[Senate Hearing 113-520]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-520
THE ESCALATING INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE
TRAFFICKING CRISIS: ECOLOGICAL,ECONOMIC
AND NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICAN AFFAIRS
AND THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN
AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 21, 2014
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
91-934 PDF WASHINGTON : 2014
_______________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey, Chairman
BARBARA BOXER, California BOB CORKER, Tennessee
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire MARCO RUBIO, Florida
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
TOM UDALL, New Mexico JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
TIM KAINE, Virginia RAND PAUL, Kentucky
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
Daniel E. O'Brien, Staff Director
Lester E. Munson III, Republican Staff Director
------------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON AFRICAN AFFAIRS
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware, Chairman
RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
TOM UDALL, New Mexico RAND PAUL, Kentucky
------------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EAST ASIAN AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut MARCO RUBIO, Florida
BARBARA BOXER, California RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
TOM UDALL, New Mexico JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hon. Daniel M. Ashe, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Washington, DC........................................ 10
Prepared statement......................................... 11
Brooke Darby, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of
International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, U.S.
Department of State, Washington, DC............................ 23
Prepared statement......................................... 24
Hon. Judith G. Garber, Acting Assistant Secretary for the
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific
Affairs, U.S. Department of State, Washington, DC.............. 5
Prepared statement......................................... 7
Hon. Eric G. Postel, Assistant Administrator for The Bureau
of Economic Growth, Education, and Environment, U.S. Agency for
International Development, Washington, DC...................... 18
Prepared statement......................................... 19
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses Of Daniel M. Ashe to questions submitted by Senator
Marco Rubio.................................................... 44
Statement submitted by the Wildlife Conservation Society..... 45
Statement submitted by the Environment and Natural Resources
Division, Department of Justice, Washington, DC................ 48
Statement submitted by Ginette Hemley, senior vice president,
Wildlife Conservation, World Wildlife Fund, and Crawford Allan,
senior director, Traffic....................................... 52
Statement submitted by Bas Huijbregts, head of policy,
Illegal Wildlife Trade Campaign, Central Africa Worldwide Fund
for Nature (WWF)............................................... 62
(iii)
JOINT HEARING ON THE ESCALATING INTERNATIONAL WILDLIFE TRAFFICKING
CRISIS: ECOLOGICAL, ECONOMIC, AND NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 21, 2014
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on African Affairs,
Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittees met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Christopher
A. Coons and Benjamin L. Cardin (chairmen of the subcommittees)
presiding.
Present: Senators Coons, Cardin, and Flake.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER A. COONS,
U.S. SENATOR FROM DELAWARE
Senator Coons. Good afternoon. I would like to call to
order this joint hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations
Subcommittees on African Affairs and on East Asian Affairs.
Today, we will consider the far-reaching ecological,
economic, and national security threats arising from the
escalating global wildlife trafficking crisis. We will also
examine the role of several key factors in fueling this crisis,
including increased demand for illegal wildlife products in
Asia, the involvement of illicit criminal networks and armed
groups, and weak enforcement capacity in both source and demand
countries in Africa and Asia.
Finally, we will consider the scope and implementation path
of the U.S. Government's national strategy for combating
wildlife trafficking, as well as other efforts to address this
crisis.
I would like to recognize one of the Senate's strongest
leaders on conservation issues and the chair of the East Asian
Subcommittee, Senator Cardin, and my friend and partner on the
Africa Subcommittee, Senator Flake.
I would also like to welcome our four witnesses and thank
you all for joining us today. I look forward to your insights
and your testimony.
Over the last decade, wildlife trafficking has grown into
an international crisis. It is a multibillion-dollar industry
driven by dangerous and sophisticated transnational criminal
syndicates used by some terrorist groups to fund their
operations. These poachers and traffickers are organized, well-
financed, heavily armed, and extremely dangerous.
The scale at which poachers are operating is threatening
the very survival of some of the world's most iconic wildlife.
Last year alone, roughly 35,000 elephants and 1,000 rhinos were
killed in Africa. The loss of these wildlife populations,
coupled with the security and stability threats of poachers and
traffickers, is having a serious impact on the economic
development of many African communities that rely on tourism
for revenue, as well.
This is an issue that should move us to act, for a wide
range of reasons. It is a serious and complicated problem, but
one in which the United States can play an important role in
solving, in partnership with Asian and African countries.
To facilitate the implementation of the administration's
national strategy, Congress, last year, provided dedicated
funding to stop wildlife trafficking. In my view, Congress must
continue to work with the administration and other partners to
stem the tide against this escalating crisis.
Senator Cardin and Senator Flake and I decided it was
important to hold a joint subcommittee hearing, because the
wildlife trafficking crisis is not constrained to one region
but involves source, transit, and demand countries across the
globe. The trade of ivory and rhino horn, sourced in Africa but
fueled primarily by strong demand in Asia, today contributes to
this ongoing challenge. We are interested in discussing
everything that happens, from the poaching of wildlife to the
purchasing of illegal animals and products, and everything in
between.
While the focus of this hearing is primarily on the trade
of elephant ivory and rhino horn between Africa and Asia, as
demonstrated by the examples on the table for us, this issue is
much broader than that. Trafficking includes illegal trade in
live wildlife, fish, seafood, trees, plants, and many other
threatened species from across the globe. Dealing with this
issue over the long run will require robust partnerships at
every level--governments, NGOs, the private sector, and
communities throughout Africa, Asia, and the world.
I want to thank and recognize the very broad range of
nongovernmental organizations that work tirelessly to conserve
vulnerable ecosystems and to secure the economic, social, and
cultural benefits of wildlife for future generations. You are
the first line of defense in this fight against wildlife
trafficking, and we are grateful for your input and thank you
for your partnership as we strive together to address this
issue.
I now turn to my friend, Senator Cardin, chair of the East
Asia Subcommittee, for his opening statement.
Senator Cardin. Why do we not let Senator Flake go.
Senator Coons. I will now turn to Senator Flake for his
opening statement. Thank you.
Senator Flake.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
Senator Flake. I would rather hear the witnesses, so I will
not talk long, but I appreciate the chairman for calling this
hearing.
This is something that, when we met last year, was in the
top of our agenda, to get a handle on this. So, pleased that
you are here before us today, and look forward to hearing the
testimony.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Cardin.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND
Senator Cardin. First, let me thank Senator Coons for the
suggestion to hold this joint hearing. I think this is the
right thing to do. Senator Flake, thank you for your help. I
also want to acknowledge Senator Rubio's help and cooperation
as the ranking Republican member of the Subcommittee on East
Asia and Pacific.
We recognize the importance of this subject matter, that it
is very much fueling a lot of illegal activities, it is a big
business and it is costing people their lives. This is an issue
that is affecting the health of species diversity around the
world, particularly in Africa. And we really need to do
something about it. It is a multibillion-dollar industry, as
Chairman Coons has pointed out. And there are a lot of
similarities as to what is happening with the trafficking of
illegal wildlife and of the trafficking of illegal arms and
drugs. There is a lot of similarity between the networks
involved.
The Convention on International Trade and Endangered
Species reported that, in 2012, an estimated 22,000 elephants
were slaughtered across Africa, and, according to U.S. Fish and
Wildlife--I hope I am quoting these numbers correctly--
approximately 2,800 rhinos have been poached in South Africa
since 2008. The chairman mentioned 1,000 in the last year. So,
you see the numbers here are astronomical. And as I have
already learned this morning, those rhino horns can get up to
$60,000 per pound, I believe is the number that was just given
to me. You can see that we are talking about a very lucrative
field and one that creates great danger as well as affects our
environment.
But, as has been pointed out, yes, the primary target for
the poaching is Africa, but it would not be possible unless
there was a demand for the product. And the demand is in Asia.
So, that is one of the reasons why we are having this joint
hearing. I might tell you, there is also a demand in the United
States. So, we have got to take care of our own business here
at home, as well as dealing with the problems in Asia and
Africa.
There are well-known species that we have talked about, but
there are also lizards and turtles and coral and hornbills--all
of which are threatened due to illegal wildlife trafficking.
So, it is not just the most visible species; there are some
other species that are very much part of this illegal
trafficking.
I do want to point out that we have seen some progress. We
often focus on the areas where the United States and other
countries struggle to see eye to eye; however, this is an issue
we can all get behind. We have seen enormous cooperation with
our partners in the Asia-Pacific region to combat the illegal
wildlife trafficking trade. Earlier this year, Vietnam's
President issued a directive to prioritize enforcement across
his entire government to combat poaching and trafficking of
African elephant ivory and rhino horns. That is good news, and
we very much want to acknowledge when the right steps are
taken. And, according to the World Wildlife Federation, 65
million mobile phone subscribers in Vietnam are now receiving
SMS text messages asking them to say ``No'' to rhino horns.
Public knowledge and support, here, is a critical factor for us
dealing with this issue.
And, through the United States Agency for International
Development-funded Asia Regional Response to Endangered Species
Trafficking Program, Lao and Thai enforcement agents recently
participated in an investigation training course at a major
endangered species smuggling corridor. In late March, the
authorities in Singapore seized about 1 ton of ivory from
shipment containers en route from Africa to another Asian
country. And at the 2013 Strategic and Economic Dialogue, the
United States and China committed to cooperate on enforcement
issues in an effort to end the supply and demand for such
products.
So, we are seeing an acknowledgment of the issue, progress
being made, and a recognition that the effectiveness of our
strategy will only work if we have a coordinated effort. I
intend to be in Asia next week, and this is one of the issues
that we will be talking about during my visit.
And we look forward to hearing the witnesses tell us how we
can use existing mechanisms and partnerships, as well as
forging new efforts, in order to combat this significant
problem.
I am pleased with the administration's aggressive National
Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, that was released
in February. I look forward to hearing from our panel on the
plans to urgently implement and institutionalize this plan with
our Asian-Pacific partners in the areas of enforcement, demand
reduction, and partner-building to ensure long-term solutions
to finally put an end to this damaging illicit practice.
Mr. Chairman, I have certain requests for statements to be
made part of the record, including the Wildlife Conservation
Society, the World Wildlife Fund and Traffic. I thank them for
their commitment and leadership on this issue, and I would
enter these statements into the record and would like to enter
into the record a statement from the Department of Justice,
which plays an important role in prosecuting international
wildlife trafficking crimes, as well as assisting and
collaborating with enforcement partners in sourced transit and
demand countries.
Senator Coons. Without objection.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, I appreciate that.
Let me introduce our panel, if I might.
We are pleased to have with us Ambassador Judith Garber,
the Acting Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Oceans and
International Environmental and Scientific Affairs at the
Department of State. A career Foreign Service officer, she
previously served as the Bureau's Principal Deputy Assistant
Secretary and as Ambassador to Latvia.
She is joined by Daniel Ashe, the Director of the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Prior to his appointment as Director, Mr.
Ashe served as the Services Deputy Director for Policy,
beginning in 2009, where he provided strategic program
direction and developed policy and guidance to support and
promote program development and fulfill the service mission.
We are also very pleased to have The Honorable Eric Postel
here, the Assistant Administrator for the Bureau of Economic
Growth, Education, and Environment at the U.S. Agency for
International Development. Mr. Postel has more than 25 years of
private-sector experience working in emerging markets,
including support for economic development in more than 45
developing countries.
And the fourth member of our panel is Brooke Darby, Deputy
Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of International Narcotics
and Law at the Department of State. A career member of the
Foreign Service, Ms. Darby has previously served as Chief of
Staff to the Director General of the Foreign Service.
I think we have an excellent panel. As is the practice of
our committee, your full statements will be made part of the
record. You may proceed as you wish, as long as you keep your
comments somewhat within the allotted time.
We will start with Ambassador Garber.
STATEMENT OF HON. JUDITH G. GARBER, ACTING ASSISTANT SECRETARY
FOR THE BUREAU OF OCEANS AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND
SCIENTIFIC AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC
Ambassador Garber. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman
Coons, Chairman Cardin, and Senator Flake. I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today to address the dramatic
escalation in wildlife trafficking.
With your permission, I would like to submit my written
statement for the record.
Senator Coons. Without objection.
Ambassador Garber. At the outset, let me extend my thanks
to Congress for focusing strong attention and action on this
pernicious, multifaceted crisis. If left unchecked, the
exponential rise in killings of protected species, such as the
iconic elephants and rhinos, will virtually wipe them out. If
left unchecked, serious threats to conservation, local
economies, security, and health will abound.
President Obama's July 2013 Executive order called for
action, establishing an interagency task force and an advisory
council. In February, the President released the National
Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking, which lays out a
clear whole-of-government approach with three strategic
priorities: strengthening domestic and global enforcement,
reducing demand for illegally traded wildlife at home and
abroad, and building international cooperation and public/
private partnerships.
For the last decade, the Department has partnered with
other U.S. Federal agencies to aid in the establishment of five
regional wildlife enforcement networks, with four additional
networks underway. Looking ahead, our goal is to connect these
into one global network for exchanging information, encouraging
best practices, and promoting coordination.
The United States sent a strong message that we will not
tolerate illicit trade in ivory when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service performed an ivory crush in November that destroyed
nearly 6 tons of seized or forfeited elephant ivory. Now other
countries are following suit, including recent destructions in
China, France, Belgium, and Chad. Hong Kong began to destroy
its stockpile of confiscated ivory just last week.
We must also address demand. We intend to strengthen our
efforts with international partners to communicate the negative
impacts of the devastating trade. We hope that by raising
awareness, consumers will reconsider harmful purchasing
patterns. We have collaborated with the NGO community to
sponsor public-service announcements, and we continue to work
closely with the NGOs, as well as the private sector, including
airlines, cruise ships, hotels, and the antiques sector.
In honor of the first World Wildlife Day, I hosted a
listening session with international NGOs on strategies to
reduce demand for illegally traded wildlife, hearing about
their international efforts, successes, and lessons learned, as
well as the challenges inherent in measuring results. This work
continues.
We are strengthening our diplomacy, highlighting this issue
at a number of multilateral foreign institutions, including the
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation, the Association of Southeast
Asian Nations, the African Union, and the U.N. General
Assembly. We secured the inclusion of language to address
wildlife trafficking in two Security Council resolutions,
adopted in January, sanctioning armed African groups. We are
working with China, raising wildlife trafficking at multiple
levels.
As part of the U.S. strategic economic dialogue, as the
chairman pointed out, we are planning, for the second year in a
row, a breakout session on this issue. We have asked that key
topics include demand reduction, enactment of an ivory ban
similar to the recent U.S. ban, and a commitment to join us in
creating a global network of regional wildlife enforcement
networks.
Secretary Kerry raised wildlife trafficking during his
visit to Vietnam last December. In February, as Chairman Cardin
pointed out, the Prime Minister of Vietnam issued a directive
instructing all ministries and local authorities to prioritize
wildlife trafficking. And later this year, we are hosting, with
Vietnam, a demand-reduction workshop under APEC auspices.
As the current facilitator for the Congo Basin Forest
Partnership, we devoted an extended session to wildlife this
past November. We are continually encouraging African leaders
to take concrete steps to protect their wildlife, to prevent
trafficking, and to end the corruption that enables this crime
to continue.
In closing, let me say a few words about our efforts,
moving forward. We will continue to promote commitments to
conservation and to fighting the crime and corruption that
fuels wildlife trafficking both within countries, across
borders, among regions, and globally. The U.S. Government will
further use diplomacy to secure commitments in international
fora and at the highest levels of government. We will continue
to strengthen effective implementation of international
agreements, and work toward new measures. We will work with our
sister agencies to ensure that our work is efficient and
effective.
Congress has shown great leadership on this issue, and we
greatly appreciate your support to enhance our ability to
combat wildlife trafficking. We look forward to working with
you on this important issue, and I greatly appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today and would be happy to
answer any questions that you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Garber follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador Judith G. Garber
introduction
Good afternoon Chairman Coons, Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member
Flake, Ranking Member Rubio and other members of the African Affairs
and East Asian and Pacific Affairs Subcommittees of the Committee on
Foreign Relations. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you
today alongside my colleagues, Deputy Assistant Secretary Darby,
Director Ashe, and Assistant Administrator Postel.
We are here today because we share an understanding that the
dramatic escalation in wildlife trafficking is something that affects
us all. We know that the illicit trade in wildlife is decimating the
populations of the world's iconic species, particularly elephants and
rhinos. The heavy toll that wildlife trafficking is taking is bringing
some species to the brink of extinction. In 2012 alone an estimated
22,000 African elephants were killed for their ivory. Even starker is
the decimation of forest elephant populations in Central Africa which
have declined by approximately two-thirds between 2002 and 2012.
This illegal trade has devastating impacts: it threatens security,
undermines the rule of law, fuels corruption, hinders sustainable
economic development, and contributes to the spread of disease.
In spite of these depressing facts the good news is that the
international community is coming together in an unprecedented way to
combat this pernicious trade. Shared understanding and commitment,
along with the efforts of governments, the international community,
intergovernmental organizations, NGOs, corporations, civil society, and
individuals are critical for collective action to this evolving
transnational threat.
Secretary Kerry has long championed efforts to combat wildlife
trafficking. As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he
held hearings on the subject. In his role as Secretary of State, he has
called on leaders everywhere to step up and meet the challenge of
rooting out the corruption, graft, and complicity in the system that
threatens all of us.
national strategy for combating wildlife trafficking
President Obama's July 1, 2013, Executive order created the
Presidential Task Force on Wildlife Trafficking and called for
development of a ``National Strategy for Combating Wildlife
Trafficking.'' The strategy was released on February 11, 2014, and
reflects the analysis and contributions from around the Federal
Government, led by the Task Force cochairs, the Departments of State,
Interior, and Justice. The Executive order also established an Advisory
Council comprising former U.S. Government officials, NGO
representatives, the private sector, and law enforcement experts. The
Council provided input into the development of the National Strategy
and continues to provide valuable input and support as we focus on next
steps for implementation.
As President Obama directed, the National Strategy describes a
``whole of government'' approach to tackle this growing threat,
identifying priority areas for interagency coordination, with the
objectives of harnessing and strategically applying the full breadth of
federal resources. It sets three strategic priorities:
Strengthening domestic and global enforcement, including
assessing the related laws, regulations, and enforcement tools;
Reducing demand for illegally traded wildlife at home and
abroad; and,
Building international cooperation and public-private
partnerships to combat illegal wildlife poaching and trade.
strengthening domestic and global enforcement
The first of these strategic priorities is strengthening domestic
and global enforcement. This includes prioritizing wildlife trafficking
enforcement domestically, maximizing the use of tools available under
U.S. law, and working with foreign governments and other partners to
enhance the capacity of other countries to fight wildlife trafficking.
We are increasingly concerned with links to terrorists and rogue
military personnel. Like many illicit activities, it is difficult to
determine the extent to which these actors are involved in wildlife
trafficking. We believe, however, that the Lord's Resistance Army, the
Janjaweed, and al-Shabaab have been at least partly involved. There is
evidence that some insurgent groups are directly involved in poaching
or trafficking, who then trade wildlife products for weapons or safe
haven. We believe that, at a minimum, they are likely sharing some of
the same facilitators--such as corrupt customs and border officials,
money launderers, and supply chains.
We still have much to learn about the full extent of the
relationship between suspected terrorist financing and wildlife
trafficking. One of the goals of our assistance efforts is to promote
greater information-sharing and coordination within and among
governments, law enforcement and intelligence agencies, conservation
groups, and other actors working in this area.
The United States sent a strong message that we will not tolerate
illicit trade in ivory when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
performed an ``Ivory Crush'' in November that destroyed nearly 6 tons
of seized or forfeited African and Asian elephant ivory (including full
tusks, carved tusks, and smaller carvings and other objects). Now many
other countries are following suit, including recent destructions in
China, France, Belgium, and Chad, and we have urged still others to
consider taking similar actions. In January, Hong Kong announced its
plans to destroy its stockpile of confiscated ivory and we were pleased
to see that destruction began just this past Thursday. Additionally,
other countries are considering destructions of their respective
stockpiles of confiscated wildlife products. We are encouraging them to
pursue these actions.
The same day that the President released the National Strategy, the
U.S. also announced an effort to close existing legal loopholes to
achieve a near total ban on the commercial trade of ivory in the United
States, with limited exceptions. This has given us the opportunity to
lead by example, as we encourage other countries to enact their own
bans on the commercial ivory trade.
For the last decade the State Department has partnered with other
U.S. Government agencies to stand up regional Wildlife Enforcement
Networks (WENs) to tackle wildlife trafficking. The State Department
and USAID are supporting the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
ASEAN-WEN, the South Asia WEN, the Central America WEN, the Horn of
Africa WEN, and other emerging WENs around the world, including efforts
in Central and Southern Africa and South America. Last October we
funded a workshop, hosted by the Government of Botswana in Gaborone,
which laid the groundwork for the Wildlife Enforcement Network for
Southern Africa (WENSA). In March 2013, we worked to strengthen
enforcement and existing partnerships by hosting at the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES) Conference of Parties the First Global Meeting of the Wildlife
Enforcement Networks. Our goal is to support the creation of a global
network of regional wildlife enforcement networks.
The Department of State has long worked with foreign governments to
enhance their capacity to fight wildlife trafficking, as well as within
international fora and through our bilateral relationships to persuade
our global partners to treat wildlife trafficking seriously. We will
continue working with our interagency partners to build law enforcement
and criminal justice capacity and cooperation globally, with the aim of
strengthening policies and legislative frameworks and developing
capacities to prosecute and adjudicate crimes related to wildlife
trafficking.
reducing demand for illegally traded wildlife
Second, the National Strategy focuses on demand reduction, at home
and abroad. Going forward, the United States will work with existing
and new partners to communicate through public outreach and education
activities, in the United States and abroad, the negative impacts of
wildlife trafficking. As we've already discussed, the impacts are vast,
causing irreparable harm to the species themselves, the broader
environment, security, food supplies, governance, livelihoods, and
human health. We hope by educating consumers, we can alter their
harmful purchasing patterns.
Addressing demand is a complex and long-term issue, which depends
in part on the species in question. It is not enough to increase public
awareness. In order to end wildlife trafficking, the buying must stop.
We collaborated a few years ago with the NGO community to sponsor
public service announcements with conservationist Jane Goodall and
actor Harrison Ford. We continue to work closely with the NGOs, many of
whom have ongoing public outreach campaigns, as well as the private
sector, including airlines, cruise ships, hotels, and the antique
sector. We are in the initial stages of working with governmental and
nongovernmental colleagues to devise a more comprehensive demand
reduction strategy that draws on the respective strengths of each
sector. On World Wildlife Day, I hosted a listening session with a
group of international NGOs on strategies to reduce demand for
illegally traded wildlife, hearing about their international efforts--
the successes and lessons learned, as well as the challenges inherent
in measuring results. We will continue to engage the NGOs, private
sector and to seek input from the Advisory Council as we go forward in
implementing this section of the Strategy.
building international cooperation and public-private partnerships
Third, the National Strategy seeks to build international
cooperation and public-private partnerships to combat poaching and the
illegal trade in wildlife. We hope to build on our existing work in the
international arena to further strengthen the implementation of
international agreements. We will seek new partnerships and strengthen
existing ones.
Multilateral Efforts
We have advocated for countries to work together to combat wildlife
trafficking in a number of multilateral fora, including Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN), the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, and the U.N.
General Assembly. We have also worked with our mission to the U.N. to
secure the inclusion of language to address wildlife trafficking in two
Security Council Resolutions, adopted in January 2014, sanctioning
African armed groups. We have also pressed multilateral institutions
including the African Union, the African Development Bank, and Regional
Economic Communities in Africa to take a more active stance against
wildlife trafficking.
We strengthened the commitment to address wildlife trafficking
expressed in both the APEC Leaders' and Foreign Ministerial
Declarations issued in 2012 and 2013, and we are developing follow-on
programming to build capacity in the region to reduce demand and
strengthen enforcement during the 2014 Chinese APEC chairmanship.
We recently worked with 30 donor countries to increase funding
significantly for the Global Environment Facility's activities to fight
wildlife trafficking by addressing both supply and demand through
monitoring and enforcement capacity building and awareness-raising
campaigns.
Bilateral Efforts
We continue to address wildlife trafficking in our bilateral
relationships. In February, Secretary Kerry and Indonesian Minister of
Forestry Zulkifli Hasan signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on
Conserving Wildlife and Combating Wildlife Trafficking. The MOU focuses
on collaborative efforts to combat wildlife trafficking in Indonesia
and in third countries, in particular, improving rhino conservation and
protection.We have also made strides in our bilateral engagement with
China to combat wildlife trafficking over the last year building on
commitments made in the 2012 and 2013 APEC Leaders Declarations and the
2013 Strategic and Economic Dialogue (S&ED). We will organize a second
breakout session on wildlife trafficking at the 2014 S&ED, following up
on the 2013 session and the subsequent progress made in the past year,
which includes the destruction of about 6 tons each of our respective
confiscated ivory stockpiles, several interdictions and prosecutions of
wildlife traffickers, and separate coordinated events in Beijing and
Washington that recognized the first World Wildlife Day on March 3. The
2014 breakout session agenda and outcome language are still under
discussion, but key topics will include demand reduction; a request to
China to enact an ivory ban similar the recent U.S. ban on the
commercial trade of elephant ivory, with limited exceptions; and a
commitment to support the development of a global network of Wildlife
Enforcement Networks.
We are committed to do more and work smarter with partners around
the world to support wildlife range and transit states in Africa to
maintain the integrity of their national borders and protect the
continent's iconic wildlife. On February 12, President Obama reached
agreement with his French counterpart, Francois Hollande, to work
together to combat wildlife trafficking in Central Africa. As current
facilitator for the Congo Basin Forest Partnership (CBFP), we devoted
an extended session to the issue at the November 2013 CBFP Partners
Meeting. Additionally, this past March the State Department and USAID
West Africa teams began a regional project with Burkina Faso, Guinea,
and Togo to forge connections and share valuable information on
wildlife crime in the region; there are plans to expand this
conversation to additional West African countries this month with the
goal of creating an integrated regional framework developed by and for
West Africans to coordinate antiwildlife trafficking efforts. An
interesting note: the team is implementing the project virtually cost
free by utilizing digital video conferencing technology already
available at U.S. missions in the region.
In 2013 and 2014 the State Department's International Visitor
Leadership Program (IVLP) held exchanges focused on antipoaching and
antitrafficking best practices, connecting wildlife authorities and
private sector stakeholders from key African countries with
counterparts in the United States.
U.S. Ambassadors in sub-Saharan African countries and State
Department principals continually encourage African leaders and senior
government officials to take concrete steps to protect their wildlife,
to prevent trafficking, and to put a stop to the corruption that
enables the crimes to continue.
conclusion
Combating wildlife trafficking is a complex challenge which demands
a multifaceted and whole-of-government approach. Within the framework
of the National Strategy, we will work across the U.S. Government to
focus our international investments to combat wildlife trafficking in
the most strategic and effective way possible.
We seek an open and inclusive dialogue about the challenges
presented by wildlife trafficking and possible ways to address those
challenges. We recognize that the United States is part of the problem,
and we are determined to be part of the solution.
We appreciate your support and interest. I would be pleased to
answer any questions that you may have.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
Director Ashe.
STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL M. ASHE, DIRECTOR, U.S. FISH AND
WILDLIFE SERVICE, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Ashe. Thank you, Chairman Coons, Chairman Cardin,
Ranking Member Flake. I really appreciate the opportunity to
testify before you today, although I have to say I regret the
necessity.
As you know, and as Ambassador Garber has said, we are
observing a devastating and escalating crisis in international
wildlife trafficking. And evidence of that trafficking is on
display on the table before us. And I believe the most
essential ingredient in dealing with that crisis is U.S.
leadership and resolve. We saw the result of this, as
Ambassador Garber noted, last November when we crushed our
entire stockpile of seized illegal ivory, and quickly we saw
other countries, leading countries in the world, responding and
crushing their own stockpiles of ivory. And we expect to see
additional nations follow that lead in the months and years to
come.
We see the world paying heed as the United States organizes
its all-of-government approach, spurred by President Obama's
Executive order creating the opportunity to leverage resources
and expertise across the Federal Government to crack down on
poaching and trafficking that is devastating some of the
world's most beloved animals.
