Illegal Wildlife Trade in Al-Madinah, Saudi Arabia: Species, Prices, and Conservation Risks

Abstract

Illegal wildlife trade is a major global driver of biodiversity loss, shaped by high consumer demand, transboundary networks, and uneven enforcement. In the Middle East, particularly the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region, factors such as high purchasing power, cultural traditions (e.g., falconry, prestige pets), and expanding digital marketplaces sustain both legal and illegal flows. We present a nine-year (2017–2025) assessment based on weekly, repeated field surveys at the Friday Market, adjacent pet shops, and private farms, complemented by systematic monitoring of online advertisements on Haraj.com.sa. We recorded 1063 individual animals across 88 species, birds (39.4%), reptiles (52.0%), and mammals (8.6%), and analyzed prices, conservation status, and venue-specific patterns. The most frequently recorded taxa included the white-eared bulbul (Pycnonotus leucotis), common slider (Trachemys scripta), and Egyptian mastigure (Uromastyx aegyptia). Mammals, though fewer in number, commanded the highest prices, particularly cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) and lions (Panthera leo). About 26% of species were IUCN-listed as threatened, with CITES Appendix I taxa fetching higher prices. Findings underscore the need for real-time monitoring, targeted enforcement, and cross-border collaboration to address escalating trade in rare and protected species.

1. Introduction

The global wildlife trade, both legal and illegal, continues to pose a major threat to biodiversity, driving species decline, habitat degradation, and the emergence of zoonotic diseases [1,2,3,4]. These dynamics are not unique to the Middle East; comparable patterns are documented in Southeast Asia and Latin America, including large volumes in physical markets and a growing shift to online platforms [5]. Despite international frameworks such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), enforcement remains uneven, evident, for example, in Southeast Asia where >35 million CITES-listed animals were exported in 1998–2007 (≈30 million wild-caught), and where illegal or undeclared exports can exceed official figures, indicating weak oversight among major exporters such as Malaysia, Viet Nam, Indonesia, and China [5]. A global 20-year analysis of legal wildlife trade further shows massive flows (USD 2.9–4.4 trillion, 1997–2016) concentrated in a few hubs and sectors, underscoring persistent monitoring and reporting gaps beyond CITES listings [6]. At the governance level, CITES decision-making reflects north–south asymmetries, with southern range states often bearing disproportionate compliance burdens. At the same time, northern actors shape agendas and dynamics that translate into uneven on-the-ground implementation [3]. Informal and decentralized markets often operate beyond regulatory oversight [7,8]. With annual revenues in the billions, the illegal wildlife trade ranks among the world’s most lucrative illicit markets, alongside arms and narcotics trafficking [3].

In the Middle East, the wildlife trade is shaped by a complex interplay of socio-cultural values, economic incentives, and regulatory gaps. Traditional practices such as falconry and the use of animal parts in medicine intersect with modern consumer demands for exotic pets and prestige species, sustaining both legal and illegal markets [9,10,11,12,13,14]. Over the past two decades, wildlife commerce has expanded into urban pet shops and increasingly digital platforms, where anonymity and lack of regulation present major challenges to enforcement and monitoring [15,16]. Recent studies have documented the open sale of wild cats, birds of prey, and reptiles in both physical and online marketplaces, often without permits or oversight [16,17]. These patterns are further documented in countries like Iran and Palestine, where informal trade persists due to weak institutional coordination, high demand, and limited deterrence [14,15,16,17,18].

Within the Gulf Cooperation Council, (GCC: Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, United Arab Emirates) these trends are especially pronounced due to high purchasing power, rapid urbanization, and cultural preferences for rare species that have either limited availability in trade, small wild populations, or exotic species, defined as a species living outside its native distributional range but which has arrived there by human activity, directly or indirectly, and either deliberately or accidentally [19]. GCC countries continue to serve as both major consumers and transit hubs for high-risk and CITES-listed species, with many transactions occurring outside of regulated systems [20]. While national authorities have introduced laws and action plans to address illegal trade, implementation and enforcement remain uneven across the region.

