Thoughts on Richard's husbandry style? (The Tarantula Collective)

[LucN]

I like his videos. He has good quality video and his care tips seem to work out. His were some of the first I watched when looking for my first tarantulas. Since then I started liking Tom Moran for a more direct approach to info. For care and info Richard and Tom are my main two. For just passing time or entrainment I'll watch others but seems everyone has their own approach and style to their videos some took time to grow on me others I just don't get into.

You haven't hinted whether you are watching Dave as well. If you haven't, it's definitely worth a look. Dave is basically the European Tom Moran, no nonsense, not necessarily flashy and gets to the point. He also shows some controversial methods of husbandry, such as using non-treated soil and pieces of wood and moss collected from the woodlands near his home. I have not heard of any issues with his methods. But he also isn't afraid to mention his failures, such as his initial assassin bug breeding.

Tom and Dave share the top spot for me when it comes to husbandry. I get two different ways that work, so it's a win-win on both channels.

 

[Ungoliant]

Some posts were deleted.

Let's focus on the topic and not on sniping at each other.

 

[Jess S]

You haven't hinted whether you are watching Dave as well. If you haven't, it's definitely worth a look. Dave is basically the European Tom Moran, no nonsense, not necessarily flashy and gets to the point. He also shows some controversial methods of husbandry, such as using non-treated soil and pieces of wood and moss collected from the woodlands near his home. I have not heard of any issues with his methods. But he also isn't afraid to mention his failures, such as his initial assassin bug breeding.

Tom and Dave share the top spot for me when it comes to husbandry. I get two different ways that work, so it's a win-win on both channels.

No dispute about Tom, he is a legend.

Look at how successful Dave's channel has been. The last few months, the subscriber count has increased exponentially.
I've been following his channel since the early days and predicted back then it would eventually become a big channel. Funnily enough, I noticed the subscriber count really starting to rocket after mentions and recommendations on AB. I think the AB seal of approval has really helped his channel.

His presenting style is excellent and BBC nature documentary worthy too. Probably honed by his past career in zoos educating the public.

He's a pretty successful breeder too and I love how he shares his knowledge in that area. Like Tom , he replies to every single YouTube comment, which I think shows he's a very nice guy.

 

[AphonopelmaTX]

I think all we can do is form an opinion on what we've seen. Richard's husbandry looks fine to me from what he shows us, but that's the thing - we don't see a complete picture of what he's set up. The videos are extreme close ups of the tarantulas interacting with their environment or sitting on a table. It's eye candy.

Tom Moran's matter-of-fact style appeals to me. He admits when he's wrong or he's made mistakes, he seems to know what he's doing. I know he repeats himself a lot, but he's not out to impress anyone. I appreciate that he just shows you what works for him and what he's learned. He's clearly not trying to impress us with a fancy enclosure, because a lot of of what he uses are not particularly attractive.

My preference is not too much talking heads and straight to the point. Lighting is important, but production value is second to the information being presented for me. Also I don't give a hoot about anyone's "journey" or vlogs. I'm here for tarantulas.

What I was getting at was by what standard of tarantula care does one compare the YouTuber's against to determine if they are presenting good quality information?

I am partial to Dave's Little Beasties because his approach to tarantula care is a lot like my own and he only talks about the things he knows about. I watched one video of Tom Moran's about housing Poecilotheria spp. and listened to a pod cast of him explaining the difference between Grammostola quirogai and Grammostola pulchra. He was factually wrong on G. quirogai/ G. pulchra matter and I hated how he housed Poecilotheria with a cork flat instead of a cork tube. Moran lost credibility from my point of view and I never looked at any other content by him. The standard(s) I use to compare a YouTuber's information against is the scientific literature (where appropriate) and my own experience. I can do that since I have a lot of experience, so how do newcomers or those with less experience determine what is good info and what is bad?

I don't know who all of these other people are with YouTube channels so I can't comment on them.

 

[8 legged]

The bottom line is that they (YouTubers) are just shallow entertainment that I don't take seriously. Sometimes I say: ok, I'll try that. But if I want to really know something I read a book or ask a REAL expert who doesn't talk about competence but has it!

Nevertheless, people like Dave and Tom are important because they demonstrate our hobby from a "good" point of view - a counterpoint to the ...!

 

[CommanderBacon]

What I was getting at was by what standard of tarantula care does one compare the YouTuber's against to determine if they are presenting good quality information?

I am partial to Dave's Little Beasties because his approach to tarantula care is a lot like my own and he only talks about the things he knows about. I watched one video of Tom Moran's about housing Poecilotheria spp. and listened to a pod cast of him explaining the difference between Grammostola quirogai and Grammostola pulchra. He was factually wrong on G. quirogai/ G. pulchra matter and I hated how he housed Poecilotheria with a cork flat instead of a cork tube. Moran lost credibility from my point of view and I never looked at any other content by him. The standard(s) I use to compare a YouTuber's information against is the scientific literature (where appropriate) and my own experience. I can do that since I have a lot of experience, so how do newcomers or those with less experience determine what is good info and what is bad?

