Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 May 2021 | 13(6): 18518–18531

 

ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print) 

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6998.13.6.18518-18531

#6998 | Received 16 December 2020 | Final received 18 March 2021 | Finally accepted 13 April 2021

 

 

A looming exotic reptile pet trade in India: patterns and knowledge gaps

 

A. Pragatheesh 1, V. Deepak 2, H.V. Girisha 3 & Monesh Singh Tomar 4

 

1,3 Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, WCCB Northern Region, 2nd Floor Trikoot-1, Bhikaji Cama Place New Delhi 110066, India.

2 Department of Life Sciences, The Natural History Museum, London SW7 5BD, UK.

2 Museum of Zoology (Museum für Tierkunde), Senckenberg Dresden, A. B. Meyer Building, 01109 Dresden, Germany.

4 Wildlife Trust of India, F-13, Sector 8, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201301, India.

 1 pragatheesh@gmail.com (corresponding author), 2 veerappandeepak@gmail.com, 3 girishhvifs2004@gmail.com,

4 monesh.mst@gmail.com

 

 

 

 

Editor: Raju Vyas, Vadodara, Gujarat, India.       Date of publication: 26 May 2021 (online & print)

 

Citation: Pragatheesh, A., V. Deepak, H.V. Girisha & M.S. Tomar (2021). A looming exotic reptile pet trade in India: patterns and knowledge gaps. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(6): 18518–18531. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6998.13.6.18518-18531

 

Copyright: © Pragatheesh et al. 2021. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.  JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the author(s) and the source of publication.

 

Funding: This research received no financial support.

 

Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.

 

Author details: A. Pragatheesh is Wildlife Inspector at Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, New Delhi. His interest is Intelligence & Investigations on Wildlife Crime. V. Deepak is currently a postdoc at the Museum of Zoology, Dresden, Germany. His research involves conservation, macroevolutionary patterns and systematics of reptiles in South Asia. H.V. Girisha, IFS is Joint Director at Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, New Delhi. He is interested in research and investigation in the field of Forestry and Wildlife. Monesh Singh Tomar is conservationist, currently working with Wildlife Trust of India. He is interested in studying Wildlife Crime in India.

 

Author contributions: AP and VD conceived the idea. AP and MST compiled the data. AP, VD, HVG and MST evaluated, validated the data and contributed in drafting. All authors reviewed, edited and approved the submission of the final version of the manuscript.

 

Acknowledgements: We thank Tilotama Varma, IPS, Additional Director, WCCB HQ, New Delhi, Maitreya Sil, ATREE, Bangalore, Avinash Basker, Environmental Lawyer, New Delhi for reading and advising this manuscript.  DV thanks late M. Ramanathan, late. R. Chandrasekar and Chandru from Chennai for their support. We thank Ms. Nilanjana Roy for preparing the map and Mr. Ajay Karthik (Madras Crocodile Bank) for helping with identification of few exotic species. We would like to thank the two anonymous reviewers and the editors of JoTT for their constructive comments that benefited the improvement of the manuscript.

 

 

 

Abstract: Commercial trade of exotic reptiles through CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) in India is relatively recent (<2 decades).  Social media platforms and web portals are known to be used for pet trade.  Exotic pet trade is not legally regulated within India.  Therefore, little is known on the scale at which this trade is carried out in India.  We conducted a two-year study between 2018 and 2020 gathering information of exotic reptile pet trade online and summarized CITES documentation of the yearly import export records from 1976 to 2018 by CITES secretariat.  This manuscript provides a baseline for the extent of the trade, invasive species and the species traded in mainland India.  We found that there is an extensive trade of exotic reptiles in the country, comprising 84 species including the highly venomous species such as Bitis gabonica.  According to CITES records of 1976–2018, 98.6% of the reptile imports into India have not been reported to the CITES management authorities in India.  We also found some evidence of trade in protected native species through the exotic pet trade network.  Furthermore, some highly threatened reptile species including many listed in Appendix I of CITES are traded in India.

 

Keywords: CITES, disease, exotic reptiles, IUCN, social media, trade.

 

Abbreviations: CITES—The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora | IUCN—International Union for Conservation of Nature.

 

 

 

Introduction

 

Globally, the exotic pet trade has increased over the years and human induced translocation of species has substantially increased during the last few decades (Pimentel et al. 2008; Seebens et al. 2017).  Live trade in exotic reptiles is no exception to this increasing trend (Auliya et al. 2016; Hierink et al. 2020).  Trade of live animals and plants is identified as a major pathway of biological invasions (Mooney & Cleland 2001; Krishnakumar et al. 2009; Engeman et al. 2011; Lockwood et al. 2019; Mohanty & Measey 2019) and in some cases it also leads to the spread of infectious diseases to other native flora and fauna including humans (Karesh et al. 2005; van Borm et al. 2005; Pavlin et al. 2009; Falcón et al. 2013; Mendoza-Roldan et al. 2020).  Invasive species have wreaked havoc on native ecosystems in different parts of the world and have led to the extinction of several native species (Savidge 1987; Mooney & Cleland 2001; Jones et al. 2008; Gurevitch & Padilla 2004; Shine 2010; Simberloff & Rejmanek 2010; Willson et al. 2011; Dorcas et al. 2012).

