# Small monitor



## julespython (Feb 16, 2012)

What is the smallest monitor besides akies. I currently have 2 sand goannas in my 4x2x2 tank but I'm getting rid of them because that is obviously to small for them. Oh and the monitor has to love the whole desert, sand, burrow thing because that is what the tank is like and I wouldn't want to get a forest sort of monitor cos It wouldn't match my hot desert, sandy, ground dwelling theme. I'll get some pics up of the tank as soon as I can.


----------



## saximus (Feb 16, 2012)

Varanus brevicauda or spenceri


----------



## Bodie (Feb 16, 2012)

saximus said:


> Varanus brevicauda or spenceri



He's getting rid of his Gouldii as they're too big for his enclosure, why would he get a Spenceri?


----------



## Pilbarensis (Feb 16, 2012)

Storrs and Gillens would work. You could easily fit a pair in that sized tank.


----------



## saximus (Feb 16, 2012)

Bodie said:


> He's getting rid of his Gouldii as they're too big for his enclosure, why would he get a Spenceri?



Because they're smaller than gouldii and they're awesome. You're right though, sorry, I didn't notice the actual enclosure size before so that wouldn't work either


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Feb 16, 2012)

I have deleted the first part of this as the information was not useful.

Varanus goudii has a recorded max length of 1.65 m and V. spenceri, which has a stockier build, 1.2 m.

Blue

*EDIT:* From discussion following this post, the _gouldii_ length is exceptional (if correct) and the _spenceri_ length is an under-statement. Snout-vent lengths (SVL) are a better indicator of size for enclosure than the total lengths (TL) quoted here.


----------



## crocdoc (Feb 16, 2012)

saximus said:


> Because they're smaller than gouldii and they're awesome.



Someone tell that to this male - 1.5m and massive!







Bluetongue - I'd be wary of quoting lengths from books. _'Varanus gouldii'_ as a species used to include what is now called _Varanus panoptes_. Although we now know they are separate species, some of the older maximum length measurements (and other details) still persist in the literature. Consequently, you'll see a maximum length of 1.6m for _Varanus gouldii_ when that would have been recorded from _Varanus panoptes_. _V. gouldii_ doesn't get that large. The other thing to consider is that total lengths are misleading when gauging or comparing size. V. spenceri have a stubby tail compared to a _V. gouldii_, so a 1.2m _V. spenceri_ would be much larger than a 1.2m _V. gouldii_.

As a bit of an aside (but sort of related to the _V. gouldii_/_V. panoptes _story), the _Varanus rosenbergi_ around Sydney were thought to be _V. gouldii_ many years ago, too. Even though they have since been split, every now and then one will still see references in the literature to _V. gouldii_ having an unmarked tail tip 'except for the population around Sydney, which has bands down to the tip of its tail'. That's a _V. rosenbergi _characteristic. 


To the original poster - if you're not a fan of ackies and want a small monitor that will use that space, I'd agree with _V. gilleni_ or _V. brevicauda_ as good choices.


----------



## richardsc (Feb 16, 2012)

because your in victoria,scrub brevies off your list,gillens or storrs would be ok,possably freckled and blackheaded monitors to but they can get bigger than ackies,so cage size u mentioned would be as small as you would want for them,more so blackheads


----------



## crocdoc (Feb 16, 2012)

I've always found Victoria's licensing bewildering. People can get crocodiles without issue and there's no experience/minimum age limit for getting lace monitors (which, in my opinion, are far more dangerous captives than most venomous snakes when it comes down to the likelihood of sustaining permanent damage), but _brevicauda_ are verboten. What's with that? They're easily bred in captivity, so it can't be a rarity thing, and they're unbelievably hardy, so it can't have anything to do with difficulty of care. Bizarre.


----------



## El_Lagarto (Feb 16, 2012)

NSW is not much better. I always find it astonishing that you can keep a number if small elapids on a Class 1 that are very difficult to feed and often require force feeding their entire lives; however you can't keep a number of species of lizards that are very easy to care for and breed readily (V.storri and V. brevacauda included).


----------



## saximus (Feb 16, 2012)

Does it come from the "old" days when these things were rare and the departments just haven't caught up or is there some strange reasoning that we just aren't privvy to?


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Feb 16, 2012)

*Crocdoc*, 

If this is in relation to a recent accusation someone posted, forget it. I made the mistake of responding to their first post. It comes about from not being able to satisfactorily justify their initial rudeness and so they sought to belittle me in an attempt to nullify my initial criticisms. Whilst I am far from impressed, the only effective way to end such nonsense was to ignore it.

Please feel free to check the figures I have quoted against any available data.

If you want more accurate data on V. gouldii, northern form to 1.6 m, southern form to1.5 m and desert form (often referred to as the subspecies flavirufus) to 1.4 m. Gould's also vary according to locale within the three regions. The sizes recorded are for Gouldii specimens collected by the WAM. 

