- Recent seizures of trafficked reptiles and amphibians provide insight into a booming trade in these animals, which are now coveted as pets worldwide.
- Patchy legislation and loopholes in wildlife trade enable traffickers to pull reptiles and amphibians from their natural habitats and sell them abroad with impunity, conservationists warn.
- They call for stronger national laws, making it illegal to sell wildlife protected in their native habitats, as well as creating a ‘positive list’ that identifies species that may be sold and kept as pets.
- Conservationists also note the need for international measures to stop exploitation of reptiles and amphibians that are already harmed by habitat loss, invasive species, diseases and changing climate.
Spain’s law enforcement agency, the Civil Guard, announced on Sept. 25, 2026, that it seized 209 reptiles from breeding facilities in Jérica and Sot de Ferrer (Castellón), including critically endangered iguanas endemic to Fiji. Nearly half of the reptiles were protected under CITES, the global wildlife trade treaty. They also seized unlicensed handguns and nearly 200 rounds of ammunition.
Authorities arrested three individuals — two men aged 48 and 51 and a 37-year-old woman — on a litany of charges: Belonging to a criminal organization, wildlife-related offenses, smuggling, money laundering and illegal weapons possession.
The alleged traffickers reportedly smuggled reptiles from the wild in the Americas, Africa and Asia, and then bred them without permits, the authorities said. They added that these reptiles were then sold at European reptile and trade fairs, mixing smuggled animals with legally acquired animals — a practice called laundering that’s prevalent in wildlife trade. In this way, traffickers exploit the “legal gray area surrounding documentation that certifies the animals’ origins,” the authorities said in a press release.
The Spanish case is just one recent example among a slew of seizures and arrests involving rare tortoises, endangered turtles, poisonous frogs, endemic iguanas and many other protected reptiles and amphibians worldwide. The trade is lucrative — estimated to be worth some $2.5 billion — and comes with little risk. It’s often unregulated. Smugglers are rarely caught, and if they are, they get off by paying a small fine, which is absorbed as the cost of doing business.
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 “low maintenance” first-time pets in stores or online, and some collectors pay thousands of dollars for rare species.
In a recent commentary published in Nature, 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 — also called a ‘positive list’ — to rein in the trade.
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.
“This isn’t a new trade, but it’s becoming more of a problem,” said one of the commentary authors Susan Lieberman, vice president of international policy at the U.S.-based NGO Wildlife Conservation Society. “We’re seeing increasing pressure on more and more species in the wild across the globe.”
Case in point: The poisonous black-and-orange harlequin mantella frog (Mantella cowanii), which has almost disappeared from its native habitat in Madagascar, in part because of its popularity among collectors.
“This is certainly an urgent and frequently overlooked issue,” said Alice Hughes, who studies the reptile and amphibian trade at the University of Melbourne and was not an author on the commentary. “Unfortunately, repeated calls to notice and act on this gap have not yet gained the traction needed to bridge them.”
This commentary, she said, “does a good job of contextualizing many of the issues” and “highlighting opportunities to improve our ability to understand and regulate trade, and raise awareness of these issues.”
Lack of data makes it hard to monitor trade
More than half of reptiles and 40% of amphibians currently in trade are pulled from the wild, Hughes’ research shows. But only a handful — 9.5% of reptiles and 4.2% of amphibians — are regulated under CITES. The rest can be traded without oversight or monitoring — and most countries have little information on what is in commerce because no one’s looking.
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’s no such data in other countries — so many reptile and amphibian species fall through the cracks.
“Without … 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,” 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.
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. “The 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.”
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.
It’s also accessible only to authorities with an EU account in countries that use the system, and not to most others. “This data is neither open — nor reportedly at a sufficient taxonomic resolution — 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,” Hughes said.
CITES records all legal transactions in listed species, but adding new species to that list is challenging without data, Lieberman said. “You need to prove not only that it’s in trade, but that trade is a threat … It’s a heavy lift to get anything listed, particularly for reptiles and amphibians where there might not be enough data.”
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.
The commentary’s 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. “It’s not that hard with AI,” she said, since the bill of lading, needed for every shipment of animals, already has the details of the species being transported.