The international trade in wildlife is estimated to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars annually and has steadily increased in value (Engler 2008; Roe 2008).  A virtual display of exotic animals on the internet attracts customers and it is a major outlet for trade in wildlife (Lavorgna 2014).  This medium (internet and social media) has also been identified as a useful source to document the scale at which the trade is carried out (Vaglica et al. 2017; Jensen et al. 2019).

Approximately, 5,800 species of animals and 30,000 species of plants are covered by CITES in order to protect them from over-exploitation by trade.  India has been a party to CITES since 1976.  Currently, 897 species & subspecies and populations of reptiles are included in Appendices I (87 species), II (749), and III (61), which is ~8% of the 11,050 reptile species in the world (http://www.cites.org; Uetz et al. 2020).  Reptiles are one of the extensively traded groups of vertebrates in the exotic pet trade.  Approximately, 8% of the reptile species traded in the world are regulated by CITES (Auliya et al. 2016; http://www.cites.org).  India is high in reptilian diversity (~619 species in mainland India) (Uetz et al. 2020) and there is a serious threat to native fauna due to exotic pets as trade increases the likelihood of invasion and spread of diseases.  Furthermore, information on the extent of globally threatened species in exotic pets traded in India is not available.  Thus, there is an urgent need to document what proportion of the reptiles traded into India are CITES listed and their International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List status.  The aim of the present study is to assess the exotic reptile pet trade in India to determine: i) the extent, in terms of traded species and trade volume, ii) associated discrepancies in the CITES records, iii) potential invasive species, and iv) discuss key challenges and provide recommendations for monitoring.

 

 

Materials and methods

 

Online sale data

To understand the scale of trade (legal and illegal) of exotic reptiles in India, information was gathered from the internet including four social networking applications (Facebook, Instagram, Telegram, and WhatsApp) and websites listing exotic animals for sale.  During the course of two years (April 2018–March 2020), we monitored 75 WhatsApp groups, 26 pet networking groups on Facebook, 18 groups on Telegram, 11 groups on Instagram, and 20 websites selling exotic reptiles.  The groups were selected based on their activity and posts related to buying and selling of various reptiles.  Each selected group was monitored on a daily basis and websites listing exotic species for sale were surveyed weekly; additionally, photos and advertisements were collected as evidence of trade and for the purpose of species identification by subject experts.  We followed the guidelines on ethical decision making and internet research (Markham & Buchanan 2012).  All exotic species were identified to the species level.  These species were categorized into four groups: lizards, snakes, turtles, and crocodiles.   The IUCN Red List and CITES Appendix status of the listed species were considered to assess threat levels.  During the monitoring of social networking platforms, efforts were made to access information about the original regions/states from which particular photos or advertisements were posted with the help of the open-source intelligence tools (OSINT).  The number of traders recorded by us in the reptile pet trade ranged from 1 to 27 in each state.  We categorized the online trading frequency as Low (1–9), Medium (10–18), and High (19–27).  Bar plots and pie chart were prepared in R 3.2.0 (R Core Development Team 2017) using package ggplot2 (Wickham 2016) and a map was prepared using QGIS 3.10 (QGIS.org 2020).

 

Seizure data

To assess the illegal import of exotic reptiles through different customs entry and exit points, information related to the seizure of exotic animals was collected from multiple media sources including news reports, seizure reports by enforcement agencies such as Customs, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), and Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) over a period of two years (March 2018–March 2020).

 

CITES trade data

To assess legal imports of exotic reptiles into India we accessed import data from 1976 to 2018 from the CITES Trade Database (https://trade.cites.org/ last accessed on 20.vi.2020).  Only imports with the purpose codes B (breeding in captivity or artificially propagation) and T (commercial) were considered as only these two codes clearly indicate specimens which were imported for the purpose of trade.  We cross-checked published CITES trade data with the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, New Delhi annual report (http://wccb.gov.in/Content/CITES.aspx). 

 

 

Results

 

In total we recorded 84 species of reptiles in trade, many are categorized as threatened by the IUCN Red List, viz: five Critically Endangered (CR), nine Endangered (EN) species, and nine Vulnerable (VU) species (Appendix 1 and Appendix 3).

 

Online trade

There is an extensive virtual market for exotic reptiles in India through social media; our findings show WhatsApp, Facebook, Telegram, Instagram, and web portals are the key media (Figure 1a).  Websites often advertised fewer species for sale than that of social media platforms (Figure 1a).