Across regions where regulatory capacity is limited or uneven, wildlife trade tends to flourish through networks that combine physical and digital markets, informal social relationships, and legal grey zones [15,16,17,18,19,20,21]. These networks are often resilient to traditional enforcement mechanisms and evolve rapidly in response to policy shifts or crackdowns, especially when economic incentives and consumer demand remain high. Digital trade has further complicated regulation, enabling cross-border transactions and private sales through encrypted platforms [16]. These challenges underscore the need for detailed, context-specific studies to understand how wildlife trade functions across different governance settings and urban environments.

Within this broader framework, Saudi Arabia has introduced a number of institutional and legal reforms in response to increasing wildlife trafficking pressures. These include the 2019 establishment of the Special Forces for Environmental Security (SFES), the 2020 Environment Law, and the 2023 update CITES enforcement regulations. However, enforcement on the ground remains uneven, particularly in urban centers where informal trade continues largely unchecked. Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah is one such center, offering a hybrid trade environment comprising traditional markets, pet shops, private breeding operations, and growing digital platforms [15]. As a religious and commercial hub, the city presents a unique mix of socio-cultural drivers and market dynamics. While anecdotal reports suggest the regular sale of both native and exotic species [10], systematic data on traded species, prices, and conservation status remain limited, hampering targeted enforcement and effective policy development.

This study addresses these gaps through a nine-year, multi-method investigation of wildlife trade in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah from 2017 to 2025. Specifically, we

(1)

Document the taxonomic diversity, trade volume, and market value of species traded across market, pet shop, farm, and online contexts;

(2)

Assess the conservation status of traded species using the IUCN Red List and CITES listings;

(3)

Analyze temporal trends in prices and individual numbers.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Area

This study was conducted in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah, a major urban center in western Saudi Arabia. The primary survey site was the Friday market (Arabic: Souq Al-Jum’ah), located within the central vegetable market complex. This market operates weekly, opening shortly after sunrise and closing around 10:00 a.m. Historically, it has served as a central hub for the sale of domestic and wild animals.

Within the area of the Friday market, 13 pet shops located within the central vegetable market complex were also surveyed. These shops regularly displayed a range of animals for sale and were included in all field visits. Additional fieldwork was conducted at unregulated animal farms on the outskirts of Al-Madinah, where rare and exotic animals were observed. Two farms were accessed during the final field period in 2025, both claiming to possess legal animal licenses. Moreover, pet shops in three residential districts, Al-Hijrah (3 shops), Al-Aziziyah (2 shops), and Al-Harrah Al-Sharqiyyah (3 shops), were surveyed due to their high commercial activity and ease of access. These locations provided valuable insights into decentralized urban wildlife trade (Figure 1).

2.2. Methods

We conducted five non-contiguous survey campaigns (2017–2025) to capture seasonal and interannual variation in wildlife trade in Al-Madinah. In each campaign, we made 4–6 consecutive weekly visits timed to Friday market hours and adjacent pet shops, for a total of 24 weekly surveys spanning peak (spring, autumn) and low-activity months. We designed the study to be strictly observational and did not handle or purchase animals. In parallel, we continuously monitored online listings. We recorded all observations digitally using a standardized template (species, number of individuals, CITES and IUCN status, price, location) and applied the quality controls described below.

2.2.1. Friday Market Surveys

We enumerated all specimens physically offered for sale at the Friday market and recorded prices and conservation status in real time.

2.2.2. Pet Shop Monitoring

We conducted surveys in 13 shops within the central market, situated in the Friday market area, and in 8 additional shops located in residential neighborhoods. All visibly displayed animals in cages or enclosures were recorded, and, when possible, information provided by shop staff on species identity and prices was documented.

2.2.3. Farm Investigations

Between 2017 and 2020, we conducted opportunistic visits to seven private farms housing exotic mammals (e.g., lions, cheetahs). Pricing information was obtained through vendor interviews and by triangulating values with contemporaneous online listings. All observations were made discreetly and without intervention. Following the establishment of the Special Forces for Environmental Security (SFES), commercial trading at these farms ceased. In 2025, we visited two additional farms whose owners stated they were licensed to keep wild animals.

2.2.4. Online Platform Monitoring

From 2017 to 2025, we monitored Haraj.com.sa weekly using Arabic and English keywords targeting both common and CITES-listed taxa (e.g., “parrot,” “cheetah,” “turtle”). Since no dedicated category existed for wild animal sales on this site, authors manually searched through general animal-related listings, over 12,000 topic pages, and filtered results by removing domestic/tame species and duplicate advertisements from the same seller. Before 2021, we found wildlife listings per month via screenshots and URLs. After enforcement tightened in 2021, overt advertisements largely disappeared, with activity shifting toward indirect listings and alternative platforms; we maintained the same search and filtering protocol to document these changes.

