1 Introduction

In recent decades, the wild population and range of lions (Panthera leo) has steadily decreased. Lions are currently listed as globally Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species [1]. This decline is linked to the trade in body parts (bones, meat, trophies), partially as a replacement for tiger (P. tigris) body parts, as well as the export of live animals for the pet and entertainment industry [2]. Much of this trade is directed towards Asia, with Thailand being a significant importer of lion bones [3] and live lions ([4]. As a non-native species in Thailand, lions have not been afforded the same level of regulation as native big cats, such as tigers and leopards (P. pardus).

The principal legislation governing wildlife in Thailand was the Wild Animal Conservation and Reservation and Protection Act B.E. 2535 (1992) (hereafter referred to as the Wild Animal Act (2019)), which initially only regulated the hunting, possession, breeding, trade and transportation of selected native species. Until the Wild Animal Act (1992) was amended in 2019, lions and all other non-native species listed on the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) were not included under the Wild Animal Act (1992) in any form. In October 2022, the regulation of lions was enacted under a ministerial Thai law, where they were listed as a “controlled” and “dangerous” species but not given the higher protection afforded by the “protected” status of native species, such as tigers. Lion-tiger hybrids (henceforth referred to as hybrids), known as ligers (the offspring of a male lion and a female tiger) and tigon (the offspring of a male tiger and a female lion), are excluded under the Wild Animal Act (2019) despite being covered under CITES Appendix I listing for all Panthera species. Under the inclusion of selected CITES-listed non-native species, anyone wishing to possess a lion must now register that lion with the Thai CITES management authority and obtain a license from the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation (hereafter referred to as the Department of National Parks). The Department of National Parks is the government agency responsible for managing protected areas, wildlife conservation and issuing zoo licenses. Before the adjustment in the law, the possession of lions did not require a permit of any kind.

However, there are some concerns about the effectiveness of the Wild Animal Act (2019) in regulating lions. First and foremost, individuals are permitted to own lions in their homes. This contrasts with protected native species, such as tigers, which can only be kept in licensed zoos and zoos run by the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand. The Zoological Parks Organization Thailand zoos do not require zoo licenses from the Department of National Parks as they are a government organization under Royal Patronage. However, under the current Wild Animal Act (2019), only zoos keeping native species require a zoo license, resulting in numerous unlicensed zoos displaying exotic, non-native species [5]. Therefore, the current zoo licensing policy allows facilities to hold non-native species, such as lions, without being legally registered as a zoo. Consequently, in addition to lions now being kept in private homes, there has been an increase in the number of facilities that are open to the public, such as exotic animal cafés (as defined in [6]), that use lions for animal-visitor interactions, including for photos to be taken with the lion as well as petting lions [7, 8]. Here, lions are increasingly flaunted on social media, especially white lions, which are incorrectly portrayed as an endangered and rare species [9, 10] and a status symbol amongst the wealthy [11].

As part of the Department of National Parks licensing stipulations for lion possession, an owner must provide only a minimal standard for living conditions. Owners must provide a minimum 3 m x 3 m (9 m2) enclosure, adequate food, and water. Another prerequisite for receiving a permit is that lions must be microchipped and safely secured to prevent escape [12]. Nevertheless, there have been reports of lions escaping in the media (fortunately without causing injury to the members of the public) [13, 14] and of owners taking lions out in public [15,16,17]. Transporting lions without a permit contravenes the Wild Animal Act (2019), as the transportation of species classified as “dangerous” requires owners to notify the Department of National Parks beforehand to receive a transportation permit. However, as noted in media reports, some owners do not apply for this permit and are thus breaking the law [15,16,17,18]. As a result of these incidents, there has been increased public scrutiny and outcry about why the individual ownership of lions is permitted, particularly considering the endangerment of human safety.

Precise data on lion ownership in Thailand is limited and relies on numbers provided by the CITES management authority through the Department of National Parks, which in turn depends on owners complying with the law and registering actual numbers in the first place. The absence of a comprehensive database of lions and hybrids is problematic because if owners do not register these animals, the authorities do not have a complete picture reflecting actual numbers. Furthermore, enforcing the law should result in confiscation if owners are non-compliant. Yet, this enforcement can present challenges for the Department of National Parks, who lack sufficient resources to provide long-term care for these animals [19], as exemplified by the difficulty caring for 147 tigers confiscated from Tiger Temple in 2016 [20]. Therefore, policy should be changed now to avoid an overwhelming influx of confiscated or rescued lions and hybrids in the future.

