Journal of Threatened Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 October 2025 | 17(10): 27734–27747

 

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

https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.9887.17.10.27734-27747

#9887 | Received 01 May 2025 | Final received 04 September 2025 | Finally accepted 10 September 2025

 

 

Understanding the ethnozoological drivers and socioeconomic patterns of bird hunting in the Indian subcontinent

 

Anish Banerjee     

 

Think Wildlife Foundation, Prestige Augusta, Konthanur, Rampura Bengaluru, Karnataka 560077, India.

anishbanerjee27112001@gmail.com

 

 

Editor: Ashutosh Singh, Sálim Ali Centre for Ornithology and Natural History (SACON), Coimbatore, India.      Date of publication: 26 October 2025 (online & print)

 

Citation: Banerjee, A. (2025). Understanding the ethnozoological drivers and socioeconomic patterns of bird hunting in the Indian subcontinent. Journal of Threatened Taxa 17(10): 27734–27747. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.9887.17.10.27734-27747

  

Copyright: © Banerjee 2025. 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: EAZA Zoos and Aquariums.

 

Competing interests: The author declares no competing interests.

 

Author details: Anish Banerjee is an early career ecologist with a masters in ecology, evolution and conservation from Imperial College London. He is currently a legal analyst for Legal Analyst, conducting policy analyst on topics ranging from tiger trafficking, biodiversity regulatory risk and wild aquatic animal health. He is also the founder of Think Wild Foundation, an organization working on small scale restoration projects and research on illegal wildlife trade and human wildlife conflict.

 

Acknowledgments: I would like to acknowledge Shreya Sethi, Chris R. Shepherd and the Monitor Conservation and Research Society for providing guidance for this research. We would also like to thank the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA) for supporting Monitor’s work on the illegal and unsustainable trade in birds.

 

 

Abstract: Bird hunting and trade pose major threats to avifauna in the Indian subcontinent. Although prohibited under the Indian Wildlife Protection Act of 1972, bird poaching has continued, driven primarily by demand from the pet trade, traditional medicine, and cultural beliefs. This study systematically reviewed literature on the socioeconomic and ethnozoological drivers of bird hunting, and trade across India, Pakistan, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. Around 124 publications were analysed to examine bird use, socioeconomic drivers, and poaching trends. Keywords including “zootherapy,” “ethnozoology,” “traditional uses”, and “bird trade” were used to identify relevant studies on bird hunting with Google Search, Scopus, and Web of Science. A linear regression analysis revealed a significant negative correlation between the sub-national human development index and the number of species hunted at the state level, while, factors like indigenous population size, and state gross production per capita did not significantly impact hunting prevalence.  A chi-square test for independence revealed that subsistence hunting in India was less than expected, with cultural, and commercial factors being more significant drivers of hunting. The pet trade was a key driver of poaching in India and Bangladesh, while traditional falconry in Pakistan severely affected raptor populations. A strong positive correlation was found between the number of studies per state and reported hunting prevalence, highlighting geographical, and temporal biases in research. A more comprehensive analysis is needed to fully understand bird hunting patterns, integrating government seizure records, NGO rescue data, CITES trade data, and online media sources.

 

Keywords: Bird conservation, bird poaching, ethnoornithology, ethnozoology, exotic bird trade, indigenous hunting, illegal wildlife trade, subsistence hunting, wildlife crime, wildlife hunting.

 

 

Introduction

 

Bird hunting and trade pose a significant threat to avifauna across the Indian subcontinent, driven by a range of cultural, economic, and commercial factors (Bhupathy et al. 2013; Roy et al. 2024) . Despite the existence of legislation such as the Wild Life (Protection) Act that prohibits the poaching and trade of wildlife, a study analyzing 182 media reports documented the seizure of 25,850 birds across 109 incidents (Poonia et al. 2022). The illegal bird trade persists due to demand from the pet market, traditional medicine (zootherapy), cultural beliefs (Solavan et al. 2004; Yesodharam et al. 2011; Velho & Laurance 2013; Vijaykumar et al. 2015), subsistence hunting, and sport hunting (Selvan et al. 2013; Das et al. 2017; Ahmed et al. 2021).

The use of birds in traditional medicine is widespread across the Indian subcontinent, reflecting broader global trends. The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 80% of the global population relies on traditional medicine, including zootherapy (WHO 2022). In northeastern India, 24 bird species have been documented as being used by 17 ethnic groups to treat 37 diseases (Das et al. 2017). Similarly, in Bhutan, five bird species are commonly used in Sowa Rigpa Medicine (Yeshi et al. 2021). Bird use in ethnopharmacology is prevalent across Nepal and Pakistan as well (Lalramnghinglova 1999; Negi & Palyal 2007; Lohani 2010, 2012; Lokwani 2011; Tynson et al. 2012; Paudyal 2014; Paudyal & Singh 2014; Kushwah 2017; Shoukat et al. 2020; Adhikari et al. 2020, 2023; Ahmad et al. 2021; Kunwar 2024). Beyond medicinal use, superstitious rituals and religious practices also drive the poaching of certain species. For example, the Mottled Wood Owl Strix ocellata, and Brown Fish Owl Bubo zeylonensis are frequently targeted for illegal trade in India during the Diwali festival, where they are used in black magic practices (Ahmed 2010).

Hunting for sport and captive breeding further exacerbates the decline of several bird species. In Pakistan, the hunting of the Houbara Bustard Chlamydotis undulata has surged as its populations have declined in the Middle East and northern Africa, making the country a key destination for Arab falconers (Tourenq et al. 2005). The live capture of raptors, including the Laggar Falcon Falco jugger, and White-eyed Buzzard Butastur teesa, has also increased due to high mortality rates in falconry, further driving illegal poaching in Pakistan (Mohan & Athreya 2011). Meanwhile, in both Nepal and Bangladesh, there have been numerous records of bird and wildlife poaching for ethnozoological purposes (Poudel & Singh 2016; Barkat et al. 2021).

       In India, subsistence hunting remains a significant driver of bird poaching in some regions. For instance, in Pangti Village, Wokha District of Nagaland, the massacre of Amur falcons Falco amurensis was driven for local consumption, and for sale in a nearby market (Mero & Mishra 2022). Despite the prevalence of bird hunting across the Indian subcontinent, limited efforts have been made to synthesize available data at a national scale. Research on bird poaching is often localized within a specific state or district or included as part of broader wildlife trade analyses (Niraj et al. 2012; Poonia et al. 2022; Singh 2023).

This literature review aims to consolidate and analyse the socioeconomic and ethnozoological drivers of bird hunting and trade in the Indian subcontinent, covering India, Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. Maldives, though a part of the Indian subcontinent, is not included in the study due to a lack of publications on the topic. Specifically, the review aims at identifying the ethnozoological uses of birds, including traditional medicine, and cultural practices. Additionally, it investigates the correlation between income levels, the subnational human development index (SHDI), and bird hunting prevalence at a subnational level. SHDI is a more comprehensive socioeconomic factor than household income, which incorporates factors like education, standard of living, and health. Lastly, the review identifies patterns in bird trade, including available data on species hunted, trade quantities, pricing, trade routes, and involvement of tribal communities.