As the United States is moving to curtail domestic commerce
in ivory, we again have the attention of the world. This is
positioning us to work to reduce demand and to speak from a
position of authority, not from a position of hypocrisy, on
this issue.
The Service has a four-tiered approach to combat wildlife
trafficking. We continue to work with international law
enforcement agencies to develop and dismantle trafficking
networks and arrest those responsible for the brutal slaughter
of these magnificent creatures. We provide critical financial
and technical support for on-the-ground conservation efforts
and capacity-building of range states to protect wildlife and
bring poachers and traffickers to justice.
We work here in the United States and with our partners in
Asia, Europe, and Latin America to reduce demand for wildlife
products, and we continue to work with CITES member nations to
support sustainable and well-managed trade and well-managed
wildlife management programs to provide jobs and economic
development in range countries; thus, reducing the allure of
poaching and trafficking.
Highlighting some of the strategy's most significant
actions and recommendations, we are using the full extent of
our legal authority to stop virtually all commercial trade in
elephant ivory and rhino horn within the United States and
across State borders. All commercial imports of African
elephant ivory into the United States will be prohibited,
without exception. Nearly all commercial exports of elephant
ivory will also be prohibited, with the exception of a very
small and strictly defined class of antiques with verified
documentation of their antiquity. Domestic commerce will be
prohibited, again with the exception of documented antiques and
other items appropriately documented.
The strategy also recommends the continued sale of the Save
Vanishing Species semipostal stamp. The public has purchased
more than 25 million stamps, generating more than $2.5 million
for conservation. We need to continue that effort.
I would like to conclude by asking you to consider this
moment in history. We have a chance to take action and ensure
that elephants, rhinos, and hundreds of other wild plants and
animals do not vanish from the wild. Because of the President's
leadership and that of good colleagues and partner
organizations and institutions, and the leadership from
subcommittees like yours, I believe we can dare to dream that
our grandchildren and even our great-grandchildren have the
opportunity to view these animals in the wild, in their natural
habitat. I look forward to working with you and your
subcommittees and the Congress to make that dream a reality.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Ashe follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dan M. Ashe
introduction
Good afternoon Chairman Coons, Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member
Flake, Ranking Member Rubio, and members of the subcommittees. I am Dan
Ashe, Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), within
the Department of the Interior (Department). I appreciate the
opportunity to testify before you today to discuss the escalating
international wildlife trafficking crisis.
The Service provides key leadership and capacity in addressing
wildlife trafficking. For decades, we have worked in countries across
the globe to conserve imperiled wildlife and address illicit wildlife
trade. The Service's responsibilities include certain international
conservation efforts, administered by our International Affairs
program. The Service's Office of Law Enforcement, which is essential to
wildlife conservation, also plays a key role in international
conservation, including combating illegal wildlife trafficking.
the wildlife trafficking crisis
Illegal wildlife trade is estimated to be a multibillion-dollar
business involving the unlawful harvest of and trade in live animals
and plants or parts and products derived from them. Wildlife is traded
as skins, leather goods or souvenirs; as food or traditional medicine;
as pets; and in many other forms. Illegal wildlife trade is typically
unsustainable, harming wild populations of animals and plants, and
pushing endangered species toward extinction. Endangered animals and
plants are often the target of wildlife crime because of their rarity
and high economic value. Furthermore, wildlife trafficking negatively
impacts a country's natural resources and local communities that might
otherwise benefit from tourism or legal, sustainable trade.
Wildlife trafficking once was predominantly a crime of opportunity
committed by individuals or small groups. Today, it is the purview of
international criminal cartels that are well structured and highly
organized, and capable of illegally moving orders of magnitude more in
wildlife and wildlife products. This lucrative business may be tied to
drug trafficking organizations and is a destabilizing influence in many
African nations. What was once a local or regional problem has become a
global crisis, as increasingly sophisticated, violent, and ruthless
criminal organizations have branched into wildlife trafficking.
Organized criminal enterprises are a growing threat to wildlife, the
world's economy, and global security.
Thousands of wildlife species are threatened by illegal and
unsustainable wildlife trade. For example, in recent months significant
media attention has gone to the plight of the world's rhinoceros
species, which are facing increased poaching as demand for their horns
increases in Asia. In some parts of Asia, rhino horn is considered to
be a powerful traditional medicine, used to treat a variety of
ailments. More recently, demand has shifted to less traditional uses,
including as a cure for cancer or even as a hangover remedy,
particularly in Southeast Asia. While there is little or no scientific
evidence to support these claims, the dramatic rise in poaching to
satisfy this demand is pushing rhinos toward the brink of extinction.
We have also seen a recent resurgence of elephant poaching in
Africa, which is threatening this iconic species. Africa's elephants
are being slaughtered for ivory at rates not seen in decades.
Populations of both savannah and forest elephants have dropped
precipitously, and poaching occurs across all regions of Africa. There
is also a terrible human cost associated with these losses. During the
past few years, hundreds of park rangers have been killed in the line
of duty in Africa.
Improved economic conditions in markets such as China and other
parts of east and Southeast Asia are fueling an increased demand for
rhino horn, elephant ivory, and other wildlife products. More Asian
consumers have the financial resources to purchase these wildlife
products, which are a status symbol for new economic elites. Although
the primary markets are in Asia, the United States continues to play a
role as a consumer and transit country for illegally traded wildlife,
and we must be a part of the solution.
president's executive order on wildlife trafficking
The administration recognized that if illicit wildlife trade
continues on its current trajectory some of the world's most treasured
animals could be threatened with extinction. We have a moral obligation
to respond, and there is a key role for the U.S. Government to play.
The criminals have raised their game, and we must do the same. In
response to this crisis, on July 1, 2013, President Obama issued
Executive Order 13648 to enhance coordination of U.S. Government
efforts to combat wildlife trafficking and assist foreign governments
with capacity-building. Upon issuing the Executive order, President
Obama said, ``We need to act now to reverse the effects of wildlife
trafficking on animal populations before we lose the opportunity to
prevent the extinction of iconic animals like elephants and
rhinoceroses.''
The Executive order establishes a Presidential Task Force on
Wildlife Trafficking charged with developing and implementing a
National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking. The Task Force is
cochaired by the Department of the Interior, Department of Justice, and
Department of State, and includes a dozen other departments and
agencies. Drawing on resources and expertise from across the U.S.
Government, we are working to identify new approaches to crack down on
poaching and wildlife trafficking and to more efficiently coordinate
our enforcement efforts with interagency and international partners.
The Executive order also establishes an Advisory Council on
Wildlife Trafficking comprised of individuals with relevant expertise
from outside the Government to make recommendations to the Task Force.
The Service, along with the cochairing agencies, is engaging the
Council's expertise in law enforcement and criminal justice, wildlife
biology and conservation, finance and trade, and international
relations and diplomacy to develop and advance this national strategy.
u.s. fish and wildlife service's role in addressing wildlife
trafficking
I would like to highlight the National Strategy for Combating
Wildlife Trafficking and how we in the Service are strengthening our
efforts to address this critical issue. But first, I would like to
discuss the Service's ongoing efforts over the past few decades working
across the globe to conserve imperiled wildlife and address illicit
wildlife trade. We have a four-tiered approach to combat wildlife
trafficking with our international partners. The approach focuses on:
law enforcement; technical assistance; the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); and demand
reduction.
Law Enforcement to Target and Stop Illicit Trade
The Service is the primary Federal agency responsible for enforcing
U.S. laws and treaties that address international wildlife trafficking
and protect U.S. and foreign species from unsustainable trade. Working
with shoestring budgets and a special agent workforce that has not
grown since the late-1970s, the Service has disrupted large-scale
trafficking in contraband wildlife ``commodities'' that range from
elephant ivory and rhino horn to sturgeon caviar and sea turtle skin
and shell.
Service special agents utilize both overt and clandestine
investigative techniques to detect and document international smuggling
and crimes involving the unlawful exploitation of protected native and
foreign species in interstate commerce. A wildlife smuggling
investigation typically involves securing charges under both the
Endangered Species Act (ESA) (a misdemeanor statute) and the felony
wildlife trafficking provisions of the Lacey Act (where the Federal
felony violation is predicated on the violation of another Federal,
State, foreign, or tribal wildlife law). Such investigations also often
document and secure felony charges for related crimes such as
conspiracy, smuggling, money laundering, false statements, and wire
fraud.
Since the mid-1970s, the Service has deployed a force of uniformed
wildlife inspectors at major ports of entry across the nation to check
inbound and outbound shipments for wildlife. These 130 officers ensure
that wildlife trade complies with the CITES treaty and U.S. laws. They
also conduct proactive inspections of air cargo warehouses, ocean
containers, international mail packages, and international passenger
flights looking for smuggled wildlife. Discoveries by wildlife
inspectors at the ports may lead to full-scale criminal investigations
of wildlife trafficking.
The Service operates the world's first and only full-service
wildlife forensics laboratory--a lab that is globally recognized as
having created the science of wildlife forensics. Guidance from the
lab, for example, provided an easy way for officers in the field to
distinguish elephant ivory from other types of ivory, such as mammoth
or walrus ivory. The Service continues to support a FY 2015 budget
request to expand research at our lab to make it easier to determine
the origin or geographic source of illicit wildlife material,
particularly for species threatened by current patterns of illegal
trade. Such evidence enhances our ability to provide law enforcement
and justice officials with evidence to more effectively prosecute
wildlife crime.
Service enforcement officers and forensic scientists have provided
specialized training to wildlife enforcement counterparts in more than
65 different countries since 2000. These capacity-building efforts have
included teaching criminal investigation skills to wildlife officers
from sub-Saharan Africa at the International Law Enforcement Academy in
Botswana on a yearly or twice-yearly basis.
One example of the Service's law enforcement efforts in combating
wildlife trafficking is Operation Crash. This Operation is an ongoing
nationwide criminal investigation led by the Service that is addressing
all aspects of U.S. involvement in the black market rhino horn trade.
More than 200 Federal, State, and local law enforcement officers in 40
States and 10 foreign countries have participated in Operation Crash
over the last 3 years. Since February 2012, 21 individuals have been
charged with numerous offenses such as conspiracy, smuggling, money
laundering, tax evasion, bribery, and making false documents as well as
violations of the ESA and Lacey Act. Nine convictions to date so far
have resulted in several prison sentences along with the forfeiture of
several luxury vehicles, gold bars, Rolex watches and several hundred
thousand dollars in illegally obtained funds from dealing in rhino
horn.
Wildlife trafficking is increasingly a transnational crime
involving illicit activities in two or more countries and often two or
more global regions. Cooperation between nations is essential to
combating this crime. Investigations of transnational crime are
inherently difficult, and among other endeavors, the U.S. Government
places U.S. law enforcement officials overseas to help combat such
transnational crime. In January 2014, with assistance from the State
Department and USAID, the Service created the first program for
stationing special agents at U.S. embassies as international attachees,
to coordinate investigations of wildlife trafficking and support
wildlife enforcement capacity-building. In collaboration with our State
Department colleagues, the Service secured the first positions ever for
FWS experts to be posted in embassies in Bangkok and Dar es Salaam,
where they will coordinate investigations of wildlife trafficking and
support wildlife enforcement capacity building. Additional postings in
key regions are planned in the coming year.
Technical Assistance and Grants to Build In-Country Capacity
The Service has a long history of providing technical assistance
and grants to build in-country capacity for conservation of wildlife
species. Through the Multinational Species Conservation Funds, the
Service provides funding in the form of grants or cooperative
agreements to projects benefiting African and Asian elephants, rhinos,
tigers, great apes, and marine turtles in their natural habitats. A
substantial portion of the funding awarded through the Multinational
Species Conservation Funds is invested in projects aimed at combating
wildlife crime through improved law enforcement, antipoaching patrols,
demand reduction, and economic alternatives. Several of the Service's
global and regional programs, including Africa, Asia, and the Western
Hemisphere, also directly address wildlife conservation efforts,
including combating wildlife crime.
Through the Wildlife Without Borders-Africa Program, a technical
and financial partnership with USAID, the Service has supported the
development of innovative methods to conserve wildlife and fight
wildlife crime in Central Africa, including improvement of
investigations, arrest operations, and legal followup. A number of
projects are geared toward building in-country capacity and providing
technical assistance to reduce the poaching of African elephants, which
once numbered in the millions but are now estimated at fewer than
400,000 across the continent. The Service is committed to working with
in-country partners to halt and reverse this trend, most notably in
Gabon, where two-thirds of the forest elephants in Minkebe National
Park have been killed since 2004, a loss of more than 11,000 elephants.
This includes a 5-year cooperative agreement with the Gabonese National
Parks Agency totaling more than $3.1 million and matched by more than
$3.3 million in additional leveraged funds in the first year.
In Latin America, the Service is working with partners to reduce
the trafficking of species such as macaws and other parrots, jaguars,
and reptiles through law enforcement training efforts in Mexico. Grant
funding also supports the expansion of income-generating programs to
communities in Colombia as an alternative to the illegal pet trade.
Throughout Africa and Asia, funding is supporting conservation efforts
to reduce the demand for ivory, rhino horn, tigers, pangolins, and
other endangered wildlife by targeting government decisionmakers, young
people, and the business sector through awareness campaigns.
Through the Critically Endangered Animal Fund and the Amphibians in
Decline Fund, projects around the world are protecting endangered
animals and amphibians from poaching and illegal wildlife trade. From
Snow Leopards in Pakistan to Peru's Lake Titicaca frogs, these two
funds are supporting projects that are helping to save these animals.
This is a pivotal moment in the conservation movement. We are now
witnessing a confluence of two forces--an alarming, unprecedented, and
dramatic increase in the slaughter of wildlife coupled with dramatic
increases in trafficking and poaching. Species decline is being
exacerbated by the lack of law enforcement coupled with corruption,
instability, and underlying poverty. These grants provide critical
conservation support across the globe for numerous endangered species.
CITES and Illegal Wildlife Trade
CITES, an international agreement among 180 member nations,
including the United States, is designed to control and regulate global
trade in certain wild animals and plants that are or may become
threatened with extinction due to international trade. As the first
nation to ratify CITES, the United States has consistently been a
leader in combating wildlife trafficking and protecting natural
resources. More than 35,000 species currently benefit from CITES
protection. International trade in plants and animals, whether taken
from the wild or bred in captivity, can pose serious risks to species.
Without regulation, international trade can deplete wild populations,
leading to extinction. The goal of CITES is to facilitate legal,
biologically sustainable trade, whenever possible. But in some cases,
no level of commercial trade can be supported.
Though a longstanding priority for CITES Parties, the focus on
combating elephant poaching and illegal ivory trade is more intense
than ever before. In March 2013, at the most recent meeting of the
Conference of the Parties (CoP16), eight countries--China, Kenya,
Malaysia, the Philippines, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, and Vietnam--
that were identified as significant source, transit, or destination
points for illegal ivory trade agreed to develop time-bound action
plans to actively address illegal ivory trade.
Also at CoP16, the CITES Parties recognized the importance of
addressing the entire crime chain by adopting several decisions to
ensure that modern forensic and investigative techniques are applied to
the illegal trade in ivory. The CITES Parties agreed to provide more
effective control over domestic ivory markets and government-held
stockpiles, and to promote public awareness campaigns, including
supply-and-demand-reduction strategies.
The decisions agreed upon at CoP16 to address the elephant poaching
crisis were a significant step in the right direction. The United
States played a major role in the development of all of these decisions
and actions, and is committed to playing a significant role in their
implementation, including ensuring that countries are held accountable
for failure to do so.
Reducing Consumer Demand for Illegal Wildlife Products
Most of the international conservation work funded by the Service
has focused on on-the-ground protection of habitat and wildlife,
including enforcement efforts, with the Service providing approximately
$10 million annually to enhance and support wildlife conservation
throughout Africa and Asia. In addition, the Service supports
government and nongovernment partners in consumer nations in Asia in
public awareness and demand-reduction campaigns.
Over the years, the Service has also worked to educate and inform
U.S. consumers about the role they play in wildlife trafficking and the
impacts of this illegal activity on animal and plant species around the
world. These efforts have ranged from partnering with nongovernmental
organizations on a long-running ``Buyer Beware'' campaign and
commissioning our law enforcement officers to present outreach programs
on wildlife trafficking at the local, State, and national levels, to
using airport billboards and social media to engage the public on this
issue.
Working with our cochairs, the Service will play a key role in
efforts to reduce demand for illegally traded wildlife. Using our
extensive network and experience, we are developing a strategy for the
Service's role in addressing consumer demand. This includes working
with the private sector and governments in key consumer countries to
build public awareness about the impacts of illegal trade on wildlife,
the potential penalties for engaging in such activities, and taking
other actions to encourage attitudinal and behavioral shifts, all
leading to measurable reductions in demand for illegal wildlife
products.
u.s. ivory crush
As part of our effort to combat illegal ivory trafficking, on
November 14, 2013, the United States destroyed its 6-ton stock of
confiscated elephant ivory, sending a clear message that we will not
tolerate wildlife crime that threatens to wipe out the African elephant
and a host of other species around the globe. The destruction of this
ivory, which took place near the Service's National Wildlife Property
Repository on the Rocky Mountain Arsenal National Wildlife Refuge near
Denver, CO, was witnessed by representatives of African nations and
other countries, dozens of leading conservationists, and international
media representatives.
This ivory crush sparked a new sense of possibility and
collaboration--that we can work together effectively to halt this
crisis before it is too late. We now are in a much better position to
work with the international community to push for a reduction of ivory
stockpiles worldwide, and to crack down on poaching and illegal trade.
The ivory crush signaled the United States commitment to combating
wildlife trafficking and one of the goals was to encourage other
nations to do the same. Following the U.S. ivory crush, a number of
other countries and regions destroyed their illegal stockpiles of
ivory, including China, France, Chad, Belgium, and Hong Kong.
national strategy for combating wildlife trafficking
In accordance with the Executive order, the Presidential Task Force
produced a National Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking. The
National Strategy establishes strategic priorities and guiding
principles to help focus and strengthen the U.S. Government's efforts
to combat wildlife trafficking, and to position the United States to
exercise leadership on this urgent issue.
The strategic priorities include: (1) strengthening the enforcement
of laws and the implementation of international agreements that protect
wildlife; (2) reducing demand for illegal wildlife and wildlife
products; and (3) working in partnership with governments, local
communities, nongovernmental organizations, the private sector, and
others to enhance global commitment to combat wildlife trafficking.
The Service is integrally involved in all of these priorities, but
I would like to highlight a few areas of particular importance in our
efforts to stem illegal wildlife trade.
Administrative Actions to Address the Current Poaching Crisis
The United States has several laws and regulations in place that
can help to address the poaching crisis. African elephants are listed
as threatened under the ESA and also protected under the African
Elephant Conservation Act. Nations across the world regulate trade in
this species under CITES. Under these U.S. laws, it is generally
illegal to:
Import or export African elephant ivory for primarily
commercial purposes;
Import or export it for other purposes without CITES
documents;
Buy or sell unlawfully imported African elephant ivory in
interstate commerce.
Asian elephants are listed as endangered under the ESA. Import,
export, and interstate commerce in ivory and other parts and products
are generally prohibited.
Though there are several laws and regulations in place to address
illegal trade, a number of loopholes exist that are exploited by
illegal ivory traders. Following the release of the National Strategy,
the Service has taken steps toward implementing a near complete ban on
commercial trade in elephant ivory. The first of these steps was the
issuance of a director's order, which re-affirmed the African Elephant
Conservation Act moratorium and the ESA definition of ``antique.''
Though this order was issued as a policy action, we intend to
incorporate provisions in the order into our regulations through a
public rule-making process, with opportunity for public comment.
In addition to the provisions in the Director's Order, we will
improve our ability to protect elephants, rhinos, and other CITES-
listed wildlife by publishing a final rule revising our CITES
regulations, including ``use after import'' provisions that limit sale
of elephant ivory within the United States. Under this new rule, items
such as elephant ivory and rhino horn imported for noncommercial
purposes may not subsequently be sold in either intrastate or
interstate commerce. These regulations were already published as a
proposed rule with opportunity for public comment.
In the coming months, we will also publish a proposed rule to
revise the ESA special rule for the African elephant (50 CFR 17.40(e)).
This action will also include a public comment period. We will also
propose limiting the number of elephant sport-hunted trophies that an
individual can import to two per person per year.
The combined result of these administrative actions would be the
virtual elimination of all commercial trade (import, export, and
interstate and intrastate sale) in elephant ivory and rhino horn, with
certain narrow exceptions. Taking these measures will establish U.S.
leadership and support diplomatic efforts to encourage demand reduction
in consumer nations. The United States is one of the world's major
consumers of illicit wildlife products, and we must lead by example. We
also believe these actions are consistent with recent CITES
recommendations adopted at CoP16.
Assess and Strengthen Legal Authorities
While the Service is pursuing administrative actions to address the
poaching crisis, the National Strategy also identifies the need to
analyze and assess in general the laws, regulations, and enforcement
tools that are now, or could be, used to combat wildlife trafficking.
The goal is to determine which are most effective and identify those
that require strengthening.
In particular, the National Strategy calls on Congress to consider
legislation to recognize wildlife trafficking crimes as predicate
offenses for money laundering. This action would be invaluable to the
Service's law enforcement efforts because it would place wildlife
trafficking on an equal footing with other serious crimes. It would
also provide our special agents with the same tools to investigate
serious crimes that other federal law enforcement agencies have. This
legislative change would help take the profit out of the illegal
wildlife trade and end the days of wildlife trafficking being a low-
risk, high-profit crime. Strong penalties provide a deterrent and
assist the U.S. Government in unraveling complex conspiracies and
combating trafficking. Offenders facing significant penalties are more
likely to become key cooperating defendants than those facing a light
penalty.
Save the Vanishing Species Semipostal Stamp
The National Strategy recommends continuing the sale of the Save
the Vanishing Species Semipostal stamp. This stamp, which went on sale
on September 20, 2011, has been providing vital support for the
Service's efforts to fight global wildlife trafficking and poaching.
More than 25.5 million stamps have been purchased in the United States
by the public online and at their local post offices, generating more
than $2.5 million for conservation. This money has been used to support
47 projects in 31 countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America to
conserve elephants, rhinoceroses, tigers, marine turtles, and great
apes. These funds have been leveraged by an additional $3.6 million in
matching contributions--making the stamp a key part of the United
States response to protecting wildlife and addressing the ongoing
worldwide epidemic of poaching and wildlife trafficking.
The continued sale of the Save the Vanishing Species Semipostal
stamp is authorized by legislation enacted by Congress. However, the
requirement to sell the stamp for 2 years has expired and the Postal
Service has discontinued the sale of the stamp at this time. Continuing
to sell the stamp would extend an opportunity for the American public
to support wildlife conservation abroad by directly contributing money
to help rhinos, tigers, elephants, sea turtles, and great apes.
Increasing Capacity to Address Wildlife Trafficking
The Service is requesting $3.0 million in increases for its Law
Enforcement and International Affairs programs as part of the National
Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking. I urge the Congress to
support the President's budget request so that we can increase our
efforts to change the trajectory of wildlife trafficking before it is
too late for some species. The current wildlife trafficking crisis
includes an escalating mass slaughter of elephants in Africa. If it is
not stopped, the world may well lose wild populations of African
elephants forever. A key to preventing this is to strengthen the
Service's capacities in a number of areas described below.
This increase would allow the Service's Office of Law Enforcement
to begin to fully utilize its network of special agent/international
attachees and build on past successes in combating global wildlife
trafficking. Most of the FY 2015 Law Enforcement Operations requested
increase would go to strengthening forensic capabilities needed to
address wildlife trafficking, including illegal timbering, and
expanding the capacity of the Special Investigations Unit so that it
can maximize the scope and effectiveness of Service efforts to respond
to the elephant poaching crisis and shutdown trafficking in elephant
ivory.
Successfully addressing the wildlife trafficking crisis requires
actions in both the source countries and in the countries where demand
for wildlife products drives poaching and illegal trade. The increase
in the FY 2015 budget request would allow the Service's International
Affairs program to work with key countries, such as Vietnam, China,
Malaysia, and the Philippines , where demand for illegal wildlife
products is high, to mobilize their private sectors in support of
demand reduction campaigns. Funding would also be used to enable the
implementation of one pilot project at a major elephant reserve to
adapt drug interdiction techniques to combatting wildlife trafficking.
Strong governance and effective implementation of international
treaty obligations, in particular CITES, will also play a key role in
curbing wildlife trafficking and supporting wildlife conservation.
Equally important, U.S. consumers need to be aware of the laws that
regulate wildlife trade and the plight of wild animal and plant species
threatened by illegal and unsustainable trade in order to reduce
demand. The increase in the FY 2015 budget request would support the
effective implementation of ivory trade action plans and other actions
agreed to at CoP16, and enable the Service to develop and implement a
comprehensive outreach and education strategy targeting U.S. consumers
of illegally traded wildlife.
conclusion
I would like to thank the subcommittees for your support of our
efforts to combat wildlife trafficking. We look forward to continuing
to work with you as we move from the National Strategy into the
implementation phase. The Presidential Task Force is developing a
detailed implementation plan--outlining proposed agency actions to
better leverage federal resources, share data, and coordinate law
enforcement and conservation efforts across government, both
domestically and internationally. The implementation plan will also
address the importance of public/private partnerships in combating
wildlife trafficking, and identify clear opportunities to work on the
ground with local communities and other members of the public. We are
also engaging the Advisory Council on Wildlife Trafficking regarding
implementation of the National Strategy. We will engage your
subcommittees, as well as other committees as appropriate, as we move
forward.
I want to leave you by asking you to consider this moment in
history--and the choice we must all make as human beings and global
citizens. We have a chance here, and now, to build on this National
Strategy to ensure a secure future for elephants, rhinos, and hundreds
of other wild plant and animal species. How will we answer when our
grandchildren ask why some of these magnificent creatures no longer
exist in the wild? I want to be able to tell them that the Service did
everything we could to keep these amazing species from vanishing from
our planet. I look forward to working with your subcommittees to make
it a reality.
Thank you for the opportunity to present testimony today. I would
be pleased to answer any questions that you may have.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Director.
Assistant Administrator Postel.
STATEMENT OF HON. ERIC G. POSTEL, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR
THE BUREAU OF ECONOMIC GROWTH, EDUCATION, AND ENVIRONMENT, U.S.
AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, WASHINGTON, DC
Mr. Postel. Good afternoon, Chairman Coons, Chairman
Cardin, and Ranking Member Flake. I would like to thank the
committee for holding today's hearing and giving USAID the
opportunity to testify.
And, like you, my fellow panelists, and everybody else in
this room, USAID is deeply concerned by the disturbing surge in
poaching and illegal fishing and the threat it represents to
wildlife diversity. The slaughter of thousands of animals, and
the murder of park rangers, let us not forget, trying to
protect these species, must be stopped.
Today, rhino horn is more valuable per ounce than gold and
a whole host of illegal products. The illegal killing and
capture of wildlife, as you have noted, triggers a host of
serious problems. The proceeds fund terrorists and militias,
the local inhabitants are harmed, livelihoods in local
economies are disrupted, and the rule of law is threatened.
Poaching also threatens tourism, which is a major source of
economic growth in countries such as Tanzania and Kenya. The
broad destabilizing effects of wildlife trafficking creates
incentives for corruption, discourages foreign investment, and
disrupts ecosystems, with far-reaching consequences. That is
why wildlife trafficking is an international development issue,
and why USAID is committed to stemming this current crisis, in
partnership with all of you and our colleagues across the U.S.
Government.
Our antipoaching work has traditionally focused on
community conservation. One particularly successful effort was
in Namibia, where, over 15 years, we invested about $40 million
to establish community conservancies, where local people were
given the rights to manage and benefit from their local natural
resources. Today, one in eight Namibians, as Senator Flake may
know, is a part of a conservancy and benefiting from the
economic benefits, and the wildlife populations are growing,
with almost no recorded poaching, the last couple of years,
within those conservancies. Nepal has been similarly
successful. In 2013, no tigers, elephants, or rhinos were
poached in Nepal; in part, due to 20 years of investment and
support by a wide range of organizations.