We prioritized Haraj.com.sa because it is a widely used, Saudi-based general classifieds marketplace with an animals/pets section, searchable listings; peer-reviewed work has also identified Haraj as a frequently used platform in the Gulf-region wildlife trade. These attributes, national coverage, keyword searchability, and date-stamped posts, made it the most consistent corpus for longitudinal monitoring relative to fragmented social media groups or encrypted channels, which raises methodological and ethical constraints for systematic research.

2.2.5. Data Recording and Quality Control

We entered all field and online data into a standardized digital database capturing species, counts, CITES/IUCN status, price, and location. We noted prices directly from sellers or visible tags. We cross-checked entries to minimize transcription errors and verified outliers against original photographs or field notes. We tagged every record by data source (market, pet shop, farm, online) to enable disaggregation of trends, cross-validation of prices across venues, and interpretation of species composition by platform.

2.3. Statistical Analyses

We used non-parametric methods because price distributions were non-normal. We applied the Mann–Whitney U test to compare average prices between CITES-listed and non-listed species. We used Spearman’s rank correlation (ρ) to evaluate temporal trends in individual prices over the study period. We conducted all analyses in IBM SPSS Statistics v27 [22].

3. Results

We documented 1063 individuals in total, representing 88 species, with reptiles dominating (553, 52.0%), followed by birds (419, 39.4%) and mammals (91, 8.6%). By data-collection method overall, pet shops accounted for 586 detections (55.1%), Friday market 214 (20.1%), farms 129 (12.1%), and online platforms 134 (12.6%). Within classes, birds (n = 419) were detected primarily via pet shops (220, 52.5%), then Friday market (94, 22.4%), online platforms (70, 16.7%), and farms (35, 8.4%); mammals (n = 91) were concentrated in farms (39, 42.9%), followed by online platforms (21, 23.1%), Friday market (16, 17.6%), and pet shops (15, 16.5%); reptiles (n = 553) were predominantly from pet shops (351, 63.4%), with additional detections from Friday market (104, 18.8%), farms (55, 10.0%), and online platforms (43, 7.8%). The following provides the results in more detail.

3.1. Bird Trade

A total of 39 bird species from 15 families (419 individuals) were recorded between 2017 and 2025 (

Table 1. Bird species recorded in trade in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah. (CITES (Appendix I, II, III), IUCN (LC: least concern, NT: near threatened, EN: endangered), and CMS status (Annex I, II, NL: not listed); FM: Friday market, PM: pet markets, OP: online platforms.

