The Role of Thailand in the International Trade in CITES-Listed Live Reptiles and Amphibians
Open Access
- 25 March 2011
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Public Library of Science (PLoS) in PLOS ONE
- Vol. 6 (3), e17825
- https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0017825
Abstract
International wildlife trade is one of the leading threats to biodiversity conservation. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) is the most important initiative to monitor and regulate the international trade of wildlife but its credibility is dependent on the quality of the trade data. We report on the performance of CITES reporting by focussing on the commercial trade in non-native reptiles and amphibians into Thailand as to illustrate trends, species composition and numbers of wild-caught vs. captive-bred specimens. Based on data in the WCMC-CITES trade database, we establish that a total of 75,594 individuals of 169 species of reptiles and amphibians (including 27 globally threatened species) were imported into Thailand in 1990–2007. The majority of individuals (59,895, 79%) were listed as captive-bred and a smaller number (15,699, 21%) as wild-caught. In the 1990s small numbers of individuals of a few species were imported into Thailand, but in 2003 both volumes and species diversity increased rapidly. The proportion of captive-bred animals differed greatly between years (from 0 to >80%). Wild-caught individuals were mainly sourced from African countries, and captive-bred individuals from Asian countries (including from non-CITES Parties). There were significant discrepancies between exports and imports. Thailand reports the import of >10,000 individuals (51 species) originating from Kazakhstan, but Kazakhstan reports no exports of these species. Similar discrepancies, involving smaller numbers (>100 individuals of 9 species), can be seen in the import of reptiles into Thailand via Macao. While there has been an increase in imports of amphibian and reptiles into Thailand, erratic patterns in proportions of captive-bred specimens and volumes suggests either capricious markets or errors in reporting. Large discrepancies with respect to origin point to misreporting or possible violations of the rules and intentions of CITES.This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- The role of Asia in the global trade in CITES II-listed poison arrow frogs: hopping from Kazakhstan to Lebanon to Thailand and beyondBiodiversity and Conservation, 2010
- An overview of international wildlife trade from Southeast AsiaBiodiversity and Conservation, 2009
- One Hundred Questions of Importance to the Conservation of Global Biological DiversityConservation Biology, 2009
- Unregulated Trade in Turtle Shells for Chinese Traditional Medicine in East and Southeast Asia: The Case of TaiwanChelonian Conservation and Biology, 2009
- The trade in bear parts from Myanmar: an illustration of the ineffectiveness of enforcement of international wildlife trade regulationsBiodiversity and Conservation, 2007
- Discrepancies in Reported Levels of International Wildlife TradeConservation Biology, 2005
- Highly Pathogenic H5N1 Influenza Virus in Smuggled Thai Eagles, BelgiumEmerging Infectious Diseases, 2005
- The dynamics of the global trade in chameleonsBiological Conservation, 2004
- International Trade Status and Crisis for Snake Species in ChinaConservation Biology, 2004
- Animal origins of SARS coronavirus: possible links with the international trade in small carnivoresPhilosophical Transactions B, 2004