Twenty countries to fight wildlife trafficking as organised crime

Latin American and European governments signed the Lima Declaration to combat a crime worth more than US$10 billion annually

Vanessa Romo October 10, 2019

Share
wildlife trafficking

The first high level regional Latin American meeting on wildlife trafficking, the fourth most profitable illegal trade, took place in Lima, Peru, last week (image: Serfor)

The first high level conference on the illegal wildlife trade in the Americas, attended by representatives from 30 countries, issued an urgent call to treat trafficking as a serious crime.

The meeting, organised by the Peruvian government and major international organisations including the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) culminated in 20 Latin American nations signing the Lima Declaration, an agreement consisting of 21 measures to fight an illegal activity worth more than
US$10 billion annually.

“This type of trafficking is the fourth most common in the world after drugs, weapons and people,” said Jorge Montenegro, Peru’s agriculture minister.

Environment minister Fabiola Muñoz added: “[It is] a problem that is embedded in the networks of corruption.”

Parties to the conference identified common problems from the need to link the illegal wildlife trade to organised crime, to non-existent sanctions against criminals and mechanisms enabling countries to coordinate responses. Nor is it yet fully understood how the networks that profit from this illegal business operate.

Each signatory will have to share results of their efforts at the next group meeting in Colombia in 2021.
A high-flying crime

Latin America is home to 40% of the world’s biodiversity and about 25% of endangered species, according to the Intergovernmental Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). Wildlife trafficking is a great threat to this. In Peru alone, 318 species are considered potential victims and 86 feature on the IUCN Red List.

Jessica Gálvez-Durand, from Peru’s National Forest and Wildlife Service (Serfor), said an average of 4,000 to 5,000 specimens are seized each year.

“Between 2000 and 2018, more than 79,000 species were detected, mostly amphibians and birds,” she said, adding that so far this year there have been 430 seizures.

However well such operations advance, illegal mechanisms to bypass government inspectors are also improving.

Yovana Murillo, health and wildlife trafficking coordinator at environmental NGO Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), said two years ago in Peru authorities found 29 Galapagos turtles on a bus and a number of Spain-bound Andean cock-of-the-rocks at the airport.

Kurth Duchez, a WCS wildlife traffic officer, added that reports have emerged from Guatemala, Honduras and Belize of embryonated macaw eggs being sent to Asia, a form easier to transport than when they’re hatched.

We can’t fight 21st century crimes with 20th century tools.

Some countries need to impose more severe sanctions to combat this crime. Panama, for example, currently only has a maximum penalty of five years, while in Uruguay wildlife trafficking is considered a basic infraction.

“Belize took tough actions after cases of jaguar hunting appeared. A reward was offered to arrest offenders, penalties were raised and their legislation strengthened,” Duchez said.

In Guatemala, which is developing a national strategy, the need to link trafficking with other crimes like smuggling, firearms offences and customs fraud would enable more severe penalties to be applied.

Peru was one of the first countries to develop this strategy and now associates trafficking with organised crime offences.

“We work closely with the Office of the Specialised Prosecutor in Environmental Matters (FEMA) and we are close to allowing that classification,” said Alberto Gonzales-Zuñiga, director of Serfor.

shark fin wildlife trafficking
Since November 2018, 5800 kilos of shark fins destined for China have been seized (image: Oceana)

It is necessary to coordinate action against trafficking with border countries, and also with the illegal transit of natural resources.

“With the reactivation of the South American Wildlife Enforcement Network (SudWEN) there will be better communication between authorities.
When we rescued the 29 Galapagos turtles, the transfer took more than nine months, a process that should be faster,” said Flor María de Vega, from Peru’s wildlife crime prosecution team.

Adrian Reuter, WCS species trafficking coordinator for Latin America,
said: “It’s time for countries to review their regulations and make the necessary reforms, both in coordination and in processes like wiretapping that they can use to investigate these criminal networks.”

Gustavo Romero, a Peruvian official of the National Superintendence of Customs and Tax Administration (Sunat) agreed. The Global Container Program, created by the UN and the World Customs Organisation and which is used to detect drug shipments, is now being used to detect illegal timber trafficking. This could easily be applied to the fight against the illegal wildlife trade.

“We have a strong infrastructure for better results,” Romero said, adding that for a year they’ve used an early warning system to identify certain persons suspected of trafficking as they travel.
$6million

the estimated value of a shipment of sea horses seized last week (US$)

Peruvian authorities first saw the fruits of these efforts a week ago when they seized more than five tonnes of seahorses being transferred from an artisanal boat to an industrial vessel. The cargo was valued at
US$6 million.

