![\"Tortoises](\"https:\/\/imgs.mongabay.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/20\/2026\/10\/15153952\/260925_incautacion_reptiles_valencia_2.jpg_523645142.jpg\" "\\"\\"")
<\/a>As demand for these animals continues to grow, conservationists are calling on countries to close legal loopholes that allow traffickers to smuggle them across the world, sometimes by breaking local laws. Many reptiles and amphibians are sold as \u201clow maintenance\u201d first-time pets in stores or online, and some collectors pay thousands of dollars for rare species.<\/p>\n
In a recent commentary published in Nature<\/em>, the authors say countries must scrutinize their exports and imports, strengthen global frameworks to punish traffickers, and introduce regulations that permit only a limited list of vetted wildlife species to be kept as pets \u2014 also called a \u2018positive list\u2019 \u2014 to rein in the trade.<\/p>\n One in five of all reptile species and two in five amphibians are threatened with extinction, according to IUCN, the global conservation authority. With the planet heating up, habitats destroyed, fatal diseases decimating entire populations and invasive species replacing them, reptiles and amphibians are already under pressure. A skyrocketing trade in them could be devastating, the authors warn.<\/p>\n \u201cThis isn\u2019t a new trade, but it\u2019s becoming more of a problem,\u201d said one of the commentary authors Susan Lieberman, vice president of international policy at the U.S.-based NGO Wildlife Conservation Society. \u201cWe\u2019re seeing increasing pressure on more and more species in the wild across the globe.\u201d<\/p>\n Case in point: The poisonous black-and-orange harlequin mantella frog (Mantella cowanii<\/em>), which has almost disappeared from its native habitat in Madagascar, in part because of its popularity among collectors.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is certainly an urgent and frequently overlooked issue,\u201d said Alice Hughes, who studies the reptile and amphibian trade at the University of Melbourne and was not an author on the commentary. \u201cUnfortunately, repeated calls to notice and act on this gap have not yet gained the traction needed to bridge them.\u201d<\/p>\n This commentary, she said, \u201cdoes a good job of contextualizing many of the issues\u201d and \u201chighlighting opportunities to improve our ability to understand and regulate trade, and raise awareness of these issues.\u201d<\/p>\n More than half of reptiles and 40% of amphibians currently in trade are pulled from the wild, Hughes\u2019 research shows. But only a handful \u2014 9.5% of reptiles and 4.2% of amphibians \u2014 are regulated under CITES. The rest can be traded without oversight or monitoring \u2014 and most countries have little information on what is in commerce because no one\u2019s looking.<\/p>\n The U.S. records all its wildlife imports, including traded species not regulated under CITES, in the Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) database. But there\u2019s no such data in other countries \u2014 so many reptile and amphibian species fall through the cracks.<\/p>\n \u201cWithout \u2026 data on what is on trade, where it is coming from, the source, and the quantity, there is simply no means to assess the sustainability, or to tease apart legal and illegal trade more clearly,\u201d Hughes said. In some cases, a species can be traded illegally from its native country to a third country, then re-exported to the intended destination with fraudulent permits and paperwork, she said.<\/p>\n The problem is particularly stark in the European Union, which is a hub of the reptile and amphibian trade, according to commentary co-author Sandra Altherr, a biologist and co-founder of the German-based NGO Pro Wildlife. \u201cThe EU wildlife imports are still largely a black box. We have no idea of the origin or the history of many animals, or even how many animals are actually entering the EU. And that, for me, is unbelievable.\u201d<\/p>\n The EU logs its wildlife imports in Trade Control and Expert Systems (TRACES), but experts say it mostly focuses on food control and biosecurity rather than wildlife trade and conservation.<\/p>\n It\u2019s also accessible only to authorities with an EU account in countries that use the system, and not to most others. \u201cThis data is neither open \u2014 nor reportedly at a sufficient taxonomic resolution \u2014 for most taxa, meaning that as long as TRACES remains inaccessible to researchers, it will fail to provide the information that could be used to monitor and manage trade and its impacts on wild species,\u201d Hughes said.<\/p>\n CITES records all legal transactions in listed species, but adding new species to that list is challenging without data, Lieberman said. \u201cYou need to prove not only that it\u2019s in trade, but that trade is a threat \u2026 It\u2019s a heavy lift to get anything listed, particularly for reptiles and amphibians where there might not be enough data.\u201d<\/p>\n Adding a species to CITES needs a proposal submitted at a once-every-three-years gathering of all treaty signatories, and it must be accepted by more than a two-thirds majority. For newly described ones hammered by trade, which typically enter commerce within a year, waiting for three years could be too long, Lieberman said.<\/p>\n The commentary\u2019s authors call for better data collection to address this. Lieberman said every country needs to create a LEMIS-like system to monitor all wildlife trade. \u201cIt\u2019s not that hard with AI,\u201d she said, since the bill of lading, needed for every shipment of animals, already has the details of the species being transported.<\/p>\n Hughes said trade data could be complemented with genetic barcoding, which uses DNA to identify a species, to verify what is being sold, and by digitizing invoices so authorities can \u201cobtain exact lists of what is being traded.\u201d Authorities can then flag irregularities, such as spotting species that are endemic to Australia, New Zealand, Fiji or Ecuador where it\u2019s illegal to remove any wildlife from the wild. \u201cWith better data on trade, all other processes become easier,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n In the U.S., the Lacey Act makes it illegal \u201cto take, possess, transport, or sell wildlife that has been taken in violation of any law.