illegal wildlife trade

Starved and hunted: the cruel reality of lion farming in South Africa revealed

Whistleblowers have exposed the controversial industry fuelling the illegal international trade of big cat bones.

South Africa’s lion farming industry is rife with cruelty and is fuelling the illegal international trade of big cat bones, according to a new research paper published in the scientific journal Nature Conservation.

The study by World Animal Protection is based on direct interviews with whistleblowing workers at two closed-access lion facilities in South Africa’s North West Province.

According to the report, legal activities such as commercial captive lion breeding and canned hunting – the hunting of captive-bred wild animals in small, fenced enclosures with no chance of escape – are being used to mask involvement in the illegal international trade of lion and tiger bones.

Four young lions behind a fence. — Lions at a commercial breeding facility in South Africa (not from the study).

Several animal welfare violations were also reported, including malnutrition, lack of clean water, filthy enclosures and animals being deliberately starved throughout the low-hunting season.

Illegal hunting practices abound, including animals being drugged and hunted within an hour of release in enclosures that violate legal minimum size requirements.

Finally, the whistleblowers reported hazardous conditions for workers at the facilities, and suggested there may be shifts towards commercial exploitation of other felid species like tigers which could be used as substitutes in the bone trade.

It is estimated that between 8,000-12,000 lions and other big cats, including tigers, are bred and kept in captivity in more than 350 facilities across the country. To evade detection during professional inspections, farm owners use various strategies, such as security cameras, patrols, and messaging apps.

“Our study highlights the troubling reality of South Africa’s captive lion industry. Legal activities are being exploited to facilitate illegal trade, and this is compounded by serious animal welfare violations and unsafe conditions for workers. Urgent action is needed to protect lions and people.”
Lead researcher Dr Angie Elwin, Research Manager at World Animal Protection.

Although the commercial captive breeding and canned hunting of lions remains legal, though poorly regulated in South Africa, the export of lion skeletons – including claws and teeth – was declared unconstitutional by the South African High Court in 2019.

In 2021, the South African Government announced its intention to immediately halt the “domestication and exploitation of lions, and to ultimately close all captive lion facilities in South Africa”.

However, a lack of enforcement of regulations and clarity on the future of the industry, has left a legal grey area, enabling some farms to operate what on the surface appear to be legitimate captive breeding and ‘canned’ trophy hunting businesses – but which in reality supply the illegal international big cat bone trade facilitated by organised crime gangs.

In light of these revelations, the study calls for the South African Government to implement a comprehensive and well-managed plan to transition away from current practices in the captive lion industry. Key recommendations include:

Full Audit of the Industry: To ensure all commercial captive lion farms are officially registered and compliant with regulations until the industry is phased out.
Breeding Moratorium: Establishment of an immediate moratorium on breeding to prevent further growth of the commercial captive lion population.
Prevention of Bone Stockpiling: Development and enforcement of plans to prevent the accumulation of lion bones, which risks fuelling the illegal international lion bone trade.
Phase out Plan: Enactment of a time-bound strategic plan to phase out the captive lion farming industry, ensuring ethical treatment of animals and safety for workers.

“The South African Government must take immediate action to fulfil its public pledge to end the controversial captive lion industry. Without a comprehensive time-bound plan and stringent enforcement, this commercial industry will continue to pose significant legal, animal cruelty, and conservation concerns.”
Senior researcher Dr Neil D’Cruze, Head of Wildlife Research at World Animal Protection.

Fraudulent microchip use and compliance issues found on controversial lion farms in the Free State, South Africa

This study serves as a crucial call to action for both the South African Government and the international community to address and resolve the complex issues surrounding the captive lion industry.

The publication comes at a time when South African NGO Blood Lions encourages the public to raise their voice by sharing the 2024 World Lion Day “You’re killing them softly” campaign message, aimed at informing tourists and visitors to lion farms about the hidden suffering and cruelty involved, and to sign this petition urging the South African government among others to extend the ban on captive lion breeding and trading to other predators.

Original source:

Elwin A, Asfaw E, D’Cruze N (2024) Under the lion’s paw: lion farming in South Africa and the illegal international bone trade. Nature Conservation 56: 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.56.124555

***

Follow Nature Conservation on Facebook and X.

Snake trade in Indonesia is not sustainable enough — but it could be

A substantial part of the trade in blood pythons in Indonesia is illegal and underreported, a new study published in the open-access journal Nature Conservation found.