As for V. panotes panoptes and V. panoptes rubidus, both get 1.6 m (males only, females are markedly smaller). 

I am aware of SVL being a better measure on many occasions. I was tempted to give both and then decided, as it was cage size, total length might be more appropriate. 

Captive monitors, especially the large species, can exceed their wild maximum length. I have seen some massive captive Lace Monitors that would easily have exceeded the expected wild length maximum of just over 2 m.

Blue


----------



## El_Lagarto (Feb 16, 2012)

I suspect it's the former Sax, would be interested to know if anyone can confirm this. 

Another good example is western and central blue tongues being Class 2 in NSW. The main difference in husbandry between them and the easterns is a lower humidity requirement. But how is that any different to shinglebacks which are Class 1?



saximus said:


> Does it come from the "old" days when these things were rare and the departments just haven't caught up or is there some strange reasoning that we just aren't privvy to?


----------



## crocdoc (Feb 16, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> *Crocdoc*,
> 
> If this is in relation to a recent accusation someone posted, forget it. I made the mistake of responding to their first post. It comes about from not being able to satisfactorily justify their initial rudeness and so they sought to belittle me in an attempt to nullify my initial criticisms. Whilst I am far from impressed, the only effective way to end such nonsense was to ignore it.


I honestly have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm guessing by your response that this is a touchy topic for you and you're confusing me with someone else.



Bluetongue1 said:


> If you want more accurate data on V. gouldii, northern form to 1.6 m, southern form to1.5 m and desert form (often referred to as the subspecies flavirufus) to 1.4 m. Gould's also vary according to locale within the three regions. The sizes recorded are for Gouldii specimens collected by the WAM.


This hints at what I was talking about. When I first went to the NT 30 years ago, before the split between _panoptes_ and _gouldii_ became widely known, _panoptes_ were referred to as 'northern form' _gouldii_. Most of the size records have not been corrected and my guess is that this may be the case with the WAM's records.

Does it not seem even a tiny bit odd to you that _gouldii_ and _panoptes_ have the same published length? Having spent time in the field seeing both species, the idea that both _panoptes_ and _gouldii_ have the same length seems odd to me as _panoptes_ is consistently a much, much larger animal. A 1.6m _gouldii_ may occur, but it would be the Robert Wadlow of _gouldii_. A 1.6m _panoptes_ would be nowhere near as unusual. 

I think SVL is a better gauge to use for captivity because a large bulky body will need a lot more space than a relatively thin tail. For example, you wouldn't dare trying to squeeze a 3m Komodo dragon into an enclosure designed for a 3m _Varanus salvadorii_, as the 3m dragon would weigh 3-4 times as much as the tree crocodile. Coincidentally, a good mate of mine has been consulting with the DPI about enclosure size standards for exhibitors and we had a SVL vs TTL discussion just a few days ago, for he is trying to convince them to base enclosure size standards on SVL rather than TTL. 




Bluetongue1 said:


> Captive monitors, especially the large species, can exceed their wild maximum length. I have seen some massive captive Lace Monitors that would easily have exceeded the expected wild length maximum of just over 2 m.


Just out of curiosity, and off topic, you wouldn't have any photos, would you? I've never seen a captive lacie that size and would be interested in seeing photographs. I'm not having a go, I'd just like to see photos of a huge lacie. I've seen a couple of huge wild ones and the odd huge captive but know how rare it is for lace monitors to reach the oft published maximum size for the species. Consequently it's always a delight to see photographs of one that has.


----------



## julespython (Feb 16, 2012)

ok so here is my tank. im really keen on a brevicauda but how woulld i go about getting one. 
also im going to the reptile expo on saturday in melbourne so what should i expect to find there? perhaps find the small monitor im looking for?


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Feb 16, 2012)

crocdoc said:


> .... Just out of curiosity, and off topic, you wouldn't have any photos, would you? I've never seen a captive lacie that size and would be interested in seeing photographs. I'm not having a go, I'd just like to see photos of a huge lacie. I've seen a couple of huge wild ones and the odd huge captive but know how rare it is for lace monitors to reach the oft published maximum size for the species. Consequently it's always a delight to see photographs of one that has.


 *Crocdoc*,
My apologies for being curt. I was tired at the time of posting and still disappointed from recent happenings. 

The two WA local books by Brian Bush, Brad Maryan, Robert Brown-Cooper and David Robinson are the "check point" for me, when It come to WA species. All four have spent a huge amount of time in the field. Brian spends half his life out there and works closely with the museum. Brad spent many years working the museum and has also done a huge amount of field work. He is the person who realised _O. temporalis_ was not a brown. I believe these guys have seen enough specimens over time, both in the field and the museum, to know what they are talking about. I know the boys personally and i can assure you that they take their herpetology very seriously. 

