2003
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/...c9b1d6c49e.pdf
“We do not know the size and frequency of clutches for wild female Chamaeleo calyptratus in Florida, but because of abundant rainfall and food, we suspect that females may be more fecund here than in their native range. If clutch sizes are large and hatching rates high in Florida, this population might be difficult to eradicate. Tall grass in the vacant lot is occasionally mowed, undoubtedly killing some young C. calyptratus. Many adults and subadults are probably not found during searches because they are too high in trees or in dense vegetation. Additionally, small neonates are easily overlooked and could reproduce only four months later. Even if all neonates could be removed at any one time, multiple clutching by single females and long incubation times mean that different clutches of eggs could hatch sporadically and repopulate the area.
One neonate was found across the street behind a shopping center, indicating that a paved two-lane street did not present a barrier to either a gravid female or at least one neonate. Therefore, it seems likely that Chamaeleo calyptratus has already dispersed to adjacent neighborhoods north and west of the vacant lot. Major highways may preclude natural dispersal of C. calyptratus south and east of the vacant lot. Farther north, extensive wooded habitat is present along the Caloosahatchee River, but this estuarine habitat may be unsuitable for the species.”
“Chamaeleo calyptratus feeds primarily on insects, but its large size enables it to occasionally prey on small mammals and fledgling birds, making it a greater ecological threat to the native fauna than solely insectivorous exotic lizard species. Chamaeleo calyptratus is primarily a sit-and-wait predator that uses its in- dependently moving eyes to spot prey, which is captured by rapidly protruding its sticky tongue with great accuracy to a distance of up to two times its SVL (Ott et al.,1998; Schmidt, 2001).
Additional populations of Chamaeleo calyptratus may become established in
Florida in the future, particularly if reptile breeder s or dealers release specimens in attempts to establish populations of this popular pet trade species for future exploitation. We recommend that monitoring of this population and its expansion continue, and if ecological impacts on native species are observed, efforts should be made to completely eradicate the population.”
2007
http://manoa.hawaii.edu/hpicesu/speci/misc2007.pdf
“State officials consider the veiled chameleon to pose a greater risk to native plants and animals than the Jackson's chameleon. The veiled chameleon is larger (up to two feet long), is known to tolerate a wider range of environmental conditions than the Jackson's, and is an omnivorous feeder. Suitable habitat for the Jackson's chameleon on Maui appears to be moisture limited with desiccation occurring during times of drought. In contrast, the veiled chameleon's native range includes dry plateaus and it can consume vegetation to replace moisture. The Jackson's chameleon is not known to eat vegetation. The veiled chameleon has been known to consume small birds, comparable in size to the native amakihi (Hemignathus virens) or apapane (Himatione sanguinea). The veiled chameleon is a prolific breeder, maturing in as little as four months, and laying an average of 30-40 eggs per clutch (range 12-85), several times per year. The veiled chameleon's cryptic colorationand habits make it hard for the public to detect or distinguish it from the Jackson's chameleon.”
2009
http://www.researchgate.net/profile/...ication_detail
“Much remains to be determined in terms of making an accurate assessment of the threat posed by Jackson’s chameleons in Hawaii, and further work is planned. For example, little is known about their precise range, elevation preference, reproductive season and rate, desiccation tolerance, and prey preference. Jackson’s chameleons occur in lower to mid-elevation non-native forests on Oahu, and have rarely been reported from tree snail habitat, which tends to be upper elevation dominated by native flora beginning around 600 m above sea level. The observations presented provide conclusive evidence that when chameleons are present in native forest where tree snails and other endemic invertebrates occur, they pose a threat. It is possible that due to a number of factors, such as prey availability and distribution, changing climatic conditions, recent population establishment due to pet release or escape, Jackson’s chameleons are undergoing a range expansion into upper elevations. This is a concern for a variety of threatened and endangered invertebrate species, including tree snails (Achatinella spp.), pomace flies (Drosophila spp.), rare damselflies (Megalagrion spp.), and rare amastrid and succineid land snails, all restricted to upper elevation forests such as Mt. Kaala Natural Area Reserve adjacent to the sampling locality. Prior to this discovery, as part of an ongoing collaborative study, one author (BSH) has collected several hundred chameleons, and gut contents are being examined from populations in the Round Top/Tantalus area of the Koolau Mountains, Honolulu, on eastern Oahu. Endangered Oahu tree snail species have not been observed in this region in several decades. It is conceivable that predation by Jackson’s chameleons may have played a role in the local extinction of Achatinella spp. in this area.