Wildlife trade is a multi-million dollar industry. While some animals are traded legally, in compliance with legislation that aims to protect populations, wildlife trafficking continues to thrive in many places, threatening precious species with extinction.

Reptiles are exported in large numbers, and snakes are no exception. They are mostly traded for their skins, used in luxury leather products, or as pets. In the case of the blood python, which can reach up to 250 cm in length, there are clear indications of misdeclared, underreported or illegal trading involving tens of thousands of individuals around the world.

According to Vincent Nijman, professor in anthropology at Oxford Brookes University in the UK, harvest and trade in certain species of snakes, especially ones that are common and have a high reproductive output, can be sustainable. But how do we make sure it really is?

Blood python in Kaeng Krachan National Park in Thailand. Photo by Tontan Travel

“Sustainability is best assessed by surveying wild populations, but this takes time and effort,” Nijman explains. “An alternative method is to use data from slaughterhouses and compare how certain parameters (number of snakes, size, males vs females) change over time.”

This method has been used by several research groups to assess the sustainability of the harvest and trade in blood pythons in Indonesia. The outcomes of these assessments vary widely, with some researchers claiming the trade is sustainable, and others that it is not and that populations are in decline.

“A major problem with these assessments is that while they can detect a change in, for instance, the number of blood pythons that arrive in slaughterhouses, it is unclear if this is due to changes in the wild population, changes in harvest areas, methods of harvesting, or changes in the regulations that permit the harvest to take place,” Nijman elaborates.

Using publicly available information, and searching for evidence of illicit trade, he set out to establish if there is sufficient data to assess whether blood pythons are indeed exploited sustainably in Indonesia.

“There is no conclusive data to support that the harvest of blood pythons in North Sumatra is sustainable, but there is sufficient evidence to suggest that a substantial part of this trade is illegal,” he points out in his study, which was published in the open-access journal Nature Conservation.

He goes on to explain that there is no one-on-one relationship between the sustainability of harvest and trade and its legality: “A species can be legally traded to extinction, or it can be traded illegally in small enough numbers for it to be sustainable.”

Conceptual framework of the relationship between population size, sustainable harvest and global conservation status. The harvest that took place between A and B, C and D, and E and F, could be considered sustainable, whereas it is unsustainable between B and C and D and E. The global threat assessment based on two of the IUCN threat level criteria (population size and declining populations) are not tightly linked to harvest sustainability (modified after Yamaguchi 2014).

A clear trend in the last decade was a change in the way blood pythons are harvested, compared to previous periods, “from opportunistic capture to, at least in part, targeted collection.”

Blood pythons are not included on Indonesia’s protected species list, but their harvest and trade, both domestically and internationally, is regulated by a quota system. The harvest for domestic trade typically constitutes 10% of what is allowed to be exported.

Nijman’s research identified substantial evidence of underreported and illegal international trade in blood pythons. “Part of any assessment of sustainability of the harvest and trade in blood pythons must address this as a matter of urgency,” he concludes.

Research article:

Nijman V (2022) Harvest quotas, free markets and the sustainable trade in pythons. Nature Conservation 48: 99-121. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.48.80988

Conservationists concerned about illegal hunting and exploitation of porcupines in Indonesia

Porcupines are being illegally hunted and exploited throughout their range in Indonesia for local subsistence and commercial trade. They are reportedly in decline, yet there seems to be little control or monitoring on uptake and trade. A new study examining seizure data of porcupines in Indonesia found a total of 39 incidents from January 2013 to June 2020 involving an estimated 452 porcupines. The research was published in the open-access, peer-reviewed journal Nature Conservation.

Porcupines are frequently traded across Asia, and Indonesia, home to five species, is no exception. They are targeted for a number of reasons: their meat as an alternative source of protein, their bezoars consumed as traditional medicine, and their quills used as talismans and for decorative purposes.

A new study examining seizure data of porcupines, their parts and derivatives in Indonesia found a total of 39 incidents from January 2013 to June 2020 involving an estimated 452 porcupines. The research was published in the open-access, peer-reviewed journal Nature Conservation.

There are no harvest quotas for any porcupine species in Indonesia, which makes all hunting and trade in porcupines illegal. Of the five species found in the country, only the Sunda porcupine (Hystrix javanica) is currently protected, with its protected status only introduced in 2018. Interestingly, prior to 2018, the Malayan porcupine (H. brachyura) was the only protected porcupine species in Indonesia, but then it was removed from the updated species protection list and replaced with the Sunda porcupine.