Furthermore, this review seeks to identify critical knowledge gaps and data limitations in existing literature. By incorporating insights from both peer-reviewed studies and technical reports (e.g., TRAFFIC, WWF), this study aims to provide a comprehensive assessment of bird poaching trends, and their implications for conservation efforts in the region.

 

 

Methods

 

Literature search

The preliminary literature search was conducted using the search terms “bird trade” and “bird hunting” on Google Search, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. The initial search was limited to articles covering bird hunting and trade in India, as this was the initial scope of the project. Only 11 articles were found in India for these specific keywords. Therefore, the geographic scope of the search was expanded to all countries in the Indian subcontinent, including Pakistan, Bhutan, Nepal, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. This resulted in an additional 14 articles on the topic of bird hunting and trade, bringing the total to 25 publications.

Snowballing techniques were used to identify other potential primary keywords related to bird hunting in the region from references cited in the preliminary papers on “bird hunting” and “bird trade”. From these papers, a recurring theme of literature cited was the traditional use of birds by indigenous communities. Phrases such as “zootherapy”, “ethnozoology”, “traditional uses”, and “ethnopharmacology” were identified as key search terms. Literature with these themes was in the scope of this literature review, which aimed to identify the drivers, uses, and patterns of bird trade and hunting in the region. While these keywords did produce studies solely focused on the traditional uses of birds, many papers were more generic and included wildlife as a whole. Additionally, numerous papers on the generic themes of “bird conservation”, “illegal wildlife trade”, and “wildlife hunting” were also identified. From the search results, any article within the geographical scope that contained the trade, hunting, or ethnozoological use of at least one species of wild bird was utilized for the study (Mirin & Klinck 2021). Publications without explicit reference to the trade, hunting, or use of a single avian species were not utilized for the literature review. The distribution of literature across keywords is illustrated in Table 1.

The literature review was not limited only to peer-reviewed publications. Technical reports from organizations, such as TRAFFIC and WWF, were also utilized for this publication. Preprint repositories such as bioRxiv and ResearchSquare were also searched, using all the mentioned keywords. The literature review also aimed to identify temporal patterns in bird hunting and trade in the region. Therefore, there was no criterion regarding the timeframe within which a study was published. The earliest study included was published in 1986 (Mian 1986). All relevant studies published until November 2024, was included in this study.

 Zotero has a built-in duplicate detection feature that was utilized to prevent the duplication of publications in the literature review. Additionally, a manual review of the citation was also conducted to remove duplicate publications (Mirin & Klinck 2021). In total 124 publications were used for the literature review, that includes 120 peer-reviewed publications, two preprints, and two technical reports.

 

Literature review data collection

A wide array of information was extracted from each source, including metadata of the study, such as study location, data collection methods, year of publication, and, where relevant, the ethnic groups interviewed.

The studies were further categorized by geographical scale, ranging from local to international levels. Local-level studies were confined to a single jurisdiction below the district level, such as a forest division, city, village, or market. District and state-level studies encompassed multiple locations within a district or state, respectively. Regional studies spanned two or more states within a single country, while national-level studies examined wildlife trade across an entire country. International-level studies included research conducted across multiple countries.

This literature review incorporated studies employing both primary and secondary data collection methods. Primary methods included local interviews and market surveys, whereas secondary methods relied on government seizure records, crime data, and news reports. Additionally, species-specific data were compiled from each source, covering bird species involved in trade, hunting, or seizures. The scientific names of the recorded species were obtained from HBW-BirdLife Version 5.0 (December 2020), while their conservation status was determined using the IUCN Red List (2024). Additional details, such as the number of seizures, the individual birds involved, trade or hunting purposes, pricing information, the ethnic groups engaged, the body parts used, and any associated ethnozoological beliefs linked to the species.

 

Socioeconomic data collection

The trends in bird species were compared to various socioeconomic parameters. The first amongst these was the sub-national human development index provided by the global data index (Global Data Lab 2022).

Another socioeconomic factor utilized in this study was the net state domestic product (NSDP) per capita for each Indian state. This was chosen to identify whether income levels affected the likelihood of hunting birds. The state-wise data were retrieved using the data provided from the Press Information Bureau under the Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation (Press Information Bureau 2023). Different conversion rates were used because the per capita NSDP values for each state are reported for different fiscal years. Exchange rates fluctuate annually, so applying a single rate for all years would introduce inaccuracies. To ensure a more precise conversion, 2020–21 data was converted using the average exchange rate of ₹74.00 per USD for that year while the 2021–22 data was converted using ₹74.50 per USD (average for that period). Finally, the 2022–23 data was converted using ₹82.00 per USD, reflecting the depreciation of the Indian rupee in that timeframe. Unfortunately, similar state-wise data was not found for the provinces and states of Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Nepal.

As this study aimed at identifying any ethnozoological patterns of bird hunting in the region, the population of scheduled tribes (ST) in each Indian state were also retrieved from the 2011 national census (Ministry of Tribal Affairs 2013). Like NSDP, the state-wise population of indigenous and tribal communities in Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Nepal was not found.

Simple linear regression analysis was conducted to understand how factors such as SHDI, NSDP per capita, and ST population influenced the number of species hunted, and the number of bird hunting records per state. Additionally, a linear regression was conducted to determine the influence of the number of publications on the number of species hunted.

 

 

Results

 

Geographical distribution of literature

India contributed the highest proportion of studies, representing 61% (n = 76), followed by Pakistan with 20% (n = 25), Nepal with 15% (n = 19), and Bangladesh with 4% (n = 5). Bhutan had only one publication, which did not include a recorded list of hunted species. At a subnational level, Arunachal Pradesh had the highest number of publications (n = 12). In fact, there was a disproportionate number of publications from the northeast Indian States, with 23 studies being published from the states of Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Mizoram, Meghalaya, and Sikkim. 

In terms of geographical scale, most studies (n = 51) were conducted at the district level. This was followed by state-level (n = 26) and local-level (n = 25) studies. Fewer studies were conducted at broader scales, with nine at the regional level and 12 at the national level. Only one study was conducted at an international level, incorporating data from Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan, and India. The geographical distribution of literature is depicted in Figure 1.

 

Temporal distribution of literature

The earliest study on bird hunting, trade, and poaching dates back to 1986. A significant increase in publications occurred after 2010, with 81% of all studies (n = 106) published in this period, including 76 studies released after 2015. The peak year for publications was 2020, with 13 studies, followed by 2015 with 12. The temporal distribution of these studies is illustrated in Figure 2.

 

Overview of species hunted

A total of 1,578 records of hunting from 613 bird species were derived from the 124 published articles. The Rock Pigeon Columba livia was the most frequently cited species in studies on bird hunting, with 55 citations. It was followed by the House Sparrow Passer domesticus and the Indian Peafowl Pavo cristatus, each with 38 citations, and the Red Junglefowl Gallus gallus with 27 citations. Table 2 presents the 10 most commonly cited species in publications on bird hunting in the region.

Around 64.3% of the hunted species were classified as ‘Least Concern’ by the IUCN Red List of 2022 (n = 529). This was followed by 35 species classified as ‘Near Threatened’ and 26 as ‘Vulnerable’. Figure 3 represents the distribution of recorded species across the IUCN Red List.