What would be more useful data to quote, if I had reliable access to it, is the average maximum length. You have only to look at the example of Scrub Pythons to see that. From my own observations, you would be extremely hard pressed to find a _goudii_ that size these days whereas sizeable _panoptes_ are still common.

You were and are correct in saying that SVL is a better measure of the size of an animal. I definitely made a mistake there and I am sorry I did not convey that clearly in my previous reply.

The varius I was referring to were held by Eric Worrell on the site of the original ARP. The animals were also obese from being overfed. I compared the length of one on a log to my own size at the time and it was a good foot longer, which would have put it over 2.1 m. There were four animals in total, all of a similar size, one a Bell's phase. I an sorry I cannot be more helpful than that. Given that it is based purely on visual estimate and memory, I should not have introduced it as an example because it subjective and cannot be verified. So suffice to say, it is not unusual for reptiles in captivity to exceed the maximum size reached in captivity but by no means a given. 

That is one impressive Spencer's at 1.5 m. I am not sure how much field data has been collected for the species. As you'd know, it was one of those odd ones known to exist for a long time before somebody bothered to actually describe it. Can you shed any light on that?

Blue


----------



## dozerman (Feb 16, 2012)

Hey nice enclosure J.P  . If those rocks aren't secure Id be worried about your new monitors getting squashed if they burrow beneath them . Im also a big believer in using a retes stack under the hot spot.

Any pics available of your sandies mate?


----------



## crocdoc (Feb 17, 2012)

No problems, Blue. I had presumed I had walked into the crossfire of another discussion going on elsewhere, so I didn't take it personally.

I'm not familiar with the Bush _et al_ publications. I have no doubt that they have had way more field experience than I have - I guess my question was as to whether or not any of the data used to compile the lengths was from older records, before _panoptes_ and _gouldii_ were split. The reason I had mentioned the _gouldii/rosenbergi_ tail-banding comment is that I've seen that information repeated in books and papers by reputable authors, who were quoting other reputable authors, who were quoting the original reputable author. That original author made a genuine observation that wasn't 'wrong', it just happened to be based on information that was later found to be incorrect, for at the time Sydney _rosenbergi_ were thought to be _gouldii_.

From my limited experience with the species, a _gouldii_ over 1-1.2m is uncommon, whereas panoptes in that size range (and larger) are the norm. To give you a sense of scale, given the SVL/TTL proportions of these species, a 1.6m _gouldii_ would have a body the size of a large male lace monitor. This _panoptes_ was approaching that size (if it weren't so thin) but I've yet to see a _gouldii_ even half that bulk.





Regarding my lace monitor question - it was probably a bit loaded. Clearly I have quite an interest in that species, for I keep and breed them at home and spend a lot of time watching wild ones. I know the exact SVL/TTL of my pair at home and have a real sense of their overall size, so it makes it easy for me to gauge the size of wild ones reasonably accurately. What I've found is that lace monitors, captive or wild, truly reaching 2m are extremely rare. A number of keepers have told me that their animals are '2m' long, but I've seen the animals in question and if a tape measure were applied most of them would fall into the 1.7-1.8m size range. I have photographs (on transparency) of the Bells phase lace monitor from ARP and it would have fallen into that category, maybe a bit larger (I can't recall what the others there looked like). Undoubtedly large, but not exceptional. In the years I've been looking at lace monitors, I've seen only four or so wild ones that I would guess to be in the 2m range. Three of those were from the southern reaches of lace monitor range, where they are known to get larger than elsewhere in the country.

This past xmas I was staying with friends down south when a huge lace monitor entered their back yard looking for scraps. I've never seen one larger than this:













What was unusual about this instance is that the animal was in a back yard and accustomed to humans, so I was able to get someone to run inside and grab a ruler, enabling me to take this shot. A rare opportunity. That's a 30cm ruler. I've measured its SVL and, depending on how much distortion is caused by its head not being flat on the ground and on the same plane as the ruler, it has a SVL in the range of 75-80cm. Using the SVL/TTL of my animals at home for a reference, that would give this animal a total length (had its tail been complete) of 2.1-2.2m.





A number of people have said "oh yeah, I've seen a lot that size" but most have not been able to provide photographic evidence, so far. With one exception - a person that lives in the same area that this monitor was photographed had shots of another large male that may have been of similar size. There was nothing in the photographs for scale, but its overall proportions suggested that it was pretty big.

My apologies to the O.P. for going off on this tangent - this probably doesn't help you choose a small monitor to put in your enclosure!


----------



## bigguy (Feb 17, 2012)

CrocDoc is very correct. Don't go by measurements in books. I had 2 of the biggest Spencers ever recorded with both over 1.5m. Was it a fluke. I dont think so.. I currently own 2 that are still growing and both are over 1.3m. As for gouldi, my adult breeders would be lucky to be more then 80cm and my flav's 90cms.