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 “obtain exact lists of what is being traded.” Authorities can then flag irregularities, such as spotting species that are endemic to Australia, New Zealand, Fiji or Ecuador where it’s illegal to remove any wildlife from the wild. “With better data on trade, all other processes become easier,” she said.
Legal loopholes fuel trade in amphibians and reptiles
In the U.S., the Lacey Act makes it illegal “to take, possess, transport, or sell wildlife that has been taken in violation of any law.” But in most countries and the EU, a species protected by law in its country of origin can be sold legally once it’s outside the region.
Traffickers exploit this loophole in EU regulations by smuggling protected species to Europe, breeding them, and selling the offspring legally — even selling to the U.S. market, mislabeling them as captive-bred, thereby circumventing the Lacey Act.
“The 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,” Hughes said.
The international trade in Galapagos land (Conolophus spp.) and marine iguanas (Amblyrhynchus cristatus) is a stark example. Ecuador never legally exported any of these endemic reptiles, but there’s a thriving legal commerce in ‘captive-bred’ 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.
Altherr from Pro Wildlife said it’s “quite easy” for traffickers to launder wildlife into the EU. “When you pass the customs, then it’s fully legal to sell these animals here … anyone selling or owning [such wildlife] is not required to prove that it was obtained legally.”
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.
Opportunities for reform
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.
“Legislation that respects the laws of range countries should be a minimum,” Lieberman said, adding that she hopes other countries pass similar laws.
The second study looks at creating an EU-wide ‘positive list’ of species that can be kept as pets without harming their wild populations; that don’t 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.
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’s purview. If passed, it would launch negotiations on a new protocol on crimes affecting the environment, including wildlife trafficking.
“It’s high time that wildlife crime, fisheries crime, illegal mining — all of those things — are treated as serious crime. These are transnational crimes,” Lieberman said. “They are often connected with drug and weapons smuggling, and we want the criminal justice community to take it seriously.” Similar protocols exist for human trafficking and arms trafficking.
Such a protocol helps countries work together on enforcement, extradition, training and technical assistance on environmental crimes.
“It will define a level playing field of what are crimes that affect the environment,” Lieberman said. “CITES is a great treaty, but it doesn’t really deal with criminality … So if a [UNTOC] protocol is adopted, then governments that ratify the protocol would be bound by it.”
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.
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.
Banner image: Endemic to Colombia, Lehmann’s poison frog (Oophaga lehmanni) is a critically endangered species threatened by the pet trade. Image by © Jonathan Vanegas/WCS.
Spoorthy Raman is a staff writer at Mongabay, covering all things wild with a special focus on lesser-known wildlife, the wildlife trade, and environmental crime.
Asia now hub of growing illegal wildlife trade across 100+ countries, study shows
Reptiles, gold and money: How Australia is cracking down on wildlife trafficking
Citations:
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, 657(8132), 596–598. doi:10.1038/d41586-026-02852-3
Edmonds, D., Andriantsimanarilafy, R.R., Crottini, A., Dreslik, M.J., Newton-Youens, J., Ramahefason, A., Randrianantoandro, C.J., … Andreone, F. (2024). Small population size and possible extirpation of the threatened Malagasy poison frog Mantella cowanii. PeerJ 12, e17947. doi:10.7717/peerj.17947
Marshall, B. M., Strine, C., … Hughes, A. C. (2020). Thousands of reptile species threatened by under-regulated global trade. Nature Communications, 11(1), 4738. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18523-4
Hughes, A. C., Marshall, B. M., … Strine, C. T. (2021). Gaps in global wildlife trade monitoring leave amphibians vulnerable. eLife, 10. e70086. doi:10.7554/elife.70086
Marshall, B. M., Strine, C., … Hughes, A. C. (2020). Thousands of reptile species threatened by under-regulated global trade. Nature Communications, 11(1), 4738. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-18523-4
FEEDBACK: Use this form to send a message to the author of this post. If you want to post a public comment, you can do that at the bottom of the page.
Cite this article
Spoorthy Raman (2026). Legal gaps allow rampant pet trade, poaching reptiles and amphibians towards extinction. Mongabay Conservation news. DOI: https://doi.org/10.66709/news-332764
Credits
This story first appeared on Mongabay
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
You may republish this article, so long as you credit the authors and Mongabay, and do not change the text. Please include a link back to the original article.
