Türkiye'de Sosyal Medya Aracılığıyla Egzotik Hayvan Ticareti: Hayvan Refahı, Halk Sağlığı ve Biyolojik Çeşitlilik Açısından Genel Değerlendirme

Abstract

Egzotik hayvanlara yönelik küresel ilginin artması, Türkiye’de sosyal medya platformları üzerinden kontrolsüz bir egzotik hayvan ticaret ağının oluşmasına yol açmıştır. Bu çalışma, Türkiye’deki sosyal medya platformlarında egzotik hayvan ticaretinin kapsamını, taksonomik çeşitliliğini ve çok boyutlu etkilerini sistematik olarak değerlendirmektedir. 2023 yılı boyunca takipçi sayısı en yüksek dört sosyal medya grubunda gerçekleştirilen izleme çalışmasında, sekiz farklı taksonomik sınıfa (Gastropoda, Arachnida, Chilopoda, Insecta, Malacostraca, Amphibia, Reptilia ve Mammalia) ait toplam 58 egzotik tür/takson tespit edilmiştir. Bulgular, Python regius, Eublepharis macularius ve Pogona vitticeps gibi sürüngenlerin yanı sıra çok sayıda tarantula ve yem böceğinin yoğun ticari faaliyete konu olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Ticareti yapılan türler arasında IUCN Kırmızı Liste’de Kritik Tehlikede (CR) olarak değerlendirilen Ambystoma mexicanum ve Poecilotheria metallica gibi küresel koruma önceliği yüksek türlerin yer alması dikkat çekmektedir. Uygunsuz barındırma koşulları, yetersiz veteriner kontrolü, nakliye sırasındaki hayvan refahı ihlalleri ve kullanıcıların bilgi eksikliği ciddi endişelere neden olmaktadır. Ayrıca, bu türlerin Türkiye ekosistemlerinde istilacı popülasyonlar oluşturma riski ile zoonotik hastalık taşıma potansiyeli, halk sağlığı açısından önemli tehditler barındırmaktadır. Tek Sağlık (One Health) yaklaşımı çerçevesinde, egzotik hayvan ticaretinin ekolojik, hayvan refahı ve halk sağlığı boyutlarının bütüncül bir yaklaşımla ele alınması ve etkili yasal düzenlemelerin acilen hayata geçirilmesi zorunluluk arz etmektedir.

Keywords

• Halk sağlığı
• Hayvan refahı
• İstilacı türler
• Tek sağlık
• Yaban hayatı

Exotic Animal Trade via Social Media in Türkiye: A General Evaluation in Terms of Animal Welfare, Public Health, and Biodiversity

Abstract

The increasing global demand for exotic animals has led to the emergence of an uncontrolled trade network through social media platforms in Türkiye. This study systematically evaluates the scope, taxonomic diversity, and multidimensional impacts of exotic animal trade via social media in Türkiye. During a monitoring study conducted throughout 2023 in the four social media groups with the highest number of followers, a total of 58 exotic species/taxa belonging to eight different taxonomic classes (Gastropoda, Arachnida, Chilopoda, Insecta, Malacostraca, Amphibia, Reptilia, and Mammalia) were identified. The findings indicate that reptiles such as Python regius, Eublepharis macularius, and Pogona vitticeps, along with numerous tarantulas and feeder insects, are subject to intensive commercial activity. Notably, globally high-priority species including Ambystoma mexicanum and Poecilotheria metallica, both categorized as Critically Endangered (CR) on the IUCN Red List, were among the traded taxa. Inappropriate housing conditions, inadequate veterinary oversight, animal welfare violations during transport, and a significant lack of knowledge among users raise serious concerns. Moreover, the risk of these species establishing invasive populations in Turkish ecosystems and their potential to carry zoonotic diseases pose significant threats to public health. Within the framework of the One Health approach, it is imperative that the ecological, animal welfare, and public health dimensions of the exotic animal trade be addressed holistically and that effective legal regulations be implemented urgently.

