Illegal trade in Galapagos iguanas - study uncovers international network

LIB: Mr Auliya, what were you able to show in the current study?

Mark Auliya : As part of an international team, we have spent years observing the trade in iguana species that are only native to the Galapagos Islands. Through meticulous research, we were able to prove that these iguanas are transported to many parts of the world by an international network of traders and sold on via several stations. All this without any serious documentation and despite the fact that the animals are protected under the Washington Conventionon International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and their trade is subject to strict rules. We were able to show that wild-caught Galapagos iguanas were smuggled into the international trade as captive-bred animals.

LIB: How did the animals get into the trade?

Mark Auliya: We cannot trace in detail how individual animals left the Galapagos Islands. But we were able to show how Galapagos iguanas were traded from various other countries. Export licences were issued by countries where the species do not occur - without checking the legal origin of the animals. This is how the trade was organised globally. It extends across Central Africa all the way to Europe, namely Switzerland. One would not have expected this. The origin of the iguanas was practically "legally laundered" via the various stations and export routes. At some point, it will be difficult to trace where an animal originally came from. This case of the iguanas is representative of many others in which nationally protected and internationally regulated species are traded illegally.

LIB: To what extent are rare species such as these iguanas endangered by the illegal wildlife trade?

Mark Auliya: Trade is never the only threat. The species are endangered by many factors: Their habitats are being destroyed, climate change is altering temperatures, sea levels are rising. In addition, introduced, invasive species can become a problem for native species, especially on islands. But especially in the case of very rare species that only live in a small area, trade is also a major threat. Such so-called endemics can be collected faster than their habitat is destroyed. And - you have to bear this in mind - the danger is particularly great if you can earn a lot of money with the animals. We have reptile species that fetch over 25,000 euros on the black market. Such sums naturally help to mobilise any illegal trade.

LIB: You have been dealing with illegal wildlife trade for decades. What was special about this case for you?

Mark Auliya : For anyone concerned with biodiversity, the Galapagos Islands are special. They are the laboratory of evolution, which many people already know from school because of the Darwin's finches. Now one species is being removed from there. That alone is something that makes this case special. And what was also interesting was that the dealers documented some of their journeys on social media. They practically showed the public where they were travelling.

LIB: How important is such information from social media for tracking wildlife trafficking?

Mark Auliya : Social media content is often not enough to initiate investigations, for example, but it can provide clues and alert the authorities. It gives an insight into the scale, timeframe and nature of the illegal trade in protected species. That's why some researchers from our working group searched social media for information and photos of Galapagos marine and land iguanas and found them.

LIB: What do you think should be done to curb the illegal trade in wild animals and thus better protect rare species?

Mark Auliya: One problem we have had since the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) came into force in 1975 is that CITES can often only make recommendations to the member states, which can take years depending on the case and species. In cases of hardship, however, trade can also be temporarily suspended. The Secretariat of the Convention should work more closely with the member states when it comes to the implementation and control of such exports. Exporting countries often have weak law enforcement. I hope that in future there will be more capacity and more staff in the right places to deal with the matter. At the next meeting of the CITES Parties, COP20 in Uzbekistan in November 2025, the problem of illegal wildlife trade should continue to be addressed with the focus of our current study. Illegal trade has long been documented by CITES, but it is always about how well the regulations are implemented. As researchers, we can communicate such illegal activities to the relevant authorities and various interest groups and, at best, offer suggestions for solutions.

LIB: In your opinion, would it also help species conservation to restrict the trade in other species more? Would the Washington Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) make this possible?

Mark Auliya: Yes. According to CITES, there are different levels of how much trade in an animal species can be restricted. There are a total of three appendices that regulate the trade of over 41,000 species internationally. The strictest regulations apply to the species on Appendix I. Even this categorisation cannot completely prevent the smuggling of species,illegal trade exists in species from all three appendices. But for species listed in Appendix I, there are significantly fewer cases. Commercial trade is illegal here. People from whom Appendix I species are confiscated must expect a higher penalty. If I try to illegally take a species listed in Appendix I from the wild and trade it, significantly more criminal energy is required. However, only the member states decide which species is on which appendix. This is another reason why the next meeting, COP 20 next November, is so important.

To the study

Further information on CITES