Cargando…
The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty
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)...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092231/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35924462 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13978 |
_version_ | 1785023297479507968 |
---|---|
author | Watters, Freyja Stringham, Oliver Shepherd, Chris R. Cassey, Phillip |
author_facet | Watters, Freyja Stringham, Oliver Shepherd, Chris R. Cassey, Phillip |
author_sort | Watters, Freyja |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10092231 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-100922312023-04-13 The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty Watters, Freyja Stringham, Oliver Shepherd, Chris R. Cassey, Phillip Conserv Biol Contributed Papers 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. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-10-07 2022-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10092231/ /pubmed/35924462 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13978 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Conservation Biology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Contributed Papers Watters, Freyja Stringham, Oliver Shepherd, Chris R. Cassey, Phillip The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty |
title | The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty |
title_full | The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty |
title_fullStr | The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty |
title_full_unstemmed | The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty |
title_short | The U.S. market for imported wildlife not listed in the CITES multilateral treaty |
title_sort | u.s. market for imported wildlife not listed in the cites multilateral treaty |
topic | Contributed Papers |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10092231/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35924462 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13978 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wattersfreyja theusmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT stringhamoliver theusmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT shepherdchrisr theusmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT casseyphillip theusmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT wattersfreyja usmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT stringhamoliver usmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT shepherdchrisr usmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty AT casseyphillip usmarketforimportedwildlifenotlistedinthecitesmultilateraltreaty |