Search

Wildlife markets are hotspots for illegal wildlife trade, with traders operating as a result of weak monitoring and law enforcement. Knowledge of species traded, sources, and routes used for transport is needed to identify illegal wildlife trade markets and intervene to stem trade. We conducted surveys in 13 wildlife markets across Bangladesh every month during January-December 2019 to assess the abundance and diversity of wildlife taxa traded and the factors driving this trade. Passeriformes, Columbiformes, Psittaciformes, Artiodactyla, Carnivora and Testudines were the most traded orders. Wildlife markets were also centres of trade for high-value species, including the tiger Panthera tigris , crocodile Crocodylus porosus and tortoises. In hill markets and peri-urban markets the most commonly sold species originated from nearby forests, whereas urban markets included both native species and exotic species sourced internationally. Market type, road links to the market, the presence of law enforcement agencies, proximity to a port and form of sale (live animals or byproducts) all significantly influenced what is being traded. Trade of mammals, reptiles, high-value wildlife species and threatened species was less common in markets proximal to law enforcement agencies. Markets close to seaports or airports were more likely to sell mammals, threatened species and high-value wildlife. Based on our results, we recommend a set of interventions to help reduce market-based wildlife trade in Bangladesh. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Unsustainable wildlife trade is a major threat to many species, but quantifying trade remains challenging, as seizure data provides an incomplete understanding. For this reason, integrating multiple types of information, including interviews with actors involved in trade, is crucial if we are to understand the problem better. Hence, in this study, we digitized Bangladesh Forest Department tiger seizure records to identify trade routes and interviewed 163 individuals involved in trafficking tigers through Bangladesh's air, sea and land ports, including poachers, smugglers, and traders. We identified six ports used to import tigers, 14 ports used for tiger export and three ports showing bi‐directional trade. Elite Bangladeshis were the most important consumer group, and tigers were sourced from populations in NE India, Myanmar and Bangladesh Sundarbans to supply domestic demand. Tiger products were exported to 14 countries, including seven G20 nations, with Bangladeshi expatriates as the consumer group in three countries (United Kingdom, Germany and Qatar). Rising economic development in Bangladesh over the last decade, combined with deep‐rooted cultural ties to tiger consumption, has led to a rise in domestic demand. Additionally, rapid growth in international transport links has increased smuggling and connected local traders with global markets, increasing the complexity of global trade. These findings suggest Bangladesh is poised to play a pivotal role in tiger conservation over the next decade, requiring strong national strategies to reduce trade opportunities, disrupt networks and weaken demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservation Biology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Wildlife trade is a major driver of biodiversity loss, yet whilst the impacts of trade in some species are relatively well-known, some taxa, such as many invertebrates are often overlooked. Here we explore global patterns of trade in the arachnids, and detected 1,264 species from 66 families and 371 genera in trade. Trade in these groups exceeds millions of individuals, with 67% coming directly from the wild, and up to 99% of individuals in some genera. For popular taxa, such as tarantulas up to 50% are in trade, including 25% of species described since 2000. CITES only covers 30 (2%) of the species potentially traded. We mapped the percentage and number of species native to each country in trade. To enable sustainable trade, better data on species distributions and better conservation status assessments are needed. The disparity between trade data sources highlights the need to expand monitoring if impacts on wild populations are to be accurately gauged and the impacts of trade minimised. Trade in arachnids includes millions of individuals and over 1264 species, with over 70% of individuals coming from the wild. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wildlife trafficking poses a major threat to global biodiversity. Species such as pangolins are particularly vulnerable and trade continues almost unabated despite numerous interventions aimed at eradicating illegal wildlife trade. Despite restrictions on the pangolin trade, thousands of pangolins continue to be intercepted annually. We focused on China because of the recent delisting of pangolins from the Chinese pharmacopeia, and their removal from healthcare insurance, despite deeply ingrained traditions of having pangolins for ethno-medicinal use. We collated pangolin interception data from public online media seizure reports to characterize the pangolin trade within China, and found that a total of 326 independent seizures equivalent to 143,130 pangolins (31,676 individuals and 222,908 kg of scale) were reported in 26 provinces. Pangolin domestic seizures are greatest in the southern cities of Dehong, Fangchenggang, and Guangzhou. Also, we found 17 countries within the global pangolins range which were the major source of the pangolin shipments to China. The number of arrests and convictions was much lower than the number of pangolin incidents reported. Our results show a significant increase in the volume of scales and number of live pangolin seizures after amended endangered species law came into effect in 2018, and recorded the highest number of individual pangolin interceptions. China has shown increasing wildlife seizures over time, owing partly to emergent trends in the international wildlife trade as well as increasing global demand for ethnomedicine. The future eradication of illegal wildlife trade