Content uploaded by Daniel Bergin
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Daniel Bergin on Aug 18, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=haaw20
Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science
ISSN: 1088-8705 (Print) 1532-7604 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/haaw20
An Assessment of Welfare Conditions in Wildlife
Markets across Morocco
Daniel Bergin & Vincent Nijman
To cite this article: Daniel Bergin & Vincent Nijman (2018): An Assessment of Welfare
Conditions in Wildlife Markets across Morocco, Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, DOI:
10.1080/10888705.2018.1492408
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2018.1492408
Published online: 13 Aug 2018.
Submit your article to this journal
View Crossmark data
ARTICLE
An Assessment of Welfare Conditions in Wildlife Markets across
Morocco
Daniel Bergin and Vincent Nijman
Oxford Wildlife Trade Research Group, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom
ABSTRACT
The welfare of wild-caught animals in markets has generally been over-
looked by both wildlife trade and welfare studies, despite the potential
negative impacts on the animals. Morocco is a member of the World
Organisation for Animal Health and has proposed draft legislation prohibit-
ing mistreatment or abuse of animals in captivity. There is still, however, a
bustling wild animal trade, and vendor compliance with industry-standard
best practices is lacking. This study provides insight into the conditions of
2113 wild-caught animals in markets in six of the largest cities in Morocco
by scoring their welfare based on four of the Farm Animal Welfare
Committee Five Freedoms: freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from
discomfort, freedom to express normal behavior, and freedom from dis-
tress. Over 88% of animals were housed in situations that broke all four of
the freedoms measured, and only 9 animals were in situations that broke
none. Access to water, sun/heat exposure, and ability to hide from stressors
were particularly poor. We urge the Moroccan government to fulfill its
commitment to establish welfare laws and devote resources to their
application.
KEYWORDS
Five Freedoms;
Mediterranean; pet; wildlife
trade; welfare assessment
Introduction
Humans, by virtue of removing nonhuman animals from the wild for use as companion animals
(pets), for use in medical practices, or for entertainment, take control of the welfare of the animals
involved. Mellor, Patterson-Kane, and Stafford (2009) argued that in any situation in which animals
are used for human purposes, we are obliged to take into account, and where possible improve, the
welfare of these animals using scientific criteria and rigorous observations to monitor them.
Although animal welfare is potentially compromised at all stages of wildlife trade, Baker et al.
(2013) observed that wildlife trade studies have not traditionally addressed the welfare of the animals
involved, especially in the case of animals caught in the wild. Several studies have focused on the
links among wildlife trade, welfare, and mortality (Ashley et al., 2014; Carder, Proctor, Schmidt-
Burbach, & D’cruze, 2016; Fuller, Eggen, Wirdateti, & Nekaris, 2016; Iñigo-Elias & Ramos, 1991;
Robinson, John, Griffiths, & Roberts, 2015), welfare aspects of animals confiscated from the illegal
wildlife trade (Fuller et al., 2016; Moore, Cabana, & Nekaris, 2015; Schmidt-Burbach, Ronfot, &
Srisangiam, 2015), and the legal implications of the link between wildlife trade and welfare (Das &
Narayan, 2016; Sollund, 2011), but very few have focused on the welfare of the animals within
wildlife markets. Baker et al. argued that although the issue of welfare and wildlife trade has been
raised, more attention must be paid to the conditions in which live animals are traded, in particular
those animals traded in large numbers for use as pets or entertainment.
CONTACT Daniel Bergin danielbergin1@gmail.com Oxford Wildlife Trade Research Group, Oxford Brookes University,
Gipsy Lane, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE
https://doi.org/10.1080/10888705.2018.1492408
Animal welfare in markets has been overlooked partially because it is seen as a transit stage of
their captivity and therefore is not significant. With around a 16% turnover of tortoises in Moroccan
markets after one week, it is apparent that some animals will not spend a very long time in the
conditions seen in these markets (Nijman & Bergin, 2017a). Some animals, however, will spend
longer periods in captivity and will experience prolonged periods of negative welfare conditions.