“It can have an economic return similar to drug trafficking,” Romero said. When traffickers become aware of port controls they simply adapt their methods since it is so lucrative, he added.

Nor is internet wildlife trafficking is not effectively controlled.

“Every month we receive 20 to 30 complaints of possible animal trafficking offenses that appear online,” said Serfor’s Gálvez-Durand.
Targeted species

The conference identified the jaguar as an emblematic species of the Americas. Its fangs, skin, bones and testicles are sold in Asia, and especially China, Li Lishu, WCS’ China specialist noted.

China has played an increasingly important role in fighting the trade in recent years and this is reflected in seizures and investigations, both in markets and the countries of origin. In the last 18 months, Chinese law enforcement has brought 580 cases for trafficking endangered species, much of which is wildlife.

However, Li said China has not yet fully recognised Latin America as a high-risk area for these crimes.

“They have begun to learn more about the danger of the jaguar thanks to the international agreement that exists to conserve it, but China’s focus continues to be on Asia and Africa for parts of elephants, tigers and rhinos,” she said.

jaguar teeth wildlife trafficking
Jaguar fangs are highly valued in China for their supposed healing and aphrodisiac properties (photo: Ecobol)

Li said that the Chinese government is open to countries’ concerns about these crimes. “The problem is the lack of knowledge on both sides about who should coordinate actions. While in Peru, wildlife functions are administered under the ministry of agriculture, in China they are under the natural resources administrator,” she said.

For a year, Li has been collecting data on endangered species that are marketed in China. She has found most adverts for green iguanas, which are sold as pets and also taken to hatcheries.

In Peru, birds and reptiles are the most trafficked, although primates, especially the yellow-tailed monkey, are the most vulnerable.
Gálvez-Durand said that Bolivia and Ecuador are also nearby entry points, and that from Lima trafficked species leave for Europe, Asia and the US.

In Colombia, ornamental river fish feature highly, as well as snakes and reptiles such as the golden tegu, and birds such as macaws and parrots, according to Sonia Uribe, from Colombia’s Directorate of National Taxes and Customs (DIAN).

Duchez said that birds and reptiles such as green and black iguana, tree turtles and vipers are the most trafficked from Central American countries.

“In Honduras and Belize there is also a lot of illegal trade in the queen snail. Generally, this traffic goes to US and European markets because Asia demands large volumes,” he said.
Work to do

Communication is a problem within countries of the region and across them. The Lima Declaration aims to strengthen cooperation at border controls.

Antonio Roma, justice system coordinator of Peru’s Assistance Program against Transnational Organized Crime (Paccto), said: “Sometimes the prosecutor in [Peruvian port] Callao doesn’t know how to contact one in [northern Chilean port city] Arica. All judicial powers, the police and penitentiary institutions must be connected.”

Ivonne Higuero, general secretary of CITES, said many of those responsible for monitoring and prosecuting do not have sufficient specialised knowledge to identify species and the seriousness of their commercialisation.

Roma said: “We can’t fight 21st century crimes with 20th century tools.”

Alberto Gonzáles-Zuñiga, director of Serfor, said they will soon launch a pilot program with the regional government of Tumbes, on the northern tip of Peru, to implement cross-border actions with Ecuador.

“A case like that of the Galapagos turtles should not cross our borders again,” he said. That time, the seizure was carried out on a bus in Piura, six hours from the border.

Scientific research in most Latin American countries on the status of their species is also under-resourced.

“Developing countries still think that environmental problems can be left for later and we already know that overexploitation is the second largest threat to the species,” Higuero said.

https://dialogochino.net/30782-twenty-countries-to-fight-wildlife-trafficking-as-organised-crime/

Pentagon Confirms Climate Change Is A National Security Threat, Contradicting Trump

The military walks a fine line between the White House’s official climate denialism and the stark realities of a warming planet.
A U.S. Air Force member assigned to the South Carolina Air National Guard assists citizens during evacuation efforts after Hu

U.S. ARMY NATIONAL GUARD VIA GETTY IMAGES
A U.S. Air Force member assigned to the South Carolina Air National Guard assists citizens during evacuation efforts after Hurricane Florence hit in September 2018.

More than a year after President Donald Trump nixed climate change from his administration’s list of national security threats, the Pentagon has released an alarming report detailing how dozens of U.S. military bases are already threatened by rising seas, drought and wildfire.

