Mixed protection of threatened species traded under CITES

Predation success of declining long-snouted seahorse (Hippocampus guttulatus) population under habitat shifts

Seahorse populations are facing significant declines worldwide, often associated to illegal trade and habitat loss or fragmentation. Emergent habitat shifts towards invasive seaweeds, facilitated by global warming, can also be at play, having still unknown effects on seahorse ecology. Particularly, indirect impacts on seahorse populations via altered predation success remains largely unexplored. Here, we conducted mesocosm experiments to investigate differences in the prey capture success of the long-snouted seahorse (Hippocampus guttulatus) among native habitats (i.e. seagrass meadows and unvegetated sediments) and non-native Caulerpa prolifera meadows when offered different preys (amphipods and shrimps), at low or high prey availability, and under low or high habitat complexity. Great plasticity of H. guttulatus to all habitats was revealed, as habitat type did not significantly affect the capture success. Instead, capture success depends on prey identity and availability regardless of the habitat type, as well as on habitat complexity. Seahorse capture success was higher under high prey availability, as well as when predating on amphipods that were offered together with shrimps. High habitat complexity of both vegetated habitats enhanced by double the capture success, whereas an opposite effect of similar magnitude was found for more complex unvegetated habitats. This indicates that vegetation complexity, regardless their native or invasive nature, reduces prey awareness to predator, whereas small structures in unvegetated habitats provide refuge for preys but not seahorse camouflage. We found no evidence that shifts from native habitats to invasive C. prolifera negatively impact H. guttulatus capture success, but further research on other aspects of its feeding ecology is still necessary.

Global dynamics of functional composition in CITES-traded reptiles

Global wildlife trade is a billion-dollar industry, with millions of individuals traded annually from a diversity of taxa, many of which are directly threatened by trade. Reptiles exhibiting desirable life-history or aesthetic traits, such as large body sizes or colorful morphologies, are traded preferentially. A key issue is understanding geographic and temporal variation between desirable species traits and their trade. Poor understanding of this can generalize patterns of consumer trait preferences and conceal functional consequences of wild harvest in ecosystems. Using records of legal, international trade in Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)-listed reptiles between 2000 and 2020, we examine geographic and temporal variation in the functional composition of traded assemblages, both captive- and wild-sourced, identifying key hotspots and routes of functional diversity in trade. We also identify associations between functional traits and species presence in trade. We find that functionally diverse trade assemblages are exported primarily from the tropics, with hotspots in sub-Saharan Africa, and imported across Asia, Europe, and North America. Patterns of functional composition in trade remained broadly stable from 2000 to 2020. Globally, the species most likely to be traded were large, fecund, generalists. Sustained wild harvest of functionally diverse reptilian assemblages in trade hotspots, such as Madagascar and Indonesia, places substantial pressure on large-bodied reptiles that fulfill important ecological functions, including population control and nutrient cycling, while also endangering harvest-vulnerable species with slow life histories. Despite limited species-specific descriptions of reptilian ecological functions, management in harvest hotspots can safeguard ecosystem functioning by prioritizing protection for threatened species that contribute disproportionately to local and regional functional diversity.

International wildlife trade quotas are characterized by high compliance and coverage but insufficient adaptive management

Effective management of international wildlife trade is crucial to ensure sustainability. Quotas are a common trade management tool and specify an annual number of individuals to be exported, yet at present there is no global assessment of quota coverage and compliance. Using over 7,000 country-year specific reptile quotas established under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) covering 343 species, we quantify quota coverage, compliance, trade trends pre-quota and post-quota setting and whether quotas likely represent adaptive management. Quotas predominantly concerned live wild-sourced reptiles, with only 6.6% of live non-zero quotas exceeded and 4.5% of zero quotas subverted. For 62.3% of species, quotas were established higher than pre-quota trade, with traded volumes post-quota mainly unchanged or higher than pre-quota establishment, thus potentially facilitating sustainable trade. Over 38% of quota series of species remained at the same level each year, with the longest-running quotas proportionately updated the least, indicating that many quotas do not change adaptively in response to changing threats to species through time. Greater specificity in exactly what quotas cover, justification for unchanged quotas and transparency over quota determination are needed to ensure that high compliance equates to sustainable use.

Assessing and improving the veracity of international trade in captive-bred animals

Captive breeding is often seen as a solution to sustainably increasing the supply of individuals in the wildlife trade. To be an effective conservation measure this requires robust systems to verify the authenticity of captive-bred species. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) monitors the international trade in Listed species-which for many taxa is dominated by captive-bred individuals-using the Review of Captive Trade (RCT) process. A key question is how best to identify laundered or inauthentic captive-bred trade and how has this changed over time and space. We develop targeted assessments based on multiple RCT criteria to identify probable instances of laundering and misuse of source and purpose codes in international trade records, and apply this to 39,167 records of captive trade from 2000 to 2020 spanning 53,674,762 individuals. We find a very low proportion of trade volume (1.8%, 37,835 individuals) misreported as originating from non-existent, registered Appendix I-breeding facilities, and low instances of exporter-reported captive trade being recorded by importers as wild-sourced (<4%) or ranched (1%). We also find that <2% of species-year-exporter records have abrupt shifts from wild to captive sources, potentially indicating laundering. Conversely, we find high incidences of exporter- and importer-reported trade differing in whether the trade was commercial or not - a phenomenon we attribute to differing definitions, not illegal activity. Our results indicate a low incidence of concerning international trade being reported, but we suggest this likely stems from reporting requirements that limit our assessments. We highlight additional trade data that, if embedded into Party's annual reports, would vastly improve inferential potential, greatly increasing the number of records (Appendix II and III species) that could be verified with minimal effort for management authorities.

