Komodo Dragons

snowleopard

snowleopard

Well-Known Member
15+ year member
Premium Member
It's interesting to think about komodo dragons in American zoos these days. In 1994 they were found in ONLY 3 zoos (National, Cincinnati and San Diego). In fact, Cincinnati became only the 2nd U.S. zoo with dragons due to a "political gift", when in 1989 the president of Indonesia gave a pair of them to President Bush (Sr). In 1992, when the National Zoo had 13 dragon eggs hatch, they were the first ever komodo dragons born outside of Indonesia! But now, a mere 15 years later, they are in about 40 American zoos, including many lesser-known collections. They are no longer a big deal in some zoos, and last summer my wife and I saw countless komodos on our epic road trip. Are komodos now just another reptile? It seems as if they are easily found at many zoos, and my two favourite (and possibly largest) exhibits for them are the ones at Disney's Animal Kingdom and the Columbus Zoo.
 
They definitely have more notoriaty these days. I never hear anyone approach the one in Boise and wonder what it is. Everyone seems to know. Whether this is because they are found in more and more zoos I don't know. I know there is a bit of excitement building in Phoenix for their new Komodo exhibit, so they are still a big deal, but they aren't something that a major collection is going to put on their brochure...
 
I definitely did not know about their recent rarity in zoos, and you wouldn't know it from my travels this summer. I have seen Komodos in every zoo that has reptiles except two. Dallas and Caldwell are the only 2 without them. Waco just opened their new exhibit for Komodos on Saturday. Houston, San Antonio, Fort Worth, and even Ellen Trout all have them here in TX. I'm actually surprised Dallas doesn't have any, but I know some people who really want them. Interesting side note. Dallas did have one on loan from National Zoo from what I've been told. Probably one of the 1st batch of young. Anyway, it was transported to Dallas on a plane in a dog kennel under someones seat in the cabin.
 
I think this is pretty much the same situation as giant otters

When Philadelphia Zoo recieved a brother pair in 1996 , it was like "wooo!"

But now, they are becoming more and more common as quite a few zoos have them/are due to recieve them

Philadelphia Zoo
Dallas World Aquarium
Jacksonville Zoo
Miami METROZoo
Los Angeles Zoo
Palm Beach Zoo (due to recieve)

I know its not tons of zoos, but as you can see, they are becoming more and more common

FYI, Philadelphia Zoo has had 7 litters of giant otters to there breeding pair. In total, 13 giant otters have been born here within the last 5 years
 
Komodos are definitely not what they used to be. I drove down to the National zoo from Boston just to see my first one. Two years later when I went to Ohio 6 out of 8 zoos I visited had them.

I don't remember who told me but I heard that Dallas used to have "Pet a Komodo" sessions where people, mostly kids, could pet a very calm Komodo dragon. They stopped doing this when kids had to go to the hospital due to bacteria they they received from petting the dragon.

I have also noticed more zoos getting or plan on getting giant otters. I didn't think that many otters were born at Philly. That is an impressive number. I remeber when they only had the breeding pair.
 
How is the population of captive Komodo's looking. Is it fairly diverse or are new founders going to be needed as more zoos inevitably want to add them?

As for Giant Otters, only what, 5(?) zoos in North America have them right now. In addition, the population has a small base, so new founders are going to be needed if they have the explosion in popularity Komodo's have had.
 
As far as them being "just another reptile", definetly not. I think Komodo's are perhaps THE biggest herp attraction for US zoos, second only if a zoo has a very large snake or croc.
 
As for the giant otter birth #, it is at least 13 (if not more)

Here is the list of pups born to this pair

Primero
Kara
Dante
Magnus
Rojo
Sohno
Rose
Tapajos
Tocantins
Paru
and atleast three new pups (no press release yet but from ISIS and the timing, there are def. new pups)
 
When the first Komodo Dragons came to zoos, they were certainly considered rarities-and like tame "Moritz" in Berlin, some even became local "favourites". But being "just" big lizards, they were not that famous and popular for the public as Giant Pandas, although they often shared the same task as a "political gift" (like the ones given to former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl in the 1990s, one of the first Komodo Dragons I ever saw). And I remember various older zoo husbandry books claiming how hard it is to breed them...
Dozens of documentaries on the BBC, Discovery Channel, Animal Planet as well as various hatchlings later, this all has changed: now the term "Komodo Dragon" is well-known to the TV-watching public, and with improved breeding success (and as Chester's "Flora" seems to prove, even parthenogenesis is a possibility), they become more and more common-at least in American zoos, where they are still the big stars in every herpetological collection.

Two things make me wonder, though:

1) Why does it take the Komodo Dragons so long to "conquer" the European zoos? Maybe because the name of the species isn't that catchy in some of the Non-English languages: "Dragon" does sound better than "monitor"...;)
At the moment, about 16 European institutions keep, and some even them-and yet big zoo countries like Germany have to wait for theirs; the Germans at least till Leipzig opens its Gondwana Hall...

2) Given the fact that in some of the US federal states (and some European countries) one can get almost everything and anything as a pet, I'm surprised that I have only once heard about a privately kept Komodo Dragon. Not that I advocate it, but their absence strikes me as particular, given their popular status among reptile fans, who otherwise keep everything, may it be Ethiopian mountain adders or Angonokas...
 