Keywords

• Animal welfare
• Invasive species
• One Health
• Wildlife

References

1. Auliya, M., Altherr, S., Ariano-Sanchez, D., Baard, E. H., Brown, C., Brown, R. M., ... & Zhou, Z. (2016). Trade in live reptiles, its impact on wild populations, and the role of the European market. Biological Conservation, 204, 103-119.
2. Altherr, S. & Lameter, K. (2020). The rush for the rare: Reptiles and amphibians in the European pet trade. Animals, 10(11), 2085.
3. 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, 63(12), 928-938.
4. Bezerra-Santos, M. A., Mendoza-Roldan, J. A., Thompson, R. A., Dantas-Torres, F. & Otranto, D. (2021). Illegal wildlife trade: a gateway to zoonotic infectious diseases. Trends in parasitology, 37(3), 181-184.
5. Bjelić-Čabrilo, O., Novakov, N., Ćirković, M., Čabrilo, B., Popović, E. & Lujić, J. (2015). Helminth fauna and zoonotic potential of the European hamster Cricetus cricetus Linnaeus, 1758 in agrobiocoenoses from Vojvodina province (Serbia). Helminthologia, 52(2), 139-143
6. Bush, E. R., Baker, S. E. & Macdonald, D. W. (2014). Global trade in exotic pets 2006–2012. Conservation Biology, 28(3), 663-676.
7. Calle, P. P. & Joslin, J. O. (2015). Zoonotic Diseases of Primates. In R. E. Miller & M. E. Fowler (Eds.), Fowler's Zoo and Wild Animal Medicine, Elsevier Saunders, Volume 8 (pp. 401-409).
8. Cardoso, M. Z., Gilbert, M., Luedtke, J. & Gaillard, D. (2020). Social media and the illegal wildlife trade: An emerging challenge. Tropical Conservation Science, 13, 1-8.

