If you read it for what it is (its hard with all that legal crap in it) i dont think chameleons will be affected by this.
It does say that non native species will be banned, BUT thise species have to have the ability to be able to sustain themselves in the wild, and be of harm to the environment in which they are introduced.
Yes chameleons can sustain themselves in the wild, over on the west coast of florida there is a growing population of Veiled Chameleons, as well as the Jacksons in Hawaii.
Chameleons, in my opinion, cannot in any way, shape, or form harm the environment into which they may or may not be introduced. Chameleons do not kill people, eat crops or anything like that. They eat bugs and not that many of them really (unless we are talking about babies and they only eat a lot for a short period)
I can see some species of snakes and other reptiles being affected by this, but not "the petsmart" selection of reptiles or chameleons for that matter.
I still say we write can call our representative and tell them this is bogus and that it should not pass, and yes this bill has been proposed many many times, and failed.
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-669
From what I see, these all apply to chams, even if in a somewhat roundabout way (what may be a few bugs to you are a big deal and a resource to native species in an ecosystem...it is all a balance!):
"(7) the likelihood that the species would harm wildlife resources in the United States;
(8) the likelihood that the species would harm native species that are rare or native species that have been listed as threatened species or endangered species in the United States under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.);
(9) the likelihood that the species would harm habitats or ecosystems in the United States;
(10) the likelihood that pathogenic species or parasitic species may accompany the species proposed for importation"
The whole listing process suggests that if a species isn't already approved, it is banned until approved. Guilty until proven innocent. If not enough is known about an animal to decide whether it should be approved or banned, it is banned. If it hasn't been considered at all , it is banned.
One of the big problems with the bill is that it is on a federal level and uses a blanket type policy that covers the whole US. This is stupid because chameleons (and most other reptiles) may be able to live in the everglades, but will not survive a Maine winter or really anywhere else. I can totally understand wanting to put control on invasive and potentially invasive species on a localized level, but it is totally asinine to apply a policy like this to the whole US. Even then, a banning of certain species isn't really viable either...I think controlled ownership via testing, inspection and permits is a better option, but this will never happen because the money that is required to make it happen is not part of the equation.
Chameleons would be banned...also, they are a threat to native species of insects, some endangered. Most reptiles would be banned- they make a point in this bill of saying that anything potentially "causing harm" to a person would be prohibited. Reptiles are so commonly touted as disease ridden balls of salmonella waiting to kill you at first chance, so it makes sense they would be banned because they are a "public health hazard."
Anyone using the point of this bill being proposed and failing before as a reason not to be involved is being ridiculous because it is up again and will keep coming up again. If you don't act on it, you will be granting permission for it to happen. Silence is the voice of compliance.
You have to remember that the people really pushing for this bill, PETA and HSUS (not to be confused with your local dog and cat loving humane society-totally different organizations), have an ultimate goal of NO PET OWNERSHIP, PERIOD. There is plenty of reading out there on the matter.
The politicans will laugh about this. Write real letters and phone with them like Sandra said !!!
