the Non-indigenous Oustalet’s Chameleon, Furcifer oustaleti (Mocquard 1894) (Squamata: Chamaeleonidae), in Southern Florida...
- Thread starter kinyonga
- Start date
bbyoda
Chameleon Enthusiast
Oh totally. I love those critters. It's also sad they had to euthanize the chameleons they caught to do this research but (I assume) since they're invasive species they can't just release them back (and I imagine you can't really get good data from x rays vs dissection).
Yup... makes me very sad to see an animal's life ended when there's nothing wrong with it. What would we ever do if some aliens cane here and decided they should do that to humans to study them...would we then realize what were doing to the animals?
bbyoda
Chameleon Enthusiast
That's a challenging question! We think of ourselves so distinctly and separately from the animal kingdom rather than as a unique part of it and the web of life.
salty dog
Chameleon Enthusiast
kill something because it's not native.....perhaps the euthanizing population of people should euthanize themselves are not native to north america.......perhaps they should euthanize all non native species incuding themselves and everybody else thats not native american...
MissSkittles
Chameleon Enthusiast
Either I missed it or there really was little purpose for this study. They found that the chameleons ate what chameleons everywhere eat…small live prey. Poor chameleons. 
bbyoda
Chameleon Enthusiast
I had this same line of thought. It's tough to reconcile. Originally humans evolved in Africa - I'm thinking that after sufficient time do we (humans but any species really) adapt and become a part of a new environment. Native peoples are great at protecting biodiversity, settlers not so much.
I can understand how invasive species can harm a fragile ecosystem. The Cuban frogs, snails, and anoles kill off the Floridian frogs, snails, and green anoles. So I guess if the invasive chameleons eat the troublemaker invasive bugs it'd be OK to keep them?
I'd love someone more versed in environmental science to help me understand. I feel ignorant and out of my element on these matters. I'm guessing the researchers felt that the knowledge gained by this endeavor would be worth the down sides and loss of chameleon lift.
If humans started in Africa, like it's been said, then anyone who ever came to any of the other countries in the world, were settlers....not just the people you're referring to as settlers IMHO....its just a continuation of the original settling in a way....isn't it?
Should all "settlers" be considered invasive? I understand that all creatures that come from another place, where they were established, are invasive in a way...but what should be done about it?
Should all "settlers" be considered invasive? I understand that all creatures that come from another place, where they were established, are invasive in a way...but what should be done about it?
bbyoda
Chameleon Enthusiast
I think there's a difference between non-Native and invasive. As for what qualifies as Native, including humans, that's probably a function of time and level of integration with the environment and ecosystem. Humans aren't necessarily invasive by default but we can be very destructive.
How that applies to chameleons - to your point, maybe they are eating important insects to Florida's ecosystem and causing harm.
I think there's a difference between non-Native and invasive too...I just said the original people in, say Canada, were still settlers....like everyone else who followed for a long time there after.
A settler is a person who moves to a new place with the intention to stay there.
The difference between a human and a non-human moving to a new area is that the human doesn't just end up ther by accident as a rule but the non-human does.
What makes the critter invasive is just like you said...they are causing harm to critters that are already there that we don't want to lose. But humans are kind of invasive too...how many critters have we wiped out or almost wiped out?
A settler is a person who moves to a new place with the intention to stay there.
The difference between a human and a non-human moving to a new area is that the human doesn't just end up ther by accident as a rule but the non-human does.
What makes the critter invasive is just like you said...they are causing harm to critters that are already there that we don't want to lose. But humans are kind of invasive too...how many critters have we wiped out or almost wiped out?
Motherlode Chameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
That was a neat population study about Furcifer oustaleti in southern Florida. Thanks for posting.
Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich
Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich
It wouldn't surprise me if they were all gone. It's a species that isn't all that available from breeders or imports.
As always...glad you enjoyed it. I'm just sorry they had to kill them.
Motherlode Chameleon
Chameleon Enthusiast
Fish and Game and conservationist normally have a zero tolerance for invasive species. Eradicating entire populations of invasive species of plants and animals is not an uncommon policy. Invasive species can really impact native species populations.
Best Regards
Jeremy A. Rich