9. Chomel, B.B., Belotto, A. & Meslin, F.X. (2007). Wildlife, exotic pets, and emerging zoonoses. Emerging Infectious Diseases, 13(1), 6-11.
10. Cowie, R. H. (2013). Biology, systematics, life cycle, and distribution of Angiostrongylus cantonensis, the cause of rat lungworm disease. Hawaii Journal of Medicine & Public Health, 72(6), 6-9.
11. Darçın, E. S. & Güçlü, Y. (2007). Biyolojik çeşitlilik ve Türkiye'deki durumu. In M. Aydoğdu & K. Gezer (Eds.), Anı Yayıncılık, Çevre Bilimi (3rd ed., pp. 145-166).
12. de Groot, M., O’Hanlon, R., Bullas Appleton, E., Csóka, G., Csiszár, Á., Faccoli, M., Gervasini, E., Kirichenko, N., Korda, M., Marinšek, A., Robinson, N., Shuttleworth, C., Sweeney, J., Tricarico, E., Verbrugge, L., Williams, D., Zidar, S. & Kus Veenvliet, J. (2020). Challenges and solutions in early detection, rapid response and communication about potential invasive alien species in forests. Management of Biological Invasions, 11(4), 637–660, https://doi.org/10.3391/mbi.2020.11.4.02
13. Elliott, S. P. (2007). Rat bite fever and Streptobacillus moniliformis. Clinical Microbiology Reviews, 20(1), 13-22.
14. Gallo, T. & Waitt, D. (2011). Creating a successful citizen science model to detect and report invasive species. BioScience, 61(6), 459-465.
15. García‐Díaz, P., Ross, J. V., Ayres, C. & Cassey, P. (2015). Understanding the biological invasion risk posed by the global wildlife trade: propagule pressure drives the introduction and establishment of Nearctic turtles. Global change biology, 21(3), 1078-1091.
16. Genovesi, P. & Shine, C. (2004). European strategy on invasive alien species. Council of Europe Publishing. Council of Europe Publishing, F-67075 Strasbourg Cedex, ISBN 92-871-5488-0
17. Gyuranecz, M., Dénes, B., Dán, A., Rigó, K., Földvári, G., Szeredi, L., Fodor, L., Alexandra, S., Jánosi, K., Erdélyi, K., Krisztalovics, K. & Makrai, L. (2010). Susceptibility of the common hamster (Cricetus cricetus) to Francisella tularensis and its effect on the epizootiology of tularemia in an area where both are endemic. Journal of wildlife diseases, 46(4), 1316-20.
18. Haley, A. L., Lemieux, T. A., Piczak, M. L., Karau S., D’Addario A., Irvine R. L., Beaudoin C., Joseph R Bennett, J. R. & Cooke S. J. (2023). On the effectiveness of public awareness campaigns for the management of invasive species. Environmental Conservation 50, 202–211.
19. Hulme, P. E. (2009). Trade, transport and trouble: Managing invasive species pathways in an era of globalization. Journal of Applied Ecology, 46(1), 10-18.
20. Innal, D. & Erk’akan, F. (2006). Effects of exotic and translocated fish species in the inland waters of Turkey. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries, 16(1), 39-50.
21. Jones, K. E., Patel, N. G., Levy, M. A., Storeygard, A., Balk, D., Gittleman, J. L. & Daszak, P. (2008). Global trends in emerging infectious diseases. Nature, 451(7181), 990-993.
22. Kaçar G. (2022). İstilacı Zararlı Türler Ve Mücadelesinde Yeni Yaklaşımları ISBN: 978-625-6957-26-8, Paradigma Akademi Yayınları.
23. Kurgun, E., Aydın, N. & Tarkay, N. (2003). Çevre El Kitabı. Çevre Bakanlığı, Çevre Eğitimi ve Yayın Dairesi Başkanlığı.
24. Kraus, F. (2015). Impacts from invasive reptiles and amphibians. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 46, 75–97.
25. Krijger, I. M., Ahmed A. A. A., Goris, M. G. A., Groot Koerkamp, P. W. G. & Meerburg, B. G. (2019). Prevalence of Leptospira Infection in Rodents from Bangladesh. International journal of environmental research and public health, 16(12), 2113.
26. Lambert, H., Elwin, A., Assou, D., Auliya, M., Harrington, L.A., Hughes, A.C., Mookerjee, A., Moorhouse, T., Petrossian, G.A., Sun, E., Warwicj, C., Can, Ö.E. & D’Cruze, N. (2025). Chains of Commerce: A Comprehensive Review of Animal Welfare Impacts in the International Wildlife Trade. Animals, 15, 971.
27. Lomolino, M. V., Riddle, B. R., Whittaker, R. J. & Brown, J. H. (2010). Biogeography (4th ed.). Sinauer Associates. Inc., Sunderland, Massachusetts, xi + 878 p., ISBN 978-0-87893-494-2.
28. Mayr, E. (1963). Animal Species and Evolution. Harvard University Press.
29. Mermin, J., Hutwagner, L., Vugia, D., Shallow, S., Daily, P., Bender, J., Koehler, J., Marcus, R. & Angulo, F. J. (2004). Reptiles, amphibians, and human Salmonella infection: A population-based, case-control study. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 38(Supplement 3), 253-261.
30. Molur, S. & Siliwal, M. (2004). Poecilotheria metallica. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2004: e.T63553A12680141.
31. Olden, J. D., Poff, N. L., Douglas, M. R., Douglas, M. E. & Fausch, K. D. (2004). Ecological and evolutionary consequences of biotic homogenization. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19(1), 18-24.
32. Pereira, H. M., Leadley, P. W., Proença, V., Alkemade, R., Scharlemann, J. P. W., Fernandez-Manjarrés, J. F., Araújo, M. B., Balvanera, P., Biggs, R., Cheung, W. W. L., Chini, L., Cooper, H. D., Gilman, E. L., Guénette, S., Hurtt, G. C., Huntington, H. P., Mace, G. M., Oberdorff, T., Revenga, C., Rodrigues, P., Scholes, R. J., Sumaila, U. R. & Walpole, M. (2010). Scenarios for global biodiversity in the 21st century. Science, 330, 1496–1501.
33. Pimm, S. L., Jenkins, C. N., Abell, R., Brooks, T. M., Gittleman, J. L., Joppa, L. N., Raven, P. H., Roberts, C. M. & Sexton, J. O. (2014). The biodiversity of species and their rates of extinction, distribution, and protection. Science, 344(6187): Art. 1246752. DOI: 10.1126/science.1246752.
34. Rara, S., Singla, N., Brar, S.K., Mandla, D. & Das Singla, L. (2023). Severe Infection of Nippostrongylus brasiliensis in Bandicota bengalensis Inhabiting Commensal Areas of Punjab, India: Prevalence, Risk Factor Analysis, Molecular Identification and Phylogenesis. Acta Parasitol., 68(1), 172-181.
35. Sardari, P., Felfelian, F.,Mohammadi, A., Nayeri, D. & Davis, E. O. (2022). Evidence on the role of social media in the illegaltrade of Iranian wildlife. Conservation Science and Practice, 4(7), e12725. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.1272510
36. Schuppli, C. A., Fraser, D. & Bacon, H. J. (2014). Welfare of non-traditional pets. Revue scientifique et technique (International Office of Epizootics), 33(1), 221-231
37. Sun, X., Tian, W., Zhang, Y., Yang, L., Jin, Y., Li, S. & Wang, X. (2025). Pathogens infected or carried by exotic pets pose emerging threat to human health. Animals and Zoonoses, 1(2), 170-177.
38. Zambrano, L., Valiente, E. & Vander Zanden, M. J. (2010). Ambystoma mexicanum. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010: e.T1095A3229615.
39. Warwick, C. & Steedman, C. (2021). Wildlife-pet markets in a one-health context. International Journal of One Health, 7(1), 42-64.
40. Warrell, D. A. (2016). Venomous Animals. In J. Farrar, P. J. Hotez, T. Junghanss, G. Kang, D. Lalloo, & N. J. White (Eds.), Elsevier, Manson's Tropical Diseases (23rd ed., pp. 1094–1111).
41. WWF (2016). Living Planet Report 2016. Risk and resilience in a new era. Gland, Switzerland: WWF International.