2011 - Monthly surveys of Oustalet’s chameleon populations started by ECISMA
Oustalet’s chameleon identified as “Priority Animal Species” by Everglades Invasive Species Summit
http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/publicat...leo-report.pdf
“A larger percentage of prey in the diets of Volcano chameleons consisted of native species than was found in dry forest on Maui (46.9% vs. 35.2%). The unexpected result that chameleons taken from native vegetation had fewer native prey species in their digestive tracts sugge sts either that chameleons move frequently among perches, such that their final resting places for the night do not necessary reflect where they have spent most of their day foraging, or that the native arthropods ingested are not particularly restricted to native vegetation.
One point of interest that we did raise in our earlier study is that these lizards clearly tolerate a diversity of prey with noxious defenses. In both studies, insects armed with painful stings (Apis mellifera, Vespula pensylvanica) or bites (Pheidole megacephala) were eaten in sufficient numbers that their consumption cannot readily be ascribed to accidental ingestion. Similarly, a large number of prey items belonged to species having noxious chemical defenses: Nezara viridula and Danaus plexippus in the Maui study, Cylindroiulus latestriatus in the present study. Similarly, active motion would appear unnecessary to elicit feeding in these chameleons, as suggested by their consumption of landsnails, which are largely inactive during daytime, and their consumption of bird eggs in captivity. Lastly, the Maui study found that these lizards consumed species comprising virtually the entire range body sizes found in native arthropods in Hawaii. Thus, it would appear that few, if any, invertebrates found in Hawaii will prove invulnerable to predation by these lizards. The conservation implications of this conclusion, coupled with the chameleons’ high population densities and wide projected range in Hawaii, should be obvious.”
2012
http://www.zoomiami.org/sites/defaul...ion_Report.pdf
“The effects this chameleon from Madagascar could have in South Florida are unknown. But, Zoo Miami is aiding researchers in studying its impacts and attempting to determine if a coordinated multi-agency effort can be successful in removing an introduced species that has become locally established.”
2013 - Surveys of Veiled chameleon populations started by UF
http://www.evergladescisma.org/2013newsletter.pdf
“A breeding population of Oustalet’s chameleons (Furcifer oustaleti), native to Madagascar, was discovered in late 2010 in an avocado grove near Florida City, FL. In July 2011, members of ECISMA partnered to conduct an assessment of the population to determine the likelihood of eradication and to understand possible effects on the native ecology of south Florida. Since then, 31 surveys have been conducted resulting in the discovery of 516 chameleons and the removal of at least 486. Data were collected on morphology, habitat use, fecundity, and diet.”
“Fecal samples have been processed for 50 individuals. The most common taxa represented in these samples is the weevil family, Curculionidae. Caterpillars of several families of moths and butterflies were also commonly found in the samples. The vertebrate diet of Oustalet’s chameleons in this grove consists of small lizards and amphibians, with approximately 16% of adult samples containing either Anolis spp. or Cuban tree frog fragments.
Because of the fecundity of this species, it appears that Oustalet’s chameleons are extremely difficult to eradicate even from a small area. Further, we are hearing rumors that people have been illegally spreading chameleons to start new populations. Although Oustalet’s chameleons may not pose a significant ecological threat in Florida, a population of veiled chameleons (Chamaeleo calyptratus) has also recently been discovered in Miami-Dade County. This population is closer to natural areas, including Everglades National Park, and research on feral populations in Hawaii indicates that veiled chameleons may be more threatening than Oustalet’s chameleons to vertebrate populations”
http://www.ircf.org/journal/wp-conte...etal_print.pdf
“A single F. pardalis was introduced in DeSoto County, Florida, USA (Krysko et al. 2011),but it appeared to be an isolated individual. Herein, we report six F. pardalis from a small area in Broward County, Florida, that may represent a group of released or escaped animals or an incipient, reproducing population.”