Scientific Name	Status			Methodology Used				# of Specimens	Avg. Price Per Individual (USD)	Total Prices
	CITES	Red List	CMS	FM	PM	Farms	OP
Family: Accipitridae
Aquila chrysaetos	II	LC	II	1	-	-	-	1	270	270
Buteo jamaicensis	II	LC	II	2	-	-	-	2	270	540
Buteo rufinus	II	LC	II	-	2	-	1	3	41	123
Family: Cacatuidae
Nymphicus hollandicus	NL	LC	NL	-	15	-	4	19	95	1805
Cacatua galerita	II	LC	NL	-	1	-	-	1	1350	1350
Family: Columbidae
Geopelia cuneata	NL	LC	NL	-	2	-	-	2	54	108
Streptopelia decaocto	NL	LC	NL	3	9	-	-	12	3	36
Streptopelia roseogrisea	NL	LC	NL	5	4	5	-	14	14	196
Metriopelia melanoptera	NL	LC	NL	-	2	-	-	2	20	40
Family: Estrildidae
Erythrura gouldiae	NL	LC	NL	-	-	-	1	1	35	35
Family: Falconidae
Falco tinnunculus	II	LC	II	2	2	-	2	6	25	148
Family: Gruidae
Anthropoides virgo	II	LC	II	-	-	2	-	2	405	810
Family: Hypocoliidae
Hypocolius ampelinus	NL	LC	NL	-	2	-	-	2	16	32
Family: Numididae
Numida meleagris	NL	LC	NL	1	-	2	-	3	14	42
Family: Phasianidae
Alectoris chukar	NL	LC	NL	-	-	-	14	14	135	1890
Ammoperdix heyi	NL	LC	NL	2	5	-	4	11	51	559
Pavo cristatus	III	LC	NL	-	-	13	3	16	995	15,120
Phasianus colchicus	NL	LC	NL	1	-	5	-	6	35	210
Family: Psittacidae
Ara chloropterus	II	LC	NL	-	1	-	-	1	2025	2025
Psittacus erithacus	I	EN	NL	20	20	-	13	53	805	42,665
Amazona aestiva	II	NT	NL	-	7	-	6	13	1370	17,820
Pseudeos fuscata	II	LC	NL	-	4	-	-	4	675	2700
Pyrrhura molinae	II	LC	NL	-	1	-	-	1	135	135
Eolophus roseicapilla	II	LC	NL	-	1	-	-	1	486	486
Ara ararauna	II	LC	NL	2	6	-	4	12	1800	21,600
Agapornis fischeri	II	NT	NL	-	2	-	4	6	54	324
Pionus menstruus	II	LC	NL	-	2	-	-	2	189	378
Family: Psittaculidae
Trichoglossus haematodus subsp. Moluccanus	NA	LC	NL	-	3	-	1	4	675	2700
Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae	I	LC	NL	-	2	-	-	2	203	406
Psittacula krameri	NL	LC	NL	4	7	-	9	20	228	4553
Psittacula derbiana	II	LC	NL	-	6	-	-	6	320	1918
Eos bornea	II	LC	NL	-	18	-	-	18	391	8235
Family: Pycnonotidae
Pycnonotus xanthopygos	NL	LC	NL	4	5	-	-	9	12	112
Pycnonotus leucotis	NL	LC	NL	33	71	-	-	104	15	1604
Family: Strigidae
Bubo ascalaphus	NL	LC	NL					1	135	135
Asio otus	II	LC	NL	-	-	-	1	1	351	351
Family: Struthionidae
Struthio camelus	I	LC	NL	-	-	8	-	8	878	7020
Family: Sturnidae
Gracula religiosa	II	LC	NL	2	-	-	-	2	459	918
Acridotheres tristis	NL	LC	NL	12	22	-	-	34	28	942

). The largest shares of individuals belonged to Pycnonotidae (bulbuls; 113 individuals; 27.0%), Psittacidae (parrots; 93; 22.2%), Psittaculidae (parakeets and lorikeets; 50; 11.9%), and Phasianidae (47; 11.2%). Individual counts per species ranged from 1 to 104 (Pycnonotus leucotis in November–December 2020). The mean number of individuals per species was 10.7 (SD = 18.5), reflecting a skewed distribution with a few species traded in large numbers and many species represented by fewer individuals.

The average price per individual across all species was USD 422.1 (SD = USD 642.9), with prices spanning from USD 3 for a collared dove (Streptopelia decaocto) to USD 2160 for turquoise-fronted Amazon (Amazona aestiva). Species listed under CITES Appendix I, including the grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus) and common ostrich (Struthio camelus), commanded significantly higher average prices (mean = USD 819.3) than non-CITES or Appendix II species (mean = USD 212.6). A Mann–Whitney U test confirmed that this difference was statistically significant (U = 134, p < 0.01).

The traded bird species included a mix of conservation statuses according to the IUCN Red List, ranging from Least Concern (LC) to Endangered (EN). Approximately 12.6% (53/419) of individuals belonged to species categorized as threatened (CR/EN/VU), driven entirely by P. erithacus (EN). Notably, P. erithacus (Endangered) accounted for 53 individuals, with a total trade value of approximately USD 42,665 (average price = USD 805), underscoring the economic importance of this threatened species in the market.

Analysis of trade data over time revealed temporal variation in individual numbers and prices. The highest numbers of birds were recorded within two-month field-campaign windows, April–May 2025 (n = 98) and October–December 2017 (n = 95); these are campaign totals pooled across weekly visits, not annual totals. To assess price trends, we aggregated asking prices at the survey-week level (one mean per week across all bird detections and platforms) and tested for a monotonic relationship with time (survey week). Across the full study period (24 weekly time points, 2017–2025), the average price per individual increased with time (Spearman’s ρ = 0.62, p = 0.03), consistent with rising demand and/or increased scarcity. Prices are nominal USD and not inflation-adjusted.

