See All Key Ideas<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
With just the click of a button or a swipe on a phone, it\u2019s possible to buy almost anything online, including rare or endangered animals. From quirky shark trophies<\/a> to exotic live birds<\/a>, contraband rhino horns or ivory<\/a>, buyers can flock to e-commerce platforms and find them all. Traffickers hide behind their screens while profiting from online sales of protected species as these animals dwindle in the wild.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s the largest wildlife market,\u201d said wildlife trade researcher Chris Shepherd from the Center for Biological Diversity<\/a>. \u201cIt\u2019s easy, it\u2019s convenient; you can operate anonymously from the comfort of your home. You don\u2019t have the expenses of setting up a shop.\u201d<\/p>\n Online commerce in illicit wildlife products continues to grow, involving more species and wider geographies. It\u2019s an illicit industry run by kingpins with well-connected networks, and it\u2019s hard to prosecute. Catching online criminals is extremely challenging.<\/p>\n \u201cWildlife markets have moved from physical locations into online locations, and that\u2019s mirroring broader trends in the global economy,\u201d said Simone Haysom, director of environmental crime programs at the Swiss-based organization Global Initiative Against Transnational Organized Crime<\/a>.<\/p>\n In a recent report<\/a>, Haysom and her colleague Russell Gray analyzed online wildlife trade data from April 2024 to March 2026. They focused on 10 countries across three continents, places where environmental crime and internet use are high, making them fertile grounds for online wildlife trafficking. They found some 266,535 wildlife products posted on 61 online marketplaces, worth about $66 million.<\/p>\n About 75% of the nearly 22,000 ads they saw were on Facebook, a platform that\u2019s been notorious in selling live wildlife, as a recent Mongabay investigation<\/a> revealed.<\/p>\n Live animals, including endangered ring-tailed lemurs, spider monkeys, and chimpanzees, are openly sold on Facebook, despite \u00a0policies prohibiting sale of live animals. Identifying information of these posts are redacted by Mongabay. Images from social media (fair use).<\/p>\n The large majority of the species offered online \u2014 about 84% \u2014 are banned from any kind of international commercial trade under CITES, a global wildlife trade treaty. More than half of all Facebook ads offered endangered or critically endangered animals including pangolins, gibbons, hornbills, sea turtles, cobras and clouded leopards.<\/p>\n \u201cThere\u2019s just anything and everything on Facebook,\u201d said Gray, citing examples of pangolin boots, chimpanzee leather and ivory trinkets carved from walrus tusks. \u201cThe world is really significantly underprepared for cyber trade in wildlife.\u201d<\/p>\n Though Facebook, Etsy, Amazon and eBay have policies prohibiting the sale of live animals and their products, online sales are rampant \u2014 and buyers are mopping them up.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s great to see another report come out that keeps the online trade, and especially the issues regarding Facebook, in the spotlight,\u201d said Shepherd, who has worked with platforms such as Etsy and eBay to stop the trade<\/a> of painted woolly bats (Kerivoula picta). This report, he said, shows that Facebook is \u201ca massive trade hub\u201d for imperiled species. Shepherd was not involved in the publication of this report.<\/p>\n Facebook\u2019s design makes selling wildlife easy, the authors say. Anyone can create an account or a private, members-only group \u2014 without physical verification or vetting, often using fake names or posting anonymously. Users can also communicate privately, using its encrypted messaging service.<\/p>\n But Facebook groups, which bring together people with shared hobbies or interests (in this case, wildlife trade), are a hub where buyers and sellers can negotiate via private messaging, making it difficult for investigators to track.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, Facebook\u2019s algorithms track users\u2019 activity and interests, and suggest similar pages, new contacts, groups and content rife with wildlife trade. The platform also lets users monetize their content: They can earn money by creating content for their paying subscribers.<\/p>\n Before Facebook groups, Haysom said most online wildlife trade was limited to random enthusiast platforms or websites that she likened to \u201csmall versions of Reddit\u201d that focused on specific species or animal groups. But now, those have disappeared, she said.<\/p>\n \u201cFacebook groups really replaced a lot of different types of sites on the Internet by providing this free infrastructure that was very good at marketing,\u201d Haysom said.<\/p>\n Facebook prohibits<\/a> the sale of \u201cany product or part\u201d from endangered and threatened animals, such as bone, teeth, horn, ivory, carcasses or live animals. In 2019, it also introduced pop-up alerts warning that trading endangered animals is illegal. But as the new report shows, ads offering these products are plentiful. The authors say that\u2019s because Facebook does a poor job of moderating content.<\/p>\n While only 12% of the posts were in English, most of the moderation was in English. \u201cIt\u2019s a global platform, but [Facebook] isn\u2019t moderating like a global platform,\u201d Haysom said.<\/p>\n Other e-commerce platforms \u201cseem to be more willing\u201d to moderate what users post and take down content that violates their policies, Gray said. \u201cFacebook doesn\u2019t really have that [moderation].