Komodo Dragons are an interesting species, a old book of mine states the largest on record (captive) was a male (they think) that was on exhibit at the St Louis zoo in 1937 it's weight was stated @165.5kgs (365lbs). it measured 3.10m long (10f-2ins).
 
In Europe, the genetic basis is too small with very few founders involved/ available. Thus, careful breeding is called for and the species coordinator has to keep a close tab on things!

In addition, natural breeding has been achieved only on the Canary Islands and in Praha Zoo. With a-reproductive offspring - basically clones - at both London and Chester.
 
And you forgot the 3 young komodo's from the EEP coordinator Rotterdam.
although these are young from a brother and sister couple, who were supposed to be too young to breed already.
 
Miami Metro Zoo obtained Komodo dragons in the nineties and bred them for the first time in 1998, producing 27 young. I guess they are largely responsible for providing many of the animals which have spread out through US zoos.

Kifaru Bwana said:
With a-reproductive offspring - basically clones - at both London and Chester.
Click to expand...

Don't bracket parthenogenesis with cloning. In both cases 100% of the genetic material comes from a single individual, but parthenogenetic offspring are not carbon-copies of their parent. In fact female Komodo dragons can only produce male young if they do not mate.
 
I vividly recall when we prepared for the first komodo dragons at the Cincinnati Zoo. They were fantastic to see. And we had so much to learn. For one thing, we had understood that individuals of the size we'd gotten (were they about 8/10' long) would not climb. But they scampered up the artificial mudbank at the rear of the exhibit and settled in among the plants...as komodo dragons prefer to do! And then it was discovered that our "pair" was in fact two females (I think) and one was switched with one from the Smithsonian.

As I see small ones at every zoo now, I miss the days when they were special and fierce.
 
Pygathrix said:
Miami Metro Zoo obtained Komodo dragons in the nineties and bred them for the first time in 1998, producing 27 young. I guess they are largely responsible for providing many of the animals which have spread out through US zoos.



Don't bracket parthenogenesis with cloning. In both cases 100% of the genetic material comes from a single individual, but parthenogenetic offspring are not carbon-copies of their parent. In fact female Komodo dragons can only produce male young if they do not mate.
Click to expand...

Pygathrix,

Correct and affirmative, but I did not wish to go into the genetics or reproductive biology for ease of reference sake and not to bore the average Zoochat reader out of their brains.

It was just a manner of expressing the notion that very little genetic diversity exists within the European Komodo group and if we are to establish a genetically healthy captive population we simply need more founder individuals.

It now transpires this may alas also be the case in the US. Are the Honolulu stock also of this first breeding origin?
 
Sun Wukong said:
Two things make me wonder, though:

1) Why does it take the Komodo Dragons so long to "conquer" the European zoos? Maybe because the name of the species isn't that catchy in some of the Non-English languages: "Dragon" does sound better than "monitor"...;)

2) Given the fact that in some of the US federal states (and some European countries) one can get almost everything and anything as a pet, I'm surprised that I have only once heard about a privately kept Komodo Dragon. Not that I advocate it, but their absence strikes me as particular, given their popular status among reptile fans, who otherwise keep everything, may it be Ethiopian mountain adders or Angonokas...
Click to expand...

Interesting questions! I'd never thought about it that "dragon" (in English) might be boosting their appeal. Then again, I never see visitors going nuts over "bearded dragons". One thing about Americans, they are usually into "the biggest" of anything, which is why things like Guinness Book of World Records (and its many spin-off museums) are popular over here. So when Americans hear that Komodos are "the biggest" lizard in the world, that appeals.

Gosh, I sure hope we never hear of Komodos being kept as pets -- for both the lizards and the humans' sake. I would think that Komodo dragons are among the more dangerous animals you could keep as pets!
 
ANyhuis said:
Interesting questions! I'd never thought about it that "dragon" (in English) might be boosting their appeal. Then again, I never see visitors going nuts over "bearded dragons". One thing about Americans, they are usually into "the biggest" of anything, which is why things like Guinness Book of World Records (and its many spin-off museums) are popular over here. So when Americans hear that Komodos are "the biggest" lizard in the world, that appeals.

Gosh, I sure hope we never hear of Komodos being kept as pets -- for both the lizards and the humans' sake. I would think that Komodo dragons are among the more dangerous animals you could keep as pets!
Click to expand...

In fact all monitor lizards have the capacity to kill by delivering a poisonous/infection prone bite. This function is not just restricted to the Komodo monitors alone, but is in all or most other monitor lizards.
 
Kifaru Bwana said:
In fact all monitor lizards have the capacity to kill by delivering a poisonous/infection prone bite. This function is not just restricted to the Komodo monitors alone, but is in all or most other monitor lizards.
Click to expand...

Yes, but most other monitor lizards are not large enough to consider humans a possible food source.
 
Im not quite so sure about that

I've seen a show on tv where a komodo bit a huge buffalo on the foot, waited two or three days and then once it died, came back and ate it

There not scared of much and will pretty much take anything
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top