in China is dependent not only on stringent border control and offender prosecution but also the; removal of other threatened species from the pharmacopeia and healthcare insurance which includes wildlife derivatives. Furthermore, our work highlights importance of current policy intervention to combat the pangolin trade within China, and the need for further interventions both within China and in export countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global trade of wildlife is a major driver of species decline. The trade in wildlife actually plays a much larger role in our daily lives than many people realize, and its use and legality are surprisingly complex. Wildlife trade includes the trade of any organism, including fungi, plants and animals, sourced from the wild. This comprises thousands of wild species, including over 7600, or nearly one quarter, of terrestrial vertebrate species. Trade in wildlife is worth billions annually via commercial fishing at $180 billion, timber at $227 billion and fashion at $2.5 billion — in addition to largely unquantified trade for meat, medicine, ornamental use and pets. Wildlife trade, such as that of ivory, is the subject of intense public debate, international regulation and criminal prosecution, while trade of other species is more often overlooked. How wildlife trade is regulated and what is legal and illegal varies both between and within taxonomic groups and depends on where and how trade occurs. Wildlife trade across most sectors has increased since monitoring began, for example, between 1996 and 2018 the global fish market rose from $40 billion to $180 billion, wood from $65 billion to $137 billion and reptile leather for fashion trade from $140 million to $600 million. In concert, the annual number of trades legally traded through CITES has also grown, from under 5000 transactions in 1977 to peaking at over 1.3 million in 2015, with shipment size increasing in parallel and seizures of illegally traded species showing similar trends. Balancing the needs of people for livelihood generation, especially with access and benefit-sharing rights, with the impact on species survival remains difficult. Issues like the role of trophy and sports hunting within conservation remain a topic of debate in the conservation community. Finding approaches that enable long-term species survival, are equitable and do not undermine livelihoods is a constant challenge. Alice Hughes introduces the dimensions of wildlife trade. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the biodiversity crisis continues, we must redouble efforts to understand and curb pressures pushing species closer to extinction. One major driver is the unsustainable trade of wildlife. Trade in internationally regulated species gains the most research attention, but this only accounts for a minority of traded species and we risk failing to appreciate the scale and impacts of unregulated legal trade. Despite being legal, trade puts pressure on wild species via direct collection, introduced pathogens, and invasive species. Smaller species-rich vertebrates, such as reptiles, fish, and amphibians, may be particularly vulnerable to trading because of gaps in regulations, small distributions, and demand of novel species. Here, we combine data from five sources: online web searches in six languages, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) trade database, Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) trade inventory, IUCN assessments, and a recent literature review, to characterise the global trade in amphibians, and also map use by purpose including meat, pets, medicinal, and for research. We show that 1215 species are being traded (17% of amphibian species), almost three times previous recorded numbers, 345 are threatened, and 100 Data Deficient or unassessed. Traded species origin hotspots include South America, China, and Central Africa; sources indicate 42% of amphibians are taken from the wild. Newly described species can be rapidly traded (mean time lag of 6.5 years), including threatened and unassessed species. The scale and limited regulation of the amphibian trade, paired with the triptych of connected pressures (collection, pathogens, invasive species), warrants a re-examination of the wildlife trade status quo, application of the precautionary principle in regard to wildlife trade, and a renewed push to achieve global biodiversity goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wildlife trade is a key driver of the biodiversity crisis. Unregulated, or under-regulated wildlife trade can lead to unsustainable exploitation of wild populations. International efforts to regulate wildlife mostly miss 'lower-value' species, such as those imported as pets, resulting in limited knowledge of trade in groups like reptiles. Here we generate a dataset on web-based private commercial trade of reptiles to highlight the scope of the global reptile trade. We find that over 35% of reptile species are traded online. Three quarters of this trade is in species that are not covered by international trade regulation. These species include numerous endangered or range-restricted species, especially hotspots within Asia. Approximately 90% of traded reptile species and half of traded individuals are captured from the wild. Exploitation can occur immediately after scientific description, leaving new endemic species especially vulnerable. Pronounced gaps in regulation imply trade is having unknown impacts on numerous threatened species. Gaps in monitoring demand a reconsideration of international reptile trade regulations. We suggest reversing the status-quo, requiring proof of sustainability before trade is permitted. There are gaps in international efforts to monitor the wildlife trade, with many species potentially being undetected by the established monitoring groups. Here the authors use an automated web search to document the sale of reptiles online, revealing over 36% of all known reptile species are in trade, including many missing from official databases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]