• The legal trade is extensive but poorly regulated
• The main problem is the capture of wild fauna
• More precise monitoring will help us understand the real impacts of the legal trade

No, there is no mistake in the headline. We are used to associating the animal market with illegal trafficking in species and/or parts thereof. What is rarely mentioned, however, is the legal market involving wild animals – a silent yet incredibly vast trade. In the United States alone, one of the world's largest importers of wild animals, nearly 2.85 billion animals across almost 30,000 species have been imported over the past 22 years.

Without reliable data, the legal trade cannot be regulated

The overexploitation of wildlife is one of the greatest threats to species survival. According to a recent study published in Pnas, based on an analysis of 22 years of data, the legalised wildlife trade has reached staggering figures. But what is most concerning is that the actual trade data, where it exists at all, is fragmented and incomplete, undermining the ability to assess the real impacts and develop targeted policies.

Some of the animals traded end up as pets – reptiles, spiders, clownfish, chimpanzees and even tigers. Thousands more go to zoos and aquariums, where unfortunately many of the species on display are taken directly from the wild. Medical research using macaques imports up to 40,000 animals a year, while the fashion industry imports roughly 1–2 million crocodile skins annually.

The largest number of imported species are birds: 4,985 different species are imported each year, led by the Muscovy duck (Cairina moschata), with over 6 million imports. Reptiles follow, with 3,048 species, mainly iguanas and ball pythons (Python regius). The most traded mammals are minks, around 48 million per year, with 2.8 per cent captured in the wild and the rest farmed. Trade can pose a particular risk when species are already rare or have limited ranges. In locations where studies have been carried out, wild populations of traded species have declined by an average of 62 per cent over the periods monitored.

The United States is one of the few countries with a (nearly) comprehensive database

For most species involved in the legal wildlife market, data is simply non-existent. The only instrument that allows for the assessment of species trade is based on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites), which monitors and regulates the international legal market for certain species in order to reduce the risk of overexploitation of vulnerable species. While it is a valuable source of data, Cites monitors only a subset of species and with many limitations: for instance, it does not catalogue the majority of species belonging to songbirds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and arachnids, meaning many traded species remain undocumented.

The absence of data is a critical challenge in assessing the true impact of the wildlife trade on biodiversity and conservation efforts. As noted, the United States is among the most important markets, but it is also one of the few countries that collects and publishes import data on wildlife across all traded taxa. Like Cites, the Lemis – Law Enforcement Management Information System – of the US Fish and Wildlife Service records the volumes and origins of wild animals and plants imported into the United States. Although it contains inaccuracies (for example, it underrepresents the number of species due to the aggregation of data on different species), it remains one of the most comprehensive databases available. It contains data on the declared origin of wildlife (e.g., captive-bred, wild-caught), quantities imported and exported, and more detailed information on commercial purpose.

US regulations on the import and export of non-Cites wildlife species are stringent, particularly compared to other markets such as those in the European Union. The stricter restrictions within the United States are partly due to the Lacey Act, which prohibits the importation of illegally harvested wildlife, in addition to restrictions under the US Endangered Species Act, the US Marine Mammal Protection Act and the US Wild Bird Conservation Act.

The main problem is the capture and trade of wild fauna

Traded species may come from farms. The research reveals that in the United States, nearly half of the species in trade are wild-caught. Capturing wild animals and selling them is an important source of income for rural communities, particularly in Africa. However, wild-caught imported species carry the highest risk of spreading diseases and parasites, and of becoming invasive species. Captive breeding has played a very important role in preventing, or at least reducing, the impact and spread of disease on local wild populations.

Nonetheless, more than half of the animals in species groups such as amphibians and mammals still come from the wild. Monitoring the legal trade is of fundamental importance for biodiversity – ecologically, economically and in terms of public health. Wildlife can transmit diseases to both other animals and humans. Wild-caught monkeys imported from abroad can carry diseases that are particularly dangerous to humans, as can minks. Species may also escape or be released into the wild, causing billions of euros in damage and threatening native fauna and flora.

Today, social media platforms are also becoming major marketplaces for animal species, making data collection even more difficult. Understanding and monitoring this data is the only way to establish management targets, especially for wild species. Capture quotas in countries of origin could help reduce, or at least control, the impact of trade on wild species.