226 J Maher and T Wyatt or ‘mega diverse’ in biodiversity, this is not always the case Russia, Canada, and the US, for example, have lower levels of diversity, but still are the source of some wildlife fuelling the black market (Wyatt 2013c) China, the USA and the EU are thought to be the largest consumers of illegal wildlife (McMurray 2008) The demand in China is for traditional medicines, whereas in the USA and the EU consumers buy a diverse range of wildlife from exotic companion animals and bird eggs to traditional medicines and bushmeat (McMurray 2008) Using the CITES online trade database, Wyatt (2013c) found that North America was responsible for 64 % of the illegal imports reported to CITES in 2012 In contrast, the region only accounted for 18 % of the illegal exports Most illegal exports (28 % of the total) originated in Asia, but surprisingly this region only accounted for % of the illegal imports reported to CITES—this clearly contradicts with the reports from NGOs and academics Europe’s illegal imports and exports were nearly the same—21 % and 20 % respectively Oceania and the Pacific (Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Island countries) are responsible for much smaller portions—12 % of the illegal imports and % of the illegal exports Central and South America including the Caribbean countries who are Parties to CITES only had % of illegal imports and then 12 % of illegal exports Finally, Africa illegally imported very little—1 %, but accounted for 17 % of illegal exports To reiterate, these can only be considered estimations due to the secretive nature of the IWT and inconsistencies with measuring and recording what is traded and confiscated It is evidence though that every region of the world is involved as both sources of and destinations for wildlife Given these estimations, questions must be raised over the sustainability of both the legal and illegal trade? Additionally, how can the welfare of these animals be adequately monitored and protected? Wildlife, whilst being traded legally and illegally, is often subjected to suffering and harm The abuse that takes place occurs on two levels As Beirne (2007) has explored, human abuse of animals happens not only on an individual basis but also on an institutionalised level This is evident in many contexts of human–animal relations such as instances of abuse of companion animals as an example of individual level abuse and also at the institutional level with the normalised legal abuse of ‘pets’ in government-funded scientific experimentation (see chapters on ‘Physical Abuse’ and ‘The use of animals in Medical Research’) Both levels of abuse are evident in the legal and illegal trade as will be detailed in the next section, though it is impossible to estimate the actual extent of harm the animals experience First though, a discussion follows on the organised nature of wildlife trafficking, which arguably enables the abuse of a greater number of animal victims than the legal trade