In total, 70 reptile species were identified to be traded via the various social media platforms, including 31 species of lizards, 12 species of snakes, and 27 species of turtles; no crocodile species were found in online trade (Figure 1b, Table 1, Appendix 1).  Among lizards, varanids (Varanidae) were found to be the most frequently traded species followed by iguanids (Iguanidae), and agamids (Agamidae).  Twelve species of exotic snakes (Appendix I) were found to be traded online.  Python regius is the most commonly traded snake species.  We also found highly venomous snakes such as Bitis gabonica and Drysdalia coronoides.  We found 27 species of exotic turtles and tortoises in trade.  Apart from Trachemys scripta elegans which are traded in large numbers (Appendix 2), we also found some rare and threatened species of turtles including Astrochelys radiata and Malacochersus tornieri in trade (Appendix 1).  Among the three groups found in online trade, more species of lizards were traded compared to snakes and turtles (Table 1).

We found five species listed in Appendix I of CITES in the Indian pet trade: Cyclura lewisi, Cyclura cornuta, Shinisaurus crocodilurus, Astrochelys radiata, and Malacochersus tornieri (Appendix 1).  Additionally, 31 species in trade were found to be listed under Appendix II, and four species under Appendix III.

Furthermore, we found seven posts (5 species) related to live reptile species which are protected under the Indian Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972.  These posts led to the seizure/rescue of Geochelone elegans (N= 11), Geoclemys hamiltonii (N= 7), Pangshura tecta (N= 71), Varanus bengalensis (N= 1), and Python molurus (N= 1) from pet traders by the enforcement authorities. 

Our study shows that Tamil Nadu (10%), Maharashtra (9.7%), and West Bengal (9.3%) holds the major proportion of traders dealing with live exotic reptiles, followed by Kerala (8.5%), Delhi (7.3%), and Uttar Pradesh (7%) (Figure 2).  Most traders are based in large metro cities (Chennai, Mumbai, Pune, Kolkata, Delhi, Lucknow, and Hyderabad).

 

Seizure data

Fifteen seizures of illegally imported reptiles were conducted by enforcement agencies, and a total of 12,505 individuals belonging to 22 species were confiscated (Appendix 2).  The seized individuals belonged to species ranging across four reptile groups; including twelve species of lizards, six species of snakes, three testudines, and one crocodile species (Table 1, Appendix 2).  Lizards were the most smuggled group; 12 species were seized by enforcement authorities in India.

During the two years period (2018–2020), enforcement authorities successfully seized individuals of five species listed in Appendix I of CITES: Cyclura stejnegeri, C. pinguis, C. lewisi, Testudo kleinmanni, Crocodylus siamensis and nine species listed under Appendix II including Centrochelys sulcata and Varanus prasinus.

 

CITES trade

We found that between 1976 and 2018 there were 25 different consignments of live import of reptiles into India from other countries for breeding in captivity (B) and commercial (T) purposes.  This included 1,293 individuals belonging to 17 species including seven species of crocodiles (63 individuals), three species of lizards (208 individuals), two species of snakes (406 individuals), and five species of turtles (616 individuals) (Appendix 3).  These imports comprised of three species from Appendix I, 13 species from Appendix II and one species from Appendix III (Table 2).  The import data shows that between 1976 and 2018 only 18 individuals of four species of crocodiles were reported to the CITES Management Authority in India (Appendix 3).  This information was reported only for the year 2000 and the remaining 1,275 individuals were never reported (Appendix 3).

CITES data revealed that between 2000 and 2017, seven Mecistops cataphractus and three Cyclura cornuta were imported into India for the purpose of breeding in captivity from Netherlands and Denmark.  These are species listed in Appendix I; however, there are no captive breeding operations registered with the CITES Secretariat for these species.

 

Discussion

 

This study reveals an extensive trade of exotic reptiles in India for the first time, which includes many threatened species.  We recorded a total of 84 species of exotic reptiles in the pet trade many of which are highly likely to have entered India illegally.  Twelve species were seized by Customs Authorities at different entry points (while attempting to smuggle into India) before it reached the market for sale (Appendix 1–3).

Cities like Bengaluru, Chennai, New Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Lucknow, Mumbai, Pune, Thiruvananthapuram, and Vadodara in 12 Indian states have been historically associated with illegal sale of Indian Star Tortoises and people who kept them as pets (Moll 1983; WWF 1994; Sekhar et al. 2004; Anand et al. 2005; D’Cruze et al. 2015).  We found similar results with high levels of exotic reptiles being traded in most of these cities (Chennai, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Lucknow, Mumbai, New Delhi, and Pune) listed above (Figure 2).  Extensive trade and export of endemic Indian fish species through exotic species traders was uncovered by Raghavan et al. (2013).  Similarly, we found that traders who sell exotic reptiles are to some extent involved in illegal trade of Indian reptile species as pets.  This mainly includes turtles (Pangshura tecta, Geoclemys hamiltonii, and Geochelone elegans) and sometimes other reptiles (Varanus bengalensis and Python molurus) which are protected species in India, listed on the Schedules of The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972.  However, we did not find any evidence of native species being exported during this study.

Social media platforms provide a safe medium for trading exotic animals by maintaining anonymity of the seller and forming closed networks controlled by group administrators.  On Instagram, traders were found to display exotic reptiles by posting photographs, without specific mention of prices for sale.  On the contrary, on open platforms like websites, very few exotic reptile species and individuals were on display.  The displayed species (e.g., Iguana spp. or Trachemys scripta) were usually available in large quantities for low prices (between   120–160) and there were some species which were sold for a higher price range (between  4,500–     40,000) per individual.

