals second. The public likes to see nice, naturalistic displays and that sometimes causes issues when trying to set up monitors properly. For example, a real hurdle is trying to offer monitors a hot basking spot without having flood lights hanging from cords in the middle of the exhibit, where the public can see them. Believe it or not, that alone is one of the biggest issues I've seen in monitor displays in the zoos I've visited over the years.

The aestivation idea is really interesting to me, especially as it relates to diet. I was reading a couple articles on the mobilization of fatty acids before, during and after aestivation. It ties in a little to the diet debate, though only if someone were feeding an all rodent diet.

Do you mean aestivation or brumation? They can have quite different meanings for the metabolism of fat. Aestivation is sometimes associated with hot (albeit dry) conditions whereas brumation is associated with cool temperatures. In the latter instance monitors hardly burn any fat at all whereas they usually look like death coming out of a hot dry season because they have no fat reserves at all.

[infernalis]

Thoughts on spaying females??

[BarelyBreathing]

Is that a general question or to somebody specific?

[infernalis]

anyone who cares to answer...

Let's say I produce a clutch or two and wish to cease producing, yet keep my pair together.

[jarich]

That's a fairly simple one. The only way someone could keep pairs of monitors long term without ever having them mate and lay eggs would be by withholding some crucial aspect of their husbandry, such as basking heat or the right foods.

And here we have the blending that I mentioned. I completely agree that these are hardy lizards that can live in substandard conditions for a great deal of time. However, I don't consider eight or ten years a measure of success for an animal that could quite possibly live to be 30 or more. And similarly I don't consider an animal that breeds 30 clutches and then dies in seven years a success either. I would consider it successful if my animal lived for 20 years and mated in that 20 years whenever I provided a female for this. I think only because we have such a terrible track record with these animals does this come up anyway though.

Incidentally, do you or anyone else happen to know what became of Jarrett Coiro and his breeding program? I believe he started back in 2001, so if he was still breeding that would be at least around five generations by now. Im guessing we would all know about it if he was still breeding, but would be great to hear from him again either way.


Do you mean aestivation or brumation? They can have quite different meanings for the metabolism of fat. Aestivation is sometimes associated with hot (albeit dry) conditions whereas brumation is associated with cool temperatures. In the latter instance monitors hardly burn any fat at all whereas they usually look like death coming out of a hot dry season because they have no fat reserves at all.

I meant aestivation, yes. What I was referring to was fatty acid concentrations, not the fat reserves so much. It seems that in aestivation certain EFAs stay pretty constant, while others continue to increase or decrease as time goes on. However, some of the biggest differences in aestivation between snakes and lizards is that one EFA in particular, arachidonic acid, continues to increase in lizards, but stays pretty much constant in snakes. Also, unlike snakes, lizards have a drastic reduction in MUFAs levels. This would seem to suggest that lizards store fatty acids for aestivation differently than snakes. I say this may relate to diet for a few reasons, but one in particular comes to mind that is pertinent for this thread.

Daniel, you mentioned that you had a theory that Savannah's in a forested environment may eat rodents whereas the ones in the grasslands do not. Has anyone seen if the ones in the forested environment aestivate in the same way as their grassland brethren? I ask because obviously rodents are high in different EFAs than the inverts/fish/reptiles that the grassland animals seem to prevalently eat. All this is total conjecture of course, but I wonder if the possible use of rodents in the forested Sav's diet (such as the one you found) was due to them not aestivating in the same way/length. I mean, if female lizards choose food based on the EFA concentrations in their egg production (which is really cool) then it isn't a stretch to think that other major life processes would influence their food choices as well. Just a thought.

[bodiddleyitis]

Daniel, you mentioned that you had a theory that Savannah's in a forested environment may eat rodents whereas the ones in the grasslands do not. Has anyone seen if the ones in the forested environment aestivate in the same way as their grassland brethren? I ask because obviously rodents are high in different EFAs than the inverts/fish/reptiles that the grassland animals seem to prevalently eat. All this is total conjecture of course, but I wonder if the possible use of rodents in the forested Sav's diet (such as the one you found) was due to them not aestivating in the same way/length. I mean, if female lizards choose food based on the EFA concentrations in their egg production (which is really cool) then it isn't a stretch to think that other major life processes would influence their food choices as well. Just a thought.