\u201d In his experience, he said, \u201cIf you report something that is clearly illegal and goes against their community standards, they just send an automated message back to you saying it doesn\u2019t go against the community standards, and they don\u2019t take it down.\u201d<\/p>\n Since 2018, Facebook\u2019s parent company, Meta, has been a part of the Coalition to End Wildlife Trafficking Online<\/a>, a group of corporations formed to crack down on illegal online commerce. In its latest report, the coalition said<\/a> that between 2018 and 2025 it took down 63.3 million prohibited wildlife listings and blocked the sellers. But it didn\u2019t detail where those listings were posted.<\/p>\n \u201cYou don\u2019t know what\u2019s been removed by who,\u201d Haysom said. \u201cWe\u2019re relying on Facebook to tell us what it\u2019s done. There is no independent oversight.\u201d<\/p>\n New pages and groups for animal sales keep appearing, the report says, with more than half of them created after Facebook joined the coalition, so constant surveillance is needed. When Facebook blocks users or closes a group, traffickers are quick to create another account or group, Shepherd said. \u201cI can\u2019t imagine anyone stopping selling illegal wildlife because their post has been taken down.\u201d<\/p>\n Since the Cambridge Analytica scandal went public in 2018, exposing 87 million users\u2019 personal data<\/a> to third parties for political advertising, Facebook has tightened access to its data for everyone, including civil society organizations that monitor wildlife trade. \u201cSo, there\u2019s no way to automate searches and moderate the platform as a third party,\u201d Gray said.<\/p>\n Since then, the platform has allowed users to post anonymously, which has helped illegal trade flourish, he said. \u201cIt\u2019s like the dark web, really. There\u2019s no real difference.\u201d<\/p>\n Meta did not respond to Mongabay\u2019s questions regarding the report\u2019s findings \u2014 or steps it\u2019s taking to combat wildlife trafficking on its platforms.<\/p>\n The report didn\u2019t delve into the profiles of buyers or sellers. But their analysis shows, Gray said, that people selling animals on Facebook are often poachers who opportunistically hunt something exotic and want to sell it. It\u2019s how they make initial contacts with wildlife traffickers and buyers.<\/p>\n \u201cIf they catch a pangolin, what do they do with it? The local community either won\u2019t buy it because they know it\u2019s illegal, or they just can\u2019t afford it. So, the first thing that they\u2019ll do is go to a group called \u2018pangolins for sale\u2019 on Facebook,\u201d Gray said. \u201cThen somebody will offer to buy it. And from that point on, they have contact with a greater network of wildlife traffickers.\u201d<\/p>\n But these groups aren\u2019t just buyers and sellers: Courier companies and escrow financial companies advertise their services to traffickers and middlemen who aggregate wildlife before exporting on a larger scale. Once someone finds a group, the algorithm does the job of showing them several more to boost their visibility, helping them build connections.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re not just looking at markets, we\u2019re also looking at the formation of networks \u2026 poachers being connected to middlemen,\u201d Haysom said. \u201cYou actually only need a few people to compose a transnational wildlife trafficking train \u2014 and to do quite a lot of damage.\u201d<\/p>\n Some poachers are double-dipping, making money through Facebook\u2019s monetization for content creators while selling rare, protected animals. \u201cThey\u2019re hunting endangered wildlife, and they\u2019re posting their activity on Facebook and also conducting their sales through those accounts,\u201d Gray said. \u201cThis is either an established trend or it\u2019s becoming a trend.\u201d<\/p>\n Pangolins and their parts are banned from being traded in Nigeria and worldwide. Yet they are sold with impunity on Facebook, as shown here. Social media platforms connect poachers with other traffickers, researchers say. Images from social media (fair use).<\/p>\n Need for tighter regulations<\/p>\n The report calls for regulations that prevent platforms\u2019 algorithms from amplifying content related to illegal wildlife trade. It also demands better surveillance of posts, especially those not in English. It\u2019s also critical, authors say, for Facebook to open its moderation to independent oversight and to coordinate with law enforcement to nab traffickers.<\/p>\n \u201cWe need regulation with teeth,\u201d Haysom said. \u201cSelf-regulation has not worked \u2026 and is unlikely to be fully successful.\u201d She cited the EU\u2019s Digital Services Act<\/a> as an example. This 2022 law mandates online platforms to verify sellers and take down illegal content. \u201cI don\u2019t think it\u2019s rocket science.\u201d<\/p>\n Facebook and Instagram are currently under investigation<\/a> in the EU for algorithms that encourage addictive behaviors in children and for their noncompliance with the act. Meta was recently found guilty<\/a> by the European Commission for failing to prevent under-13 children from accessing its platforms.<\/p>\n Despite a multitude of reports<\/a> and studies<\/a> exposing unrelenting illegal wildlife trade on Facebook, Meta hasn\u2019t been held accountable in the U.S., where it\u2019s headquartered, because of protection under Section 230 of the U.S. Communications Decency Act<\/a>. The 1996 law prevents U.S. internet service companies from liability for content posted by users \u2014 unless it violates federal criminal law and the government can show the company intentionally did so.