TRAFFIC: le pagelle WWF


Published on

Il rapporto, intitolato “Crime Wildlife Scorecard: Valutazione e applicazione degli impegni CITES per tigri, rinoceronti e elefanti” analizza le performance di 23 tra i più importanti paesi considerati di transito o consumatori diretti di parti e prodotti di queste specie.
I punteggi dei vari paesi vanno dal verde, al giallo al rosso per ogni singola specie. Il WWF ha con questo lavoro fatto emergere come la piaga del commercio illegale persiste in quasi tutti i 23 paesi esaminati, ma la classifica cerca di differenziare tra i paesi dove il crimine viene attivamente contrastato da quelli in cui gli sforzi attuali sono del tutto inadeguati. Nel dossier WWF si scopre che ben 448 rinoceronti sudafricani sono stati uccisi nel solo 2011, in Africa il bracconaggio di elefanti non è mai stato così alto e restano solo 3.200 tigri in natura. In italia preoccupa il commercio illegale di avorio online.

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

TRAFFIC: le pagelle WWF

  1. 1. A WWF Report, produced for the 62nd meetingreport CITES A of the Standing Committee, produced forREPORT 23-27WWF by July 20122012 Kristin NowellWILDLIFE CRIMESCORECARDAssessing compliance with and enforcement ofCITES commitments for tigers, rhinos and elephants
  2. 2. Contents©WWF-Canon / James Morgan Introduction 4 Selection of countries for assessment 6 Compliance and Enforcement 7 Yardsticks for evaluating compliance and enforcement 7 Methods for monitoring compliance and enforcement 8 Compliance and enforcement scoring 8 Assignment of scores 9 Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcemeNT 10 Progress along the trade chain 12 Primarily destination countries 12 Countries of origin and transit 12 Countries of origin 13 Discussion of scores for tigers 14 Discussion of scores for rhinos and elephants 16 Rhinos – Africa and Asia 16 Elephants – Asia 18 Elephants – Central Africa 19 Elephants – Nigeria 21 Elephants – Egypt 21 Elephants and rhinos – East Africa 21 Elephants and rhinos – Southern Africa 22 key recommendations 24 Tigers 24 Rhinos 21 Elephants 25 China 25 Thailand 25 Transit countries 25 Central Africa 26 Annex 1: Country selection procesS 27 Parcs Gabon ecoguards patrol the Oua river in northwest Gabon. Rivers are often used as quick Annex 2: Review of recent compliance and enforcement actions in China 30 ways to export poached elephant Ivory and out of the forest. References 32 Acknowledgements 32 Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 3
  3. 3. Introduction International commercial trade of elephants, ©WWF-Canon / James Morgan rhinos and tigers – and their parts and products — is almost universally prohibited by CITES, the international endangered species trade convention, however the enforcement of this restriction remains weak. Illegal trade in ivory, rhino horn and tiger parts is of major conservation concern. While CITES mainly prohibits or regulates international trade, it has continued to expand its role to prevent illegal trade at the national level through the adoption of various “Decisions” and “Resolutions”. This is critical to ensure illegal trade at national levels does not lead to international trade dynamics that undermine the conservation of elephants, rhinos and tigers, in addition to the effectiveness of the Convention itself. The approach to each species group differs, but all include national measures to control not only international, but also internal trade in the species’ parts, derivatives and products: 23 • For tigers, it is recommended that internal trade be “prohibited” (Res Conf. 12.5 Rev. CoP15 ); • For rhinos, it is recommended that such trade be “restricted” (Res Conf. 9.14 Rev. CoP15); range, • For elephants, “unregulated domestic sale of ivory [is to] to be prohibited” transit and under he Action Plan for the Control of Trade in Elephant Ivory Decision 13.26 t Rev. CoP15 Annex 2). destination Other common themes include strengthening law enforcement; coordination with countries other countries; improved data collection; enacting deterrent legal penalties for illegal trade; and raising public awareness, especially among user groups. Tigers, implicated in rhinos and elephants were the subject of renewed and substantial concern at the 15th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (CoP15) in 2010 and the 61st meeting illegal trade of the CITES Standing Committee (SC61) in 2011, specifically in regard to the scale of illegal trade. of elephant, This report, produced to coincide with the 62nd meeting of the CITES Standing rhino and Committee (in July 2012), selects 23 range, transit and consumer countries from Asia and Africa facing the highest levels of illegal trade in elephant ivory, rhino horn and tiger tiger parts (Annex 1), and evaluates their progress since CoP15 towards compliance with and enforcement of CITES commitments for these three species groups. Countries products are scored green, yellow and red to signal recent implementation effort, and indicate whether governments are moving in the right direction to curb illegal trade in these assessed species groups, or to indicate whether they have made little progress. Recent actions underpinning the country scores are discussed, and recommendations are made for all countries to improve compliance and enforcement, but with focus on key countries identified in this assessment as urgently needing to show progress. It is important to note that illegal internal trade in these three species groups persists in virtually all of the selected countries, however this report seeks to differentiate Ivory tusks seized from illegal trade are labelled and stacked after TRAFFIC & WWF audit in countries where it is actively being countered from those where current efforts are preparation for the burning of Gabon’s ivory stockpile. entirely inadequate. It should also be noted that a green score of all three species groups does not mean that the country in question is free of wildlife crime. In many cases there are widespread problems concerning illegal trade in other species, such as reptiles and primates. Moreover, some of these countries are performing poorly in terms of other conservation governance indicators and threats to the three species groups, such as the integrity of protected areas (WWF, 2012a).Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 4