Psittacidae were not numerically dominant in our dataset; Pycnonotidae had the highest individual count (113), followed by Psittacidae (93) and Psittaculidae (50) (Table 1). Nevertheless, psittacines accounted for the largest share of market value among birds, driven by high-priced taxa such as Psittacus erithacus, Ara ararauna, and Amazona aestiva. The presence of multiple CITES Appendix I species highlights the need for stringent regulatory enforcement to mitigate unsustainable trade practices.

3.2. Mammal Trade

A total of 91 mammal individuals were documented in trade records between 2017 and 2025, representing 22 species across 11 families. The dominant families, by individual count, were Procaviidae (rock hyraxes, 25 individuals), Felidae (cats, 23 individuals), and Cercopithecidae (Old World monkeys, 11 individuals). The traded individuals included a mix of common species with Least Concern (LC) status and highly threatened species categorized as Vulnerable (VU), Endangered (EN), or Critically Endangered (CR). The number of individuals per species ranged from 1 to 25, with an overall mean of 4.23 individuals per species (SD = 4.69). The rock hyrax (Procavia capensis) was the most frequently traded species (25 individuals total across survey periods). Charismatic mammals, such as the cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus, 11 individuals) and lion (Panthera leo, 11 individuals), were traded in smaller numbers but commanded high prices.

Prices per individual varied widely, from as low as USD 20 for the desert hedgehog (Paraechinus aethiopicus) to USD 71,280 for cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus). The total reported market value for A. jubatus was USD 784,080 (11 individuals × USD 71,280). The average price per individual across all mammals was USD 8705 (SD = USD 21,814). CITES Appendix I species (n = 13) commanded significantly higher prices (mean = USD 38,576) than non-CITES-listed species (mean = USD 450); this difference was statistically significant (Mann–Whitney U = 58, p < 0.001). The Panthera leo trade accounted for USD 147,147 (11 individuals × USD 13,377), matching table entries after correction.

The species traded included a substantial proportion of threatened taxa, with 31% of individuals belonging to species classified as VU/EN/CR by the IUCN Red List. Critically endangered species, such as the white-thighed colobus (Colobus vellerosus), were represented, albeit by a single individual priced at USD 10,800. Counts of individuals varied over time: the highest count in a single period was 25 rock hyraxes during April–May 2025. The largest economic values occurred in October–December 2017 and October–November 2018, largely driven by sales of cheetahs and lions. The average price per individual increased over time overall, although prices observed in 2025 (mean USD 345) were lower than peaks in 2017–2018 (mean > USD 14,000), likely reflecting shifts in species composition between sampling periods.

Table 2. Mammal species recorded in trade in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah. (CITES (Appendix I, II, III, NL: not listed), IUCN (LC: least concern, NT: near threatened, VU: vulnerable); FM: Friday market, PM: pet markets, OP: online platforms.

Scientific Name	Status		Methodology Used				# of Specimens	Avg. Price Per Individual (USD)	Total Prices
	CITES	Red List	FM	PM	Farms	OP
Family: Bovidae
Gazella leptoceros	I	EN	-	-	1	-	1	810	810
Oryx beisa	NL	EN	-	-	1	-	1	21,600	21,600
Gazella gazella	NL	EN	-	-	1	1	2	810	1620
Tragelaphus derbianus	NL	VU	-	-	2	-	2	13,500	27,000
Antilope cervicapra	III	LC	-	-	2	-	2	1755	3510
Family: Canidae
Canis aureus	III	LC	-	-	2	-	2	594	1188
Canis lupus	III	LC	1	-	1	-	2	540	1080
Family: Cercopithecidae
Colobus vellerosus	II	CR	1	-	-	-	1	10,800	10,800
Papio hamadryas	II	LC	3	1	2	4	10	362	3621
Family: Erinaceidae
Paraechinus aethiopicus	NL	LC	1	3	-	1	5	20	98
Family: Felidae
Acinonyx jubatus	II	VU	-	-	9	2	11	71,280	784,080
Panthera leo	I	VU	-	-	7	2	11	13,377	147,147
Caracal caracal	I	LC	-	-	-	1	1	405	405
Family: Herpestidae
Suricata suricatta	NL	LC	1	-	-	-	1	1215	1215
Family: Perissodactyla
Equus quagga	NL	NT	-	-	2	-	2	2025	4050
Family: Petauridae
Petaurus breviceps	NL	LC	1	5	-	2	8	135	1080
Family: Procaviidae
Procavia capensis	NL	LC	6	3	9	7	25	123	3075
Family: Sciuridae
Eutamias sibiricus	NL	LC	2	2	-	-	4	108	432
Sciurus anomalus	NL	LC	-	-	-	1	1	540	540
Callosciurus finlaysonii	NL	LC	-	1	-	-	1	540	540