 

Spatial distribution of hunted species

India had the highest number of hunted species recorded with 490 species, followed by Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh as depicted in Figure 4. The one publication from Bhutan did not provide specific species. The hunted species list often overlapped across countries.

At a sub-national level, the state of Arunachal Pradesh in northeastern India had the highest prevalence of hunting, with 141 hunting records from 110 species. This was followed by Tamil Nadu with 68 species, and Jammu & Kashmir with 33 species.

 

Correlation between number of studies and species hunted per state

A simple linear regression was conducted to examine the relationship between the number of publication and number of hunted species recorded in each state. A significant positive correlation was recorded between the number of hunted species recorded in a state and the number of studies. Specifically, for each additional study conducted within a state, the number of hunted species recorded in the state increased by 9.06 species (F-statistic = 39.47, df = (1,44),  p < 0.01). The model explains 47% of the variation. This relationship is illustrated by Figure 5.

 

Relationship between sub-national human development index and bird hunting

A simple linear regression analysis was performed to assess the relationship between the SHDI and the number of hunted species recorded in each state. The results indicated a significant negative correlation, with the number of hunted species decreasing as SHDI increased (F-statistic = 4.77, df = (1,44), p < 0.05). The model accounted for 10% of the variation in the number of hunted species. Figure 6 represents the relationship between SHDI and the number of hunted species.

 

Relationship between net state domestic production per capita and bird hunting

A linear regression analysis was conducted to estimate the correlation between number of species hunted with the net state domestic product per capita (USD) across each Indian state. A negligible insignificant negative relationship was detected as NSDP per capita only determined 0.3% of the variation in number of species hunted in each state (F-statistic = 0.08, df = (1,44), p-value = 0.769). Similarly, no significant correlation was detected between NSDP per capita and number of bird hunting records in each state (F-statistic = 0.07, df = (1,44), p-value = 0.797).

 

Relationship between state-wise schedule tribe population and bird hunting

A total of 92 tribal communities were recorded to be involved in the trade, hunting, and poaching of birds across the region. The Mughal, Sayed, Sheik, and Malik communities of Pakistan were recorded with the highest number of species hunted (117 each).

A simple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between the population of tribals and the number of species hunted in each state. The analysis was limited to the ST population in each Indian state as the state-wise population of indigenous and tribal communities of Pakistan, Nepal, and Bangladesh were not found. Results show a very weak and insignificant negative relationship between the number of species hunted and the ST population (F-statistic = 0.1289, df = (1,44), p-value = 0.722), with the model explaining only 0.4% of the variation in species count.

Similarly, a separate linear regression was performed to analyse the relationship between the ST population and the number of bird hunting records in each state. The findings indicated that the ST population accounted for only 0.2% of the variation in hunting records, again showing an insignificant negative relationship (F-statistic = 0.06, df = (1,44), p-value = 0.808).

 

Drivers of bird hunting across countries

A chi-squared test of independence was conducted to examine whether the distribution of the bird use categories varied significantly across India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Nepal. The test revealed a highly significant difference (χ² = 415.47, df = 18, p < 0.0001), indicating that the differential utilization of species differed significantly across countries.

The observed and expected frequencies revealed significant deviations across specific use categories. Pakistan recorded 190 instances of birds being used for cultural purposes, markedly exceeding the expected count of 92.3. Similarly, India showed a disproportionately high number of records in the pet trade (observed = 267, expected = 198.0), and zoo trade (observed = 22, expected = 12.6). In contrast, Bangladesh had significantly fewer records than expected across most categories, with zero recorded instances for medicine and food, compared to the expected 8.9 and 2.7, respectively. Lastly, Nepal demonstrated a greater-than-expected reliance on species for medicinal (observed = 63, expected = 35.1), and food purposes (observed = 33, expected = 10.6). Categorization of bird uses for different purposes across countries is illustrated in Figure 7.

 

 

Discussion

 

This literature review aimed to identify the ethnozoological and socioeconomic drivers of bird hunting and trade. Surprisingly, no correlation was found between net state domestic production per capita and the prevalence of bird hunting across different states. This contradicts previous studies that have linked poverty with wildlife poaching and crime in regions such as the Serengeti (Harrison et al. 2015), the Amazon, and the Congo Basin (Choudhury & Talukdar 2023), where bushmeat serves as both a source of protein, and livelihood (Harrison et al. 2015; Choudhury & Talukdar 2023). Notably, in Uganda, poverty alleviation has been an effective tool for mitigating wildlife crime, and poaching (Rane & Datta 2015).

While this review did not establish a direct correlation between income and hunting prevalence, findings indicate that hunting activity decreases with an increasing SHDI. This aligns with previous research conducted in Brazil (El Bizri et al. 2024), Europe (Harrison et al. 2015), and central & western Africa (Nasi et al. 2011). Moreover, this literature review found that subsistence was not a primary driver of bird hunting in South Asia, suggesting that poverty alleviation alone may be insufficient to curb hunting, and that broader improvements in overall socioeconomic wellbeing are likely more effective. This study found that factors like cultural traditions and commercial wildlife trade were bigger drivers of bird hunting in the region.

For instance, this study found that cultural practices was a major driver for bird hunting in Pakistan, where traditional falconry, and sport hunting has severely impacted endangered bird populations (Ali & Khan 2019; Kumar & Kant 2021; Muhammad et al. 2021; Sadam 2022). Meanwhile, the pet trade was identified as a major driver of bird poaching in India and Bangladesh, surpassing its prevalence in neighbouring countries. This aligns with the growing concern over the commercialization of the domestic wildlife trade and the rising exotic pet market in the region (Ahmed 1997; Singh et al. 2011; Paudel et al. 2020; Poonia et al. 2020; Choudhury & Talukdar 2023; Hinsley et al. 2024; Uddin 2024). The demand for birds as traditional medicine, while existent in South Asia, was not identified as a major driver of bird hunting in this literature review (Mahawar & Jaroli 2006; Mahaway & Jaroli 2007; Mahawar 2008; Quave et al. 2010; Rai & Singh 2015; Negi & Kandari 2017; Ataf et al. 2018; Mughal et al. 2020; Mussarat et al.  2021; Mandal & Rahaman 2022; Shrestha & Bajracharya 2023; Bashir et al. 2023).

Interestingly, in India, bird poaching for cultural purposes was not a major driver of bird hunting, despite its prevalence in Arunachal Pradesh. This possibly could be attributed to India has strict legislation, such as the Wild Life (Protection) Act (1972), and Forest Rights Act (2008), which strictly prohibits traditional hunting (Robinson et al. 2018). Additionally, no significant correlation was found between the population of scheduled tribes and hunting prevalence at the state level in India. Contrastingly, in regions, such as the Peruvian Amazon (Aiyadurai et al. 2010), Indonesia (Francesconi et al. 2018), Malaysia (Tukuboya et al. 2024), traditional hunting practices have contributed to drastic wildlife declines. Similar trends have been recorded in northeastern India as well (Solanki & Chutia 2009; Solanki et al. 2004; Solanki & Chutia 2004; Aiyadurai et al. 2010; Aiyadurai 2012; Singh 2023).

