IUCN Red List Assessments for Chameleons Updated!

Chris Anderson

Dr. House of Chameleons
Hi Everyone,

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species is the international standard for assessing the extent to which species are facing extinction. These assessments provide a cornerstone for conservation action and are invaluable summaries of our knowledge on the status and biology of different species, with the potential to reveal trends that indicate whether conservation efforts are effective or not.

An analysis published last year revealed that nearly one in five reptile species (19%) are threatened with extinction, with an additional 7% being estimated as Near Threatened (Böhme et al., 2013, Biological Conservation 157, 372-385). At that time, just over half of all chameleon species had been assessed by the IUCN Red List, but these assessments suggested that in contrast to this global trend of all reptiles, the majority of chameleon species (63%) were Threatened or Near Threatened (i.e., Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, or Near Threatened), indicating that chameleons may be under a disproportionately large level of threat.

Last year the IUCN/SSC Chameleon Specialist Group (CSG) pledged to undertake the assessment of more than 60 additional species, primarily from East Africa (the largest major gap in finished assessments) in order to help understand the conservation status of not only the remaining species, but the family as a whole. With the help of the chameleon community, and in no small part to the members of Chameleon Forums (https://www.chameleonforums.com/sup...chameleon-specialist-group-fundraiser-109719/), the CSG was able to raise funds to hold an East African Chameleon IUCN Red List Assessment Workshop in order to achieve that goal.

This workshop was extremely successful and in conjunction with several other reptile assessment initiatives, I’m pleased to report that the IUCN Red List assessments have been completed for 92% of currently recognized species of chameleon and are now available on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species website. These assessments, however, have revealed a number of troubling trends regarding the conservation status of chameleons. Among these:

- At least 33% of chameleons are threatened! Of the 200 currently recognized species of chameleon, 66 are assessed as threatened (i.e., Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable) and an additional 35 are assessed as Near Threatened. When accounting for species assessed as Data Deficient (DD - 10) or that have not yet been assessed by the IUCN Red List (NE - 16), this means that 33-46% of the family (36% of species for which sufficient data are available) are Threatened, and 51-64% of the family (approximately 55%) are Threatened or Near Threatened. This is compared to reptiles in general, where 19% are threatened and 26% Threatened or Near Threatened.
- Nine (9) species of chameleon are considered Critically Endangered (CR)! The Red List Category of CR is one step removed from Extinct in the Wild (EW) and then Extinct (EX). These species are considered to be facing an extremely high risk of extinction in the wild, and are in immediate need of conservation action. The chameleon species assessed as CR are: Brookesia bonsi, Brookesia desperate, Calumma hafahafa, Calumma tarzan, Furcifer belalandaensis, Rhampholeon acuminatus, Rhampholeon bruessoworum, Rhampholeon chapmanorum, and Rhampholeon tilburyi.
- There are 37 species of chameleon that have been assessed as Endangered (EN). Species assessed as EN are considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild. The chameleon species assessed as EN are: Archaius tigris, Bradypodion caffer, Bradypodion taeniabronchum, Brookesia bekolosy, Brookesia decaryi, Brookesia dentata, Brookesia exarmata, Brookesia karchei, Brookesia lineata, Brookesia minima, Brookesia perarmata, Brookesia peyrierasi, Brookesia ramanantsoai, Brookesia tristis, Brookesia valerieae, Calumma andringitraense, Calumma furcifer, Calumma gallus, Calumma glawi, Calumma globifer, Calumma hilleniusi, Calumma vencesi, Calumma vohibola, Furcifer balteatus, Furcifer minor, Furcifer nicosiai, Kinyongia magomberae, Kinyongia matschiei, Kinyongia multituberculata, Kinyongia tenuis, Kinyongia vosseleri, Nadzikambia mlanjensis, Rhampholeon platyceps, Rhampholeon spinosus, Rhampholeon temporalis, Rhampholeon viridis and Trioceros laterispinis.
- 61% of Rhampholeon spp. are threatened, but the genus is not CITES listed! Of the 18 currently recognized species of Rhampholeon, 11 are threatened (i.e., Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable), including four (4) of the nine (9) chameleon species listed as CR. Unfortunately, with the exception of Rhampholeon spinosus (which is listed under its previous taxonomy; more here), Rhampholeon spp. are not currently listed on any appendix of CITES, an international agreement establishing a permit system to control and monitor international trade to protect against over-exploitation. Some of these threatened Rhampholeon spp., however, are currently being harvested heavily for the pet trade.
- Ten (10) chameleon species have been assessed as Data Deficient (DD). Species assessed as DD lack sufficient information to make a direct, or indirect, assessment of their risk of extinction based on their distribution and/or population status. As a result, the conservation status of these species is still unknown. The chameleon species assessed as DD are: Brookesia lambertoni, Calumma fallax, Calumma vatosoa, Chamaeleo necasi, Furcifer tuzetae, Kinyongia gyrolepis, Trioceros kinetensis, Trioceros ntunte, Trioceros schoutedeni, and Trioceros widersheimi.
- IUCN Red List assessments of 16 chameleon species are currently listed as Not Evaluated (NE). IUCN Red List assessments for 184 out of 200 currently recognized chameleon species are currently published on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species website, leaving 16 remaining unpublished. These assessments are currently in process and under external review, and should be published in the near future. Species currently listed as NE are: Bradypodion atromontanum, B. caeruleogula, B. damaranum, B. gutturale, B. kentanicum, B. melanocephalum, B. ngomeense, B. occidentale, B. pumilum, Calumma linotum, Chamaeleo anchietae, Trioceros oweni, T. perreti, T. pfefferi, T. quadricornis, and T. serratus.