From 10 weeks to 12 weeks, turnover estimates only increased from 74% to 75%, indicating that a
significant number of animals (~25%) spend several months in these markets (Nijman & Bergin,
2017a). Animals used as photo props or to entice customers to a shop can spend months or even
years in these situations.
Using different grading indicators, it is possible to assess the likely impacts of external physical
and mental stimuli on the well being of animals in captivity, while taking into account social and
biological needs (Mellor et al., 2009). The Farm Animal Welfare Committee (FAWC) detailed the
Five Freedoms designed to represent conditions essential for the basic physical and mental well being
of animals in captivity. These freedoms are defined as: freedom from hunger and thirst; freedom
from discomfort; freedom from pain, injury, or disease; freedom to express normal behavior; and
freedom from fear and distress (FAWC, 2009). Complete accordance with these freedoms is not
always practically achievable, and in reality, animal welfare exists on a continuum with a complex
relationship between suffering and welfare in which a reduction of one does not necessarily lead to
an increase in the other (Mellor et al., 2009).
The Five Freedoms have been referenced directly or indirectly in the keeping and transportation
guidelines outlined by entities such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE). Although
CITES only refers to the international transport of animals, the cage, food, and water requirements
have been influenced by a desire to provide good welfare for animals and to reduce the risk for
unnecessary fear, injury, damage to health, and suffering of animals in transit. The OIE provides
welfare guidelines for animals in many forms of captivity. These welfare guidelines are used to design
policy and legislation around the world.
Morocco has a range of habitat conditions, from mountainous regions to Mediterranean coastline
to arid desert, and therefore, it contains a rich biodiversity. Both domesticated, captive-bred animals
and wild-caught animals are kept and sold openly in pet shops, marketplaces, and squares (Bergin &
Nijman, 2014; Nijman, Bergin, & Van Lavieren, 2016; Znari, Germano, & Mace, 2005). For some
species, the number of individuals affected by this trade is high (Bergin & Nijman, 2014; Nijman &
Bergin, 2017a,2017b). The welfare of these animals does not appear to be prioritized, and the
conditions in which they are kept are very poor (Bergin & Nijman, 2014; Martin & Perry-Martin,
2012; Shipp, 2002; Van Lavieren, 2008). Morocco is a member of the OIE, and in 2013, the
government proposed draft legislation (Law 122–12, Article 14) prohibiting the mistreatment or
abuse of animals in captivity, with fines of up to MAD 20,000 (US$2000 at 2016 exchange rates).
Article 14 of this legislation states that animals must be kept in conditions compatible with the
biological requirements of their species. However, the proposed legislation does not appear to apply
to mistreatment due to negligence and does not incorporate all the OIE’s guiding principles and
standards for animal welfare (World Animal Protection, 2014). This legislation has finished its
consultation period but has yet to be enacted. Law 29–05 on the Protection of Species of Flora and
Fauna and the Control of Their Trade deals primarily with the sustainability of trade of wild animals.
Article 11 (B) of Law 29–05 indicates that all animals in trade shall be prepared and transported in a
manner that avoids the risk for injury, illness, or ill treatment but does not further elaborate. Articles
601, 602, and 603 of the Moroccan Criminal Code No. 1-59-413 1962 prohibit the unnecessary
killing or maiming of pets.
We here report on the welfare conditions of mammals and reptiles taken from the wild and
displayed in Moroccan markets, including those animals who are sold as pets, live animals sold for
medicinal purposes, and animals kept as photo props. We aimed to quantify the welfare conditions
of these animals while also contextualizing this information.