A possible explanation for this unexpected finding is the geographical bias in the reviewed publications. This represents a limitation of the literature review, as a strong positive correlation has been observed between the number of studies conducted and the reported hunting prevalence across states. Notably, around 23% of the analysed studies focused on northeastern India (Lalramnghingloa 1999; Kumar & Riba 2005; Chakravoty et al. 2011; Chinlampianga et al. 2013; Chaudhury et al. 2016; Chowdhury et al. 2017; Betlu 2022).

 While traditional hunting has historically posed a significant threat to wildlife in this region, community-led conservation initiatives have achieved remarkable success (Dasgupta 2012; Shepherd et al. 2023). For instance, the Pakke Paga Hornbill festival in Arunachal Pradesh and the Amur Falcon conservation efforts in Nagaland have not only significantly reduced the hunting of these species but also encouraged widespread community engagement in conservation programs (Rane & Datta 2015; Smith & Lee 2024). Similarly, southern India (Dixit 2010; Chellappandian et al. 2014; Gubbi & Linkie 2015; Holennavar 2015; Vijaykumar et al. 2015; Ramachandran et al. 2017; Sinha et al. 2023), and the province of Azad Jammu & Kashmir in Pakistan occupied Kashmir were regions with a substantial number of studies (Hakeem et al. 2017; Faize et al. 2022; Hassan et al. 2022; Faiz & Altaf 2024).

In contrast, only nine studies focused on bird hunting from central and eastern Indian states, including Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Jharkhand, West Bengal, Telangana, and Maharashtra (Choubey 2021). Although wildlife hunting is prevalent in central India and the Eastern Ghats, there is limited scientific documentation in the region (Benarjee et al. 2010; Rao et al. 2010; Bagde & Jain 2013; Misar & Subhas 2014; Mishra et al. 2020; Gajendra & Tirkey 2020; Samal et al. 2020; Chakraborty & Mondal 2021; Sethi 2022; Patil 2022; Veena & Krishna 2023; Pandey 2024). Provided that these states are among the poorest in India and host significant tribal populations, bird hunting by tribal communities in India is likely to be understated (George et al. 2014).

Additionally, a significant temporal bias was noted in the publications. A majority (61.3%) of the studies were published within the last 10 years, while 85.5% were published within the last 15 years. This temporal limitation restricts the ability to analyse long-term trends in bird hunting. Moreover, it prevents an assessment of whether critical legislative measures, such as the Forest Rights Act and the Wildlife Conservation (Protection) Amendment Act, have had any tangible impact on bird hunting.

While this review provides a broad overview of trends in bird poaching, hunting, and trade, more comprehensive studies incorporating diverse data sources are required. For instance, data from forest departments, the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau, and wildlife rescue centres would offer valuable insights into bird poaching, and seizures at the local level.

 Other potential sources include the CITES database, which records the legal international trade of birds, as well as online platforms such as social media, e-commerce websites, and news media reports (Datta 2021), which are increasingly relevant given the rising use of the internet for the exotic pet trade (Massocato et al. 2024). Incorporating seizure and poaching data from these sources will be critical in developing a more holistic understanding of the bird trade in the region. This would be particularly useful, as through the literature review, there was negligible data extracted on the quantity, prices, and trade routes of specimens traded for each species. Lastly, an analysis on specific habitats, such as wetlands, and taxa, such as cranes & parakeets, might provide useful insights, due to the prevalence of habitat, and taxa-specific poaching (Pandit 1988; Tariq 2015; Gosai et al. 2016; Umar et al. 2018; Rehman et al. 2022; Pandey et al. 2024).

 

Table 1. Number of Publications Retrieved by Keyword: Various keywords were applied in Google Scholar, Web of Science and Scopus to compile information on the drivers of bird hunting and trade in the Indian subcontinent.

Keyword

Number of results

Bird Trade

13

Bird Hunting

12

Bird Conservation

10

Ethnopharmacology

22

Ethnozoology

24

Illegal Wildlife Trade

8

Wildlife Traditional  Uses

12

Wildlife Hunting

9

Zootherapy

14

 

 

Table 2. Ten most frequently cited species for hunting in published literature from the region. The number of citations refer to the number of studies that identified the hunting of the species.

Common name

Scientific name

Order

IUCN Red List status

Number of citations

Rock Pigeon

Columbia livia

Columbiformes

Least Concern

55

House Sparrow

Passer domesticus

Passeriformes

Least Concern

38

Indian Peafowl

Pavo cristatus

Galliformes

Least Concern

38

Red Junglefowl

Gallus gallus

Galliformes

Least Concern

27

House Crow

Corvus splendens

Passeriformes

Least Concern

21

Great Hornbill

Buceros bicornis

Bucerotiformes

Vulnerable

17

Common Mynah

Acridotheres tristis

Passeriformes

Least Concern

17

Common Quail

Coturnix coturnix

Galliformes

Least Concern

16

Spotted Dove

Spilopelia chinensis

Columbiformes

Least Concern

15

Large-billed Crow

Corvus macrorhynchos

Passeriformes

Least Concern

14

 

For figures - - click here for full PDF

 

References

 

Adhikari, A., K. Timilsina, S. Koirala & R. Bhandar (in press). Illegal wildlife trade in a protected area of western Himalayas, Nepal. 11 September 2023 PREPRINT Version 1 available at Research Square https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3326827/v1

Adhikari, J., B. Bhattarai, M. Rokaya & T. Thapa (2020). Ethno-medicinal uses of vertebrates in the Chitwan-Annapurna landscape, central Nepal. PLOS ONE 15(10): e0240555. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240555

Ahmad, S., M. Akram, M. Riaz, N. Munir, I. M. Tahir, H. Anwar, R. Zahid, M. Daniyal, F. Jabeen, E. Ashraf, G. Sarwar, G. Rasool & S.A. Shah (2021). Zootherapy as traditional therapeutic strategy in the Cholistan desert of Bahawalpur, Pakistan. Veterinary Medicine and Science 9(4): 1861–1868. https://doi.org/10.1002/vms3.491

Ahmed, A. (1997). Live Bird Trade in Northern India. TRAFFIC India, New Delhi, 104 pp. https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/Traf-082.pdf

Ahmed, A. (2010). Imperilled Custodians of the Night: A Study of Illegal Trade, Trapping and Utilization of Owls in India. TRAFFIC India, New Delhi, 78 pp. https://www.traffic.org/site/assets/files/3160/imperilled-custodians-of-the-night-1.pdf

Ahmed, T., F. Rehman, G. Saba, N. Munawar, T. Mahmood, F. Akram & A. Baig (2021). Hunting pressure on two migratory species, Common Crane Grus grus and Demoiselle Crane Anthropoides virgo in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, Pakistan. International Journal of Biosciences 19(4): 76–83. https://doi.org/10.12692/ijb/19.4.76-83

Aiyadurai, A. (2012). Bird hunting in Mishmi Hills of Arunachal Pradesh, north-eastern India. Indian Birds 7(5): 134–137.