Among lizards, Varanus species were found to be the most smuggled species followed by iguanids, agamids, chamaeleonids, and scincids (Appendix 2).  In March 2018, Guwahati police and forest authority conducted a seizure of four Gaboon Vipers Bitis gabonica, among several other wild animals.  The consignment’s suspected origin was Aizawl in Mizoram, reportedly, it was planned to be sold to a trader in New Delhi.  In another case, the Chennai Customs Authority (CCA) detained a person at the Chennai International Airport and confiscated several exotic animals including a Horned Pit Viper Cerastes cerastes, which was allegedly smuggled into India from Thailand.  Published reports on exotic reptile pet trade in India are sparse (Soundararajan et al 2015).  While the trade of live reptiles in India has been recorded since 1983, extensive trade is only recorded in the last two decades (Appendix 2–3; Ramsay et al. 2007) and CITES import/export data shows an increase in the number of traded species and individuals in the past decade (Appendix 3).  Undocumented import/export of species and individuals is much higher than the reported numbers.

Bush et al. (2014) reported globally a large number of Appendix I listed captive-bred mammals and birds and wild-caught birds and reptiles in legal international trade.  Seven species of exotic reptiles listed in Appendix I (Cyclura cornuta, C. lewisi, Shinisaurus crocodilurus, Astrochelys radiata, Malacochersus tornieri, Crocodylus siamensis, and Mecistop scataphractus) and found to be in the pet trade, but were not reported to the CITES authorities in India.  CITES trade data shows that until 2000 there were only eight species of reptiles imported into India (Appendix 3).  Only more recently the trade has intensified in both number of species and individuals (Appendix 3).  Discrepancies in the number of import and export in CITES data have been reported in the past (Blundell & Mascia 2005; Russo 2015; Robinson & Sinovas 2018) and we also found similar pattern in this study (Appendix 3).  Species listed in Appendix I of CITES are threatened with extinction and in general no international commercial trade is allowed.  International trade in species listed in Appendix II and Appendix III for commercial purposes is permitted, but only with the relevant permits required by the convention.  The domestic online trade of CITES listed species in such large quantities raises concerns about illegal imports into the country especially given that 98.6% of the imports into India have not been reported to the CITES management authorities in India.  Apart from the fact that these imports were not reported to Indian CITES Management Authority, they indicate a lack of compliance with CITES Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15) by the parties involved.

 

Regulations for exotic species in India

In India, the import of exotic live reptiles is regulated by CITES and Customs Act 1962 with the “Policy Conditions”.  The importer has to apply for a license to import live animals (including their parts and products) to the director general of foreign trade along with the recommendation of the concerned chief wildlife warden of the state which is to be furnished at the time of custom clearance at “Exit” point.  On June 2020, the Indian Government (Ministry of Environment forest & climate change (Wildlife Division) released an advisory for dealing with import of exotic live species in India and declaration of stock (http://environmentclearance.nic.in/writereaddata/om/30052020WildlifeAdvisorySpecies.pdf).

 

Threatened species in trade

Already threatened wild populations of species such as Chelodina mccordi, Astrochelys radiata, Carettochelys insculpta, and Malacochersus tornieri if over exploited for the pet trade, may be decimated in their native range.  The former two tortoises were identified among the 25 most endangered turtles and tortoises in the world (Rhodin et al. 2011).  India as a signatory to CITES should take serious preventive measures to avoid trade of threatened species.  As per the CITES Article VII, Paragraph 4, specimens of an animal species included in Appendix I bred in captivity for commercial purposes, may be deemed to be specimens of species included in Appendix II.  While some species imported in pet trade into India are reported to have been bred in captivity (Appendix 3) many other threatened species in trade do not have this information.  This is another reason to have a proper record for import and export of exotic species.  Lyon & Natusch (2011) showed that 80% of Morelia viridis exported from Indonesia annually are illegally wild-caught.  Population declines have been reported in some reptile species due to heavy exploitation for pet trade (Parusnath et al. 2017).

 

Invasive species in the exotic pet trade

The Red-eared Slider Trachemys scripta elegans is classified by the IUCN’s Invasive Species Specialist Group as one of the ‘World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species’ (Lowe et al. 2000; ISSG 2010).   A species native to the Mississippi River in the United States, the Red-eared Slider is now an invasive species in 75 countries or overseas territories (Vyas 2019; Uetz et al. 2020).  They are often sold as small hatchlings but upon reaching adulthood, these turtles are much larger and more aggressive (Cadi & Joly 2004).  This is often the case for many other reptiles (Stringham & Lockwood 2018).  Thus, they are often discarded into local waterways (Cadi & Joly 2004).  Young Red-eared Slider turtles are carnivorous; they undergo a shift in diet as they mature to become omnivores (Ligon 2007; Boyer & Scott 2019) and predate on native species of turtles (Vyas 2020).   They prey on local fish species and may compete for food and nesting space with the native turtle populations (Girondot et al. 2007).