\u201d But in most countries and the EU, a species protected by law in its country of origin can be sold legally once it\u2019s outside the region.<\/p>\n Traffickers exploit this loophole in EU regulations by smuggling protected species to Europe, breeding them, and selling the offspring legally \u2014 even selling to the U.S. market, mislabeling them as captive-bred, thereby circumventing the Lacey Act.<\/p>\n \u201cThe E.U. represents a major gap for global trade at present, often stated to be more lax than the United States and providing a route for animals to be taken from the wild and end up in the global pet trade,\u201d Hughes said.<\/p>\n The international trade in Galapagos land (Conolophus spp.<\/em>) and marine iguanas (Amblyrhynchus cristatus<\/em>) is a stark example. Ecuador never legally exported any of these endemic reptiles, but there\u2019s a thriving legal commerce in \u2018captive-bred\u2019 marine and land iguanas from the archipelago, mostly from Europe and Africa. All Galapagos iguanas are now protected under CITES, but they continue to be smuggled.<\/p>\n Altherr from Pro Wildlife said it\u2019s \u201cquite easy\u201d for traffickers to launder wildlife into the EU. \u201cWhen you pass the customs, then it\u2019s fully legal to sell these animals here \u2026 anyone selling or owning [such wildlife] is not required to prove that it was obtained legally.\u201d<\/p>\n Other challenges include poor enforcement and lack of political will. Many countries lack the resources and funding needed to detect and stop wildlife trafficking. Some nations are plagued by corruption, with poaching and transport aided by police, environmental officials or customs agents that turn a blind eye or validate fraudulent paperwork. Fewer than half of the countries in the world impose maximum penalties of at least four years in prison for wildlife-related crimes.<\/p>\n The authors point to opportunities to rein in the global pet trade. The EU, for example, has commissioned three feasibility studies. One of them, published in 2025, looks at formulating a regulation like the U.S. Lacey Act, called Criminalisation of Illegally Sourced Wildlife Trade.<\/em><\/p>\n \u201cLegislation that respects the laws of range countries should be a minimum,\u201d Lieberman said, adding that she hopes other countries pass similar laws.<\/p>\n The second study looks at creating an EU-wide \u2018positive list\u2019 of species that can be kept as pets without harming their wild populations; that don\u2019t become invasive; and that can be kept without concerns for their welfare. The third study looks at ways to reduce demand for wildlife as pets. These two are expected to be published later this year, Altherr said.<\/p>\n At the upcoming gathering of the U.N. Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC) to be held Oct. 19-23, 2026, delegates will purportedly submit a resolution that would expand the charter\u2019s purview. If passed, it would launch negotiations on a new protocol on crimes affecting the environment, including wildlife trafficking.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s high time that wildlife crime, fisheries crime, illegal mining \u2014 all of those things \u2014 are treated as serious crime. These are transnational crimes,\u201d Lieberman said. \u201cThey are often connected with drug and weapons smuggling, and we want the criminal justice community to take it seriously.\u201d Similar protocols exist for human trafficking and arms trafficking.<\/p>\n Such a protocol helps countries work together on enforcement, extradition, training and technical assistance on environmental crimes.<\/p>\n \u201cIt will define a level playing field of what are crimes that affect the environment,\u201d Lieberman said. \u201cCITES is a great treaty, but it doesn\u2019t really deal with criminality \u2026 So if a [UNTOC] protocol is adopted, then governments that ratify the protocol would be bound by it.\u201d<\/p>\n Other international organizations are taking note. In 2025, the IUCN World Congress agreed to create a task force to develop guidelines on regulating the pet trade. Because bribery, fraud and money laundering enable wildlife trafficking, an industry often run by crime syndicates, the authors say the U.N. Convention against Corruption should also be strengthened to fight it.<\/p>\n The short-term solution to rein in the pet trade is to get a grip on it and improve enforcement; in the medium term, to change legislation and regulations; and in the long term, to both establish a new protocol and change consumer behaviors, Lieberman said.<\/p>\n Vora, N. M., Lieberman, S., Altherr, S., Ferreira, J. M., Boratto, R., Hamers, M., . . . Walzer, C. (2026). The pet trade puts reptiles and amphibians at risk: close legal gaps now. Nature<\/em>, 657<\/em>(8132), 596\u2013598. doi:10.1038\/d41586-026-02852-3<\/a><\/p>\n Edmonds, D., Andriantsimanarilafy, R.R., Crottini, A., Dreslik, M.J., Newton-Youens, J., Ramahefason, A., Randrianantoandro, C.J., \u2026 Andreone, F. (2024). Small population size and possible extirpation of the threatened Malagasy poison frog Mantella cowanii<\/em>. PeerJ<\/em> 12, e17947. doi:<\/a>10.7717\/peerj.17947<\/a><\/p>\n Marshall, B. M., Strine, C., \u2026 Hughes, A. C. (2020). Thousands of reptile species threatened by under-regulated global trade. Nature Communications<\/em>, 11<\/em>(1), 4738. doi:10.1038\/s41467-020-18523-4<\/a><\/p>\n Hughes, A. C., Marshall, B. M., \u2026 Strine, C. T. (2021). Gaps in global wildlife trade monitoring leave amphibians vulnerable. eLife<\/em>, 10<\/em>. e70086. doi:10.7554\/elife.70086<\/a><\/p>\n Marshall, B. M., Strine, C., \u2026 Hughes, A. C. (2020). Thousands of reptile species threatened by under-regulated global trade. Nature Communications<\/em>, 11<\/em>(1), 4738. doi:10.1038\/s41467-020-18523-4<\/a><\/p>\nLack of data makes it hard to monitor trade<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Legal loopholes fuel trade in amphibians and reptiles<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Opportunities for reform<\/strong><\/h2>\n
Citations:<\/strong><\/h2>\n