2D. BERGIN AND V. NIJMAN
Methods
The first author visited the wildlife markets in Marrakesh, Fez, Casablanca, Meknes, Tangier, and
Rabat in Morocco a total of 40 times from April 2013 to April 2017 to collect data on the wildlife on
offer. Data specifically referring to the welfare of the animals in these markets were collected on 2
visits to each city, 1 in May 2016 and 1 in May 2017. Welfare was judged for all wild-caught animals
present in the markets during these 12 visits. Wild animals in Morocco are traded in pet shops but
more frequently in open markets. Towns and cities in Morocco often have multiple markets, and
while wildlife tends to be concentrated in a single market, individual vendors in different locations
are also present. Not every animal is necessarily visible at any given time, but there is no apparent
attempt made to conceal animals from view; in fact, live animals are generally one of the most
prominently displayed goods in shops. Animals are also displayed outside shops in an attempt to
attract customers and are kept in squares for use as photo props. The Northwest region of Morocco
in which the surveys were carried out has a typical Mediterranean climate with moderately hot
summers and mild winters; in the summer months especially, the conditions in the markets can be
extremely hot. For instance, in Marrakesh in April, the mean temperature is ~ 18°C but can be as
high as 27°C, whereas in July and August, temperatures of 42°C have been recorded.
Due to the noninvasive nature of wildlife trade surveys and the need for a rapid scoring method,
welfare was assessed based on husbandry factors that did not require physical contact with the animals
and that were observable in a short period of time. Freedom from pain, injury, or disease could not be
estimated because the animals could not be closely examined, although injuries and deceased animals
were common. For the other four freedoms, six indicating factors were noted from which conclusions
about the welfare conditions could be drawn (Figure 1). These indicators were: (a) access to appropriate
food (scored as a yes or no), (b) access to water (yes/no), (c) ability to control heat or sun exposure (able/
unable), (d) material of the floor of the enclosure (uncovered steel bars/plastic, wood, or otherwise
comfortable floors), (e) proximity to conspecifics (sufficient space/overcrowded), and (f) ability to retreat
from stressors (able to hide/unable to hide). Due to the inability to gather invasive data on the animals,
we were unable to grade the welfare of animals according to the Five Domains model proposed by Mellor
et al. (2009). A χ
2
test showed no significant differences in the welfare conditions of animals between
years; thus, the data were grouped together. We tested for differences between the six welfare indicators
using χ
2
tests by adjusting the sample sizes to the city with the smallest sample size (Meknes, 49 animals)
and accepting significance when pwas < .05 in a two-tailed test.
Contextualizing information was gathered on all 40 visits to the markets during informal
conversations with vendors. This information was freely given, and no personal details were
recorded about those who provided it. Excessive interest in animals for sale was avoided, no animals
were purchased, and no money was given for photographs during the course of this survey to avoid
stimulating the trade. Observer reliability was assessed on the conditions of 208 animals in
Marrakesh in 2017. The first author and a visiting researcher separately evaluated the welfare of
the observed animals and compared the results, and they found negligible difference in their
assessments. Ethical approval was granted by Oxford Brookes University.
Results
Marrakesh had the most vendor or photo-prop stalls containing wild-caught live animals with 25 stalls,
while Meknes and Rabat had as few as 2 stalls on some visits. Casablanca and Marrakesh had the greatest
number of live wild animals in markets, with averages of 290 and 285 over the two years, respectively,
followed by Tangier with an average of 223. The vendors were almost exclusively male, and all except
three sold other goods such as herbs, spices, souvenirs, medicinal products, fabrics, or domesticated
animals alongside the wild animals. Prices ranged from US$1 for a small spur-thighed tortoise (Testudo
graeca) to US$500 for a Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus; though the macaques were primarily used
as photo props). Welfare conditions were scored for 2113 animals in 61 enclosures in 48 shops, and 94%
JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE 3
of the animals were spur-thighed tortoises. Only 9 animals (all Bell’s dabb lizards [Uromastyx acanthi-
nura] in a single enclosure) were seen in conditions that were not assessed as breaking any of the four
freedoms measured, with 88% of animals being kept in situations in which all four freedoms were
broken (Figure 2). The ability to hide from stressors (present for 9% of the individuals), access to water
(5%), and ability to control sun exposure (1%) were notably poor (Figure 1). Space restrictions were a
common problem, especially for tortoises. In 22 enclosures, we observed so many tortoises that some
could not touch the floor (Figure 3). Attempts to stimulate animals in a positive manner were rare as
only 11 of the observed cages had any sort of enrichment attempts.