In India, Red-eared Sliders were reported from 35 water bodies in the state of Gujarat which is also the natural habitat for one or more of the four native species of turtles (Pangshura tecta, Nilssonia gangetica, Lissemys punctata, and Melanochelys trijuga) (Vyas 2019).  Apart from Gujarat, Red-eared Slider has also been reported from Karnataka, West Bengal, Punjab, Hyderabad, Rajasthan, and Goa (Jadhav et al. 2018; Chaudhuri et al. 2018; Vyas 2019).  Until recently (2007), there were no records of Red-eared Slider from India (Ramsay et al. 2007) but now it is considered to be an invasive species in India which if not tackled may pose a serious threat to native turtles. 

Red-eared Sliders are often traded in large quantities.  In the two-year period, 12,385 individuals were seized by the custom authorities from Chennai and Trichy international airports.  Our monitoring of online traders suggest that these turtles were sold at low prices   (   30 to 40 per individual) from exporting countries, due to high availability, better survival rate, and small size suitable for transporting in large quantities.

 

Zoonotic diseases and fatal snake bites associated with pet reptiles

Snake fungal diseases caused by Ophidiomyces ophiodiicola have been documented in the pet trade and are identified as responsible for the population decline of free ranging snakes in North America (Allender et al. 2015).  Multiple disease outbreaks in chelonians due to ranavirus infections have been described in North America, Europe, and Asia (Duffus et al. 2015; Marschang et al. 2016).  Global trade of reptiles and amphibians in combination with the wide host range of ranaviruses are suspected to have increased the emergence of these infections (Stöhr et al. 2013; Marschang et al. 2016).   

Iguana iguana as pets have been identified as a source of Salmonella infections in humans (Sanyal et al. 1997; Warwick et al. 2001).  Furthermore, several zoonotic diseases with high risk to humans such as neuroangiostrongyliasis, pentastomiasis, and sparganosis are transmitted from reptiles (Mendoza-Roldan et al. 2020).  Annually, an estimated 50,000 people die of snake bites in India (Mohapatra et al. 2011).  Importing venomous exotic pets and the danger of snake bites from these exotic species impose an unnecessary additional burden to the medical community.

 

Key challenges and recommendations

We identify six main challenges arising from exotic reptile pet trade in India: 1. introduction of invasive species, 2. spread of diseases from exotic pets to native reptiles, 3. spread of zoonotic disease from exotic reptile pets to humans, 4. trade of highly threatened species poses serious conservation challenges, 5. trade of protected species in India under the cover of exotic pet trade, and 6. trade of highly venomous reptiles.  Thus, it is essential to introduce corrective measures to stop illegal trade and regulate legal trade of exotic reptiles.  Systematic monitoring of the pet trade online will be crucial to understand the extent of trade.  India currently lacks systematic information on even the relatively better-known invasive reptiles; for example, the Red-eared Slider turtles is not listed as invasive species in India by the Global Invasive Species Database and there is only one record of this species in India Biodiversity Portal (IBP; Vattakaven 2016).  Global citizen science initiative iNaturalist have 395 observations of this species in Singapore since September 2016 but only 34 records from India during the same time period (accessed on 17 February 2021).  We need better documentation of introduced species in India and citizen science initiative like IBP and iNaturalist can be a useful platform to record and map distribution of such species.  The general public also need to be made aware of the damage inflicted to the native fauna and environment by releasing exotic reptiles (e.g., turtles).  International trade of threatened species listed in Appendix I of CITES needs to be eradicated in India with more cyber patrolling.

 

Table 1. Number of exotic reptile species in trade found by this study in mainland India. See Appendices 1–2 for complete list of species.

 

Listed for sale by exotic pet traders

Seizures by enforcement authority

 

No. of Species

No. of Species

No. of Individuals

Crocodiles

0

1

21

Lizards

31

12

45

Snakes

12

6

22

Turtles

27

3

12417

 

Table 2. Summary of species recorded in online trade, seizures and import data listed in CITES website. Categorized by CITES Appendices (I–III); NA—Not available.

 

No. of species found on sale by pet traders in India

No. of species seized by enforcement authority in India

No. of species imported to India via CITES from 1976 to 2018

Appendix

I

II

III

NA

I

II

III

NA

I

II

III

Crocodiles

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

2

5

0

Lizards

3

18

0

10

3

7

0

2

1

2

0

Snakes

0

5

0

7

0

3

0

3

0

2

0

Turtles

2

8

4

13

1

1

0

1

0

4

1

 

 

For figures – click here

 

References

 

Allender, M.C., D.B. Raudabaugh, F.H. Gleason & A.N. Miller (2015). The natural history, ecology, and epidemiology of Ophidiomyces ophiodiicola and its potential impact on free-ranging snake populations. Fungal Ecology 17: 187–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.funeco.2015.05.003

Anand, V.D., A. Moses & S. Varma (2005). The Fading Star – An investigation into the illegal trade in Indian Star Tortoise in south India. A Rocha India, Bangalore, and Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi. 1–26.