I wouldn't call it a theory, rather idle speculation; I only ever caught one in woodland and it had rodent fur in its feces. It was one of the strangest days of my life and it's quite possible that the rodent fur was as unusual as everything else that happened on that day. I didn't go back and as far as I'm aware nobody else has looked (although I'm still waiting, not with bated breath, for these other papers about wild savannah monitors that barelybreathing made reference to). I don't think lizards have the luxury of picking the prey types that contain the best mix of nutrients, they eat what they can compete for. In the grasslands that doesn't seem to include rodents. It would make sense if females were looking for different prey types to males but as far as I am aware that hasn't been demonstrated in any monitor lizard. Females are usually much harder to find than males (I think they take fewer risks) and this difference in behaviour might also be reflected in their diet. No idea how seasonal behaviour differs between the two areas either!

[infernalis]

This list is not complete, but I found a directory of research papers.

Varanus Reference List (http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~varanus/varanusrefs.html)

[infernalis]

I don't think lizards have the luxury of picking the prey types that contain the best mix of nutrients, they eat what they can compete for.

I think you make a very valid point. Lizards don't go by any dietary charts like us humans do.


http://www.varanus.us/nutrition/rat.gif

[BarelyBreathing]

My thoughts on spaying:

It's iffy at best. First off, any surgery performed on a reptile is risky. They don't do well under anesthesia. There's a bit of a recovery time where you must take the monitor out of a "good" environment and keep it on paper towels with low humidity. It's risky.

On the other hand, a healthy, unspayed female will continue to produce eggs even if she's never with a male. This can be risky, too, because if your nesting areas aren't suitable, she could become egg bound and die.

Either way, it's a risk. I think it's a matter of personal preference.

[Gregg M]

There's a bit of a recovery time where you must take the monitor out of a "good" environment and keep it on paper towels with low humidity. It's risky.

Why would you need take it out of its proper caging and need to keep it on paper towels?

[Gregg M]

This list is not complete, but I found a directory of research papers.

Varanus Reference List (http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~varanus/varanusrefs.html)


Does my heart good to see my late but very good buddy Mark K Bayless referenced so often in that link. A great friend and a great monitor guy. A loss to the hobby for sure. I learned tons from that man.

[infernalis]

Why would you need take it out of its proper caging and need to keep it on paper towels?

So the sutures can heal without getting dirt on the wound.

[BarelyBreathing]

Why would you need take it out of its proper caging and need to keep it on paper towels?

So the sutures can heal without getting dirt on the wound.

What Wayne said.

[Gregg M]

So the sutures can heal without getting dirt on the wound.

Its really not needed to be honest. You would be suprized at how quickly varanids heal up without human intervention.

A stitched up wound will not require a stay on paper towels.

[BarelyBreathing]

...and then they wind up with CanV

[jarich]

I wouldn't call it a theory, rather idle speculation; I only ever caught one in woodland and it had rodent fur in its feces. It was one of the strangest days of my life and it's quite possible that the rodent fur was as unusual as everything else that happened on that day. I didn't go back and as far as I'm aware nobody else has looked (although I'm still waiting, not with bated breath, for these other papers about wild savannah monitors that barelybreathing made reference to). I don't think lizards have the luxury of picking the prey types that contain the best mix of nutrients, they eat what they can compete for. In the grasslands that doesn't seem to include rodents. It would make sense if females were looking for different prey types to males but as far as I am aware that hasn't been demonstrated in any monitor lizard. Females are usually much harder to find than males (I think they take fewer risks) and this difference in behaviour might also be reflected in their diet. No idea how seasonal behaviour differs between the two areas either!

I have to disagree with the idea that lizards don't have the ability, or luxury as you called it, to pick their prey. If we look at what their stomach contents are, there seems to be some uniformity not just in what they eat, but in the general percentages. It shows a correlation with the other studies of stomach contents as well. This can't just be coincidence. And I don't think they just wander around aimlessly searching for anything they can put in their mouths. They hunt, they look in specific places and they seem to chose those places based on trying to find a certain type of prey. Of course if something edible presents itself along the way Im sure they'll eat it, but they seem to hunt in a habitual way. I don't think its beyond reason to think that they are hunting those specific prey for a reason.

