Zoos consenting to the illegal wildlife trade – the earless monitor lizard as a case study

The illegal wildlife trade has direct relevance for zoo management, animal acquisition and disposition and it has no place in modern zoo management. Zoos must not only act within the law of the country in which it is based, but they should also follow the rules and intentions of international trade regulations and, where relevant, domestic laws of the animal’s country of origin. After its rediscovery in 2012, zoos in Asia and Europe started displaying Bornean earless monitor lizards (Lanthanotus borneensis), the ‘Holy Grail of Herpetology’. Earless monitor lizards have been legally protected in each of its three range countries for over four decades and, over this period, no specimen has ever been legally exported. However, the illicit trade in the species is thriving and individuals become more affordable. Using publicly available data, I present a timeline of how and from where a total of 16 zoos acquired their earless monitor lizards, including from private individuals and non-accredited zoos. Apart from one zoo in Japan (since 2012) and one zoo in the USA (since 2021), all non-range country zoos that currently display the species are based in Europe. Their absence prior to 2021 in US zoos (despite an increasing illegal trade) could be explained as the acquisition of earless monitor lizards would have been in violation of the Lacey Act (1900) that requires buyers to ensure that imported or purchased wildlife has not been taken in violation of any foreign law. While there is no evidence that any of the zoos, their directors or their staff have broken any laws – no-one in the zoo community has been convicted for illegally trading earless monitor lizards – with more zoos speaking out against the illegal wildlife trade, it is imperative that zoos behave in an exemplary manner and set high standards. At present, some zoos do not meet this standard.

Legal or unenforceable? Violations of trade regulations and the case of the Philippine Sailfin Lizard Hydrosaurus pustulatus (Reptilia: Squamata: Agamidae)

The Philippine Sailfin Lizard (Agamidae: Hydrosaurus pustulatus) is a nationally protected Philippine endemic species. It is threatened by habitat destruction, pollution and overexploitation for the domestic pet trade, yet less is known about the international component of the trade. Here we investigate the international trade in Hydrosaurus spp. (H. weberi, H. amboinensis, and H. pustulatus) with an emphasis on H. pustulatus. We analysed international seizures combined with international online sales and trade data for the United States of America (USA). The export of H. pustulatus from the Philippines has been prohibited since 1991, except under special circumstances, yet they continue to be traded internationally, and we found evidence for trade in Asia, Europe, and North America. Most of these animals, however, were declared to be captive-bred. While imports to and exports from the US consisted mostly of other species of Hydrosaurus, H. pustulatus was by far the most coveted species online, with prices significantly higher for H. pustulatus than any of the other species. While not many seizures have occurred outside the Philippines, even wild-caught individuals were found to be ‘legally’ imported to the USA – in apparent violation of the Lacey Act. We recommend H. pustulatus to be listed in CITES Appendix III, in order for countries other than the USA to have a legal basis to seize wild-caught animals trafficked from the Philippines and to monitor trade in captive-bred specimens. Further, we suggest the use of automated cross-referencing between imported species and the national protection status of the species’ native range states to ensure that legislation violations are detected at the point of import.

Proceedings of the First International Snakehead Symposium

<em>Abstract.</em>—Northern Snakeheads <em>Channa argus </em>were imported by fish farmers in Arkansas for use and sale in live food markets before being banned by the state in July 2002. Farmers were advised to destroy their stock in 2002 when importation and interstate trade were federally banned under the Lacey Act (18 U.S.C § 42(a) (1)). These farmers reportedly attempted this action, but on April 14, 2008; a wild Northern Snakehead, confirmed by the Arkansas Game and Fish Commission, was captured by a local row crop farmer. An eradication plan was formulated for Fall 2008 involving several government agencies and universities. Arkansas experienced several late summer storms resulting in flood conditions during that time. The eradication effort, named Operation Mongoose, was rescheduled for March, 2009. Operation Mongoose involved the application of the fish toxicant rotenone using helicopters, Marsh Masters, boats, and ground teams to cover approximately 700 km of creeks, ditches, and backwater areas within the 20,250 ha Piney Creek watershed. The effort reduced the Northern Snakehead population in the drainage but did not eradicate them. Because this area is prone to annual flooding, range expansion of Northern Snakehead occurred. The Arkansas Game and Fish Commission tracks Northern Snakehead dispersal through reporting from the angling public. During 2017, the first confirmed range expansion outside of Arkansas occurred in Mississippi.

A categorical modeling approach to analyzing the impacts of the Lacey Act 2008 amendment on Chinese companies’ export cost and the implications on their sourcing behaviors

The United States (US) Lacey Act 2008 amendment (LAA) is a timber legality regulation that requires US importers to monitor and minimize the risk of illegally harvested wood products within their supply chains. This paper empirically examines the effect of the LAA on Chinese companies’ export costs to the US. The study uses 138 responses from two surveys in Shanghai, China, in 2013, i.e., 5 years after the LAA was implemented. Given the high proportion of zero export increase indicated by the Chinese companies, a zero-inflated ordered probit model was used to model Chinese companies’ export cost increases to the US. The research results demonstrate that pre-LAA raw material sourcing patterns are primary indicators of the respondents’ export cost increase to the US as a result of the LAA. From the results, it can be inferred that log and lumber importers from suspect regions are taking additional measures, by changing their procurement practices, to ensure the legality of their raw material, which is adding to their cost structure. The results also indicate that smaller companies, given their flexibility with raw material procurement, were less likely to experience a post-LAA cost increase relative to their larger counterparts.

Trade Interference or Good Environmental Stewardship: The Case of Gibson Guitar and the Lacey Act

The Gibson Guitar Corporation based in Tennessee was raided by federal agents twice for importing prohibited wood products. The raids, especially the second, attracted much public attention and have even led for calls from some members of Congress for a change. The case examines the Lacey Act, the allegations of wrong doing, and the question trade and domestic job creation at the expense of environmental stewardship. JEL Classifications Code: F18