“In this case, a cooperative interagency approach resulted in the early detection of Furcifer pardalis in Florida and ensured a rapid response to an introduced but hopefully not established population. Short of prevention, early detection and rapid response is the most effective way to deal with non-native species. We recommend continued surveys of Helene Klein Nature Preserve and surrounding areas with the goal of eradicating the population as we determine if reproduction and dispersal are occurring.”
2014
http://141.232.10.32/pm/ssr_2014/Doc...endix_2014.pdf
“Breeding populations of at least two chameleon species are known in Miami-
Dade County immediately adjacent to the GE region (Gillette et al. 2010). Oustalet’s chameleons are the second largest chameleon species in the world and are native to Madagascar. The native range of veiled chameleons extends across an area of the Middle East and they also grow relatively large. Both species primarily eat insects but large adults are capable of eating small vertebrates. ECISMA cooperators began conducting monthly surveys for Oustalet’s chameleons in 2011 and wildlife biologists from the University of Florida began conducting surveys for veiled chameleons in 2013, discovering the first Miami-Dade County breeding population. Chameleon breeding populations do not seem to be able to expand rapidly on their own but instead are rumored to be spread by humans. There is potential for known populations to be eradicated but by all indications it will take considerable effort.”
“A new population of veiled chameleons (Chamaeleo calyptratus) was detected in Miami-Dade County near the entrance to ENP. Another population for which only one individual had previously been documented was confirmed nearby in a rural neighborhood and the two populations do not seem to be connected to each other.
At least one more population near the L-31E is almost certainly extant; however, this has not been confirmed. Rumors of panther chameleon (Chameleo pardalis) and caiman lizard (Dracaena guianensis) have been investigated but thus far have not been confirmed.”
“A total of 89 Oustalet’s chameleons (Furcifer oustaleti) were removed out of 91 observed from December through April during systematic surveys in Florida City. December was the most successful month with 29 animals found. One adult male veiled chameleon was removed during one survey. Since that time, this population has been discovered, the location where these animals occur has been under heavy collection pressure from amateur reptile enthusiasts, thus making it difficult to find animals. Ten additional veiled chameleons were observed on opportunistic surveys but could not be removed due to their presence on various pieces of private property.”
Rapid Response Strategy for Oustalet’s & Veiled chameleon populations: Eradication
http://seafwa.org/conferences/2014/d...SEAFWA2014.pdf
“In recent years, the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission has been managing several populations of nonnative chameleons in the state. Multiple individuals of three species have been discovered in Florida and breeding populations of two different species are known to exist in three counties. These introductions are suspected to have been done intentionally in order to start a breeding population, a practice commonly known as “seeding.” People have seeded chameleons on public and private property with the goals of harvesting these animals for the commercial pet trade. Preliminary research on the diets of wild chameleons in Florida indicates that chameleons may not have significant environmental impact on natural systems. However, the issue of continuing illegal release and commercialization of wild-caught chameleons in Florida is a social concern.
Examined here are three case studies of different chameleon species in Florida: the veiled chameleon (Chamaeleo calyptratus), Oustalet’s chameleon (Furcifer oustaleti), and panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis). These examples illustrate the importance of early detection and rapid response to halt establishment of new populations, the efforts that must go into eradication attempts, and the complications of managing species on private property. Lessons learned from chameleons have implications on management of other introduced species and it should not be discounted that the “ranching” of chameleons or other nonnative species may already occur in other states in the Southeast.”
http://www.int-res.com/articles/esr2014/24/n024p115.pdf
Despite a recent effort to model future range expansion for Jackson’s chameleons (Rödder et al. 2011), detailed geographic distribution and population densities of this species have yet to be documented. The population at Puu Hapapa is evidently established, healthy, well fed, and clearly reproductive (authors’ pers. obs.); it may therefore represent a useful model for other island locations that share basic habitat characteristics. The observed incidence of endangered A. mustelina tree snail predation in field-collected lizards might at first appear relatively low, since only 4 of the 45 (8.9%) field collected chameleons had A. mustelina shells in their guts. However, these chameleons were uniformly well fed and their stomach contents revealed diverse and abundant prey items (authors’ unpubl. data), suggesting conditions leading to a relatively short passage time of shells through the gut of individuals from this area.