If you look at studies of captive animals, this is exactly what they do when given a choice. I know, I know, those are captive animals, but again it seems unlikely that captive animals possess a capacity that wild animals would not. And those captive animals specifically chose prey based on dietary requirements, especially females. Like I said before, there was one particular study by Speake, et all that showed that females chose prey based on the particular fatty acid profiles off of their eggs. Granted it was scincid lizards, but again it seems a pretty easy to use that example to postulate on monitors too.

[crocdoc]

I have to disagree with the idea that lizards don't have the ability, or luxury as you called it, to pick their prey. If we look at what their stomach contents are, there seems to be some uniformity not just in what they eat, but in the general percentages. It shows a correlation with the other studies of stomach contents as well. This can't just be coincidence. And I don't think they just wander around aimlessly searching for anything they can put in their mouths.
I think it would depend on the species of monitor, but some monitors are just generalists and eat whatever they can find. If there's a consistency in percentages of food found in their stomach, it's probably a reflection of the availability of those food items. I can recall reading papers on the stomach contents of lace monitors, for example, and what the researchers found is that they were eating just about every meat-based life form they stumbled across, from tiny insects to road-killed kangaroos. In one particular study the researcher was hard pressed finding a correlation between the type of food eaten and the size of the monitor, for the largest lace monitors in his study occasionally ate invertebrates and the smallest lace monitors in his study were found with scavenged kangaroo meat in their stomachs. The proportion was different, of course, and the small monitors were unable to take in whole small mammals such as possums and rabbits, which the larger animals were doing. Otherwise monitors of all size groups were eating a wide variety of prey, from insects to large mammals.


I know, I know, those are captive animals, but again it seems unlikely that captive animals possess a capacity that wild animals would not.
It's important not to confuse capacity with options. Captive monitors often do behave differently from wild monitors, not because their instincts have altered but because their options aren't the same. One thing that's available to captives that isn't usually available to wild monitors is a predictable, steady supply of food. Most wild monitors are lean, hungry beasts and they are highly unlikely to pass up a meal, whereas one often sees images of captives lazily taking food from tongs or even ignoring food in their enclosure, knowing that it'll still be there to be eaten later. That's something you'd rarely see a wild monitor do.

It's true that many wild animals, even non-specialists, develop search images for certain types of food and will ignore others, but that's usually only when that particular food item is in extreme abundance and it is advantageous to concentrate on that food rather than waste time looking for other, harder to find morsels. That's why fly fishing for some species of trout is such hard work - you have to 'match the hatch' and only present flies that look like whatever insect is emerging that particular day, as the trout will be concentrating on those and ignoring everything else. Another example is the behaviour of crows around garter snake dens. Instead of eating the whole snake, as they might normally do, they only eat the livers (which they remove with the precision of a surgeon). When there are that many snakes available, they don't need to eat the whole thing but can afford to concentrate on the most nutritious item.

However, those seasonal abundances, at least ones large enough that they might cause a monitor to concentrate on only one food item, are uncommon and most of the time generalist species of monitors will eat whatever they stumble upon.

[Gregg M]

...and then they wind up with CanV

Wind up with what?

[SpOoKy]

Yellow fungus disease???

[bodiddleyitis]

I have to disagree with the idea that lizards don't have the ability, or luxury as you called it, to pick their prey.

No it's not ability, by luxury I mean the breadth of niche. They are physically capable of it but to do so (be a generalist) would mean them competing direct with lots of different animals for the same prey types, and over evolutionary time that hasn't been feasible for savannah monitors. Their stomach contents are quite uniform and they don't wander about "aimlessly" eating whatever fits in their stomachs. But Nile monitors eat whatever they can swallow and so do lace monitors and all the other generalists monitor species that can be attracted to carrion. The BIG difference between lacies and Nile monitors is the dentition; Nile monitors can be durophagous, but if lacies tried it their magnificent slicing teeth would just snap. What it means is that Nile monitors can (and do) switch between a very generalised diet of animals dead or alive and a diet comprised largely of snails. If there are other foods available they won't bother with the snails, but if need be they can live on snails indefinitely, and they have very few competitors for that sort of food. This durophagous dentition occurs only in Polydaedalus and Philippinosaurus monitor lizards.