The specific criteria by which each species was assessed to their respective Red List Category is provided in the individual assessments under the “Assessment Information” section and is outlined in the IUCN Categories & Criteria (version 3.1). There is also quite a bit of information on the distribution and conservation status of each species in their respective assessments. I definitely encourage people to look over them and educate themselves about the conservation status of these animals!

Obviously these assessments show that there is a lot of work that needs to be done to conserve chameleons in the wild. The CSG will be announcing its first efforts to address specific conservation needs illuminated by these assessments later today. I will be sure to post a thread on this and how everyone can help make it happen as soon as the effort goes live.

Chris
 
Last edited:
Thanks for posting this.
I see a lot of effort and work has been done to get this data, but I have a question.
On the government levels, and I mean East Africa and Madagascar, what action is actually taken to preserve and protect these red list species?
 
Thanks for posting this.
I see a lot of effort and work has been done to get this data, but I have a question.
On the government levels, and I mean East Africa and Madagascar, what action is actually taken to preserve and protect these red list species?

It really varies on the country and species in question. In many areas, it comes down to protection of habitat that these species occur in. In other areas, the species can be protected at various levels.

Chris
 
- There are 37 species of chameleon that have been assessed as Endangered (EN). Species assessed as EN are considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild. The chameleon species assessed as EN are: Archaius tigris, Bradypodion caffer, Bradypodion taeniabronchum, Brookesia bekolosy, Brookesia decaryi, Brookesia dentata, Brookesia exarmata, Brookesia karchei, Brookesia lineata, Brookesia minima, Brookesia perarmata, Brookesia peyrierasi, Brookesia ramanantsoai, Brookesia tristis, Brookesia valerieae, Calumma andringitraense, Calumma furcifer, Calumma gallus, Calumma glawi, Calumma globifer, Calumma hilleniusi, Calumma vencesi, Calumma vohibola, Furcifer balteatus, Furcifer minor, Furcifer nicosiai, Kinyongia magomberae, Kinyongia matschiei, Kinyongia multituberculata, Kinyongia tenuis, Kinyongia vosseleri, Nadzikambia mlanjensis, Rhampholeon platyceps, Rhampholeon spinosus, Rhampholeon temporalis, Rhampholeon viridis and Trioceros laterispinis.