<\/p>\n That\u2019s often tricky to establish. \u201cThe government would need evidence that Meta was doing more than just hosting the post,\u201d Gray said. \u201cThat is why, in practice, the question is not, \u2018Was illegal wildlife sold on Facebook?\u2019 It is, \u2018Did Facebook itself knowingly participate in the crime?\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n But recent court rulings in California<\/a> and New Mexico<\/a> have held Meta liable for its content, specifically for harm to children\u2019s mental health. The jury in New Mexico went as far as to say that Meta concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on the platform, thereby knowingly perpetuating the harm.<\/p>\n Gray said he hopes U.S. policymakers see the need for regulations that hold online platforms accountable for other damaging activities. \u201cAs physical [wildlife] trade moves to digital trade, it\u2019s going to be challenging in the future to regulate.\u201d<\/p>\n Shepherd said platforms need to move beyond just removing posts. \u201cThat\u2019s really just scratching the surface. What really needs to be done is the follow-up: Where are these people? Where are these animals that are being sold?\u201d he said. \u201cEnforcement action should be taken.\u201d<\/p>\n He said online platforms must work with law enforcement agencies to catch traffickers and bring them to court. \u201cThey need to go beyond inconveniencing these trade groups and focus on prosecuting these people, arresting these people and putting them out of business.\u201d<\/p>\n Time is running out for actions. The massive trade is contributing<\/a> to what is being called the Sixth Mass Extinction<\/a>, and many species are in serious trouble, teetering on the brink.<\/p>\n \u201cMeta needs to ask itself what role it wants to play in that process. Does it want to be the central platform where that trade is concentrated and scaled, or does it want to set a model for how to deal with the complex online trade?\u201d Haysom asked.<\/p>\n Banner image:<\/strong> A Bengal tiger from Rajasthan, India. Poaching is one of the biggest threats to tigers, an endangered cat in Asia. Image \u00a9 Thomas Fuhrmann via iNaturalist<\/a> (CC BY-NC 4.0<\/a>).<\/p>\n Spoorthy Raman<\/strong> is a staff writer at Mongabay, covering all things wild with a special focus on lesser-known wildlife, the wildlife trade, and environmental crime.<\/p>\n Facebook shuts Indonesia groups after Mongabay and Bellingcat report illegal wildlife trade<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n Citations:<\/strong><\/p>\n Salas-Picazo, R. I., Ram\u00edrez-Bravo, O. E., Meza-Padilla, I., & Camargo-Rivera, E. E. (2023). The role of social media groups on illegal wildlife trade in four Mexican states: A year-long assessment. Global Ecology and Conservation, 45, e02539. doi:10.1016\/j.gecco.2023.e02539<\/a><\/p>\n Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P. R., & Raven, P. H. (2020). Vertebrates on the brink as indicators of biological annihilation and the sixth mass extinction. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(24), 13596\u201313602. doi:10.1073\/pnas.1922686117<\/a><\/p>\n FEEDBACK:<\/strong> Use this form<\/a> 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.<\/p>\n ![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/iguana-768x512.jpg\")
Gal\u00e1pagos land iguanas are a protected species endemic to the Gal\u00e1pagos. A 2025 study found they were being traded online in Uganda, and raised suspicions about their origin. Credits: (c) Tim Ellis, some rights reserved (CC BY-NC)
\nFacebook is an ideal platform for traffickers<\/p>\n![\"When](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/FB-Screeshot.png\")
When a user searches for \u201cpangolins\u201d, Facebook displays a banner that says selling endangered animals or their parts is not allowed, as shown. But just below, it displays plenty of sale listings anyway. The details of the poster have been redacted by Mongabay. Image from social media (fair use).<\/p>\n![\"Painted](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/original-1-768x512.jpg\")
In 2025, scientists successfully convinced Etsy and eBay to remove listings of bats sold online as decor. Painted woolly bats, native to Southeast Asia, were one of the most sold species. Image by faridmuzaki via iNaturalist (CC BY-NC 4.0).<\/p>\n![\"Illegal](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/tiger-parts.png\")
Illegal wildlife products, such as tiger claws, tiger penises, bear gall bladder and pangolin meat are openly posted on Facebook for sale, mostly from accounts in languages other than English. Only 12% of illegal wildlife trade-related posts are in English, the researchers found. Images from social media (fair use).
\nBuyers and sellers on Facebook<\/p>\n![\"Some](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/Monetized-account.png\")
Some accounts, presumably of poachers like these ones, monetized content on Facebook using the \u2018Subscribe\u2019 feature. Users can pay these creators for exclusive content. These photos from the accounts show hunting of small mammals, wild cats and birds. Images from social media (fair use).<\/p>\n![\"Parrots](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/agp.jpeg\")
Parrots are widely sold online on Facebook, including species such as the endangered African grey parrot, whose international trade is banned. Researchers found nearly 84% of ads involved animals whose international trade is prohibited. Image \u00a9 Attila Steiner via iNaturalist<\/a> (CC BY-NC 4.0<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/1778093660_855_92a8467a68ba6484f5372dc6c0c8580efd7d81cc823c1a1f46c9977026eb411e.png\")
<\/p>\n