It's interesting that you talk about food choice experiments because there's very little literature about it in the context of monitor lizards.
I have tried it myself and the results bore no relation whatsoever to the diets in the wild. So I don't think it's safe to postulate at all about that until there is some evidence. Those are the sort of experiments that anybody who keeps lizards in boxes can do, it would be very interesting to see what happens.

[bodiddleyitis]

Also, are there any Australian monitors that are known not to be attracted to carrion? I guess keithhornei might not be, but what about the Varanus and Odatria species?

[infernalis]

Those are the sort of experiments that anybody who keeps lizards in boxes can do, it would be very interesting to see what happens.


I have seen exanthematicus take rodents over inverts in captivity with my own eyes, and a recent post on another forum there is a member who posted that his sav will take nothing but rodents.

Is it a learned behaviour? that I cannot say nor care to speculate.

When Chomper roamed the property, if it moved, he ate it.

[BarelyBreathing]

Yes, yellow fungus. Somebody had a beardie who got yellow fungus in the surgical site after an amputation. It didn't end well.

[infernalis]

You should see the picture of stumpy at mampam.com.

That sav had no tail.

[Gregg M]

Yes, yellow fungus. Somebody had a beardie who got yellow fungus in the surgical site after an amputation. It didn't end well.

Yellow fungus disease is not known to infect varanids (at leat there are no reported cases) and it is not caused by open wounds. Proper ambient temps and good husbandry will keep yellow fungus at bay. Yellow fungus disease is associated with poor husbandry, not cuts, scrapes, or otherwise. A reptile that just had surgery would NOT be no more subseptible than one who has not had surgery.

I really wonder where some of this information comes from. Whats with all the scare mongering?

[jarich]

I think it would depend on the species of monitor, but some monitors are just generalists and eat whatever they can find. If there's a consistency in percentages of food found in their stomach, it's probably a reflection of the availability of those food items. I can recall reading papers on the stomach contents of lace monitors, for example, and what the researchers found is that they were eating just about every meat-based life form they stumbled across, from tiny insects to road-killed kangaroos. In one particular study the researcher was hard pressed finding a correlation between the type of food eaten and the size of the monitor, for the largest lace monitors in his study occasionally ate invertebrates and the smallest lace monitors in his study were found with scavenged kangaroo meat in their stomachs. The proportion was different, of course, and the small monitors were unable to take in whole small mammals such as possums and rabbits, which the larger animals were doing. Otherwise monitors of all size groups were eating a wide variety of prey, from insects to large mammals.

True, but this thread is specifically related to exanthematicus, who do not appear to be generalists. Daniel gave a good model, I think, in stating that those monitors that will eat carrion seem to belong to a particular adaptation regarding diet, that other monitors do not belong to. (Please correct me, Daniel, if I am misrepresenting what you said earlier) Carrion traps do not work on savannahs, they do work on lacies. I think that difference is very important.

Yes, the seasonal availability of food will determine the percentages quite a bit, undoubtedly. This does not negate the argument however, as each new season there are multiple prey that become available and not just one. However, if the nutrients of the varying prey are, in each season, shown to be roughly the same in scope and quality, that would be a strong argument that the species was still seeking out a particular group of nutrients.

Its important not to confuse capacity with options. Captive monitors often do behave differently from wild monitors, not because their instincts have altered but because their options aren't the same. One thing that's available to captives that isn't usually available to wild monitors is a predictable, steady supply of food. Most wild monitors are lean, hungry beasts and they are highly unlikely to pass up a meal, whereas one often sees images of captives lazily taking food from tongs or even ignoring food in their enclosure, knowing that it'll still be there to be eaten later. That's something you'd rarely see a wild monitor do.

I can only see that type of behaviour being a problem either with diet or habitat. And its severely depressing to think about.


Its true that many wild animals, even non-specialists, develop search images for certain types of food and will ignore others, but that's usually only when that particular food item is in extreme abundance and it is advantageous to concentrate on that food rather than waste time looking for other, harder to find morsels. That's why fly fishing for some species of trout is such hard work - you have to 'match the hatch' and only present flies that look like whatever insect is emerging that particular day, as the trout will be concentrating on those and ignoring everything else. Another example is the behaviour of crows around garter snake dens. Instead of eating the whole snake, as they might normally do, they only eat the livers (which they remove with the precision of a surgeon). When there are that many snakes available, they don't need to eat the whole thing but can afford to concentrate on the most nutritious item.