Determining the sustainability of legal wildlife trade

Exploitation of wildlife represents one of the greatest threats to species survival according to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Whilst detrimental impacts of illegal trade are well recognised, legal trade is often equated to being sustainable despite the lack of evidence or data in the majority of cases. We review the sustainability of wildlife trade, the adequacy of tools, safeguards, and frameworks to understand and regulate trade, and identify gaps in data that undermine our ability to truly understand the sustainability of trade. We provide 183 examples showing unsustainable trade in a broad range of taxonomic groups. In most cases, neither illegal nor legal trade are supported by rigorous evidence of sustainability, with the lack of data on export levels and population monitoring data precluding true assessments of species or population-level impacts. We propose a more precautionary approach to wildlife trade and monitoring that requires those who profit from trade to provide proof of sustainability. We then identify four core areas that must be strengthened to achieve this goal: (1) rigorous data collection and analyses of populations; (2) linking trade quotas to IUCN and international accords; (3) improved databases and compliance of trade; and (4) enhanced understanding of trade bans, market forces, and species substitutions. Enacting these core areas in regulatory frameworks, including CITES, is essential to the continued survival of many threatened species. There are no winners from unsustainable collection and trade: without sustainable management not only will species or populations become extinct, but communities dependent upon these species will lose livelihoods.

The ecological drivers and consequences of wildlife trade

Wildlife trade is a key driver of extinction risk, affecting at least 24% of terrestrial vertebrates. The persistent removal of species can have profound impacts on species extinction risk and selection within populations. We draw together the first review of characteristics known to drive species use - identifying species with larger body sizes, greater abundance, increased rarity or certain morphological traits valued by consumers as being particularly prevalent in trade. We then review the ecological implications of this trade-driven selection, revealing direct effects of trade on natural selection and populations for traded species, which includes selection against desirable traits. Additionally, there exists a positive feedback loop between rarity and trade and depleted populations tend to have easy human access points, which can result in species being harvested to extinction and has the potential to alter source-sink dynamics. Wider cascading ecosystem repercussions from trade-induced declines include altered seed dispersal networks, trophic cascades, long-term compositional changes in plant communities, altered forest carbon stocks, and the introduction of harmful invasive species. Because it occurs across multiple scales with diverse drivers, wildlife trade requires multi-faceted conservation actions to maintain biodiversity and ecological function, including regulatory and enforcement approaches, bottom-up and community-based interventions, captive breeding or wildlife farming, and conservation translocations and trophic rewilding. We highlight three emergent research themes at the intersection of trade and community ecology: (1) functional impacts of trade; (2) altered provisioning of ecosystem services; and (3) prevalence of trade-dispersed diseases. Outside of the primary objective that exploitation is sustainable for traded species, we must urgently incorporate consideration of the broader consequences for other species and ecosystem processes when quantifying sustainability.

Commercial trade of wild animals: examining the use of the IUCN Red List and CITES Appendices as the basis for corporate trade policies

Wildlife exploitation is considered a predominant factor driving global biodiversity loss and zoonotic disease transmission, in addition to a range of concerns for animal welfare and ecosystem health. One of the ways in which wild animals are exploited is for commercial trade as exotic pets, fashion products, luxury foods, traditional medicine, entertainment, ornaments and more. While the trade in some wildlife species is restricted or prohibited under various domestic and international laws, many species are not bound by legal protection and are traded in largely unmonitored numbers with the potential for severe consequences. Companies, particularly large e-commerce platforms, are increasingly adopting policies to restrict the legal trade in wild animals. Due to the absence of clear guidelines for corporate services of wildlife trade, these policies commonly adopt pre-determined species lists, such as the International Union for the Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) Appendices, as the basis for ‘negative lists’ to guide which species to restrict trade in. However, these databases were not intended for this application and there has been no assessment of their use for this purpose. Here, we summarise and compare the scale and scope of species listed on the IUCN Red List and the CITES Appendices, to discuss how much additional protection these lists provide wild animals if used as policy instruments to guide corporate wildlife trade restrictions beyond the relevant legal bounds. Based on our results, we discuss why that using one list or another would likely omit taxa of conservation concern from protection, and using both lists in conjunction would still not comprehensively reflect all species vulnerable to extinction as a result of exploitation. Further, neither list can mitigate the animal welfare and public health concerns inherently associated with all commercial wildlife trade. We recommend that companies looking to develop policies relating to commercial wildlife trade consider going beyond the scope of predetermined species lists to help mitigate the harmful effects of commercial wildlife exploitation via trade for all wild animals.

Conservation: Trading species to extinction?

Is the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) up to the task of preventing species from being driven to extinction by trade? A new study documents some success but also highlights major deficiencies.