But, though we take pride, along with others, in those
successes, we face the stark reality that, since 2008, there
has been a tremendous growth in demand for wildlife products,
and it is fueling the poaching that we have all been discussing
today. And these traffickers are sophisticated, organized, and
violent, using all the financial, political, and technological
tools at their disposal.
Pursuant to the new U.S. national strategy, USAID's
expanded efforts will focus on three main goals: stop the
demand for wildlife products, stop the poaching, and stop the
trafficking. And to achieve that, USAID will nearly double
direct funding to combat wildlife trafficking, to an estimated
$40 million in fiscal year 2014. We will focus on wildlife
trafficking hotspots in these source, transit, and demand
countries, and especially those that have made a political
commitment to address the issue. We will concentrate the
majority of the funding in Africa, the center of the elephant
and rhino poaching; next will be Asia, where there are both
poaching problems and, of course, it is one of the main sources
of the demand.
We have activities underway, as you noted in your opening
comments, involving stopping the demand, stopping poaching, and
trying to stop trafficking, often in great partnership with
other colleagues and departments within the United States
Government.
Finally, I would like to note that, as the U.S. Government
and USAID works on the front lines in the courts, on community
conservation, and on reducing demand, we will also try new
approaches, such as launching a new wildlife trafficking tech
challenge that will seek to identify the most creative and
promising technological solutions to wildlife crime. This
effort is part of our overall USAID new model of development
that emphasizes partnerships, innovation, and results. By
applying new methods to our comprehensive approach to fight
trafficking, we hope to save the world's most iconic species
and promote sustainable development in all these countries.
Based on my 3 years in government, I want to assure you and
my fellow citizens that the employees with whom I have worked
on this issue at the State Department, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, and USAID are all completely committed to trying to
tackle this problem, are working very hard, are incredibly
smart and experienced experts, and are dedicated to partnering
with governments, the private sector, NGOs, and citizens around
the world to tackle this.
Thank you for your interest in this topic, and I look
forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Postel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Eric G. Postel
introduction
Good afternoon Chairman Coons, Chairman Cardin, Ranking Member
Flake, Ranking Member Rubio and other members of the subcommittees. On
behalf of U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
Administrator Shah, I would like to thank the committee for holding
today's hearing and giving me the opportunity to testify.
President Obama set forth a new vision of a results-driven USAID
that would lead the world in development. We have risen to this
challenge, pioneering a new model of development that emphasizes
partnerships, innovation, and results. We are guided in these efforts
by a new mission statement: we partner to end extreme poverty and
promote resilient democratic societies while advancing our security and
prosperity. Combating wildlife trafficking and the promotion of
conservation are critically important to USAID and our mission.
Conservation, which includes combating wildlife trafficking, is
fundamental to human development and in achieving sustainable
development.
USAID along with our U.S. Government counterparts represented here
today are deeply concerned by the recent disturbing surge in poaching
and the threat it represents to wildlife diversity. The slaughter of
thousands of animals and the murder of park rangers trying to protect
these species must be stopped.
USAID has a longstanding commitment to conserve and protect
wildlife, reflecting, as Secretary Kerry recently noted the United
States deep and abiding conservation tradition. Millions of Americans
treasure the world's natural heritage and support safeguarding its
wildlife. The increased flood of criminal trafficking not only raises
the specter of species extinction and ecological disturbance, but also
undermines conservation achievements, erodes economic prospects and
saps national security. As a result, USAID has tripled its support to
address this crisis over the past 2 years, investing an estimated $40
million this year to develop innovative solutions in antipoaching,
community conservation, and the reduction of consumer demand for
trafficked products.
USAID's wildlife trafficking efforts are underway within the
context of the administration's ``National Strategy for Combating
Wildlife Trafficking.'' The National Strategy establishes guiding
principles and priorities for U.S. efforts to stem the illegal trade in
wildlife via enhanced interagency cooperation and coordination. The
National Strategy also affirms our Government's resolve to work in
partnership with other governments, local communities, nongovernmental
organizations (NGO), the private sector and others to combat wildlife
trafficking.
Today, rhino horn is more valuable per ounce than gold. The illegal
and brutal capture and culling of wildlife trigger a host of additional
serious problems: the proceeds fund weapons for terrorist networks and
militias, local inhabitants are harmed, livelihoods and local economies
are disrupted, and the rule of law threatened. Poaching also threatens
tourism, which is often a major source of economic growth in developing
countries such as Tanzania and Botswana. The broad destabilizing
effects of wildlife trafficking creates incentives for corruption
(including inside the wildlife management agencies that are responsible
for protecting wildlife) discourages foreign investment, and disrupts
ecosystems with far-reaching consequences. In my time at USAID, I have
met people who can send their kids to school because of income earned
from ecotourism, who have enough food because they are harvesting wild
fish sustainably and who are healthy because of the clean water
protected by forested hillsides. When nature is lost and the
environment is degraded, the poorest in the world usually suffer the
most.
usaid role in combating wildlife trafficking
In helping to implement the National Strategy, USAID's vision is to
adapt and deploy a range of development tools and interventions to
significantly reduce illegal wildlife trafficking. Historically,
USAID's antipoaching work has focused on community-based conservation.
A particularly successful effort was with our Namibian partners. For
almost 15 years, USAID invested $40 million in this program to
establish community ``conservancies'' where local people were given the
rights to manage and benefit from their natural resources. As a result
of this transformational program, community opinion changed in favor of
wildlife and wildlife populations increased along with the economic
benefits to communities. Today, one in eight Namibians is a member of a
conservancy, the economic benefits and wildlife populations continue to
grow, and there is almost no recorded poaching in the conservancies in
Namibia. Similar success has been seen in Nepal, where in 2013 no
tigers, elephants, or rhinos were poached. This was due, in part, to 20
years of USAID support to communities to manage their forests. We also
credit U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service grants for rhino conservation as
part of these successes, and appreciate the recent work of the
Millennium Challenge Corporation in investing in Namibia's
conservancies.
These examples demonstrate that regions with a history of long-term
investment in community conservation are more resistant to the current
poaching crisis. As we move forward, it is important to recognize that
this success required major investments and consistent effort over
decades. We recognize as well that we are only one part of the answer,
and that we must work with other partners, such as our U.S. Government
colleagues, the private sector, NGOs and host country governments.
Together we can work to strengthen the front lines, build political
will, and foment cultural changes to reduce demand and underlying
corruption.
While we take pride in these successes, we face the stark reality
that since 2008, the tremendous growth in demand for wildlife products
(including in the United States) has fueled a poaching rate that has
completely overwhelmed previously secure regions. Forest elephant
populations in Central Africa declined by 62 percent between 2002 and
2011. Relentless poaching in South Africa's Kruger National Park is
threatening the world's largest white rhino population. And in our
oceans, illegal shark finning is pushing many shark species to the
brink of extinction. Today's wildlife traffickers are sophisticated,
organized, and violent, using all of the financial, political, and
technological tools at their disposal. New approaches, new partnerships
and better coordination at the local, national, and international level
are needed if we are to save these precious resources.
Pursuant to the National Strategy, our efforts will focus on three
main goals: stop the demand for wildlife products, stop the poaching,
and stop the trafficking.
To achieve these goals:
1. USAID will nearly double direct funding to combat wildlife
trafficking to an estimated annual $40 million, up from over $20
million in the previous fiscal year. It is worth noting that this $40
million estimate is conservative as many of our biodiversity programs
in our $200 million per year conservation portfolio contribute
indirectly to antitrafficking efforts such as protecting critical
habitats for wildlife.
2. We will focus on wildlife trafficking hotspots in those source,
transit, and demand countries that have made a political commitment to
address the issue.
3. We will concentrate the majority of FY14 funding in Africa, the
center of the elephant and rhino poaching crisis, followed by Asia,
where both consumer demand and poaching continue to rise.
To do all that, our first step is to analyze the country-level
factors affecting and being affected by illicit trade. The analysis
yields a suite of support activities to be undertaken. That may mean
helping communities manage wildlife at the same time that we provide
training and equipment to park rangers. In other cases, we work with
national governments to develop new wildlife policies. Our analysis
also recognizes that we cannot--and should not--do everything. We work
with other agencies, NGOs, and private companies to achieve impact.
And, we emphasize that programs won't succeed unless the counterpart
government is committed to achieving success. Once designed, we monitor
and measure progress, generating evidence about what works.
stop the demand
USAID supports activities that help shut down illicit markets. In
2012, a monitoring report from USAID's partner International Fund for
Animal Welfare led to a crackdown by the Chinese State Forestry Police
on Web sites and antique markets in China. The police disrupted 13
criminal gangs, arrested or fined more than 1,000 illegal traders, and
seized more than 130,000 wild animals and 2,000 animal products.
Authorities shut down more than 7,000 street shops and over 600 Web
sites selling banned animals, and removed 1,600 related online
messages. This effort was the largest police action to date tackling
the massive online trade in illegal wildlife in China. When the same
Web sites were revisited 4 months later, the number of wildlife
products for sale had decreased by more than 50 percent. Continuous
monitoring shows that the effect of the enforcement action has kept the
illegal trade below previous levels.
A growing part of USAID's portfolio seeks to reduce consumer demand
for wildlife, the root cause of wildlife trafficking. We have a 5-year
program that supports public awareness campaigns to reduce demand for
wildlife in Thailand, Vietnam, and China. For example, its iThink
campaign uses local celebrities and high-profile government officials
in public service campaigns to create a groundswell of public opinion
against wildlife purchases. The ``Fin Free Thailand'' campaign recently
unveiled its ``Blue List'' of 100 hotels that will no longer serve
shark-fin soup or any shark meat, an example of working with the
private sector to achieve greater impact. Other activities focus on
Asia's youth, who have tremendous power to influence their peers--and
parents--to stop buying illegal wildlife products.
stop the poaching
On the supply side, USAID fights poaching in more than 25
countries, often with our colleagues at the Department of State, the
U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and other federal agencies. We work with
governments to ensure that poachers are prosecuted and held
accountable. For example, in countries such as Kenya, Tanzania and the
Philippines, USAID is providing support to wildlife-focused Ministries
to develop national antipoaching strategies; improve ranger capacity;
enhance information networks; and reform out-of-date wildlife laws,
including penalties.
One example of this work is in the Salonga National Park in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, home to rare forest elephants and the
endangered bonobo. When USAID-supported collections of park patrol data
revealed in early 2012 that heavily armed elephant poachers had
infiltrated the park and overwhelmed undertrained and ill-equipped park
guards, the Congolese Government committed more than 300 military
personnel to root out the poachers through ``Operation Bonobo.'' In
collaboration with National Park authorities, the military conducted a
sweep of the park and surrounding communities. As of September 2012,
authorities had arrested 30 suspected poachers, seven of whom have been
sentenced to prison. In addition, more than 120 high-powered firearms
were confiscated, including assault rifles. Since then, nearly all
signs of hunting have disappeared, and elephants have returned to areas
they avoided during the siege.
As we support antipoaching efforts on the front lines, we will also
continue to invest in communities that live with and benefit from
wildlife. Local communities are increasingly recognized as key partners
with government in the fight against poaching, de facto ``gatekeepers''
because they often live next to protected areas that support wildlife
populations. By increasing the economic returns from conservation,
wildlife becomes more valuable alive than dead, building a local
constituency for action on protection. Community-based conservation is
a key part of USAID's approach because it provides the foundation for
lasting success, as we have seen throughout our work.
stop the trafficking
In the illegal wildlife supply chain, poachers profit the least and
are easily replaced. Targeting mid- and high-level traffickers is a
more effective strategy to shut down trafficking networks. Much work
remains to be done in this area. USAID supports activities to help
build strong criminal cases against traffickers. For example, in the
Philippines, we and our colleagues in the U.S. Department of the
Interior, including the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, advise and
support the Philippine Government to improve environmental law
enforcement. Together, we are helping to build robust systems to
prosecute wildlife traffickers, including the development of ``rules of
procedure'' for environmental cases, institutionalized training for
prosecutors and judges to prosecute wildlife crimes, and capacity-
building for wildlife forensics.
USAID was also an early funder of the ``WEN''--or Wildlife
Enforcement Network--enforcement model, starting in 2005. This program,
in concert particularly with the Department of State, forged regional
cooperation between police, customs, judicial, and environmental
agencies in the ten ASEAN countries. ASEAN-WEN established a model that
is now being replicated in other regions, with support from USAID and
our interagency colleagues.
USAID is also supporting some efforts to map and shut down the
transit routes through which illegal wildlife is trafficked. Wildlife
traffickers use complex shipping routes that frequently change, conceal
illicit cargo on transport vessels and falsify documents at ports of
exit and entry. For example, USAID assessments have revealed direct
links between the abalone trade and drug trafficking and provided new
insights into the complexity of ivory trade routes, including seasonal
changes and the opening of new export and import nodes. These findings
will inform targeted interventions in that will help disrupt illegal
trade between Africa and Asia.
final remarks
Despite the strong programs and successes I have just described,
there is no denying that we are in the throes of a poaching crisis.
Almost every week, a new article details fresh atrocities committed
against wildlife. But there are also encouraging signs of increased
global vigilance, cooperation and effort.
Since President Obama issued the Executive order to Combat Wildlife
Trafficking last summer, we have also been examining how else USAID can
best support the global effort to combat wildlife trafficking. It is
clear that community conservation should remain a major focus that we
must continue our work with governments on the front lines and in the
courts and that we must stamp out consumer demand. But what about new
approaches? As you know, there is a renewed focus on using science,
technology, innovation and partnership at USAID to solve intractable
development problems. We are also applying this to the illicit trade in
wildlife.
Later this year, we will launch the Wildlife Trafficking Tech
Challenge, a new program that will seek the most creative, innovative,
and promising science and technology solutions to wildlife crime. We
will focus on four critically important areas where technology has the
potential to make big impacts: (1) understanding and shutting down
transit routes, (2) improving forensic tools and intelligence gathering
to build strong criminal cases, (3) understanding and reducing consumer
demand and (4) combating corruption along the illegal wildlife supply
chain. This program will specifically draw in applicants from fields
outside of conservation, such as software engineers, forensic
scientists, social media experts and universities. We hope some of your
constituents will participate so that fresh eyes and new partnerships
will complement our ongoing conservation work to reduce the slaughter.
I would like to thank you again for your support on this issue and
for the opportunity to speak with you today. I look forward to your
questions and any thoughts you might have on how we might engage your
constituencies in the fight against wildlife trafficking. Attached to
my written testimony for the record is a copy of the 2013 USAID
Biodiversity Conservation Report which details all of USAID's
programming to combat wildlife trafficking.
[Editor's note.--The Report mentioned above sumitted for the
record by Eric Postel was too voluminous to include in the
printed hearing. It will be retained in the permanent record of
the committee.]
Senator Coons. Thank you, Assistant Administrator.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Darby.
STATEMENT OF BROOKE DARBY, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR THE
BUREAU OF INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW ENFORCEMENT AFFAIRS,
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE, WASHINGTON, DC
Ms. Darby. Chairmen Coons and Cardin, Ranking Member Flake,
it is a pleasure to appear before you today to discuss the
threat posed by wildlife trafficking and efforts of the
Department of State's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law
Enforcement Affairs, known as INL, to address it.
Wildlife trafficking is among the top five most lucrative
forms of transnational organized criminal activity, generating
an estimated $8 to $10 billion in illicit revenues each year.
The damage it causes is serious and multifold. It puts the
safety of civilian populations at risk through the use of heavy
weaponry and aggressive tactics; it fuels and is fueled by
corruption, which undermines the rule of law, good governance,
and citizens' faith in their government; it creates and
exacerbates border insecurity; it weakens financial stability
and economic growth, particularly in countries that rely
heavily on tourism revenues; and there is some evidence that
terrorist and militia groups, including al-Shabaab, the Lord's
Resistance Army, and the Janjaweed, have profited from the
trade.
Today, wildlife trafficking is a low-risk, high-reward
enterprise. The President's national strategy to combat
wildlife trafficking and the efforts that INL, those
represented here today, and other agencies throughout our
government are taking in furtherance of that strategy, are
designed to change that equation and, in doing so, to protect
wildlife and to protect people.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee, then under the
chairmanship of now Secretary of State Kerry, was early to
raise the alarm about the illegal wildlife trade and the
threats it poses. With strong support from this committee and
others in Congress, INL is advancing the enforcement and
international cooperation pillars of the President's strategy
through capacity-building programs and diplomatic engagement,
targeting four key areas.
First, legislative frameworks to make sure countries have
the laws in place to vigorously investigate and successfully
prosecute wildlife crime, with penalties that constitute true
deterrence.
Second, investigative and enforcement capacities to develop
deeper knowledge of how organized criminal groups operate in
this space, and begin to dismantle them.
Third, prosecutorial and judicial capacities to give courts
the tools they need to prosecute wildlife trafficking
effectively.
And fourth, enhancing cross-border law enforcement
cooperation, particularly through the wildlife enforcement
networks.
We already are seeing results. In February, a monthlong
operation named COBRA II, involving 28 countries from
throughout Africa, Asia, as well as the United States, and
supported by INL, USAID, and others, arrested 400 individuals
and made more than 350 major wildlife seizures. More such
operations will follow in the future.
Late last year, Secretary Kerry announced the first $1
million reward offer under the new Transnational Organized
Crime Rewards Program that this committee helped to authorize
for prolific wildlife trafficking syndicate based in Laos, but
operating throughout Africa and Asia, known as the Xaysavang
Network. There are early signs that turning up the pressure on
this network is having an impact on its operations.
And last year's U.N. Crime Commission adopted a resolution,
cosponsored by the United States and Peru, that presses
countries to make wildlife trafficking a serious crime, which
not only creates a bigger deterrent, but also allows countries
to utilize tools available under the U.N. Convention on
Transnational Organized Crime, like extradition and mutual
legal assistance, to go after and punish wildlife traffickers.
There is much more we and the international community must
do, but, with your continued support, we are better positioned
than ever to address the wildlife trafficking threat.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Darby follows:]
Prepared Statement of Brooke Darby
Chairmen Coons and Cardin, Ranking Members Flake and Rubio, and
distinguished members of the Subcommittees on African Affairs and East
Asian and Pacific Affairs, thank you for inviting me here today to
discuss the threat posed from wildlife trafficking and the efforts of
the Department of State's Bureau of International Narcotics and Law
Enforcement Affairs (INL) to address it.
I testify before you today alongside committed champions and long-
time supporters of enhancing conservation efforts, improving land
management, protecting endangered species, and strengthening law
enforcement capacities that safeguard natural resources and prevent and
prosecute environmental and wildlife trafficking crimes. And while this
may be an area that INL is somewhat new to, you can rest assured that
we are now much more actively engaged, taking to heart the call-to-
action by both the President and Secretary of State, to leverage all
instruments at our disposal to strengthen our partners' law enforcement
and criminal justice capacities to combat wildlife trafficking.
Let me provide some insights into the breadth and scale of the
challenge posed by the global illicit trade in wildlife. Increasing
demand for illegally traded wildlife products in the last several years
has fueled a massive uptick in poaching, particularly in Africa, and
growing engagement by sophisticated transnational organized criminal
networks, drawn to profits that can rival, or in some cases even
exceed, those derived from drug trafficking. Conservative estimates of
$8-$10 billion in illicit revenues per year place wildlife trafficking
among the top five most lucrative forms of transnational organized
crime. In addition to searching out opportunities for high rewards,
criminals also exploit environments with low risks of detection and
meaningful punishment--and they find that in the illicit wildlife trade
where they are able to exploit porous borders, corrupt officials,
insufficient enforcement and investigative capacities and penalties,
weak legal regimes, and lax financial system oversight.
All of us need to be concerned about the wide-ranging impact of the
illegal wildlife trade, and organized criminal organizations'
involvement in it. I'd like to talk about the serious impact this crime
has on humans and our security from INL's perspective:
The high-tech weaponry and violent, aggressive tactics now
employed by poachers threaten the safety and security of
civilian populations, particularly in supply (also known as
``range'') states. Park rangers are at special risk and many
have been killed trying to protect wildlife.
The corruption that both fuels, and is fueled by, the
illegal wildlife trade undermines good governance and the rule
of law, and erodes citizens' confidence in their government
institutions.
Wildlife trafficking crimes create and exacerbate border
insecurity, creating new vulnerabilities that other criminals,
terrorists, and militias can exploit.
The depletion of natural resources, and related corruption,
weakens financial stability and economic growth, particularly
in countries for which tourism is a major revenue source.
Furthermore, illicit trade in illegally harvested marine
species threatens food security, potentially undermining
political stability in many developing nations.
Terrorists and militia groups may seize the opportunity to
benefit from the wildlife trade. We have some evidence that the
Lord's Resistance Army and the Janjaweed have done so, for
example, trading wildlife products for weapons or safe haven.
For these reasons, the President issued an Executive order calling
for a whole of government response to combat wildlife trafficking on
July 1, 2013, and released the ``National Strategy for Combating
Wildlife Trafficking'' on February, 11, 2014. The strategy calls on
agencies and departments to address wildlife trafficking by: (1)
strengthening domestic and global enforcement; (2) reducing demand for
illegal wildlife products; and (3) building international cooperation
and public-private partnerships.
INL is primarily involved in implementing the enforcement and
international cooperation goals of the strategy through programmatic
and diplomatic initiatives. We are not complete newcomers to the game--
for over a decade, we have provided wildlife investigative training
delivered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as part of our
International Law Enforcement Academy (ILEA) program. But within the
last year, with strong support from Congress, we have begun to greatly
expand our programs, drawing on our experience in addressing other
forms of transnational criminal activity. We have organized our work
around four key areas.
First, we will work with interested partners to strengthen
legislative frameworks to make wildlife trafficking a serious crime
with strong penalties in order to provide investigators and prosecutors
the legal tools they need to put the traffickers behind bars.
Second we will improve law enforcement and investigative
capabilities--including intelligence, evidence collection and analysis,
investigative skills and methods, and collaboration across agencies and
governments--with our partner agencies to promote intelligence-led
investigations and operations that strive not simply to pick up
individual poachers but rather to better understand and begin to
dismantle the organizations for which they work.
Third, we will work to build prosecutorial and judicial capacities
with our partners. As we have learned, rangers and police will not
continue to apprehend the bad guys if they believe prosecutors or
judges will just let them go. So as we improve legislative frameworks
and offer up new tools, we need to ensure prosecutors and judges know
how to use those tools effectively and creatively.
And fourth, we will enhance cross-border law enforcement
cooperation, particularly by working with the regional Wildlife
Enforcement Networks (WENs) with other agencies. There is much that we
need to learn about how wildlife trafficking organizations operate--but
we do know that illegal wildlife products often make their way through
multiple transit points as they move from supply states to demand
markets. So we need to build alliances and processes across borders for
sharing information and intelligence and collaborating on operations.
The National Strategy stresses the need to marshal and
strategically apply federal resources through a coordinated approach.
Our work in these areas will be done on a bilateral and regional basis
looking at priority areas and landscapes for U.S. foreign assistance in
Latin America, Africa, and Asia. When the President announced the
Executive order to Combat Wildlife Trafficking last July, he also
announced that $10 million would support law enforcement efforts in
Africa. Those funds, coupled with approximately $6 million in prior
year funding, are supporting bilateral INL programming in Kenya and
South Africa; regional capacity-building efforts in Africa and East
Asia and the Pacific, and global programs, including efforts through
INTERPOL, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), and the
World Customs Organizations, all of which are part of the International
Consortium for Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC). The approximately $15
million recently directed in FY 2014 International Narcotics Control
and Law Enforcement (INCLE) funds will enable us to expand efforts
begun or piloted using prior year resources, such as training for
customs officers at ports of entry, prosecutorial training, and joint
capacity-building/operational exercises across regions and continents.
INL's engagement extends beyond assistance programming. We also are
tapping into tools developed to address transnational organized crime,
to tackle the specific challenge of wildlife trafficking, including the
Transnational Organized Crime Rewards Program, which Congress
authorized in 2013. In November 2013, Secretary Kerry announced the
first reward offer under the program of up to $1 million for
information leading to the dismantling of the Xaysavang Network. The
Xaysavang Network, based in Laos and operating across Africa and Asia,
facilitates the illegal trade of endangered elephants, rhinos, and
other species.
Through diplomatic outreach and engagement, we are building
international consensus around the importance of dismantling wildlife
trafficking networks. For example, at the U.N. Crime Commission in
April 2013, the United States introduced a successful joint resolution
with Peru encouraging governments around the world to treat wildlife
trafficking as a ``serious crime'' pursuant to the U.N. Convention
against Transnational Organized Crime. Making it a serious crime
unlocks new opportunities for international law enforcement cooperation
provided under the Convention, including mutual legal assistance, asset
seizure and forfeiture, extradition, and other tools to hold criminals
accountable for wildlife crime. The U.N. Economic and Social Council
adopted the resolution in July 2013, further elevating wildlife
trafficking as a major concern for the United Nations. These measures
provide the mandate that we need, as members of a larger body of
concerned nations, to harness our collective capabilities to learn more
about these trafficking networks, share information, and collaborate on
plans and programs that will undermine them.
Another early success to which we can point is a recent month-long
global law enforcement cooperative effort, known as ``Cobra II,'' that
we helped to support. Participants from 28 countries, including
representatives from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with
participation from USAID, executed this global operation in February
2014 to combat wildlife trafficking and poaching which resulted in more
than 400 arrests and 350 major seizures of wildlife and wildlife
products across Africa, Asia, and the United States. The operation
demonstrated to participants the benefits and results that can be
achieved by working together and we will seek to build on the positive
momentum it generated.
Although we have more to learn about the links that exist between
wildlife trafficking organizations and other transnational criminal
groups, we do know that wildlife traffickers do not operate in a
vacuum. Criminal organizations tend to use the same routes and shipping
methods as smugglers of weapons, drugs, and counterfeits. They bribe
the same customs officials. They deploy poachers in the same restive
regions where terrorists and other criminals may sow instability and
conflict and exploit weak institutions and porous borders. Money and
corruption are common denominators of all forms of transnational
organized crime, and wildlife trafficking is no exception.
INL is looking at ways to connect our anticorruption and unit
vetting programs used effectively in narcotics-producing regions, to
support willing governments afflicted by wildlife trafficking. We are
also examining the broader use of Presidential Proclamation (PP) 7750,
which is used to bar entry into the United States of high-level corrupt
officials and their family members, against wildlife traffickers and
their enablers.
Following the money is equally important. All illicit criminal
networks need money to finance their activities and as illicit funds
move through the international financial system, they can be detected
and monitored. In addition to exercising leadership within the
Financial Action Task Force (FATF), we are promoting and applying tools
like asset recovery and forfeiture to combat transnational organized
crime and money laundering. Through the FATF style regional body for
Eastern and Southern Africa, we are working with international partners
to uncover and counter money laundering and other illicit financial
flows related to wildlife trafficking. We then will develop capacity-
building projects to address gaps this study identifies.
Illicit networks undercut the ability of law enforcement to protect
citizens, deprive the states of vital revenues, promote corruption, and
contribute to bad governance. But as organized crime has evolved and
diversified, so has INL. Our programs are tailored to specific and
cross cutting threats, including wildlife trafficking, to target the
common facilitators of all types of crime.
Thank you, Chairman Coons, Chairman Cardin, and distinguished
members of the subcommittees for your attention to and support of our
collective efforts to combat wildlife trafficking. I welcome your
questions.
Senator Coons. Thank you very much.
We will now begin 7-minute rounds of questions, if my
colleagues here--let me ask just an initial question of all
four of you. And this is going to be a multipart question.
Ambassador Garber, I appreciate your complimenting Congress
on our leadership, but I am interested in hearing from each of
you, in turn, What are the real opportunities for congressional
action? What are the things that we should be doing that will
actually move this forward in a concrete way? Because each of
you referenced, in passing, something, whether it is
reauthorization or extension of the stamp, whether it is
funding, whether it is strengthening the criminal penalties for
particular actions. So, what congressional actions should we be
taking promptly, if at all possible?
Second, how are you spending the $45 million that Congress
dedicated to wildlife trafficking?
And how does your budget request for this year specifically
deal with the--my third question--implementation plan for the
national strategy?