Auliya, M., S. Altherr, D. Ariano-Sanchez, E.H. Baard, C. Brown, R.M. Brown, J.C. Cantu, G. Gentile, P. Gildenhuys, E. Henningheim & J. Hintzmann (2016). Trade in live reptiles, its impact on wild populations, and the role of the European market. Biological Conservation 204: 103–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.05.017

Bush, E.R., S.E. Baker & D.W. Macdonald (2014). Global trade in exotic pets 2006-2012. Conservation Biology 28: 663–676. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12240

Blundell, A.G & M.B. Mascia (2005). Discrepancies in reported levels of international wildlife trade. Conservation Biology 19: 2020–2025. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00253.x 

Boyer, T.H & P.W. Scott (2019). Nutritional diseases, pp. 932–950. In:  Divers, S., S. Stahl (eds.). Mader’s Reptile and Amphibian Medicine and Surgery. WB Saunders, Philadelphia.

Cadi, A. & P. Joly (2004). Impact of the introduction of the Red-eared Slider (Trachemys scripta elegans) on survival rates of the European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis). Biodiversity and Conservation 13: 2511–2518. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:BIOC.0000048451.07820.9c

Chaudhuri, A., A. Banerjee, S. Chowdhury & K. Deuti (2018). Report of Red eared Slider turtle (Trachemys scripta elegans) from a wetland near Kolkata, West Bengal, India. The Herpetological Bulletin 146: 41–42.

D’Cruze, N., B. Singh, T. Morrison, J. Schmidt-Burbach, D.W. Macdonald & A. Mookerjee (2015). A star attraction: The illegal trade in Indian Star Tortoises. Nature Conservation 13: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.13.5625

Dorcas, M.E., J.D. Willson, R.N. Reed, R.W. Snow, M.R. Rochford, M.A. Miller, W.E. Meshaka, P.T. Andreadis, F.J. Mazzotti, C.M. Romagosa & K.M. Hart (2012). Severe mammal declines coincide with proliferation of invasive Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109: 2418–2422. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115226109

Duffus, A.L., T.B. Waltzek, A.C. Stöhr, M.C. Allender, M. Gotesman, R.J. Whittington, P. Hick, M.K. Hines & R.E. Marschang (2015). Distribution and host range of ranaviruses, pp. 9–57. In: Gray, M.J. & V.G. Chinchar (eds.). Ranaviruses. Springer International Publishing, Cham.

Engeman, R., E. Jacobson, M.L. Avery & W.E. Meshaka Jr (2011). The aggressive invasion of exotic reptiles in Florida with a focus on prominent species: A review. Current zoology 57: 599–612. https://doi.org/10.1093/czoolo/57.5.599

Engler, M. (2008). The Value of International Wildlife Trade, TRAFFIC Bulletin Vol. 22 No. 1.

Falcón, W., J.D. Ackerman, W. Recart & C.C. Daehler (2013). Biology and Impacts of Pacific Island Invasive Species. 10. Iguana iguana, the Green Iguana (Squamata: Iguanidae). Pacific Science 67: 157–186. https://doi.org/10.2984/67.2.2

Girondot, M., C. Archinard, A.C. Prévot-Julliard, A. Cadi & E. Gousset (2007). Pets and invasion risks: is the slider turtle strictly carnivorous? Amphibia-Reptilia 28: 139–143. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853807779799036

Gurevitch, J. & D.K. Padilla (2004). Are invasive species a major cause of extinctions? Trends in Ecology & Evolution 19: 470–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2004.07.005

Hierink, F., I. Bolon, A.M. Durso, R.R. de Castañeda, C. Zambrana-Torrelio, E.A. Eskew & N. Ray (2020). Forty-four years of global trade in CITES-listed snakes: Trends and implications for conservation and public health. Biological Conservation 248: 108601.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108601

ISSG (2010). Invasive Species Specialist Group. http://issg.org/database/species/

Jadhav, T., N. Sawan & S.K. Shyama (2018). First report on presence and status of introduced invasive species Red-eared Slider, Trachemys scripta elegans in Goa, India. NeBIO 9: 177–179.

Jensen, T.J., M. Auliya, N.D. Burgess,  P.W. Aust, C. Pertoldi & J. Strand (2019). Exploring the international trade in African snakes not listed on CITES: highlighting the role of the internet and social media. Biodiversity and Conservation 28: 1–19.

Jones, H.P., B.R. Tershy, E.S. Zavaleta, D.A. Croll, B.S. Keitt, M.E. Finkelstein & G.R. Howald (2008). Severity of the effects of invasive rats on seabirds: a global review. Conservation Biology 22: 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00859.x

Karesh, W.B., R.A. Cook, E.L. Bennett & J. Newcomb (2005). Wildlife trade and global disease emergence. Emerging Infectious Diseases 11: 1000–1002. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1107.050194

Krishnakumar, K., R. Raghavan, G. Prasad, A. Bijukumar, M. Sekharan,  B. Pereira & A. Ali (2009). When pets become pests–exotic aquarium fishes and biological invasions in Kerala, India. Current Science 97: 474–476.