Chris

These two were surprises to me to be on this list as Endangered species. Kinyongia matschiei coming from the East Usambara has always been documented as a rare species from people in the hobby. However their availability recently in the States (wild caught and captive bred) plus being protected by a couple preserves the Amani and Nile Nature Reserves made this assessment a somewhat surprise not an impossibility.

Kinyongia multituberculata however with a much larger range and being documented in primary and secondary habitat is a huge surprise.

http://www.inaturalist.org/projects...ca/assessments/591-kinyongia-multituberculata

Adapts to anthropogenic habitats. Relatively common in disturbed, non-forest habitats. Shrubs and trees by roadsides.
Posted by janstipala over 1 year ago
18494-thumb

I agree with Jan Stipala, K. multituberculata are very common in shrubs and trees along roadways. They can also occasionally be found in tea plantations (which for some reason are less intensively farmed in the West Usambaras than in the East Usambaras: in the West there is often space between each tea plant with grass and weeds growing, while in the East the tea plants are tightly packed together) and invasive Eucalyptus trees. In 3 evenings of recreational surveys in Mazumbai forest, I did not see any K. multituberculata in the forest interior, but dozens along road and forest edges.
Posted by filups about 1 year ago
19432-thumb

I've only spent a short time in the West Usambara's (2 or 3 nights) but there were lots in the forests, and they werent that hard to observed. My impression is tha they are more common in the forest than in the transformed landscape. So I would agree they can utlise the forest edges, but given my own observations, plus talking to others who've spend a significant amout of time there, the forest is the primary habitat.

The people I have talked too that have seem Kinyongia multituberculata in there native habitat stated that Kingongia multituberculata are the Fucifer pardalis of Tanzania West Usambara Mountains along with the observation quotes/reports from iNaturalist. They have got high fecundity and can thrive in primary (Furcifer pardalis does not even thrive in primary dense forest that well they live in forest edge habitat) and secondary habitats. Plus that the species is the most imported out of all the species that were once grouped together as the species called Kinyongia fischeri. That pick for me as an endangered species is a huge surprise. I have looked for the justification for Kingonig matschiei and Kingongia multituberculata and only found the justification posted for Kinyongia matschiei. What is going on with the justification for Kinyongia multituberculata being listed as an endangered species? They even live in Eucalyptus Trees?

Best Regards
Jeremy A.Rich
 
Last edited:
- There are 37 species of chameleon that have been assessed as Endangered (EN). Species assessed as EN are considered to be facing a very high risk of extinction in the wild. The chameleon species assessed as EN are: Archaius tigris, Bradypodion caffer, Bradypodion taeniabronchum, Brookesia bekolosy, Brookesia decaryi, Brookesia dentata, Brookesia exarmata, Brookesia karchei, Brookesia lineata, Brookesia minima, Brookesia perarmata, Brookesia peyrierasi, Brookesia ramanantsoai, Brookesia tristis, Brookesia valerieae, Calumma andringitraense, Calumma furcifer, Calumma gallus, Calumma glawi, Calumma globifer, Calumma hilleniusi, Calumma vencesi, Calumma vohibola, Furcifer balteatus, Furcifer minor, Furcifer nicosiai, Kinyongia magomberae, Kinyongia matschiei, Kinyongia multituberculata, Kinyongia tenuis, Kinyongia vosseleri, Nadzikambia mlanjensis, Rhampholeon platyceps, Rhampholeon spinosus, Rhampholeon temporalis, Rhampholeon viridis and Trioceros laterispinis.

Chris

These two were surprises to me to be on this list as Endangered species. Kinyongia matschiei coming from the East Usambara has always been documented as a rare species from people in the hobby. However their availability recently in the States (wild caught and captive bred) plus being protected by a couple preserves the Amani and Nile Nature Reserves made this assessment a somewhat surprise not an impossibility.

