- Joined
- Nov 7, 2012
- Messages
- 5,173
- Location (City and/or State)
- South of Southern California, but not Mexico
argus333 said:what about the new sulcata/ leopard mix?
It's a big specific question.
Wild caught or otherwise well exposed to various things over a long history of life would tend to indicate the same issues as mixing species that do not have any biogeographic overlap. Its a conservative measure based on your not knowing what their exact history has been.
If you got, what are could be thought of as sterile hatchlings, never exposed to any other species, and there was a huge amount of space it might be an OK risk.
The over-riding thought though is why risk it?
I have seen sulcatas and leopards in enclosures that were huge, hundreds of feet by hundreds of feet, think of the images Aldabraman shows for his tortoises. All is good until someone starts mating, and then the male of the same as well as the male of the other species comes over and gets into an altercation.
This point in time altercation can become a habit that occurs more and more frequently even if no mating is going on, then you have to separate. Now think about albadramans huge area again, and fill it with fountains of grass, logs and tortoise-line of sight disruptions and it can be workable long term, ad berms and hills, and dense plantings and it becomes more manageable.
But now you have a huge area with alot of gardening to do too. The overriding hesitation for this line of response is that most people seem to be good intentioned and set out to do all this, then don't and fall back to well, they said this and they said that, and it didn't work so it's not my fault.
In short, anything YOU do with captive animals is YOUR Fault or Success depending on the outcome. So the best and easiest resolve is to not suggest risky husbandry. Mixing species is risky, mixing individuals is risky. The risks have been explained ad nauseum.
Will