provides details on mammals recorded in trade over the study period.

3.3. Reptile Trade

A total of 553 reptile individuals were recorded across 27 species in 13 families from 2017 to 2025. The families Emydidae (pond sliders and related turtles), Testudinidae (tortoises), and Chamaeleonidae (chameleons) accounted for the majority of individuals traded, collectively representing ~62% of all reptiles recorded. Individual counts per species varied considerably, from a single individual for the desert monitor (Varanus griseus) to 53 individuals for Trachemys scripta. The mean number of individuals per species was 15.1 (SD = 13.7), indicating a moderately skewed distribution with a few species traded extensively. Prices per individual ranged from USD 14 for T. scripta to USD 2160 for the Burmese python (Python bivittatus). The average price per individual across all reptiles was USD 204.6 (SD = USD 397.8). Species listed under CITES Appendix II, such as P. bivittatus and Boa constrictor, commanded the highest prices, with B. constrictor averaging USD 676 per individual.

Testudinidae species such as the Greek tortoise (Testudo graeca, vulnerable) and the African spurred tortoise (Centrochelys sulcata, endangered) were traded at average prices of USD 54 and USD 473 per individual, respectively, with totals consistent with observed counts (e.g., C. sulcata: two individuals × USD 473 = USD 946). The Egyptian mastigure (Uromastyx aegyptia, vulnerable) was traded in high numbers (174 individuals), with an average price of USD 108, yielding a total market value of USD 18,792 (correcting an earlier misreported figure of USD 1398). Overall, approximately 52% of reptile individuals belonged to species categorized as vulnerable or endangered on the IUCN Red List, indicating notable conservation concern within this trade segment.

Temporal analysis revealed consistent trade volumes across years, with the largest number of individuals (n = 53) recorded for T. scripta in November–December 2020 and April–May 2025. Price fluctuations were observed, with higher average prices in later years for some species; for example, U. aegyptia increased from USD 16 in 2017 to USD 378 in 2018.

Table 3. Reptile species recorded in trade in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah. (CITES (Appendix I, II, III, NL: not listed), IUCN (LC: least concern, NT: near threatened, VU: vulnerable).; FM: Friday market, PM: pet markets, OP: online platforms.

Scientific Name	Status		Methodology Used				# of Specimens	Avg. Price Per Individual (USD)	Total Prices
	CITES	Red List	FM	PM	Farms	OP
Family: Testudinidae
Centrochelys sulcata	II	EN	-	2	-	-	2	473	946
Family: Chamaeleonidae
Chamaeleo calyptratus	II	LC	4	14	-	2	20	24	480
Chamaeleo chamaeleon	II	LC	10	32	-	3	45	14	630
Family: Crocodylidae
Crocodylus niloticus	II	LC	1	7	-	1	9	226	2030
Family: Boidae
Eryx jaculus	II	LC	3	3	-	-	6	19	114
Boa constrictor	II	LC	1	1	-	2	4	676	2705
Family: Colubridae
Hemorrhois nummifer	NL	LC	2	-	-	-	2	14	28
Platyceps saharicus	NL	LC	1	-	-	-	1	14	14
Spalerosophis diadema	NL	LC	1	1	2	-	4	14	56
Family: Iguanidae
Iguana iguana	II	LC	3	7	-	2	12	174	2096
Family: Psammophidae
Malpolon monspessulanus	NL	LC	2	-	3	3	8	27	216
Psammophis schokari	NL	LC	7	13	7	4	31	41	1256
Family: Geoemydidae
Mauremys rivulata	NL	LC	-	39	-	-	39	17	686
Family: Pythonidae
Python bivittatus	II	VU	1	-	-	1	2	2160	4320
Python sebae	II	NT	1	1	-	1	3	540	1620
Family: Testudinidae
Testudo graeca	II	VU	11	22	-	-	33	54	1769
Family: Emydidae
Trachemys scripta	NL	LC	-	156	-	-	156	14	2184
Family: Agamidae
Uromastyx aegyptia	II	VU	55	53	43	23	174	108	18,792
Uromastyx ornata	II	LC					1	22	22
Family: Varanidae
Varanus griseus	I	LC	1	-	-	-	1	68	68

provides details on the reptiles recorded in trade over the study period.