I think all of us spoke, in some way, in support of or
complimenting the national strategy. But, it was released 3
months ago. I am eager to hear more about the timeline for an
implementation strategy.
So, what should we be doing? What are you doing? And how
are we going to get to an implementation strategy?
Ambassador.
Ambassador Garber. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
In terms of what Congress can do, holding a hearing like
this is so important because it shows that it is not just the
administration that is concerned about this issue, but that the
U.S. Congress is, too.
We also have deeply appreciated the seed funding, from the
position in my Bureau that we have received, for setting up the
Wildlife Enforcement Networks that we were talking about
earlier. And we have been able to leverage a very small bit of
money into something that has real effect and has helped us to
staunch what is going on in wildlife trafficking.
And we also have deeply appreciated the support that we
received for funding some of the international conventions that
we are also partnering with, because this is an issue that the
U.S. Government cannot solve alone. As you said in your opening
remarks, this is something that requires partners and
partnership, and it really requires a partnership between the
administration and Congress, but also a partnership with the
U.S. Government, with many other countries, with
nongovernmental organizations, and with the private sector. And
Congress is helpful in all of that.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
Director Ashe.
Mr. Ashe. Thank you, Senator.
I would say--I mentioned the stamp before. I think funding,
in general, we have a $3 million budget increase that the
President has proposed for our budget this year, which will
allow us to put more capacity into our forensics lab in
Ashland, OR. And that is going to provide us with the
opportunity to provide technical support to range and transit
countries to do a better job of enforcement and, ultimately,
prosecution, which is key, support to put liaison positions
into State Department embassies around the world so that we
have eyes and ears on the ground, and we are coordinating at
the embassy level with our other agency colleagues.
I think ESA penalties, the penalties for trafficking can be
improved; but perhaps more important, we can consider the
possibility of using antiracketeering and other statutes to
attack these syndicated criminal networks.
And I would say accountability, that you should hold us
accountable to actually accomplish the aspirations that are
reflected in the President's strategy, so perhaps maybe
thinking about having us come back here this time next year and
to see what we have been able to accomplish during that period
of time.
Senator Coons. I like that idea. I welcome anyone who seeks
more congressional accountability. [Laughter.]
Senator Coons. Assistant Administrator Postel.
Mr. Postel. Thank you, Senator.
To add to the list two or three things, in terms of
opportunities, one is, on your CODELs, to raise the issue with
the host-country governments. I think it is very important that
they hear lots of voices. They, of course, hear from all of us,
but also hearing from all of you about the importance of these
issues and how good governance is part of what is needed to
have success.
Second, if and when you ever have interactions with the
various U.S. companies involved in transit and transport, we
have some partnerships--for instance, with Delta and other
folks--but, you know, how does this stuff get moved around? We
need those partnerships and engagement from CEOs of a number of
different types of companies involved.
Also, the conversation with local constituents. As you
noted, Mr. Chairman, the second-biggest market is the United
States. And I am not sure people always understand what harm
comes from some of their private activities. So, visibility on
that is very useful.
And, of course, we very much appreciate the fundings and
the support you give, in terms of directives for budgets, not
only on specific issues, but the overall top line to the
agency, which then gives us the wherewithal to accomplish all
those things.
In terms of our spending--of the FY 14 funds that I
mentioned, 65 percent will be for Africa, 25 percent will go to
Asia, and 10 percent will be for more global goods, like the
tech challenge analysis of transit routes and things like that.
In terms of FY 15, we will definitely be looking--the
request is based on the concept that we will make adjustments.
And we are already starting to pivot, even without the
implementation plan, because of moving more toward some other
countries, which maybe we were not as active in, but they are
demand hotspots or supply hotspots.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
DAS [Deputy Assistant Secrertary] Darby.
Ms. Darby. I do not have too much to add, in terms of the
ways that Congress can be supportive of this effort beyond what
my colleagues have said, which I certainly agree with.
And I think--to reinforce the domestic awareness points, I
think, Chairman Coons, the Opportunity Africa Conference that
you held in Delaware earlier this year, and the opportunity
that you gave us to speak at that conference on the issue of
wildlife trafficking, interacting with the members of your
audience reinforced how interested people are in this issue,
and yet how they do not have all of the facts at their
disposal. And I think fora like that are a really important way
that we can get the message out to domestic audiences. And I
think the elementary school students who were in the front row
and asking questions is a great sign of future generations'
engagement on this issue, because clearly, while we are very
engaged right now, and we want this to remain a priority for
the years to come, addressing this in a comprehensive way is
going to be a generational challenge, and we need to make sure
it stays on the radar.
Senator Coons. That is right. Thank you. I believe it is a
long-term challenge. And one of the things that made that panel
particularly successful at the conference in Delaware was a
Delawarian who is an iconic filmmaker who has dedicated a great
deal of time to documenting the hard work needed to save
elephants in Africa. We also had a Namibian former--his father
was a poacher, and he is involved in community-based
conservation. So, it was a great panel. And thank you again for
coming to Delaware for that.
Let me turn to Senator Flake.
Senator Flake.
Senator Flake. Well, thank you.
Thank you for your testimony.
I have spent about 3 years of my life in southern Africa,
been in countries where things are going well. Namibia,
certainly since I was there, has had good success in
maintaining these conservation efforts, with a lot of help from
the United States. And I have seen Zimbabwe, as well, where I
spent time in the early 1980s, go the other direction.
But, the first question, just in terms of budget. CRS notes
that, between all the agencies that are spending money in this
regard--and it is about $617 million enacted in FY 2015 to
combat wildlife trafficking--in your estimation, is the
coordination what it should be between agencies? Could we
better spend the money that we are spending?
I know that when I meet with NGOs, some of them are
critical about where some of the money is spent, in terms of
tamping down demand or other conservation efforts. I realize we
are all government witnesses here, and all of you rely on, you
know, appropriations from us on that regard, but I would like
to get your opinion on how we can--and have we made some moves
in the past couple of years to better utilize the numbers that
we are talking about here?
First Ms. Garber.
Ms. Darby. Thank you very much--oh, I am sorry.
Senator Flake. Go ahead.
Ambassador Garber. Thank you very much for that question.
Part of what we are trying to do with the national strategy as
we develop the implementation plan is do just that. We are
trying to take a very strategic look at what we are doing to
make sure that it is really complementary and reinforcing
across the agencies. And so, as we are developing that plan, we
are trying to look at where we can use the money most wisely to
make sure that we are implementing the strategy effectively.
Because, absolutely, Senator, we can always do better, and that
is something that we are really very much aware of,
particularly right now, in a tight fiscal time.
So, thank you.
Senator Flake. Will I get the same answer from everybody on
that? We are doing better with the strategy?
Mr. Ashe. We certainly can. And I would just highlight a
few things. Customs and Border patrol is an essential partner
in this enterprise. And I think all of us are working with U.S.
Customs and Border Protection to institute things like the
Commercial Targeting and Analysis Center, so 10 Federal
agencies working together to expand our abilities to target
illegal trade, in general, but certainly illegal wildlife
shipment. The International Trade Data System is going to be an
important new evolution for us in working together to create a
single window for trade data so that we can both facilitate
legal trade and target illegal trade. And so, I think we are
working, as we never have before, together, but we certainly
can do better.
Senator Flake. Mr. Ashe, the ban that Fish and Wildlife
Service put on elephant trophies from Zimbabwe and Tanzania,
some are critical. Safari Club and others have criticized that,
saying we are taking away money that is used for conservation.
What is your feeling there? Is this prompting Zimbabwe and
Tanzania to take measures where they better regulate what goes
out? Or is this, over the long term--and I know this is being
reviewed for next year. Can you talk about that ban and what
you hope to achieve there?
Mr. Ashe. Sure. I think that, first of all, I would say,
you mentioned Namibia, and what we need to do, number one, is
reward countries that have good wildlife management programs.
And last year there was a lot of controversy about the
potential of a black rhino being harvested in Namibia and
potentially, you know, imported the trophy, imported into the
United States. And my position on that was, we need to stand
behind countries like Namibia, who have--one-third of the black
rhinos that remain in the world are in Namibia. They manage
them very well. We need to stand behind those countries. And
when they can allow harvest, we need to support that.
I think hunting is not--well-regulated, well-managed
hunting is not what is driving this crisis. But, we need to
ensure that hunting remains a well-regulated aspect of wildlife
management.
And from the perspective of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service right now in Tanzania, we are seeing extremely
disturbing signs of devastation of elephant populations in the
Selous, which is one of the strongholds in Tanzania. In
Zimbabwe, we simply do not have the information that is
necessary for us to make those determinations.
But, we are talking to both countries. And it is a matter
of getting better information and putting in place the
mechanisms that need to be there to ensure that hunting is a
sustainable process, that it is free from corruption, and the
revenues from hunting are going back into conservation of the
species. We expect to be able to see hunting resume in Zimbabwe
and Tanzania in the future.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
It seems as if it is going to be tough, really, to work
with these countries and--because, I mean, some of them see the
economic benefit of protecting the herds that they have. They
certainly do in countries like Namibia, and the whole country
benefits from the economic value of tourism and everything
else. But, that is only until the value of poaching, you know,
exceeds that value, at least to individuals and poachers. So,
it is the demand side that really has to be affected.
Like I said, there are some NGOs that are critical that we
are not spending more money on the demand side, tamping down
demand, or trying to. There are some NGOs that are working in
China, in particular, working with public officials, with
celebrities. How would you rate the efforts that are going on
right now among the NGO community to try to address the demand
side in China and Southeast Asia? I do not know who is best to
address that.
Mr. Postel. Thank you for the question, Senator. I think a
couple of people might speak on it.
But, we feel that the involvement, engagement of NGOs is
very important in this area and with the citizens, who may not
even be part of that. There was a large meeting of people in
London, in February, that the Ambassador and I and a number of
other people went to, and there was a whole session, where
activists were presenting evidence about what was working in
China and other countries. And interestingly, the most
effective of all was something not done by an organization, but
a Chinese actress, who tweeted a photo of what it looks like
when one of these animals is slaughtered, and had 500,000
people see that.
There are some very effective and sophisticated things that
I have seen the NGOs are doing; some of that is with our
support or other agency colleagues, but some of it is on their
own. And so, I see a lot of progress being made, but also just
by regular citizens.
Senator Flake. Does anybody want to follow up? I am out of
time, but go ahead.
Ambassador Garber. What I would just say is that, as you
said, Senator, addressing demand is a really complex and long-
term issue, and the factors are very different in each one of
these countries. It is not a one-size-fit-all answer. And we
certainly recognize that we, as the U.S. Government, do not
have all the solutions, all the answers to this particular
question. The NGOs are doing really excellent work. What works
in one place does not necessarily work effectively in another.
But, that is why we are really reaching out to have a
conversation with the nongovernmental organization community,
with the private sector, and with other governments, because,
in some places, really the government taking this on and
showing that it does not support this, showing leadership
themselves, can also be critical to changing these patterns of
behavior.
So, it is a very complicated approach. We are working an
awful lot on the demand side, very hard across the U.S.
Government and with a variety of partners. But, it has to be a
key part of our focus, because the demand, in part, is really
what is driving this.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coons. Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Well, again, I thank all the witnesses.
And, you are correct, this hearing is a clear indication that
the Congress is very much focused on this issue. And it is a
continuing interest. Today's record will help us in trying to
figure out where we can be the most helpful to deal with this
illicit trade.
It is very interesting, on your point that the value of the
rhino horn is more than gold. That points out, as you have all
said, you need a comprehensive strategy. You also have to deal
with public awareness and demand, you have to deal with supply.
But, at that price, it shows that we are doing something about
the supply, for it to be that precious, from the point of view
of the trade.
But, I want to get on to the demand side for one moment.
You have all talked about this a little bit. But, my
information says that, in Asia, rhino horns, particularly, but
also elephant tusks, are looked at as a luxury item and a
social status item, and that many of the people who desire and
want and acquire these items do not realize it is illegal and
do not realize the impact it has on the species. So, yes, you
are absolutely correct, when we bring this attention to the
public, they become outraged, they get involved, and there is
political support to take more dramatic action. But, it seems
like we have a challenge in Asia, that we have not yet reached
the mainstream of those who are capable of purchasing these
products and wanting these products, because it looks like it
is still perceived as a status symbol to have these products in
your possession.
Can you just share with us whether we are taking steps to
try to change that within the demand countries, and what we can
do in the United States to help in that regard?
Whoever wants to grab that.
Mr. Ashe. I will start, Senator, and--I think that we are
taking steps, and I am sure my colleagues will have things to
add.
But, for my part, I think the ban on commercial trade in
the United States is an essential first step. When we talk to
our colleagues in other countries, they look right back at us
across the table and say, ``Well, you are doing the same thing
that we are doing.'' And when you see this elephant tusk, these
two products here, they--each of those represents a dead
elephant. And, you know, part of the education that needs to
take place in countries like China and others in Southeast Asia
is a cultural belief that the elephants do not die when the
tusks are taken, that, some cases, they just fall off, like
antlers fall off of a deer. And so, an essential first step is
telling people, ``These are dead--these represent dead
animals.''
And so, in the United States, we need to lead by example,
as we have done so many times in the past on issues like this.
We need to stop domestic trade in ivory, as an example of U.S.
resolve and leadership.
Senator Cardin. Can someone respond to the question on
reaching the market in Asia so that the public is aware that if
they, indeed, have these products, it is illegal and affecting
the diversity of species? Are those efforts underway? And why
are they not more effective?
Ambassador Garber. Let me take that on first, and then
perhaps Assistant Administrator Postel can add some more.
Yes, those efforts are very much underway. And it is part
of what we are talking about with these governments. Chairman,
you mentioned the Strategic and Economic Dialogue with China,
and we have put wildlife trafficking on the agenda of that
particular forum. And one of the agenda items that we are
having on that is conversations about demand reduction. And, on
the very first Worldwide Life Day, which took place this past
March 3, we worked with the Government of China and agreed to
do some joint activities as many of our embassies around the
world, particularly in Asia, did, as well. And the focus of
these was on education. Many of them were activities with
schools. In China, they did two full days of activities, both
with the Embassy and also the Government doing its own thing
throughout the country to try and get out this message.
I have also recently learned that the Chinese Government,
when it has citizens traveling abroad, sends SMS messages to
their cell phones when they arrive in countries in Africa,
reminding them that it is illegal to purchase--you know,
against purchasing illegal ivory or rhino horn. And this is
really steps, I think, particularly in China, where many look
to the government for leadership. The fact that we are seeing a
change in tone and some activities is really important.
Is it done yet? No. Are they all the way there? Absolutely
not. We are going to be asking them to follow our leadership on
implementing an ivory ban. That would be a very important step,
should they agree to do so. There is a lot more that we need to
be doing.
But, we are making this a point of emphasis with many of
the governments throughout Asia. We have put it in the APEC
Leaders Declaration, we are raising it in ASEAN, so we are
driving very, very hard on the demand question.
But, Eric may want to talk a little bit about some of the
specific programs----
Senator Cardin. I want to--I think U.S. leadership is
critically important, and that we have got to lead by example,
we have got to do the things that Mr. Ashe has talked about.
But, I would be interested as to those countries in Asia where
we think are--where the markets are particularly strong--a
strategy for us to use every means we can to help provide
further education to people of that country. Because I think
most people would be shocked to know that this is illegal, and
who own it, for status, and that it is--as you point out, Mr.
Ashe, it is dead animals and affecting the health of that
species.
Mr. Postel.
Mr. Postel. Thank you, Senator.
To add to your discussion, a couple other places, first of
all, involving sharks and shark-fin soup. I am sure you know
that the Chinese Government has banned that from their official
functions. In Thailand, we have got a partnership going. The
number of partners is climbing, but right now we are up to 102
restaurants and hotels that have agreed to keep it off their
menus. So, we are trying to work in, in Thailand, in ways that
reduce demands for some of the species.
One of the areas that we are pivoting to more, which is one
of these hotspots--and under the increased funding, we are able
to do that as we are--for the first time, in 2014, we are going
to move money into Vietnam, into our programs there, because
that is one of the other areas where there is a lot of demand
issues and misconceptions. And so, that is some of the pivot
that is going on, in accordance with the strategy and just the
overall surge in this problem to try to address demand, because
we fully agree with you, we have got to work on that.
Senator Cardin. Ms. Darby.
Ms. Darby. As part of our implementation of the U.S.
strategy to combat transnational organized crime, we have been
engaged with the U.N. Office of Drugs and Crime on a series of
public-service announcements to raise awareness about specific
types of transnational organized crime activity among
particular audiences.
So, as part of this series, we just funded a PSA that is
focused on wildlife trafficking, that features Chinese actress
Li Bingbing, that is now airing in Asia and should reach
millions in Asia as part of this awareness-raising effort.
Senator Cardin. Let me ask you one more question, if I
might, and it is a final question for me, and that is: Your
agency deals with all types of trafficking, including wildlife
trafficking. Is there a similarity between the type of illegal
activities that take place in wildlife trafficking that is
supporting crime syndicates, is the money being used to support
other types of illegal activities? Do we find that wildlife
trafficking is similar to what we see with arm dealers and drug
dealers and human traffickers?
Ms. Darby. I think the biggest things they have in common
is that they are motivated by the same thing, which is money,
and they take advantage of the same facilitators. They take
advantage of corrupt officials, they take advantage of document
forgers, they take advantage of lax customs enforcement, they
take advantage of bankers and attorneys who help facilitate the
illegal trade.
Right now, we have not seen a lot of evidence of drug-
trafficking groups getting involved in wildlife trafficking,
for example, or vice versa. We are obviously alert to that
possibility in the future. And, frankly, the gaps in our
knowledge with respect to how wildlife trafficking
organizations operate, we have significant gaps. And one of the
reasons why we are focused on evidence collection,
investigative skills, and information analysis in our capacity-
building programs in both Africa and Asia is that we need to
build up the knowledge that we have about these organizations.
Right now, what we see is--a customs official or police at an
airport may pick up a shipment, and they arrest the person who
is associated with that illegal transit of the wildlife
product. What we need to do is go a level deeper. And what we
are really focused on doing, in INL, is trying to then mine
that for the intelligence that you need to be able to get to
who is really driving this trade, not just who is a courier, if
you will.
So, that is a major focus of what we are----
Senator Cardin. So, we still do not have enough
information. I would be very interested in how your findings
proceed on that. So, thank you.
Ms. Darby. Absolutely.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator Cardin.
Let me just continue along that line, if I can. I would be
interested in how we are working with African countries to
strengthen their abilities--borders, intelligence. And I am
interested in what role you think the Department of Defense and
the intelligence community will be playing in the
implementation of the national strategy, and how you see the
similarity with drug trafficking, human trafficking, other
sorts of illicit transnational criminal activity, how that
requires some more active involvement from law enforcement,
DOD, intelligence.
Ms. Darby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think the way we approach the wildlife trafficking trade
is very similar to the way that we approach other forms of
transnational criminal activity. And I think the focus that the
INL Bureau is taking on this issue is very much informed by our
experience working on other forms of transnational organized
crime, including drugs, which is the need to focus on the laws.
And I think, as one of my colleagues--the point one of my
colleagues made, it is not just about the penalties, it is also
about having conspiracy statutes and other tools that
investigators and prosecutors can use to vigorously pursue
these cases.
Investigative skills, training for both the people who are
on the front lines--park rangers, et cetera--in how to collect
and preserve evidence, and then training for investigators who
can take that evidence and make some links on the basis of that
evidence, as well as training prosecutors and judges on how to
use new legal tools to effectively go after the trade. And then
getting countries to work both within their own country across
agencies, just as our national strategy compels us to do, we
want other countries to do the same, and we have engaged our
Chiefs of Mission overseas to try to get our embassies involved
in encouraging countries to develop their own national
strategies. And things like the attachees from the Fish and
Wildlife Service are very helpful in that regard. And then
working across borders, because, obviously, the animals do not
know any borders, criminal activity knows no borders. And so,
operations like COBRA II, where we bring those countries
together.
And, you know, it is notable for both the seizures and the
arrests that stem from a particular operation like that, but, I
think even more important, in terms of long-term impact, is
getting these countries to develop better trust among
themselves and to see the rewards that cooperation can bring to
them. And that is something we are really trying to foster.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
If I might, Assistant Administrator Postel, one of the
places that I think we have really seen engagement at the
grassroots level, effective NGO, and national leadership work
is in community-based conservation. You referenced a great
example in Namibia. Now, what is the role and the efficacy of
community-based conservation approaches in incentivizing
wildlife conservation? And where else can we replicate this,
beyond Namibia? What role is USAID taking in that? First.
Second, comment--tell me a little bit more about the USAID
wildlife tech challenge. I would be interested in hearing where
that is headed and what impacts you expect from it.
Mr. Postel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So, conservancies are in existence and being created in a
number of other countries. I was in northern Kenya, looking at
some that are achieving good results. And, you know, what it
takes to make that a success is a long-term investment. It has
got to have a good policy-enabling environment. But, you really
see that it has other spinoff effects because you are talking
about creating incomes and a stake in the people who live there
in preserving what they have, as opposed to the other model,
where they have a stake in killing what is there to have
livelihoods. So, if they can have good livelihoods from what is
there, they have got a stake in keeping it around for all time.
So, we see the successes, and there is a number of other
countries that have been looking at that; and, even within
Kenya and other places, it is expanding.
One more thing on that, Senator. The one challenge we have
is that these conservancies are good at dealing with more local
poaching. But, when you have a armed group with serious
technology and large numbers, then they are sort of
outnumbered, and that is part of the thing that we have to
tackle, in combination with host countries and with their
police forces and so forth, because the local trackers and
rangers, then, are completely outnumbered. So, that is a
current-day challenge to conservancies.
As far as the tech challenge, there are a number of people
that have worked on technological solutions to some of these
problems. For instance, there is a whole consortium of
organizations and U.S. Fish and Wildlife service and ourselves
are working with North Carolina Zoo and others on this open-
source software that--the initiatives led by the North Carolina
Zoo to help people with tracking and other things.
So, there are existing efforts, but what we are hoping to
do, consistent with the Global Development Lab that you are
such a strong supporter of, is to tap into all those other
people around our country who may not, day in, day out, work on
wildlife trafficking, but have special skills in--whether it is
DNA or forensics or in tracking or GIS--to get some of their
energy. So, we are still putting this together, but we will
have partners, such as Google and National Geographic and
others, and will be reaching out to all Americans to offer
their ideas to solve some of these problems in several
different areas.
Senator Coons. Thank you.
Director Ashe, in your written testimony, you said--and I
do not mean to take this out of context, but it was memorable--
``Working with shoestring budgets and a special-agent workforce
that has not grown since the late 1970s, the service has
disrupted large-scale trafficking in contraband wildlife
commodities that range from elephant ivory and rhino horn to
sturgeon caviar and sea turtle skin and shell.'' Wow. Well
written. A good reminder that we may have been underfunding
enforcement capabilities for a long time.
How could we better invest in Fish and Wildlife Service?
And what progress are you seeing from the two attachees that
have been referred to before, that, if memory serves, are in
Bangkok and Nairobi? And how do you see that as a promising
model for the long term?
Mr. Ashe. Well, thank you, Senator. Yes, we have just over
200 special agents in our law enforcement force. We have had as
many as 230, I believe, in the past. But, we find ourselves,
today, about where we were in 1978, in terms of our law
enforcement capacity. Of course, we have learned more, we are
more sophisticated, we have great partners. So, I am optimistic
about the future. But, we simply need additional resources.
I think the liaison positions in U.S. embassies will be a
quantum leap forward as we have people in country that are
developing direct relationships, as I think has been noted
here. Trust is a key element as we do law enforcement on the
international scale. People share information with people that
they trust. And so, having our people there, able to build
those trust-based relationships, coordinating more effectively
amongst partner organizations, and doing on-the-ground
training. So, as Ms. Darby said, not just helping people on the
ground, but--with evidence collection--but helping in
prosecution and--I think will be a key ingredient in success.
So, we have just begun that, we just stationed our first
liaison in--at the Embassy in Bangkok. By the end of this year
we hope to have five, total, and we have additional funding in
our FY15 budget for more positions. And so, we hope to see that
as a key ingredient of success in the years ahead.
Senator Coons. Terrific. Thank you, Director.
Senator.
Senator Flake. Thanks.
Let me just return to--a minute on the demand side. We are
spending considerable amount of money. I just want to know,
with the new strategy that we have and working across agencies
to make it more efficient, how are we spending that money? Does
Fish and Wildlife have a budget that it uses to then contract
with NGOs or spend directly or do public-private partnerships?
I am just speaking of the--on the demand side. Does AID, does
State? Give me a sense of how that is going to work now. Are
you all going to be contracting with your favorite NGOs? Or how
is it going to work?
I see you smiling, Ms. Garber. Can you shed some light on
that?
Ambassador Garber. I think that is exactly what we are
trying to look at in the implementation strategy, is to make
sure that we are very coordinated on this, because we want to
make sure that it is very integrated, going forward.
Senator Flake. Right. Well, you are going to be spending
money this year.
Ambassador Garber. Right. And----
Senator Flake. And will--this year, will it be coordinated?
Ambassador Garber. Yes. We are working together as we never
have before, so absolutely. But, there--I would like to ask my
colleagues to talk about their specific pots of money, because,
in my Bureau, the amount that we have for this kind of thing we
use in very small amounts. We are talking, in this year's
budget, some small grants proposals for some of our
environmental hubs, maybe 20,000 apiece----
Senator Flake. Okay.
Ambassador Garber [continuing]. Totaling 60,000. And the
level of my colleagues down the row is a little bit more than
that. So----
Senator Flake. Right. If you could just each tell me how
you are going to do that--on the demand side, how you are going
to spend it.
Mr. Ashe. I will say that, in the Fish and Wildlife
Service, we have direct funding through our international
program, and we have asked for increased funding. Again, part
of that will be demand reduction. I will have to get back to
you for the record in terms of what, specifically, we are
doing. But, we work very closely with both USAID and the State
Department. And I think what we should do--to be able to do for
you is to paint a picture for how we are going to use that
money most effectively, particularly on the demand side.
Senator Flake. All right. Well, what I think would concern
me is if U.S. Fish and Wildlife, if AID and, to some extent,
State--it is not as big--but if you each have your own program
officers that deal with these issues, and we--you just do not
get any economies of scale there, and you are not able to--a
lot of the money is wasted in implementation rather than the
end product. Do you see a danger in that? Or this strategy that
we have, is it going to solve that, or not?
Mr. Ashe. I see a--there certainly is a danger in that, but
I would say, I think this is a pretty small community of
people, and I think that my experience is that we get the
maximum amount of muscle for every dollar that we spend,
because it is a small community of people and they work very
closely together, both across government and across NGO
organizations. So, I would be surprised to see, you know, that
we are spending demand reduction--our demand-reduction efforts
are duplicative or working at cross purposes.
Senator Flake. Thank you. I would appreciate that.
Mr. Postel. Senator, I will add one example. In the case of
Vietnam, which will be a new one, after the CN and 653(a)
clear, that money will move into the field, and then our team
in Vietnam will work with the Embassy and have consultation
with government, civil society, and other people to finalize
the key priorities.
And, as part of that, we also look at the various tools
that need to be brought to bear. And, if necessary, we will sit
with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and move money to them
because of all the expertise there, or to other parts of
Department of Interior and so forth. And that is--a lot of
coordination occurs in the field as people are finalizing
exactly what is the most strategic thing on which to spend
money.
So, I think we always have to be on guard. I agree with
your premise. And so, we can never take our eye off that ball,
but we also have a lot of people try to work hard to
coordinate, and the strategy is really enforcing that.
Senator Flake. Ms. Darby.
Ms. Darby. I would add that, while our Bureau does not play
a big role in the demand reduction side of the house, this was
one of our concerns across the board. How do we, as newer
players in the mix, avoid duplicating or stepping over things
that our colleagues were already doing? And so, our working-
level folks who are on these issues are getting together every
2 weeks to make sure that we are identifying gaps, we are
identifying priorities, and that we are having discussions
about who is best placed to address certain needs across the
board, not just demand-reduction-related, but across the board.