“The effects of a changing climate are a national security issue with potential impacts to Department of Defense missions, operational plans, and installations,” states the 22-page document, which was published Thursday.

The congressionally mandated analysis looked at a total of 79 military installations around the country. The Defense Department found that 53 sites are currently vulnerable to repeat flooding. Langley Air Force Base in Virginia, for example, has experienced 14 inches of sea level rise since 1930. Additionally, more than half of the 79 bases are at risk from drought, while nearly half are vulnerable to wildfire.

These climate impacts are expected to pose a risk to several other installations over the next two decades, and the report notes that “projected changes will likely be more pronounced at the mid-century mark” if climate adaptation measures are not taken.

While the report is a clear recognition of the immediate threat that climate change poses to the nation’s military infrastructure, it makes no mention of the greenhouse gas emissions driving the crisis. It also doesn’t mention some of the most recent climate-related devastation to military bases, including the estimated $3.6 billion in damages that Camp Lejeune in North Carolina suffered during Hurricane Florence last year.

President Donald Trump removed any reference to climate change from the White House's National Security Strategy report in 20

BLOOMBERG VIA GETTY IMAGES
President Donald Trump removed any reference to climate change from the White House’s National Security Strategy report in 2017.

The Pentagon’s assessment comes just over a year after Trump eliminated any reference to climate change from the White House’s 2017 National Security Strategy report, breaking with two decades of military planning.

Even then, there was dissonance between the Defense Department and the White House.

A week earlier, Trump had signed the National Defense Authorization Act, which devoted about 870 words to the “vulnerabilities to military installations” over the next two decades and warned that rising temperatures, droughts and famines might lead to more failed states ― which are “breeding grounds of extremist and terrorist organizations.” “Climate change is a national security issue,” the legislation said, quoting then-Defense Secretary Jim Mattis; Gen. Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and four other former top military commanders. And it said that the Air Force’s $1 billion radar installation on a Marshall Islands atoll “is projected to be underwater within two decades.”

Yet a month later, in January 2018, the Pentagon followed Trump’s lead and scrubbed its National Defense Strategy of all references to climate change.

In Thursday’s report, the Defense Department describes climate change as “a global issue” and says it is “continuing to work with partner nations to understand and plan for future potential mission impacts.”

Subscribe to the Politics email.
How will Trump’s administration impact you?

The department said in a statement to HuffPost that the report delivers a “high-level assessment of the vulnerability of DOD installations.”

“DOD must be able to adapt current and future operations to address the impacts of a wide variety of threats and conditions, to include those from weather, climate and natural events,” Pentagon spokeswoman Heather Babb said by email. “DOD will focus on ensuring it remains ready and able to adapt to a wide variety of threats ― regardless of the source ― to fulfill our mission to deter war and ensure our nation’s security.”

The department did not respond to HuffPost’s questions about any White House role in the report.

Oddly, the new analysis omits the Marine Corps. It also doesn’t identify the top 10 military bases within each service branch that are most vulnerable to climate impacts, a requirement of the defense bill that Trump signed into law in December 2017.

“They don’t have the prioritization of impact. That’s confusing,” said John Conger, a former principal deputy under secretary of defense in the Obama administration and current director of the research group Center for Climate and Security.

Conger said he expects that Congress will tell the Pentagon to go back and fulfill its request.

Climate change was first publicly recognized as a major concern for the Pentagon in May 1990, when the U.S. Naval War College issued a 73-page report, titled “Global Climate Change Implications for the United States,” which found that “Naval operations in the coming half century may be drastically affected by the impact of global climate change.”

The issue gained prominence under President George W. Bush, despite that administration’s embrace of climate change denialism. In October 2003, the National Defense University published a report stating that “global warming could have a chilling effect on the military.”

Today, the military still walks a fine line when discussing climate issues, particularly given that many congressional Republicans reject the realities of human-driven warming. Officials at Naval Station Norfolk in Virginia, the world’s largest naval station, have admitted to avoiding language such as “sea level rise” when requesting maintenance funds to raise docks, according to journalist Jeff Goodell’s recent book The Water Will Come.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, called the new report “inadequate” and criticized the Trump-era Defense Department for “treating climate change as a back burner issue.”

“President Trump’s climate change denial must not adversely impact the security environment where our troops live, work, and serve,” Reed said in a Friday statement. “Whether the Trump Administration wants to admit it or not, climate change is already costing the Department significant amounts of taxpayer resources and impacting military readiness.”