Disentangling the Legal and Illegal Wildlife Trade-Insights from Indonesian Wildlife Market Surveys

Simple Summary Throughout the world, wild-caught animals are traded in wildlife markets, but it is not always easy to disentangle what part of the trade is legal and what part is not. This may diminish the value of conducting wildlife market surveys. Conservationists narrowly focus on whether a species is legally protected, whereas in most countries there are several laws and regulations in place that guide the trade in wild-caught animals. Here we present empirical data from various species of birds recorded during wildlife market surveys in Indonesia and assess whether violations take place in terms of (1) protected species, (2) harvest quota, (3) welfare, (4) transport restrictions, and (5) importation. Our five distinctly different case studies showed that while it is challenging to distinguish legal and illegal aspects, in all cases it was evident that at least some aspects of the trade were in violation of Indonesia's domestic legislation. By focusing on a wider range of legal restrictions, it is possible to get a good insight into the legality of wildlife trade, what interventions can be made, and overall, our study underscores the value of conducting wildlife trade surveys. It is challenging to disentangle the legal and illegal aspects of wild-caught animals that are traded in wildlife markets or online, and this may diminish the value of conducting wildlife trade surveys. We present empirical studies on the trade in birds (ducks, owls, songbirds, non-passerines) in Indonesia (2005 to 2021). Based on visits to wildlife markets, wholesale traders, and monitoring of an Instagram account, we examine if five specific pieces of legislation (domestic and international) are adhered to: (1) protected species, (2) harvest quota, (3) welfare, (4) provincial transport restrictions, and (5) illegal import of CITES-listed species. Our five distinctly different case studies showed that in each case, certain rules and regulations were adhered to, whilst others were violated to varying degrees. When trade involved non-protected species, there was frequently a lack of harvest quotas or trade occurred above these allocated quotas. Basic welfare provisions were regularly and habitually violated. Visiting wildlife markets and recording first-hand what is openly offered for sale is a highly reliable, verifiable, and valuable method of data collection that can give insight in numerous aspects of the animal trade. Our research provides support for recognising the urgency for the government to take appropriate action to curb all the illegal aspects of the bird trade in Indonesia.