Chameleon Mortality in First Year after Acquisition

[OldChamKeeper]

What is the purpose of this report to tell us what percent of essentially break down in types animals died at the hands of attendees @ 2 herp shows in the uk?
Certainly this title is misleading Captive Reptile Mortality Rates in the Home and Implications for the Wildlife Trade should read Captive Reptile Mortality Rates In a Small Segment of United Kingdom..How can we come to any real " Implications for the Wildlife Trade" with this small data set..Im not buying it. Im of the belief the percents are much higher in the big global picture..and fairly high even in the captive bred chameleons.

I really don't know if anybody is going catch what I'm going to say, I fail at communicating via text sometimes. I'd rather toss a rock from my cave to get my point across sometimes.

It was the early 90's, I saw different groups going to bird shows and gathering data from people there about mortality and vet visits and what types of parrots people kept. They published a huge paper on hos both wild caught and captive bred parrots were dying in captivity, being mistreated, all kinds of bad stuff. It turned out much later some of the people who were researchers were from PETA. To this day I don't believe the paper was valid. The vast majority of bird owners I knew as customers my self included had their birds for decades in some cases as pets. Many keepers in those circles later felt it was just part of a multi-pronged approach to building data and support for banning the keeping of birds. never think PETA and those who want to tell you or me we can't keep a pet are idiots, or shortsighted, they focus on the long term goals.

Is that what happened here? I'm not saying it did, but I am saying that their sampling method has holes in it and a bigger red flag is the purpose of it.

Anybody here ever met a zealot? As it pertains to our topic I am referring to a person whose life is so totally consumed feeling that we are the bad guys hurting all these animals to the point that they will devote their waking life and resources to "saving" the animals via a number of methods, like collecting data to support their new laws.

 

[gotwqqd]

@gotwqqd: it sounds that you do not think that there is a problem in the chameleon community with improper care, health issues, etc. Is that true? If so, I would like to exchange my experiences for yours: I've seen too many very sad cases to personally believe this is true.



Wanna talk science? Talk science with me. I literally work in the reptile scientific field. I rely on scientific herpetocultural studies for a living. That being said...

The study is valid. I'm not saying that it's without bias, representational issues, sample size problems, etc, but it is still valid if taken as a piece of the whole picture. An entire study or review of studies is not invalidated just because of a few issues with it's methodology: if that were so, almost no studies would ever be taken as evidence for anything. You just take the study and filter the information through the issues you fond therein.

I found this study interesting as something that supports a hypothesis on chameleon average longevity in captivity, and not as an entire and whole truth. Just like any other study. No one piece of evidence should be taken in the exclusion of all others, but all pieces have their place as well. In honesty, it backs up my own anecdotal experiences which certainly doesn't hurt, though that is really neither here nor there.

Comparing captive lifespans to wild lifespans is a difficult proposition, as accurately determining wild lifespans is pretty close to impossible in most cases. Best guesses usually give us a idea of what we are dealing with. Some anecdotal reports show that some species of chameleons all but disappear yearly, and rely on the eggs they laid to repopulate the species. Should this be good enough for our captive chameleons? Are we happy with keeping to the wild lifespan, without going for more? Let me take off my science hat for a second and I would say no; that if we are arrogant enough to remove a wild creature from the wild and keep it for no other reason than our own pleasure and gratification, then it's our duty to ensure that their lives are in some way "better" (an objective concept, to be sure) than whatever they would have had previously.

A feral cat's average lifespan is only 1 year. Should then we expect our indoor pampered cats to keel over dead at 12 months of age? No, obviously not. The average "wild" lifespan is important information, absolutely, but captive life takes away much of the uncertainty of lifespan-determining factors: resource scarcity, predation, intraspecifc competition, etc. In captivity, damage to one eye may not be an insurmountable problem for a chameleon; but in the wild it almost certainly would be. And yet, even with all this, there still seems to be a real issue with chameleon long-term survivability in captivity. I think the real issue I take with this study, beyond the obvious problems of self-reported studies, is the lack of information on cause of death. Anecdotally I have my own opinions about why the short lifespans of chameleons should be (owner ignorance, lack of funds, etc) but i would be interested in seeing a follow-up study.

This study is not all-encompassing nor is it without fault, but it is still a valuable resource and one piece of information in an important puzzle.



"What If" arguments are just hypotheses contrary to the facts:
"What if every singe one of the survey participants had never owned a chameleon before and kept them with their leopard geckos?"
"What if chameleons only want to live one year?"
"What if we were all space monsters on the planet XQ48J and wore our pet chameleons like a hat?"

