Illegal Wildlife Trade in Traditional Markets, on Instagram and Facebook: Raptors as a Case Study

Simple Summary Wildlife trade, just like other trade, is moving online; this also includes wildlife that cannot be traded legally. To assess the extent to which the illegal wildlife trade has moved online, we focused on the bird trade on the Indonesian islands of Java, Bali and Lombok, where there is widespread access to the Internet and where social media is widely used. We conducted a five-year study (2016-2021) on the raptor trade in traditional bird markets, on Instagram and on Facebook and assessed seizures and successful prosecutions over this period. We found close to 1000 birds of prey for sale (29 species), and evidence of 47 seizures of 131 birds of prey. The five most common birds of prey were similar in all four datasets. Smaller species were more common in the bird markets, whereas the larger ones were more abundantly offered online. In the seizure reports, social media was frequently mentioned, and only five of the seizures led to a successful prosecution. Our study confirms that wildlife trade has indeed shifted from the physical marketplace to online and shows that enforcement is insufficient to curb this illegal trade.Abstract Monitoring illegal wildlife trade and how the modus operandi of traders changes over time is of vital importance to mitigate the negative effects this trade can have on wild populations. We focused on the trade of birds of prey in Indonesia (2016-2021) in bird markets (12 markets, 194 visits), on Instagram (19 seller profiles) and on Facebook (11 open groups). We link species prevalence and asking prices to body size, abundance and geographic range. Smaller species were more traded in bird markets and less so online. Abundance in trade is in part linked to their abundance in the wild. Asking prices (mean of USD 87) are positively correlated with size and negatively with their abundance in the wild. Authorities seize birds of prey according to their observed abundance in trade, but only 10% of seizures lead to successful prosecutions. The trade is in violation of national laws and the terms and conditions of the online platforms; the low prosecution rate with minimal fines shows a lack of recognition of the urgency of the threat that trade poses to already imperilled wildlife. The shift of trade from physical bird markets to the online marketplace necessitates a different strategy both for monitoring and enforcement.