We contend that existing legislation needs to be strengthened to ban the private ownership of lions and only permit lions to be kept in licensed zoos, zoos under the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand, and licensed wildlife rescue centers run by NGOs. For the last seven years, we have monitored the trade in lions in Thailand, of which we report here. Specifically, we aimed to (1) estimate the number of captive lions and hybrids, (2) determine the proportion of white lions and cubs, (3) identify the types of facilities lions and hybrids are kept in, (4) understand pricing data, and (5) investigate ownership trends. This research highlights conservation concerns, animal welfare, and human safety issues and illustrates the need for improved policy and enforcement of lion ownership in Thailand. Thus, the ultimate aim of the paper is to advocate for policy and legislative reform.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Definitions

We defined facilities as the following: (1) licensed zoos are facilities with a zoo license and may or may not be open to the public, (2) unlicensed zoos are facilities that do not have a zoo license (facilities in Thailand displaying non-native species as facilities are not required to obtain a zoo license) and are open to the public (including exotic animal cafés), (3) zoos operated by the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand that do not require zoo licenses, (4) farms are breeding facilities that are closed to the public, (5) private homes are facilities that may be a private house or other private property without a zoo license (6) wildlife rescue and rehabilitation centres operated by the Department of National Parks, that care for rescued and confiscated animals. Until the Wild Animal Act was amended in 2019, only the Department of National Parks facilities could house confiscated animals. As of 2025, to the best of our knowledge, only one NGO operates a rescue centre with a Memorandum of Understanding with the Department of National Parks to help care for confiscated animals.

2.2 Data collection

Between January 2018 and November 2024, we monitored the number of lions kept in facilities in Thailand. We visited all known facilities open to the public in Thailand, including licensed zoos, unlicensed zoos (including exotic animal cafés), zoos under the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand and the Department of National Parks centres open to the public at least once a year between 2018 and 2024. These 86 facilities were identified from existing records of known zoos and new facilities identified during our research, in addition to our collective knowledge spanning several decades of visiting facilities with captive wildlife in Thailand. We did not visit farms in person as they are closed to the public, nor did we visit private homes. Between 2020 and 2022, because of the Covid-19 pandemic, some zoos were not open to the public, but we could still monitor them through their online presence.

Over the same period (January 2018 and November 2024), we monitored social media sites (Facebook, TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram) three times a week for over 1000 monitoring sessions. We used social media posts to collect data on lions or hybrids in private homes. We used the following search terms in Thai and English: สิงโต (lion) สิงโตขาว (white lion) สิงโตน้ำตาล (brown lion), สิงโตน้อย (baby lion), ลูกสิงโต (white baby lion), ลูกสิงโตขาว (little lion) แมวยักษ์ (giant cat), and สิงโตน่ารัก (lovely cat). We did not join any closed or private groups on social media. All social media accounts we viewed had their privacy settings set to “public”; otherwise, the information would not be available. We cross-checked posts to minimize the chances of duplicate postings by identifying the account (some people have accounts on multiple social media platforms) and comparing photographs of the lions posted using size, color, and other distinctive identifying features of the animal, such as the lion’s vibrissae pattern. We also checked the animal’s name, as most lions posted online had given names. Finally, we searched online using Google for news reports detailing lion possession and trade in Thailand during the study period. For price information, we recorded price data from social media posts and personal communication with traders.

2.3 Data analysis

We categorized animals by species (lion or lion hybrid), by color (tawny, white, or mixed (identified as lighter brown cubs that do not fit into the traditional tawny or white standards)), and by age (adult or cub—we defined a cub as up to one year old). There was one lead researcher over the entire study period who was highly experienced in identifying individual lions using a combination of physical characteristics, given names, and locations. The names of many lions were provided on social media posts, further facilitating identification. If no name was given, we assigned an identification code, with the date (or year of birth) alongside visual data, including colour. Although we noted the sex of the animals where possible, we did not analyze data for sex because it was challenging at times to assign sex to cubs. We assigned a status of “alive”, “dead”, and “lost to follow-up” for each animal. We recorded an animal as being “alive” when we had a visual of the animal. Animals are recorded as “dead” if we have social media posts or other evidence, such as a news report, that the animal was no longer alive. Lions were listed as “lost to follow-up” when we were unable to verify their status conclusively (dead or alive) after one year. It is possible that we missed lions that were in facilities but not on display (i.e., back of house). It is also possible that we did not detect all relevant social media posts. Furthermore, it is important to recognize the limitations of this study in that there may be lions in private homes or farms that were not posted on social media; thus, these lions are not included in our analysis.