“The reasons for this are unclear, but certainly unwarranted, considering that the Malayan porcupine is the species most frequently identified as confiscated, and one can only assume the reason for its removal is due to its commercial value,” says Lalita Gomez, author of the study and Programme Officer of Monitor Conservation Research Society.

*Porcupine for sale in an Indonesian bird market Photo: Lalita Gomez*

What clearly emerges from this study is that porcupines are being illegally hunted and exploited throughout their range in Indonesia for local subsistence and commercial trade. Porcupines are reportedly in decline in Indonesia, yet there seems to be little control or monitoring on uptake and trade. This is particularly concerning because four of the five porcupine species in Indonesia have a restricted range, and three of them are island endemics – the Sumatran porcupine (H. sumatrae), Sunda porcupine, and Thick-spined porcupine (H. crassispinis).

Illegal hunting and trade of porcupines in Indonesia is facilitated by poor enforcement and legislative weakness, and it is imperative that effective conservation measures are taken sooner rather than later to prevent further depletion of these species.

Gomez recommends that all porcupines be categorised as protected species under Indonesian wildlife laws and listed in Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). This would require any international trade to take place through a supervisory system, which would allow for regulation and make it easier to track and analyse trends, thus providing an early warning system in case wild populations begin to decline.

Original source:

Gomez L (2021) The illegal hunting and exploitation of porcupines for meat and medicine in Indonesia. Nature Conservation 43: 109-122. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.43.62750

Illegal trade with terrestrial vertebrates in markets and households of Laos

Extensive surveys on wildlife markets and households in the Khammouane Province of Laos showed overlaps between the most traded species at wildlife markets and those of highest conservation importance.

It’s not a surprise to anyone that numerous vertebrate species are being sold at different wildlife markets, but at the moment there is still no comprehensive understanding of how much people are involved in those actions in Laos (Lao PDR), nor what the impact on local wildlife populations really is.

East Asian bullfrogs with broken legs at a market in Laos
Photo by Dr Thomas Ziegler

The majority of Laotians live in rural areas and their income largely depends on wildlife. Since wildlife products are used as one of the major food sources, numerous species of terrestrial vertebrates are currently being offered at local markets.

Across the tropical regions, mammals and birds have been vanishing, with recent models estimating up to 83% decline by 2050. Furthermore, wild-caught reptiles have been reported from Southeast Asian wildlife markets for over 20 years, with Laos occupying the position of a very popular source.

Due to the large number of native endemic species, Lao PDR should assume the responsibility to introduce conservation measures to keep control over the predicted population declines. At the moment, the regulations on wildlife use and trade in Laos are mostly based on the Lao Wildlife and Aquatic Law, which, however, largely disregards international statuses of the species and other biological factors.

Slow loris (left), bats (top right) and squirrels (bottom right) offered at a food market in Laos
Photo by C.L. Ebert

Stricter and reinforced legislation is needed in the fields related to wildlife trade and consumption, since such practices are not only causing biodiversity loss, but also suggested to pose a great threat of wildlife-associated emergence of zoonotic parasites and pathogens to humans. As an immediate example, the outbreak of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) is primarily considered to be a consequence of human consumption of wild animals.

An international group of students and scientists, led by Professor Dr. Thomas Ziegler at the University of Cologne and the Cologne Zoo (Germany), has conducted a number of extensive surveys on wildlife markets (66 observational surveys at 15 trade hubs) and households (63 households at 14 sites) in the Khammouane Province of Laos. The key question of the survey was: “Which species are traded and to what extent?” The results of the study are published in the open-access journal Nature Conservation.

The surveys showed overlaps between the most traded species at wildlife markets and those of highest conservation importance.

As for the households, approximately 90% of the surveyed respondents confirmed the use of wildlife. For the majority of the population, wildlife harvesting was found to be important for their livelihood and trapping activities were mostly aimed at self-consumption / subsistence. The reason for this could be explained by the prices of domesticated meat, which can be three times as higher as those of wildlife products.

A Buffy fish owl and a Chinese water dragon offered at a food market in Laos
Photos by K. Kasper and T. Ziegler

The demand for the species on the wildlife market remained the same over time, according to the opinions of 84,1% of respondents, while the availability of wild meats was reported to have decreased, due to increasing price.

