Trends in illegal wildlife trade: Analyzing personal baggage seizure data in the Pacific Northwest

Abstract

The illegal import of wildlife and wildlife products is a growing concern, and the U.S. is one of the world's leading countries in the consumption and transit of illegal wildlife and their derivatives. Yet, few U.S. studies have analyzed the illegal wildlife trade (IWT) on a national or local scale. Moreover, to our knowledge, no studies have specifically examined the trends associated with IWT moving through personal baggage. This work aimed to better understand the magnitude of illegal wildlife importation into U.S. ports of entry by determining trends associated with illegal wildlife products from personal baggage seizures, using the Pacific Northwest (PNW) as a specific case study. To identify the most influential factors determining the numbers and types of personal baggage seizures into PNW, we analyzed 1,731 records between 1999 and 2016 from the Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) database. We found five significant contributors: taxonomic classification of wildlife, categorical import date, wildlife product, source region, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) status. While wildlife seizures across taxonomic categories have generally decreased in the PNW since 2008, other findings provide a reason for concern. More specifically, mammals were identified as the largest animal group of seized wildlife, and temporal trends indicate increases in seizures for this and several other taxonomic groups. Many of the seizures originated from overseas, with East Asia serving as the largest source. Our PNW case study can be a model for how large-scale geographical seizure data can be used to inform about the major factors that have historically and presently contribute to IWT, with conservation implications globally.

Economic value of illegal wildlife trade entering the USA

“…The mode of transport (e.g. via cargo vs. personal baggage) is also likely to have associations with different taxa and influence probability of detection [ 26 ]. LEMIS reports the country where the seizure was exported from but not the actual country of origin [ 25 ].…”

Illegal and legal wildlife trade analysis discourse: response to Natusch et al. 2021

“…Our unit of analysis was not the aggregated shipment, but rather the disaggregated data on what specific species were seized from each shipment. This approach is not new; similar methods were applied in a series of other studies in which LEMIS data were used to disaggregate data at the species or genus level (i.e., Eskew et al., 2020; Hitchens & Blakeslee, 2020; Janssen & Leupen, 2019; Petrossian et al., 2016). The selection of the unit of analysis depends on the research question.…”

Profiling Wildlife Crimes Prosecuted Federally by the United States

“…The United States is one of the largest consumer (and transit) countries for the global illegal wildlife trade (Petrossian et al, 2016;van Uhm et al, 2019;Hitchens and Blakeslee, 2020), which is estimated to be worth from $7 billion to $10 billion annually (excluding fish and timber) (Wyler and Sheikh, 2013). While studies have attempted to quantify the general patterns of trade into the US (Petrossian et al, 2016;Eskew et al, 2019;van Uhm et al, 2019), there have yet to be attempts to more broadly understand the consequences of such crimes as processed by the federal courts.…”