Regulating the Burgeoning Pet Trade in the Country
This article is part of the special WCT Blog series which will focus on the growing demand for exotic species in India and the urgent need for stronger wildlife laws for better regulation of the same.
Myriad species of exotic animals, including several species of monkeys, are kept as pets in India and this demand for exotic species is on the rise. This is a representational image. Credit: pxfuel.com
While we may strive hard to protect our indigenous wildlife and wild habitats, it is a given that the consequences of our actions resonate well beyond man-made boundaries. Thus, our wildlife protection laws must safeguard extralimital species in theory and practice. We must strive to protect all species, native or otherwise, as excluding exotic species from the ambit of India’s wildlife protection laws is counterintuitive.
The trade in exotic species is on the rise in India as per the Smuggling in India Report 2019-20, while the trade in native species is prohibited by law. This dichotomy has led traders and smugglers to turn their attention to exotic animals and run amok to meet the growing demand for exotic animals. Unfortunately, the trade in exotic species does not fall within the purview of the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972, leaving a gaping legal hole in India’s wildlife protection system. This lacuna is well-exploited by those involved at various levels of the wildlife trade supply chain.
This is well illustrated by an example highlighting one of the many implications of this legal limitation in the Mongabay – India report from April 2021 on the ills of exotic animal trade in India. It reads thus – ‘The two persons arrested in Cachar [Assam] last year after rare animals like kangaroos, macaws, and Aldabra tortoises were seized from their truck later got bail from the Gauhati High Court. The court observed, “as seized animals do not come under the purview of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the detention of the petitioners would not be permissible under Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 and, since the only case registered against the petitioners is under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, the Court is of the view that the petitioners will be entitled to go on bail vis a vis the aforesaid case under the Wildlife (Protection ) Act, 1972 unless wanted in connection with any other case.” ‘
Wildlife Protection Act Ignores Exotic Species
It is true that India’s legal framework for wildlife conservation is one of the strongest in the world. Different Acts and Policies have been passed by the Government of India over the years for wildlife protection, curbing deforestation, regulating timber extraction, protecting the environment, regulating discharge of pollutants, declaring Protected Areas and the management of Protected Area Network, among other conservation interventions.
The Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, is the foremost legislation instated in India with respect to protection and conservation of native wildlife and habitats. No hunting, trading or commerce of wild animals listed under various Schedules is allowed under the Act. The six Schedules of the Act list only native species of plants and animals. Further, the Act is also concerned with ‘prevention and detection of offences’ against wildlife and can be invoked by wildlife law enforcement authorities and judiciary to penalise individuals violating the law. But, the Act, does not have any rules or penalties for trading and owning of exotic species, endangered or not. This is a huge limitation, for it spells anarchy as unregulated trade and possession of exotic animals within the country has been rampant and growing, with thousands of exotic species (many endangered in their native countries) smuggled into India every year.
India’s border with countries like Bangladesh and Myanmar witnesses massive influx of smuggled exotic wild animals. As recently as September 2021, the Border Security Force (BSF) battalion in West Bengal rescued a rare Victoria Crowned Pigeon which was being smuggled in from Bangladesh, and also rescued two white peafowl in Nadia, West Bengal, adjacent to the Bangladesh border, in the same month. Just across the border too, the Border Guard Bangladesh (BGB) force and other law enforcement authorities have made several seizures including those carrying swans, otters, eagles, pangolins etc., all meant to make their way into India. By the month of October in the year 2020, BSF had made about 25 such seizures. As per the data released by India’s Union Ministry of Home Affairs in March 2020, Indian security agencies had made 1,175 arrests in 2017, 1,118 arrests in 2018, and 1,351 arrests in 2019 along the Bangladesh border alone.
But, these figures don’t paint the full picture. For every contraband seized, there are tens of consignments which pass by undetected into India, as there is no law governing the possession, trade and breeding of exotic animals.
Unfortunately, despite being a signatory to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) agreement since 1976, India is still to extend robust legal protection to the exotic animals including those listed in the CITES Appendices. Markets trading in live exotic wildlife are operating online and in many parts of the country, and apprehending illegal traders and poachers, and clamping down on pet shops has thus far been a hugely unsuccessful endeavour.
What Is CITES?
Concerned by the threat the unregulated international trade in wildlife posed to the world’s flora and fauna, the members of the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature), in 1963, adopted a resolution and the CITES draft was passed. CITES truly came into force in 1975 in the form of an international agreement between Governments. It is essentially an international treaty to ensure that the international trade does not endanger the survival of species in their native ranges in the wild. Presently, 180 countries are signatories to the agreement and are expected to implement CITES provisions.
Nearly 35,000 species are protected under CITES at the moment, and are categorised under three main appendices – Appendix I, Appendix II and Appendix III in the decreasing order of level of protection bestowed and trade restrictions enforced depending upon the level of extinction threat faced by the species. For example, gorillas, lady slipper orchids and giant pandas fall under Appendix I of CITES as they are gravely threatened with extinction in the wild and there are restrictions in place on commercial trade of the species.
India signed the Convention in 1976. The Director of Wild Life Preservation, Government of India, is designated as the principal Management Authority for CITES in India, while the Wildlife Crime Control Bureau (WCCB) has been designated as the Assistant CITES Management Authority body. WCCB’s Regional Deputy Directors, the Customs Authorities and officers of the Directorate General of Foreign Trade have the power to take action against or apprehend people illegally trading in CITES listed species.
Because in India, the regulations on cross border trade in wildlife for native and CITES listed species are enforced largely only through the Customs Act, 1962, and Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, only those consignments which can be proven to have crossed international borders illegally can be charged with crimes. But, those consignments that manage to evade detection, are more or less untouchable by current wildlife protection laws. And until 2020, there wasn’t any legal obligation for exotic animal owners without necessary permits to declare their ownership either. Hopefully, the recent government advisory for voluntary disclosure of exotic animals will be a positive start towards improving the regulation of their trade.