Aiyadurai, A., N.J. Singh & E.J. Milner-Gulland (2010). Wildlife hunting by indigenous tribes: a case study from Arunachal Pradesh, north-east India. Oryx 44(4): 564–572. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605309990937

Ali, A. & A. Khan (2019). Trapping techniques and lure (bait) used in capturing of falcons in Punjab, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 52(1): eSC4. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/2020.52.1.sc4

Altaf, M., M. Umair, A. Abbasi, N. Muhammad & A. Abbasi (2018). Ethnomedicinal applications of animal species by the local communities of Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 14(1): e55. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-018-0253-4

Arshad, M., M. Ahmad, E. Ahmed, A. Saboor, A. Abbas & S. Sadiq (2014). An ethnobiological study in Kala Chitta hills of Pothwar region, Pakistan: multinomial logit specification. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 10(1): e13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-10-13

Badola, S. (2020). Indian Wildlife Amidst the COVID-19 crisis: An Analysis of Status of Poaching and Illegal Wildlife Trade. TRAFFIC & WWF, New Delhi, India, 35 pp. https://wwfin.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/indian_wildlife_amidst_the_covid_19_crisis.pdf

Bagde, N. & S. Jain (2013). An ethnozoological study and medicinal values of vertebrate origin in the adjoining areas of Pench National Park of Chhindwara district of Madhya Pradesh, India. International Journal of Life Sciences 1(4): 278–283. 

Baral, H. (2010). Protected birds of Nepal: a review of their status, distribution and habitat. The Initiation 3: 66–80. https://doi.org/10.3126/init.v3i0.2429

Barkat, A., F. Liza, S. Akter, A. Shome & M. Rabbe (2021). Wildlife hunting practices of the Santal and Oraon communities in Rajshahi, Bangladesh. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(11): 19484–19491. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.7260.13.11.19484-19491

Bashir, S.M., M. Altaf, T. Hussain, M. Umair, M. Majeed, W.M. Mangrio, et al.  (2023). Vernacular taxonomy, cultural and ethnopharmacological applications of avian and mammalian species in the vicinity of Ayubia National Park, Himalayan Region. Biology 12(4): e609. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12040609

Benarjee, G., R. Gundu, K. Srikanth & N. Ramulu (2010). Ethnozoological study in a tropical wildlife sanctuary of Eturunagaram in the Warangal district, Andhra Pradesh. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 9(4): 701–704.

Betlu, A. (2022). Indigenous knowledge of zootherapeutic use amongst Biate tribe of Dima Hasao district, Assam, Northeast India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 9(56): e2013. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-9-56

Bhupathy, S., S. Kumar, P. Thirumalainathan, J. Paramanandham & C. Lemba (2013). Wildlife exploitation: a market survey in Nagaland, north-eastern India. Tropical Conservation Science 6(2): 241–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/194008291300600206

BirdLife International (n.d.). Taxonomy. BirdLife Data Zone. https://datazone.birdlife.org/about-our-science/taxonomy. Accessed on?

Chakraborty, S. & M. Mondal (2021). Wildlife hunting by indigenous tribes: a case analysis from Susunia hills, West Bengal, India. International Journal of Conservation Science 12(3): 935–944. https://doi.org/10.21786/bbrc/13.3/87

Chakravorty, J., V. Meyer-Rochow & S. Ghosh (2011). Vertebrates used for medicinal purposes by members of the Nyishi and Galo tribes in Arunachal Pradesh (north-east India). Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 7(1): e13. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-7-13

Chaudhury, S., H.R. Chowdhury & H. Singh (2016). Some ethnozoological uses of Birhor tribe of West Bengal, India. Journal of Traditional and Folk Practices 2(3–4): 33–42. https://doi.org/10.25173/jtfp.38

Chellappandian, M., P. Pandikumar, S. Mutheeswaran, M. Gabriel Paulraj, S. Prabakaran, V. Duraipandiyan, S. Ignacimuthu & N. Al-Dhabi (2014). Documentation and quantitative analysis of local ethnozoological knowledge among traditional healers of Theni district, Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 154(1): 116–130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2014.03.028

Chinlampianga, M., R. Singh & A. Shukla (2013). Ethnozoological diversity of northeast India: empirical learning with traditional knowledge holders of Mizoram and Arunachal Pradesh. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 12(1): 18–30.

Choubey, K.N. (2021). Categorisation in forest areas: a study of the ‘OTFDs’ in the Forest Rights Act. Indian Journal of Public Administration 67(4): 537–551. https://doi.org/10.1177/00195561211051518

Choudhury, P. & N.R. Talukdar (2023). Illegal trade of exotic wildlife along the porous borders of northeastern Indian states. Zoo’s Print 38(6): 1–4.

Chowdhury, M., M. Halim, M. Miah, N. Muhammed & M. Koike (2007). Biodiversity use through harvesting faunal resources from forests by the Mro tribe in the Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh. International Journal of Biodiversity Science & Management 3(1): 56–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/17451590709618162

Das, K., S. Choudhury, K. Chanreila & L. Nonglait (2017). Zootherapy among the ethnic groups of north eastern region of India: a critical review. Journal of Critical Reviews 4(2): 1–9. https://doi.org/10.22159/jcr.2017v4i2.14698

Dasgupta, S. (2012). Differential effects of hunting on populations of hornbills and imperial pigeons in the rainforests of the eastern Indian Himalaya. Indian Forester 138(10): 902–909.

Datta, A. (2021). Status of illegal bird hunting in Bangladesh: online news portal as the source. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 27(2): 183–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2021.1895380

Dhakal, P., B. Chettri, S. Lepcha & B. Acharya (2020). Rich yet undocumented ethnozoological practices of socio-culturally diverse indigenous communities of Sikkim Himalaya, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 249: 112386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2019.112386

Dixit, A., K. Kadavul, S. Rajalakshmi & M. Shekhawat (2010). Ethno-medico-biological studies of south India. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 9(1): 116–118. 

Faiz, M. & M. Altaf (2024). Study of avian-human interaction: uses of avian species in ethnopharmacological practices in Haveli, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of Wildlife and Ecology 8(2): 154–178. 

Faiz, M., M. Altaf, M. Umair, K. Almarry, Y. Elbadawi & A. Abbasi (2022). Traditional uses of animals in the Himalayan region of Azad Jammu and Kashmir. Frontiers in Pharmacology 13: 807831. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.807831

Francesconi, W., V. Bax, G. Blundo-Canto, S. Willcock, S. Cuadros, M. Vanegas, M. Quintero & C.A. Torres-Vitolas (2018). Hunters and hunting across indigenous and colonist communities at the forest-agriculture interface: an ethnozoological study from the Peruvian Amazon. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 14(1): 54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-018-0247-2

Gajendra, R. & S. Tirkey (2020). Ethnozoological remedial practices by the Madia tribe and indigenous inhabitants of Dantewada District, Chhattisgarh, India. National Journal of Life Sciences 17(1): 57–62. 

George, V., P. Sreedevi & T. Iljinu (2014). Ethnozoological knowledge of Indian scheduled tribe, scheduled caste and rural communities. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 13(4): 735–741. 

Global Data Lab (2022). Subnational Human Development Index (SHDI) Table for Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, and Nepal. Global Data Lab. https://globaldatalab.org/shdi/table/2022/shdi+lifexp+lgnic+pop/BGD+PAK+IND+NEP/?levels=1+4&interpolation=0&extrapolation=0. Accessed on ?