I think you make an important point, although I'm surprised to hear that you dismiss Tom Moran as a resource out of hand based on those two things.

I know which episode you're talking about re: quirogai vs pulchra. I don't recall that he presented the information in any authoritative way, though, and always acknowledges that he's not an expert on the matter. I don't think he'd argue with you if you were to provide him with correct information.

I don't know anything about Poecilotheria, as I don't keep them.

So back to your point, though: how can a newcomer know the difference between good info and bad info when they choose to look to a YouTuber for their husbandry information? I mean, obviously they can't. How would they know? But if their learning preference is video, Tom Moran doesn't suck. He never presents himself as an expert who knows everything. He's open to criticism and acknowledges that he's still learning, too. He encourages people to dig deeper and do more research. I can't say as much for most other prominent youtubers I've seen.

I tried watching Dave's Little Beasties a few times but I lost patience with it early in and never finished watching. I'll give it another try, as I've heard nothing but good things.

 

[Weightsandwebs]

You haven't hinted whether you are watching Dave as well. If you haven't, it's definitely worth a look. Dave is basically the European Tom Moran, no nonsense, not necessarily flashy and gets to the point. He also shows some controversial methods of husbandry, such as using non-treated soil and pieces of wood and moss collected from the woodlands near his home. I have not heard of any issues with his methods. But he also isn't afraid to mention his failures, such as his initial assassin bug breeding.

Tom and Dave share the top spot for me when it comes to husbandry. I get two different ways that work, so it's a win-win on both channels.

I'll have to check Dave out.

I think you make an important point, although I'm surprised to hear that you dismiss Tom Moran as a resource out of hand based on those two things.

I know which episode you're talking about re: quirogai vs pulchra. I don't recall that he presented the information in any authoritative way, though, and always acknowledges that he's not an expert on the matter. I don't think he'd argue with you if you were to provide him with correct information.

I don't know anything about Poecilotheria, as I don't keep them.

So back to your point, though: how can a newcomer know the difference between good info and bad info when they choose to look to a YouTuber for their husbandry information? I mean, obviously they can't. How would they know? But if their learning preference is video, Tom Moran doesn't suck. He never presents himself as an expert who knows everything. He's open to criticism and acknowledges that he's still learning, too. He encourages people to dig deeper and do more research. I can't say as much for most other prominent youtubers I've seen.

I tried watching Dave's Little Beasties a few times but I lost patience with it early in and never finished watching. I'll give it another try, as I've heard nothing but good things.

Tom does welcome corrections to any thing he says and will even state it if he is corrected on something. He's said it numerous times actually.

 

[Jess S]

What I was getting at was by what standard of tarantula care does one compare the YouTuber's against to determine if they are presenting good quality information?

I am partial to Dave's Little Beasties because his approach to tarantula care is a lot like my own and he only talks about the things he knows about. I watched one video of Tom Moran's about housing Poecilotheria spp. and listened to a pod cast of him explaining the difference between Grammostola quirogai and Grammostola pulchra. He was factually wrong on G. quirogai/ G. pulchra matter and I hated how he housed Poecilotheria with a cork flat instead of a cork tube. Moran lost credibility from my point of view and I never looked at any other content by him. The standard(s) I use to compare a YouTuber's information against is the scientific literature (where appropriate) and my own experience. I can do that since I have a lot of experience, so how do newcomers or those with less experience determine what is good info and what is bad?

I don't know who all of these other people are with YouTube channels so I can't comment on them.

Dave Fisher uses cork flats for his pokies and all his arboreals though. The point he made is using a flat you can always see what's happening with the spider even if they web the top up (I presume that's especially useful for his breeding purposes). I'm currently using tubes for my P Mets and I'm beginning to see his point!

 

[waynerowley]

Dave Fisher uses cork flats for his pokies and all his arboreals though. The point he made is using a flat you can always see what's happening with the spider even if they web the top up (I presume that's especially useful for his breeding purposes). I'm currently using tubes for my P Mets and I'm beginning to see his point!

And if privacy is needed, he also attaches a piece of black cardboard to the back of the glass. I think if you are breeding then the bark flats or half- holes are better than a tube.

 

[The Grym Reaper]

I felt his videos were style over substance so I don't care for his stuff.

This basically, his videos are so over-edited that I struggle to sit through them, some of the info in the ones that I have managed to sit through has been really iffy.

I think if you are breeding then the bark flats or half- holes are better than a tube.

