4.6 Article

The US market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty

期刊

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
卷 36, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cobi.13978

关键词

exotic pets; international wildlife trade; IUCN; LEMIS; wildlife regulation

资金

  1. Centre for Invasive Species Solutions [P01-I-002]
  2. Australian Research Council [DP210103050]
  3. Adelaide University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The international wildlife trade poses significant conservation and environmental security risks, and there is a lack of international regulations to monitor the trade of non-CITES listed species. This study examined the composition and dynamics of regulated and unregulated trade, focusing on imports of wild-caught terrestrial vertebrates entering the United States. The findings revealed a higher number and trade quantity of unlisted species compared to CITES-listed species, highlighting the need for governments to adapt their policies to monitor and report on all wildlife trade.
The international wildlife trade presents severe conservation and environmental security risks, yet no international regulatory framework exists to monitor the trade of species not listed in the appendices of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). We explored the composition and dynamics of internationally regulated versus nonregulated trade, with a focus on importations of wild-caught terrestrial vertebrates entering the United States from 2009 to 2018. We used 10 years of species-level trade records of the numbers of live, wild-caught animals imported to the United States and data on International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) estimates of extinction risk to determine whether there were differences in the diversity, abundance, and risk to extinction among imports of CITES-listed versus unlisted species. We found 3.6 times the number of unlisted species in U.S. imports compared with CITES-listed species (1366 vs. 378 species). The CITES-listed species were more likely to face reported conservation threats relative to unlisted species (71.7% vs. 27.5%). However, 376 unlisted species faced conversation threats, 297 species had unknown population trends, and 139 species were without an evaluation by the IUCN. Unlisted species appearing for the first time in records were imported 5.5 times more often relative to CITES-listed species. Unlisted reptiles had the largest rate of entry, averaging 53 unique species appearing in imports for the first time per year. Overall trade quantities were approximately 11 times larger for imports of unlisted species relative to imports of CITES-listed species. Countries that were top exporters of CITES-listed species were mostly different from exporters of unlisted species. Because of the vulnerabilities of unlisted, traded species entering the United States and increasing global demand, we strongly recommend governments adapt their policies to monitor and report on the trade of all wildlife.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据