  4. 4. selection of In the scope of this analysis, it was not possible to carry out an assessment for all three compliance and The above countries are assessed for compliance and enforcement in the period since countries for enforcement species groups of every country involved in CoP15 (June 2010-June 2012), using methods the international illegal trade chain (origin, which have precedent in CITES procedures assessment transit and destination). (Guide to CITES Compliance Procedures, annexed to Resolution Conf. 14.3). In the interests of fairness and transparency, a measured pproach was required to select a subset of key countries, rather Colour scores modelled on traffic signals (red, yellow, green) are given as a simplified than simply relying on anecdotal information. The approach indicator of government progress toward implementation of CITES Decisions and was essentially a quantitative one, based on reports and databases of the TRAFFIC Resolutions for the target species. Countries are evaluated only for the species groups network, details of which are set out in Annex 1. The list of countries selected for flagged in the country selection process (so that Indonesia and Malaysia, for example, further analysis is shown below. while being important rhino range countries, are not given rhino scores, as they were not Countries are classified according to their primary role in the trade chain when all flagged in the country selection process for illegal trade) (Annex 1). three species groups are considered together, but these groupings are not clear-cut. Compliance refers to the alignment of national policy with CITES requirements, as For example, concerning ivory, Viet Nam and Thailand are also countries of transit described below, and enforcement refers to recent actions taken against wildlife crime. (particularly for African elephant ivory) as well as origin (Asian elephant ivory). Compliance and enforcement are determined to be generally good or failing in regard to Central African countries are another example, grouped as primarily origin due to implementation of the CITES requirements. This is not to say that there has been a substantial losses in national elephant populations, although all have seen resultant drop in wildlife crime pertaining to the target species. All the countries substantial cross-border flows of illegal ivory. selected are facing serious levels of crime associated with these species (and also with many other species groups). This scorecard simply evaluates how well they are Table 1. Countries selected for scorecard assessment employing the resources available to them to combat it. Primarily destination Transit and origin Primarily origin Yardsticks for evaluating compliance and enforcement Compliance and enforcement are evaluated on the basis of the following CITES Decisions and Resolutions, with particular attention to the key elements common to China Kenya Cameroon all three species groups: Egypt Laos Central African Republic Thailand Malaysia Congo Viet Nam Mozambique Democratic Republic Table 2. Countries selected for compliance and enforcement assessment Myanmar of Congo Nigeria Gabon Tiger Rhino Elephant Nepal India Tanzania Indonesia Conservation Conservation Action Plan for the Control of Zambia Russia of and trade in of and trade in Trade in Elephant Ivory (Decision South Africa tigers and other African 13.26 (Rev. COP15) Annex 2) and Zimbabwe Appendix I Asian and Asian associated elements of the Res. big cat species Rhinoceroses Conf. 10.10 (Rev. COP15): Res Conf. 12.5 Res Conf. 9.14 Regarding control of internal (Rev. COP15) (Rev. COP15) ivory trade; and Decisions Selected elements of the African 14.66-69 Elephant Action Plan (Decision 14.75 and COP15 Inf 68): * Enact adequate penalties (AECP Activity 1.3.1.) * Develop regional law enforcement networks (AECP Activity 1.1.4) * Enforce CITES provisions on ivory trade (AECP Activity 1.4.2) ContinuedWildlife Crime Scorecard page 6 Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 7