“the actual impact of Jackson’s chameleons on endangered tree snails may be far more substantial than this low number would suggest, due not only to the relatively short passage time these lizards exhibit when well fed, but also to the relatively short time required to completely dissolve an A. mustelina shell (~8 d). We estimated the density of Jackson’s chameleons in this area (Puu Hapapa) by extrapolating from the 45 chameleons collected per 2000 m2 without replacement, giving a value of 1 chameleon per 44 m2. We might assume that at any given time, about 9% of these chameleons prey on snails, or an instructive way to view the data is that every 3 to 4 d, 45 chameleons can potentially consume 8 snails. Extrapolating these figures to a period of 1 yr, for every 2000 m2 , chameleons at this density could consume 730 to 974 tree snails.
However, it should be noted that this estimate may be conservative, because the density of chameleons could be substantially higher in the future, or in other localities. For example, Kraus et al. (2012) reported a density of 173 chameleons per 2000 m2 on the island of Maui. At this population density, we estimate a loss rate of 2806 to 3744 snails yr, per 0.2 ha. The estimated feeding frequency of 72 h may also be conservative, since our gut content analyses revealed that Jackson’s chameleons have the potential to feed on A. mustelina at an even higher frequency, snail density permitting. For instance, chame leon no. 71 had 5 shells in its stomach in various states of degradation, corresponding to Categories 1, 2, and 3. According to our laboratory experiments, shells in the stomach went from Category 1 to 3 in ~48 h, suggesting that this individual likely ingested A. mustelina on 3 consecutive days.
“this predator could pose a serious threat to native fauna globally, and particularly to threatened or endangered taxa in tropical and subtropical ecosystems. Impact assessment data therefore have relevance for resource management in all regions where chameleons either have become established or have the potential to be released in the future.”
2015
http://www.sfwmd.gov/portal/page/por...ers/v1_ch7.pdf
“A reproducing population of the Oustalet’s chameleon was discovered in rural Miami-Dade County in early 2010. This large chameleon is native to Madagascar where it utilizes a wide variety of habitats, including human-altered environments (D'Cruze et al.,2007). An interagency team, led by the FWC, began a rapid assessment monitoring project in July 2011. Between July 2011 and July 2014, biologists removed over 573 Oustalet’s chameleons from a 122-acre site (Jenny Ketterlin Eckles, FWC and Mike Rochford, UF, personal communications). Preliminary diet analysis indicates that this chameleon population consumes a variety of insect and anole species. The interagency team is continuing periodic surveys in the known population area in order to better understand the extent of the population and natural history of this species in Florida. Through these efforts biologists hope to determine the potential ecological impact of Oustalet’s chameleon and whether the population is expanding without human assistance. This information will help scientists prioritize this species as a candidate for eradication.
The veiled chameleon (Chamaeleo calyptratus) naturally occurs in the mountain and coastal regions of Yemen, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia. Males reach a length of 2 feet; females get about half that size. Like the previous species, Oustalet’s chameleon[sic] is notable for the wide range of habitats it uses in its native countries. A breeding population of the veiled chameleon was documented in a low density residential area of Lee County (northwest estuaries) in 2002 and more than 100 of these lizards were captured (FWC, 2013).
Scattered individual sightings have been made in the same general area.
Recently, a significant population was discovered 100 miles across the Everglades in an agricultural area in southern Miami-Dade County near the area invaded by Oustalet’s chameleons. A second (sub-) population was located on the boundary between the agricultural area and the Everglades wetlands, less than 4 miles from the ENP boundary. More than 50 specimens of veiled chameleon have now been removed from Miami-Dade populations. Biologists studying Oustalet’s chameleon are also investigating the veiled chameleon with the same concerns and objectives. Florida populations of both species are suspected to have been established through intentional releases by reptile enthusiasts. If chameleons demonstrate the ability to spread from suburban and agricultural land and build up populations in native Florida habitats, then the argument for an aggressive eradication program will be strong.
Rapid Response Strategy for Oustalet’s & Veiled chameleon populations: Eradication
Jim Flaherty of the Chameleon Company
discussed, I can't recall anything negative about his business. For a large breeder/seller there is something to be stated about the lack of complaints about service and animals. If any one can assume they must have been handled well if and/or when they occurred.
Linear Mode