There was a statistically significant difference between cities in terms of the floor conditions
(χ
2
= 19.289, df =5,p= .0017); this difference was driven by Casablanca and Rabat, which had
predominantly acceptable floor conditions while other cities did not. Likewise, for food (present or
absent), there was a tendency for cities to differ (χ
2
= 8.578, df =5,p= .127); this finding was mainly
driven by Casablanca as very few individuals there had access to food. For the other conditions, we
did not find any significant differences between cities (all χ
2
< 2.168, df =5,p> .825).
In this survey, there was no way to accurately check for the presence of diseases. However, ticks
on tortoises and North African hedgehogs (Atelerix algirus) were common, and recently deceased
animals, especially Mediterranean chameleons (Chamaeleo chamaeleon) and spur-thighed tortoises,
were regularly seen. Snakes were grouped together for this study but included 51% puff adders (Bitis
arietans), 22% Egyptian cobras (Naja haje), and 27% unidentified species. Unidentified snakes were
likely from the families Viperidae, Colubridae, and Lamprophiidae (Pleguezuelos, Feriche, Brito, &
Fahd, 2016).
In conversations with vendors, they did not generally seem receptive to suggestions of improved
welfare. In some instances, the researcher was informed that the animals did not require drinking
water; in others, we observed on subsequent visits that the researcher’s suggestions to add water to
Figure 1. Welfare conditions of 2113 animals observed in the wildlife markets of six cities in Morocco in April 2016 and April 2017.
Note. Access to food: 1 = yes, 2 = no; access to water: 1 = yes, 2 = no; heat exposure: 1 = able to escape from or enter sunlight
at will, 2 = unable to control sun access; floor of enclosure: 1 = acceptable floor, 2 = uncovered steel bars or covered only with
rotting food; space: 1 = sufficient space, 2 = isolation or insufficient space; and ability to hide: 1 = able to hide, 2 = unable to hide.
The brackets indicate the four Farm Animal Welfare Committee freedoms measured in this study.
4D. BERGIN AND V. NIJMAN
animal enclosures had been ignored. Vendors informed the researcher that terrapins—who live in
freshwater environments—could be released into the sea, and deceased animals rotting in cages with
live animals were not always removed when noted by the researcher.
Discussion
The conditions of wild animals kept for sale or used for entertainment in Morocco were almost
universally poor. In conversations with vendors, they possessed little knowledge of proper care and
advised poor care and transportation practices, reflecting those observed in the markets. In many of
the observed instances, increasing the animal’s freedoms would not necessarily result in sufficiently
appropriate welfare. Markets are busy, hot, stressful places for wild animals, and good welfare
equates to more than the absence of negative influences; contemporary animal welfare thinking is
that animal welfare should also include positive influences (Mellor & Beausoleil, 2015). Vendor
apathy indicated they are unlikely to work toward eliciting positive welfare states in animals if the
effort level is high and the incentives are low or absent.
Freedom from hunger and thirst
Although 37% of animals had access to food, much of it was rotting and only lettuce and mint leaves
were seen given to the animals (Figure 3[d]). Animals require variation in their diets: Spur-thighed
tortoises eat at least 34 species of plants in the wild (Cobo & Andreu, 1988); Barbary ground
squirrels (Atlantoxerus getulus) eat manly fruit, seeds, and nuts (López-Darias & Nogales, 2008); and
Mediterranean chameleons, despite commonly held beliefs in Morocco, cannot survive solely on
Figure 2. Species observed in wildlife markets in six Moroccan cities in April 2016 and April 2017 showing how many were kept in
conditions that violated four of the Five Freedoms (freedom from hunger and thirst, freedom from discomfort, freedom to express
normal behavior, and freedom from distress). The key represents the number of freedoms broken (no specimens were observed
breaking only one freedom). Total number of each species observed is shown above each column.
JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE 5
mint leaves (Highfield & Bayley, 2007;Figure 3[a]). Although other food may, and in some cases,
must have been given outside of observed market hours, vendors frequently mentioned in conversa-
tion their belief that a diet consisting of entirely lettuce was appropriate for many species, indicating
that the variety of food offered to animals is often insufficient.
Readily available water was rarely seen in animal enclosures, even for those who were kept in
direct sunshine for the majority of the day. Few enclosures even had a mechanism for storing water.
Vendors informed the researcher that tortoises did not require drinking water. However, tortoises,
especially smaller ones, require regular access to water, and lack of water may result in kidney disease
and bladder stones (Highfield & Highfield, 2008). Mammals and other reptiles also require regular
access to water to keep from becoming dehydrated.
Figure 3. Welfare conditions of wildlife in markets in Morocco. (a) Chameleons were used to attract tourists to spice shops and
were sold as pets. (b) A snake charmer in Marrakesh’s Jemaa el Fna using cobras and pythons as photo props for tourists and
locals. Cobras were regularly worked up into a state of distress for pictures. (c) Spur-thighed tortoises in Tangier crammed into a
cage in which many could not touch the floor. (d) A Barbary ground squirrel (Atlantoxerus getulus) in Marrakesh in a cage with
spur-thighed tortoises (Testudo graeca) and rotting lettuce. The bars on the floor of this cage were left uncovered.
6D. BERGIN AND V. NIJMAN
Freedom from discomfort
Enclosures were poorly designed to provide comfort to animals and were frequently overcrowded,
particularly for tortoises. Tortoises were often seen piled on top of one another, and some could not
even reach the floor of the enclosure (Figure 3[c]). In more than 30% of the enclosures, the floors of
cages were left uncovered and provided no relief for animals from the bars digging painfully into their
feet (Figure 3[d]). Despite the extreme heat of some summer days in Morocco, we observed only five
containers that allowed animals access to both sun and shade (Figure 3[b]). This situation would cause
great discomfort as reptiles thermoregulate by entering and exiting sunlight and mammals easily
overheat if exposed to direct sunlight for a prolonged period, especially without access to water.
Freedom from pain, injury, or disease
Although the presence of disease could not be accurately determined, the close proximity of
animals and the poor cage-cleaning practices—with rotting lettuce and feces often left in the
cages (Figure 3[d])—meant that any illness or disease present in one individual could easily
spread to others. Checking for injuries would require a thorough examination of the animals,
which was not possible, though obvious wounds and deceased animals indicated that injury and
disease were present.
Freedom to express normal behavior
Almost 90% of animals observed were in cages in which their normal movement was restricted by a lack
of space (Figure 3[c]). Overcrowding was judged on species-specific criteria based on the life history of
the particular species. Snakes, for example, were assessed as requiring more space to retreat from
conspecifics than Barbary ground squirrels, a more sociable species. Incidents in which an animal did
not have space to avoid physical contact with a conspecific were always considered inappropriate and
were regularly observed. This overcrowding of animals not only leads to discomfort, but also prevents
them from retreating from their conspecifics if desired and severely hinders normal social interactions,
especially for largely solitary animals such as tortoises or snakes. Other species such as the Barbary
ground squirrel were seen mostly in isolation, despite their social nature. Close confinement and
isolation of social animals in threatening and/or barren environments may lead to experiences that
include various combinations of fear or panic (Mellor, 2017). The vast majority of animals received very
little stimuli that would emulate a normal environment as any form of enrichment was rarely seen.
Freedom from fear and distress
In Morocco, animals are generally kept in front of a shop or stall to be most visible to potential
customers, and only 9% of animals had the ability to hide if so desired. Animals therefore have to deal
with the near-constant presence of people who are encouraged to handle them and interact with them.
