Regional Bans on Wild‐Bird Trade Modify Invasion Risks at a Global Scale

Abstract

Wildlife trade is currently the most important and increasing source of vertebrate invasive species. However, exhaustive analyses of potential side effects of trade regulations on this pathway of introduction are lacking. We addressed this by combining environmental niche models and global trade data on parrots (Psittaciformes), one of the most widely traded and worldwide invasive taxa. We used the wild bird trade bans of United States (1992) and Europe (2005) as case-studies. Results showed that regional bans can generate geographic redirections in trade, with important consequences on worldwide invasion risk. While the amount of parrots traded internationally remained largely constant, changes in trade destination occurred. Consequently, the world surface predicted at risk of parrot invasions increased with successive bans. Of concern, a redirection of trade toward developing countries was observed. Attention should be paid on the mismatch between the global requirements of invasion management and the regional scales governing trade regulations.

The European trade ban on wild birds reduced invasion risks

“…However, to avoid unintended consequences of the EU ban or other regional bans, such as unexpected geographic redirections or taxonomic changes in the international pet trade (Cardador et al., ; Reino et al. ), more global inter‐continental strategies that address biological invasions as a global issue are required.…”

“…Moreover, the responsibility for protection against invasive species lies mostly with national governments. Thus, global patterns in the trends of nonnative species richness may obscure differences in those same patterns among countries or regions due to the disparity in regulations (Cardador et al., ). Assessment of the effectiveness of trade regulations requires specific analyses at the regional level where those regulations have been implemented.…”

“…Although not directly related to invasion management, this regulation is likely to have affected invasion risks, given the invasive potential of wild‐caught traded birds (Abellán, Tella, Carrete, Cardador, & Anadón, ; Carrete & Tella, , ). Two recent modeling approaches have predicted that the EU ban may have reduced invasion risks in target regions, while legal trade fluxes were redirected to other regions along with predicted risks (Cardador et al., ; Reino et al. ).…”

Dealing in deadly pathogens: Taking stock of the legal trade in live wildlife and potential risks to human health

“…Although the USA was second to Hong Kong with regards to legal live reptile imports, it still involved 1,275,892 individual animals and represented 14.3% of all such live trade between 2012 and 2016. The fact that Mexico, a non-WEIRD country, imported the most live birds legally (328,304 animals representing 32.7% of such live trade) is likely due to the fact that both the USA (following the Wild Bird Conservation Act) and the EU (in response to avian influenza) have opted to ban international imports in wild caught live birds since 1992 and 2007 respectively (Cardador et al, 2017). Our review of the CITES Trade Database also provides insight into shifting patterns regarding how live wild animals involved in trade are being sourced.…”

The Legal International Wildlife Trade Favours Invasive Species Establishment: The Monk and Ring-Necked Parakeets in Spain

“…fully become established in new environments as a result of accidental escapes or deliberate releases (Abellán et al, 2017;Cardador et al, 2017;Mori et al, 2017). In the last decade, almost 63% of all known parrot species have been imported into Spain, especially for pets (BirdLife International, 2016;CITES, 2016).…”