  5. 5. Compliance and enforcement Common elements include: assignment Country compliance and enforcement scores are presented in three tables according to the country’s of scores • National policies permitting no uncontrolled internal trade • Strengthened law enforcement position along the international illegal trade chain: • International coordination primarily destination (Table 1), transit and origin • Improved data collection for wildlife crime analysis • Enactment of penalties that would constitute credible deterrents (Table 2), and primarily origin (Table 3). • Raising public awareness to reduce demand and increase compliance, Countries are listed in alphabetical order. The scores should not be interpreted as especially among user groups indicative of countries having solved their wildlife crime problems – since the three species groups are threatened with unprecedented levels of poaching and illegal trade While evaluation emphasis was placed on the common elements, key elements pressure – but rather of the degree of effort governments have directed since CoP15 pertaining only to certain species were also included, such as provisions related to towards this goal. Green denotes substantial levels of compliance and enforcement preventing trade in captive tiger parts and provisions relating to controls for which should be continued and strengthened. Yellow is a warning that key aspects of internal ivory trade. either compliance or enforcement fall short, and Red signals that little progress has been made. Constraints facing many governments are acknowledged; corruption is a Methods for monitoring compliance and enforcement persistent problem and wildlife authorities are often under-resourced. Compliance and Compliance and enforcement were monitored on the basis of government enforcement pose steep challenges, but these challenges must be met and it would announcements covered in the media, other news reports, documents for CITES appear that, at least in some cases, lack of political will, rather than lack of resources, Standing Committee meetings 61 and 62, documents for the May 2012 Tiger is the primary impediment. Stocktaking meeting in India, published market surveys by TRAFFIC and other NGOs, and unpublished information collected by TRAFFIC offices. Although employing Table 4. Compliance and enforcement scores Table 6. Compliance and enforcement different information sources, this method was modelled on that outlined in the Guide for destination countries* scores for countries of origin to CITES Compliance Procedures: “Annual and biennial reports, legislative texts as well as other special reports and responses to information requests, for example within • • • • Country Tiger Rhino Elephant Country Tiger Rhino Elephant the Review of Significant Trade or the National Policy Project, provide the primary, • but not exclusive, means of monitoring compliance with obligations under the China Cameroon • Convention” (Res. Conf. 14.3 para. 15). • • • • Egypt Central African • Republic Compliance and enforcement scoring • • Thailand • Congo Countries are scored green, yellow or red in an assessment of their recent efforts to Viet Nam comply with and enforce CITES trade controls for the three species groups. Democratic • Republic of Congo Table 3. Country species score for period June 2010-June 2012 • • • • Gabon • Table 5. Compliance and enforcement scores for origin and transit countries • India • General progress in key aspects of compliance and enforcement • • • • Indonesia • • Failing on key aspects of compliance or enforcement Country Tiger Rhino Elephant Russia • • • Failing on key aspects of compliance and enforcement Kenya • • South Africa • • Laos The Guide to CITES Compliance Procedures (Res. Conf. 14.3) highlights “appropriate Zimbabwe • • Malaysia domestic measures” as an area of particular attention for compliance matters, e.g., • • • Mozambique “para. 2c taking appropriate domestic measures to enforce the provisions of the * ote: A blank space indicates that the species is N Convention and prohibit trade in violation thereof.” Domestic measures evaluated for • • • Myanmar not applicable for the country in question this report include compliance with and enforcement of Decisions and Resolutions • Nepal (the yardsticks) relating to international as well as internal trade controls. Progress in enforcement was assessed based on governments’ capacity and use of resources • • Nigeria available to them. Countries differ from one another in these regards but, after this is • • Tanzania taken into account, the scores represent a comparative indication of their willingness or otherwise to tackle the problems they face. Zambia Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 8 Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 9
  6. 6. Discussion of There were important advances ©WWF-Canon / James Morgan in compliance in 2010-2012, with advances and gaps introduction of stricter legislation, wildlife trade controls and penalties in a number in compliance of countries, including China, India, Laos, Malaysia, Nigeria, Russia, South Africa and enforcement and Zimbabwe. Other countries have policy improvements in process, including the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kenya, Myanmar, Russia (amendments to legislation increasing 1500 criminal penalties), Tanzania, Thailand and Viet Nam (Anon., 2011a; Govt. of India, 2011; GTI, 2012; Guvamombe, 2010; Khan, 2011; Milliken and Shaw, in prep.; Nowell et al., 2011; Saving Rhinos, 2012b; SC62 Doc. 46.2; SC62 SumRec; Thome, 2011; TRAFFIC, in prep.). However, major prosecutions for wildlife enforcement crime are still rare, and overall the scoring shows that enforcement has lagged behind compliance, indicating that many countries are not fully making full use of the policy officers tools they have set in place. One common gap in enforcement is the lack of clear jurisdictional authority and effective trained by coordination mechanisms for relevant government agencies involved in law enforcement, including wildlife authorities, police, customs authorities, commerce, the judiciary Traffic in and others (SC Doc. 43 Annex, Ringuet and Ngandjui, 2012). China (NICEGG1, 2012), South Africa (Milliken and Shaw, in prep.), India, and Nepal (TRAFFIC, pers. comm. SE Asia since 2012) are examples of countries that have recently established such mechanisms, which should prove