Kinyongia multituberculata however with a much larger range and being documented in primary and secondary habitat is a huge surprise.

http://www.inaturalist.org/projects...ca/assessments/591-kinyongia-multituberculata

Adapts to anthropogenic habitats. Relatively common in disturbed, non-forest habitats. Shrubs and trees by roadsides.
Posted by janstipala over 1 year ago
18494-thumb

I agree with Jan Stipala, K. multituberculata are very common in shrubs and trees along roadways. They can also occasionally be found in tea plantations (which for some reason are less intensively farmed in the West Usambaras than in the East Usambaras: in the West there is often space between each tea plant with grass and weeds growing, while in the East the tea plants are tightly packed together) and invasive Eucalyptus trees. In 3 evenings of recreational surveys in Mazumbai forest, I did not see any K. multituberculata in the forest interior, but dozens along road and forest edges.
Posted by filups about 1 year ago
19432-thumb

I've only spent a short time in the West Usambara's (2 or 3 nights) but there were lots in the forests, and they werent that hard to observed. My impression is tha they are more common in the forest than in the transformed landscape. So I would agree they can utlise the forest edges, but given my own observations, plus talking to others who've spend a significant amout of time there, the forest is the primary habitat.

The people I have talked too that have seem Kinyongia multituberculata in there native habitat stated that Kingongia multituberculata are the Fucifer pardalis of Tanzania West Usambara Mountains along with the observation quotes/reports from iNaturalist. They have got high fecundity and can thrive in primary (Furcifer pardalis does not even thrive in primary dense forest that well they live in forest edge habitat) and secondary habitats. Plus that the species is the most imported out of all the species that were once grouped together as the species called Kinyongia fischeri. That pick for me as an endangered species is a huge surprise. I have looked for the justification for Kingonig matschiei and Kingongia multituberculata and only found the justification posted for Kinyongia matschiei. What is going on with the justification for Kinyongia multituberculata being listed as an endangered species? They even live in Eucalyptus Trees?

Best Regards
Jeremy A.Rich

Jeremy,

If you pull up any IUCN Red List Assessment, the second section of the assessment is the "Assessment Information" section. The first subsection of this section is "Red List Category & Criteria", which outlines the specific criteria by which the species was assigned to a given category level. The last subsection of this same section is "Justification" which is a section of text explaining those criteria specific to the species in question.

In the case of the assessment for Kinyongia multituberculata (http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/172574/0), the "Red List Category & Criteria" subsection states: "Endangered B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii) ver 3.1". This means that the species was assessed as Endangered under criteria B1ab(iii) and B2ab(iii). If you click the "ver. 3.1", it takes you to the explanation of the criteria for assessing a species to these categories. For being assessed as Endangered, the specified categories for K. multituberculata are:

B. Geographic range in the form of either B1 (extent of occurrence) OR B2 (area of occupancy) OR both:
1. Extent of occurrence estimated to be less than 5000 km2, and estimates indicating at least two of a-c:
a. Severely fragmented or known to exist at no more than five locations.
b. Continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in any of the following:
(i) extent of occurrence
(ii) area of occupancy
(iii) area, extent and/or quality of habitat
(iv) number of locations or subpopulations
(v) number of mature individuals.​
c. Extreme fluctuations in any of the following:
(i) extent of occurrence
(ii) area of occupancy
(iii) number of locations or subpopulations
(iv) number of mature individuals.​
2. Area of occupancy estimated to be less than 500 km2, and estimates indicating at least two of a-c:
a. Severely fragmented or known to exist at no more than five locations.
b. Continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in any of the following:
(i) extent of occurrence
(ii) area of occupancy
(iii) area, extent and/or quality of habitat
(iv) number of locations or subpopulations
(v) number of mature individuals.​
c. Extreme fluctuations in any of the following:
(i) extent of occurrence
(ii) area of occupancy
(iii) number of locations or subpopulations
(iv) number of mature individuals.​

So for K. multituberculata, an IUCN Red List category of Endangered was assigned because the species has an extent of occurrence estimated to be less than 5000 km2 and an area of occupancy estimated to be less than 500 km2, with estimates indicating its distribution is severely fragmented or known to exist at no more than five locations, and with estimates indicating continuing decline, observed, inferred or projected, in the area, extent and/or quality of habitat. The "Justification" subsection of K. multituberculata's assessment goes on to clarify:

This species is listed as Endangered applying Criteria B1ab(iii)+2ab(iii) because it occurs as a severely fragmented population restricted to highly fragmented forest patches and their immediate surroundings, a habitat that is undergoing a continuing decline in both extent and quality due to the impacts of timber removal, resource utilization, and encroachment and transformation for agriculture. This species is also one of the most heavily exported from East Africa for the pet trade. It is not clear whether current levels of export are sustainable, and research is needed to determine whether offtake is contributing to suspected population declines. Although it is observed in transformed landscapes, these observations are close to forested areas and on vegetation that is thick and structurally complex, and it will not tolerance heavy disturbance.