“We recommend local authorities to assess the markets within the province capital Thakhek in particular, as they showed the highest quantity of wild meats. The markets at Namdik and Ban Kok turned out to be very active trade hubs for wildlife as well, regardless of the vertebrate group. The loss of certain species may cause a cascade of unforeseeable effects in the ecosystems. Therefore, the biodiversity of tropical Southeast Asian countries like Lao PDR must be protected,”
shares Dr. Thomas Ziegler.

To help the local population to avoid the crisis related to the change of activity and growing unemployment, scientists propose to introduce new activities in the region.

“Eco-tourism presents a great opportunity to combine conservation efforts and an alternative source of income. Former hunters with excellent knowledge of the forest and wildlife habitats can serve as professional wildlife tour guides or their involvement in the Village Forest Protection Group could help to protect natural resources in Laos”,
suggests Dr. Thomas Ziegler.

###

Original source:

Kasper K, Schweikhard J, Lehmann M, Ebert CL, Erbe P, Wayakone S, Nguyen TQ, Le MD, Ziegler T (2020) The extent of the illegal trade with terrestrial vertebrates in markets and households in Khammouane Province, Lao PDR. Nature Conservation 41: 25-45. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.41.51888

Illegal hunting and bushmeat trade threatens biodiversity and wildlife of Angola

Hunting and bushmeat trade negatively impact wildlife worldwide with serious implications for biodiversity conservation. The current situation in Angola shows a concerning increase in bushmeat trade along main roads. In a recent publication in the open-access journal Nature Conservation, an international group of scientists presented data gathered on a roundtrip around five main Angolan cities. It turned out that the influence of those activities on wildlife population is very unsettling.

Hunting wild animals has been practised by humans for millions of years; however, the extraction of wildlife for subsistence and commercialisation has become a major biodiversity threat in recent decades. Meanwhile, over-exploitation is reported to be the second most important driver of change and biodiversity loss globally.

To assess the state of affairs, an international group of scientists, led by Dr. Francisco M. P. Gonçalves of the University of Hamburg in Germany, went on a roundtrip along the roads between five main Angolan cities. Their observations made it possible to conclude that, despite the existing legislation, as well as government efforts to handle poaching and bushmeat trade, currently there is no effective law enforcement mechanism to help dealing with the situation.

Map of Africa showing the location of Angola (left) and the provinces covered by the study along the main road from Lubango (Huíla province) to Uíge (right).
Credit: Francisco Maiato P. Gonçalves

In their study, the team also states that Angola is one of the richest and most biodiverse countries in Africa with an estimated 6,850 native and 226 non-native plant species, 940 bird species (including many endemic species), 117 amphibians species, 278 reptile species, 358 freshwater fishes (22% of them endemic) and 275 species of mammals.

The long-lasting civil war in Angola has contributed to the dramatic loss of wildlife and led to the near extinction of many species, as a result of the increase in illegal poaching. A variety of fresh, smoked or dried bushmeat, as well as live animals, are being sold along the roads, mostly to urban dwellers travelling between the main cities of Angola.

Despite the recent outbreaks of diseases (i.e. Ebola in the neighbouring Democratic Republic of Congo), animals still appear to be obtained directly from hunters and slaughtered with no sanitary measures, while the consumption of wildlife in Africa is frequently associated with an increased risk of acquiring zoonotic diseases.

The major trade road runs between the provinces of Bengo and Uíge, where the animals sold include many species of antelopes, monkeys, snakes and a globally protected species of pangolin (Manis tricuspis). Multiple species of wading birds and parrots are often sold in pet shops, as well as along the streets. At fairs and entry points to the main cities, these can be found offered by young boys.

Wild animals and smoked bushmeat on sale along the roadside of the Sequele village, between Bengo and Uíge provinces: Blue duikers, Talapoin and Vervet (green) monkey in the cage on the ground on the left, Northern Rock *Python* on the right top and Tree pangolin (bottom right).
Photo by Francisco Maiato P. Gonçalves

Although there is no evidence of cross-border trade, there might, however, be cases of bushmeat trade in the informal markets at the principal border posts. Commercial activities between the countries are not regulated and stay intense, note the scientists.

“We witnessed a Chinese customer looking for pangolins in one of the villages; pangolin scales, when soaked, are trusted for having medicinal properties for a large variety of human illnesses mostly in Asia. It is currently estimated there are 0.4–0.7 million pangolins hunted annually, representing an increase of around 150% only for medicinal purposes over the past four decades,” share the researches.