Senator Flake. Well, I would say in closing, there are best
practices; we know what campaigns work. I hope that we are
looking out there and spending our money on those campaigns
rather than simply always coordinating with that money, whether
it is with embassy staff or others. And when we know what
works, if there is something out there that is working--I know
it is specific to each country. What works in Vietnam may not
be working in China or elsewhere. But, I hope that, when we see
those things that are working, that is where the money goes,
and less money actually coordinating to get there, if you know
what I mean.
Thank you.
Senator Cardin. Well, once again, I thank you all, not just
for your testimony, but what you do every day on these issues
and so many other issues.
I want to follow up my first round of questioning in which
we talked about the similarities between trafficking in
wildlife and other forms of trafficking, and that there is a
lot of common ground here, from the point of view of
corruption, the importance of custom and border issues, law
enforcement, and treating this as a crime and not just as a
casual activity. It reminds me of some of our discussions, many
years ago, on what we could do to be effective in stopping
trafficking in persons. And in one of the hearings, we had a
great deal of discussion about best practices and with law
enforcement and dealing with the fact that you have originating
countries, transit countries, and destination countries. In a
way, that is the same problems that we have on trafficking in
wildlife. And one of the tools that we developed--with the
State Department taking the lead, I might say--was a
Trafficking in Person report that we get every year that rates
the performance of every country--including the United States--
in dealing with these issues. Because each country is
different, as Senator Flake has pointed out. One size does not
fit all, here.
So, I am just exploring whether a similar type of an effort
would be useful. Let me just say, by way of an example, that
report is very much in my office at all times. When Ambassadors
from other countries visit, I know exactly where they stand on
the TIP report and what they need to do to improve. So, it is
on the agenda of just about every meeting we have, particularly
if the country is on one of our watch lists.
So, it seems to me it might be helpful to have some type of
matrix developed as to expectations in dealing with wildlife.
There may not be as many countries involved that are critical
to this task as it is in trafficking in persons, but it might
be a useful guide. I can assure you that embassies lobby us to
move in a more positive direction on the TIP report, so they
are very mindful of that. We might be able to achieve a similar
result with a Trafficking in Wildlife report.
I welcome your thoughts. We have two representatives from
the State Department here. What do you think? Helpful, or not?
Would it work for you?
Ms. Darby. You know, I think the ``name and shame''
exercises can be helpful in some contexts. I do not think we,
frankly, have had discussions about whether we think it would
be helpful in this context.
I think one thing that we have seen as a result of the
national strategy in the executive order is a lot of engagement
by our embassies and far more reporting than we ever saw in the
past, in terms of the unique challenges countries face, what is
the scope of the wildlife trafficking problem in a given
country, what is the political will to combat it, what specific
engagements with these countries would be helpful, what partner
nations we need to engage. So----
Senator Cardin. But, it is somewhat haphazard today. I do
not question the sincerity of trying to advance, in a positive
way, this issue. What the TIP report has done is
institutionalized it. It is now part of the agenda because it
is there. And wildlife is not at the same level as humans in
trafficking, from the point of view of visibility and
attention. I do not expect we will get there. As serious as
trafficking in wildlife is, when you traffic a person, it is a
much more horrendous crime. I recognize that.
But, the process, here, of trying to institutionalize
concern is something that may not require the same amount of
effort that we put into TIP report. But, to develop protocols
and to start rating countries on how well they are meeting
those protocols, to me, might be a valuable tool to help you in
your work.
Ambassador Garber. As DAS Darby was saying, it is something
that we have not fully considered in the context of doing this,
but one of the things that many of--what we find that is
happening since the President's strategy came out and since
Congress has owned an interest in this as well, is that we are
seeing a change in the attitudes of many countries on this. And
I think China is a good example. I think if you had said, 3
years ago, that China would sit down as part of our premier
bilateral policy dialogue, put wildlife on the agenda, people
would have probably laughed you out of the room. Not you,
Senator, of course, but me, if I had suggested that; let me be
clear.
But--and I do think that we have many multilateral
environment agreements and efforts, such as CITES, that also
are forums for discussion on how countries are doing on certain
areas, and setting criteria. We are trying to introduce the
issue of wildlife trafficking into more forums. So, setting
those standards in APEC, trying to bring it to ASEAN. We
approached the African Union about having wildlife trafficking
as an issue on their agenda. They have been receptive to it,
and technical discussions are going along those lines.
And what I would be cautious about on--at this point, as
immediately saying yes, is because some of those efforts may
turn out to be very effective, and you would not want to
undercut them. But, it is something that I think we would need
to evaluate and think about, and it is an interesting
suggestion.
Senator Cardin. Okay. Thank you.
I just want to make sure I get this into the record. We are
going to keep the committee record open until next Wednesday,
close of business, for additional comments or questions that
might be asked. Just wanted everyone to be aware of that.
And I really do appreciate what you do every day. This is a
subject matter that we are trying to figure out how Congress
can be more helpful in carrying out your responsibility.
I do think it has gotten a lot more visibility. And that is
to the credit of the people that are in this room. And I
compliment you all.
I do think there is a lot of private-sector interest in
helping us in this regard, which makes our job a little bit
easier when we have that type of private-sector interest. I
just think that we need to find more effective ways to develop
expected practices.
And the thing that I think troubled me the most in the
background that was prepared by my staff is the fact that, in
so many places, owning a piece of ivory or a piece of rhino
horn is considered to be a status symbol, considered to be a
sign of success. And to me, that is something that we should be
able to overcome, and we need to develop strategies to let
people know that having such a product in your home is
contributing to crime and contributing to the devastation of
species.
Thank you.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Senator.
I have just a few more questions, if I might, which I hope
continues to demonstrate the very real interest of Members of
Congress in this topic.
I have never forgotten the first time I encountered an
elephant that had been slaughtered by poachers. This was on the
banks of the Ewaso Nyiro River in northern Kenya in 1984. It is
just an awful sight. And, you are right, it is easy to forget
that there are many people who believe that collecting ivory
does not contribute to killing elephants. And whatever we can
do to help spread that message globally and domestically, I
think, is important for us to continue to work together on.
Ambassador Garber, demand reduction in the United States is
an important piece of this. I would be interested if you and
Director Ashe would comment on what you think is our path
forward on demand reduction in the United States, reducing the
consumption of, the collection of, the purchasing of illicit
and illegal wildlife products.
Director.
Mr. Ashe. So, I think we have taken the first steps, which
is using our full authority under the African Elephant
Conservation Act and the Endangered Species Act. We have one
more step to take, which is to revise our Section (4)(d) rule
under the Endangered Species Act, and that will prohibit all
trade, except for documented antiques, things that are over 100
years old, that--and so, we will, effectively, have banned all
commercial trade domestically in the United States in
international commerce, in--and interstate and intrastate
commerce.
So, we have the ability to do that, we need to do that. I
think what you will hear, and what we will hear, are many
people making arguments that sound like, ``Well, these products
just have a de minimis amount of ivory.'' And if you see a
product, and it has a little piece of ivory, it is the same as
that entire tusk. It represents a dead animal. And we cannot--
our law enforcement agents cannot distinguish--you know, this
product over here could be 100 years old, it could be 100 days
old. You cannot distinguish between them without very
sophisticated genetic analysis, and sometimes even without--
even genetic analysis cannot determine the age of a product
like that.
So, we need to make a difficult decision, because we are
asking our trading partners to make difficult decisions.
Culturally, economically, they are difficult decisions. So,
again, I think it is important for us to show leadership and
show resolve. And we have the tools. Legally, we have the tools
to implement a near-complete ban. The Endangered Species Act
explicitly authorizes trade in antiques. And so, that is the
one piece of trade that we cannot ban, administratively; but,
you know, legitimate, documented antiques that are over 100
years old are not--again, are not the cause of the problem. So,
I think we have the ability to do it. We need to do it.
Senator Coons. I am interested in how conflict is fueling
some of the poaching crisis, particularly in Central Africa.
And, Ambassador, I would be interested in your comment on how
the interplay between instability, political and security
instability situations in countries like Central African
Republic, Democratic Republic of the Congo, South Sudan--are
accelerating a wildlife poaching problem, both because of the
free flow of weapons and then the lack of controlled borders
and increasing number of folks who are, frankly, desperate for
any way to generate revenue.
And then, Deputy Assistant Secretary Darby, you made a
passing reference to some evidence that al-Shabaab and the
Janjaweed and the Lord's Resistance Army are trafficking in
wildlife products. I would be interested in your comment on
whether--how reliable is that? Is this just conjecture, or do
we have any evidence?
Ambassador Garber.
Ambassador Garber. Yes, political insecurity and elephant
poaching really have been going hand-in-hand. And with fragile
states with very porous borders in which there is not very
clear governance and a lot of monitoring, it gives free
passage, so to speak, for many of the bad actors that are
involved in this trade to go in. For instance, in the Central
African Forest, elephant population has been extremely
vulnerable and has seen a two-third decline in its population
since 2002.
Working very closely with our mission to the United
Nations, in January we were able to get, in the Security
Council resolutions that were addressing some of these
conflicts, also wildlife traffickers to be a sanctioned element
in those particular resolutions. So, by this, we are trying to
demonstrate that, even though these fragile states may not have
the governance that would stop this, that the international
community is working hand-in-hand together to try and prevent
this from going on.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
Deputy Assistant Secretary Darby.
Ms. Darby. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
While we have some evidence of involvement of some
terrorist organizations and armed groups in this activity, we
do not have good evidence on the extent of that involvement. We
believe that, in some cases, they may be profiting financially
from it. In some cases, they may be exchanging wildlife
products for safe haven or for weapons. But, the picture is far
from clear, and I would--you know, I would defer to my
intelligence-community colleagues. But, I think, even in the
unclassified assessment that the Office of the Director of
National Intelligence has posted, the links that we can
establish at this point are not strong.
One area where we have better insights, I think, is in the
area of terrorist financing. And, at this stage, we do not see
that wildlife trafficking is a major revenue source, or a
significant revenue source of any kind for terrorist
organizations. But, again, we seek to develop better knowledge
on this. And we are very attuned to the possibility that it is
out there.
Senator Coons. Ambassador, let me focus on one country, in
particular, if I might. Mozambique has recently come under
fairly intense scrutiny as both a transshipment country and the
base from which a significant number of poachers are operating
who are going in and out of Kruger National Park in South
Africa, as well as other parks in the region. What is the U.S.
Government doing to address Mozambique's particularly strong
role in fueling poaching and trafficking in southern Africa?
Ambassador Garber. Thank you for that question, Mr.
Chairman.
We have been addressing this issue with the Government of
Mozambique. And the Government of Mozambique has acknowledged
the seriousness of the wildlife trafficking problem. The U.S.
Government is currently engaged with the Mozambique Government
to consider ways to address these issues. And we currently have
a 20-year public-private partnership between the Government of
Mozambique and the Gorongosa Restoration Project, a U.S.
nonprofit organization that has been a strong partner in
overall park management in combating wildlife trafficking.
Our Embassy has also been engaging with civil society in
Mozambique and various partners trying to leverage additional
public-private partnership. And recently--and I think, again,
this is a sign of how the attention that the United States has
been paying to this issue is beginning to make a difference--
the Government of Mozambique, just last month, the Parliament
passed a Conservation Areas Act, which will introduce
significantly more serious penalties for wildlife crimes. Under
this law, protected animals, without a license, would result in
a prison sentence of 8 to 12 years, and the illegal
exportation, storage, transportation, or sale of protected
species results in fines equivalent of up to $90,000, which in
Mozambique is significant.
But, this is not just a one-country issue. I think a number
of us have addressed that in the course of our comments today,
that if you put pressure in one area, you can often see the
traffickers and the problem moving elsewhere. So, we are also
putting a lot of effort to try and put more into our regional
wildlife enforcement network into southern--in southern Africa,
trying to get South Africa to play a greater role, to get
Mozambique to be involved, and just, generally, to put more
concentration in there. So, as they are all sharing best
practices, information, techniques, they will, together, work
to the problem to prevent that this additional pressure that we
have been putting on Mozambique, if we are successful, it does
not just result in the problem moving next door.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Ambassador.
I would like to thank all four of you for your very hard
work, your leadership, and your cooperation and coordination.
I would like to thank, again, representatives who are with
us today from a wide range of nongovernmental organizations. I
do think this is an area that enjoys broad interest and support
from Members of Congress, a significant interest and engagement
from our constituents, and where there is a very great
challenge for us in demand reduction in Asia and in the United
States and in dealing with the corruption, the violence, the
porous borders, the lack of trained and adequately staffed and
supported wildlife rangers and border guards that really make
Africa, sadly, tragically, the focus of a lot of illicit
poaching.
So, thank you for your work and your service, and thank you
for your testimony here today.
The record of this hearing will be kept open til the close
of business tomorrow, Thursday, May 22.
And I am grateful for your testimony and your work.
With that, we are hereby adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:04 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Daniel M. Ashe to Questions
Submitted by Senator Marco Rubio
On February 11, 2014, the administration announced a ``National
Strategy for Combating Wildlife Trafficking'' and a proposal to ban all
U.S. commercial trade in elephant ivory. However, a September 2012 FWS
International Affairs Division report stated: ``Since the vast majority
of seizures in the United States were small quantities, we do not
believe that there is a significant illegal ivory trade into this
country.''
Question. What has changed since the September 2012 report to move
the administration to pursue a complete ban on U.S. commercial trade in
elephant ivory?
Answer. The quote above is included in a fact sheet that the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) prepared highlighting U.S. efforts
to control illegal ivory trade. The statement was based on the Elephant
Trade Information System (ETIS) analysis of U.S. import/export seizure
data. As we noted in the fact sheet, the vast majority of seizures
interdicted at the point of import are small quantities. However, the
data reported for inclusion in the ETIS analysis did not include large-
scale seizures of ivory that had previously entered the United States
illegally and were not detected upon import.
The U.S. v. Victor Gordon case is just one such example. On June 4,
2014, a judge in New York sentenced Victor Gordon to 30 months in
prison, followed by 2 years of supervised release, for smuggling
elephant ivory into the United States. Approximately one ton of
elephant ivory was seized in that case alone.
A more holistic evaluation of U.S. ivory seizures, as well as the
substantial volume of elephant ivory available within the United States
that is of questionable legal origin, indicates that we remain a
significant ivory market, and we must continue to be vigilant in
combating illegal ivory trade.
Question. How would a complete ban on the domestic trade and sale
of legally owned, preban ivory stop poaching and the illicit trade in
ivory?
Answer. By effectively controlling illegal ivory trade at home and
encouraging and assisting elephant range states and consumer countries
around the world to take additional actions to control poaching and
illegal trade, we can have a significant impact on elephant
conservation.
Though there is trade in antiques and other legally acquired ivory
imported prior to the 1989 African Elephant Conservation Act ivory
import moratorium, we believe a substantial amount of elephant ivory is
illegally imported and enters the domestic market. It is extremely
difficult to differentiate legally acquired ivory from ivory derived
from elephant poaching. Our criminal investigations and antismuggling
efforts have clearly shown that legal ivory trade can serve as a cover
for illegal trade. In addition to the Victor Gordon case noted above,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and state wildlife officers seized more
than 2 million dollars' worth of illegal elephant ivory from two New
York City retail stores in 2012.
We have not yet implemented any regulatory or policy action to
completely ban all domestic trade and we have not asserted that we will
do so. Instead, we will propose a revision to the Endangered Species
Act special rule for the African elephant that will further restrict
commercial trade in African elephant ivory within the United States.
This proposed rule will be subject to public comment and we will
address those public comments before publishing a final rule.
______
Statement submitted by the Wildlife Conservation Society
Thank you for the opportunity to submit written testimony on the
hearing entitled ``The Escalating International Wildlife Trafficking
Crisis: Ecological, Economic and National Security Issues.'' The Bronx
Zoo-headquartered Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) is an
international conservation organization with the mission of saving
wildlife and wildlife places. Globally, WCS works to protect more than
a quarter of the world's biodiversity in more than 60 countries around
the world. WCS manages or comanages more than 200 million acres of
protected areas across Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean,
Oceania, and North America employing more than 4,000 staff including
200 Ph.D. scientists and 100 veterinarians. WCS works to protect many
of the world's most iconic species, including elephants, tigers,
gorillas, chimpanzees, bison, sea turtles, whales, sharks, and many
others. WCS also works to conserve ecologically significant and intact
land and sea scapes partnering with governments, local communities, and
other stakeholders.
International wildlife trafficking, driven largely by burgeoning
demand in Asia and facilitated by corruption, is considered by experts
to be the fourth-largest illegal trade in the world behind drugs, guns
and human trafficking, and is estimated to be worth at least $5 billion
and potentially in excess of $20 billion annually.\1\ Wildlife
trafficking and other transnational crimes are often interlinked,
either involving the same trade routes and countries, or even some of
the same criminal syndicates. The current wave of wildlife poaching in
many countries is carried out by sophisticated and well-organized
criminal networks--often using helicopters, night-vision equipment, and
silencers--avoiding enforcement patrols. In many countries, the
poaching of elephants and other species threatens sustainable
development and the security of local communities, especially when
illicit proceeds partially fund insurgency groups such as the Lord's
Resistance Army and al-Shabab.\2\
WCS is implementing a 4-pronged global approach to end wildlife
trafficking: (1) documenting the crisis; (2) stopping the poaching; (3)
stopping the trafficking; and (3) ending the demand for illegally or
unsustainably sourced products such as ivory. WCS works to monitor,
analyze, and publish population trend data for key wildlife species,
poaching rates, and trafficking information. For example, WCS led on
recent seminal scientific papers showing dramatic declines in range and
populations of tigers and forest elephants.\3\ This work has been
effective in raising awareness of the scale and the nature of the
problem, and stimulating government actions.
WCS works to stop wildlife poaching through its long-term field-
based projects, including in 24 sites across 16 countries in Africa and
Asia on elephants, and another 11 sites across 7 countries on tigers.
To measurably reduce poaching, WCS is establishing and supporting
ranger and community guard patrols; deploying the GIS-based SMART4
software across 100 partner sites for parks and protected areas to
enhance monitoring, enforcement patrols, morale, and transparency; and
conducting aerial surveillance for detection and early warning system
to trigger an enforcement response--particularly in large savannah
areas and marine ecosystems.
WCS also works to stop the trafficking along major global and
regional trafficking chains in multiple source, intermediary, and
consumer countries. WCS supports government partners to ensure national
legislative frameworks and the institutional environment elevates the
recognition of wildlife trafficking to a serious transnational
organized crime to enable both an effective policing response and
deterrent to wildlife trafficking. WCS also strengthens the technical
capacity of frontline enforcement agencies and promotes and facilitates
the strategic application of appropriate technologies and tools (e.g.,
sniffer dogs, mobile apps, x-ray scanners, and wildlife forensics such
as DNA and isotopic analyses of seized contraband) toward significantly
improving rates of successful arrests, prosecutions, and convictions of
wildlife traffickers resulting in deterrent penalties. WCS gathers and
analyses information to generate actionable intelligence on key
individuals and key trafficking routes, and carries out a range of
activities with our government partners to ensure that agencies are
legally mandated, sufficiently trained, and empowered to share
information and respond, with effective enforcement, to actionable
intelligence at multiple scales. Finally, WCS also works to reduce
demand through multiple evidence-based approaches, including active
social media campaigns in Asia and the United States to reach potential
consumers.\5\
The political attention on this issue continues to grow within the
U.S. Government with the release and implementation of the National
Strategy to Combat Wildlife Trafficking (National Strategy). Wildlife
conservation, antipoaching, and antitrafficking efforts would not be
possible without the tremendous support and assistance of the U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. State Department
Office of International Narcotics & Law Enforcement (INL), the U.S.
State Department Office of Oceans, Environment and Scientific Affairs
(OES), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the U.S.
Department of Justice Division of Environment & Natural Resources
(DNR). Congressionally directed appropriations to biodiversity
conservation, large landscape conservation programs, wildlife
trafficking, law enforcement, and international species conservation
have been essential to mounting a sustained long-term response to the
crisis. Ensuring that these funds are directed to the greatest threats
and the priority geographies is critical as funds are scaled up, rather
than sprinkling small amounts across many countries. U.S. Government
collaboration with other countries and civil society is already
delivering increased political will as several countries have followed
the U.S. Government's lead in destroying their confiscated ivory
stocks.
Government agencies responsible for combating wildlife trafficking
in Asia still lack the political and legislative support, resources, or
skills to mount an effective response. While recent improvements in law
enforcement and successful investigations have occurred, trafficking
remains largely unaffected. International mechanisms such as Interpol
and United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), and regional
support initiatives such as ASEAN-Wildlife Enforcement Network can
allow for greater regional coordination, but are only as strong as
their members. This ``third-party convener'' model for international
cooperation depends upon the level of trust between countries and with
the international organizations convening them.
In recognition of the shortcomings of existing programs, WCS is (a)
maximizing our in-country presences and deep knowledge through
intelligent and strategic analysis and dissemination of information;
and (b) leveraging this information through our trusted in-country
relationships by helping to generate government responses along the
trade chains to catalyze enforcement at key nodes to prevent, detect,
and suppress criminals who sustain illegal flows of wildlife. China,
Vietnam, Lao PDR, Cambodia, Indonesia, and Burma are the priority
investment countries based on the global impact that criminal networks
in those countries are having on wildlife populations in Africa. There
are five priority approaches: (1) strengthen coordination and
cooperation within and between governments in priority trafficking
countries; (2) increase political support toward effective enforcement
on wildlife traffickers within key countries at national and local
levels; (3) provide and train frontline law enforcement officials--
border, customs, police, and regulatory bodies--on new mobile
technologies to apprehend, arrest, prosecute, and penalize criminals;
(4) generate accurate information and intelligence on criminals,
companies, species trafficked, methods of trafficking, trafficking
routes; and (5) empower local civil society and media in priority
countries along the trade chain to pressure and support government
agencies to act. These approaches will build political will and
galvanize action to stop trafficking in supply, transit, and consumer
countries, as well as reduce demand. It is important to note that being
aware of an issue does not necessarily lead to an attitudinal or
behavior change resulting in reduced consumption. From WCS's
experience, in many Asian countries, government action and inaction are
perhaps more important drivers of both criminal and consumer behavior.
In dealing diplomatically with China, the U.S. Government should
continue the Strategic and Economic Dialogue as a means to elevate
wildlife trafficking and promote China as a global leader. The U.S.
could encourage China to building off of leadership statements at APEC
and ASEAN to convene an international global or regional dialogue with
China's key economic or trade partners, on the national and economic
security threats from wildlife trafficking. Behavior-change campaigns
like the recent 96 Elephants Campaign's parody of ``The Antique Road
Show,'' ``Antique HorrorShow'' \6\ which is urging broadcasters to stop
assessing and glorifying the value of ivory for commercial sale, need
to spring up within China coupled with increased public reporting of
wildlife crimes through smart-phone apps such as the Wildlife Guardian
App.\7\
In Vietnam, law enforcement needs to be professionalized through
training academy curricula for prosecutors, police, and customs. The
World Customs Organization and Interpol should provide greater on-the-
job support for the use of investigative techniques. To increase the
effectiveness of existing policies, technical assistance to coordinate
and operate the Vietnam Wildlife Enforcement Network is needed,
including regular meetings, field missions, analyses, and task forces
at key trafficking locations. To enhance international cooperation,
Vietnam should be convinced to open up strategic dialogues with key
countries in Africa and Asia along the trade chain to share
information, build relationships, and plan joint investigatory and
enforcement operations.
Through our antitrafficking work on the China/Vietnam border, WCS
has alerted both countries to ongoing smuggling at a key border point,
and have followed up with training and other activities. The U.S.
Embassies in both Vietnam and the Lao PDR, and many other countries,
are now actively engaged on the crisis, working through diplomatic
channels to elevate the issue. A recent government workshop in Vietnam
was attended by the U.S. Embassy along with other governments,
demonstrating the value of the National Strategy to elevate wildlife
trafficking as a transnational organized crime necessitating higher
level engagement of U.S. embassies and foreign policy actors.
In Africa, site-based protection of wildlife and antitrafficking
techniques such as sniffer dogs must be used to address this crisis
head-on. In Tanzania's Ruaha National Park, which harbors the largest
remaining population of elephants in East Africa, WCS and our partners
have proven that building the professional capacity of rangers,
enhancing protected area management, and applying new technologies for
reporting poaching incidents are working. These same successes could be
realized in other countries. In the Sudano-Sahelian region south of the
Sahara in Africa, collusion between smugglers and state officials has
eroded state authority and created lucrative funding channels for
terrorists, militias, and criminal groups.\8\ In response, INL is using
a successful technique in the battle against the narcotics trade, to
link anticorruption and unit vetting programs to support willing
governments plagued with wildlife trafficking. Asset recovery and
forfeiture will be integral to shutting down corruption, money
laundering, and other illicit financial flows related to wildlife
trafficking.
In Uganda, a critical transshipment hub for illegal wildlife
products such as ivory, protecting elephants from poachers and shutting
down transboundary trafficking routes are critical. The Greater Virunga
and Murchison Semliki Landscapes in Uganda are a priority for WCS
investment in order to protect the most important remaining populations
of elephants, lions, and chimpanzees in the country. Efforts must focus
on professionalizing the Uganda Wildlife Authority in antitrafficking
techniques and the interception of ivory being transited through Uganda
to other destinations on the African Continent and in Asia.
U.S. political leadership can make all the difference in stopping
this crisis. The U.S. must continue to elevate this issue politically,
through bilateral and multilateral relationships around the world,
particularly in key source, transit, and consumer countries. In
addition to conservation efforts, U.S. work with other governments on
anticorruption, transnational organized crime, and money laundering
should include wildlife crime. Where U.S. ambassadors collaborate with
international donors in a country and regionally with other U.S.
ambassadors, the impact can be significant, as has been the case in
Central Africa. U.S. ambassadors have the authority to direct the
military, intelligence, legal, and law enforcement staff in the embassy
to analyze and share key intelligence with wildlife law enforcement
officials. With the placement of FWS staff at major transit locations
this info sharing will be essential. This practice needs to be
standardized across all U.S. embassies.
U.S. Government leadership at CITES can help end wildlife crime.
One such opportunity is the CITES Standing Committee meeting this July,
in Geneva. This Committee, the body that manages the work of CITES
intersessionally, will discuss the ivory trade at its next meeting,
including decisions related to the eight countries identified as the
most problematic in ivory trafficking; those countries that have not
fulfilled their obligations run the risk of sanctions by CITES on
wildlife trade. The U.S. is a member of the Committee, and building on
the National Strategy, the U.S. is in a strong position to work with
other member governments to take a firm, proactive position on wildlife
trafficking at the upcoming meeting.
Thank you to Africa Subcommittee Chairman Senator Coons, Asia
Subcommittee Chairman Senator Cardin, and Senate Foreign Relations
Committee Chairman Menendez for hosting the May 21, 2014, joint hearing
on wildlife trafficking. Raising the profile on the wildlife poaching
and trafficking crisis, and especially the transnational criminal
nature of this economic and national security issue, can serve as a
great mobilizing force to coordinate a global response. As the
limitations of existing federal authorities become apparent it is
imperative that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee legislate and
guide federal agencies to work in an effective and efficient
coordinated manner with the full array of resources, capabilities and
assets the U.S. Government can bring to bear internationally.
----------------
End Notes
\1\ Wyler, L.S., Sheikh, P.A., 2013. ``International Illegal Trade
in Wildlife: Threats and U.S. Policy.'' Congressional Research Service
Report for Congress RL34395, Washington D.C., USA.
\2\ UNEP, CITES, IUCN, TRAFFIC, 2013. Elephants in the Dust--The
African Elephant Crisis. A Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations
Environment Programme, GRID-Arendal. www.grida.no and Vira, V., Ewing,
T., 2014. ``Ivory's Curse: The Militarization & Professionalization of
Poaching in Africa.'' Born Free USA and c4ads, Washington DC, USA.
\3\ Maisels, F. Strindberg, S., Blake, S., et al., 2013.
``Devastating Decline of Forest Elephants in Central Africa.'' PLoS ONE
8, e59469. and Walston, J., Robinson, J.G., Bennett, et al. E.L., 2010.
``Bringing the Tiger Back from the Brink--The Six Percent Solution.''
PLoS Biol 8, e1000485.
