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,
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 |
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