Exactly my point! What you are talking about is selection based on specific nutritional needs rather than calories, because of an abundance of prey. When caloric intake is not the only measure by which prey is chosen, then nutritional content seems to be. This is a situation much like captive animals are looking at. So do we feed these non carrion eaters different than we would feed the generalist carrion eaters? I think so.

[jarich]

No it's not ability, by luxury I mean the breadth of niche. They are physically capable of it but to do so (be a generalist) would mean them competing direct with lots of different animals for the same prey types, and over evolutionary time that hasn't been feasible for savannah monitors. Their stomach contents are quite uniform and they don't wander about "aimlessly" eating whatever fits in their stomachs. But Nile monitors eat whatever they can swallow and so do lace monitors and all the other generalists monitor species that can be attracted to carrion. The BIG difference between lacies and Nile monitors is the dentition; Nile monitors can be durophagous, but if lacies tried it their magnificent slicing teeth would just snap. What it means is that Nile monitors can (and do) switch between a very generalised diet of animals dead or alive and a diet comprised largely of snails. If there are other foods available they won't bother with the snails, but if need be they can live on snails indefinitely, and they have very few competitors for that sort of food. This durophagous dentition occurs only in Polydaedalus and Philippinosaurus monitor lizards.

It's interesting that you talk about food choice experiments because there's very little literature about it in the context of monitor lizards.
I have tried it myself and the results bore no relation whatsoever to the diets in the wild. So I don't think it's safe to postulate at all about that until there is some evidence. Those are the sort of experiments that anybody who keeps lizards in boxes can do, it would be very interesting to see what happens.


Absolutely right, the only studies I know of are from 'easier' lizards, not monitors. You mean you have tried this with monitors? What parameters/controls did you set on it? Do you think if both were reduced to a paste this would take away the movement/visual aspects that might effect their appeal? (Im assuming you used live prey, but this might not be true)

[BarelyBreathing]

Yellow fungus disease is not known to infect varanids (at leat there are no reported cases) and it is not caused by open wounds. Proper ambient temps and good husbandry will keep yellow fungus at bay. Yellow fungus disease is associated with poor husbandry, not cuts, scrapes, or otherwise. A reptile that just had surgery would NOT be no more subseptible than one who has not had surgery.

I really wonder where some of this information comes from. Whats with all the scare mongering?

I know of one well documented case of CanV in a savannah monitor. The animal had to have both hind legs amputated. I'm not sure of his recovery at this time.

Yes, CanV is associated with improper husbandry, but unfortunately, it is far more prevelant that most people realize. It's fairly easy to treat if it's just a surface infection, but when it gets in an open wound (like in the bearded dragon case, or in the case of this monitor) it is almost incurable. Reptiles with open wounds are more prone to infection than those who are in tip top shape.

Something to watch out for.

[Gregg M]

I know of one well documented case of CanV in a savannah monitor. The animal had to have both hind legs amputated. I'm not sure of his recovery at this time. . Link it please.

Yes, CanV is associated with improper husbandry, but unfortunately, it is far more prevelant that most people realize. It's fairly easy to treat if it's just a surface infection, but when it gets in an open wound (like in the bearded dragon case, or in the case of this monitor) it is almost incurable. Reptiles with open wounds are more prone to infection than those who are in tip top shape.

Something to watch out for.

If your husbandry is proper, it is not something you need to worry about. The yellow fungus can not live in a properly heat monitor cage or on a properly heated reptile. This fungus is also commonly found in bearded dragons.

Reptiles that have open wounds are NOT more prone to yellow fungus disease. There is nothing written in any literature to suggest this at all. The yellow fungus causes open lessions, it is not started in open lessions. It starts as a skin infection.

[BarelyBreathing]

Wayne, can I link to another forum on here?