When price data was included in the posts, this was noted. For analysis, this was corrected for inflation for November 2024 (1,000 Thai Baht on 1 January 2018 = 1,113 Thai Baht on 30 November2024) and converted from Thai Baht to US$ (I US$ = 35.216 THB). We compared prices for adult lions with that of cubs, and between white and tawny cubs with a t-test for independent means on log-transformed data, and for cubs, we compared prices over time (again log-transformed as to approach a normal distribution more closely) using a Pearson’s rank correlation coefficient and accepting significance when P < 0.05 in a two-tailed test. Using these data, we calculated the total value of the lion cub trade in Thailand by multiplying the mean annual number of cubs born by the mean asking prices, taking the proportion of white, tawny and mixed-colour lions into account. The monetary value of a white breeding female was calculated by assuming she was reproductive between the ages of three and 11 years and that she could produce a total of 48 offspring (two litters of three cubs a year). Captive lions may experience puberty when less than two years old, which is faster than their wild counterparts, with growth rates thought to be an influencing factor [21]. Fecundity decreases with age, between 11 and 14 years [22]. However, wild lions have reportedly reproduced at approximately 16 years [23], and a captive lioness reproduced at almost 15 years [21]. Therefore, our estimate of eight reproductive years is highly conservative. For the online part of our research, we followed the recommendations and guidelines of Morcatty et al. [24] and visits to lion facilities were added to Oxford Brookes University's Register of Observations on Animals (2018–2024).

3 Results

3.1 Lion numbers

We recorded a total of 848 individual lions that were observed over the seven-year study period (Fig. 1). We observed a significant increase in the number of lions we observed over time (Pearson’s correlation coefficient, R = 0.955, P = 0.0008). On average, each lion was followed over a period of 3.4 ± 1.5 years (ranging from an average of 4.9 years for lions that were first recorded in 2018 to 11 months for the ones that were first recorded in 2024). As of November 2024, we identified 444 individual lions that we can confirm are currently in captivity, a 239% increase from the 132 individuals recorded in 2018. Of the 848 lions, 19 (2%) were dead, 346 (41%) were lost to follow-up (not observed in a year), and 444 (52%) were identified as alive. An additional 39 (5%) lions are presumed alive based on media sources; however, we could not conclusively verify the status of these individuals. Therefore, we excluded these lions from the 444 lions confirmed as alive. In addition to lions, we recorded 32 hybrids comprising 25 ligers in 12 facilities and seven liligers (offspring of a male lion and a female liger) in a single facility.

Fig. 1
figure 1

The number of lions (bars) and all facilities (dots) over a seven-year period with a line of best fit. The insert shows the number of white lions from 2018 to 2024

Full size image

3.2 Proportion of white lions and cubs

The proportion of white lions (adults and cubs) remained close to 50% throughout the study period (Fig. 1). An average of 101 cubs were born yearly, representing an average of 41% of the total lions observed per year (Table 1). We recorded a substantial increase in mixed-color (white and tawny) cubs. Two individuals were born in 2021, increasing to 24 mixed-color cubs born in 2024, with 46 individuals born since 2021.

Table 1 The number of lion cub colour variants recorded per year in all Thai facilities
Full size table

3.3 Facilities holding lions

In total, we identified a total of 128 facilities that keep or kept lions over the study period, and we observed a significant increase in the number of facilities over time (R = 0.959, P = 0.0006). At present, a total of 82 facilities house lions, comprising nine farms, six zoos under the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand, 13 licensed zoos, 24 unlicensed zoos, 28 private homes and two Department of National Parks facilities. The number of private homes represented the largest facility type housing lions in 2024, representing an increase of 1300% from 2018, when only two private houses were recorded keeping lions (Fig. 2). Of the 24 unlicensed zoos in 2024, just under half (n = 11) of these facilities are cafés and restaurants. We found lion hybrids in 12 facilities, including ligers in three private homes. All seven liligers were housed in the same licensed zoo.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Number of facilities by type between 2018 and 2024. Note that 2021 was when the addition of lions under the Wild Animal Act (2019) was announced (as indicated by the dashed line) and enacted in October 2022. ZPOT zoos are zoos run by the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand, and DNP is the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation

Full size image

For the number of lions found in each facility type, farms had the highest number since 2020, with a mean of 84 lions observed per year. This was followed by licensed zoos (mean = 58) and unlicensed zoos (mean = 45). The Department of National Parks facilities had the lowest number of lions throughout the study period (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Number of lions by facility type between 2018 and 2024. Note that 2021 was when the addition of lions under the Wild Animal Act (2019) was announced (as indicated by the dashed line) and enacted in October 2022. ZPOT zoos are zoos run by the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand, and DNP is the Department of National Parks, Wildlife and Plant Conservation

Full size image

3.4 Pricing data

We observed a range of prices for lions and hybrids. Adults are more expensive than cubs (t-test for independent means, t = 4.379, P = 0.0005). A one-month-old white cub sells for US$13,403 (n = 7, range US$10,208–US$15,618), whereas a tawny cub sells for US$6,471 (n = 4, range US$5,250–US$7,207), the difference being significant (t = 9.097, P = 0.0001). We did not record a price change for cubs over time (R = − 0.234, P = 0.421). We recorded one price for a mixed-color lion cub of US$7,099. We recorded only one price for a liger cub = US$56,792. No prices were recorded for liliger cubs. The value of the mean number of cubs born annually for all colour variants amounts to US$985,575. Considering that 45% of cubs born each year are white, and, on average, 47 white cubs are born annually, this equates to approximately US$629,941 for the sale of these white cubs alone annually. The highest price we recorded was US$151,833 in 2020 for a breeding pair of white lions. No prices were obtained for a breeding pair of tawny lions; however, the price for an adult tawny lion was US$14,040. The monetary value of a white breeding female, throughout her life, is some US$643,344 (48 cubs times a mean price of US$13,403) for the value of selling cubs alone. The value of a dead lion in terms of bones and meat was not easy to find as prices are not freely advertised; however, one trader stated that the value is US$11,361.

3.5 Modus operandi

Through our monitoring of individual lions, we found that many lions were transferred to different facilities depending on how they could be best utilized according to their life stage (Fig. 3). Cubs are usually available for sale after they reach 15 days old. At 60 days old, the cub must be registered with the Department of National Parks. Once cubs are born, if they are destined for a zoo, they may be used for animal-visitor interactions (such as for photo props, cub feeding, and petting), generally from when they are between two and six months old. When cubs are too old for feeding, they may be used for photos or walk-with animal visitor interactions (whereby the visitor walks the lion around an enclosure). When the lion is no longer suitable for interacting with visitors, it may be used for breeding. For people purchasing lions as pets, we uncovered a “buy-back” system, where owners could return their lions to the farm where they were purchased after they became more difficult to handle. In the same year, we observed three farms advertising the option to rent out their lions for private hire, especially for parties or photo shoots (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4
figure 4

The modus operandi showing the activity and movement of lions between 2018 and 2024, showing transfers between facility types and various uses of lions during their different life stages. The color of the dashed line for breeding denotes the breeding female. Lion names are anonymized. Cubs used for photo props may also be used for cub feeding or petting animal-visitor interactions

Full size image

4 Discussion

We sought to estimate the number of captive lions and hybrids in Thailand, the number of facilities housing lions, the percentage of cubs and white lions, the price to purchase, and to understand the modus operandi of the lion business since there is limited knowledge of these lion ownership trends. We found a substantial increase in lions and hybrids in Thailand from 2018 to 2024, with a high proportion of white lions and an exponential rise in the number of facilities, especially private houses, holding lions. Moreover, we illustrated the scope of the economic value of the lion industry through a complex business model that facilitates the trade in lions between buyer and seller for profit maximization through “buy-back” schemes.

4.1 Numbers

Our monitoring of lion numbers in Thailand over a seven-year period reveals a significant increase in the demand for lions and hybrids, especially after the Wild Animal Act (2019) was enacted in 2022 to regulate lion possession. The number of lions we recorded was higher than the latest data from the Department of National Parks, reporting that 40 facilities registered 342 lions [25]. The fact that we recorded more lions than registered is unsurprising given that some media reports on lions escaping or being taken out in public states that those lions were unregistered [13,14,15,16]. The high number of cubs born annually illustrates one of the main weaknesses of the Wild Animal Act (2019): it does not regulate breeding. If the owner has a license to possess a lion, they do not need to obtain specific permission to breed. One of the biggest loopholes is that lion cubs do not need to be registered until they are 60 days old, potentially facilitating trade as cubs can be quickly sold before registration is required. On the other hand, tiger cubs must be registered with the Department of National Parks within 24 h of birth, making it much more challenging to trade in these species.