a model for adoption elsewhere. Capacity-building and raising awareness 2009 of wildlife crime across this spectrum of government agencies is also important. In its capacity-building activities in Southeast Asia since 2009, TRAFFIC has provided CITES implementation training to more than 1,500 officials, ranging from protected area rangers to frontline enforcement officers (customs and police), investigators, members of the judiciary (senior judges and prosecutors) and border control officers. Increased effort is being put into building the capacity of agencies to conduct their own training (Beastall and Yee, 2011). Another is the collection and analysis of trade data as a tool for intelligence-based law enforcement. While country provision of data to the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) is improving (SC Doc. 46.1), the CITES Secretariat is still urging more scrupulous participation in the system (CITES Notification 2012/034). The Secretariat has struggled to collect adequate data on rhino and tiger trade for wildlife crime analysis (SC61 Doc. 41 Annex 1, SC Doc. 47.2), and it is recommended that Parties participate in creating centralized databases, building on models developed by TRAFFIC (CoP15 Doc. 45.1 Annex 1; Verheij et al., 2010; Stoner, 2012). However, there have been many recent advances in enforcement which should be continued and strengthened. These include international cooperation on law enforcement, with new regional networks set up in South Asia (TRAFFIC, 2012a) and under establishment in Central Africa (SC62 Doc. 30); international enforcement Two convicted poachers are handcuffed at the jail in Oyem, Gabon. Elephant poaching carries actions coordinated by the International Coalition Against Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) and a three year sentence in the country. Interpol (Interpol website), a Heads of Police and Customs Seminar on Tiger Crime held in Thailand in 2012 (SC62 Doc. 43 Annex), convening of the CITES Ivory and Rhino Enforcement Task Force in 2011 (SC61 Doc. 44.1), and the first Technical Exchange Meeting between producing, consuming, and transiting nations to reduce the illegalWildlife Crime Scorecard page 10
  7. 7. Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcement Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcement trade in African elephant ivory in China in 2010 (SC61 Doc. 44.7). In Southeast Asia, in the port of Mombasa (WWF, unpublished information). Sniffer dogs are also being the CITES Secretariat and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) are preparing introduced in China (WWF, 2011a), and used in DRC, India and Russia to track poachers to train border guards in countries of the Greater Mekong region, including China, (GTI, 2012; Merode, 2012; WWF, 2012d). Laos, Myanmar, Thailand and Viet Nam among others (SC62 Doc. 29). There were Countries of origin also advances in cooperation between countries playing different roles along the trade chain, for example meetings between South African and Vietnamese officials There are several green species’ scores for the countries of origin which have served concerning rhino horn trade (although these have yet to bear real fruit) (Milliken as the major sources of supply for international illegal trade, showing that a number of and Shaw, in prep.), and creation of a Russo-Chinese working group for Amur tiger range states have made progress in compliance and enforcement. Since many of them conservation (GTI, 2012). China has also increased its outreach to African countries still experience high levels of poaching, the ultimate effectiveness of their efforts remains as well as South and Southeast Asia (Annex 2). Advances were also made with more to be proven, although there are indications that enhanced enforcement is providing governments using DNA analysis and other laboratory tests to determine origin of a mitigating effect in countries such as India (TigerNet Mortality database), Indonesia seized tiger, rhino and elephant products (Ogden, 2012; SC Doc’s 46.1 and 47.2). (which has protected critical populations of two Critically Endangered rhinoceros species with its anti-poaching patrols [Fidelis, 2012; Konstant, 2012], to the extent that Progress along the trade chain the country was one of the few in Asia not flagged for significant illegal trade in rhino horn), Nepal (where zero tigers as well as rhinos were lost to poaching in 2011: GTI, Primarily destination countries 2012), Russia (GTI, 2012) and South Africa (Milliken and Shaw, in prep.). Compliance There are few green species’ scores for countries that are primarily destinations for and enforcement for countries of origin have been best implemented protecting wild tiger and rhino products, and none for elephant ivory, indicating a serious lack of populations on the ground. These countries have all made progress implementing progress. Major gaps in enforcement at the retail market level are primarily responsible intelligence-based and analytical anti-poaching systems (Law Enforcement Monitoring: for the failing scores in destination countries, while Egypt, Thailand and Viet Nam LEM) (GTI, 2012), an approach which is now being adopted by Kenya (Koros, 2011) and fail for key areas of compliance as well. It is critical that demand countries, including other countries in southern Africa. Several countries, notably India and Nepal, have also China, Thailand and Viet Nam, urgently and dramatically improve enforcement effort established specialized wildlife crime agencies and units to improve enforcement up the to crack down on illegal