Gosai, K., T. Shrestha, S. Hill, S. Shrestha, B. Gyawali, D. Gautam & A. Aryal (2016). Population structure, behavior, and current threats to the Sarus Crane Grus antigone antigone in Nepal. Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity 9(3): 301–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.japb.2016.06.008

Gubbi, S. & M. Linkie (2012). Wildlife hunting patterns, techniques, and profile of hunters in and around Periyar Tiger Reserve. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 109(3): 165–172. 

Hakeem, F., M. Altaf, S. Manzoor, K. Rauf, B. Mumtaz, M. Bashir, R. Haider, S.I. Farooq, L. Safdar & M. Altaf (2017). Assessment of behavioral study, human activities, impacts, and interaction with Streak Laughing Thrush Trochalopteron lineatum in district Bagh, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of Wildlife and Ecology 1(3): 1–7. 

Haq, S., E. Calixto, U. Yaqoob, R. Ahmed, A. Mahmoud, R. Bussmann, O. Mohammed, K. Ahmad & A. Abbasi (2020). Traditional usage of wild fauna among the local inhabitants of Ladakh, Trans-Himalayan Region. Animals 10(12): 2317. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani10122317

Haq, S.M., M. Waheed & R.W. Bussmann (in press). “Traditional” use in a global world: Unsustainable harvesting drives species to extinction. Research Square PREPRINT Version 1. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3259535/v1. Accessed on 01.xii.2024.

Harrison, M., D. Roe, J. Baker, G. Mwedde, H. Travers, A. Plumptre, A. Rwetsiba & E.J. Milner-Gulland (2015). Wildlife crime: a review of the evidence on drivers and impacts in Uganda. IIED Research Report, 142 pp.

Hassan, M., S. Haq, R. Ahmad, M. Majeed, H. Sahito, M. Shirani, I. Mubeen, M. Aziz, A. Pieroni, R. Bussmann, A. Alataway, A. Dewidar, M. Al-Yafrsi, H. Elansary & K. Yessoufou (2022). Traditional use of wild and domestic fauna among different ethnic groups in the western Himalayas: a cross cultural analysis. Animals 12(17): 2276. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani12172276

Hinsley, A., D.W.S. Challender, S. Masters, D.W. Macdonald, E.J. Milner-Gulland, J. Fraser & J. Wright (2024). Early warning of trends in commercial wildlife trade through novel machine-learning analysis of patent filing. Nature Communications 15: 6379. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-49688-x

Holennavar, P. (2015). Use of animal and animal derived products as medicines by the inhabitants of villages in Athani Taluka of Belagavi District (Karnataka). International Journal of Applied Science 1(12): 437–440. 

IUCN (2024). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2024-2. https://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed on 19.xii.2024.

Jameel, M., M. Khan, M. Awan, M. Nadeem, S. Aslam, S. Mehmood, D. Ahmad, R. Wali, Q. Rehman, M. Khan & T. Mahmood (2022). Population and risk assessment of sympatric pheasant species in Palas Valley, Pakistan. Brazilian Journal of Biology 84: e259582. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.259582

Jaroli, D., M. Mahawar & N. Vyas (2010). An ethnozoological study in the adjoining areas of Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary, India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 6(1): e6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-6-6

Jugli, S., J. Chakravorty & V. Meyer-Rochow (2020). Tangsa and Wancho of north-east India use animals not only as food and medicine but also as additional cultural attributes. Foods 9(4): 528. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods9040528

Kalra, S., A. Davies, R.O. Martin & A. Poonia (2024). Insights from the media into the bird trade in India: an analysis of reported seizures. Oryx 58(1): 69–77. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605322001594

Kanagavel, A., S. Parvathy, P. Nameer & R. Raghavan (2016). Conservation implications of wildlife utilization by indigenous communities in the southern Western Ghats of India. Journal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity 9(3): 271–279. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.8948.16.5.25147-25156

Katuwal, H.B., H.P. Sharma, R.K. Thakur, P. Rokka, D.N. Mandal, H.S. Baral & R.C. Quan (2023). Illegal trapping and local trade of farmland birds in Madhesh Province, Nepal. Global Ecology and Conservation 42: e02391. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2023.e02391

Kaul, R., Hilaluddin, J. Jandrotia & P. McGowan (2004). Hunting of large mammals and pheasants in the Indian western Himalaya. Oryx 38(4): 426–431. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605304000808

Khan, A. & I. Khaliq (2008). Status, threats and conservation of Great Indian Bustard Ardeotis nigriceps in Pakistan. Current Science 95(8): 1079–1082. 

Khan, A.M., M. Altaf, T. Hussain, M.H. Hamed, U. Safdar, A. Ayub, Z. Memon, A. Hafiz, S. Ashraf, M.S. Amjad, M. Majeed, M. Hassan, R.W. Bussmann, A.M. Abbasi, M. Al-Yafrsi, H.O. Elansary & E.A. Mahmoud (2024). Ethnopharmacological uses of fauna among the people of central Punjab, Pakistan. Frontiers in Veterinary Science 11: 1351693. https://doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2024.1351693

Krishna, C., K. Sarma & A. Kumar (2012). Rapid assessment of wreathed hornbill (Aceros undulatus) (Aves: Bucerotidae) populations and conservation issues in fragmented lowland tropical forests of Arunachal Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 4(14): 3342–3348. https://doi.org/10.11609/JoTT.o2969.3342-8

Kumar, A. & B. Riba (2025). Assessment of effectiveness of conservation action adopted for hornbill species in Arunachal Pradesh, India: the Great Indian Hornbill Buceros bicornis. International Journal of Conservation Science 6(1): 125–134.

Kumar, A. & S. Kant (2021). Economic valuation of forest ecosystem services: a review of methods and applications. Forest Ecosystems 8(1): 47. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.eco.20150405.11

Kunwar, A., D. Rai, R. Pandey, R.B. Adhikari & T.R. Ghimire (2024). Ethnozoological study of the Tamang people in Konjyosom Rural Municipality, Lalitpur, Nepal. Nepalese Journal of Zoology 8(1): 7–15. https://doi.org/10.3126/njz.v8i1.67107

Kushwah, V., R. Sisodia & C. Bhatnagar (2017). Magico-religious and social belief of tribals of district Udaipur, Rajasthan. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 13(1): 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13002-017-0195-2

Lalramnghinglova, H. (1999). Ethnobiology in Mizoram State: folklore medico-zoology. Bulletin of the Indian Institute of History of Medicine (Hyderabad) 29(2): 123–148. 

Lohani, U. (2010). Man-animal relationships in central Nepal. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 6(1): 31. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-6-31

Lohani, U. (2012). Zootherapeutic knowledge of two ethnic populations from central Nepal. Studies on Ethno-Medicine 6(1): 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/09735070.2012.11886420

Lokwani, U. (2011). Eroding ethnozoological knowledge among Magars in central Nepal. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 10(3): 466–473. 