\4\ ``SMART Conservation Software,'' North Carolina Zoological Park
on behalf of the SMART Collaboration, 2014, available at http://
www.smartconservationsoftware.org/.
\5\ See, www.96elelphants.org for U.S.-based demand reduction
public campaign and http://shouhudaxiang.org for a Chinese ivory demand
reduction campaign site.
\6\ See, www.96elelphants.org for U.S.-based demand reduction
public campaign.
\7\ See, http://china.wcs.org/AboutUs/LatestNews/tabid/6788/
articleType/ArticleView/articleId/953/
Wildlife_Guardian_mobile_software.aspx#.U3tqgfldVPo.
\8\ Written Testimony of Ambassador William R. Brownfield,
Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics & Law
Enforcement Affairs, ``United States Assistance to Combat Transnational
Crime'': Hearing before the Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations,
and Related Programs of the Appropriations Committee (U.S. House of
Representatives, May 7, 2014), available at http://docs.house.gov/
meetings/AP/AP04/20140507/102189/HHRG-113-AP04-Wstate-BrownfieldA-
20140507.pdf.
______
Statement submitted by the Environment and Natural Resources Division,
Department of Justice, Washington, DC
i. introduction
Chairmen Coons and Cardin, and members of the Committee on Foreign
Relations Subcommittees on African Affairs and East Asian and Pacific
Affairs, thank you for the opportunity to submit to you this testimony
discussing the work of the Environment and Natural Resources Division
of the U.S. Department of Justice (``ENRD'' or the ``Division'') with
respect to the administration's efforts to combat wildlife trafficking.
ii. overview of the environment and natural resources division
The Environment and Natural Resources Division is a core litigating
component of the U.S. Department of Justice (the ``Department'').
Founded more than a century ago, ENRD has built a distinguished record
of legal excellence. The Division is organized into nine litigating
sections (Appellate; Environmental Crimes; Environmental Defense;
Environmental Enforcement; Indian Resources; Land Acquisition; Law and
Policy; Natural Resources; and Wildlife and Marine Resources), and an
Executive Office that provides administrative support. ENRD has a staff
of about 600, more than 400 of whom are attorneys.
The Division functions as the Nation's environmental lawyer,
representing virtually every federal agency in courts across the United
States and its territories and possessions in civil and criminal cases
that arise under an array of federal statutes. Our work furthers the
Department's strategic goals to prevent crime and enforce federal laws,
defend the interests of the United States, promote national security,
and ensure the fair administration of justice at the Federal, State,
local, and tribal levels.
iii. enrd's work with respect to wildlife trafficking
For the purposes of this hearing, this testimony highlights the
work of the Division in prosecuting wildlife and wildlife-related
crimes; conducting capacity-building and training on wildlife-related
issues; and helping to develop and implement the National Strategy for
Combating Wildlife Trafficking.
The Department of Justice, principally through the work of the
Environment Division, has long been a leader in the fight against
wildlife trafficking. Combating wildlife trafficking is a top priority
for the Department. Earlier this year, Associate Attorney General Tony
West led the United States delegation at the London Conference on the
Illegal Wildlife Trade, where high-level representatives from more than
40 countries gathered and issued a declaration emphasizing that urgent
action is necessary to end wildlife trafficking and eliminate demand
through high-level political commitment and international cooperation.
The Division has a separate section devoted to the prosecution of
environmental crimes, including wildlife crime. The Environmental
Crimes Section has 35 dedicated criminal prosecutors who often work
together with U.S. Attorneys' Offices around the country and our
federal agency partners (such as the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) in the area of
wildlife trafficking. Our cases enforce the Endangered Species Act and
the Lacey Act, as well as statutes prohibiting smuggling, criminal
conspiracy, and related crimes. We have had significant successes over
the years prosecuting those who smuggle and traffic in elephant ivory,
endangered rhinoceros horns, South African leopard, Asian and African
tortoises and reptiles, and many other forms of protected wildlife.
Some cases that exemplify these critical enforcement efforts are
discussed below.
The Department also works in the international sphere by assisting
and collaborating with enforcement partners in source, transit, and
destination countries for illegal trade in protected wildlife. The
Department works closely with the State Department and various
international organizations to promote more proactive international law
enforcement operations, including through efforts to train
investigators, prosecutors, and judges. Some examples of these
activities are discussed in more detail below.
Most recently, the Department of Justice has engaged deeply in the
administration's effort to combat wildlife trafficking in its role as
one of the three agency cochairs of the Presidential Task Force on
Wildlife Trafficking, established by President Obama's July 1, 2013,
Executive order on Combating Wildlife Trafficking. The Department,
principally through ENRD, has worked closely with the other cochairs
from the Departments of State and the Interior, and the other Task
Force agencies, to craft the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife
Trafficking. The Strategy, announced by the White House on February 11,
2014, identifies three key priorities: (1) strengthening domestic and
global enforcement; (2) reducing demand for illegally traded wildlife
at home and abroad; and (3) strengthening partnerships with foreign
governments, international organizations, NGOs, local communities,
private industry, and others to combat illegal wildlife poaching and
trade. The Department is committed to contributing to the
implementation of all aspects of the Strategy, though our primary
efforts naturally focus on enforcement. The work we do to improve
domestic and global enforcement includes not only our own case work but
also our substantial efforts to improve enforcement through
international capacity-building and training.
A. Wildlife Trafficking Prosecutions
The two primary federal antiwildlife trafficking statutes that the
Department enforces are the Lacey Act and the Endangered Species Act.
The Lacey Act reaches two broad categories of wildlife offenses:
illegal trafficking in wildlife and false labeling. The Endangered
Species Act establishes a U.S. program for the conservation of
endangered and threatened species. The Endangered Species Act makes it
illegal to traffic in listed endangered or threatened species without a
permit and also implements our international treaty obligations under
the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES)--a treaty establishing limits on trade in
certain species of wildlife.
The types of cases we prosecute for illegal trafficking are varied.
While many involve individuals trafficking in illegal wildlife and
wildlife parts, we are also seeing the involvement of criminal
organizations, including transnational criminal organizations that may
threaten the security interests of the U.S. and its allies. We
routinely seek punishment that includes sentences for significant
periods of incarceration, fines, and restitution or community service
to help mitigate harm caused by the offense; forfeiture of the wildlife
and instrumentalities used to commit the offense; and, where wildlife
traffickers also violate laws against smuggling or other related
crimes, disgorgement of the proceeds of the illegal conduct.
A prominent example of the Division's robust prosecution of illegal
wildlife trafficking is ``Operation Crash,'' an ongoing multiagency
effort to detect, deter, and prosecute those engaged in the illegal
killing of rhinoceros and the illegal trafficking of endangered
rhinoceros horns. This initiative has resulted in multiple convictions,
significant jail time, penalties, and asset forfeiture. In one case,
United States v. Zhifei Li (D.N.J), the defendant pled guilty this past
December to organizing an illegal wildlife smuggling conspiracy in
which 30 raw rhinoceros horns and numerous objects made from rhino horn
and elephant ivory (worth more than $4.5 million) were smuggled from
the United States to China. Li pleaded guilty to a total of 11 counts:
one count each of conspiracy to smuggle and conspiracy to violate the
Lacey Act, seven smuggling violations, one Lacey Act trafficking
violation, and two counts of making false wildlife documents. Li
admitted that he was the ``boss'' of three antique dealers in the
United States whom he paid to help obtain wildlife items and smuggle to
him through Hong Kong. One of those individuals was Qiang Wang,
a/k/a ``Jeffrey Wang,'' who was sentenced to serve 37 months'
incarceration for smuggling Asian artifacts, including ``libation
cups,'' made from rhinoceros horn and ivory (United States v. Qiang
Wang (S.D.N.Y.)). More information about the Li case is available at
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/December/13-enrd-1335.html, and
information about the Wang case is at http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/
2013/December/13-enrd-1284.html.
Another recent ``Operation Crash'' success is United States v.
Michael Slattery, Jr. (E.D.N.Y.). This past January, Slattery (an Irish
national) was sentenced to serve 14 months' incarceration, followed by
3 years' supervised release. Slattery also will pay a $10,000 fine and
forfeit $50,000 of proceeds from his illegal trade in rhinoceros horns.
In 2010, Slattery traveled from England to Texas to acquire black
rhinoceros horns. Mr. Slattery admitted to illegal trafficking
throughout the United States and is alleged to belong to an organized
criminal group engaged in rhino horn trafficking. This organized
criminal element speaks to the scope, scale, and lawlessness of this
problem. More information about this case is available at:
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2013/November/13-enrd-1181.html.
``Operation Crash'' cases, like the Wang case above, may also
include charges related to the illegal smuggling and sale of elephant
ivory. The Division has seen success in other elephant ivory cases. In
United States v. Tania Siyam (N.D. Ohio), Siyam, a Canadian citizen,
was sentenced in August 2008 to 5 years' incarceration and a $100,000
fine for illegally smuggling ivory from Cameroon into the United
States. Siyam originally operated art import and export businesses in
Montreal (Canada) and Cameroon that were fronts for smuggling products
from endangered and protected wildlife species, including raw elephant
ivory. The two ivory shipments to Ohio included parts from at least 21
African elephants.
Another ivory case, United States v. Kemo Sylla, et al. (E.D.N.Y.),
concerned the illegal importation of ivory over a 2-year period through
New York's JFK Airport. The ivory was disguised as African handicrafts
and wooden instruments. The six defendants pleaded guilty to Lacey Act
violations and received sentences ranging from 1 year of probation to
14 months' incarceration. A number of the defendants also were ordered
to pay fines to the Lacey Act Reward Fund. More information about this
case is available at: www.justice.gov/usao/nye/pr/2011/2011mar03.html.
Still other prosecutions involve the illegal import or export of
endangered species. For instance, in United States v. Nathaniel Swanson
(W.D. Wash.), three defendants were recently sentenced (following
guilty pleas) to incarceration ranging from 5 months to 1 year,
supervised release, and an order to pay $28,583 in restitution for
conspiracy to smuggle various turtle and reptile species from the
United States to Hong Kong, including Eastern box turtles, North
American wood turtles, and ornate box turtles. One of the defendants
also illegally imported several protected turtle species from Hong
Kong, including black-breasted leaf turtles, Chinese striped-necked
turtles, big-headed turtles, fly river turtles, and an Arakan forest
turtle.
The Arakan forest turtle is critically endangered, having once been
presumed extinct. The illegal trafficking spanned approximately 4
years. More information about this case is available at http://
www.justice.gov/usao/waw/press/2014/January/swanson.html.
B. Working in the International Sphere: Training and Capacity-Building
As the Strategy recognizes, wildlife trafficking is a global
problem that requires a global solution. For many years, prosecutors
and other Division attorneys have worked closely with our foreign
government partners to build their capacity to develop and effectively
enforce their wildlife trafficking laws, better enabling them to combat
local poaching and the attendant illegal wildlife trade. The Division's
training efforts have focused on the legal, investigative, and
prosecution aspects of fighting wildlife crime. We seek to help our
partners craft strong laws, strengthen their investigation and
evidence-gathering capabilities, and improve their judicial and
prosecutorial effectiveness. Our experience has shown that such
training develops more effective partners to investigate and prosecute
transnational environmental crimes, increases our ability to enforce
U.S. criminal statutes that have extraterritorial dimensions while also
helping law enforcement officials in the U.S. and other countries meet
their enforcement obligations under international environmental and
free trade agreements. These training initiatives also foster positive
relationships with prosecutors in other countries in a way that better
enables us to share information and assist in prosecuting transnational
crimes.
We often conduct our international training in close collaboration
with the Department of State and other federal agencies, such as the
Department of the Interior and the U.S. Forest Service. Capacity-
building may be conducted bilaterally (in the United States or a
partner nation) or in multilateral fora, and our programs may span a
range of environmental crimes. The Division has participated
extensively in training and providing support for foreign
investigators, prosecutors, and judges through the various Wildlife
Enforcement Networks (``WENs''). These include the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations WEN (``ASEAN-WEN''), South Asia WEN, and
Central American WEN, as well as the launch of WENs in Central Africa,
Southern Africa, and the Horn of Africa. In multiple countries in these
regions, we have conducted workshops that involved dozens of agencies
from the host countries, and typically have included hundreds of
participants representing government, the judiciary, industry, and
civil society. The workshops are a mix of direct course instruction on
legal and wildlife trafficking enforcement issues, including
presentations by U.S. environmental prosecutors, and an opportunity for
representatives from the different countries to exchange views on the
issues they face. Thus, these sessions are both a valuable training
opportunity and an opportunity to develop a law enforcement network in
that region.
The Division has also been involved in numerous international
training efforts focused on enhancing prosecutions brought under the
Lacey Act. The Lacey Act is the United States oldest plant and wildlife
protection statute and is one of our primary tools to fight wildlife
trafficking. With the amendment of the Lacey Act in 2008 to protect a
broader range of plants and plant products, the State Department and
the U.S. Agency for International Development have provided funding for
much of our recent capacity-building work, focused on the trade in
illegally harvested and traded timber and timber products, an illegal
trade conservatively estimated at a value of $10 to $15 billion
worldwide. ENRD has conducted numerous training sessions abroad on
investigating and prosecuting illegal logging cases in Indonesia,
Brazil, Peru, Honduras, and Russia. The training agenda may vary
somewhat from country to country, but is typically done in close
collaboration with the foreign government and local prosecutors. Such
collaboration benefits and strengthens criminal law enforcement both
here and abroad. These capacity-building efforts further our efforts to
combat wildlife trafficking. As the National Strategy recognizes,
wildlife trafficking is facilitated and exacerbated by the illegal
harvest and trade in plants and trees, which destroys needed habitat
and opens access to previously remote populations of highly endangered
wildlife.
The Division conducts further international capacity-building in
the area of illegal wildlife trafficking through its participation in
INTERPOL (specifically the Wildlife Crime Working Group, Environmental
Crime Committee, and Fisheries Crime Working Group) and the
International Law Enforcement Academy (with programs for eastern
European and Southeast Asian law enforcement officials).
The Division is also working closely with the Office of the United
States Trade Representative to promote conservation objectives and to
combat wildlife trafficking by pursuing commitments including with
respect to law enforcement cooperation in U.S. free trade agreements,
like the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.
C. The National Strategy to Combat Wildlife Trafficking
The Department is proud of its record of achievement in this area,
but the National Strategy is a reminder that more must be done. The
National Strategy calls for a ``whole of government'' approach and
increased federal coordination to address three priorities: (1)
enhancing domestic and international law enforcement to curb the
illegal flow of wildlife; (2) reducing the demand for illegally traded
wildlife; and (3) building and strengthening global cooperation and
public/private partnerships to support the fight against wildlife
trafficking. The National Strategy resulted from the analysis,
contributions, and expertise of multiple federal agencies, and it
benefitted from the contributions of the Advisory Council on Wildlife
Trafficking established by the July 1, 2013, Executive order. Coming
from outside the government, the Advisory Council brings a wide range
of experience and skills to the process and represents the many
different communities that will have to be engaged as partners to
tackle this problem.
The result is a robust, coordinated, and far-reaching National
Strategy that addresses the multiple dimensions of this growing crisis,
and the Department is proud to have played a major role in developing
the National Strategy. The Strategy recognizes that strong enforcement
is critical to stopping those who kill and traffic in these animals,
whether on land or in the oceans. And, as is described above, the
Department of Justice has for many years aggressively pursued and
prosecuted those engaged in the illegal wildlife trade. We have also
worked vigorously to train and support partner countries in their
efforts to stanch this terrible crime.
As we work to implement the National Strategy, those enforcement
and capacity-building efforts will be enhanced and intensified.
Department prosecutors will continue to target traffickers and their
networks, investigate and prosecute them, bring down their leaders, and
disrupt the illicit finance that flows to and from these syndicates. We
will focus on making illegal wildlife trafficking much less profitable
by using the tools of fines and penalties, seizure and forfeiture, and
payment of restitution to those victimized by illegal trafficking. The
Department will also strengthen our coordination of enforcement
efforts, looking for ways to improve the way we work with our federal
partner agencies (including through the improved sharing of
intelligence), as well as state and tribal authorities.
We also look forward to working with Congress to strengthen
existing laws and develop new legislation to improve the tools
available to address this challenge. The law should place wildlife
trafficking on an equal footing with other serious crimes, for example,
by recognizing wildlife trafficking as a predicate crime for money
laundering. We can also more effectively fight the scourge of wildlife
trafficking if Congress passes legislation that allows for using funds
generated through wildlife trafficking prosecutions to mitigate the
harms caused by that trafficking, as well as to ensure adequate
authority to forfeit all proceeds of wildlife trafficking.
Looking globally, the Department will continue to help source,
transit, and demand countries build their capacity to take action
against illegal wildlife traffickers. Given the transnational dimension
of this problem, we will continue our support and training of existing
Wildlife Enforcement Networks and look to support additional regional
WENs, where appropriate. And more directly, recognizing that illegal
wildlife trafficking is a growing area of transnational organized
crime, we will support and engage in enforcement initiatives together
with the enforcement authorities of other nations. These efforts will
target the assets and seek to impede the financial capacity of
international wildlife traffickers.
iv. conclusion
In closing, the Department remains fully committed to working with
the administration and Congress to do all that we can to stop those who
poach and traffic illegally in wildlife.
______
Statement submitted by Ginette Hemley, senior vice president, Wildlife
Conservation, World Wildlife Fund, and Crawford Allan, senior director,
TRAFFIC
Chairmen Coons and Cardin, Ranking Members Flake and Rubio, and
members of the subcommittees, thank you for the opportunity to submit
testimony on the international wildlife trafficking crisis and its
implications for conservation, economic growth and development and U.S.
security interests. Our testimony is offered on behalf of both World
Wildlife Fund-US and TRAFFIC and also reflects the views of our broader
networks around the globe. WWF is the largest private conservation
organization working internationally to protect wildlife and wildlife
habitats. WWF currently sponsors conservation programs in more than 100
countries with the support of 1.2 million members in the United States
and more than 5 million members worldwide. TRAFFIC, a strategic
alliance of WWF and IUCN-International Union for Conservation of
Nature, is the world's leading wildlife trade monitoring organization.
It is a global network with 25 offices around the world working to
ensure that trade in wild plants and animals is not a threat to the
conservation of nature. Over the past 38 years, TRAFFIC has gained a
reputation as a reliable and impartial organization and a leader in the
field of conservation as it relates to wildlife trade and trafficking.
Both WWF and TRAFFIC are proud to have representation on the U.S.
Federal Advisory Council on Wildlife Trafficking.
introduction
Illegal wildlife trafficking and poaching to supply the illegal
trade in wild fauna and flora is one of the greatest current threats to
many of our planet's most charismatic, valuable, and ecologically
important species. As has been recognized by many in the U.S.
Government, including the President of the United States through
Executive Order 13648 and the new National Strategy for Combating
Wildlife Trafficking, wildlife trafficking poses a threat not just to
wildlife conservation and our shared natural heritage but also to
security, good governance, and economic development objectives around
the globe. It is a transnational criminal enterprise worth billions of
dollars annually that is strongly connected to other transnational
organized crimes, such as drug and arms trafficking.\1\
According to the best estimates, the illegal wildlife trade has a
value of approximately $10 billion per year, a figure which puts it the
top 5 largest illicit transnational activities worldwide, along with
counterfeiting and the illegal trades in drugs, people, and oil.\2\ If
the illegal trades in timber and fish are included in the total, then
the estimated value of illegal wildlife trafficking rises to almost $20
billion annually. In terms of its size, wildlife trade outranks the
illegal small arms trade. It also has strong connections to other
illegal activities--guns, drugs, and ivory may be smuggled by the same
criminal networks and using the same techniques and smuggling routes.
According to data from the CITES Elephant Trade Information System
(ETIS) that was established by TRAFFIC, the increase of large-scale
(>500kg) ivory seizures is one piece of evidence of the growing
involvement of organized crime in the illegal wildlife trade. Since
2009, we have seen a significant upsurge in the number of large-scale
seizures. Last year, 2013 saw more large-scale ivory seizures than any
year since records began 25 years ago, surpassing the previous record
in 2011. While seizures of rhino horn are smaller by weight, rhino horn
is worth far more than elephant ivory, priced higher than gold pound
for pound. Illicit traders can make more profit from smuggling a kilo
of rhino horn than they would make from smuggling any illicit drug, and
the risks are minimal in comparison. (It is estimated that 3,000kg of
illicit rhino horn reaches Asian markets each year.)
These record seizure numbers translate into devastating declines
for the affected species. Tens of thousands of African elephants are
killed every year to supply the illegal ivory market, with an average
of nearly 20 tonnes seized per year over the past 20 years and annual
highs of over 40 tonnes seized. The Convention on International Trade
in Endangered Species of Fauna and Flora (CITES) reported that roughly
25,000 elephants were illegally killed on the African Continent in 2011
and that another 22,000 fell victim to poaching in 2012. Many
independent experts see these estimates as conservative and believe the
number to be significantly higher, with some estimates ranging from
30,000 to as high as 50,000. During the same period, the number of
rhinos illegally killed in South Africa also rose dramatically: from 13
animals in 2007 to 1,004 in 2013--more than a 7,500-percent
increase.\3\ Tigers continue to be subjected to intense poaching
pressures throughout their range in Asia, and numerous other species--
many less well-known--are being rapidly depleted to feed a voracious
global trade, including sharks, pangolins, corals, tortoises and
terrapins, tokay geckos, song birds and endangered plant species, such
as orchids and tropical hardwoods.
At the root of this wildlife trafficking and poaching crisis is the
growing demand--primarily in Asia--for high-end products made from
wildlife parts, such as elephant ivory, rhino horn, and tiger skins and
bones. Products made from these and other increasingly rare species
command high prices on Asian black markets as purported medicinal cures
(e.g., rhino horn powder and tiger bone wine), culinary delicacies
(e.g., shark fins), or demonstrations of wealth and status (e.g., ivory
carvings). Growing wealth in Asia, particularly in countries such as
China and Vietnam, is a primary driver and has resulted in a steep
increase in Asian consumers with the means to purchase such products--
and in the prices being paid for them.
If the growth in demand is primarily from Asia, the criminal
networks feeding that growing demand are global in nature, reaching
across oceans and continents and operating in many countries, including
the United States. Middleman traders often direct poaching activities
and engage in targeted efforts to corrupt law enforcement, border
inspection and wildlife protection efforts in affected countries. In
some cases, organized Asian criminal syndicates, which are now
increasingly active in Africa, work with local economic and political
elites to subvert control systems and operate with relative impunity.
With respect to ivory, the trends in both the MIKE (Monitoring the
Illegal Killing of Elephants) \4\ and ETIS data sets are highly
correlated with governance shortfalls and corruption. In other words,
where poaching of elephants and illegal trade in ivory is most acute,
poor governance is likely to be a serious operating factor. A related
issue is the theft of government ivory stocks, a persistent problem in
many African countries. For example, in April 2012 in Mozambique, 266
pieces of elephant ivory, representing over one tonne of ivory, were
stolen from the government ivory store in the Ministry of Agriculture
building in Maputo. Overall, illegal trade in ivory produces a broad
corrupting influence on governments.
The combination of rapidly rising prices and inadequate enforcement
regimes in many countries makes poaching and illegal wildlife
trafficking a high profit, low risk criminal enterprise and has led to
a dramatic upsurge in not just the amount of poaching and illegal
wildlife trafficking, but also its severity. Poachers supplying
products such as elephant ivory and rhino horn are less often local
criminals armed with spears or shotguns and more frequently resemble
highly organized and heavily armed gangs, at times including militia or
military personnel. They violate international borders, carry AK-47s
and rocket-propelled grenades, and possess strong connections to
transnational criminal networks. In some regions of Africa, trafficking
in wildlife and other natural resources has been strongly connected to
the financing of destabilizing forces, including armed insurgencies,
groups responsible for human rights abuses, and organizations with ties
to terrorism.\5\ In many parts of Africa and Asia, poachers and
wildlife traffickers can operate largely with impunity due to weak laws
or law enforcement, poor capacity, governance shortfalls, and a failure
of many governments to recognize wildlife crime as the serious crime
that it is.
It is on the ground, primarily in developing countries and rural
regions, where large-scale illegal trade in wildlife and wildlife
products is having its most devastating effects, negatively impacting
local communities by undermining regional security and economic growth
while exacerbating corruption and instability. The current poaching
crisis is pushing some of our most iconic species closer toward
extinction, and many developing countries are witnessing the rapid
decimation of their wildlife--a potentially valuable resource on which
to build sustainable growth and eventually bring greater stability to
impoverished and often conflict-torn regions. At the same time that
wildlife crime is taking a profound toll on many ecological systems, it
is also robbing some of the poorest communities on earth of their
natural wealth, breeding corruption and insecurity and disenfranchising
them of sustainable pathways to prosperity.
In the testimony that follows, we hope to describe the problem as
presented through two representative wildlife products--elephant and
rhino horn--and provide recommendations on the role the U.S. Government
can play in light of the new National Strategy on Combating Wildlife
Trafficking.
elephant ivory
WWF has over 40 years of experience in elephant conservation.
Through WWF's African Elephant Program, we aim to conserve forest and
savanna elephant populations through both conservation projects and
policy development. WWF works with elephant range state governments,
local people, and nongovernmental partners to secure a future for this
powerful symbol of nature. TRAFFIC tracks illegal trade in elephant
ivory using records of ivory seizures that have occurred anywhere in
the world since 1989. The Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS), one
of the two monitoring systems for elephants under CITES, is managed by
TRAFFIC and currently comprises over 20,000 elephant product seizure
records from over 90 countries, the largest such collection of data in
the world.
Elephants are important keystone species, and their future is tied
to that of much of Africa's rich biodiversity. African elephants help
to maintain suitable habitats for many other species in savanna and
forest ecosystems, directly influencing forest composition and density
and altering the broader landscape. In tropical forests, elephants
create clearings and gaps in the canopy that encourage tree
regeneration. In the savannas, they can reduce bush cover to create an
environment favorable to a mix of browsing and grazing animals. Many
plant species also have evolved seeds that are dependent on passing
through an elephant's digestive tract before they can germinate; it is
calculated that at least a third of tree species in west African
forests rely on elephants in this way for distribution of their future
generations.
African elephants once numbered in the millions across Africa, but
by the mid-1980s their populations had been devastated by poaching. An
international ban on the sale of ivory, put in place in 1989, helped to
slow the rate of decline significantly for the past two decades in many
parts of Africa. The status of the species now varies greatly across
the continent. Some populations have remained in danger due to poaching
for meat and ivory, habitat loss, and conflict with humans. In Central
Africa, where enforcement capacity is weakest, estimates indicate that
populations of forest elephants in the region declined by 62 percent
between 2002 and 2011 and lost 30 percent of their geographical
range,\6\ almost entirely due to poaching. This is in spite of the
global trade ban in ivory trading, in place since 1989. Elephants in
Central Africa are also heavily impacted by the existence of large,
unregulated domestic ivory markets, especially those still functioning
in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and Luanda, Angola. In
other parts of Africa, populations have remained stable or grown until
recently. However, evidence now clearly shows that African Elephants
are facing the most serious crisis since the ivory trade ban under
CITES was agreed to in 1989, and whatever gains were made over the past
25 years may be in the process of being reversed.
MIKE data show an increasing pattern of illegal killing of
elephants throughout Africa and demonstrate an escalating pattern of
illegal trade--one that has reached new heights over the past 3 years.
Those working on the ground throughout Africa have seen an alarming
rise in the number of elephants being illegally killed, even in areas
that were, until recently, relatively secure and free from large-scale
poaching, such as southern Tanzania and northern Mozambique.\7\ This
past January, the Tanzanian Government released numbers showing that
the population of elephants in that country's Selous Game Reserve had
fallen 66 percent in just 4 years--a shocking decline of tens of
thousands of elephants for a reserve that until recently was home to
Africa's second-largest concentration of elephants. Witnesses have also
seen a disturbing change in the sophistication and lethality of the
methods being used by the poachers, who are frequently well armed with
automatic weapons, professional marksmen and even helicopters. In most
cases in Africa, poachers are better equipped than the park supervisors
and guards. In some instances, they are better equipped even than local
military forces.