Our findings also showed that hybrid numbers have increased significantly, perhaps because they are considered rarer and more expensive and because hybrids do not need to be registered with the authorities. Because of this nonregulation, anyone can own hybrids without that animal being assessed for its origin (i.e., whether it is the offspring of an illegally kept animal) or for the living or safety conditions provided. Since lions are listed under the Wild Animal Act (2019) as a controlled and dangerous species, hybrids must be equally dangerous, if not more. Ligers can be bigger than lions and tigers, and even the smaller tigon is large enough to kill a human. Therefore, any legislation for lions must include all Panthera species, including hybrids.

There are other driving forces behind the increase in the high percentage of cubs born yearly. Lions are considered charismatic megafauna due to their size and high entertainment value, and they are popular species at zoos worldwide [26]. Another factor is the influence of social media, as evidenced by the very high number of lions observed on social media platforms. Posting photos on social media can increase the demand for animal-visitor interactions [27,28,29] and can encourage the demand for wild animals as exotic pets, which is a driver in the wildlife trade [30, 31]. Animal-visitor interactions with lions and tigers, such as bottle-feeding cubs and “selfies”, are prolific in Thai zoos [7, 32, 33], with such encounters often posted online by zoos and visitors alike and are a lucrative business [9, 32]. However, as cubs grow and become less manageable, replacement cubs are needed, contributing to the very high number of lion cubs born in Thailand every year. As a result, speed breeding is a common practice, whereby females go into heat shortly after their cubs are taken from them [34], a practice already seen with tigers in Thailand [35]. Constant breeding has welfare implications and can cause multiple health issues [36]. Furthermore, other welfare issues are caused by inbreeding, especially in white lions and hybrids, who may suffer from developmental defects, weakened immune systems, and other conditions [37, 38].

4.2 Proportion of color variants

Since a large proportion of lions recorded in this study are white, this amounts to a high number of individuals whose welfare may be compromised by inbreeding alone, without even taking into consideration the often-substandard living conditions frequently found in Thai zoos [32, 35, 39, 40]. The high number of white lions in Thailand mirrors the popularity of these animals in zoos worldwide, partly due to the misconception that they are rare and are a separate subspecies that need conserving [9, 10]. The Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) requests that member zoos not intentionally breed species with white color morphs in their facilities because of the deleterious consequences on animal welfare and conservation messaging [41]. From a conservation perspective, these lions are of no importance. Nevertheless, a driver for the prevalence of these animals is the willingness of facilities to breed them thanks to their high monetary value (white lions can fetch double the price of tawny lions) and consumer demand driven by social media.

4.3 Facilities

The substantial increase in the number of private houses that keep lions following the inclusion of lions under the Wild Animal Act (2019) is another indicator that the amended legislation is inadequate in regulating lion ownership. There are likely many more lions in private homes that remain out of sight as owners do not post them on social media platforms and, hence, are not picked up in our research. The private ownership of lions is fraught with risk to human safety, as evidenced by lions that have escaped or been illegally taken out of the property by their owners [13,14,15,16,17] and transported without a permit. Therefore, from a human safety issue alone, the ownership of lions in private houses must be forbidden.

The high number of cubs born on farms illustrates the motivation to breed lions, given their high monetary value and the lack of permission needed to breed. A further worrying trend is the number of unlicensed facilities, such as zoos holding non-native species and cafés that display lions. The increase in unlicensed facilities displaying lions is likely due to the simple and fast way to generate income from animal-visitor interactions. As these facilities do not need a zoo license to keep lions, it is likely that the number of lions in these establishments will increase without a change in legislation. Since the licensing requirements regarding the conditions needed to house a lion are very minimal, it essentially means that anyone with a small backyard can own a lion. Clearly, the 3 m × 3 m enclosure required for a permit falls far short of best animal welfare practices. For example, the AZA states that enclosures should be a minimum of 929 m2 (equal to 30.5 m x 30.5 m) for a pair of lions and larger when additional lions are kept in the same enclosure [41]. Therefore, as only a small amount of space is legally required to keep lions (with no specifications on how the space should be furnished to cater for species-specific needs), this may encourage facilities to house more lions.