Even if you're not breeding they're better IMO, I like being able to easily check on my tarantulas, I can do this with flats/half-tubes leant into a corner, it's a pain in the arse to do with whole tubes (not to mention that if a tarantula opts to use a tube hide then you'll basically never see it out).

 

[KaroKoenig]

He also shows some controversial methods of husbandry, such as using non-treated soil and pieces of wood and moss collected from the woodlands near his home.

Quite frankly, it really isn't all that controversial in our neck of the woods (Central and western Europe).

 

[LucN]

Quite frankly, it really isn't all that controversial in our neck of the woods (Central and western Europe).

Perhaps there's less pesticides being used in Europe than in North America ? That's what makes me think twice about trying his methods. There's no telling if the nearby woodlands in my area haven't been heavily sprayed or not.

 

[8 legged]

Perhaps there's less pesticides being used in Europe than in North America ? That's what makes me think twice about trying his methods. There's no telling if the nearby woodlands in my area haven't been heavily sprayed or not.

I have been collecting in the forest for over 20 years ...
so far with success!
Especially with moss you have to be clear about the fact that the stuff in the trade is probably more contaminated than what I find!

 

[Nocebo75]

Nevertheless, people like Dave and Tom are important because they demonstrate our hobby from a "good" point of view - a counterpoint to the ...!

I think this in an extremely important point. And I would put Richard's and other more "mainstream" channels on the same boat. Maybe my standards are low, but as long as there's no animal abuse of any type, unsafe practices like handling are not encouraged for the sake of the show and the views and a real effort is made to give good advice that's already much much better than the picture mainstream media in general is giving of these animals and the hobby. And that's a good thing.

I come from reptiles, where exactly the same happens, but with 10x times the drama. As soon as a channel becomes a business the educational aspects begin to decline and the show takes over. And it's normal, it's a business after all. But IMO channels like Richard's positives heavily outweight the negatives for the global image of the hobby.

I started watching Dark Den, which took me to Richard's, which in turn took me to Tom and Dave, which I enjoy a lot and are an amazing source of knowledge for a noob like me. But the initial mainstream channels played an important part in my decision to dive deeper, look for more resources, buy my first Ts and get into this hobby.

 

[Weightsandwebs]

Perhaps there's less pesticides being used in Europe than in North America ? That's what makes me think twice about trying his methods. There's no telling if the nearby woodlands in my area haven't been heavily sprayed or not.

I've heard baking outdoor collected would kill any possible harmful things

 

[8 legged]

I've heard baking outdoor collected would kill any possible harmful things

No, that certainly also harbors dangers, but if one can't count to 3 and are not smart enough to only collect in certain and untouched places, you should perhaps not keep any animals at all.
With enough oxygen in the brain, incredible things are possible.

 

[Weightsandwebs]

I think this in an extremely important point. And I would put Richard's and other more "mainstream" channels on the same boat. Maybe my standards are low, but as long as there's no animal abuse of any type, unsafe practices like handling are not encouraged for the sake of the show and the views and a real effort is made to give good advice that's already much much better than the picture mainstream media in general is giving of these animals and the hobby. And that's a good thing.

I come from reptiles, where exactly the same happens, but with 10x times the drama. As soon as a channel becomes a business the educational aspects begin to decline and the show takes over. And it's normal, it's a business after all. But IMO channels like Richard's positives heavily outweight the negatives for the global image of the hobby.

I started watching Dark Den, which took me to Richard's, which in turn took me to Tom and Dave, which I enjoy a lot and are an amazing source of knowledge for a noob like me. But the initial mainstream channels played an important part in my decision to dive deeper, look for more resources, buy my first Ts and get into this hobby.

Richard is for the newer keepers he said that's what he was trying for to help new comers find the hobby.

 

[8 legged]

Richard is for the newer keepers he said that's what he was trying for to help new comers find the hobby.

Without wanting to become abusive now: maybe he just doesn't feel like working?
Why even if you have Patreons...

 

[Frogdaddy]

Richard is for the newer keepers he said that's what he was trying for to help new comers find the hobby.

Absolutely. Get the new people subscribed to your YouTube and in your FB group before they even get a spider. That's how he gets paid. It's not about the spiders it's about the number of clicks.

 

[Weightsandwebs]

No, that certainly also harbors dangers, but if one can't count to 3 and are not smart enough to only collect in certain and untouched places, you should perhaps not keep any animals at all.
With enough oxygen in the brain, incredible things are possible.

I don't bother with collecting from outside so never tried it as well as my area doesn't really have very clean nature areas being near to many mills. I also find the baking thing questionable but many claim it works

Without wanting to become abusive now: maybe he just doesn't feel like working?
Why even if you have Patreons...

Huge reason I like Tom he doesn't care about patreon. One episode he stated he had one and never checked it till then and didn't give it much thought. He never tries to sell merchandise and never mentions asking for patreon like most YouTube channels.