Escalating Ivory Trade and Large-Scale Ivory Seizures
Illegal trade in ivory has been steadily increasing since 2004. The
increases were rather modest initially, but since 2009 the upward trend
has surged, with historic highs for large-scale ivory seizures.
Preliminary estimates for last year, 2013 saw more large-scale ivory
seizures (over 500kg) than any year since records began 25 years ago,
involving over 40 tonnes of ivory. Successive years of high-volume,
illegal trade in ivory is a pattern that has not been previously
observed in the ETIS data. This represents a highly worrying
development and is jeopardizing two decades of conservation gains for
the African Elephant, one of Africa's iconic flagship species and an
animal that the U.S. public feels adamant about protecting.
Requiring greater finance, levels of organization and an ability to
corrupt and subvert effective law enforcement, large-scale movements of
ivory are a clear indication that organized criminal syndicates are
becoming increasingly more entrenched in the illicit trade in ivory
between Africa and Asia. Virtually all large-scale ivory seizures
involve container shipping, a factor that imposes considerable
challenges to resource-poor nations in Africa.
Large-scale movements of ivory exert tremendous impact upon illegal
ivory trade trends. Unfortunately, very few large-scale ivory seizures
actually result in successful investigations, arrests, convictions and
the imposition of penalties that serve as deterrents. International
collaboration and information-sharing between African and Asian
countries in the trade chain remains weak, and until very recently,
forensic evidence was rarely collected as a matter of routine
governmental procedure. Finally, the status of such large volumes of
ivory in the hands of Customs authorities in various countries, which
generally do not have robust ivory stock management systems, remains a
problematic issue and leakage back into illegal trade has been
documented.
Ivory Trade Routes Out of Africa
In terms of ivory trade flows from Africa to Asia, East African
Indian Ocean seaports remain the paramount exit point for illegal
consignments of ivory today, with Kenya and the United Republic of
Tanzania as the two most prominent countries of export in the trade.
This development stands in sharp contrast to ivory trade patterns
previously seen whereby large consignments of ivory were also moving
out of West and Central Africa seaports. Whether the shift in shipping
ivory from West and Central African Atlantic Ocean seaports reflects a
decline in elephant populations in the western part of the Congo Basin
remains to be determined, but the depletion of local populations is
steadily being documented throughout this region, according to the
IUCN's Species Survival Commission's African Elephant Database. Data on
elephant poaching from the Monitoring Illegal Killing of Elephants
(MIKE) program, the other site-based monitoring system under CITES,
also show that illegal elephant killing has consistently been higher in
Central Africa than anywhere else on the African Continent. Now,
however, poaching is seriously affecting all parts of Africa where
elephants are found.
End Use Markets in Asia
In terms of end-use markets, China and Thailand are the two
paramount destinations for illegal ivory consignments from Africa.
While repeated seizures of large consignments of ivory have occurred in
Malaysia, the Philippines, and Viet Nam since 2009, these countries
essentially play the role of transit countries to China or Thailand.
Directing large shipments of ivory to other Asian countries for onward
shipment is an adaptation by the criminal syndicates to the improved
surveillance and law enforcement action in China and Thailand where
targeting of cargo from Africa has increased. Importation into other
Asian countries allows the shipping documents to be changed, concealing
the African origin of the containers in question. In the case of Viet
Nam, which shares a long terrestrial border with China, ivory is being
smuggled overland into China. CITES data also suggest that Cambodia,
Laos, and most recently Sri Lanka are now rapidly emerging as new trade
routes into China and Thailand, reflecting further adaptations by the
criminal networks behind this trade.
China's Role
Without any doubt, ivory consumption in China is the primary driver
of illegal trade in ivory today. The Chinese Government recognizes
ivory trafficking as the country's greatest wildlife trade problem, and
law enforcement officials are making almost two ivory seizures every
single day, more than any other country in the world. Regardless,
strict implementation of China's domestic ivory trade control system
seriously faltered in the wake of the CITES-approved one-off ivory sale
held in four southern African countries in late 2008. Various observers
to China, including TRAFFIC monitors, have found government-accredited
ivory trading retail outlets persistently selling ivory products
without the benefit of product identification certificates, which
previously were an integral discriminating feature in the Chinese
control system. The ability of retail vendors to sell ivory products
without product identification certificates means that they do not
become part of China's database system, which is designed to track
ivory products at the retail level back to the legal stocks of raw
ivory at approved manufacturing outlets. This circumvention creates the
opportunity to substitute products from illicit sources of ivory into
the legal control system.
China remains the key for stopping the growing poaching crisis
facing Africa's elephants. While Chinese CITES authorities are engaged
on ivory trade issues and law enforcement is certainly taking place on
an unprecedented scale, China's demographics appear to be swamping the
impact of such actions. Within the country, stricter internal market
monitoring and regulation are needed, and investigative effort directed
at fighting the criminal syndicates behind the ivory trade needs to be
scaled up as a dedicated, ongoing concern. At the same time, Chinese
nationals based throughout Africa have become the principle middleman
traders behind the large illegal movements of ivory to Asia. The advent
of Asian criminal syndicates in Africa's wildlife trade stands as the
most serious contemporary challenge, and China needs to actively
collaborate with African counterparts to address the growing Chinese
dimension in Africa's illegal trade in ivory and other wildlife
products.
Thailand's Role
Thailand also has one of the largest unregulated domestic ivory
markets in the world. Unlike China, Thailand has consistently failed to
meet CITES requirements for internal trade in ivory. In recent years,
interdictions of several large shipments of ivory have occurred at
Thailand's ports of entry, resulting in over 8.3 tonnes of ivory being
seized between 2009 and 2012. This development is welcomed, but there
is almost no evidence of similar law enforcement pressure on the
hundreds of retail ivory vendors in the country's marketplace which
effectively exploit legal loopholes in Thailand's legislation to offer
tens of thousands of worked ivory products to tourists and local
buyers. An initial attempt by the Thai Government to address these
legal deficiencies and provide a basis for stricter market regulation
has been blocked by industry insiders, and the view that remedial
measures in Thailand will only result if sanctions are imposed under
CITES or an application of the Pelly amendment is increasingly taking
hold as the only hope for breaking the current impasse. CITES data
underscore the global reach of Thailand's ivory markets as more than
200 ivory seizure cases have been reported by other countries regarding
illegal ivory products seized from individuals coming from Thailand
over the last three years.
Recognizing the elephant poaching and illegal ivory trade crisis,
the U.S., the U.K. and others took a hard line at the 63rd Meeting of
the CITES Standing Committee (March 2, 2013) and agreed to a Decision
requiring countries identified as being involved in substantial illegal
ivory trade as source, transit, or destination countries to develop
ivory trade ``action plans'' that included milestones and clear
timeframes for addressing the illegal flow of ivory along the trade
chain. The countries or territories that were subject to this decision
were: China and Thailand as destination countries, Malaysia, Hong Kong,
Philippines, and Viet Nam as transit countries/territories, and Kenya,
the United Republic of Tanzania and Uganda as source countries.
Thailand submitted their report by the required deadline, but their
action plan, and their progress against that action plan to date, has
been unsatisfactory. At the 16th Meeting of the Conference of the
Parties to CITES (March 2013), and in the decade prior, Thailand
attempted to deflect criticism of being a major ivory-consuming nation
by continually characterizing itself as a transit country. Fortunately,
such posturing is not apparent in this action plan and the Thai
Government seems to have finally acknowledged its role as a major ivory
trade destination. However, a host of other issues do raise serious
concerns. Although a comprehensive action plan has been submitted, its
content creates serious ambiguity in terms of overall, long-term
intent. The plan presents conflicting signals concerning whether there
will be controlled domestic ivory trade or a complete end to ivory
trade in Thailand's future and commits little in the way of increased
law enforcement.
The timeline of Thailand's action plan is of serious concern,
particularly as it relates to the legislative reform process. Indeed,
Thailand is the only country that has structured its action plan around
a 5-year timeframe extending to the end of 2017. This is an
unacceptably excessive amount of time, as legislative issues should
have been resolved decades ago. The proposed legislative amendments
would enable Thailand to implement the Appendix I listing of African
elephant ivory that took effect in January 1990--over 23 years ago.
Thailand has been a Party to the Convention since January 1973.
Next to China, Thailand's domestic ivory market is perhaps the
second-greatest driver of illegal trade in ivory at the present time,
and Thailand needs to be held accountable for years of inaction. WWF
and TRAFFIC would strongly encourage the U.S. Government to consider
using the full force of punitive measures allowed by CITES--a
``recommendation to suspend trade''--to encourage Thailand to address
its illegal ivory market. The U.S. should make this recommendation at
the 65th Meeting of the CITES Standing Committee, July 7-11, 2014.
Additionally, the U.S. should work in advance of the meeting to
encourage other Members of the Standing Committee and other governments
to actively support this recommendation as well.
rhino horn
In addition to the poaching crisis affecting elephants in West,
Central, and Eastern Africa, a concurrent and related crisis is
affecting rhinos, primarily in South Africa, which is home to roughly
80 percent of the world's remaining rhinos. In the early 2000s, roughly
a dozen rhinos were illegally killed in South Africa in any given year,
but since 2007, the country has been experiencing an unprecedented
surge in rhino poaching: in 2007, 13 rhinos were illegally killed; by
2011, it was 448; in 2012 it was 668; and in 2013, it was 1,004. These
numbers represent a more than 7,500-percent increase in poaching deaths
in just 6 years' time--a situation made all the more shocking given
that South Africa is recognized to have the most well-developed park
system in Africa, with the highest capacity and best enforcement.
Much like ivory poaching, rhino horn poaching and trading
operations are associated with organized and well-armed criminal
networks, some with access to high-powered weapons, helicopters, and
night vision goggles. These poaching operations can outgun wildlife
rangers or move so rapidly there is low risk of detection. Profits are
now so high that even those charged with protecting rhinos are becoming
corrupted and facilitating the poaching. There is no sign of abatement
in poaching rates, in spite of military support and intervention in
Kruger National Park, the primary site of the poaching surge. Many
African nations fear their rhinos will be targeted next, particularly
if South Africa somehow manages to prevent further slaughter and the
poachers seek out easier targets. Kenyan officials are particularly
concerned and have seen an increase in poaching losses, which, as a
percentage of their total rhino population, are worse than those in
South Africa. In Namibia this week, reports are that DNA testing of
rhino horns seized from Chinese nationals leaving the country earlier
this year, show that the rhino horns were taken from seven Namibian
rhinos.
Vietnam's role
Rhino poaching is surging due to demand for rhino horn in Vietnam,
where many believe that the horn has medicinal properties. Some believe
it to be a last resort cure for fever and even cancer; others employ it
as a party drug/hangover cure that doubles as a status symbol due to
its exorbitant cost. Rising prosperity in Vietnam means that wealthy
buyers have driven up prices and demand for rhino horn to a level where
it is now being sourced not just from live rhinos in Africa and Asia,
but also from trophies, antiques, and museum specimens in the U.S. and
Europe. Rhino horn is now worth more than its weight in gold or heroin.
While trade in rhino horn is illegal in Vietnam, possession is not.
Rhino horns trophies are officially permitted in Vietnam only as
personal effects, not for commercial purposes (under CITES rules) and
not to be traded or used post-import. Under the terms of the trophy
export permit from South Africa, horns are not to be used for
commercial purposes. South Africa has now prevented Asia nationals from
trophy hunting however, as they uncovered a ``pseudohunt'' system where
Vietnamese and Thai nationals (not known for trophy hunting), were
hunting rhinos to export the horns to trade illegally in Vietnam. Until
recently, Vietnam had shown little willingness to clamp down on illegal
trade in rhino horn, but engagement by the U.S. State Department and
recent CITES decisions regarding rhino horn seem to have helped move
Vietnam to be more cooperative in addressing the problem. Much more
will need to be done to clamp down on illegal trade in rhino horn and
educate the Vietnamese public, however, if current trends are to be
reversed and demand for the product is to be curtailed and eliminated.
Mozambique's Role
Mozambique is coming under intense scrutiny as a major driver of
both rhino horn and ivory trafficking, due to its role as a major
transshipment point for illegal wildlife products out of Africa and a
major base for poaching operations into South Africa's Kruger National
Park, whose eastern frontier is comprised of a 220-mile stretch of
South Africa's porous border with Mozambique. It is estimated that 80
percent of the rhino poaching occurring in Kruger National Park is
being carried out by poaching gangs from Mozambique. This situation is
exacerbated by the fact that, at present, Mozambique has no serious
laws or penalties to deter rhino poaching or possession of rhino horn.
Poaching is simply considered a misdemeanor offence, and trafficking
gangs have raced to take advantage of the permissive environment that
this legal vacuum provides for their operations. Corrupt practices on a
significant scale are supporting the criminal networks operations. In
March 2013, the CITES Conference of the Parties directed Mozambique to
take urgent actions to tackle its role in the rhino poaching crisis,
including the need to give priority attention to the creation and
implementation of effective legislation to effectively deter wildlife
crime and to preventing the illegal killings of rhinos and possession
of rhino horn. Some legislative reforms have moved forward since that
Decision was issued, but these have yet to take legal effect. At the
next CITES Standing Committee meeting, July 7-11, 2014, there is a
potential that Mozambique may receive punitive measures for chronic
failings in this regard.
benefits of wildlife for economic growth and development
Wildlife resources, if properly protected, can form the basis for
future economic growth in impoverished, rural regions of the continent.
In several African and Asian countries, this is already happening. In
Namibia, WWF has helped to establish community-run ``conservancies'' in
which local communities own and manage their own wildlife resources,
deriving profits from ecotourism opportunities and sustainable use of
wildlife, have contributed to new attitudes toward wildlife, rebounding
populations of such charismatic species as rhinos and lions, and--just
as importantly--an exponential increase in the economic benefits that
communities receive from their wildlife, including income and
employment. Due to joint-venture lodges and related ecotourism
opportunities, community conservancies now generate upward of 6 million
USD annually for rural Namibians--up from an insignificant amount in
the mid-1990s. These successful programs receive critical support from
USAID and, more recently, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, as well
as WWF and others.
By demonstrating the value of wildlife to local communities, these
programs have also made essential partners out of local people in the
long-term conservation of wildlife and defense against poaching,
helping to build successful informer networks and wildlife stewardship
among communities, which have helped keep wildlife poaching low to
nonexistent in countries where these programs have become established.
Namibia's conservancies have remained largely immune to elephant and
rhino poaching until recently, and a central reason why, when isolated
poaching incidents have occurred in the past year, the poachers have
been apprehended within 24 hours because of information provided by
local informers. Empowered to communally own and manage their wildlife
resources, conservancies have helped to created local governance and
democracy in addition to economic prosperity and a respect for the rule
of law in post-apartheid Namibia. In Nepal, a similar approach
combining Community-Based Anti-Poaching Units, strong engagement by the
government in park protection and enhanced intelligence-sharing led to
a full year free of poaching of rhinos, tigers or elephants in that
country on two separate occasions--in 2011 and 2013.
In Central Africa, a wildlife-based economic success story can also
be told about Virunga National Park--Africa's oldest national park and
one of its most important in terms of biodiversity. It is also the
continent's best known park, because it is home to the last remaining
mountain gorillas. Gorilla-based tourism is a huge economic engine: the
annual revenue earned directly from gorilla tourism in the Virungas is
now estimated at 3 million USD. In Rwanda alone, the number of tourists
visiting the country from 2010 to 2011 increased 32 percent and tourism
revenues rose an amazing 12.6 percent, from $200 million to $252
million in 2011--much of it due to mountain gorillas and other
ecotourism opportunities.
Through USAID, the U.S. is currently helping to support additional
community-based wildlife conservation efforts in other priority
landscapes for wildlife, including Tanzania's Wildlife Management Areas
(WMAs) and southern Africa's Kavango-Zambezi Transfrontier Conservation
Area (KAZA)--the largest transboundary conservation area in the world,
encompassing 109 million acres, crossing five southern Africa countries
(Angola, Botswana, Namibia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe), and home to nearly
half of Africa's remaining elephant population. Given its rich wildlife
resources, the KAZA partnership in particular has the potential to
improve the livelihoods of the 2.5 million people who live in the
Okavango and Zambezi river basin regions through Community-Based
Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) approaches informed by the
successful Namibia conservancies model that ensure that local
communities benefit economically from wildlife on their land, through
conservation of animals and their habitats and the creation of a world-
class tourism experience while also bringing southern African countries
together to more effectively combat international wildlife trade and
poaching through information-sharing, joint patrols and surveillance,
as well as harmonized law enforcement policies.
We strongly encourage continued U.S. Government support for
programs such as these, which help to create clear economic benefits
for local people from protecting wildlife, thereby incentivizing
locally driven conservation efforts and building immunity to poaching
and wildlife trafficking. For these reasons, they are an essential part
of the long-term solution to the current crisis.
the u.s. government role
Over the past 2 years, the U.S. Government has demonstrated
historic leadership on the issue of wildlife trafficking, at all
levels. Long an international leader on the issue, the U.S. has, since
2012, helped to elevate attention on wildlife crime both at home and
abroad to a new apex. The President's issuance of Executive Order 13648
and the creation of the National Strategy for Combating Wildlife
Trafficking by a Presidential Task Force led by the Departments of
State, Interior and Justice are a profound recognition by the
administration of the importance of this issue and the will to address
it. This U.S. leadership has also set the stage internationally,
putting the issue firmly on the agendas for our international partners,
including in fora such as APEC, ASEAN, UNODC, the U.N. Security Council
and--with renewed energy and impressive success--at the most recent
CITES CoP. The U.S. ivory crush last November has helped to trigger
similar actions by major demand countries, including China and Hong
Kong. And the leadership of many in Congress, from both sides of the
aisle, has already helped to raise the profile of the issue and
strengthen U.S. law to address it, and is now working to provide the
resources and needed oversight to ensure that the new U.S. strategy is
implemented efficiently, effectively, and with the concerted energies
of all relevant U.S. agencies in a whole-of-government approach. We
strongly believe that this whole-of-government approach must continue,
guided by the strategy, and hope it can serve as a model that other
countries will emulate to ensure that they are bringing to bear not
just their conservation resources and expertise to solve this problem,
but also the full range of law enforcement, security, intelligence, and
diplomatic resources guided by high-level leadership and political
will. Following are some specific thematic recommendations for priority
government actions.
Diplomatic Recommendations
The U.S. Government should continue to raise the issue of wildlife
trafficking at the highest levels with key countries and in
international forums and should strive to insert wildlife crime into
the agendas of relevant bilateral and multilateral agreements where it
is not yet addressed and where the work of those agreements could
benefit the fight against wildlife trafficking (as was done in 2013
with the U.N. Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice and
at APEC in 2012).
The United States Government should continue to use its
considerable diplomatic influence and technical capacity to work with
the primary consumer countries to shut down the illegal trade and
should ensure that countries are held accountable at this summer's
Standing Committee meeting for applicable decisions made at the last
CITES Conference of the Parties. Recent steps by China are encouraging
and need to be institutionalized and sustained through the U.S.-China
Strategic Economic Dialogue. Thailand must enact major legislative and
enforcement reforms to control its internal ivory market. Mozambique
must play a critical role in preventing its citizens from driving a
poaching epidemic in South Africa and in ending its role as a major
transit hub for ivory and rhino horn. And Vietnam must take action at
all levels to enforce CITES rhino trade restrictions and launch public
initiatives to reduce demand. These countries must be held accountable
to CITES and the global community if they fail to live up to their
international commitments.
To drive needed action, the U.S. should consider application of the
Pelly amendment and the sanctions process that law offers in cases
where CITES continues to be seriously undermined. The Pelly amendment
has been used sparingly but successfully in the past to achieve swift
reforms in countries where endangered species trafficking was
completely out of control, specifically for the illegal trade in tiger
and rhino parts in Taiwan, China, South Korea, and Yemen. Each of those
countries made major positive wildlife trade control improvements as a
result of action under the Pelly amendment and parallel action through
CITES. The ivory and rhino trade today is as serious as any wildlife
trade issue in the past and warrants equally serious measures.
Anti-Poaching Recommendations
The men and women on the front lines who put their lives on the
line in order to prevent wildlife crime are the thin green line between
the poachers and the animals they wish to kill. In order to effectively
reduce poaching, we need to ensure that they are up to the task when
they are confronted with today's poaching threats, which are more
dangerous than they have ever been and require more skills than have
often been expected in the past.
There are two ways to look at antipoaching; the short-term
emergency response and the long-term solution. In terms of the
emergence response, effective on-the-ground protection requires:
suitable operational support, including trained rangers; knowledge of
patrol tactics; access to equipment and transportation; and adaptive
management systems, such as that provided by the SMART \8\ conservation
tools.
In order for on-the-ground operations to be efficient and proactive
they need to be supported by intelligence, and this can be gained
through community relationships, informant networks, on-patrol
interviews, and through the use of surveillance technology.
Interdiction also needs to lead to prosecution so that the cost of
breaking the law outweighs the benefits, requiring a whole-of-
government approach even at the local level. Crucially, the best
antipoaching operations are focused on crime prevention and not
violator interdiction. This means working with communities through a
community policing framework where there is a strong partnership
between rangers and communities. These approaches are enhanced where
communities see direct benefits between conservation and economic
development. It is an integrated approach such as this one, which WWF
has helped to foster through its program in Nepal, which has seen Nepal
achieve zero rhino and elephant poaching in 2 of the last 3 years.
We know what works and how to establish these systems at the local
level. But we have also been here before: in the 1980s,
conservationists worked to abate the last poaching crisis affecting
elephant, rhino, and tiger populations. We successfully abated that
crisis, and with a concerted effort, we can abate the current one as
well, but what we have not been able to do is get ahead of the curve to
prevent the next crisis from happening in the first place. To do this
takes a more strategic, long-term approach; one of sector reform.
In the majority of countries being a ranger is a not a profession
that one aspires to. Despite being charged with protecting a national
asset, rangers are often poorly paid, poorly trained, lacking health or
life insurance, expected to work long hours, stationed in remote areas
away from their families for long periods of time, operating in some of
the most hostile and dangerous environments on the planet, lacking
access to performance-based reward systems, and regularly intimidated
or prosecuted if they don't turn a blind eye to crime. In order to
build a professional ranger corps, rangers deserve our attention not
just in times of crisis but in a sustained fashion.
In order to transform the ranger force we need to:
Establish accredited higher education training centers that
produce professionally trained rangers--in a similar fashion to
police academies, no ranger should be hired without receiving a
professional, accredited qualification;
Rewards and promotions should be based on performance and
set competencies--this means transforming the human resource
systems in many ranger departments;
Rangers need to be empowered with the legal authority to
detain and arrest suspects, to process a crime scene and
present admissible evidence in court, and to legally defend
themselves in life threatening situations;
Rangers should be reasonably protected by the law when they
are doing their duty;
Adequate insurances should be provided to rangers and their
families;
Outposts should provide shelter, basic amenities,
communications equipment, and medical supplies.
The long-term solution to the poaching crisis is to reform the
ranger force just like the international community supports reform in
other sectors such as police, education, and health. Professionalizing
the ranger force will support rule of law, provide an additional layer
of good governance and provide protection for environmental services
including biodiversity, timber, fisheries, watersheds, and carbon
stocks. Rangers are also often on the front line in remote areas that
are safe havens for criminal gangs, militias and terrorist
organizations and, in many cases, the protected areas they patrol also
run along international borders, adding another layer of security
considerations. The U.S. Government should consider how it can support
the promotion of global standards and training and accreditation
systems to achieve the transformation outlined above, whether through
existing U.S. institutions, such as the State Department-run
International Law Enforcement Academies, or through partnerships with
national or regional training institutions that can help foster
``ranger academies'' and the long-term professionalization of the
wildlife law enforcement sector in partner countries.
Where suitable, the U.S. Government should also explore possible
collaboration and/or assistance by the Department of Defense/AFRICOM
with those local forces tasked with wildlife and/or park protection in
countries facing militarized poaching threats, whether through training
opportunities, logistical and intelligence support, or provision of
equipment.
Anti-Trafficking Recommendations
In implementing the U.S. strategy, the U.S. should focus
significant efforts on disrupting and dismantling the illicit
trafficking networks and crime syndicates that are driving the poaching
and illegal trade, including advanced investigative and intelligence
gathering techniques and bringing to bear the same sorts of tools used
to combat other forms of trafficking, such as narcotics. As the
narrowest point in the trade chain, impeding traffickers offers the
best opportunity to disrupt the flow of illicit goods, represents the
highest-value targets for arrest and prosecution, and their arrest,
prosecution, and incarceration can serve as a strong disincentive to
others involved in or hoping to involve themselves in the illegal
wildlife trade.
The U.S. should continue to support transregional programs, similar
to Wildlife TRAPS and Operation Cobra/Cobra II, which coordinate joint
law enforcement actions between demand, range and transit states and
focus on multiple points in the illegal trade chain.
The U.S. should focus on enhancing port and border security at key
transit points (e.g., seaports in Southeast Asia and East, Central, and
West Africa), including border detection efforts and investigative
techniques. The expertise of U.S. Customs and Border Protection and
others at the Department of Homeland Security could be of value in
these efforts, and their active involvement should be encouraged.
The U.S. should dedicate serious efforts to enhancing the
prosecutorial and judicial law enforcement capacity in priority
countries in order to ensure successful convictions and incarcerations
of serious wildlife traffickers, including anticorruption measures.
The U.S. should continue to support the development and
sustainability of regional Wildlife Enforcement Networks (WENs) as well
as the creation of national-level Wildlife Crime Task Forces or
National Coordination Units in participating countries (using the U.S.
Task Force and National Strategy as a model).
The U.S. should assist a targeted number of countries to build the
requisite capacity, political will, and improvements in their law
enforcement systems that will enable and empower them to emulate
relevant elements of the U.S. approach to combating wildlife
trafficking and to investigate, arrest, prosecute, and incarcerate
wildlife criminals effectively.
The U.S. should support development and dissemination of new
technologies and tools, including DNA testing of specimens, tracking of
shipments, SMART or similar patrolling software and the International
Consortium to Combat Wildlife Crime's (ICCWC) Forest and Wildlife Crime
toolkit.
Congress should take legislative action to make wildlife
trafficking a predicate offense under Title 18 to money laundering,
racketeering, and smuggling. Congress should also consider other
legislative fixes that put wildlife trafficking on par with other
trafficking offenses, such as drug trafficking, and authorize U.S. law
enforcement to bring the same legal tools to bear.
The U.S. Government should continue to improve wildlife crime
intelligence-sharing and cooperation in evidence-gathering between law
enforcement, security and intelligence agencies of the U.S. Government,
including the Department of Defense (on security linkages) and the
Department of the Treasury (on illicit financial flows).
conclusion
We are once more at a crisis moment for elephants and rhinos and
numerous other species targeted by the illegal wildlife trade. U.S.
policymakers at the highest level have provided outspoken leadership
and strong statements of commitment and action, and these have played a
large part in galvanizing global action around this issue in an
unprecedented way. It is time to put those commitments into action, and
to implement them with concerted efforts on the ground, energetic
diplomatic engagement, and the full range of law enforcement tools. The
United States Government at all levels has demonstrated its willingness
to lead on this issue, and that leadership will continue to be pivotal
to solving this crisis and protecting our planet's wildlife heritage
over the long term. WWF and TRAFFIC are redoubling our efforts to
combat this threat, and we are deeply heartened and deeply grateful to
see the level of U.S. Government leadership on this issue, which gives
us hope for a positive future.
On behalf of WWF and TRAFFIC, we thank you for the opportunity to
provide testimony to the committee. We thank you and your subcommittees
for your leadership on this issue, and we look forward to continuing to
work with Congress and the administration to address this crisis.
----------------
End Notes
\1\ www.dni.gov/files/documents/
Wildlife_Poaching_White_Paper_2013.pdf.
\2\ http://transcrime.gfintegrity.org/.
\3\ http://wwf.panda.org/?uNewsID=203098.
\4\ http://www.cites.org/eng/prog/mike/index.php.
\5\ www.dni.gov/files/documents/
Wildlife_Poaching_White_Paper_2013.pdf.
\6\ Maisels F, Strindberg S, Blake S, Wittemyer G, Hart J, et al.