Egyptian cobras were kept in a state of agitation to evoke a defense posture with the hood on show
because they were therefore seen as more photogenic. Barbary macaques were forced to regularly
interact with people and often showed signs of distress and stereotypic behavior. Although the stress
animals experienced in these conditions was not measurable, the fear caused by human presence
coupled with their forced proximity to conspecifics undoubtedly caused fear and distress.
Moroccan welfare laws and their relevance to welfare in markets
The laws in Morocco do not currently reflect the commitment of the government to animal welfare. The
vast majority of animals in Moroccan markets are experiencing poor welfare conditions, which would
be in breach of the proposed Law 122–12 as the conditions are not suitable for the biological needs of
JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE 7
these animals. Simple improvements in housing and care such as access to water and shade would
greatly improve the animals’quality of life and decrease their mortality rate and would therefore benefit
both animals and traders. Enacting this law, which was produced in 2013 and has finished the legislative
consultation period, would allow for authorities to intervene in the widespread abuse of animals in
markets. New animal welfare laws must be used in conjunction with Law 29–05, which prohibits the
sale of CITES-listed or nationally protected animals, to influence the selling or keeping of animals in
markets and direct people away from unsustainable and cruel practices.
Despite vendors’unwillingness to increase animal welfare at the suggestion of the researcher,
more long-term, focused efforts have achieved results in the past. The Society for the Protection of
Animals Abroad has greatly increased the focus on the welfare of horses used to pull tourist carts in
Marrakesh and has improved conditions for these animals (Jones, 2003).
In ideal circumstances, there are many changes that would allow for the wild animals in
Moroccan markets to experience more positive welfare circumstances. These changes include a
white list of allowable pets, a licensing system for vendors, and vendors keeping records of the
animals in their care (de Volder, McLennon, & Schmit, 2013). However, given the current apathy of
vendors and the government toward animal welfare, we propose more achievable goals that will
impact the welfare of these animals. Many of these goals are in line with the recommendations
suggested by CITES and the OIE .
●Enacting Law 122–12: The government has committed to introducing this law, but it has not
progressed in several years. This law would at least provide recourse for government officials to
enforce to discourage people from poor animal welfare practices. Enforcement efforts should
focus on Casablanca, Marrakesh, Tangier, and Rabat as they contain the greatest number of live
animals affected by trade. When this law is enacted, it is recommended that resources be
devoted to the application of the new law and fines should be imposed on those who continue
to show poor welfare practices and sell illegal animals.
●Providing access to water and a greater variety of food for animals: This change would be easy
and would require low cost for vendors to implement.
●Providing the animals with shelter from the sun and the ability to retreat from stressors:
Although the ability to remain completely hidden could impede sales and would therefore be
unrealistic, pet shops and vendors globally have utilized structures that provide animals with a
sense of security without allowing them to remain completely hidden from view. These
structures would also provide shelter from the glaring sun.
●Providing simple enrichment for the animals: Complex enrichment is not necessarily a priority
for animals while they are on sale, but for those who are kept over longer periods as photo
props, enrichment would be beneficial. Even minor additions such as leafy branches would
provide more stimulation for animals housed for sale.
●Improving the floor quality for animals: Ideal flooring for the animals seen in markets would
differ between species, and the maintenance of such enclosures would likely be an unrealistic
expectation in these markets. We therefore recommend plastic flooring with regular holes, as
seen in many of the crates that were considered as having appropriate flooring in this study.
This flooring maintains the animals’comfort but still provides the hygiene benefits and ease of
cleaning provided by the bars. Even simply covering half the bars with plastic would provide
animals with an area to rest.