There are many(at least 10) species of monitors that are far smaller than acanthurus(spineytails), however most are as rare as hens teeth and are almost impossable to obtain. The best chance is Storrs, Gillens or Brevicauda

CrocDoc. That lacey is huge. The biggest I have ever seen and measured was 6ft 4inches. I never thought I would ever see a bigger one, but it appears I was wrong


----------



## richardsc (Feb 17, 2012)

only way to get a brevicaudo is to move out of victoria,lol,we arent able to keep them ,hopefully they get with the times and add such species down the track

that lacies a whopper croc doc,love its dark look to


----------



## sesa-sayin (Feb 17, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> _Varanus caudolineatus_ (max TL = 0.32 m), _V. eremius_ (max TL = 0.46 m) and _V. pilbarensis_ (max TL = 0.5 m) would also be suitable for a desert style set up of that size.
> 
> _V. gouldii_ attain a max total length of around 1.6 m while _V. spenceri_ reaches 1.2 m and has a stockier build.
> 
> Blue


I think this posting might be tongue-in-cheek.......the 3 mons. mentioned in the former par. are almost unprocurable....or am i missing the latest "for sale " ads. they sa y, not to say even "moisture ", in the presence of a caud, or it will drop down dead


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Feb 17, 2012)

*julespython*, 
Unfortunately the only small monitors on the Victorian keeping list are Ridge-tailed (V. acanthurus), Pygmy Mulga (V. gilleni) and Storr's Monitor (V. storri). I do not know about availability. 

*sesa-sayin*, 
I was not thinking clearly at the time and did not take into account keeping lists or availability – which renders the information prented of no use. My error.

You are correct that caudos do not like moist conditions and it important to keep the enclosure dry. The other critical area of husbandry is a high temperature basking spot = 60[SUP]o[/SUP]C. Everything else is pretty standard. They do very well in captivity in Perth.

*Crocdoc*,
Thanks for posting the Lacie photos. It sure is a good size. I can visualise the slow, lumbering gait of such a large animal. It certainly shows no fear of humans. A sure sign it is being regularly fed by people in my opinion.

Blue


----------



## crocdoc (Feb 18, 2012)

Bluetongue1 said:


> It certainly shows no fear of humans. A sure sign it is being regularly fed by people in my opinion.



It is now, yes. That hasn't always been the case, though. It lives on a very large property owned by good friends, whom I've been visiting once or twice a year for the past 8 years. I have hundreds of photographs of lace monitors taken on their property and it is one of two places for which I keep a photographic record of individual monitors based on their facial markings, so I am very familiar with 'the regulars'. 

This is the first year I (and the owners of the property) have seen this particular monitor anywhere near the house. Apparently it has become accustomed to people over the course of the past year or so, when it started foraging near (and then in) the yard of their daughter who has a cabin on the same property. The people that own the property, in whose yard these photographs were taken, do not normally feed lace monitors because they have small dogs that are silly enough to run out and chase them. In this particular instance they fed the monitor because I was out at lunch when it first entered the yard and they knew I would have loved to have seen it, so they were keen to keep it hanging around. 

These photographs don't tell the whole story, either, for much of the time I was photographing it, it was still being distracted by morsels of food thrown out to it (that's how I got the photographs of it near my boot and next to the ruler and also explains its full belly). Being a monitor, it learned fairly quickly and made a few more hopeful visits to the house looking for food. I tried to approach it on a couple of other occasions when there was no food around and it was much warier, heading up a tree if I got within a certain distance. It isn't that size because it's had constant food from people, it's that size because it comes from the south of lace monitor range (and consequently has the genetic potential to get large) and has clearly been able to find enough food to eat over the years.


----------



## richardsc (Feb 18, 2012)

in vic we can keep tristis to,both black heads and freckleds,not to mention storri ocreatus along with storri storri,kingorum used to be on our list but is gone now,not sure why,perhaps no one kept any so they took it off,not sure,seems odd to remove species from the list


----------



## Bluetongue1 (Feb 18, 2012)

_V. tritis_ is a very active monitor and highly arboreal. I would want a lot more elevation in the cage to keep them. Both subspecies of _storri _would be highly suited to the set-up. A shame about _kingorum_. They are an awesome small monitor.

*Crocdoc*,
I did wonder if the feeding was short term or long term. I have not had a lot of experience with _varius_ in the field but I do know them to be very wary and likely to head straight up the nearest tree if you start to approach too fast or too near. In heavy forest they tend to be heard, crashing through the undergrowth, before being seen, shimmying up a sizeable tree. It seems the only thing that attracts them to human habitat is a feed. But as you say, they are adaptable animals that do learn fast. 

Blue


----------