Lavorgna, A. (2014). Wildlife trafficking in the Internet age. Crime Science 3: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-014-0005-2

Ligon, D. (2007). Trachemys scripta elegans (Red-eared Slider). Predation. Herpetological Review 38: 201–202. 

Lockwood, J.L., D.J. Welbourne, C.M. Romagosa, P. Cassey, N.E. Mandrak, A. Strecker, B. Leung, O.C. Stringham, B. Udell, D.J. Episcopio-Sturgeon & M.F. Tlusty (2019). When pets become pests: the role of the exotic pet trade in producing invasive vertebrate animals. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 17: 323–330.  https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2059

Lowe. S., M. Browne, S. Boudjelas & M. De Poorter (2004). 100 of the World’s Worst Invasive Alien Species. A Selection from the Global Invasive Species Database (updated and reprinted version). The Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG), Species Survival Commission (SSC), World Conservation Union (IUCN), Gland, Switzerland (first published as a special lift-out in Aliens 12 in December 2000).

Lyons, J.A. & D.J. Natusch (2011). Wildlife laundering through breeding farms: illegal harvest, population declines and a means of regulating the trade of green pythons (Morelia viridis) from Indonesia. Biological Conservation 144: 3073–3081. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2011.10.002

Marschang, R.E., A.C. Stöhr & M.C. Allender (2016). Ranaviruses of reptiles—an increasing problem. Bulletin of the European Association of Fish Pathologists 36: 151–154.

Markham, A. & E. Buchanan (2012). Ethical decision-making and internet research: recommendations from the AoIR ethics working committee (Version 2.0). Chicago, IL: Association of Internet Researchers. Available at: https://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf

Mendoza-Roldan, J., D. Modry & D. Otranto (2020). Zoonotic parasites of reptiles: a crawling threat. Trends in Parasitology 36: 667–687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pt.2020.04.014

Mohanty, N.P. & J. Measey (2019). The global pet trade in amphibians: species traits, taxonomic bias, and future directions. Biodiversity and Conservation 28(14): 3915–3923. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-019-01857-x

Mohapatra, B., D.A. Warrell, W. Suraweera, P. Bhatia, N. Dhingra, R.M. Jotkar, P.S. Rodriguez, K. Mishra, R. Whitaker, P. Jha & Million Death Study Collaborators (2011). Snakebite mortality in India: a nationally representative mortality survey. PLoS Neglected Tropical Disease 5: p.e1018. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pntd.0001018

Moll, E.O. (1983). Turtle survey update (January to April 1983). Hamadryad 8: 15–17.

Mooney, H.A. & E.E. Cleland (2001). The evolutionary impact of invasive species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98: 5446–5451. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.091093398

Pavlin, B.I., L.M. Schloegel & P. Daszak (2009). Risk of importing zoonotic diseases through wildlife trade, United States. Emerging infectious diseases 15: 1721–1726. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1511.090467

Parusnath, S., I.T. Little M.J. Cunningham, R. Jansen & G.J. Alexander (2017). The desolation of Smaug: The human-driven decline of the Sungazer lizard (Smaug giganteus). Journal for Nature Conservation 36: 48–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2017.02.002

Pimentel, D., M. Pimentel & A. Wilson (2008). Plant, animal, and microbe invasive species in the United States and world, pp. 315–330. In: Nentwig, W. (Ed.). Biological Invasions. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.

Ramsay, N.F., P.K.A. Ng, M. O’Riordan & L.M. Chou (2007). The Red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta elegans) in Asia: a review, pp. 161–174. In: Gherardi, F. (Ed.). Biological Invaders in Inland Waters: Profiles, Distribution, and Threats. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg.

Raghavan, R., N.N. Dahanukar, M.F. Tlusty, A.L. Rhyne, K.K. Kumar, S. Molur & A.M. Rosser (2013). Uncovering an obscure trade: threatened freshwater fishes and the aquarium pet markets. Biological Conservation 164: 158–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2013.04.019

Rhodin, A.G.J., A.D. Walde, B.D. Horne, P.P. van Dijk, T. Blanck & R. Hudson (2011). Turtles in Trouble: The World’s 25+ Most Endangered Tortoises and Freshwater Turtles. IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group, Turtle Conservation Fund, Turtle Survival Alliance, Turtle Conservancy, Chelonian Research Foundation, Conservation International. Wildlife Conservation Society, and San Diego Zoo Global. Lunenburg, MA.

Robinson, J.E & P. Sinovas (2018). Challenges of analyzing the global trade in CITES-listed wildlife. Conservation Biology 32: 1203–1206.

Roe, D. (2008). Trading Nature: A report, with case studies, on the contribution of wildlife trade management to sustainable livelihoods and the Millennium Development Goals, TRAFFIC International and WWF International.