Heh. Don't complain about someone else's scientific acumen if you're going to use logistical fallacies yourself to try and make them feel small. Additionally, science should never be the end-all/be-all. That paves a very dangerous path. Ethics and the human-animal connection are vital factors in both human and captive animal lives, and shoving that aside in favour of "pure science" is a grave mistake... and there is science to back that up if you happen to peruse veterinary journals

You are missing the entire point.

IF you were granted omniscience and knew the perfect husbandry of 1. chameleon, 2. reticulated python.

you raised the proper sized group for a study of each

chameleons death rate in first year was 30%, python death rate was 2%

your comparisons of death rate IN RELATION TO CARE is pointless.....its simply a trait of the species
there is zero blame to be put on the caretaker

are we seeing something of this nature in this study?

what is needed is a study without comparisons to other reptiles....and each species of chameleon should be separate. It should be about separating laymen raising the animals against those that have been doing it for long times with scientific background in herpetology .
Basically the most important data to collect is on the people. How much do they know? How long in the field? How long raising animals?

 

[Kingkush]

I really don't know if anybody is going catch what I'm going to say, I fail at communicating via text sometimes. I'd rather toss a rock from my cave to get my point across sometimes.

It was the early 90's, I saw different groups going to bird shows and gathering data from people there about mortality and vet visits and what types of parrots people kept. They published a huge paper on hos both wild caught and captive bred parrots were dying in captivity, being mistreated, all kinds of bad stuff. It turned out much later some of the people who were researchers were from PETA. To this day I don't believe the paper was valid. The vast majority of bird owners I knew as customers my self included had their birds for decades in some cases as pets. Many keepers in those circles later felt it was just part of a multi-pronged approach to building data and support for banning the keeping of birds. never think PETA and those who want to tell you or me we can't keep a pet are idiots, or shortsighted, they focus on the long term goals.

Is that what happened here? I'm not saying it did, but I am saying that their sampling method has holes in it and a bigger red flag is the purpose of it.

Anybody here ever met a zealot? As it pertains to our topic I am referring to a person whose life is so totally consumed feeling that we are the bad guys hurting all these animals to the point that they will devote their waking life and resources to "saving" the animals via a number of methods, like collecting data to support their new laws.

Im not sure if anyone read the single comment on that paper it basically tears it to bits and shows why its unreliable and misleading... Just by looking at this forum it seems even an application that can log statistics over the captive animals life.environment,feeding.along with all aspects of husbandry and anonymous death report with questionaire would provide useful species specific data and possibly impact whatever the real number are. Ill try it and see cannot hurt thats for sure.
http://www.plosone.org/article/comments/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0141460[/QUOTE]

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-re...-criticised-by-leading-experts-562909691.html

 

[jajeanpierre]

Im not sure if anyone read the single comment on that paper it basically tears it to bits and shows why its unreliable and misleading... Just by looking at this forum it seems even an application that can log statistics over the captive animals life.environment,feeding.along with all aspects of husbandry and anonymous death report with questionaire would provide useful species specific data and possibly impact whatever the real number are. Ill try it and see cannot hurt thats for sure.
http://www.plosone.org/article/comments/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0141460

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-re...-criticised-by-leading-experts-562909691.html[/QUOTE]

The group making the critique seem to have their own agenda. They sound like UK's PETA.

http://www.apa.org.uk/about/profile.html

"We oppose the activities of individuals or companies involved in the trade in wild animals as pets ..."

 

[Kingkush]

I have no alliance to any of these people for the most part i consider them mostly paper pushers.making zero impact.my idea gathers specific data and should help save animals lives..however i do scratch my head at these people essentially running chameleon mills i cannot see how you can give them the care they need on a individual basis it takes alot of commitment.and are these places even selling adults? As prolific as they are and as many clutches females lay why would there be the need to export more of those? As many genetics out here..that i do not get. If someone can explain why you why you would need to "ive imported thousands in the last 15 years" a quote from i wont say who..but i cannot wrap my head around it can you explian it? Sounds like bad breeding husbandry or complete abuse.

 

[MissLissa]

IF you were granted omniscience and knew the perfect husbandry of 1. chameleon, 2. reticulated python.

you raised the proper sized group for a study of each

chameleons death rate in first year was 30%, python death rate was 2%

your comparisons of death rate IN RELATION TO CARE is pointless.....its simply a trait of the species
there is zero blame to be put on the caretaker

You make this claim that the ~28% mortality rate is irrespective of care, but I don't see any information to back that up. Can you find me some studies that support your stance? I would definitely be interested in reading up on that: I'm not above changing my opinion upon preponderance of evidence.