wildlife trade in their countries. trade chain (GTI, 2012). Overall, the components of demand reduction and public awareness represent While Russia is generally in compliance regarding CITES and tigers, important gaps a significant gap in implementation of CITES commitments in these countries. remain in legislative protections. A working group of the parliament (State Duma) has International wildlife crime is demand-driven, and it is recommended that China held three hearings to improve national legislation on conservation and protection of and Viet Nam, in particular, prioritize the development and implementation of well- threatened species, including tigers (Kovalchuk, 2011). Many recommendations identified researched demand reduction campaigns. Targeted strategies should be developed by a recent assessment of Russian legislation carried out by WWF and TRAFFIC to influence consumer behaviour around tiger parts, rhino horn, and ivory of illegal (Vaisman, 2012) were officially accepted for inclusion in the portfolio of proposals before origin. Such strategies should include working closely with user groups, including the State Duma, and swift action upon these recommendations is desirable. Russia the traditional medicine community, along the lines of the programme advanced by a received a CITES Certificate recent creative experts’ workshop (TRAFFIC, 2012d) and included in the Global Tiger Compared to Asia, scores are lower for compliance and enforcement in Africa, Recovery Programme’s 2012 work plan (GTI, 2012). Egypt, Thailand and China need to particularly in Central Africa. This could in part reflect a lack of resources, although increase their efforts to educate consumers about the rules regarding ivory purchases. Nepal’s efforts in this regard could provide a model approach, particularly the While recognizing the efforts already undertaken (e.g., SC62 Doc. 46.2; Milliken and development of its community-based intelligence networks (SC62 Doc. 47.2). However, Shaw, in prep.; Annex 2), China, Thailand and Viet Nam should increase efforts to corruption and lack of political will to combat illegal wildlife trade are also a major educate their citizens travelling abroad about the illegality of returning with tiger, problem, with poor governance in Central Africa consistently linked to high levels of rhino and elephant products. The CoP15 ETIS analysis found that (since 1989) Chinese illegal ivory trade (CoP14 Doc. 53.2; CoP15 Doc. 44.1 Annex). Central Africa also nationals have been arrested within or coming from Africa in at least 134 ivory seizure attracts more Chinese nationals than any other sub-region of Africa, which has cases, totalling more than 16 tonnes of ivory, and another 487 cases representing exacerbated the illegal ivory trade. Given the escalation of elephant poaching in Central almost 25 tonnes of ivory originating from Africa was seized en route to China (CoP15 Africa and the increased levels of organized crime involved in the trade (SC62 Doc. Doc. 44.1 Annex). 46.1), it is clear that the situation is now critical. In addition, recent studies of elephant meat trade in Central Africa found that it has a high earning potential as a prestigious Countries of origin and transit bushmeat, providing additional economic incentive for the illegal killing of elephants There are also few green species’ scores for countries of origin and transit. Nepal in the region (IUCN, 2012a). was recognized by the CITES Secretariat for its development of community-based While most Central African countries face national crises of elephant poaching, they intelligence networks, and 2011 was the first zero poaching year for rhinos in Nepal, in also need to strengthen their regional cooperation to counter illegal ivory flows across marked contrast to the trend in Africa (SC Doc. 47.2). Transit countries, and indeed all national borders. Enforcement agencies from both Cameroon and Central African countries, need to prioritize enhancement of the capacity of their customs and border Republic indicate that significant amounts of ivory are trafficked across their respective control authorities to intercept smuggling of wildlife products (SC62 Doc’s 29, 43.2 and boundaries from northern Congo and Gabon. DNA testing has implicated Gabon as a 46.1). This includes training, awareness-raising and vigilance against corruption, as major source behind some of the largest ivory movements in ETIS. Ivory also crosses well as use of technology and tools such as sniffer dogs, which have been successfully borders with DRC (CoP15 Doc. 44.1 Annex; WWF, unpublished information). In addition, deployed in Kenyan airports to detect ivory (KWS, 2012) and are being extended to use Sudan and Chad are linked into the picture. Recently, well-armed bands of poachers – 1 National Inter-Agencies CITES Enforcement Coordination Group.Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 12 Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 13