Russo, A. (2015). The prevalence of documentation discrepancies in CITES (Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) trade data for Appendix I and II species exported out of Africa between the years 2003 and 2012. PhD Thesis.  University of Cape Town.

R Core Development Team (2017). R: a language and environment for statistical computing.

Sanyal, D., T. Douglas & R. Roberts (1997). Salmonella infection acquired from reptilian pets. Archives of disease in childhood 77: 345–346. https://doi.org/10.1136/adc.77.4.345

Savidge, J.A. (1987). Extinction of an island forest avifauna by an introduced snake. Ecology 68: 660–668.

Seebens, H., T.M. Blackburn, E.E. Dyer, P. Genovesi, P.E. Hulme, J.M. Jeschke, S. Pagad, P. Pyšek, M. Winter, M. Arianoutsou, S. Bacher, B. Blasius, G. Brundu, C. Capinha, L. Celesti-Grapow, W. Dawson, S. Dullinger, N. Fuentes, H. Jäger, J. Kartesz, M. Kenis, H. Kreft, I. Kühn, B. Lenzner, A. Liebhold, A. Mosena, D. Moser, M. Nishino, D. Pearman, J. Pergl, W. Rabitsch, J. Rojas-Sandoval, A. Roques, S. Rorke, S. Rossinelli, H.E. Roy, R. Scalera, S. Schindler, K. Štajerová, B. Tokarska-Guzik, M.V. Kleunen, K. Walker, P. Weigelt, T. Yamanaka & F. Essl (2017). No saturation in the accumulation of alien species worldwide. Nature communications 8(1): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14435

Sekhar, A.C., N. Gurunathan & G. Anandhan (2004). Star tortoise: A victim of the exotic pet trade. Tigerpaper 31: 4–6.

Shine R. (2010). The ecological impact of invasive cane toads (Bufo marinus) in Australia. The Quarterly review of biology 85: 253–291.

Simberloff, D. & M. Rejmanek (2010). Encyclopedia of Biological Invasions. University of California Press, California.

Soundararajan, N., R.M. Raj, N. Kamaladhasan, R.I. Saidanyan & S. Chandrasekaran (2015). On-line trade of aesthetic exotic organisms: sword of Damocles? Current Science 109: 1404–1410.

Stöhr, A.C., S. Blahak, K.O. Heckers, J. Wiechert, H. Behncke, K. Mathes, P. Günther, P. Zwart, I. Ball, B. Rüschoff & R.E. Marschang (2013). Ranavirus infections associated with skin lesions in lizards. Veterinary Research 44: 84.

Stringham, O.C. & J.L. Lockwood (2018). Pet problems: biological and economic factors that influence the release of alien reptiles and amphibians by pet owners. Journal of Applied Ecology 55(6): 2632–2640. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13237

Uetz, P., P. Freed & J. Hošek (2020). The Reptile Database. Available from: <http://reptile-database.reptarium.cz> Accessed on 18 June 2020

Vaglica, V., M. Sajeva, H.N. McGough, D. Hutchison, C. Russo, A.D. Gordon, A.V. Ramarosandratana, W. Stuppy & M.J. Smith (2017). Monitoring internet trade to inform species conservation actions. Endangered Species Research 32: 223–235. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00803

van Borm, S., I. Thomas, G. Hanquet, B. Lambrecht, M. Boschmans, G. Dupont, M. Decaestecker, R. Snacken & T. van den Berg (2005). Highly pathogenic H5N1 influenza virus in smuggled Thai eagles, Belgium. Emerging Infectious Diseases 11: 702. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid1105.050211

Vattakaven, T., R.M. George, D. Balasubramanian, M. Réjou-Méchain, G. Muthusankar, B.R. Ramesh & R. Prabhakar (2016). India Biodiversity Portal: An integrated, interactive and participatory biodiversity informatics platform. Biodiversity Data Journal 4: e10279. https://doi.org/10.3897/BDJ.4.e10279

Vyas, R. (2019). Distribution of Invasive Red-eared Sliders, Trachemys scripta (Testudines: Emydidae) in the wetlands of Gujarat State, India. IRCF Reptiles & Amphibians 26: 145–150.

Vyas, R. (2020). A Captive Study of Interactions between the Invasive Red-eared Slider, Trachemys scripta elegans (Wied 1838), and native Indian turtles. IRCF Reptiles & Amphibia 27(2): 318–323.

Warwick, C., A.J.L. Lambiris, D. Westwood & C. Steedman (2001). Reptile related salmonelosis. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 94: 124–126. https://doi.org/10.1177/014107680109400306

Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: elegant graphics for data analysis. Springer.

Willson, J.D., M.E. Dorcas & R.W. Snow (2011). Identifying plausible scenarios for the establishment of invasive Burmese Pythons (Python molurus) in southern Florida. Biological Invasions 13: 1493–1504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-010-9908-3

WWF (1994). Turtle trade in India: A study of tortoises and freshwater turtles. WWF, New Delhi, 1–50pp.

QGIS.org (2020). QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation Project. http://qgis.org