Conclusion and animal welfare implications
It is clear from this study that the animals in markets in Morocco are not kept in conditions
that meet any standards of basic welfare and that bad welfare practices are affecting a large
number of animals. Although the welfare standards in markets need not reach the same levels
8D. BERGIN AND V. NIJMAN
as those for animals housed in permanent situations, it is clear that basic improvements are
necessary. There is no “one-size-fits-all”approach to improving people’s commitment to animal
welfare, and any training of vendors would need to be targeted and specifically designed
(Butterworth, Whittington, & Hammond-Seaman, 2012). Although improvements in welfare
conditions would benefit animals in wildlife markets, the majority are being sold illegally
(Bergin & Nijman, 2014; Nijman & Bergin, 2017b; Van Lavieren, 2008) and using Law 29–05
to prevent animals from being taken from the wild may have the greatest impact on overall
animal welfare. Enacting Law 122–12 prohibiting the mistreatment or abuse of animals in
captivity would also allow officials to target vendors for specific welfare-related issues. Morocco
has an obvious need to and will hopefully soon have the power to completely overhaul the
wildlife markets by changing them from a place of suffering and illegal sale of protected
animals to a regulated, legal practice.
Acknowledgments
We thank Abderrahim Benattabou, Els van Lavieren (Moroccan Primate Conservation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands),
and Mohamed Amezian (Groupe de Recherche pour la Protection des Oiseaux au Maroc, Rabat, Morocco) for
information and support and Judith Myara for translation services.
ORCID
Daniel Bergin http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5319-6727
Vincent Nijman http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5600-4276
References
Ashley, S., Brown, S., Ledford, J., Martin, J., Nash, A. E., Terry, A., . . . Warwick, C. (2014). Morbidity and mortality of
invertebrates, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals at a major exotic companion animal wholesaler. Journal of
Applied Animal Welfare Science,17, 308–321.
Baker, S. E., Cain, R., Van Kesteren, F., Zommers, Z. A., D’Cruze, N., & Macdonald, D. W. (2013). Rough trade:
Animal welfare in the global wildlife trade. BioScience,6312, 928–938.
Bergin, D., & Nijman, V. (2014). Open, unregulated trade in wildlife in Morocco’s markets. Traffic Bulletin,26,65–70.
Butterworth, A., Whittington, P., & Hammond-Seaman, A. (2012). Applying welfare training in global commercial
settings. Animal Welfare,21(3), 373–377.
Carder, G., Proctor, H., Schmidt-Burbach, J., & D’cruze, N. (2016). The animal welfare implications of civet coffee
tourism in Bali. Animal Welfare,25(2), 199–205.
Cobo, M., & Andreu, A. C. (1988). Seed consumption and dispersal by the spur-thighed tortoise Testudo graeca.Oikos,
51, 267–273.
Das, A. S., & Narayan, A. V. (2016). Settling the debate of animal welfare, public morals and trade: In the light of the
EC-seal products case. Global Trade and Customs Journal,11, 267–279.
de Volder, S., McLennon, S., & Schmit, V. (2013). Eurogroup for animals: Analysis of national legislation related to the
keeping and sale of exotic pets in europe. Eurogroup for Animals, Brussels.
FAWC. 2009. Five freedoms. Retrieved Apr 19, 2018, from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/file/319292/Farm_Animal_Welfare_in_Great_Britain_-_Past__Present_and_Future.pdf
Fuller, G., Eggen, W. F., Wirdateti, W. and Nekaris, K. A. I. (2018). Welfare impacts of the illegal wildlife trade in a
cohort of confiscated greater slow lorises, Nycticebus coucang. Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science,21(3),
224-238.
Highfield, A. C., & Bayley, J. R. 2007. Folklore, myth, and exploitation of snakes in Morocco and Tunisia. Tortoise
Trust. Retrieved Apr 19, 2018, from. http://www.tortoisetrust.org/articles/exploit.html
Highfield, A. C., & Highfield, N. (2008). Taking care of pet tortoises. The Tortoise Trust and the Jill Martin Fund For
Tortoise Welfare and Conservation, London.