4.4 Pricing

The consistently high price of purchasing a lion over the study period reflects that lion ownership is a status symbol of the wealthy, as people are willing to pay a premium for exotic animals [10]. Such trends are also prevalent in Pakistan [42] and Albania [43]. The cost of procuring lions and hybrids emphasizes the significant economic value of the trade, especially highlighted by the income that can be generated by one breeding female alone. The prevalence of white cubs found in our study clearly indicates the willingness to pay, given they are significantly more expensive than tawny cubs. As such, the breeding and selling of lions is big business, especially for the farms, who have no incentive to discontinue their operation when it is legal and such large profits can be made. For that reason, government intervention is required to disrupt supply and demand.

4.5 Modus operandi

Our illustration of the modus operandi highlights the exploitative business models that maximize profit through all life stages. The ingenuity of the buy-back system is a worrying trend that facilitates the ownership of lions as pets as it provides people with a solution once their lion is too large to handle. The farms benefit from this arrangement because they do not have to cover the cost of raising the lion for a portion of time and can make money from hiring lions before they are of reproductive age. Consequently, we can expect to see more lions in private houses if breeders continue to offer this buy-back service and legislation is not improved.

The multiple transfers of lions between facilities illustrated in the modus operandi help explain why many lions are lost to follow-up because of the multiple transfers between facilities. It is not possible to know conclusively whether the high number of lions lost to follow-up are genuinely “missing” if the animals have been transferred and are out of sight, or whether the lions are, in fact, dead. By law, owners of lions in Thailand must report the lion’s death to the Department of National Parks; however, this probably does not happen in many cases because lions may not be registered in the first place. As a result, there may be a leakage of lions across the border, which, given the thriving big cat trade in Southeast and East Asia [2], it is quite probable that many lions lost to follow-up do end up in the trade.

According to lion farmers, lions bred in Thailand are being illegally traded with neighboring countries (pers. comms). An increase in captive lions in both Cambodia and Laos PDR has been observed [44,45,46]. However, according to CITES records, Cambodia only imported one lion in 2003, and Laos PDR only imported ten lions in 2023. Such illicit cross-border trade is exacerbated by weak legislation and lax law enforcement in both Cambodia and Laos PDR. For example, the Cambodian Prime Minister personally intervened to return a pet lion to the owner despite the authorities confiscating it for keeping the animal illegally [47]. In Laos PDR, the legal framework governing wildlife lacks clarity, with gaps in legislation enabling the exploitation of wildlife [48, 49]. Therefore, strengthened legislation and enforcement of lion ownership in Thailand can help to reduce illegal cross-border trade. Irrespective of lions being traded internationally, we clearly showed that the industry alone within Thailand is evidently a multi-million-dollar enterprise. While we focus our study on Thailand, we recognize that private ownership is an issue in many countries, including Pakistan [42], Albania [43], and the Ukraine [50]. Until recently, the private ownership of big cats in the United Arab Emirates was prevalent, but it was outlawed in 2017 [51]. Similarly, the USA has a large captive big cat population and recently enacted The Big Cat Public Safety Act in 2022, which also banned the interaction between the public and big cats to address big cat ownership [52]. Further, enhanced enforcement mechanisms under CITES are imperative to ensure more effective regulation and oversight of lion ownership, particularly in addressing illicit trade.

5 Conclusions and recommendations

Our findings represent an absolute minimum number of lions and hybrids in captive facilities in Thailand. In reality, the true number is certainly higher, and this trend is likely to continue if legislative changes are not made. Whilst we welcome the addition of lions under the Wild Animal Act (2019), as it stands, the legislation is clearly not sufficient. The substantial increase in lions across all facilities, especially in private homes, suggests that legislation enabled ownership rather than deterred it. There needs to be stricter control measures, starting with including hybrids under the Wild Animal Act legislation and forbidding the private ownership and commercial breeding of lions and hybrids. Furthermore, only licensed zoos, zoos under the Zoological Parks Organization Thailand, Department of National Parks facilities and wildlife rescue centers run by NGOs should be able to keep lions. Existing zoo licensing standards must be more specific, including mandating animal welfare measures that follow international standards for keeping lions. Improving welfare should also limit the number of lions a zoo can keep if each lion requires significantly more resources, which helps safeguard against trading.

A ban on animal-visitor interactions involving lions and other big cats should be considered, as these interactions promote exotic pet ownership with subsequent negative consequences on conservation and animal welfare. Implementing legislation similar to The Big Cat Public Safety Act would be a step forward. Consistent monitoring of and reporting by facilities is required to ensure the law is adhered to. We demonstrate the urgent need for legislative change to prevent both the captive lion population in Thailand from being out of control and in consideration of the implications to conservation, animal welfare, and risk to public safety.