Without evidence, I think we are stuck at a "my hypothesis/your hypothesis" impasse. My thought that the high rate of first-year mortality could be reduced if new homes were given (and implemented) proper care protocols is admittedly only supported by my own experiences working with hundreds of chams, of whom we (unofficially) have less than 12% first year mortality rate from hatch- which is less than half what this study reported. However, there are studies done with other animals that demonstrate that proper care and management is a critical factor in lifespan. These studyiesspan such a large range of species that it would be ludicrous to think that chameleons would be exempt.

what is needed is a study without comparisons to other reptiles....and each species of chameleon should be separate. It should be about separating laymen raising the animals against those that have been doing it for long times with scientific background in herpetology .
Basically the most important data to collect is on the people. How much do they know? How long in the field? How long raising animals?

I already agreed that the posted study had it's problems, and needs more in-depth follow ups with tightened protocols and reduced bias. I agree that a more in-depth study is necessary on the captive longevity of chameleons, and species specific would be even better. In fact, that is one of the things the facility I work at is doing. However, no papers will be published on that work for several more years (8-10, likely) as longevity studies are- as one would expect- long. However, our study is not focused on pet homes and instead focuses on the longevity of a particular species cared for a specific way under a certain set of conditions that we control. This is not super useful for the average pet home, which is unlikely to be able to replicate our methods. However, the researchers are not interested in pet homes: they are interested in facility longevity specifically, so that works for them.

Any study involving "laymen" is going to be littered with reporting issues. It's difficult to get an accurate study done on dogs that way, let alone chameleons.

 

[Kingkush]

This is not super useful for the average pet home, which is unlikely to be able to replicate our methods

why wouldnt they are you using something proprietary?..sensors and automation and software is within reach..for home users.. why isolate make the working template avail.you come up with.i will make mine avail.

 

[Kingkush]

whats more important how long we can keep an animal alive in artificial environments n a facility(anything that doesnt fall into the animals locale climate and microclimates) than actually starting to collect care and medical data on real people of all types..you realize how much data could be collected in 8 years? from users via a mechansim like free care and management software im going to make ..Ill see you in 8 years and compare actual impact.

 

[OldChamKeeper]

http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/news-re...-criticised-by-leading-experts-562909691.html

The group making the critique seem to have their own agenda. They sound like UK's PETA.

http://www.apa.org.uk/about/profile.html

"We oppose the activities of individuals or companies involved in the trade in wild animals as pets ..."[/QUOTE]


Well there you go. If it is from the PETA playbook then they will cite that "study" when they try to get a law passed to restrict or ban the animals. Might be a good idea to let the UK keepers know what may be coming

 

[jajeanpierre]

The group making the critique seem to have their own agenda. They sound like UK's PETA.

http://www.apa.org.uk/about/profile.html

"We oppose the activities of individuals or companies involved in the trade in wild animals as pets ..."

Well there you go. If it is from the PETA playbook then they will cite that "study" when they try to get a law passed to restrict or ban the animals. Might be a good idea to let the UK keepers know what may be coming[/QUOTE]

Ralph, it's worse than that. They are claiming that there is a 75% first-year mortality rate for reptiles across the board. They claim this study underestimates the true first-mortality rate.

Anyone suggesting that just because a group of people with stacks of biology degrees following their names wrote a very fancy-sounding critique on the scope and methods of the study, doesn't mean the study has no value.

We all need to keep in mind that someone who has lots of degrees listed behind their name still might have an agenda.

 

[MissLissa]

whats more important how long we can keep an animal alive in artificial environments n a facility(anything that doesnt fall into the animals locale climate and microclimates) than actually starting to collect care and medical data on real people of all types..you realize how much data could be collected in 8 years? from users via a mechansim like free care and management software im going to make ..Ill see you in 8 years and compare actual impact.

I have no idea what you are saying. I feel like you are trying to sell me something. Probably snake oil.

A multimillion dollar facility is not going to be able to be replicated in your home; it's really that simple. We house over 200 adult chameleons. That is also not likely to be replicated in your home. The longevity study is looking at age-related disease in reptiles, including two chameleon species. The diseases themselves are the variable they are measuring so all care parameters must be identical to limit unnecessary variability in the study.

Information gathered through self-reporting, like you suggest for whatever kind of program you are making, is wildly unreliable; especially since there is no consistency in care/husbandry even among experienced private chameleon owners. Information gathered that way- like the study the OP posted- is useful as a starting place to craft a more focused research study, but that's really about it.

 

[Kingkush]

you dont understand what im creating melissa period..who is trying to sell you anything im making software myself with my own funding giving it away free..i will send you a copy when its done

 

[OldChamKeeper]

Ralph, it's worse than that. They are claiming that there is a 75% first-year mortality rate for reptiles across the board. They claim this study underestimates the true first-mortality rate.

Anyone suggesting that just because a group of people with stacks of biology degrees following their names wrote a very fancy-sounding critique on the scope and methods of the study, doesn't mean the study has no value.

We all need to keep in mind that someone who has lots of degrees listed behind their name still might have an agenda.