Mahawar, M. & D. Jaroli (2006). Animals and their products utilized as medicines by the inhabitants surrounding the Ranthambhore National Park, India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 2(1): 46. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-2-46

Mahawar, M. & D. Jaroli (2007). Traditional knowledge on zootherapeutic uses by the Saharia tribe of Rajasthan, India. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 3(1): 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-3-25

Mahawar, M. (2008). Traditional zootherapeutic studies in India: a review. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 4: 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-4269-4-17

Manisha, K.C. & N. Singh (2020). Ethnomedicinal knowledge of Kisan community: a case study. Himalayan Journal of Science and Technology 3(4): 16–23. https://doi.org/10.3126/hijost.v4i0.33861

Mandal, S. & C. Rahaman (2022). Perception and application of zootherapy for the management of cattle diseases in the northern laterite region of West Bengal, India. Asian Journal of Ethnobiology 5(1): 12–19. https://doi.org/10.13057/asianjethnobiol/y050102

Massocato, G.F., A.L.J. Desbiez, J.V. Campos-Silva, D.Z. La Laina, J.M.B. Duarte, R.S.L. Barboza & J.A. Bogoni (2024). Exposing illegal hunting and wildlife depletion in the world’s largest tropical country through social media data. Conservation Biology 38(5): e14334. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14334

Mazumdar, K. (2014). Hunting of avifauna in proposed Tsangyang Gyatso Biosphere Reserve, western Arunachal Pradesh. Zoo’s Print 29(4): 3–7. 

Mian, A. (1986). Ecological impact of Arab falconry on houbara bustard in Baluchistan. Environmental Conservation 13(1): 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900035852

Ministry of Tribal Affairs (2013). Statistical profile of Scheduled Tribes in India 2013. Ministry of Tribal Affairs, Government of India. https://tribal.nic.in/ST/Statistics8518.pdf

Mirin, B.H. & H. Klinck (2021). Bird singing contests: looking back on thirty years of research on a global conservation concern. Global Ecology and Conservation 30: e01812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2021.e01812

Misar, S. & M. Subhas (2014). Ethno-zoological practices in some tribal areas of Chandrapur district, Maharashtra, India. The Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources Science 1(3): 172–179.

Mishra, N., S. Rout & T. Panda (2022). Ethno-zoological studies and medicinal values of Similipal Biosphere Reserve, Orissa, India. African Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology 5(1): 6–11.

Mughal, S., M. Pervaz, S.M. Bashir & S.S. Shamashad (2020). Assessment of diversity and ethnopharmacological uses of birds in Chakar, Hattian Bala District, Azad Jammu and Kashmir, Pakistan. Journal of Wildlife and Ecology 4(1): 35–44. 

Muhammad, E., M. Ali, M. Imran, M. Nadeem & M. Khan (2021). Analytical study of chukar partridge farming, marketing, fighting and using it as cage bird in houses of Balochistan, Pakistan. Gazi University Journal of Science 34(3): 18–32. 

Mussarat, S., R. Ali, S. Ali, R. Mothana, R. Ullah & M. Adnan (2021). Medicinal animals and plants as alternative and complementary medicine in southern regions of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Frontiers in Pharmacology 12: 649046. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2021.649046

Naro, E., E. Mero, E. Naro, K. Kapfo, K. Wezah, K. Thopi, K. Rhakho, L. Akami, L. Thopi, M. Chirhah, T. Chirhah, T. Tsuhah, T. Thopi, W. Wezah, W. Mero, W. Thopi, K. Thopi, T. Naro, W. Tsuhah, N. Dahanukar & P. Molur (2015). Project hunt: an assessment of wildlife hunting practices by local community in Chizami, Nagaland, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 7(11): 7729–7743. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.2317.7729-7743

Nasi, R., A. Taber & N. Van Vliet (2011). Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the Congo and Amazon Basins. International Forestry Review 13(3): 355–368. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554811798293872

Negi, C. & V. Palyal (2007). Traditional uses of animal and animal products in medicine and rituals by the Shoka tribes of District Pithoragarh, Uttaranchal, India. Studies on Ethno-Medicine 1(1): 47–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/09735070.2007.11886300

Negi, T. & L.S. Kandari (2017). Traditional knowledge and zootherapeutic use of different animals by Bhotiya tribe: a case study from Uttarakhand, India. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 16(4): 638–647.

Niraj, S., P. Krausman & V. Dayal (2012). Temporal and spatial analysis of wildlife poaching in India from 1992 to 2006. International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics 24(1): 79–109. 

Pandey, S., A. Samal & D. Priyadarshini (2024). Enforcement and capacity building to combat illegal trade of Alexandrine parakeets Psittacula eupatria (Linnaeus, 1766) in Odisha, India. Sustainability and Biodiversity Conservation 3(3): 1–14.

Pandit, A. (1988). Threats to Kashmir wetlands and their wildlife resources. Environmental Conservation 15(3): 266–268. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0376892900029142

Patil, S. (2022). Ethno-medico-zoological studies of Nandubar district of Maharashtra. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 2(3): 297–299.

Paudel, P.K., K.P. Acharya, H.S. Baral, J.T. Heinen & S.R. Jnawali (2020). Trends, patterns, and networks of illicit wildlife trade in Nepal: a national synthesis. Conservation Science and Practice 2(9): e247. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.247

Paudyal, R. & N. Singh (2014). Ethno-medicinal uses of animals and plants among the migratory Tangbetons of Pokhara, Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology 19(1): 145–149.

Poonia, A., A. Ghanghas, R. Sharma & M. Jangra (2022). Trends in CITES-listed birds’ trade in Indian subcontinent countries in view of evolution of Indian laws during last four decades. International Journal of Ecological Economics and Statistics 43(1): 1–114.

Poudel, M. & N. Singh (2016). Medical ethnobiology and indigenous knowledge system found in Darai ethnic group of Chitwan, Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology 21(1): 103–111. https://doi.org/10.3126/jist.v21i1.16061

Press Information Bureau (2023). State-wise data on per capita income. Press Information Bureau, Government of India. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=1942055. Accessed on 01.iii.2025.

Quave, C., U. Lohani, A. Verde, J. Fajardo, D. Rivera, C. Obón, A. Valdes & A. Pieroni (2010). A comparative assessment of zootherapeutic remedies from selected areas in Albania, Italy, Spain and Nepal. Journal of Ethnobiology 30(1): 92–125. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-30.1.92

Rai, R. & N. Singh (2015). Medico-ethnobiology in Rai community: a case study from Baikunthe Village Development Committee, Bhojpur, eastern Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology 20(1): 127–132. https://doi.org/10.3126/jist.v20i1.13935

Ramachandran, R., A. Kumar, K. Gopi Sundar & R. Bhalla (2017). Hunting or habitat? Drivers of waterbird abundance and community structure in agricultural wetlands of southern India. Ambio 46(5): 613–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-017-0907-9

Rane, A. & A. Datta (2015). Protecting a hornbill haven: a community-based conservation initiative in Arunachal Pradesh, northeast India. Malayan Nature Journal 67(2): 203–218. 

Rao, M., S. Hedges & A. Johnson (2010). The “empty forests” of the northern Eastern Ghats, India: a case study of the loss of wildlife due to hunting. Tropical Conservation Science 3(3): 331–343. 

Rehman, J., S. Alam, S. Khalil, M. Hussain, M. Iqbal, K. Khan, M. Sabir, A. Akhtar, G. Raza, A. Hussain & U. Habiba (2022). Major threats and habitat use status of Demoiselle Crane Anthropoides virgo in district Bannu, Pakistan. Brazilian Journal of Biology 82: e242636. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.242636

Robinson, E.J.Z., A.M. Kumar & H.J. Albers (2018). Protecting forests by promoting use of biomass briquettes: does gender matter? Land Use Policy 70: 367–375. 