Finally, pet shops were the dominant detection pathway overall, especially for reptiles (351 individuals) and birds (220). Farms contributed proportionally more to mammals (39) and also to reptiles (55). Friday market surveys added substantial counts for reptiles (104) and birds (94), whereas online platforms yielded fewer records (birds 70; reptiles 43; mammals 21), consistent with reduced overt advertising post-2021. Summed across these channels, reptiles had the highest total detections (553), followed by birds (419) and mammals (91) (Figure 2).

4. Discussion

4.1. Summary of Key Findings

Across 2017–2025, we documented 1063 individuals representing 88 species in three vertebrate classes, with reptiles being most numerous (553; 52.0%), followed by birds (419; 39.4%) and mammals (91; 8.6%). Detection patterns were venue-specific: Pet markets accounted for the largest share overall (586; 55.1%), followed by the Friday market (214; 20.1%), farms (129; 12.1%), and online platforms (134; 12.6%). Within classes, birds were detected primarily via pet markets (52.5%), mammals via farms (42.9%), and reptiles via pet markets (63.4%).

Economic signals mirrored these patterns. Among birds, CITES Appendix-I species had significantly higher prices than non-Appendix-I/II taxa (mean USD 819.3 vs. USD 212.6; Mann–Whitney U = 134, p < 0.01), and the weekly mean price increased over time (Spearman’s ρ = 0.62, p = 0.03). Mammals were fewer but economically dominant: cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus) averaged USD 71,280 (n = 11; total USD 784,080) and lions (Panthera leo) averaged USD 13,377 (n = 11; total USD 147,147). Prices for CITES Appendix-I mammals were far higher than for non-listed species (mean USD 38,576 vs. USD 450; U = 58, p < 0.001). For reptiles, trade volume was high and included conservation-relevant taxa (e.g., Centrochelys sulcata, EN; Testudo graeca, VU), with ~52% of individuals from VU/EN species; Uromastyx aegyptia (VU) was particularly prominent (n = 174) and exhibited sharp inter-annual price variation (e.g., USD 16 in 2017 vs. USD 378 in 2018).

We use “trade” neutrally with respect to legal status: our observational design did not include systematic verification of permits or provenance at point of sale, and the absence of visible documentation does not, by itself, establish non-compliance. We therefore report venue-based patterns rather than classifying individual records as legal vs. illegal.

4.2. Pet Shops and Friday Market in the Regional Context

Bird trade was numerically substantial (n = 419), with Pycnonotidae the largest by count, while psittacines (Psittacidae/Psittaculidae) dominated market value, a pattern consistent with regional and global pet-trade dynamics, in which parrots and parakeets underpin a large share of demand [10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31]. The repeated appearance and high prices of the grey parrot (Psittacus erithacus; Appendix I, EN) underscore persistent market demand for charismatic, protected taxa despite international restrictions.

Reptiles were recorded at high volumes in pet markets, showing a dual structure of abundant, low-priced taxa (e.g., Trachemys scripta) alongside higher-priced Appendix-II snakes (e.g., Python bivittatus, Boa constrictor). Regionally significant desert lizards such as Uromastyx aegyptia (VU) were traded heavily, reflecting cultural, medicinal, and pet-keeping demand that complicates enforcement [10]. These findings concur with reports of sustained demand for tortoises, monitor lizards, and Uromastyx across the Middle East, often with cross-border dimensions [28,29].

Mammals were less frequent but disproportionately valuable, driven by Felidae. High prices and repeated listings of cheetahs and lions align with evidence that the Gulf region functions as both a destination and transit hub for high-value mammals, with routes linking African source regions (e.g., the Horn of Africa) [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25]. Approximately 31% of traded mammal individuals belonged to VU/EN/CR species, mirroring patterns elsewhere in the region where big cats are acquired for private display and prestige [26,27].