No I get that. Hence why from the start I said things didn't feel right. It's also why I brought up the reference to captive birds. While the majority of my customers never had birds die on them but the study done at some bird shows indicated the opposite. Lots of people felt it was bullshit. Same there in that they are saying the numbers of reptiles dying the first year of purchase are most likely above 75%. That's bullshit. Most people I know who buy a starter reptile still have the animal well after a year.

I've met a lot of people with degrees over the years, very few knew what they were talking about.

 

[wodesorel]

Ralph, it's worse than that. They say the study's mortality numbers are LOW, and a mortality rate of 75% for all reptiles across the board is more accurate.

Are they including those that are wild caught and die in transport, and those that die at the hands of distributors and stores? Culls from breeders trying to get the perfect color? I agree the numbers sound ridiculous at the surface and may very well be altogether if it's activists putting it together, but there are many reasons for first-year deaths.

My area is hermit crabs. They probably have a 90% - likely much higher - rate of death in the first year. Pet shops alone experience anywhere from 25%-50% losses of new arrivals. We know millions are imported on an annual basis (by admission of the distributors), but there are not millions and millions of hermit crabbers in the USA because the vast majority are sold as beach souvenirs and live around three months in poor conditions. It horrifying to think about, but the numbers and proof are there - death during import, death during warehousing, death during delivery and time at store, death at the hands of buyers. Even owners who try to do it right experience a high level of death. And don't even get me started on non-Purple Pinchers species who survive on average only 2-4 years in captivity with the best of care.

And please keep in mind, they can live over 40 years if properly cared for - likely a few decades longer in the wild - and they are only now starting to be successfully bred in captivity. (A lot of time and work for around a dozen at a time, only 6 or so batches known so far.)

 

[Kingkush]

My area is hermit crabs

thats pretty cool when was in okinawa there was tons of them almost like the forest was alive near the beaches =_) Not sure what type they were think they were purple and red ones..not to get off topic but..my thought were there is alot of demographics not in the equation..as you say..fyi i used to pull dead and maintian animals in the wholesale thing and the number of deaths is staggering,,why imho mutiple houseing..no animal likes that it creates stress and just bad health in general. So this is my problem with it..the only thing i can agree is that i do believe that chameleons are the highest due to its specialized needs..i have unpacked some pretty bad shipments from madagascar and the animals were so full of parasites they wouldnt last long even in the wild to the point worms are under the skin and visible in large quantities. So glad i got away from that maddness.

 

[jajeanpierre]

Are they including those that are wild caught and die in transport, and those that die at the hands of distributors and stores? Culls from breeders trying to get the perfect color? I agree the numbers sound ridiculous at the surface and may very well be altogether if it's activists putting it together, but there are many reasons for first-year deaths.

Which number are you talking about? The 75% number or the numbers from the study I posted?

The study I posted the link to only dealt with the first year after acquisition. The 75% number came from a comment on the study and that 75% number was apparently from the first year in the home after acquisition. I haven't read that second study (Toland et al., 2012).

 

[Lizardguy1]

A staggering 28.2% of chameleons die within their first year of acquisition compared to the average of 3.6% for all reptiles. That's a very shocking number, especially considering 88.8% of the reptiles were captive bred, not wild caughts.

Facinating article and subsequent discussion! 2 quick points:

1) I believe part of the passion behind this is the mis-understanding of the mortality statistic. Take a 25-year life expancy animal like a bearded dragon or Python. Assuming the population being studied has all age classes randomly distributed, then in a given year 4% of the population will die of "old age." Likewise an animal with a 6-year life expectancy, in a given year 16.7% of the population will die of "old age." Given what we know about the life expectancy of chameleons then at least half the 28% is due to the intrinsic biology of the animal and it's known life expectancy.

2) The 88% captive bred figure appears to be an average, and is applicable to the UK not the US. I've made this point before on this forum, but I believe a significant fraction of the Veiled Chameleon market in the US (by far the most common chameleon in the pet trade) is filled by Florida wild caught. Because these are produced domestically the there are no CITES import quotas or other data to track, and probably get sent to retail stores as "captive bred." A number of large distributors in south Florida ship large numbers of Veileds nationwide.

 

[jpm995]

I think the study while not really scientific points out some things that many already suspect. Chams die in captivity at a higher rate than other repts. Even the best keepers on this forum have had failures. My guess the reason is probably most are purchased from pet stores that don't know their care requirements and/or are wild caught and have parasites or other health or transport issues. Their care is more complex than other repts and their geometery makes them more fragile [mouth/tongue issues can keep them from feeding]. My first cham [jacksons] died the first month i got him so i'm part of the problem. My guess that most of these numbers are low for all the animals listed [knew pet shop owner that said 90% of all fish he sold died within a month] but probably are close as far as relative to each species.