Roy, K., B.P. Narzary & J. Narzary (2024). Zootherapeutic and perspective among the ethnic groups of Gossaigaon sub-division in Kokrajhar, Assam, India. Bioscene 21(3): 708–731.

Sadam, A. (2022). Hunting and illegal trade of White-breasted Waterhen Amaurornis phoenicurus: evidence from district Mardan, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 54: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20210822070833

Samal, M., K. Sahoo, S. Pati, S. Tripathy, M. Parida & B. Das (2020). Use of animal and animal products for rheumatoid arthritis treatment: an explorative study in Odisha, India. Frontiers in Medicine 6: 323. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2019.00323

Sarwar, M., A. Hamid & I. Hussain (2021). Hunting pressure on migratory demoiselle cranes in Pakistan. Pakistan Journal of Zoology 54(1): e20180625070601. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.pjz/20180625070601

Selvan, K., G. Veeraswami, B. Habib & S. Lyngdoh (2013). Losing threatened and rare wildlife to hunting in Ziro Valley, Arunachal Pradesh, India. Current Science 104(11): 1492–1495.

Sethi, S. (2022). Insights into illegal wildlife hunting by forest guards of selected tiger reserves in central India. European Journal of Wildlife Research 68(1): 4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10344-021-01553-8

Shepherd, C.R., L. Shepherd, D. Rathore & U. Mendiratta (2023). Recent seizures of hornbills trafficked to India. Hornbill Natural History & Conservation 4: 20–24.

Shoukat, A., M. Khan, G. Shah, S. Tabassam, K. Badshah & I. Ullah (2020). Indigenous knowledge of zootherapeutic use among the people of Hazara division, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 19(3): 568–579.

Shrestha, N. & S. Bajracharya (2023). Utilization of fauna for therapeutic purposes by the Newar community in Bhanu Municipality, Tanahun, Nepal. Amrit Research Journal 4(1): 69–78. https://doi.org/10.3126/arj.v4i1.61215

Singh, O.I., K.S. Devi & K.B. Singh (2023). Rare and unexplored ethnozoological practices of the Tangkhul Naga community of Manipur: a north-eastern state of India. Journal of Advanced Zoology 44(3): 451–464. https://doi.org/10.53555/jaz.v44i3.711

Singh, R., J. Sethy & D. Chatrath (2023). Trends and patterns of illegal wildlife hunting and trading in Uttar Pradesh, India. International Journal of Conservation Science 14(1): 327–336. 

Singh, R., L. Slade & O. Ilyas (2011). Trapped and traded—an insight into the field realities of the live bird trade in Uttar Pradesh, India. BirdingAsia 16: 45–47.

Sinha, A., P. Hazra & T.N. Khan (2023). Potential threats to the migratory waterbirds in south Bengal, India. Research Square PREPRINT (Version 1). https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3375273/v1. Accessed on 01.xii.2024.

Smith, J. & T. Lee (2024). Conservation strategies for endangered species in fragmented landscapes. Conservation Science and Practice 6(2): e13191. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.13191

Solanki, G. & P. Chutia (2004). Ethnozoological and socio-cultural aspects of Monpas of Arunachal Pradesh. Journal of Human Ecology 15(4): 251–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/09709274.2004.11905701

Solanki, G. & P. Chutia (2009). Studies on ethno-medicinal aspects and zoo-therapy in tribal communities in Arunachal Pradesh, India. International Journal of Ecology and Environmental Sciences 35(1): 67–76.

Solanki, G., P. Chutia & O. Singh (2004). Headgear – a cultural artifact and its impact on biodiversity in Arunachal Pradesh, India. Arunachal University Research Journal 7(1): 35–44.

Solavan, A., R. Paulmurugan, V. Wilsanand & A. Singh (2004). Traditional therapeutic uses of animals among tribal population of Tamil Nadu. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 3(2): 198–205.

Tariq, M. & R. Aziz (2015). Threats and hunting methods of crane species in district Karak of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Journal of Environment and Earth Science 5(22): 11–15. 

Timilsina, S. & N. Singh (2015). Ethnobiology and indigenous knowledge about medicinal animals and plants in the Balami ethnic group in Nepal. Journal of Institute of Science and Technology 19(2): 79–85. https://doi.org/10.3126/jist.v19i2.13857

Tukuboya, F., K. Mizuno, H. Herdiansyah & E. Frimawaty (2024). Togutil tribe’s ecological hunting calendar on Halmahera Island, Indonesia. Global Ecology and Conservation 55: e03244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2024.e03244

Tourenq, C., O. Combreau, M. Lawrence, S. B. Pole, A. Spalton, X. Xinji, M. Al Baidani & F. Launay (2005). Alarming houbara bustard population trends in Asia. Biological Conservation 121(1): 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2004.03.031

Tynsong, H., B. Tiwari & M. Dkhar (2012). Bird hunting techniques practised by War Khasi community of Meghalaya, north-east India. Indian Journal of Traditional Knowledge 11(2): 334–341.

Uddin, N., A. Islam, T. Akhter, T. Ara, D. Hossain, C. Fullstone, S. Enoch & A. C. Hughes (2022). Exploring market-based wildlife trade dynamics in Bangladesh. Oryx 58(1): 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605322001077

Umar, M., M. Hussain, G. Murtaza, F.A. Shaheen & F. Zafar (2018). Ecological concerns of migratory birds in Pakistan: a review. Punjab University Journal of Zoology 33(1): 69–76. https://doi.org/10.17582/pujz/2018.33.1.69.76

Veena, P. & C. Krishna (2023). Importance, threats and conservation strategies of Telangana state bird, Palapitta. International Journal of Researches in Biosciences, Agriculture and Technology (XI): 12–15.

Velho, N. & W. Laurance (2013). Hunting practices of an Indo-Tibetan Buddhist tribe in Arunachal Pradesh, north-east India. Oryx 47(3): 389–392. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605313000252

Vijayakumar, S., J. Morvin Yabesh, S. Prabhu, M. Ayyanar & R. Damodaran (2015). Ethnozoological study of animals used by traditional healers in the Silent Valley of Kerala, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 162: 296–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2014.12.055

Vijayakumar, S., S. Prabhu, J. Morvin Yabesh & R. Pragashraj (2015). A quantitative ethnozoological study of traditionally used animals in Pachamalai hills of Tamil Nadu, India. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 171: 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2015.05.023

World Health Organization (2022). WHO establishes the Global Centre for Traditional Medicine in India. World Health Organization. https://www.who.int/news/item/25-03-2022-who-establishes-the-global-centre-for-traditional-Medicine-in-india. Accessed on 01.iv.2025.

Yeshi, K., P. Morisco & P. Wangchuk (2017). Animal-derived natural products of Sowa Rigpa medicine: their pharmacopoeial description, current utilization and zoological identification. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 207: 192–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2017.06.009

Yesodharan, K., P. Padmanabhan & N. Cini (2011). Wild food traditionally used by the indigenous people of Parambikulam Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Ghats, Kerala, India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 108(1): 41–46.