  8. 8. Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcement Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcement allegedly from Sudan and coming through Chad and/or CAR – have penetrated deep Programme, and its responsibilities under CITES (Viet Nam NGOs, 2012). Viet Nam into Central African Republic and Cameroon territory in search of ivory.  also needs to develop a policy and enforcement mechanism to address the issue of At present it is not clear how the ivory that is allegedly taken by Sudanese poachers finds online advertisements for tiger products (as with rhinos: Milliken and Shaw, in prep.). its way onto the international market (since it is unlikely that the domestic clientele Although Laos has shown strong political will for tiger conservation, with a speech in that country is sufficient to make poaching profitable). This is an issue that merits by the country’s President at the Heads of State Tiger Summit in Russia in 2010, and investigation. made progress towards improving administration of legal protections for tigers, with An associated issue of concern is the flow of arms in Central Africa and the high establishment of a new Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment and upgrading involvement of some national military forces in poaching. In recent years, significant the conservation agency to the Department of Forest Resource Management, it lacks numbers of AK-47s have been confiscated in Central African Republic and Cameroon, controls to prevent parts from captive tigers entering into illegal trade, especially to and can be easily obtained in Congo for prices as low as US$40 (WWF, unpublished Viet Nam, and has not made this an implementation priority (GTI, 2012). information). This flow of arms, driven by a desire to poach elephants, exacerbates the In 2010, Vietnamese journalists gained access to a large tiger (and other exotic animal) ease at which ivory is harvested from the forest, increases risks to people, and increases breeding farm near Thakhek, Laos, not far from the Vietnamese border. The well- risks of arms being used in local conflicts. guarded facility is owned in part by Vietnamese nationals, and one owner told the 13 journalists that their main business was delivering tiger carcasses to Viet Nam for discussion scores for tigers making tiger bone medicine (Anon., 2012c). Companies in Laos and Viet Nam also Compared to African elephants, Asian elephants and African rhinos (though not, of began importing lion bone and lions of captive origin from South Africa in 2009, with course, Asian rhinos), tigers have a much lower extant wild population and so are much agents from one of the Laotian companies also being prosecuted for illegal trade in countries more vulnerable to illegal trade. Consequently, even relatively low absolute volumes of rhino horn in South Africa (Macleod, 2012). While the end-use of the lion bones is trade pose a problem. Moreover, CITES has not agreed an external assessment process not known, it is likely that they are feeding into illegal internal markets for tiger bone endorsed the for tigers equivalent to MIKE/ ETIS for elephants or the IUCN-TRAFFIC report that is medicine. Laos and Viet Nam should clearly enforce prohibitions against the use of captive big cats to supply internal and international trade. Global Tiger produced at each Conference of the Parties for rhinos. Nevertheless, tigers are the species for which green country scores are most numerous, China has been identified as one of the main destination markets for the international Recovery indicating that significant progress has been made by governments. Much of that success illegal tiger trade (Verheij et al., 2010), and is home to some of the world’s largest can be credited to the Global Tiger Recovery Programme, developed and endorsed by collections of captive tigers, whose owners have advocated strongly for permission to Program 13 tiger range countries at a Heads of State Tiger Summit in Russia at the end of 2010. use these animals to make tiger bone medicines (Nowell and Xu, 2007). China received Still, TRAFFIC’s tiger seizure database found that seizures increased from an average a green score, however, for compliance and enforcement, indicative of significant in 2010 of more than 175 tigers (minimum) per year from 2006-2008 to more than 200 tigers progress implementing CITES requirements since 2010 (see Annex 2 for details). per year (minimum) in 2009-2011 (Stoner, 2012). Progress in enforcement is evident, In 2006-2007 China reassessed its 1993 policy prohibiting internal trade in tiger and increasing seizures may be a reflection of this, but wild tigers remain under serious products and the use of tiger bone as medicine (Nowell and Xu, 2007). In 2009-2010 poaching threat and enforcement of trade controls must be further strengthened. the government made a series of announcements that the policy of prohibition would Intelligence-led enforcement would benefit from a more robust data collection system continue (CoP15 Inf. 16, SC61 Doc. 41 Annex 2, Nowell et al., 2011). China has tightened (SC61 Doc. 41 Annex 1), with governments directly providing information on seizures to regulation of animals in captivity, with particular attention to its large captive tiger a centralized database (Stoner, 2012). population, although it is unclear if these measures are being enforced to a degree sufficient to prevent illegal trade from these facilities (Nowell et al., 2011). While a 2007 Elimination of demand for tiger products (GTI, 2012) and preventing parts and regulation (SFA, 2007) permits trade in tiger skins which have been registered with derivatives from entering illegal trade from or through captive breeding facilities (Res. the authorities and determined to be legally acquired, market monitoring by TRAFFIC Conf. 12.5 and Decision 14.69) are viewed as key requirements for tiger conservation in (unpublished information) has not found evidence that this potential loophole is being international agreements. Two countries failed on both compliance and enforcement exploited nor that such trade is being condoned by authorities. While substantial related to CITES requirements regarding captive tigers – Laos and Viet