There are a number of other more specific explanations on the range, population, habitat, trade and use, major threats and conservation recommendations in the full assessment for the species.

As for K. matschiei, it was assessed as Endangered under the same criteria as K. multituberculata, with the following specific justification:

This species is listed as Endangered on the basis that it has an Extent of Occurrence of only 800 km2, and an Area of Occupancy less than 300 km2. It occurs as a severely fragmented population, and the forest fragments where it occurs are experiencing continuing declines in their extent and quality as a result of agricultural encroachment and resource extraction.

Hope that helps clarify how these two species ended up being classified as Endangered. Happy to help try to clarify any specifics though.

Chris
 
Hope that helps clarify how these two species ended up being classified as Endangered. Happy to help try to clarify any specifics though.

Chris

Chris

The link to the IUCN Red List page for Kinyongia multituberculata was mostly all I was looking for. For the last couple days I could raise the IUCN Red List page for Kinyongia matschiei and not Kinyongia multituberculata which is strange.

I understand assessing how big a population is by determining how much optimum habitat there is and approximating/determining how many chameleons there are in optimum habitat by using transect studies for unit areas. However from my readings it is a surprise that Kinyongia multituberculata does not live in secondary habitat more as reported in my previous posts and other readings I have done.

When I search for the Kinyongia multituberculata IUCN Red List page it is not showing on my search engine. Thanks for the link.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich
 
Last edited:
Kinyongia matschiei now endangered, no big surprise there. Even if they issue a zero quota, any bets on how many come in to the USA next year?

We'll see what happens. Tanzania is in the middle of the Review of Significant Trade for K. fischeri, and the mislabeling of these species has been highlighted. It will be interesting to see what happens as a result.

Chris
 
We'll see what happens. Tanzania is in the middle of the Review of Significant Trade for K. fischeri, and the mislabeling of these species has been highlighted. It will be interesting to see what happens as a result.

Chris

I'm wondering if the new Red List (EN) classification of Kinyongia multituberculata might be beneficial to the whole complex. If I were in a country that didn't have resources to ID each species exported within the fischeri complex, I would recommend that they all be red listed (EN) in order to protect the one or two that were actually endangered. Especially as K. multi is the fischeri species most commonly exported.

Shotgun approach. Just thinking out loud here.....
 
I'm wondering if the new Red List (EN) classification of Kinyongia multituberculata might be beneficial to the whole complex. If I were in a country that didn't have resources to ID each species exported within the fischeri complex, I would recommend that they all be red listed (EN) in order to protect the one or two that were actually endangered. Especially as K. multi is the fischeri species most commonly exported.

Shotgun approach. Just thinking out loud here.....

Mike

That would be something to consider.

Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich
 
I'm wondering if the new Red List (EN) classification of Kinyongia multituberculata might be beneficial to the whole complex. If I were in a country that didn't have resources to ID each species exported within the fischeri complex, I would recommend that they all be red listed (EN) in order to protect the one or two that were actually endangered. Especially as K. multi is the fischeri species most commonly exported.

Shotgun approach. Just thinking out loud here.....

They wouldn't be able to adjust the IUCN Red List category for this reason (there are strict criteria for each category and species assessment), but CITES quota levels could potentially be adjusted for different species to account for difficulty in differentiating species. The differentiation of these species was one of the things the Tanzanian Management Authority was told to address as a result of the CITES Review of Significant Trade, and I provided them with feedback on how to do so, so we'll see what happens.

Chris
 
Back
Top Bottom