Trying to find a solution, the Angolan government has undertaken a number of measures, including: a list of species prohibited for hunting and trade (five of those species were found on the markets during the survey); banning hunting of certain species outside the hunting season; introducing compensation fees.

However, despite the legal basis, local authorities (i.e. police checkpoints close to the road markets) do not take the necessary measures to discourage hunting and bushmeat trade practices in the region. Due to lack of clear definition and responsibility arrangements, the hunting and trade of wild animals remain uncontrolled.

All these recent observations bring us to the necessity for a re-assessment of the wildlife in Angola and the need to produce appropriate legislation to be efficiently enforced across the whole territory of the country. This can be achieved through better-educated police officials and alternative sources of meat supply in rural areas. These actions should bring down the demand for bushmeat and reduce the overharvesting of wildlife, suggest the scientists.

###

Original source:

Gonçalves FMP, Luís JC, Tchamba JJ, Cachissapa MJ, Chisingui AV (2019) A rapid assessment of hunting and bushmeat trade along the roadside between five Angolan major towns. Nature Conservation 37: 151-160. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.37.37590

Thousands of illegally traded wild animals at risk due to gaps in data

The fate of over 64,000 live wild animals officially reported to have been confiscated by CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) enforcement agencies between 2010 and 2014 remains untraceable, according to a new report released by the University of Oxford Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU) and World Animal Protection.

In their publication in the open access journal Nature Conservation, the researchers document merely one in three partnering to CITES countries providing any data on seizures, and also highlight the importance of having this changed.

Although the reported number of confiscated animals is staggering, the researchers warn that these are likely to be only a fraction of the actual seizures. The study found two out of three countries did not report any live wildlife seizures, despite poaching of endangered species and supplying the illicit global wildlife trade being estimated to be worth between $8-10 billion per year.

The figures have prompted calls for better reporting of seizures and what happens to confiscated live wild animals.

The ultimate fate of seized live wild animals is unknown, the researchers found. Once animals have been confiscated, national authorities must decide whether to: keep them in captivity, return them to the wild or euthanize them. CITES provides guidelines to aid this decision-making based on the conservation status and welfare needs of the animals.

However, information about the fate of these wild animals is not a formal CITES requirement and as a result, there are no official numbers on just how many were euthanized, placed in captivity or returned to the wild.

Researchers are concerned this lack of data is placing the well-being and survival of seized wildlife at risk – many wild animals could be re-entering the wildlife trafficking industry as they simply can’t be accounted for.

University of Oxford‘s Professor David Macdonald, senior researcher for the study, said:

“We fear this staggering number is just the tip of the iceberg. Only a relatively small proportion of wild animals involved with illegal trade are thought to be intercepted by enforcement agencies – confiscation records were completely missing for 70% of countries Party to CITES. Given the rapidly growing global trends in illegal wildlife trade activity, it is highly unlikely that no live wildlife seizures were made on their borders.

“The records that were provided show that around 20% of all live wild animals reported as seized are currently considered to be threatened by extinction. We strongly recommend that the CITES trade database should include information on the fate of all live wild animal seizures, so we know what happens to these animals, and we can reduce the risk of them re-entering the illegal wildlife trade.”

World Animal Protection’s Dr Neil D’Cruze, lead researcher for the study, said:

“The illegal wildlife trade is a big, complex and dirty business. National authorities play a key role, facing some tough choices when they seize animals – whether they release them in the wild, place them in care in captivity or euthanize them.

“Improved data recording is critical to knowing what happens to each animal, and can help in looking at the challenges and issues enforcement agencies face in managing animals after seizure. Without this transparency, there’s a real possibility that endangered species may be put back into the hands of the same criminals whom they were taken from. We need to be able to account for these wild animals.

“If we’re really serious about protecting wildlife, action needs to be taken at all levels. It’s unfathomable that 70% of countries recorded no seizures when we know a global, multi-billion wildlife trafficking industry is flourishing.”

###

The findings and recommendations of this research were presented at the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP) in Johannesburg, South Africa on 27 September 2016 during a side event focused on the confiscation of live wild animals organised by the Species Survival Network (SSN).

###

Original source:

Citation: D’Cruze N, Macdonald DW (2016) A review of global trends in CITES live wildlife confiscations. Nature Conservation 15: 47-63. doi: 10.3897/natureconservation.15.10005