Nam. While numbers of tiger products, especially tiger bone wine claiming to be pre-Convention Viet Nam (and Laos, to a lesser degree), has clearly dedicated effort to enforcing its (EIA, 2012) or legally derived from captive animals (Nowell et al., 2011) have been policy prohibiting internal trade in tiger products (TRAFFIC Tiger Seizures database), advertised on Internet sites, China substantially increased its policing of online trade these efforts are undermined by the government’s consideration of allowing trade in in June 2012, introducing new regulations and cooperating with 15 major Internet captive tigers, and it appears that captive tigers are supplying a substantial proportion auction sites, which signed a declaration stating they have a zero-tolerance policy of the illegal trade, given the relatively high number of carcasses seized (SC61 Doc. towards their services being used to conduct illegal wildlife trading (TRAFFIC, 2012b). 41 Annex 1) and the small tiger population in Viet Nam. In 2007, Viet Nam permitted It is too soon to assess the full impact of these measures, but preliminary monitoring the establishment of “pilot breeding farms” for tigers, and in a 2012 report to the indicates a substantial reduction (more than 65 per cent) of illegal advertisements Prime Minister, the Ministry for Agriculture and Rural Development (the CITES for tiger products (TRAFFIC, unpublished information). China carried out several Management Authority) described three facilities and proposed that “dead tigers [from sweeping enforcement actions in 2010-2012 specifically targeting illegal trade in tiger captive facilities] can be used to make specimens and traditional medicine on a pilot products (Annex 2), and demonstrated strong political will and commitment with an basis” (MARD, 2012). A letter from conservation NGOs based in Viet Nam has urged unprecedented speech by Premier Wen Jiabao at the 2010 Heads of State Tiger Summit the Prime Minister to reject the proposal, as it will undermine enforcement, Viet in Russia (Govt. of China, 2010). Nam’s commitment to reduce demand for tiger products in the Global Tiger RecoveryWildlife Crime Scorecard page 14 Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 15
  9. 9. Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcement Discussion of advances and gaps in compliance and enforcement China’s green score for tigers is contingent upon their continued policy of prohibition, and and to ensure that imports of hundreds of rhino horn trophies from South Africa in there should be more active monitoring of captive facilities to prevent illegal trade. The recent years have been for non-commercial purposes as required under the white rhino’s same is true for Thailand, which, like Viet Nam, has a high proportion of tiger carcasses Appendix II annotation (“for the exclusive purpose of allowing international trade in its recent seizures (SC61 Doc. 41 Annex 1). Thailand has reported on the status of its in live animals to appropriate and acceptable destinations and in hunting trophies:” numerous captive tiger facilities in detail to CITES, and is carrying out DNA testing on Ceratotherium simum simum, CITES Appendix II ). Many Vietnamese nationals have seized tiger carcasses to try to determine their origin (SC61 Doc. 43 Annex 3). A CITES been arrested or implicated in South Africa for acquiring rhino horns illegally (including Certificate of Commendation was awarded for their interception of a smuggled live tiger diplomats), but there has been little evident enforcement follow-up on information cub at the Bangkok airport, and subsequent public awareness efforts in the Asian Year of provided by the South African authorities (Milliken and Shaw, in prep.). Viet Nam is the Tiger (CITES Notif. 2012/030). urged to strengthen enforcement effort and provide effective deterrents to any of its nationals who may be engaged in illegal rhino horn trade. Myanmar’s national wildlife trade controls have been categorized as not generally in compliance with CITES (CITES Notif. 2012/036), which has been noted as a deficiency for While Thailand is not a major destination for rhino horn, Thai citizens with Laotian controlling illegal tiger trade (Shepherd and Nijman, 2008a), but it is strengthening its connections have been deeply involved with rhino crime in South Africa (Milliken and legal protections for tigers with a new draft environmental law completed and submitted Shaw, in prep.), and both Thai and Lao authorities need to improve their investigation for enactment (GTI, 2012). It failed on enforcement, however, reporting few seizures of their citizens’ links to organized rhino crime. Myanmar has been implicated in the despite a well-documented trade in tiger and other big cat parts and products – especially movements of poached Indian rhino horn to China (CoP15 Doc. 45.1 Annex 1, Ching, in border towns (Oswell, 2010). Although Indonesia has increased its efforts to protect 2011) and needs to strengthen international coordination on enforcement. According to wild tiger populations and detect illegal trade (GTI, 2012), there remains a significant CITES trade data, Myanmar imported six live white rhinos from South Africa in recent enforcement gap for tigers at the retail level, with Sumatra having a significant illegal years, for unclear purposes (Saving Rhinos, 2012c). None of the ASEAN countries are2011-12 domestic market for tiger parts, as outlined in TRAFFIC surveys (Ng and Nemora, 2007 fully compliant with Res Conf 9.14 pertaining to rhino horn stock pile recording and security. However, some ASEAN nations