4.3. Online Platforms and Displacement

Regulatory reforms and enhanced platform oversight in 2020–2021 did not eliminate trade; rather, they shifted its visibility and location. As overt online listings declined after 2021, detections increased in pet markets and, to a lesser extent, farms, indicating displacement rather than cessation. This trajectory mirrors broader dynamics in the illegal wildlife trade, where enforcement pressure pushes activity into less visible channels, exploits regulatory asymmetries, and leverages social networks and coded communications [15,16,17,18,19,20,21].

Price dynamics complement this picture: CITES-listed species consistently commanded higher prices across classes, and some high-risk taxa (e.g., P. erithacus) showed positive temporal price trends, consistent with an anthropogenic Allee effect in which rarity and protection status elevate perceived value and willingness to pay [30]. While price is an imperfect proxy for availability, the convergence of protection status, consumer preference for charismatic species, and documented willingness to pay suggests that economic drivers can entrench exploitation even under stricter regulatory regimes [4].

These venue-specific signatures underscore the value of combining physical-market surveys with systematic e-commerce surveillance to detect displacement, indirect listings, and coded activity over time [7,21].

4.4. Implications for Monitoring and Policy

First, enforcement should be venue-specific. Routine compliance checks in pet markets (permits, source documentation, welfare) and appropriate farm licensing/auditing are needed to reduce laundering of wild-caught mammals. Second, platform governance should pair proactive moderation with transparent takedown reporting and adaptive keyword/image tools that keep pace with euphemisms and indirect listings [15,16]. Third, regional coordination is essential. Gulf states act as shared demand and transit nodes for high-risk, CITES-listed taxa; joint operations, harmonized penalties, and shared indicators (e.g., watchlists, seizure data, online signals) can reduce jurisdiction shopping and raise deterrence [20,21,22,23,24,25]. Finally, integrate biosecurity. Legally imported pets may escape or be released and become established; Saudi Arabia already hosts at least 21 non-native bird species [30]. Import screening, traceability, and owner-surrender/”white-list” pathways should be embedded within trade oversight to reduce ecological risk and management costs [23,30,31].

4.5. Limitations and Future Work

Our approach necessarily underestimates concealed transactions (e.g., private sales, encrypted channels) and was constrained by opportunistic access to farms. Prices can vary by season, buyer identity, and negotiation context; bird prices were not inflation-adjusted. Future work should (i) pair undercover or respondent-confidential methods with market surveys; (ii) apply provenance tools (e.g., genetics, stable isotopes) to high-risk mammals; and (iii) causally evaluate the effects of discrete policy actions (e.g., platform rule changes, on-the-ground operations) on detection probabilities, prices, and trade composition [7,15,21].

Overall, our results show that the wildlife trade in Al-Madinah is taxonomically diverse, venue-structured, and economically stratified, with regulatory pressure reshaping, rather than halting, activity. Aligning venue-specific enforcement, adaptive online governance, regional cooperation, and biosecurity safeguards offers the greatest promise for reducing conservation risk while improving oversight across legal and illegal channels.

5. Conclusions

This study reveals a complex and adaptive wildlife-trade system in Al-Madinah, driven by economic incentives, cultural traditions, and gaps in local enforcement. Despite regulatory advancements since 2021, including bans on market sales and online restrictions, high-risk trade in threatened and CITES-listed species persists through informal and evolving networks. To address this, targeted enforcement should include proactive surveillance of known trade hubs, undercover investigations, and routine audits of pet shops and private farms that claim compliance. Online platforms should be systematically monitored using AI-based keyword detection and real-time takedown protocols to strengthen content moderation. At the regional level, cooperation should extend beyond information sharing to include joint operations, harmonized legal frameworks, and a Gulf-wide wildlife-trade intelligence database. Public education that reduces demand for exotic pets is essential. Given the high invasion risk of commonly traded taxa (e.g., red-eared slider, ring-necked parakeet), trade oversight should incorporate measures such as invasion-risk screening, clear positive lists, owner-surrender options, and rapid response for escapes/releases. Without integrated, multi-level measures, trade will adapt and persist, threatening biodiversity and undermining the rule of law.