[BarelyBreathing]

Wayne has given me permission to post this:
Nacho updates (http://www.reptileforums.net/forums/showthread.php?84739-Nacho-updates)

[Gregg M]

Wayne has given me permission to post this:
Nacho updates (http://www.reptileforums.net/forums/showthread.php?84739-Nacho-updates)

That is far from a "well documented case". There is nothing other than what was stated by the OP. So, they were able to diagnose but did not know how to treat it?

Besides all that, even if it was CANV (the only case ever seen in a varanid), it was not because of a surgury or open wound. As the OP in that thread stated, it was from imporper husbandry. I am just saying that keeping your reptile on dirt after a surgery will NOT lead to yellow fungus disease. It is wong to state it will happen as fact. That is what you did and there is NOTHING to back that up.

I do not understand why you would say they "will wind up with CANV" if kept on dirt with an open wound or a stitched up one. CANV is a dermatological disease caused by suboptimal temps, not an infection cause by wounds and dirt.

[BarelyBreathing]

I believe in another thread, the OP stated that it got inside his skin when he cut himself on some flooring.

[crocdoc]

Even if that monitor with the canV got it through a wound, that's more a case of a combination of circumstances (poor husbandry + wound + presence of the fungus in that particular environment) than an inability of monitors to fight off infection. There have been many documented cases of canV in crocodilians, for example, which got the fungal infection without having any wounds, and yet there have been documented cases of crocodilians losing an entire limb in a fight and not getting infected by anything (fungus or bacteria). That one instance of canV in a monitor is the only instance I've ever heard of a monitor getting an infection like that from a wound.

I'm definitely of the school of thought that a healthy monitor with access to a hot basking spot has phenomenal healing power with a strong resistance to infections. Provided the vet has stitched up the wound properly (in the case of a removal of the ovaries, which is what is currently being discussed) it will heal quickly. Even if one were to want to play it safe by putting the monitor on newspaper to keep the wound clean, the length of time for this to be necessary would be minimal and would not affect the monitor's health from lack of humidity.

Having said all of that, I suspect that after you got a couple of clutches of eggs and watched them hatch there's not much chance of you putting a stop to it by having the female spayed, Wayne. I've had 20+ clutches from my lace monitors and still get as excited digging out the eggs and watching the hatchlings emerge.

On the topic of the healing properties of monitors, my pair got into a minor fight a number of years ago. It was the female's fault - she started it - but she managed to push the male's buttons and, unusual for him, he bit her on the side. Her skin on that side was shredded, hanging in a series of parallel strips as though she'd had a run-in with Freddy Krueger. It was late evening, so taking her to the vet was not an option. First off I tried the little sterile-strips one buys at the pharmacist, to hold her skin together, but they just didn't cut it and kept falling off. Fortunately I had roll of gaffer tape on hand. This is the real gaffer tape, used by gaffers on movie sets to tape sound cables and other wiring to the floor so people don't trip on it. It's cloth based and incredibly tough and sticky. I cut it into strips and put them perpendicular to the strips of the female monitor's skin, to hold the skin together. Then I took some spray-on bandage and kept spraying until the whole area had the consistency of cardboard. I figured it would all come off the next time she shed her skin. It did the trick - no infection and not even a scar.

For future wounds I now have superglue on hand.

[Gregg M]

I believe in another thread, the OP stated that it got inside his skin when he cut himself on some flooring.

That is not how CanV works.

If the animal did indeed cut itself on flooring, this tells me that the animal was not being kept properly and that it was not on dirt at all.

What most likely really happend is the yellow fungus disease went un-noticed until it started to cause an ulseration or "abscess". Not knowing what actually caused the ulseration, the keeper just speculated that the Sav must have cut itself on an improper substrate.

[infernalis]

the more this discussion rolls on, the more I am learning about things I probably would have never asked about.

[BarelyBreathing]

The animal was free roaming the house when he got cut (I believe).

[Gregg M]

The animal was free roaming the house when he got cut (I believe).

That is still neither here nor there. The fact is, CANV is a skin disease, not an infection from a wound. Can you get athletes foot from cutting your toe on bit of flooring? No. The same way you cant get jock itch from catching yourself in your zipper.

Reptiles with wounds are not more prone to fungal infections of the skin as you wrongly stated.

[BarelyBreathing]

I've got to be honest, I am only half reading these replies. I am SOOOO TIRED right now. I'll try to get some decent responses in tomorrow.