Iñigo-Elias, E. E., & Ramos, M. A. (1991). The psittacine trade in Mexico. In J. G. Robinson & K. H. Redford (Eds.),
Neotropical wildlife use and conservation (pp. 380–392). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Jones, K. E. (2003). Transport animal welfare legislation and inspection: How to progress and succeed. In World
association for transport animal welfare and studies (TAWS) The challenge of improving transport animal welfare in
the world: Ways forward Workshop held 24 April 2003. UK: Silsoe Research Institute, Bedford.
JOURNAL OF APPLIED ANIMAL WELFARE SCIENCE 9
López-Darias, M., & Nogales, M. (2008). Effects of the invasive Barbary ground squirrel Atlantoxerus getulus on seed
dispersal systems of insular xeric environments. Journal of Arid Environments,726, 926–939.
Martin, E., & Perry-Martin, C. (2012). Tourists underwrite Morocco’s illegal trade in wildlife artefacts. Swara (Jul–
Sep), 16–29.
Mellor, D., Patterson-Kane, E., & Stafford, K. J. (2009). The sciences of animal welfare. John Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford,
UK.
Mellor, D. J. (2017). Operational details of the five domains model and its key applications to the assessment and
management of animal welfare. Animals,7, 60.
Mellor, D. J., & Beausoleil, N. J. (2015). Extending the’Five Domains’model for animal welfare assessment to
incorporate positive welfare states. Animal Welfare,24, 241–253.
Moore, R. S., Cabana, F., & Nekaris, K. A. I. (2015). Factors influencing stereotypic behaviours of animals rescued
from Asian animal markets: A slow loris case study. Applied Animal Behaviour Science,166, 131–136.
Nijman, V., & Bergin, D. (2017a). Trade in spur-thighed tortoises Testudo graeca in Morocco: Volumes, value and
variation between markets. Amphibia-Reptilia,38, 275–287.
Nijman, V., & Bergin, D. (2017b). Reptiles traded in markets for medicinal purposes in contemporary Morocco.
Contributions to Zoology, 86(1).
Nijman, V., Bergin, D., & Van Lavieren, E. (2016). Conservation in an ever-globalizing world: Wildlife trade in, from,
and through Morocco, a gateway to Europe. In A. A. Aguirre & R. Sukumar (Eds.), Tropical conservation: A view
from the south on local and global priorities (pp. 313–323). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Pleguezuelos, J. M., Feriche, M., Brito, J. C., & Fahd, S. (2016). Snake charming and the exploitation of snakes in
Morocco. Oryx, 52(2) 1–8.
Robinson, J. E., John, F. A. S., Griffiths, R. A., & Roberts, D. L. (2015). Captive reptile mortality rates in the home and
implications for the wildlife trade. PloS One,10, e0141460.
Schmidt-Burbach, J., Ronfot, D., & Srisangiam, R. (2015). Asian elephant (Elephas maximus), pig-tailed macaque
(Macaca nemestrina) and tiger (Panthera tigris) populations at tourism venues in Thailand and aspects of their
welfare. PloS One,10, e0139092.
Shipp, A. (2002). Wildlife for sale in Marrakech, Morocco. TRAFFIC Bulletin,19, 65.
Sollund, R. (2011). Expressions of speciesism: The effects of keeping companion animals on animal abuse, animal
trafficking and species decline. Crime, Law and Social Change,55, 437–451.
Van Lavieren, E. (2008). The illegal trade in Barbary macaques from Morocco and its impact on the wild population.
TRAFFIC Bulletin,21, 123–130.
World Animal Protection. 2014. Morocco. Retrieved Apr 19, 2018, from http://api.worldanimalprotection.org/coun
try/morocco
Znari, M., Germano, D. J., & Mace, J. C. (2005). Growth and population structure of the Moorish tortoise (Testudo
graeca graeca) in westcentral Morocco: Possible effects of over-collecting for the tourist trade. Journal of Arid
Environments,62,55–74.
10 D. BERGIN AND V. NIJMAN