reported no rhino horn seizures in the past 10 discussion scores for rhinos and elephants years, indicating no need (or perceived need) for stockpile procedures. Viet Nam and Thailand, the main seizing countries, are not fully compliant with the recommendations In Africa, there are no green scores for rhinos and few for elephants. Indeed, 2011-2012 saw the for stockpile management, according to a recent assessment (TRAFFIC, in prep.). registered the highest levels of poaching and illegal trade in rhino horn and ivory in many years (SC62, Doc’s 46.1 and 47.2). Widespread failures of compliance and enforcement China was the only country to receive a green score for rhinos. On the face of it, thishighest levels in Africa are in part due to the relative lack of resources available to these countries, but lack of political will is also a factor. Whatever the cause, given the escalation of this illegal may seem extraordinary given China’s strong historical tradition of using rhino horn medicine (SC62 Doc. 47.2 Annex) and an escalating number of rhinos poached in Africa. of poaching trade, its level of organized criminal involvement, and the threat it now poses not just to wildlife but to national security, stability and human lives; it is imperative that implicated However, China has made progress on both compliance and enforcement for rhinos in recent years (see Annex 2 for details). Its 1993 policy banning the use of rhino horn and illegal countries undertake a significant up-scaling of enforcement and compliance. The more medicine continues, and an entrepreneurial project to breed white rhinos imported fromtrade in rhino prosperous countries of Asia, which are the destinations of illegally exported rhino horn South Africa for their horns (SC Doc. 47.2 Annex) has not been given permission by the and elephant ivory, are urged to increase their support for wildlife crime control in Africa. government to engage in any rhino horn trade (TRAFFIC, unpublished information). horn and According to monitoring of major Chinese e-commerce websites, the availability of Rhinos – Africa and Asia illegal rhino horn items dropped by more than 70 per cent (TRAFFIC, unpublished ivory in many South Africa, the epicentre of the African rhino poaching crisis, received a yellow score information) after major enforcement actions in April and June 2012, as described in for failing on key areas of enforcement, as outlined by recommendations for improvement more detail in Annex 2. While comprehensive surveys of traditional pharmacies in years in a recent TRAFFIC report (Milliken and Shaw, in prep.). The report acknowledges that China have not been carried out in recent years, in 2006 TRAFFIC found that only about South Africa has made great strides in compliance and enforcement since 2009-2010, 2 per cent of hundreds of retail outlets investigated across the country were apparently and it is possible that the increasing number of arrests and breaking up of organized engaged in illegal trade (SC62 Doc. 47.2 Annex), and there is little indication this crime syndicates linked to Southeast Asia has started to pay off (Milliken and Shaw, proportion has changed much (TRAFFIC, unpublished information). in prep.). However, the absolute numbers of rhinos poached is still increasing (Saving The role and dimensions of China (and Thailand) in the illegal international rhino horn Rhinos, 2012a), and South Africa is urged to address the recommendations in the trade remain somewhat out-of-focus and imprecise, but based on available information TRAFFIC report, while working with Viet Nam, and other implicated Asian countries on it is Viet Nam that appears to be the major destination market (Milliken and Shaw, in international enforcement coordination. prep.). However, the growing influx of illegal African ivory provides an opportunity for Viet Nam, the major destination for South African rhino horn, has not shown nearly the criminals to also attempt to smuggle rhino horn, as shown in a recent case. Authorities same level of effort (Milliken and Shaw, in prep.), and received a red score for rhinos, in Hong Kong seized 33 rhino horns as well as worked ivory in November 2011, an action failing on compliance and enforcement. While Viet Nam made a number of seizures of for which a CITES Certificate of Commendation was awarded to them (CITES Notif. illegal rhino horns from 2004-2008 (numbering several tens), since 2008 there have 2012/020). After SC61, the CITES Secretariat issued a confidential enforcement Alert to apparently been none (SC62 Doc. 47.2; Milliken and Shaw, in prep.). A review of Viet Parties regarding import of rhinoceros horn to China (SC62 Doc. 29). The substance of Nam’s national policy and legislation with a specific focus on rhino horn trade is needed CITES Alerts are not public information, but the CITES Secretariat has recommended to identify and close gaps and legal loopholes which currently give rise to rhino horn trade enhanced enforcement between China and South Africa on rhino crime (SC62 Doc. and consumption. Special attention should be paid to the following issues, as outlined by 47.2). China must continue to strengthen its intelligence-led enforcement and, as with Milliken and Shaw (in prep.): legal penalties adequate to serve as a deterrent for illegal tigers, direct more effort toward demand reduction and continued monitoring of captive trade and possession; and legal measures sufficient to curtail illegal trade on the Internet; populations to prevent illegal trade.Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 16 Wildlife Crime Scorecard page 17