But much more needs to be done to restrict and discourage the surging demand for exotic animals in the country, and that will in turn help to combat illegal trade of innumerable species to a substantial degree. India needs to urgently strengthen its wildlife protection laws to include the exotic species, at least those listed under CITES Appendices, within its purview and ensure their effective enforcement on the ground.
“At the international meetings of the CITES parties, the Government of India has always been at the forefront of wild animal protection by proposing and supporting the inclusion of different species that are threatened by illegal wildlife trade in the CITES list. However, within the country, the Government is yet to take concrete action to control and prevent illegal trade of exotic species. By bringing in a law to implement CITES protection to wild animals not already covered by the 1972 Act, the Government will truly fulfill its commitment towards combatting illegal wildlife trade as one of the world’s most biodiverse nations and as one of the oldest parties to the Convention,” says C. Samyukta, Head, Wildlife Forensics, Wildlife Conservation Trust.
India’s ‘Prevention To Cruelty To Animals Act ‘ Fails To Be A Deterrent Too
Another weak link in India’s legal framework that could have potentially acted as a deterrent to the illegal pet trade, (possession, and breeding of exotic animals) in India is ‘The Prevention of Cruelty To Animals Act, 1960’. Unfortunately, while the different sections under this Act judiciously state the various scenarios and actions that could potentially cause “infliction of unnecessary pain or suffering on animals”, and would qualify as unlawful, the quantum of punishment stated for committing relevant offences is embarrassingly small.
The clauses pertaining to ‘Cruelty to Animals Generally’ under the Act, states that any person found guilty of – transporting any animal in vehicles in painful, stressful and overcrowded conditions; or keeping or confining any animal in “cage or receptacle which does not measure sufficiently in height, length and breadth to permit the animal a reasonable opportunity to movement”; or selling animals in possession that are being exposed to painful acts such as mutilation, starvation, thirst, overcrowding, or other ill-treatment; or abandoning any animal which would lead it to suffer pain, thirst or starvation; among others – will be slapped with the following punishment under the Act –
“[H]e shall be punishable, [in the case of a first offence, with fine which shall not be less than ten rupees but which may extend to fifty rupees and in the case of a second or subsequent offence committed within three years of the previous offence, with fine which shall not be less than twenty-five rupees but which may extend to one hundred rupees or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, or with both].
How can a meagre fine amounting to Rs. 50 and Rs. 100, and/or a maximum imprisonment term of just three months deter those engaging in cruel practices against animals?
Extreme cruelty and inhumane practices underline illegal wildlife trade, including the pet trade. Captured animals are put through unimaginable suffering for transportation, under discreet conditions, with no regards for the animals’ welfare. Birds and reptiles have been found stuffed in small plastic bottles, hundreds of turtles, spiders, lizards, scorpions, etc. are often found stuffed in small, cramped containers. Some animals like monitor lizards are often restrained with their limbs and mouths tied with no room for even the slightest movement, akin to torturous stress positions. Innumerable animals succumb in the course of transit due to asphyxiation, physical and mental trauma, while several others are maimed in the process. Those who make it out alive suffer further horrors in unnatural, unfit and poorly sanitised captive conditions.
The slow loris, a nocturnal and arboreal primate, for example, is one of the many animals which is gravely threatened by the exploding pet trade. But, because the bite of the slow loris is toxic, traffickers are known to cruelly pull out their teeth inflicting severe pain and trauma in the process. Their looks and behaviour, often construed as “cute” , are factors that drive the demand for lorises and various other animals among pet owners, globally. Videos of pet lorises posted by their owners have become hugely popular on social media. But, their “cute” actions, according to experts, are signs of distress, and these animals are known to adapt poorly to unnatural, captive, daylight conditions, and do not survive in captivity.
Slow lorises like this Sunda Slow Loris juvenile (Nycticebus coucang) have their teeth forcibly removed by animal traffickers. The slow loris is the world’s only venomous primate. This is a representational image. Credit: International Animal Rescue/Public Domain
“To begin with, the overall knowledge on animal husbandry and care practices are extremely primitive or absent for the most part of it. There is almost no understanding of the animal’s physiology, their habitat needs, enrichment etc. Owing to this, the physical and mental health of most of these animals in captivity is severely compromised. This is blatantly visible in most exotic pets with birds pulling their own feathers out to a great degree and small mammals inflicting a variety of injuries on themselves,” says Sumanth Bindumadhav, Senior Manager, Wildlife, Disaster Response and Dharwad Program, Humane Society International/India.
“It also does not help that the only piece of legislation that somewhat seeks to regulate this does not address the sale of animals itself but rather how well an animal is cared for under a person’s ownership. Even this is abysmal at best as an offence under PCA, 1960, costs a person meagre penalty of Rs.50 for animals that they would have spent a LOT more on,” he further adds.
Read other articles in the series:
- India’s Growing Fetish for Wildlife Of The Exotic Kind
- India’s Burning Exotic Pet Trade Crisis
- [Expert Speak] Law Over Advisory is the Urgent Need of the Hour
- Forced to Pay the Ultimate Price for the Pet Trade
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————
About the author: Purva Variyar is a conservationist, science communicator and conservation writer. She works with the Wildlife Conservation Trust and has previously worked with Sanctuary Nature Foundation and The Gerry Martin Project.
Disclaimer: The author is associated with Wildlife Conservation Trust. The views and opinions expressed in the article are her own and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of Wildlife Conservation Trust.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Your donations support our on-ground operations, helping us meet our conservation goals.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————————