(2013) ``Devastating Decline of Forest Elephants in Central Africa.''
PLoS ONE 8(3):e59469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.
0059469.
\7\ http://namnewsnetwork.org/v3/read.php?id=180566; http://
www.sanwild.org/NOTICEBOARD/2011a/
Elephant%20poachers%20use%20helicopter%20in%20Mozambique%20National%20Pa
rk.
HTM; http://www.savetheelephants.org/news-reader/items/selous-the-
killing-fields-40tanzania41.
html.
\8\ Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool: a GPS-based law
enforcement monitoring system that improves the effectiveness and
transparency of patrols, www.smartconservationsoft
ware.org.
______
Statement submitted by Bas Huijbregts, head of policy, Illegal Wildlife
Trade Campaign, Central Africa Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF)
Chairmen Coons and Cardin, Ranking Members Flake and Rubio, and
members of the subcommittees, thank you for the opportunity to submit
testimony on the international wildlife trafficking crisis and its
implications for conservation, economic growth and development, and
U.S. security interests. As Head of Policy for WWF's International
Wildlife Trade Campaign in Central Africa, my testimony is offered on
behalf of the WWF International with respect to combat poaching and
wildlife trafficking in the Congo Basin countries of Central Africa.
Prior to my current role, I also spent nearly 2 years as Regional
Conservation Director for WWF's Central Africa Regional Programme
Office. Founded in 1990, the WWF Central Africa Programme is focused on
the Congo Basin and provides support to WWF's offices and projects in
Cameroon, Central African Republic, the Democratic Republic of Congo
and Gabon. WWF global network of offices and programs makes it the
largest private conservation organization working internationally to
protect wildlife and wildlife habitats. WWF currently sponsors
conservation programs in more than 100 countries with the support of
more than 5 million members worldwide, including 1.2 million members in
the United States.
introduction
Illegal wildlife trafficking and poaching to supply the illegal
trade in wild fauna and flora is one of the greatest current threats to
many of our planet's most charismatic, valuable, and ecologically
important species. It is a transnational criminal enterprise worth
billions of dollars annually: according to the best estimates, the
illegal wildlife trade has a value of 7.8-10 billion USD per year, a
figure which puts it the top five largest illicit transnational
activities worldwide, along with counterfeiting and the illegal trades
in drugs, people, and oil.\1\ If the illegal trades in timber and fish
are included in the total, then the estimated value of illegal wildlife
trafficking rises to roughly 20 billion USD annually. In terms of its
size, wildlife trade outranks the illegal small arms trade. It also has
strong connections to these other illegal activities--guns, drugs and
wildlife products, such as ivory, may be smuggled by the same criminal
networks and using the same techniques and smuggling routes.\2\
For these reasons wildlife trafficking and the poaching that
accompanies it pose a threat not just to wildlife conservation, but
also to security, good governance, and economic development objectives
in many developing countries, including in Central Africa.
The combination of rising prices for illegal wildlife products,
such as ivory, and inadequate enforcement regimes in many countries
makes poaching and illegal wildlife trafficking a high profit, low-risk
criminal enterprise and has led to a dramatic upsurge in not just the
amount of poaching and illegal wildlife trafficking, but also its
severity. Poachers supplying products such as elephant ivory and rhino
horn are less often local criminals armed with spears or shotguns and
more frequently resemble highly organized and heavily armed gangs, at
times including militia or military personnel. They violate
international borders, carry AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades, and
possess strong connections to transnational criminal networks. In some
regions of Africa, trafficking in wildlife and other natural resources
has been strongly connected to the financing of destabilizing forces,
including armed insurgencies, groups responsible for human rights
abuses, and organizations with ties to terrorism.\3\ In many parts of
Central Africa, poachers and wildlife traffickers can operate largely
with impunity due to weak laws or law enforcement, poor capacity,
governance shortfalls, and a failure of many governments to recognize
wildlife crime as the serious crime that it is.
elephants and ivory poaching in central africa
Poaching in Central Africa is putting serious pressure on numerous
species, including great apes, pangolins, and a variety of species that
are targeted by the bushmeat trade. However, my testimony will focus on
one species in particular--Central Africa's elephants and the ongoing
ivory poaching crisis in the region.
WWF has over 40 years of experience in elephant conservation.
Through WWF's African Elephant Program, we aim to conserve forest and
savanna elephant populations through both on-the-ground conservation
projects and policy development. WWF works with elephant range state
governments, local people and nongovernmental partners to secure a
future for this powerful symbol of nature. Elephants are important
keystone species, and their future is tied to that of much of Africa's
rich biodiversity. African elephants help to maintain suitable habitats
for many other species in savanna and forest ecosystems, directly
influencing forest composition and density and altering the broader
landscape. In tropical forests, elephants create clearings and gaps in
the canopy that encourage tree regeneration. In the savannas, they can
reduce bush cover to create an environment favorable to a mix of
browsing and grazing animals. Many plant species also have evolved
seeds that are dependent on passing through an elephant's digestive
tract before they can germinate--it is calculated that at least a third
of tree species in west African forests rely on elephants in this way
for distribution of their future generations.
African elephants once numbered in the millions across Africa, but
by the mid-1980s their populations had been devastated by poaching. An
international ban on the sale of ivory, put in place in 1989, helped to
slow the rate of decline significantly for the past two decades in many
parts of Africa. The status of the species now varies greatly across
the continent. In some parts of Africa, populations have remained
stable or grown until recently, with evidence now clearly showing that
African Elephants are facing the most serious crisis since the ivory
trade ban under CITES was agreed to in 1989. Whatever gains were made
over the past 25 years may be in the process of being reversed.
However, in Central Africa, where enforcement capacity is weakest,
elephant populations never had the opportunity to recover during the
1990s. In spite of the global trade ban in ivory trading put in place
in 1989, Central Africa's elephants have remained in danger due to
poaching for meat and ivory, habitat loss and conflict with humans.
They are now reaching a critical point: estimates indicate that
populations of forest elephants in the region declined by 62 percent
between 2002 and 2011 and lost 30 percent of their geographical
range,\4\ almost entirely due to poaching. If current poaching rates
continue or rise, forest elephants could be extinct within the next
decade.
In Central Africa's developing countries and rural regions, this
large-scale illegal activity is having devastating effects, negatively
impacting local communities by undermining regional security and
economic growth while exacerbating corruption and instability. The
current poaching crisis is pushing some of the most iconic African
species closer toward extinction, and Central African countries are
experiencing the rapid decimation of their wildlife--a potentially
valuable resource on which to build sustainable growth and eventually
bring greater stability to impoverished and often conflict-torn
regions. At the same time that wildlife crime is taking a profound toll
on many ecological systems, it is also robbing some of the poorest
communities on earth of their natural wealth, breeding corruption and
insecurity and disenfranchising them of sustainable pathways to
prosperity. The poaching crisis is also taking a huge toll on the lives
of park rangers and the families they support, making the ranger
profession one of the most dangerous jobs in some parts of Africa.
threats to security, stability and rule of law
Poaching, by definition, entails armed individuals, often gangs,
operating illegally in wildlife habitats which, in many cases, are
protected areas that attract tourists and contribute to the economic
development of many African countries. Where poaching is particularly
entrenched and pernicious, armed militias from one country temporarily
occupy territory in another country, destroying its wildlife assets and
posing serious national security threats on many levels. Every year,
throughout Africa, dozens of game scouts are killed by poachers while
protecting wildlife.
Poachers who profit from killing elephants and harvesting illegal
ivory may also have ties to criminal gangs and militias based in
countries such as Sudan (in the case of Central Africa) and Somalia (in
the case of East Africa). Longstanding historical ties between slave
trading, elephant poaching and the tribes that form Sudan's Janjaweed
militia (responsible for many of the worst atrocities in Darfur), mean
that illegal ivory may well being used as powerful currency to fund
some of the most destabilizing forces in Central Africa.
In parts of West and Central Africa, the situation has been dire
for some time, and severe poaching is already resulting in the local
extinction of elephant populations. In the past few years, the
situation has grown even worse as we have seen a disturbing change in
the sophistication and lethality of the methods being used by the
poachers, who are frequently well armed with automatic weapons,
professional marksmen and even helicopters. In most cases, poachers are
better equipped than park rangers. In some instances, they are better
equipped even than local military forces.
The connection between wildlife crime and regional security has
been dramatically driven home over the past 3 years due to a number of
high-profile poaching incidents involving large-scale massacres of
elephants, violations of international sovereignty and the need for
military involvement, both by African Governments and the U.S.
military. The U.S. intelligence community has also been engaged to
analyze the threat posed by wildlife trafficking to U.S. interests.
According to a September 2013 white paper published by the U.S.
National Intelligence Council and entitled, ``Wildlife Poaching
Threatens Economic, Security Priorities in Africa'':
Criminal elements of all kinds, including some terrorist
entities and rogue security personnel, often in collusion with
government officials in source countries are involved in
poaching and movement of ivory and rhino horn across east,
central, and southern Africa. We assess with high confidence
that traffickers use sophisticated networks and the complicity
of public officials in order to move ivory and rhino horn from
relatively remote areas to markets and ports of export,
perpetuating corruption and border insecurity in key eastern,
central and southern African states. We judge some of these
networks probably are the same or overlap with those of other
illicit goods such as drugs and weapons.
Poaching presents significant security challenges for
militaries and police forces in African nations (e.g., Kenya,
Tanzania, Congo-Kinshasa, South Africa, and others), which are
often outgunned by poachers and their criminal and extremist
allies. Corruption and lack of sufficient penal and financial
deterrents are hampering these governments' abilities to reduce
poaching and trafficking.\5\
The connections between wildlife trafficking and security threats
are particularly acute in Central Africa, where large parts of the
region remain plagued by insecurity, civil war, and uncontrolled
movements of armed and terrorist groups across national boundaries.
This is demonstrated by the ongoing civil war in Central African
Republic (CAR); kidnappings and killings by the terrorist group Boko
Haram in Nigeria and its violent incursions in neighboring countries,
such as Cameroon; the continued presence of the Lord Residence Army
(LRA) in CAR and surrounding countries; and continued unrest and
fighting by rebel and uncontrolled armed groups, including rogue
elements of the armed forces in the case of DRC. Several of these armed
factions, as well as al-Shabaab, Seleka, M23, the Janjaweed and the
Sudanese Army, have been implicated in the trafficking in wildlife and
other natural resources as a means of financing their operations.
Other parts of the subregion--mainly the heavily forested parts of
Cameroon, as well as Gabon and the Republic of Congo (RoC)--have so far
been spared such acute insecurity. However, even in these areas, lack
of rule of law, corruption and abuse of power, combined with lack of
law enforcement capacity, inaccessibility of the terrain, ease of
access to guns and small arms, and the out of control price of ivory
and other protected species products, such as pangolin scales, continue
to lead to the rapid depletion the most iconic wildlife in the Congo
Basin's forests.
Leadership in the region clearly understands the links between
wildlife crime, peace and security and economic development, as
demonstrated during the high-level round table on the links between
wildlife crime and peace and security in Africa organized by the French
Government on December 5, 2013 (one day before the Elysee summit on
Peace and Security in Africa). Central African Governments also agreed
to the language of the final Declaration\6\ of the London Conference on
Illegal Wildlife Trade, convened by the U.K. Government from February
12-13, 2014, at Lancaster House, London to inject a new level of
political momentum into efforts to combat the growing global threat
posed by illegal wildlife trade.
Cameroon
WWF is active in four priority forest landscapes in Cameroon and
provides on-the-ground support to law enforcement agencies in their
fight against poaching and trafficking, including support to
investigations, field operations leading to arrests, and legal support
throughout the judiciary process. In the winter of 2012, Cameroon was
the site of one of the worst elephant massacres ever recorded.\7\ In
early February 2012, bands of heavily armed poachers illegally crossed
from Chad into northern Cameroon's Bouba N'Djida National Park. Over
the course of several weeks, they massacred upward of 300 of the park's
elephants for their tusks. The poachers, believed to have come from
Sudan with ties to the Janjaweed, traveled over 1,000 miles on
horseback, disregarding international borders to systematically target
the elephants of Bouba N'Djida. The park guards were ill-equipped,
unarmed and few in number, and the Sudanese militants were able to
operate with impunity for weeks. The Cameroonian Government was slow to
react or recognize the severity of the problem. Repelling the invaders
eventually required the involvement of the Cameroonian military,
resulting in casualties on both sides and the seizure of both ivory and
weapons. The crisis provoked the engagement of the U.S. military,
including an in-person meeting between the President of Cameroon and
U.S. General Carter F. Ham, Commander of AFRICOM at the time.
Since 2012, Cameroon has shown progress in its efforts to address
wildlife crime. Elite units of the military have been dispatched to
secure the border regions and to assist the park authorities, with some
encouraging collaboration and results. While data since January 2014 is
still being compiled, a total of 87 cases involving 134 wildlife
traffickers were followed up with WWF support from July to December
2013 for a total of 39 court decisions obtained. The 39 court decisions
were given against a total of 55 wildlife traffickers out of which 49
were declared guilty. Some of the high profile cases that led to
successful prosecutions include:
In September 2013, after a year-long trial, the notorious
poacher Sangha Symphorien was sentenced to an unprecedented 3
years imprisonment and fined 45,000 USD as damages for assault
against a wildlife ranger, elephant poaching and ivory
trafficking;
An ivory trafficker arrested with 29 ivory tusks was
sentenced to 6 months imprisonment and payment of 55,000 USD as
damages to the Ministry in charge of forests and wildlife
(MINFOF) in October 2013;
In November 2013, two wildlife traffickers were sentenced to
4 years imprisonment for illegal hunting in the Korup National
Park and for illegal possession and trafficking in elephant and
chimpanzee products;
Two ``white collar'' wildlife traffickers are currently
being prosecuted: a Vietnamese trafficker arrested with 10
ivory tusks and 60 kilograms of pangolin scales; and a council
mayor, her son, and an accomplice are being prosecuted for
ivory trafficking.
Central African Republic: Dzanga-Sangha Protected Areas
Since the military coups in Central African Republic (CAR) by a
coalition of rebel groups called Seleka in March 2013, and the
subsequent rise of a counter rebel group called Anti-Balaka, the
situation in CAR remains chaotic and violent with daily attacks
terrorizing civilians across the country. The United Nations estimates
that, ``more than 1 million people--roughly one-quarter of the total
population--have been displaced or have fled the country. Thousands of
people have been killed--at least 2,000 since December alone--although
no one knows the exact figure, which is likely much higher. Despite
having the largest number of peacekeepers ever deployed to the country,
the violence in CAR continues unabated.'' \8\
The Dzanga-Sangha protected area complex in Central African
Republic (CAR) is home to the majority of that country's remaining
elephants. Prior to the March 2013 coup, numerous poaching attempts
were made by Sudanese militants targeting elephants in the Dzanga-
Sangha Reserve. Gangs of armed horsemen attempted on at least two
occasions to enter the protected area complex: the first attempt in the
fall of 2011 was successfully repelled by the CAR army (not without
casualties) after WWF and other partners on the ground alerted the
government to the imminent threat; and in May 2012, WWF became aware of
the presence of about three dozen Sudanese raiders in CAR and
determined that they were moving toward the Dzanga-Sangha Reserve. At
least 8-10 elephants were killed outside of the park, but operations by
the CAR military again repelled the invaders and prevented them from
entering the protected areas. Cameroon and the Republic of Congo
coordinated in that effort, stationing troops along their borders with
CAR to prevent the poachers from moving into their territory.
Throughout 2011, not a single elephant poaching incident was
detected in Dzanga-Sangha, the first such achievement in many years,
due in large part to strong protection efforts developed over several
years by WWF and its governmental and nongovernmental partners,
including the support of the U.S. Agency for International Development
(USAID) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through its Central
African Regional Program for the Environment (CARPE). Another major
factor was the cross-border cooperation developed between park rangers
of the three bordering countries--CAR, Cameroon, and Republic of
Congo--each of which contain a portion of the Sangha River Tri-national
landscape (of which Dzanga-Sangha is the CAR portion). As part of these
tri-national operations--a unique and innovative agreement between the
three countries--park rangers engaged in regular communication, joint
patrols, and joint law enforcement, ensuring information was rapidly
shared and potential poachers could be pursued across borders.
However, following the March 2013 coup and the collapse of
government authority in CAR, the Dzanga-Sangha Protected Areas became
vulnerable to armed incursions. Within days, trucks with armed
``Seleka'' rebels arrived in the small town of Bayanga, home to Dzanga-
Sangha park headquarters, leading WWF to decide to evacuate its
expatriate staff and volunteers. The park headquarters, including WWF
offices and premises, were subsequently looted (including the stockpile
of seized ivory), as were WWF's office in the capital, Bangui. Seleka
fighters took seven AK47, two ``MASS 36'' weapons, and an RPG7 from the
park HQs and briefly took four rangers hostage before leaving the area.
On April 6, 2013, 17 armed Sudanese Seleka arrived from Bangui in a
pickup truck with Seleka insignia, drove out to Dzanga Bai, the world
famous elephant clearing, ransacked the research camp and then opened
fire on the elephants, killing 26 individuals, including 4 infants.
They left the next day with their truck full of ivory. Park rangers and
local WWF staff resumed work the day after, and a support team of
security advisors arrived 5 days later to establish contact with the
local Seleka group in order to seek their support in protecting Dzanga-
Sangha and in stopping potential new groups of ``Seleka'' poachers.
Since then, huge efforts have been made by the government, WWF and its
partners, to continue to protect this World Heritage site from further
incursions by armed groups searching for ivory.
Despite repeated and ongoing threats, not a single elephant has
been poached in Dzanga-Sangha since April 6, 2013, and numbers have
since increased. This clearly demonstrates that elephants can be
protected even under the most difficult of circumstances by a dedicated
local ranger force as long as there is no complete breakdown of law and
order, as happened in April 2013.
The security situation in CAR remains fragile, however. Seleka
groups have left the area but have been replaced by uncontrolled groups
of ``Anti-Balaka'' fighters who, with support from members of the local
community, have chased away all the Muslim inhabitants of the area,
ransacking their houses and shops. Although the security situation
remains worrying, calm is returning to Bayanga. This month, following
an agreement established between the Ministers of Forestry and Defense
with WWF, a small force of armed forces of the CAR Army from Nola
together with elements of the police supported by park rangers is now
based in Bayanga with the aim of disarming remaining anti-Balaka
elements.
Chad
Fifty years ago the Republic of Chad was home to roughly 50,000
elephants; today the population is estimated to be around 1,500. In
2013, Chad initiated a National Elephant Protection Plan, which
included the establishment of a National Elephant Monitoring Centre to
track and respond to threats to the country's remaining elephants. In
February 2014, President Deby, together with Heads of State from
Botswana, Ethiopia, Gabon, and Tanzania pledged support for a new
Elephant Protection Initiative at the U.K. Government's London summit
on the Illegal Wildlife Trade, which means these countries will refrain
from any trade in ivory products for a minimum of 10 years. Also in
February 2014, Chad's President Deby Itno burned 1.1 tons of ivory
stockpiled in the country over the past 8 years. The ivory burn showed
Chad's commitment to take the lead in the fight to protect Central
Africa's remaining savannah elephants. With this highest level of
Government commitment, significant progress has been made on the
ground, particularly in Zakouma National Park, where the tide finally
may be turning and poaching is being brought under control by
courageous local rangers with assistance from the Africa Parks Network.
Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)--Garamba National Park
Garamba National Park is located in northeastern DRC, on the border
with South Sudan. For many years this park was supported by WWF to
protect the last remaining population of northern white rhino, as well
as the park's elephants. The park was invaded many times by both sides
during the long civil war in Sudan, and poaching by well-armed militias
was common. The result was a steady decline in rhino populations from
at least 500 in the 1970s to the last observation in the wild several
years ago. As a result of the ongoing poaching, Northern White Rhino
are now considered extinct in the wild. Garamba NP is still home to one
of the few remaining viable elephant populations in DRC. An analysis of
elephant trends in DRC shows that there are probably only a handful of
remnant populations of elephants in that country numbering more than
500 individuals and that the country's total elephant population is
less than 20,000 and declining rapidly--down from an estimated 100,000
as recently as 50 years ago.\9\ Garamba NP is now comanaged by DRC's
national park agency and Africa Parks Network, a Dutch NGO. Due to
their efforts and the improved security following the tentative peace
in southern Sudan, the situation in the park saw a steady improvement
in recent years and a reduction in poaching. This was true up until
March 15, 2012, when a foreign helicopter entered DRC airspace and 22
elephants were killed by a marksman, firing from the helicopter and
killing the elephants with a single shot to the top of the head. While
the actual slaughter was not witnessed, a Russian manufactured Mi-17
troop-carrying helicopter was photographed in the vicinity at the same
time. The helicopter was illegal and of unknown origin.
Earlier this month, on May 13, Africa Parks Networks issued an
urgent statement to update conservation colleagues on a new and serious
elephant poaching onslaught in Garamba, noting that 33 elephants had
been killed over the past 5 weeks, including 10 deaths alone on May 9.
Two days later, on May 11, a gunfight broke out in the park when
antipoaching teams encountered poaching camps, resulting in the deaths
of three poachers. While the source of the poaching threat cannot be
confirmed, there is reason to believe that the major thrust of the
poaching activities are emanating from the heavily forested Azande
Domaine de Chasse to the west of the park, which has been a traditional
base for the Lords' Resistance Army (LRA) over many years. As yet, it
is not confirmed whether the current poaching onslaught emanates from
the LRA, Sudanese poaching gangs, local Congolese poachers, or a
combination of these. However, the extremely heightened level of
poaching suggests organized groups of poachers are focusing new efforts
on Garamba and its elephants.
Gabon
Gabon continues to be a victim of transborder ivory poaching, with
Cameroonian ivory gangs entering northern Gabon and penetrating deep
into the country in search for elephants. Ivory gangs are typically
made up of 4 hunters, 6-10 porters and 1 ``field leader'' who ensures
that all ivory effectively goes to the ``organizer'' of the expedition.
These south Cameroonian ivory poaching groups are known to have
widespread immunity in South Cameroon and support from corrupted local
authorities. The inability to control cross-border incursions
originating in Cameroon is a major reason why Gabon's Minkebe National
Park, located in northern Gabon on the border with Cameroon and RoC,
has lost an estimated 11,000 elephants since 2004. Another major
weakness in Gabon is the inadequacy of current law, which has a maximum
prison sentence of 6 months for ivory trafficking/elephant poaching.
This is compared to a 3-year maximum sentence in Cameroon and 5-year
maximum in RoC.
Republic of Congo (RoC)
The same ivory poaching syndicates that operate in Minkebe are
active in the northwestern forests of RoC. WWF and the RoC Ministry of
Forests have signed a cooperation agreement that includes collaboration
on antipoaching. In 2013, with WWF support, 37 people were arrested for
elephant poaching related crimes and transferred to the provincial
capital, Ouesso, for trial. However, none of these criminals was
effectively condemned, and suspects were released after an average of 4
months of temporary custody. In 2014, WWF supported the arrest of 12
ivory poaching criminals, 2 of whom received firm prison sentences of 2
years and 10 of whom received suspended prison sentences of 3 years. It
is clear that the effective application of the law is being hampered by
corruption and abuse of power by powerful elites involved in the trade.
African Parks Network, which operates in Odzala NP through a management
agreement with the government, arrested a major ivory trafficker who
was sentenced in March 2014 to 5 years in prison, following wide
interest in local and international press \10\ combined with strong
pressure from the diplomatic community, including the U.S. Ambassador
and conservation organizations. African Parks has since been victim of
a violent uprising in Mbomo town (HQ of the park) where their head of
antipoaching was threatened and had to leave the country in early May.
It is widely thought that the uprising has been instigated by interests
linked to the ivory trade.
recommendations for u.s. actions in central africa
The success in Dzanga-Sangha pre- and post-coup demonstrates that,
in spite of persistent challenges in the region, Central African
countries can combat the environmental and security threats posed by
transnational wildlife crime when governments engage and prioritize the
issue, when enough capacity is in place to respond effectively, and
when countries cooperate on a regional and transboundary basis. Such
regional cooperation can also help to foment stronger regional ties on
other issues and reduce regional tensions, as evidenced by the fact
that countries that were in conflict with each other not long ago have
since engaged in joint security missions to protect their shared
wildlife resources.
The U.S. can help enhance antipoaching and antitrafficking efforts
in this most acutely affected region in the following key ways:
1. The U.S. Government, particularly through the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service and USAID, should maintain and (where
possible) enhance its support for urgently needed park and
wildlife protection efforts in Central Africa, through;
a. Support for park rangers and park guards and law
enforcement training programs. Innovative protected
areas comanagement initiatives, where NGO partners take
on part of the management responsibility, while holding
governments and NGOs accountable for management
effectiveness, should be supported.
b. Support forest and wildlife crime national
assessments in Cameroon, CAR, DRC, and RoC, for example
using the International Consortium to Combat Wildlife
Crime (ICCWC) Toolkit as standardized methodology.
c. Support the establishment and operations in
Central African countries of national coordination
units, bringing together different ministries and
government agencies, that can conduct operations to
dismantle criminal networks of wildlife traffickers.
d. Based on training needs identified as a result of
the national assessments, support ICCWC members and
conservation NGOs to provide targeted trainings in
intelligence, controlled deliveries, informant
networks, judiciary followup and way to improve legal
instruments. The training needs of police, wildlife and
magistrate schools also need to be included in this
assessment.
e. Provide technical and financial support to
informant networks, investigations, operations, and
judiciary following of arrested wildlife traffickers,
with an emphasis on operations in the forest elephant
strongholds of the Dja-Minkebe-Odzala Tri-National
(TRIDOM) landscape of Cameroon, RoC and Gabon, and the
Tri-National de la Sangha (TNS) landscape of Cameroon,
RoC and CAR.
f. Support the establishment of a political dialogue
between Central Africa and Asia, particularly China,
through the Forum on Africa-China Cooperation (FOCAC),
with a focusing on demand reduction and information
exchange. Expand this discussion to other African
Economic Communities with a focusing on breaking the
illegal trade chain.
2. Increase the involvement of U.S. Embassies in the region
related to wildlife crime policy and diplomacy, especially in
cases of high-level traffickers, to create political momentum
for governments to apply their sanction regimes to the full
extent of the law.
3. Evaluate trade sanction laws relative to African countries
with weak enforcement of wildlife laws.
4. Support the CAR sanction regime of the U.N. Security
Council Resolution 2127 (2013). This resolution targets
individuals who are involved in the illicit exploitation of
wildlife and wildlife products.
5. Support the renewed U.N. Security Council Resolution S/
RES/2136 (2014) on DRC's sanctions regime, which targets
individuals and entities illegally supporting armed groups
through the illicit trade of natural resources, including
wildlife and wildlife products, such as elephant ivory.
On behalf of WWF and its Illegal Wildlife Trade Campaign, I thank
you for your leadership on this issue and for the opportunity to
provide testimony to the subcommittees.
----------------
End Notes
\1\ http://transcrime.gfintegrity.org/.
\2\ www.dni.gov/files/documents/
Wildlife_Poaching_White_Paper_2013.pdf.
\3\ www.dni.gov/files/documents/
Wildlife_Poaching_White_Paper_2013.pdf.
\4\ Maisels F, Strindberg S, Blake S, Wittemyer G, Hart J, et al.
(2013) ``Devastating Decline of Forest Elephants in Central Africa.''
PLoS ONE 8(3):e59469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.
0059469.
\5\ ``Wildlife Poaching Threatens Economic, Security Priorities in
Africa,'' National Intelligence Council, 6 September 2013.
\6\ https://www.google.cm/
?gws_rd=cr&ei=Gb90U4z_Eo7S4QSdpYGICA#q=Declaration+of+the
+London+Conference.
\7\ http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/environment/story/2012-03-
16/cameroon-elephants-poaching/53564500/1.
\8\ http://enoughproject.org/reports/behind-headlines-drivers-
violence-central-african-republic.
\9\ http://www.bonoboincongo.com/2009/02/01/how-many-elephants-are-
left-in-dr-congo/.
\10\ http://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/06/world/africa/congo-poacher-
camp-bust/.
[all]